http://www.mechrsch.org/adoptionlinks.htm

First link..Clicked on..

Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption: Narrative
Summary

http://www.mechrsch.org/SumLink3.pdf
The following implications for policy and practice are posed for consideration:1. Guidelines for Adoption Counseling.Establish mandatory guidelines for adoption counseling for all adolescent pregnancy programs that receive federal funding. (Title X and Title XX.) Points considered important to include are:a) Require that a procedures/resources manual for counselors be maintained in which adoption is described as a positive option, and that any language in existing manuals that is considered negative and discriminatory toward adoption be deleted.

Deleted??????

The books are being burned again!!!!!
b) Manuals should emphasize the licensed adoption agency as the preferred resource, rather than describing private placements on an equal basis with agency placements.c) Terminology such as "surrendering", "giving up", or "relinquishing" should be replaced by concepts such as "developing an adoption plan", "acting in the best interests of the child," "family building", and exploring "future plans and prospects" for the young mother.

We will now have a whole new language..
Kiddies we must comply here.. Money is being spent on this..
d) Manuals should include an accurate listing of adoption resources in the communities served, along with information about adoption procedures for each resource and the degree of"openness" permitted by the facility. Liaison and/or contact persons should be identified for each adoption resource. Manuals should be updated periodically with respect to agency resources, policies and procedures.e) Manuals should include (for each adoption resource) the extent of medical care provided during pregnancy and at birth.

Agencies are into the medical care (control) of the pregnant woman.
Here it is reinforced IMO.
f) Manuals should describe the extent of post-adoption counseling, assistance, or supports available for birthparents who make an adoption plan. (Education, job training, etc.)

Ah but some things are deleted..
2. Counseling Models Counselors should be encouraged to consider using social influence and interactional models of helping which establish an expectation with clients that adoption is to be explored as an option, irrespective of whether clients ask about adoption.

Perfect..

Social influence procedures may necessitate counselors applying "threshold" techniques prior to interviewing clients. One possibility is to use a self administered inventory to assess client receptivity toward adoption. A 20 item prototype device has beendeveloped at the University of Illinois as a possible aid to counselors in exploring adoption with adolescent clients. (Note: It is our contention that while clients make the decision, it is a counselor's responsibility to ensure that adoption is explored so that clients are better able to arrive at an informed decision. Non-directive procedures provide no such assurance.

A counselors responsibility?

Other recommended counseling procedures include establishing adolescent support groups, groups to discuss decision alternatives, and resource people to speak to adolescent clients. Group sessions consisting of adolescents who are involved in pregnancy resolution decisions offer peer support, information exchange, and the benefit of different perceptions. Resource speakers should bethose who have been involved in the adoption circle, as well as those who have gone through keeping and parenting a child.

But as said above.. Negatives about adoption are verboten..
3. Certification of Counselor Knowledge in Adoption As a precondition for conveying accurate and objective information about adoption, it may be necessary for counselors to demonstrate "functional competency" in adoption. One approach is to establish a model curriculum for counselors that includes knowledge of state statutes and requirements for adoption, the location of adoption agencies, the policies and practices of each agency, and the location, availability, and program elements of key consumer resource groups (i.e. Adoption circle, birth parents, adoptees, adoptive parents). Curriculum content would be established by persons knowledgeable about adoption, with input from various sectors of the adoption field, including recommendations from adoption circle members. Self instructional and workbook type materials could be developed and made available to programs as a basis for conductinginservice counselor training.

Perfect..
Qualified agencies, groups, or units within states could be designated to examine and to certify counselors as to their status in meeting minimal requirements. Federal funding would be contingent on programs being certified that counselors have successfully met curriculum requirements. Volunteer counselors would not be exempted from the certification process.

Federal funding.. Tax dollars at work..
4. Outreach The outreach concept refers to (a) extending existing programs and services to "at risk" target groups not usuallyserved by pregnancy counselors, (b) attempting to educate and to heighten community awareness about adoption as a positive teen alternative, and (c) to expand decision resources for adolescents. A number of outreach strategies are possible. Three of the outreach variations are:a) Outreach to special "at risk" target groups. Programs such as WIC and AFDC serve large numbers of adolescent mothers, WIC (Women, Infants and Children) for example is one of the largest and fastest growing federal child nutrition programs. To qualify for the WIC program, mothers and children must be individually certified as nutritionally "at risk" and as having an inadequate income. WIC is a program where counselors can have an influence since mothers must come in on a regular schedule to get certified for food vouchers.

In order to eat the woman must listen to a counselor selling
adoption.. They are on a roll!

It may be useful to consider a federal interagency policy that requires adolescent clients to participate in counseling during each visit in order to receive food vouchers.

Now on every visit they will be told adoption is a good alternative..
While this may be viewed as a punitive approach, the procedure provides a route to opening up options (other than single parenting) and may help to prevent subsequent pregnancies.b) Outreach for Community Education Systematic efforts to educate about adoption and to heighten community awareness about adoption should be encouraged and supported. This can be accomplished by organizing speakers, panels, and presentations of educational materials via radio, TV, and films, for use in schools, clinics, agencies, churches, etc. The most credible resource people are those who have been partners in an adoption plan. (Birthparents, adoptees, adoptive parents.)c) Expansion of Residential (Decision) Centers. Encourage state and local jurisdictions to support the expansion of residential centers for pregnant adolescents. The aim would be to provide resources for pregnant unmarried minors to receive programs of structured services (including counseling, continued education, vocational training and job exploration) in a residential setting as a way of resolving ambivalence about options and facilitating decisions that are made consciously and from among alternatives with as much information as possible.

Except for the negative thoughts that have been erased from the
literature..

5) Consumer Input(Adoption Circle) Counseling programs' should be encouraged to activate special advisory units that are comprised of consumer representatives. This suggestion is based on the assumption that health and social agencies can learn much about the consequences of adoption from birthparents, adoptees, and adoptive parents and in turn can put this information to good use in programs for counseling adolescent clients, utilizing adoption circle representatives as resources in establishing more valid adoption counseling programs for adolescent clients recognizes the importance of this constituency, its growing advocacy power, and the need for professional experts to " share the power" with a constituency that in a sense exerts control over vital adoption resources. The goal of sharing power with consumers may prove difficult for many experts and professionals who historically have been in control of adoption policies, programs, and procedures.
What a load of hogwash..

Jackie

>The following implications for policy and practice are posed forconsideration:1. Guidelines for Adoption Counseling.Establish mandatory guidelines for adoption counseling for all adolescentpregnancy programs that receive federal funding. (Title X and Title XX.)Points considered important to include are:a) Require that a procedures/resources manual for counselors be maintainedin which adoption is described as a positive option, and that any language inexisting manuals that is considered negative and discriminatory towardadoption be deleted.

Why are pregnancy pregrams getting federal funding? If the mother is not in the
armed forces, how is it any business of Congress? Congress steals money from
innocent workers and spends the loot to brainwash pregnant girls that they are
unfit mothers. If you don't pay the demanded money, armed mercenaries will pay
you a visit and either grab you, handcuff you, force you into a vehicle against
your will and bring you to the government's jail, or they'll just steal your
car and sell it off to raise money to counsel girls into believing that they
are unfit mothers. You fail to understand that the federal mercenaries are to
blame for breaking up families. There's hardly an injustice in society that
cannot be traced back to law enforcement officers initiating violent force
against innocent persons or their property.

b) Manuals should emphasize the licensed adoption agency as the preferredresource, rather than describing private placements on an equal basis withagency placements.c) Terminology such as "surrendering", "giving up", or "relinquishing"should be replaced by concepts such as "developing an adoption plan", "actingin the best interests of the child," "family building", and exploring "futureplans and prospects" for the young mother.We will now have a whole new language..Kiddies we must comply here.. Money is being spent on this..

Newspeak. George Orwell described it in his book, 1984. The adoption industry
does not want to be cut out of the middle, with private adoptions. They are
greedy.
Agencies are into the medical care (control) of the pregnant woman.Here it is reinforced IMO.

I list the other kind of maternity home at http://withchild.us/links.html but
alas, many birthmothers will be reluctant because of the heavy religious tone
of many of these facilities. The better approach is to offer assistance
"because our God told us to do this for you."
Federal funding.. Tax dollars at work..

Avoid applying for Federal funding, no matter what. The government is the
enemy.There's one truly independent college that does not want federal tax
money: http://hillsdale.edu/
In order to eat the woman must listen to a counselor sellingadoption.. They are on a roll!

Avoid WIC.
It may be useful to consider a federal interagency policy that requiresadolescent clients to participate in counseling during each visit in order toreceive food vouchers.Now on every visit they will be told adoption is a good alternative..

Better option: Can't feed 'em? Don't breed 'em.
c) Expansion of Residential (Decision) Centers. Encourage state and local jurisdictions to support the expansion ofresidential centers for pregnant adolescents. The aim would be to provideresources for pregnant unmarried minors to receive programs of structuredservices (including counseling, continued education, vocational training andjob exploration) in a residential setting as a way of resolving ambivalenceabout options and facilitating decisions that are made consciously and fromamong alternatives with as much information as possible.

Like, if I had the money to buy a building and wanted to invite pregnant girls
to move in, the zoning board would be all over me, and in some States it's
illegal without a license to operate a maternity home! Oh, but the zoning board
wouldn't mind, as long as I brainwash the girls into thinking they are unfit
mothers. Of course, if it weren't for law enforcement officers initiating
violence, I wouldn't NEED a license or a zoning variance.

Tom

http://withchild.us
http://adoption.com.ws

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: jbj4712@aol.com (Jbj4712)Date: 2/11/04 8:29 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <20040211112948.22644.00001707@mb-m18.aol.com>

Top Posting:

Why do you hate gay people and think that they would not make fit parents? And
after you answer this question, ask yourself how it is that you can with a
straight face ***** about the feds brainwashing young pregnant girls? You're as
hypocritical as they are, you loon.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~The following implications for policy and practice are posed forconsideration:1. Guidelines for Adoption Counseling.Establish mandatory guidelines for adoption counseling for all adolescentpregnancy programs that receive federal funding. (Title X and Title XX.)Points considered important to include are:a) Require that a procedures/resources manual for counselors be maintainedin which adoption is described as a positive option, and that any languageinexisting manuals that is considered negative and discriminatory towardadoption be deleted.Why are pregnancy pregrams getting federal funding? If the mother is not inthearmed forces, how is it any business of Congress? Congress steals money frominnocent workers and spends the loot to brainwash pregnant girls that theyareunfit mothers. If you don't pay the demanded money, armed mercenaries willpayyou a visit and either grab you, handcuff you, force you into a vehicleagainstyour will and bring you to the government's jail, or they'll just steal yourcar and sell it off to raise money to counsel girls into believing that theyare unfit mothers. You fail to understand that the federal mercenaries are toblame for breaking up families. There's hardly an injustice in society thatcannot be traced back to law enforcement officers initiating violent forceagainst innocent persons or their property.b) Manuals should emphasize the licensed adoption agency as the preferredresource, rather than describing private placements on an equal basis withagency placements.c) Terminology such as "surrendering", "giving up", or "relinquishing"should be replaced by concepts such as "developing an adoption plan","actingin the best interests of the child," "family building", and exploring"futureplans and prospects" for the young mother.We will now have a whole new language..Kiddies we must comply here.. Money is being spent on this..Newspeak. George Orwell described it in his book, 1984. The adoption industrydoes not want to be cut out of the middle, with private adoptions. They aregreedy.Agencies are into the medical care (control) of the pregnant woman.Here it is reinforced IMO.I list the other kind of maternity home at http://withchild.us/links.html butalas, many birthmothers will be reluctant because of the heavy religious toneof many of these facilities. The better approach is to offer assistance"because our God told us to do this for you."Federal funding.. Tax dollars at work..Avoid applying for Federal funding, no matter what. The government is theenemy.There's one truly independent college that does not want federal taxmoney: http://hillsdale.edu/In order to eat the woman must listen to a counselor sellingadoption.. They are on a roll!Avoid WIC. It may be useful to consider a federal interagency policy that requiresadolescent clients to participate in counseling during each visit in ordertoreceive food vouchers.Now on every visit they will be told adoption is a good alternative..Better option: Can't feed 'em? Don't breed 'em.c) Expansion of Residential (Decision) Centers. Encourage state and local jurisdictions to support the expansion ofresidential centers for pregnant adolescents. The aim would be to provideresources for pregnant unmarried minors to receive programs of structuredservices (including counseling, continued education, vocational training andjob exploration) in a residential setting as a way of resolving ambivalenceabout options and facilitating decisions that are made consciously and fromamong alternatives with as much information as possible.Like, if I had the money to buy a building and wanted to invite pregnantgirlsto move in, the zoning board would be all over me, and in some States it'sillegal without a license to operate a maternity home! Oh, but the zoningboardwouldn't mind, as long as I brainwash the girls into thinking they are unfitmothers. Of course, if it weren't for law enforcement officers initiatingviolence, I wouldn't NEED a license or a zoning variance.Tomhttp://withchild.ushttp://adoption.com.ws




Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

Thanks, Jackie. Mech is, I understand, very much involved with the Infant
Adoption Awareness Program.

Marley


"Jackie" <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message
news:41gk20drubsoeelhne371j6jbe420d6vf5@4ax.com... http://www.mechrsch.org/adoptionlinks.htm First link..Clicked on.. Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption: Narrative Summary http://www.mechrsch.org/SumLink3.pdfThe following implications for policy and practice are posed for
consideration:1. Guidelines for Adoption Counseling.Establish mandatory guidelines for adoption counseling for all adolescent
pregnancy programs that receive federal funding. (Title X and Title XX.)
Points considered important to include are:a) Require that a procedures/resources manual for counselors be
maintained in which adoption is described as a positive option, and that any
language in existing manuals that is considered negative and discriminatory
toward adoption be deleted. Deleted?????? The books are being burned again!!!!!b) Manuals should emphasize the licensed adoption agency as the preferred
resource, rather than describing private placements on an equal basis with
agency placements.c) Terminology such as "surrendering", "giving up", or "relinquishing"
should be replaced by concepts such as "developing an adoption plan",
"acting in the best interests of the child," "family building", and
exploring "future plans and prospects" for the young mother. We will now have a whole new language.. Kiddies we must comply here.. Money is being spent on this..d) Manuals should include an accurate listing of adoption resources in
the communities served, along with information about adoption procedures for
each resource and the degree of"openness" permitted by the facility. Liaison and/or contact persons
should be identified for each adoption resource. Manuals should be updated
periodically with respect to agency resources, policies and procedures.e) Manuals should include (for each adoption resource) the extent of
medical care provided during pregnancy and at birth. Agencies are into the medical care (control) of the pregnant woman. Here it is reinforced IMO.f) Manuals should describe the extent of post-adoption counseling,
assistance, or supports available for birthparents who make an adoption
plan. (Education, job training, etc.) Ah but some things are deleted..2. Counseling Models Counselors should be encouraged to consider using social influence and
interactional models of helping which establish an expectation with clients
that adoption is to be explored as an option, irrespective of whether
clients ask about adoption. Perfect.. Social influence procedures may necessitate counselors applying
"threshold" techniques prior to interviewing clients. One possibility is to
use a self administered inventory to assess client receptivity toward
adoption. A 20 item prototype device has beendeveloped at the University of Illinois as a possible aid to counselors
in exploring adoption with adolescent clients. (Note: It is our contention
that while clients make the decision, it is a counselor's responsibility to
ensure that adoption is explored so that clients are better able to arrive
at an informed decision. Non-directive procedures provide no such assurance. A counselors responsibility? Other recommended counseling procedures include
establishing adolescent support groups, groups to discuss decision
alternatives, and resource people to speak to adolescent clients. Group
sessions consisting of adolescents who are involved in pregnancy resolution
decisions offer peer support, information exchange, and the benefit of
different perceptions. Resource speakers should bethose who have been involved in the adoption circle, as well as those who
have gone through keeping and parenting a child. But as said above.. Negatives about adoption are verboten..3. Certification of Counselor Knowledge in Adoption As a precondition for conveying accurate and objective
information about adoption, it may be necessary for counselors to
demonstrate "functional competency" in adoption. One approach is to
establish a model curriculum for counselors that includes knowledge of state
statutes and requirements for adoption, the location of adoption agencies,
the policies and practices of each agency, and the location, availability,
and program elements of key consumer resource groups (i.e. Adoption circle,
birth parents, adoptees, adoptive parents). Curriculum content would be
established by persons knowledgeable about adoption, with input from various
sectors of the adoption field, including recommendations from adoption
circle members. Self instructional and workbook type materials could be
developed and made available to programs as a basis for conductinginservice counselor training. Perfect.. Qualified agencies, groups, or units within states could be designated
to examine and to certify counselors as to their status in meeting minimal
requirements. Federal funding would be contingent on programs being
certified that counselors have successfully met curriculum requirements.
Volunteer counselors would not be exempted from the certification process. Federal funding.. Tax dollars at work.. 4. Outreach The outreach concept refers to (a) extending existing programs
and services to "at risk" target groups not usuallyserved by pregnancy counselors, (b) attempting to educate and to heighten
community awareness about adoption as a positive teen alternative, and (c)
to expand decision resources for adolescents. A number of outreach
strategies are possible. Three of the outreach variations are:a) Outreach to special "at risk" target groups. Programs such as WIC and AFDC serve large numbers of adolescent
mothers, WIC (Women, Infants and Children) for example is one of the largest
and fastest growing federal child nutrition programs. To qualify for the WIC
program, mothers and children must be individually certified as
nutritionally "at risk" and as having an inadequate income. WIC is a
program where counselors can have an influence since mothers must come in on
a regular schedule to get certified for food vouchers. In order to eat the woman must listen to a counselor selling adoption.. They are on a roll! It may be useful to consider a federal interagency policy that
requires adolescent clients to participate in counseling during each visit
in order to receive food vouchers. Now on every visit they will be told adoption is a good alternative.. While this may be viewed as a punitive approach, the procedure provides
a route to opening up options (other than single parenting) and may help to
prevent subsequent pregnancies.b) Outreach for Community Education Systematic efforts to educate about adoption and to heighten
community awareness about adoption should be encouraged and supported. This
can be accomplished by organizing speakers, panels, and presentations of
educational materials via radio, TV, and films, for use in schools, clinics,
agencies, churches, etc. The most credible resource people are those who
have been partners in an adoption plan. (Birthparents, adoptees, adoptive
parents.)c) Expansion of Residential (Decision) Centers. Encourage state and local jurisdictions to support the expansion
of residential centers for pregnant adolescents. The aim would be to provide
resources for pregnant unmarried minors to receive programs of structured
services (including counseling, continued education, vocational training and
job exploration) in a residential setting as a way of resolving ambivalence
about options and facilitating decisions that are made consciously and from
among alternatives with as much information as possible. Except for the negative thoughts that have been erased from the literature..5) Consumer Input(Adoption Circle) Counseling programs' should be encouraged to activate special
advisory units that are comprised of consumer representatives. This
suggestion is based on the assumption that health and social agencies can
learn much about the consequences of adoption from birthparents, adoptees,
and adoptive parents and in turn can put this information to good use in
programs for counseling adolescent clients, utilizing adoption circle
representatives as resources in establishing more valid adoption counseling
programs for adolescent clients recognizes the importance of this
constituency, its growing advocacy power, and the need for professional
experts to " share the power" with a constituency that in a sense exerts
control over vital adoption resources. The goal of sharing power with
consumers may prove difficult for many experts and professionals who
historically have been in control of adoption policies, programs, and
procedures. What a load of hogwash.. Jackie

In article <41gk20drubsoeelhne371j6jbe420d6vf5@4ax.com>, Jackie
<forgetit@me.com> wrote:
The most credible resource people are those who have been partners in anadoption plan. (Birthparents, adoptees, adoptive parents.)

In what sense, I wonder, do these NCFA-funded assholes imagine adoptees are
"partners in an adoption plan"?

whoever
-------------------------
neonatal coffeedrinker

"fiend" <reveohw@aol.compromise> wrote in message
news:20040211175556.00545.00004309@mb-m02.aol.com... In article <41gk20drubsoeelhne371j6jbe420d6vf5@4ax.com>, Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote:The most credible resource people are those who have been partners in anadoption plan. (Birthparents, adoptees, adoptive parents.) In what sense, I wonder, do these NCFA-funded assholes imagine adoptees
are "partners in an adoption plan"? whoever ------------------------- neonatal coffeedrinker

The way a can of ham is a partner in the purchase plan at Krogers.

Marley

On 11 Feb 2004 16:29:48 GMT, jbj4712@aol.com (Jbj4712) wrote:

I wrote..Now on every visit they will be told adoption is a good alternative..Better option: Can't feed 'em? Don't breed 'em.


This is anti abortion propaganda..

Breeders are what is needed!


Jackie

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:42:05 GMT, "Marley Greiner"
<maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Thanks, Jackie. Mech is, I understand, very much involved with the InfantAdoption Awareness Program.Marley

I intend to print up his agenda.. (see below)
I could not copy and paste it into my software from the pdf file on
the net..

http://www.mechrsch.org/adoptionlinks.htm

An Inventory-Based Counseling Model for communicating adoption to
pregnant adolescents. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Edmund V. Mech, Ph.D.



The big push is on..


Jackie

"Jackie" <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message
news:2uqp20dv5ao57dfc7ip1g6f565c5bdmrn7@4ax.com... On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:42:05 GMT, "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:Thanks, Jackie. Mech is, I understand, very much involved with the
InfantAdoption Awareness Program.Marley I intend to print up his agenda.. (see below) I could not copy and paste it into my software from the pdf file on the net.. http://www.mechrsch.org/adoptionlinks.htm An Inventory-Based Counseling Model for communicating adoption to pregnant adolescents. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Edmund V. Mech, Ph.D. The big push is on.. Jackie
Pehaps we should call this "Disorientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward
Adoption

Marley

In article <OU6Xb.30089$fV5.638373@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, "Marley
Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Pehaps we should call this "Disorientation of Pregnancy Counselors [...]

It's not an orientation, it's a learned behavior and a chosen lifestyle.

whoever
----------------------------
disoriented coffee counselor

Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message news:<2uqp20dv5ao57dfc7ip1g6f565c5bdmrn7@4ax.com>... On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:42:05 GMT, "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:Thanks, Jackie. Mech is, I understand, very much involved with the InfantAdoption Awareness Program.Marley I intend to print up his agenda.. (see below) I could not copy and paste it into my software from the pdf file on the net.. http://www.mechrsch.org/adoptionlinks.htm An Inventory-Based Counseling Model for communicating adoption to pregnant adolescents. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Edmund V. Mech, Ph.D. The big push is on.. Jackie


Mech first pushed for more infant adoptions in 1980. It was him who
istigated the idea of open adoptions after a survey he conducted on
non pregnant high school girls showed that those young students all
turned their noses up at the draconian adoption concept of never
seeing their own child again under the closed system. It was after
that study he went about promoting the open adoption option. And US
adoption numbers began to florish again after almost dying out in the
US, as it did elsewhere. Open adoption became a ruse used to snare
young women into the closed adoption system. As you know, in all but a
few States, adopters can and often do close them up again once the
order is made.

It sounds like the open adoption option is no longer working as women
wise up to the scam that it is. Now they have to come up with a new
one. I wonder what the next ploy will be?

Di

"Dian" <patrice068@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:9a095db9.0402131830.2a5b1217@posting.google.c om... Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message
news:<2uqp20dv5ao57dfc7ip1g6f565c5bdmrn7@4ax.com>... On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:42:05 GMT, "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:Thanks, Jackie. Mech is, I understand, very much involved with the
InfantAdoption Awareness Program.Marley I intend to print up his agenda.. (see below) I could not copy and paste it into my software from the pdf file on the net.. http://www.mechrsch.org/adoptionlinks.htm An Inventory-Based Counseling Model for communicating adoption to pregnant adolescents. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Edmund V. Mech, Ph.D. The big push is on.. Jackie Mech first pushed for more infant adoptions in 1980. It was him who istigated the idea of open adoptions after a survey he conducted on non pregnant high school girls showed that those young students all turned their noses up at the draconian adoption concept of never seeing their own child again under the closed system. It was after that study he went about promoting the open adoption option. And US adoption numbers began to florish again after almost dying out in the US, as it did elsewhere. Open adoption became a ruse used to snare young women into the closed adoption system. As you know, in all but a few States, adopters can and often do close them up again once the order is made. It sounds like the open adoption option is no longer working as women wise up to the scam that it is. Now they have to come up with a new one. I wonder what the next ploy will be? Di

The argument is mainly upward mobility and the desirability of children
being reared in a 2-parent home, which is why adoption trade lobbyists
object to single parent and queer adoption. Mech, imo, is very tied to
CPCs and conversion at this point. I have no idea if he admits it, though.

Marley

On 13 Feb 2004 18:30:23 -0800, patrice068@optusnet.com.au (Dian)
wrote:
Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message news:<2uqp20dv5ao57dfc7ip1g6f565c5bdmrn7@4ax.com>... On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:42:05 GMT, "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:Thanks, Jackie. Mech is, I understand, very much involved with the InfantAdoption Awareness Program.Marley I intend to print up his agenda.. (see below) I could not copy and paste it into my software from the pdf file on the net.. http://www.mechrsch.org/adoptionlinks.htm An Inventory-Based Counseling Model for communicating adoption to pregnant adolescents. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Edmund V. Mech, Ph.D. The big push is on.. JackieMech first pushed for more infant adoptions in 1980. It was him whoistigated the idea of open adoptions after a survey he conducted onnon pregnant high school girls showed that those young students allturned their noses up at the draconian adoption concept of neverseeing their own child again under the closed system. It was afterthat study he went about promoting the open adoption option. And USadoption numbers began to florish again after almost dying out in theUS, as it did elsewhere. Open adoption became a ruse used to snareyoung women into the closed adoption system. As you know, in all but afew States, adopters can and often do close them up again once theorder is made.It sounds like the open adoption option is no longer working as womenwise up to the scam that it is. Now they have to come up with a newone. I wonder what the next ploy will be?Di


On adoption.com last week a woman (amom) posted that she did not want
the woman who gave birth to the child visiting the child (what was
originally promised).... She was willing to send pictures etc but did
not want the physical visits..
She was/is a single parent.. She IMO was worried that the baby would
love the mother and not her..

The thread was taken out.. Erased

Today I believe the war has been lost Di..



Jackie

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/14/2004
The thread was taken out.. Erased

Was it erased by the poster or censored? Kathy J

>It sounds like the open adoption option is no longer working as womenwise up to the scam that it is. Now they have to come up with a newone. I wonder what the next ploy will be?Di

Us usual, you know not of what you speak, Di.

Open adoption is very much the norm and even the law in some states (such as
CA). "Open" in adoption means no parties to adoption can participate
anonymously. Identities are revealed and shared among all parties. Your
assertion that open adoption is "not working" is just stupid. It is here to
stay. You are confusing the concept of "open" with the concept of "contact".
While all people I know who adopted newborns here in the US has some level of
ongoing contact with the birth relatives of their children, the fact is laws
will never successfully force contact between people, even if they are
connected via a child placed/adopted. Unless a person placing a child for
adoption is actually granted some sort of visitation rights, which would, in
effect, ensure a sort of "parental right", no court will be able to force
people to be friends. Yes, there are post contact agreements in some states
designed to move children from state care into permanent families. Stories of
how those agreements hold up in a court of law have yet to unfold.

Open adoption is no ruse. People who place children for adoption and those who
adopt them commonly believe these days that hiding and keeping secrets have no
place in modern adoption. I don't see that changing, ever.




P2P

>On adoption.com last week a woman (amom) posted that she did not wantthe woman who gave birth to the child visiting the child (what wasoriginally promised).... She was willing to send pictures etc but didnot want the physical visits..She was/is a single parent.. She IMO was worried that the baby wouldlove the mother and not her..


While I am skeptical, Jackie, of your story, I would say, if this story
actually exists, it represents an example of two people failing to communicate.
A woman placing a child who expects a certain level of contact and visitation
and a woman adopting who expects entirely another are headed for trouble. Fact
is, the person doing the placing of the child holds all the power until the
person doing the adopting has legal custody. Anyone who believes otherwise is
foolish. Education is key.


P2P

Palms2pines wrote:
It sounds like the open adoption option is no longer working as womenwise up to the scam that it is. Now they have to come up with a newone. I wonder what the next ploy will be?Di Us usual, you know not of what you speak, Di. Open adoption is very much the norm and even the law in some states (such as CA). "Open" in adoption means no parties to adoption can participate anonymously. Identities are revealed and shared among all parties.

I work with a fellow in local politics who is the executive director and head
organizer of a seniors advocacy group. We're currently organizing an action for
the SF Board of Supervisors to reinstate a nutrition program for low income
seniors. He's an adopted dad of two; both were open, but one of the birth mothers
changed the arrangement since she did not want further contact, the other is
still open and this guy's son goes and plays with his half siblings. The agency
through which he adopted shows Sheila Ganz' film "Unlocking the Heart of
Adoption" to their PAPs.



Your assertion that open adoption is "not working" is just stupid. It is here to stay. You are confusing the concept of "open" with the concept of "contact". While all people I know who adopted newborns here in the US has some level of ongoing contact with the birth relatives of their children, the fact is laws will never successfully force contact between people, even if they are connected via a child placed/adopted. Unless a person placing a child for adoption is actually granted some sort of visitation rights, which would, in effect, ensure a sort of "parental right", no court will be able to force people to be friends. Yes, there are post contact agreements in some states designed to move children from state care into permanent families. Stories of how those agreements hold up in a court of law have yet to unfold. Open adoption is no ruse. People who place children for adoption and those who adopt them commonly believe these days that hiding and keeping secrets have no place in modern adoption. I don't see that changing, ever.

It really depends on adoption professional how much of a ruse it is. I have heard
plenty of reliable testimony of mothers under the mistaken impression that they
retained rights of contact, assumptions promoted by the adoption practioner, only
to find their rights completely vacated if the adoptive parents back out for
whatever reason. Just so, I've heard reliable stories of birth mothers backing
out or even disappearing from ongoing open adoption relationships. The term "open
aadoption" has no definitive meaning, it's used to describe everything from one
preadoptive meeting between mother and PAP to ongoing semi-contactual contact.
Everybody seems to know what they mean by it, but in the end it means whatever
the person wants it to mean. Legally, it is meaningless in most states. I believe
Minnesota has codified it into statute. I'm not sure that California has.

Ron
P2P

Dian wrote:
Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message news:<2uqp20dv5ao57dfc7ip1g6f565c5bdmrn7@4ax.com>... On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:42:05 GMT, "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:Thanks, Jackie. Mech is, I understand, very much involved with the InfantAdoption Awareness Program.Marley I intend to print up his agenda.. (see below) I could not copy and paste it into my software from the pdf file on the net.. http://www.mechrsch.org/adoptionlinks.htm An Inventory-Based Counseling Model for communicating adoption to pregnant adolescents. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Edmund V. Mech, Ph.D. The big push is on.. Jackie Mech first pushed for more infant adoptions in 1980. It was him who istigated the idea of open adoptions after a survey he conducted on non pregnant high school girls showed that those young students all turned their noses up at the draconian adoption concept of never seeing their own child again under the closed system.

It would be news to Annette Baran and Rubin Pannor that Mech first instigated the idea of open
adoption, since they more or less invented and were the first to promote it.

Ron
It was after that study he went about promoting the open adoption option. And US adoption numbers began to florish again after almost dying out in the US, as it did elsewhere. Open adoption became a ruse used to snare young women into the closed adoption system. As you know, in all but a few States, adopters can and often do close them up again once the order is made. It sounds like the open adoption option is no longer working as women wise up to the scam that it is. Now they have to come up with a new one. I wonder what the next ploy will be? Di

"Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote The argument is mainly upward mobility and the desirability of children being reared in a 2-parent home, which is why adoption trade lobbyists object to single parent and queer adoption. Mech, imo, is very tied to CPCs and conversion at this point. I have no idea if he admits it, though. Marley

What are CPCs?

Rupa

Rupa Bose wrote: "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wroteThe argument is mainly upward mobility and the desirability of childrenbeing reared in a 2-parent home, which is why adoption trade lobbyistsobject to single parent and queer adoption. Mech, imo, is very tied toCPCs and conversion at this point. I have no idea if he admits it, though.Marley What are CPCs? Rupa

Crisis Pregnancy Centers... [read anti-choice]

pb...

Palms2pines wrote:
It sounds like the open adoption option is no longer working as womenwise up to the scam that it is. Now they have to come up with a newone. I wonder what the next ploy will be?Di Us usual, you know not of what you speak, Di. Open adoption is very much the norm and even the law in some states (such as CA). "Open" in adoption means no parties to adoption can participate anonymously. Identities are revealed and shared among all parties.
<snip> P2P

Exactly *which* LAW in California are you referring to, P2P?


pb...

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: "pb..." woodlark-99@newsguy.comDate: 2/14/04 10:36 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <c0lprg114kh@enews1.newsguy.com>Palms2pines wrote:It sounds like the open adoption option is no longer working as womenwise up to the scam that it is. Now they have to come up with a newone. I wonder what the next ploy will be?Di Us usual, you know not of what you speak, Di. Open adoption is very much the norm and even the law in some states (suchas CA). "Open" in adoption means no parties to adoption can participate anonymously. Identities are revealed and shared among all parties.<snip> P2PExactly *which* LAW in California are you referring to, P2P?pb...

Palms was talking about fully identified adoptions being the law in Ca. for
parties that plan to relinquish and adopt. Who knew that this equates to
legalized open adoption?? Yeah, I'm confused too.




Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message
news:e5619372.0402141007.303f8732@posting.google.c om... "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote The argument is mainly upward mobility and the desirability of children being reared in a 2-parent home, which is why adoption trade lobbyists object to single parent and queer adoption. Mech, imo, is very tied
to CPCs and conversion at this point. I have no idea if he admits it,
though. Marley What are CPCs? Rupa

Crisis Pregnancy Centers (Or whatever name they like to use now). There are
oer 4000 of them in the US today. They ae the main source of "students" for
NCFA's Infant Adoption Awareness program.

Marley

Ron writes:
It really depends on adoption professional how much of a ruse it is. I haveheardplenty of reliable testimony of mothers under the mistaken impression thattheyretained rights of contact, assumptions promoted by the adoption practioner,onlyto find their rights completely vacated if the adoptive parents back out forwhatever reason.>>

Even a potato would understand, imo, that people, even those who adopt your
child, can change their phone numbers, move and leave no forwarding address and
just plain duck out of sight. I cannot imagine, unless someone actually *lies*
and says promises of future contact are somehow legally binding, that a
woman/parents would make a decision to place a child for adoption based on
promises of future contact with the child.

<< Just so, I've heard reliable stories of birth mothersbackingout or even disappearing from ongoing open adoption relationships. >>

Yes, this is quite common. However, you don't often hear adoptive parents
lamenting, "But we thought she had a *legal* obligation to stay in touch with
us!"

<<The term"openaadoption" has no definitive meaning, it's used to describe everything fromonepreadoptive meeting between mother and PAP to ongoing semi-contactualcontact.Everybody seems to know what they mean by it, but in the end it meanswhateverthe person wants it to mean. Legally, it is meaningless in most states. IbelieveMinnesota has codified it into statute. I'm not sure that California has.>>

Very true. When we set out in 1993 to adopt, the word "open", we were advised
by agencies and attorneys, means nothing more than parties involved in an
adoption revealing all identifying information. Ongoing contact was another
matter, we were told, and very much individual in choice and design.




P2P

>Exactly *which* LAW in California are you referring to, P2P?pb...


Are you asking for a code number? I do not have one. When we met with
attorneys and agencies in CA starting in 1993, we were told consistently that
in CA open adoption is the law, meaning we could not adopt a child and shield
our identities from the birth parents and birth parents could not relinquish a
child but conceal their identities from the adopting family. I'd have to ask
an attorney to cite the law.


P2P

Kathy writes:
Palms was talking about fully identified adoptions being the law in Ca. forparties that plan to relinquish and adopt. Who knew that this equates tolegalized open adoption?? Yeah, I'm confused too.>>

"Identified" adoption and "open" adoption do not mean the same thing.
"Identified" means the birthmother/parents plan to place their infant with
specified parents, parents they name. Another word for "identified" is
"designated". "Open" adoption means all parties reveal identifying information
about themselves to all other parties to the adoption. "Contact" is yet another
kettle of fish.


P2P

"pb..." <woodlark-99@newsguy.com> wrote in message news:<c0lpnv014kh@enews1.newsguy.com>... Rupa Bose wrote:
What are CPCs? Rupa Crisis Pregnancy Centers... [read anti-choice] pb...

Ah, thanks. BTW, it's nice to be able to see your posts now...

Rupa

palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote in message news:<20040214122529.28408.00002192@mb-m01.aol.com>...It sounds like the open adoption option is no longer working as womenwise up to the scam that it is. Now they have to come up with a newone. I wonder what the next ploy will be?Di Us usual, you know not of what you speak, Di.

I certainly do.

Open adoption is very much the norm and even the law in some states (such as CA). "Open" in adoption means no parties to adoption can participate anonymously.

Well duh!

Identities are revealed and shared among all parties. Your assertion that open adoption is "not working" is just stupid.
It is here to stay. You are confusing the concept of "open" with the
concept of "contact".

I am confusing nothing.

While all people I know who adopted newborns here in the US has some
level of ongoing contact with the birth relatives of their children, the fact is laws will never successfully force contact between people, even if they are connected via a child placed/adopted. Unless a person placing a child for adoption is actually granted some sort of visitation rights, which would, in effect, ensure a sort of "parental right", no court will be able to force people to be friends. Yes, there are post contact agreements in some states designed to move children from state care into permanent families. Stories of how those agreements hold up in a court of law have yet to unfold.

Are you trying to suggest that many open adoptions do not close
tighter than a fishes bum once the adoption is secured?
Open adoption is no ruse.

It certainly is. It's used to con young mothers into believing they
will continue to have contact with their child throughout life. But
you and I both know that those promisory contracts are not worth the
paper their written on in most states once the adoption order is made.
Open adoption is a ruse to encourage relinquishment. Always was,
always will be.

People who place children for adoption and those who adopt them commonly believe these days that hiding and keeping secrets have no place in modern adoption. I don't see that changing, ever.

Who is talking about closed adoptions?

Di

P2P

palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote in message news:<20040214123038.28408.00002194@mb-m01.aol.com>...On adoption.com last week a woman (amom) posted that she did not wantthe woman who gave birth to the child visiting the child (what wasoriginally promised).... She was willing to send pictures etc but didnot want the physical visits..She was/is a single parent.. She IMO was worried that the baby wouldlove the mother and not her.. While I am skeptical, Jackie, of your story, I would say, if this story actually exists, it represents an example of two people failing to communicate. A woman placing a child who expects a certain level of contact and visitation and a woman adopting who expects entirely another are headed for trouble. Fact is, the person doing the placing of the child holds all the power until the person doing the adopting has legal custody. Anyone who believes otherwise is foolish. Education is key. P2P

Are you being deliberately obtuse? There is nothing stopping a PAP
from lying through her front teeth in order to get her hands on the
baby, and how is the mother to know until the lie is exposed?
Education has nothing to do with it.
A lie detector should be part of the adoption selection process.

Di

On 14 Feb 2004 16:53:26 GMT, tmnkat@aol.com (Tm n Kat) wrote:
Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/14/2004The thread was taken out.. ErasedWas it erased by the poster or censored? Kathy J

I don't know.. If the one who starts the thread over there
(http://forums.adoption.com/) takes out their initial message.. The
whole thread is gone..


Jackie

On 14 Feb 2004 17:30:38 GMT, palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines)
wrote:
On adoption.com last week a woman (amom) posted that she did not wantthe woman who gave birth to the child visiting the child (what wasoriginally promised).... She was willing to send pictures etc but didnot want the physical visits..She was/is a single parent.. She IMO was worried that the baby wouldlove the mother and not her..While I am skeptical, Jackie, of your story, I would say, if this storyactually exists, it represents an example of two people failing to communicate.

http://forums.adoption.com/t134824,15,1.html

Check out this thread.. This one may be erased so do it quickly..

A woman placing a child who expects a certain level of contact and visitationand a woman adopting who expects entirely another are headed for trouble.

The woman in the thread (above) found that the wording of the
(contact) letter was all wrong..
She was smart enough to suss what was going on..

Factis, the person doing the placing of the child holds all the power until theperson doing the adopting has legal custody. Anyone who believes otherwise isfoolish. Education is key.

And this woman was lucky (smart) enough to have kept her baby in
foster care.
The potential aparents do not have custody of the child..

That is why I say a woman should keep her options open before and
after the birth..


Jackie

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/15/2004
And this woman was lucky (smart) enough to have kept her baby infoster care.The potential aparents do not have custody of the child..That is why I say a woman should keep her options open before andafter the birth..Jackie

Jackie, If the child is in foster care, won't she have to go through the courts
to get her child? Kathy J

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines)Date: 2/14/04 3:22 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <20040214182257.13223.00001620@mb-m20.aol.com>Kathy writes:Palms was talking about fully identified adoptions being the law in Ca. forparties that plan to relinquish and adopt. Who knew that this equates tolegalized open adoption?? Yeah, I'm confused too.>>"Identified" adoption and "open" adoption do not mean the same thing.

Ok, glad that you clarified your point.
"Identified" means the birthmother/parents plan to place their infant withspecified parents, parents they name. Another word for "identified" is"designated". "Open" adoption means all parties reveal identifyinginformationabout themselves to all other parties to the adoption. "Contact" is yetanotherkettle of fish.

Indeed, and a kettle of fish that both paps and p-bparents should know about
before signing on the dotted lines; open adoptions are not legally binding.

As long as everyone knows upfront, I think that open adoption is way healthier
for all parties concerned, especially the child.
P2P




Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: patrice068@optusnet.com.au (Dian)Date: 2/14/04 8:09 PM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <9a095db9.0402142009.34845304@posting.google.com>palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote in messagenews:<20040214122529.28408.00002192@mb-m01.aol.com>...

(snip)
Open adoption is no ruse.
It certainly is. It's used to con young mothers into believing theywill continue to have contact with their child throughout life.

I thought that you were for promoting 'informed decisions' for those that are
placing and adopting? No surprise to me that you really were not.

Of course, it can be an advertising tool, but if all parties obtain informed
and accurate information, and are willing to proceed anyway, there is no con.
Get it? No, of course you don't.
Di






Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

"Tm n Kat" <tmnkat@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040215115258.13026.00002201@mb-m02.aol.com...Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/15/2004And this woman was lucky (smart) enough to have kept her baby infoster care.The potential aparents do not have custody of the child..That is why I say a woman should keep her options open before andafter the birth..Jackie Jackie, If the child is in foster care, won't she have to go through the
courts to get her child? Kathy J

I wouldn't count on it. The mere fact that she put the kid in fostercare
makes her suspect.

Marley

Di asks:
Are you trying to suggest that many open adoptions do not closetighter than a fishes bum once the adoption is secured?>>

"Open" adoptions can never become "closed", Di. "Open" means identifying info
was shared among all participants at the time of placement. There's no way to
"take that back" down the road. However, the issue of ongoing contact is
separate. Yes, people can commit to certain forms of contact and then drop out
of sight, even people involved in adoptions. Why this would surprise anyone is
beyond me.


P2P

Kathy writes of open adoption:
Of course, it can be an advertising tool, but if all parties obtain informedand accurate information, and are willing to proceed anyway, there is no con.Get it? No, of course you don't.>>

I believe ongoing contact can be bait. I believe promises of ongoing contact
or promises of access to the child can be used to sway a person to relinquish.
My point is even a moron could figure out there is no way to *guarantee*
promises of contact or access. If a person will only place a child in exchange
for promises of ongoing contact or access to the child, chances are that person
does not really view adoption as letting go.


P2P

Di says:
There is nothing stopping a PAPfrom lying through her front teeth in order to get her hands on thebaby, and how is the mother to know until the lie is exposed?>>

How could a person contemplating placing a child *only* if promises of contact
are made ever expect those promises can be guaranteed or enforced? How can
anyone be forced to maintain contact with anyone? Unless people have parental
rights and visitation rights granted by courts, the do not have right of access
to *any* child.

I realize, Di, you intend to spin this as if I am saying lying about ongoing
contact is okay and people are fools to believe the lies. I am not. I am saying
a person who does not think ahead and ask, "Even though you are promising
visits twice yearly, how can I be sure you'll keep those promises?" is being
obtuse. There is no way to be sure in the absence of parental rights and
court-granted visitation.


P2P

Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message news:<8osu209c28ghnmeqc6a02dgm1q5635a6v1@4ax.com>... On 14 Feb 2004 17:30:38 GMT, palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote:On adoption.com last week a woman (amom) posted that she did not wantthe woman who gave birth to the child visiting the child (what wasoriginally promised).... She was willing to send pictures etc but didnot want the physical visits..She was/is a single parent.. She IMO was worried that the baby wouldlove the mother and not her..While I am skeptical, Jackie, of your story, I would say, if this storyactually exists, it represents an example of two people failing to communicate. http://forums.adoption.com/t134824,15,1.html Check out this thread.. This one may be erased so do it quickly.. A woman placing a child who expects a certain level of contact and visitationand a woman adopting who expects entirely another are headed for trouble. The woman in the thread (above) found that the wording of the (contact) letter was all wrong.. She was smart enough to suss what was going on..Factis, the person doing the placing of the child holds all the power until theperson doing the adopting has legal custody. Anyone who believes otherwise isfoolish. Education is key. And this woman was lucky (smart) enough to have kept her baby in foster care. The potential aparents do not have custody of the child.. That is why I say a woman should keep her options open before and after the birth..

I read the thread, and yes, this looks very much like an adoption that
shouldn't happen. This woman perhaps should not even relinquish the
child, and if she does, probably not to the couple she had chosen.
She's getting a lot of good advice from the others on the board --
some of them a-moms.

I think she was wise to keep her options open. And I can see why you
recommend it to others as well. It allows time to correct mistakes in
judgement.

However, if she had made the plan only after the child was born, she
wouldn't have known anything about them. She would still be at the
initial stages, where she thought they were ideal. I think the way she
has done it gives her a chance to think it all through.

I wish she had found the forum earlier. That might have been even more
helpful.

Rupa

"Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote "Tm n Kat" <tmnkat@aol.com> wroteFrom: Jackie forgetit@me.comAnd this woman was lucky (smart) enough to have kept her baby infoster care.The potential aparents do not have custody of the child..That is why I say a woman should keep her options open before andafter the birth..
Jackie, If the child is in foster care, won't she have to go through the courts to get her child? Kathy J I wouldn't count on it. The mere fact that she put the kid in fostercare makes her suspect.

On reading the thread, I didn't get the impression that it was DSS
foster care, rather that it was something provided by the agency. In
that case, it shouldn't be difficult for her to recover her child.

Rupa

palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote I believe ongoing contact can be bait. I believe promises of ongoing contact or promises of access to the child can be used to sway a person to relinquish. My point is even a moron could figure out there is no way to *guarantee* promises of contact or access. If a person will only place a child in exchange for promises of ongoing contact or access to the child, chances are that person does not really view adoption as letting go.

Probably true. But in the same forum, there seem to be birthmothers
who do have ongoing contact with their b-kids. So there are families
that are built like that, where it all works out.

IIRC, we had a poster here who had ongoing contact with the mothers of
one of her a-kids, though we were focussed at the time on her closing
off contact (though not information) with the family of another of her
a-kids.

I think that in such situations, there should be legal enforceability,
perhaps in the form of visiting rights.

Rupa

palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote in message news:<20040215133915.28443.00002041@mb-m01.aol.com>... Di asks:Are you trying to suggest that many open adoptions do not closetighter than a fishes bum once the adoption is secured?>> "Open" adoptions can never become "closed", Di. "Open" means identifying info was shared among all participants at the time of placement. There's no way to "take that back" down the road. However, the issue of ongoing contact is separate. Yes, people can commit to certain forms of contact and then drop out of sight, even people involved in adoptions. Why this would surprise anyone is beyond me. P2P

You seem to be deliberately avoiding the reality that in all but a few
states, once the adoption order is made the mother has no legal
recourse to force the adopters to comply with their contractual
promise of ongoing contact between the mother and child. Those
contracts are not worth the paper they are written on - making them a
ruse to encourage the mother who otherwise would not
have considered it under a closed system, to relinquish.


Di

palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote in message news:<20040215134706.28443.00002043@mb-m01.aol.com>... Di says:There is nothing stopping a PAPfrom lying through her front teeth in order to get her hands on thebaby, and how is the mother to know until the lie is exposed?>> How could a person contemplating placing a child *only* if promises of contact are made ever expect those promises can be guaranteed or enforced? How can anyone be forced to maintain contact with anyone? Unless people have parental rights and visitation rights granted by courts, the do not have right of access to *any* child.


In legitimate open adoption contractual agreements they work in the
same way as visitation rights between divorced parents. Our new
adoption lawsin NSW do not allow adopters to terminate visitation
contracts at whim. They have to be brought before the courts if the
nmother complains about being denied her contractual visitations. I
think it works both ways if a complaint is made. Will need to check
that.

BTW, this is not about the mothers rights, but about protecting the
child's right to maintain established relationships without fear of
political intervention between other adult parties.

I realize, Di, you intend to spin this as if I am saying lying about ongoing contact is okay and people are fools to believe the lies. I am not. I am saying a person who does not think ahead and ask, "Even though you are promising visits twice yearly, how can I be sure you'll keep those promises?" is being obtuse. There is no way to be sure in the absence of parental rights and court-granted visitation.
See above.
P2P

On 15 Feb 2004 16:52:58 GMT, tmnkat@aol.com (Tm n Kat) wrote:
Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/15/2004And this woman was lucky (smart) enough to have kept her baby infoster care.The potential aparents do not have custody of the child..That is why I say a woman should keep her options open before andafter the birth..JackieJackie, If the child is in foster care, won't she have to go through the courtsto get her child? Kathy J


The agency told her she has one week to get the baby..

The potential adoptive parents worded the open adoption agreement with
nothing said about real time visits (this was presented to her after
the birth).. She assumed there would be visits.. That was her 'red
flag'. IMO

She told the agency that she wanted a couple that was willing to have
visits.. The agency she was with told her that they did not have a
couple registered with them who would be any more open than the couple
she chose...(<my interpretation of what she wrote)

The pastor of her church (they are an adoptive couple) is going to
take the baby till she can get proper living conditions.. She is
rooming in someones home now and does not think the people there would
be willing to have a baby in the home..
So now she is sorting the logistics of it.

The agency seems to have cut her off.. Just told her that she has one
week..

http://forums.adoption.com/showthread.php?threadid=134824

Check out this thread as well..

http://forums.adoption.com/showthread.php?threadid=134966

In this thread a woman is caring for a pregnant woman who is going to
relinquish into an open adoption.. Or thinks she is going to do this..

The potential aparents (who are paying the bills) are asking very deep
medical questions.. Blood tests etc.. Another red flag according to
the woman (birthmom and nurse) who is caring for the pregnant girl..

Jackie

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:20:09 GMT, "Marley Greiner"
<maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
"Tm n Kat" <tmnkat@aol.com> wrote in messagenews:20040215115258.13026.00002201@mb-m02.aol.com...Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/15/2004And this woman was lucky (smart) enough to have kept her baby infoster care.The potential aparents do not have custody of the child..That is why I say a woman should keep her options open before andafter the birth..Jackie Jackie, If the child is in foster care, won't she have to go through thecourts to get her child? Kathy JI wouldn't count on it. The mere fact that she put the kid in fostercaremakes her suspect.

The baby is with a 'foster mother' who is provided by the agency..

She has one week to get the baby..

What drama this is..

Jackie

On 15 Feb 2004 16:14:21 -0800, rkbose@pacific.net.sg (Rupa Bose)
wrote:
"Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote "Tm n Kat" <tmnkat@aol.com> wrote >From: Jackie forgetit@me.com >And this woman was lucky (smart) enough to have kept her baby in >foster care.The potential aparents do not have custody of the child.. >That is why I say a woman should keep her options open before and >after the birth.. Jackie, If the child is in foster care, won't she have to go through the courts to get her child? Kathy J I wouldn't count on it. The mere fact that she put the kid in fostercare makes her suspect.On reading the thread, I didn't get the impression that it was DSSfoster care, rather that it was something provided by the agency. Inthat case, it shouldn't be difficult for her to recover her child.Rupa


She started up a new thread in 'Failed adoptions'.

http://forums.adoption.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=134930


Jackie

On 15 Feb 2004 12:30:43 -0800, rkbose@pacific.net.sg (Rupa Bose)
wrote:
That is why I say a woman should keep her options open before and after the birth..I read the thread, and yes, this looks very much like an adoption thatshouldn't happen. This woman perhaps should not even relinquish thechild, and if she does, probably not to the couple she had chosen.She's getting a lot of good advice from the others on the board --some of them a-moms.

There are some amazing amoms (aparents) on that board..
Real honest people who really want to make all of this work..

Heck there was one thread about the potential adoptive parent having
nothing to do with the potential birth mom before the birth..

They don't want to be put through all that paying money out and
risking terrible disappointment either..
It is very obvious that someone else cooked this up..IMO
I think she was wise to keep her options open. And I can see why yourecommend it to others as well. It allows time to correct mistakes injudgement.

Yes..
However, if she had made the plan only after the child was born, shewouldn't have known anything about them.

Yes.. and she would not be going into the horrible guilt she is into..

The potential amom was her labor coach..
I feel very sorry for the couple.. They must be devastated..
But who told them to tell her about how open the adoption would be
*after the birth*.. Why did they not tell her from the get go?
She said she made it very clear that she wanted visits..
She would still be at theinitial stages, where she thought they were ideal. I think the way shehas done it gives her a chance to think it all through.

I kept hearing when she was doing the stream of thought writing that
when she held the baby she knew she did not want to give it up..
I wish she had found the forum earlier. That might have been even morehelpful.

Its a very interesting place.. I like to just sit and read it at nite
when the hockey game is on..

There is a dance there tho.. The place is run by an adoption attorney
or someone like that.. I try and keep a low profile. Key word is
'try'.

Jackie

Di writes:
In legitimate open adoption contractual agreements they work in thesame way as visitation rights between divorced parents.>.

Perhaps, Di. That has yet to be seen in the US. In the states with
post-adoption contact agreements they are used primarily to free children from
foster care. We should not have to wait too long to see how one holds up in a
court of law. Sans legal rights of visitation, I'd think anyone, even
birthparents, would realize people can legally move, change phone numbers and
drop out of sight.


P2P

Rupa writes:
Probably true. But in the same forum, there seem to be birthmotherswho do have ongoing contact with their b-kids. So there are familiesthat are built like that, where it all works out.>.


Yes! Our family is an example. However, in now way could holding my family up
as an example of how open adoption can work with ongoing contact serve as a
guarantee it can work for everyone. People have issues. Some personalities
cannot mix over the longhaul. Lives change. Feelings are born and die. There
are no crystal balls, not even in adoption.


P2P

>I think that in such situations, there should be legal enforceability,perhaps in the form of visiting rights.Rupa


Probably won't be in US adoption, Rupa. The relinquishing of a child severs all
claims. The adopting of a child gives the adoptive parents full control. The
entire wording and design of US adoption would have to change in order to grant
visitation by a birthparent, who is non-family/non-parent once the adoption
takes place. Even grandparents in this country do not have rights of
access/visitation.


P2P

Di writes to me:
You seem to be deliberately avoiding the reality that in all but a fewstates, once the adoption order is made the mother has no legalrecourse to force the adopters to comply with their contractualpromise of ongoing contact between the mother and child. Thosecontracts are not worth the paper they are written on - making them aruse to encourage the mother who otherwise would nothave considered it under a closed system, to relinquish.


Avoiding the reality? Good lord, woman! This is exactly what I have been
saying. Aren't you stunned we agree*?



P2P


*Mostly. I am not sure plans on all sides of an adoption for ongoing contact
are always a "ruse". I think they can be plans made in the heat of a drama.
Once the heat cools, those plans sometimes don't seem do-able.


P2P

She has one week to get the baby..What drama this is..Jackie


A drama created by whom, Jackie?


P2P

Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote
rkbose@pacific.net.sg (Rupa Bose) wrote:However, if she had made the plan only after the child was born, shewouldn't have known anything about them. Yes.. and she would not be going into the horrible guilt she is into..
She would still be at theinitial stages, where she thought they were ideal. I think the way shehas done it gives her a chance to think it all through. I kept hearing when she was doing the stream of thought writing that when she held the baby she knew she did not want to give it up..

I can't imagine she did.
I felt her reasons for relinquishing seemed a little...unrealistic? A
Stay-at-home mom and having a dad?

However, she still needed some kind of a plan. I don't think the
agency would have taken her at all if she didn't. And it's also
reasonably generous of them to pay for a week of childcare if she
isn't going to relinquish.

Rupa

palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines) wrote Probably won't be in US adoption, Rupa. The relinquishing of a child severs all claims. The adopting of a child gives the adoptive parents full control. The entire wording and design of US adoption would have to change in order to grant visitation by a birthparent, who is non-family/non-parent once the adoption takes place. Even grandparents in this country do not have rights of access/visitation.

Yes, I know. It's not that impossible, though. It just has to allow
for the possibility of more than just two parents.

At present, a child can legally have 0-2 parents. I think there's
room, in this society, for some kind of a "quasi-parent" relationship.
It could be used to give step-parents some legal rights concerning
their step-kids, if the mother/ father do not wish to relinquish their
parental rights. And it could be used in situations like open
adoption.

Rupa

On 16 Feb 2004 12:58:30 -0800, rkbose@pacific.net.sg (Rupa Bose)
wrote:
Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote rkbose@pacific.net.sg (Rupa Bose) wrote:However, if she had made the plan only after the child was born, shewouldn't have known anything about them. Yes.. and she would not be going into the horrible guilt she is into..She would still be at theinitial stages, where she thought they were ideal. I think the way shehas done it gives her a chance to think it all through. I kept hearing when she was doing the stream of thought writing that when she held the baby she knew she did not want to give it up..I can't imagine she did.I felt her reasons for relinquishing seemed a little...unrealistic? AStay-at-home mom and having a dad?However, she still needed some kind of a plan. I don't think theagency would have taken her at all if she didn't. And it's alsoreasonably generous of them to pay for a week of childcare if sheisn't going to relinquish.

It seems they are fighting her..

http://forums.adoption.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=135481

They have sent 'A Child Protective Investigator for DCYF' to check out
abuse.. Abuse that could not have happened because she did not ever
have possession of the child.. I guess thinking about relinquishing is
the abuse..

The other thread is gone.. She deleted it out of respect for the
potential aparents..
I guess they don't have much respect for her tho..


Jackie

On 16 Feb 2004 12:58:30 -0800, rkbose@pacific.net.sg (Rupa Bose)
wrote:
Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote rkbose@pacific.net.sg (Rupa Bose) wrote:However, if she had made the plan only after the child was born, shewouldn't have known anything about them. Yes.. and she would not be going into the horrible guilt she is into..She would still be at theinitial stages, where she thought they were ideal. I think the way shehas done it gives her a chance to think it all through. I kept hearing when she was doing the stream of thought writing that when she held the baby she knew she did not want to give it up..I can't imagine she did.I felt her reasons for relinquishing seemed a little...unrealistic? AStay-at-home mom and having a dad?

But that seems to be what a lot of the potential birthmoms think..IMO

'They' can give what she can not..
However, she still needed some kind of a plan. I don't think theagency would have taken her at all if she didn't. And it's alsoreasonably generous of them to pay for a week of childcare if sheisn't going to relinquish.

Its all wrong..

All of it..

Should not happen..


Jackie

Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote > It seems they are fighting her.. http://forums.adoption.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=135481 They have sent 'A Child Protective Investigator for DCYF' to check out abuse.. Abuse that could not have happened because she did not ever have possession of the child.. I guess thinking about relinquishing is the abuse.. The other thread is gone.. She deleted it out of respect for the potential aparents.. I guess they don't have much respect for her tho..

I don't know all that she's said about them -- but it looks very much
as though it's the agency that is fighting her and not the
p-a-parents. The agency doesn't seem to be acting very ethically. That
would be the downside of agency foster care: They make a costly
investment in caring for the baby, and so it's in their interest to
pressure the mother to relinquish the child.

Rupa

Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote But that seems to be what a lot of the potential birthmoms think..IMO 'They' can give what she can not..

And sometimes it's true. But relinquishing a child because of some
idealised family structure may be too idealistic, IMO. Besides, as
someone else pointed out -- 50% of US marriages end in divorce anyway.

Rupa

"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message
news:e5619372.0402191623.5247f02b@posting.google.c om... Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote > It seems they are fighting her.. http://forums.adoption.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=135481 They have sent 'A Child Protective Investigator for DCYF' to check out abuse.. Abuse that could not have happened because she did not ever have possession of the child.. I guess thinking about relinquishing is the abuse.. The other thread is gone.. She deleted it out of respect for the potential aparents.. I guess they don't have much respect for her tho.. I don't know all that she's said about them -- but it looks very much as though it's the agency that is fighting her and not the p-a-parents. The agency doesn't seem to be acting very ethically. That would be the downside of agency foster care: They make a costly investment in caring for the baby, and so it's in their interest to pressure the mother to relinquish the child. Rupa

Does the agency have a name? That is, has it been mentioned in the thread?

Marley

"Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote Does the agency have a name? That is, has it been mentioned in the thread?

People have asked her to post the name *after* she gets the kid back.

Rupa

On 19 Feb 2004 16:25:12 -0800, rkbose@pacific.net.sg (Rupa Bose)
wrote:
Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote But that seems to be what a lot of the potential birthmoms think..IMO 'They' can give what she can not..And sometimes it's true. But relinquishing a child because of someidealised family structure may be too idealistic, IMO. Besides, assomeone else pointed out -- 50% of US marriages end in divorce anyway.

What I believe is that some of these women do not have a positive
outlook in life.. Heck if they were in control with their life they
would have used birth control..

They don't think they are good enough to raise a baby.. And they think
they know what they are doing *before* the birth..


Jackie

On 19 Feb 2004 16:23:08 -0800, rkbose@pacific.net.sg (Rupa Bose)
wrote:
Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote > It seems they are fighting her.. http://forums.adoption.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=135481 They have sent 'A Child Protective Investigator for DCYF' to check out abuse.. Abuse that could not have happened because she did not ever have possession of the child.. I guess thinking about relinquishing is the abuse.. The other thread is gone.. She deleted it out of respect for the potential aparents.. I guess they don't have much respect for her tho..I don't know all that she's said about them -- but it looks very muchas though it's the agency that is fighting her and not thep-a-parents. The agency doesn't seem to be acting very ethically. Thatwould be the downside of agency foster care: They make a costlyinvestment in caring for the baby, and so it's in their interest topressure the mother to relinquish the child.


She is probably has the baby now.. Its a shame that all the really
good threads (on adopiton.com) end up dissapearing..

Jackie

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:38:28 GMT, "Marley Greiner"
<maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Does the agency have a name? That is, has it been mentioned in the thread?

She has not named it.. I am watching for that..

Someone (a sysop) wanted to know the name (private) to make sure they
are not connected with adoption.com..

But they did hand the baby over.. Or she said they were going to do it
last nite..


Jackie

"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message
news:e5619372.0402192348.44bbe0aa@posting.google.c om... "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote Does the agency have a name? That is, has it been mentioned in the
thread? People have asked her to post the name *after* she gets the kid back. Rupa

That's smart. Any idea what state?

Marley

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/20/04 4:39 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <qtvb3014aflesrammmjc5vtuboi5ci2vdn@4ax.com>On 19 Feb 2004 16:23:08 -0800, rkbose@pacific.net.sg (Rupa Bose)wrote:Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote > It seems they are fighting her.. http://forums.adoption.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=135481 They have sent 'A Child Protective Investigator for DCYF' to check out abuse.. Abuse that could not have happened because she did not ever have possession of the child.. I guess thinking about relinquishing is the abuse.. The other thread is gone.. She deleted it out of respect for the potential aparents.. I guess they don't have much respect for her tho..I don't know all that she's said about them -- but it looks very muchas though it's the agency that is fighting her and not thep-a-parents. The agency doesn't seem to be acting very ethically. Thatwould be the downside of agency foster care: They make a costlyinvestment in caring for the baby, and so it's in their interest topressure the mother to relinquish the child.She is probably has the baby now.. Its a shame that all the reallygood threads (on adopiton.com) end up dissapearing..Jackie


Couldn't have anything to do with YOU posting the thread over her umteen times
in direct violation of adoption.com's rules could it?
Tif

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:33:53 GMT, "Marley Greiner"
<maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in messagenews:e5619372.0402192348.44bbe0aa@posting.g oogle.com... "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote Does the agency have a name? That is, has it been mentioned in thethread? People have asked her to post the name *after* she gets the kid back. RupaThat's smart. Any idea what state?


No idea.. She said she may tell folks when she has had time to think..
Others have asked her to keep posting on how she is doing..

Last nite she said that the look on the face of the woman from the
agency was not very nice when the baby was handed over..

But she has her baby..

She is taking parenting classes and sorting her life..

Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!!

"Jackie" <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message
news:3moe309otpv387ndav130ba25htqci5cdq@4ax.com... On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:33:53 GMT, "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in messagenews:e5619372.0402192348.44bbe0aa@posting.g oogle.com... "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote > > Does the agency have a name? That is, has it been mentioned in thethread? People have asked her to post the name *after* she gets the kid back. RupaThat's smart. Any idea what state? No idea.. She said she may tell folks when she has had time to think.. Others have asked her to keep posting on how she is doing.. Last nite she said that the look on the face of the woman from the agency was not very nice when the baby was handed over.. But she has her baby.. She is taking parenting classes and sorting her life.. Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!!

Hey! Glad to hear that, Jackie!

Marley

In article <20040220235506.10267.00000089@mb-m03.aol.com>, daisy511@aol.com
(Daisy511) wrote:
Couldn't have anything to do with YOU posting the thread over her umteentimes in direct violation of adoption.com's rules could it?

That's extremely remote and I daresay you know it.

whoever
-----------------------------
drinking my umpteenth coffee

In article <20040220235506.10267.00000089@mb-m03.aol.com>, daisy511@aol.com
(Daisy511) wrote:
Couldn't have anything to do with YOU posting the thread over her umteentimes in direct violation of adoption.com's rules could it?

That's extremely remote and I daresay you know it.

whoever
-----------------------------
drinking my umpteenth coffee

In article <20040220235506.10267.00000089@mb-m03.aol.com>, daisy511@aol.com
(Daisy511) wrote:
Couldn't have anything to do with YOU posting the thread over her umteentimes in direct violation of adoption.com's rules could it?

That's extremely remote and I daresay you know it.

whoever
-----------------------------
drinking my umpteenth coffee

>> Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!!Hey! Glad to hear that, Jackie!Marley


Wooohoo! This is great news, Jackie.


P2P

>In article <20040220235506.10267.00000089@mb-m03.aol.com>, daisy511@aol.com(Daisy511) wrote:Couldn't have anything to do with YOU posting the thread over her umteentimes in direct violation of adoption.com's rules could it?That's extremely remote and I daresay you know it.whoever-----------------------------drinking my umpteenth coffee


That umpteenth cup of coffee is making you jumpy. You have hit the send button
five times in a row.


P2P

"Palms2pines" <palms2pines@aol.comh8spam> wrote in message
news:20040221115652.10134.00000079@mb-m17.aol.com...In article <20040220235506.10267.00000089@mb-m03.aol.com>,
daisy511@aol.com(Daisy511) wrote:Couldn't have anything to do with YOU posting the thread over her umteentimes in direct violation of adoption.com's rules could it?That's extremely remote and I daresay you know it.whoever-----------------------------drinking my umpteenth coffee That umpteenth cup of coffee is making you jumpy. You have hit the send
button five times in a row. P2P

Channeling Crackangeleo?

Marley

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: palms2pines@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines)Date: 2/21/04 8:56 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <20040221115652.10134.00000079@mb-m17.aol.com>In article <20040220235506.10267.00000089@mb-m03.aol.com>, daisy511@aol.com(Daisy511) wrote:Couldn't have anything to do with YOU posting the thread over her umteentimes in direct violation of adoption.com's rules could it?That's extremely remote and I daresay you know it.whoever-----------------------------drinking my umpteenth coffeeThat umpteenth cup of coffee is making you jumpy. You have hit the sendbuttonfive times in a row.P2P

I only see three cups here this morning.

For a minute, I thought the crackangelo virus was runnin' loose.




Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/21/04 5:58 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <3moe309otpv387ndav130ba25htqci5cdq@4ax.com>On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:33:53 GMT, "Marley Greiner"<maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in messagenews:e5619372.0402192348.44bbe0aa@posting.g oogle.com... "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote > > Does the agency have a name? That is, has it been mentioned in thethread? People have asked her to post the name *after* she gets the kid back. RupaThat's smart. Any idea what state?No idea.. She said she may tell folks when she has had time to think..Others have asked her to keep posting on how she is doing..Last nite she said that the look on the face of the woman from theagency was not very nice when the baby was handed over..But she has her baby..She is taking parenting classes and sorting her life..Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!!

Wonderful, Jackie!!!!

My bson called me the other morning. He has done the calling to me the last two
times. I am more than happy to finally acknowledge that I feel that our
relationship is cement. Perhaps only another bmom or bparent can really
understand what I mean. Ya know?

Anyway, I am soooo happy for you and your son, Jackie.






Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: reveohw@aol.compromise (fiend)Date: 2/21/04 9:44 AM Mountain Standard TimeMessage-id: <20040221114433.23171.00004219@mb-m05.aol.com>In article <20040220235506.10267.00000089@mb-m03.aol.com>, daisy511@aol.com(Daisy511) wrote:Couldn't have anything to do with YOU posting the thread over her umteentimes in direct violation of adoption.com's rules could it?That's extremely remote and I daresay you know it.whoever

Who let the crackangelo virus in here? LOL


-------------------------
A good friend will come and bail you out of jail . . . but, a true friend will
be sitting next to you saying, "Damn . . . that was fun!"
-----Unknown

Marley Greiner wrote: "Palms2pines" <palms2pines@aol.comh8spam> wrote in message news:20040221115652.10134.00000079@mb-m17.aol.com...In article <20040220235506.10267.00000089@mb-m03.aol.com>, daisy511@aol.com(Daisy511) wrote:>Couldn't have anything to do with YOU posting the thread over her umteen>times in direct violation of adoption.com's rules could it?That's extremely remote and I daresay you know it.whoever-----------------------------drinking my umpteenth coffeeThat umpteenth cup of coffee is making you jumpy. You have hit the send buttonfive times in a row.P2P Channeling Crackangeleo? Marley


No way...one must always consider the electronic source, and you *know*
that AOL is just plain crap.AOL has lost, and continues to lose millions
of members. I am about to cancel AOL but I'm having trouble 'cause Mom
has her email address there and doesn't want to let go ;-) I'll have
to set up another mailbox for her elsewhere, then we'll be FREE AT LAST.

pb...



"I don't worry about numbers, I worry about people," Bush said.
"There are still some people looking for work because of the
recession."
--GWB in Pennsylvania, 2/12/04

Jackie wrote:
Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!!

Congrats, Jackie...how wonderful for you!

Patty B...

"Kathy" <meagan787@aol.comsthesun> wrote in message
news:20040221125141.20223.00000120@mb-m04.aol.com...Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/21/04 5:58 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <3moe309otpv387ndav130ba25htqci5cdq@4ax.com>On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:33:53 GMT, "Marley Greiner"<maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in messagenews:e5619372.0402192348.44bbe0aa@posting.g oogle.com...> "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote> >> > Does the agency have a name? That is, has it been mentioned in thethread?>> People have asked her to post the name *after* she gets the kid back.>> RupaThat's smart. Any idea what state?No idea.. She said she may tell folks when she has had time to think..Others have asked her to keep posting on how she is doing..Last nite she said that the look on the face of the woman from theagency was not very nice when the baby was handed over..But she has her baby..She is taking parenting classes and sorting her life..Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!! Wonderful, Jackie!!!! My bson called me the other morning. He has done the calling to me the
last two times. I am more than happy to finally acknowledge that I feel that our relationship is cement. Perhaps only another bmom or bparent can really understand what I mean. Ya know? Anyway, I am soooo happy for you and your son, Jackie.

Glad to hear this, Kathy. I'm the first one to admit that I don't
understand where all the problems arise. I never had them with either
Dottie or Jack. Maybe you reach a certain age where it makes no difference.

Marley Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business
in baby trafficking". ~~121603 http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.netDate: 2/21/2004
Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!!Hey! Glad to hear that, Jackie!Marley

Same here, good to hear. Kathy J

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 15:15:25 GMT, "Marley Greiner"
<maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!!Hey! Glad to hear that, Jackie!

I think we are entering another stage of reunion..

I like this stage.. I am comfortable in this stage..

Jackie

On 22 Feb 2004 01:07:50 GMT, tmnkat@aol.com (Tm n Kat) wrote:
Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: "Marley Greiner" maddogmarley@worldnet.att.netDate: 2/21/2004 Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!!Hey! Glad to hear that, Jackie!MarleySame here, good to hear. Kathy J

Thanks Palms and Kathy..

He is on the west coast so he woke me up.. But he just wanted to talk.

He said he was happy.. He said he was having a good life..

And so am I..

Jackie

On 21 Feb 2004 17:51:41 GMT, meagan787@aol.comsthesun (Kathy) wrote:
Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/21/04 5:58 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <3moe309otpv387ndav130ba25htqci5cdq@4ax.com>On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:33:53 GMT, "Marley Greiner"<maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in messagenews:e5619372.0402192348.44bbe0aa@posting.g oogle.com...> "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote> >> > Does the agency have a name? That is, has it been mentioned in thethread?>> People have asked her to post the name *after* she gets the kid back.>> RupaThat's smart. Any idea what state?No idea.. She said she may tell folks when she has had time to think..Others have asked her to keep posting on how she is doing..Last nite she said that the look on the face of the woman from theagency was not very nice when the baby was handed over..But she has her baby..She is taking parenting classes and sorting her life..Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!!Wonderful, Jackie!!!!My bson called me the other morning. He has done the calling to me the last twotimes. I am more than happy to finally acknowledge that I feel that ourrelationship is cement. Perhaps only another bmom or bparent can reallyunderstand what I mean. Ya know?Anyway, I am soooo happy for you and your son, Jackie.

I will be able to follow them in their lives now.. When the kids go
skiing (first grandson is skiing with this dad).. He wants me and my
family to go visit again.. Money is tough in Canada now so thats not
going to happen..

He says he does not email well but wants me to keep writing..

I am happy..

Jackie

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 16:47:51 -0800, "pb..." <woodlark-99@newsguy.com>
wrote:
Jackie wrote: Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!!Congrats, Jackie...how wonderful for you!

Thanks Patty.. I hope and pray that you will be in contact with your
birthdaughter soon..

Jackie

>Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/22/04 4:53 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <nd9h309vsa0vhkohio29dmi8oo4rumtmnl@4ax.com>On 21 Feb 2004 17:51:41 GMT, meagan787@aol.comsthesun (Kathy) wrote:Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/21/04 5:58 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <3moe309otpv387ndav130ba25htqci5cdq@4ax.com>On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:33:53 GMT, "Marley Greiner"<maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:>>"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message>news:e5619372.0402192348.44bbe0aa@posting.google.c om...>> "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote>> >>> > Does the agency have a name? That is, has it been mentioned in the>thread?>>>> People have asked her to post the name *after* she gets the kid back.>>>> Rupa>>That's smart. Any idea what state?No idea.. She said she may tell folks when she has had time to think..Others have asked her to keep posting on how she is doing..Last nite she said that the look on the face of the woman from theagency was not very nice when the baby was handed over..But she has her baby..She is taking parenting classes and sorting her life..Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!!Wonderful, Jackie!!!!My bson called me the other morning. He has done the calling to me the lasttwotimes. I am more than happy to finally acknowledge that I feel that ourrelationship is cement. Perhaps only another bmom or bparent can reallyunderstand what I mean. Ya know?Anyway, I am soooo happy for you and your son, Jackie.I will be able to follow them in their lives now.. When the kids goskiing (first grandson is skiing with this dad).. He wants me and myfamily to go visit again.. Money is tough in Canada now so thats notgoing to happen..He says he does not email well but wants me to keep writing..I am happy..Jackie

There you go! Again, I am happy that he is setting the course for what appears
to be a lifelong relationship.

I remember my bson saying from day one that he would be in my life forever.
It's just taken me almost 7 years to allow myself to believe it! You know what
I mean, I am sure...

Anyway, nothing better than to learn how the grandchildren are doing, and
seeing pictures of how much they have grown.
My bgrandson just lost his first tooth. He is almost 7, and is in first grade
already. When I reunited he was just 5 mths old. And the other one, he is
almost 4 this March, and gets ont he phone with me, and tells me all about his
trucks, and super heroes. Just adorable boys...:)

And of course, I am now a grandmother to a baby girl of six months. My youngest
son's daughter. All these boys, and I finally got a girl to spoil. Life if
good, Jackie....really good!




Diane Welfare, "she describes the US market as a "$US1.4 billion business in
baby trafficking". ~~121603
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/15/1071336884771.html

In article <CaTZb.28134$aH3.894399@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, Marley
Greiner says..."Kathy" <meagan787@aol.comsthesun> wrote in messagenews:20040221125141.20223.00000120@mb-m04.aol.com...Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/21/04 5:58 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <3moe309otpv387ndav130ba25htqci5cdq@4ax.com>On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:33:53 GMT, "Marley Greiner"<maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:>>"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message>news:e5619372.0402192348.44bbe0aa@posting.google.c om...>> "Marley Greiner" <maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote>> >>> > Does the agency have a name? That is, has it been mentioned in the>thread?>>>> People have asked her to post the name *after* she gets the kid back.>>>> Rupa>>That's smart. Any idea what state?No idea.. She said she may tell folks when she has had time to think..Others have asked her to keep posting on how she is doing..Last nite she said that the look on the face of the woman from theagency was not very nice when the baby was handed over..But she has her baby..She is taking parenting classes and sorting her life..Jackie.. whose bson called her last nite.. Hooray!!!!! Wonderful, Jackie!!!! My bson called me the other morning. He has done the calling to me thelast two times. I am more than happy to finally acknowledge that I feel that our relationship is cement. Perhaps only another bmom or bparent can really understand what I mean. Ya know? Anyway, I am soooo happy for you and your son, Jackie.Glad to hear this, Kathy. I'm the first one to admit that I don'tunderstand where all the problems arise. I never had them with eitherDottie or Jack. Maybe you reach a certain age where it makes no difference.

You're probably all going to laugh at me, but I'm personally glad that my
meeting with my bmom and bsis is OVER. Who needs tension like that? I've
written her to say that perhaps we'll get together in the future and that my
bsis should be feel to contact me, but I'm pretty much leaving the ball in their
court. I've done my part - Anything else is up to them.

Will I hear from them in the future? Honestly, I don't know. I've sort of
always felt that this meeting was probably a one-time thing. Am I okay with
that? Absolutely.

Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & EAC Spellcaster
#1557

Glad to hear your good news, Jackie.

Linda

Jackie <forgetit@me.com> wrote in message news:<nd9h309vsa0vhkohio29dmi8oo4rumtmnl@4ax.com>... On 21 Feb 2004 17:51:41 GMT, meagan787@aol.comsthesun (Kathy) wrote:Subject: Re: Orientation of Pregnancy Counselors toward Adoption:From: Jackie forgetit@me.comDate: 2/21/04 5:58 AM Pacific Standard TimeMessage-id: <3moe309otpv387ndav130ba25htqci5cdq@4ax.com>On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:33:53 GMT, "Marley Greiner"<maddogmarley@worldnet.att.net> wrote:>>"Rupa Bose" <rkbose@pacific.net