Quote:
Originally Posted by RobinMask
I'm pretty sure the discussion about adopted children and their roots has been had before, and many different people on the forum - some adopted and some not - all seemed to say the same thing. The family who raise you are your family, blood ties are not as important as you seem to think - (I'm including culture and native origins under 'blood ties') - and I really don't think the majority of adpotive children are as distraught, confused, or have any real crisis of identity as you make out.
No, it isn't black and white, but roots aren't important in the sense you make it out to be. To most adoptive children their family are the ones that raise them, that culture is there culture, and when there is a curiosity it's just a curiosity. Also not all celebrity children are Paris Hiltons or Kelly Osbournes, some lead very well-adjusted and productive lives, again because they had families who loved them - no doubt the adoptive children stand the same chances.
Edit: I also don't remember saying there is no such thing as natural history, just that identity is a seperate issue, and most children who are adopted at birth do not associate or identify with their natural history. (Sorry, I see the 'natural history' comment was aimed at Suki, but my point still stands).
|
I was involved for many years with ADOPTION-- and believe you me there can be many issues.
However I'll leave you all to think whatever you like
PS: for those who think the title ENVIRONMENT is a subject not worth discussing-- Then Just DON''T bother. either to read or to write. Its perfectly simple.