My word for 2012 was write, and my word for 2013 is speak. I aim to talk with people about the benefits of openness in adoption (which is not necessarily the same as “open adoption,” as you’ll see below) to anyone involved in adoption who will listen.
So imagine my delight when Erica of Parenthood for Me notified me that her nonprofit’s board of directors had decided to present me with the Commitment to Excellence Award for 2013. And with the award comes an invitation to be the keynote speaker for the annual Gala in March in Rochester, NY. Might I see you there?
Here is a guest post that originally appeared on the site of the organization that is sponsoring my attendance at the Gala. The post was prompted by a question put to me.
** UPDATED BELOW **
What is open adoption — and is it a spectrum?
I bet if you asked a bunch of people who know about adoption what open adoption is, you would get variations on the theme of contact, that there is a continuum of contact, and that each adoption will find its way on to a point on the continuum. On one end might be a fully closed adoption, meaning no contact and no identifying information. At the other end people might place full openness — adoptive and birth parents treating each other as extended families.
Seems kinda flat, no?
But as we move into the third decade of the movement toward open adoptions, I submit that we should stop using contact as our measure. Why?
Because contact ≠ openness. Contact is not the same as openness.
Further, because of the need to consider contact and openness separately, we need a better tool than a spectrum. How about a grid? A grid that takes into account a measure other than contact — the level of open-heartedness on the part of the parents of the child.
Let’s look at each of the boxes:
- Box 1 is what we would call a closed adoption. Not only is there very little contact or identifying information available to the child, but the adoptive parents are ill-equipped to deal with adoption openly. They may have unresolved grief left over from their infertility struggles. They may have been counseled to act as if their child were born to them. They may not be comfortable having tough conversations and confronting “icky” feelings about adoption, either theirs or their child’s as she grows and advances cognitively. This box may be the most crippling for a child to grow up in, the least conducive to integrating her identity from both her sets of parents.
- Box 2 is where there is contact with birth family, maybe through exchanges of photos, emails or even meetings. Parents here may say things like, “We follow our open adoption agreement and send monthly updates and pictures.” or “We’re not afraid to let the birth parents know where we live.” But what’s lacking in Box 2 is what Jim Gritter calls the Spirit of Open Adoption. Adoptive parents may harbor feelings of guilt, envy, distaste or even superiority about their child’s birth family, either consciously or subconsciously (by no means am I saying that all do, but rather the observation that some do). These adoptive parents may enjoy having all the power they hold in the relationship rather than inviting the first parents to co-create their open adoption relationship. Because of the lack of openness here, the child is still at a disadvantage, feeling split between her clan of biology and her clan of biography, for there is quite a gap between them.
- Box 3 is at play in many foster and international adoptions, as well as some domestic infant adoptions where distance or birth family availability is a factor. It involves low contact but high openness. Logistics and safety issues may make actual contact not possible or unwise, but the parents in Box 3 still parent with openness. They are able to deal with their own emotions about their family-building story mindfully, and they are able to open their hearts to their child as she processes her adoption story and integrates her identity. She is in a good position to have the space and support from her parents to do just that.
- Box 4 is where the birth family is considered extended family, both in contact and in openness. This relationship may be no different than one with a beloved uncle, sister-in-law or grandmother (or even a relative not so beloved!). The relationships are child-centered and inclusive. The child is claimed by and able to claim both her clans, thereby helping her integrate all her pieces as she grows through her toddler and school years, through her tweens and teens and into adulthood. She is not pulled to choose or rank one family over the other and she is therefore not split — she is free to integrate herSelves and pursue wholeness in her identity.
Adopting and adoptive parents, where would you plot yourselves? I encourage you to consider both aspects of open adoption — contact and openness — as you build and sustain a child-centered adoption constellation.
Adoption STAR is sponsoring my attendance at the Gala. I am grateful to the folks there for making my participation possible.
I am seeking other opportunities to speak about openness in adoption in the coming year. If you know of an adoption agency or other organization that would like me to speak to clients about HOW to “do” open adoption , please direct them to my Speaker Showcase page (bonus: speaking gigs in the metro-Denver area could also include Crystal, my book’s contributor and the first mom to my daughter.)
** UPDATE **
Feedback from some adoptive parents here and in discussions elsewhere was that since they can’t fully control the level of contact with birth family, why should they be penalized for being in a less-than-ideal box?
First of all, no one is being penalized. In Adoption World, it’s better to deal with What Is rather than what we wish things would be. The boxes are meant to self-assess, not to personalize. I would counsel adoptive parents to focus on openness — what they CAN control — over contact, which they only partially control. Boxes 3 and 4 are where the benefits of openness in adoption occur, anyway.
People have also pointed out that one family may have open adoption relationships in more than one box, based on differing situations with birth family members for each child.
And it was also pointed out that plotting can change over time, as contact and openness can both be fluid measures.