John&Nina

Congratulations to all, but especially to Teena and Joe, our first WO's to place!!!!

I just stumbled on this thread, thanks to Jan. We would have seriously considered bringing these little ones into our home if we had had our paperwork in order. Several family issues unfortunately have slowed us down. It's funny, though. When we started the process I told Nina one stipulation I had was that Hendrick remained the "oldest" in our family. However, as we all know, man plans and God laughs. With Abrazo on the case, an excellent home for this boy and girl is not far away. Our prayers to all in this soon-to-be triad. May God's blessings flow freely for everyone involved.

I received this press release by e-mail today: Abrazo's cost estimate for child birth is obviously very much in line with the results of this study. Here is a link to the study.

This may not be the right place for this, because it's about a celebrity who placed a child for adoption, but here's a recent quote from Joni Mitchell about the effect that placing her daughter had on her and her music. Mitchell has since been reunited with her daughter.

Sorry, Adam. I only posted the first two paragraphs of that story. Here's the rest...

Another celebrity looking at adoption...

My brother, Ralph, passed away four years ago this week. He had colon cancer, lived with my parents for the last 10 months of his life and, quite literally, died in my mother's arms. I want to share with you the Bible verses that have comforted me from the moment I learned of his passing. They have stayed with me since, and I reread them today to once again remind me of the comfort that awaits those who suffer. RIP, my brother, Ralph David, June 6, 1954 - Sept. 23, 2003

Good idea, Elizabeth. I remember when our birthmom reached either Nina's or my mother (for some reason right now, I forget which, although I think it was my mom). It was totally unplanned and by accident. We just happened not to be home when she called. Even though the conversation was short, I think it went a long way to lifting the veil of mystery. She became very human at that point and not an abstract. I think that's important.

Laurie, I agree with you. While we're terrible with photo albums (see Nina's blog on this), I do sit Hendrick on my lap and put on "slide shows" on the computer. When he sees his birthmother, he says her name. Also, every night during prayer time we mention her. The cutest thing was one night when I left her out, he stopped me and said her name. Now, it's like a little game with us. At one point in the prayer, I say, "and..." and he'll chime in with his birthmother's name. I wish he could hear her voice more often, so there was more of a connection there, but as you said, the future may bring that. I honestly could not imagine not sharing his story with him. It's a great story. I hope he'll be as proud of it as we are.

Another celebrity adoption:

Just when you think all celebrities adoptions have weird circumstances (Madonna, Rosie, etc.), along comes Jamie Lee Curtis, who seems incredibly normal, respectful and insightful. She's not saving the world; she's not trying to make a political statement. She wants to be a mom, and adoption was her route to fulfill that wish. God bless her! Her response to contact with the birthmother was indeed vague, but who knows that the reasons are behind that. It would have been nice to hear, "Yes, we have a relationship," but that may not be her reality. One very interesting tidbit was her response to acting roles and motherhood. Often, we hear actors talk about being "brave" and accepting roles that are waaaaayyyy out there, either in terms of violence, sex or some other thing that kids really shouldn't be watching. Frankly, I think it's more brave to acknowledge that your life, with children in it, is simply not your own anymore and that your choices really need to reflect that. She seems to believe that, too. All in all, a very interesting interview

I truly believe that folks such as Rosie and Paris have been placed on this earth to give us irrefutable evidence that there really are people in the world who are more obnoxious, stupid and annoying than anyone we could possibly come across in our own neighborhoods. In other words, count your blessings...

We are also bombarded with insensitive and downright ignorant or rude remarks that make us need to defend our position. And we are often times called upon to educate those same people so as to spread the "correct" message about adoption. So, while we may very well have an honest respect for the "realness" of the birthparents and are very comfortable with our role as real parents, we feel the need to assert our "realness" when placed on the defensive. I think we don't answer that way unless provoked. Dr. Babb's "the lady doth protest too much" approach doesn't fly with me. I agree with your sentiments completely. How often do we hear comments about how our children are not our "real" children? Or hear people ask what happened to the "real" parents? I've kind of developed a "water off a duck's back" attitude to those types of comments, but if anything will make you stand up to declare your own "realness," it's being faced with someone who just won't accept what you know to be fact: I wake up at night with my son when he cries. I feed him in the morning. I clean his cuts and scrapes and sing stupid songs with him. Does he think I'm real? You bet. None of this, of course, negates the role or impact of birthparents in our children's lives and our lives. In fact, this kind of psychobabble seems designed to drive a wedge among the partners in the adoption triad, rather than help to bond us. I swear that people like Dr. Babb put too much weight on what escapes our mouths sometimes in a bizarre effort to prove how smart and insightful they are. Even Freud recognized that sometimes a cigar really is just a cigar... (By the way, Elizabeth, I scored a 110 on that little test, and that was only because HP is still too young for homework!)

Adam, Beth & Nathan: All our best to you and yours, including Nathan's birthparents. Enjoy this time together. Our prayers are with you. John, Nina & Hendrick

This is a very interesting debate, but for clarification purposes, we should distinguish between civil rights and human rights. Civil rights are rights bestowed by governments; human rights are rights bestowed by the virtue of birth. I think Elizabeth, recognizing the difference, was very careful when she chose the headline for this thread. I just wanted to spell it out further. The original article seems to come down on the side of parenthood not being a human right, but instead being a civil right (and a debatable one, at that). There have been numerous worries about "playing God" when it comes to the ethical implications of modern genetics, so there is a valid question here: How far is too far? Frankly, when we start engineering the process of procreation to predetermine sex, that's too far for me. Others may find that perfectly OK. When it comes to the children, however, I think we can all agree. It is a human right to know where you come from. It should be a civil right, too. One last thing, and it is a purely personal observation not transferable to others. I view parenthood as a privilege. The minute I allow myself to think about it as a "right" is the moment I become more important than the child I am parenting. That, for me, would be very dangerous.

I've seen some things that make my jaw drop, but this is one of the most insanely stupid comments I've ever heard of. When confronted with dunces like this, just walk away. Traci, I'm sorry you ever had to hear anything so mean. This person is an idiot. Tamra, we were in the same boat, and feel the exact same way. We've commented on this in talks before religious groups that the "unexplained fertility" and our adoption journey were our challenge, and it was our blessing to accept it.

OK, I'm not a member of a new group, but one of the craziest things said to us was neither insulting nor annoying. It was just plain funny. Pre-Hendrick, we were discussing our "issues" with some friends at a party. They had just had a beautiful baby girl. "You know what you need to do?" said the woman. "Get really, really drunk." Then the couple, dear friends and former coworkers, proceeded to tell us they did just that when their little girl was conceived, even confessing to us, while cackling hysterically, that they got "kinky." I'm not sure what that meant, and I really don't want to know. But it gave Nina and I lots of jokes to tell each other on the way home...

You're probably right. TMZ is most likely looking for snark rather than seriousness. And there's nothing like a bit of intelligence to ruin the troglodytes' party!

Please note that "freedom of speech" applies when it's the government doing the censoring. Privately owned companies are allowed (and, indeed, should be encouraged) to set restrictions on what people can say on their Web sites. Some are very strict; some not so. But all have restrictions. While Elizabeth's and Renee's comments don't fall into this category (and I'm making no excuses for what the Web site operators did), one person's truth is another person's libel.

Just went looking for your post, Elizabeth, and I could not find it. Strikes me that what you and Renee had to say was relevant commentary. One question: Did you put your affiliation in the post? If so, they may have considered it advertising. Some sites are very strict about stuff like that. Either way, what the two of you said was on the mark. It's a shame more people didn't get a chance to see it.

What Latifah was probably refering to is New Jersey's byzantine child welfare system, which is notoriously and frustratingly difficult to deal with. That being said, it was the reporter's job to challenge such a blatantly incorrect statement. You would be right to send letters to the editor seeking an opportunity to enlighten USA Today's 2 million readers...

Here's the latest on Angelina Jolie: Angelina Jolie plans to adopt Vietnamese child, officials confirm

Elizabeth, I'm so happy to hear this. I've been troubled for a long time about these very public adoption stories of celebrities, and I can't help but feel that the children will suffer because of them. The fact that you know of cases where celebrity adoption has been different and apparently successful is a comfort. Well-meaning celebrities have just as much right as we do to go through this process. That some are willing to not cut corners is testament to their integrity. It also makes these public displays all the more questionable. If you can make an adoption plan quietly (although not secretly), without trying to cast yourself in the media (or on Oprah) as some kind of saint, why wouldn't you do it? The answer, of course, is that publicity for some of these folks like Madonna is more important than anything else, including the child.

Here's an unfortunate follow-up to the ticket auction: Woman says eBay shut down football ticket auction intended to help raise money for adoption CANTON, Ohio (AP) -- A woman says eBay has shut down her sale of two tickets to Saturday's Michigan-Ohio State football game that she and her husband had hoped would help them raise money to adopt a boy from Guatemala. Kristie Sigler and her husband, Ken, put their season tickets, about 10 rows from the field, on the Internet auction site hoping the payout would help defray the $12,500 cost to begin processing their adoption paperwork. But Sigler said eBay canceled the sale Wednesday, saying it violated its policy on charitable auctions. "They never called, never e-mailed us or anything. They took it off and said because we were using the auction as fundraiser for the adoption, it violated their policy," Kristie Sigler told The Repository newspaper in Thursday's editions. According to its Web site, eBay has specific guidelines for charitable fundraising because the area is subject to many state and federal laws. A message seeking comment from the company was left early Thursday. The couple had been offered as much as $1,550 for the tickets by Wednesday afternoon. "I'm most concerned that people will think we weren't being genuine," Sigler said. "We're still selling the tickets." The tickets are now listed on the Web site dreamseats.com. The top-ranked Buckeyes and second-ranked Wolverines are both undefeated, and the winner advances to the national championship game.

Here is Andrea Peyser's interesting take on the Oprah-Madonna sideshow.