Every crime has at least one
victim and one perpetrator and adoption is no different.
Just as in any regular kidnapping,
the first victim - the first mother, is taken for a ride, in this case
by an organized crime syndicate, overseen by the government and executed
by its appointed agents. Adoption victims are told to get lost, made
to get lost, banished into exile and rewarded with the approval of professional
perpetrators, for keeping their mouths shut about what actually happened.
The second victim of adoption is the ransomed baby that is not returned.
Remember Patty Hearst, the famous
kidnap victim who was brainwashed by her kidnappers, terrorized and
victimized so effectively she came to believe they were her supporters.
By the time she had blasted her
way through a few banks, they were her only supporters because no one
else could understand the process she had undergone. Whatever made Patty
Hearst pick up a gun and assist her kidnappers to rob banks!
Who could possibly relate to
that? First mothers can.
They identify with their oppressors,
just like Patty Hearst. They have their reality distorted by the perpetrators,
all those who gain from adoption crime. Like Patty, adoption victims
are temporarily grateful for the approval extended in return for their
compliance.
Then they come to their senses.
By that time, adoption consent is signed and they are in a prison of
exile, complete with psychological bars to maintain the threat of confidentiality.Like
Patty, they only get that approval when they do what these criminals
want them to do - rob the bank, surrender the baby. And like Patty,
they need deprogramming afterwards in order to know and understand exactly
what happened to them, how they were disempowered by their own overwhelming,
situational fear created by their tormentors, who practice a mental
form of rape.
Adoption is the only kidnapping
in the law books where the perpetrators actually get to keep the ransom.
The only way for the mother to protect herself and her baby from the
threats of these kidnappers, is to surrender it to them. Guns are not
needed - fear of the future is the main weapon used in this crime. Its
ridiculously easy to distress and confuse any new mother suffering from
an imbalance of hormones following a birth. Like taking candy off a
baby, or taking a baby off your victim once you have her vulnerable,
confused, depressed, and also desperate for your approval. In rape literature
this is known as dehumanising your victim.
When a baby is abducted in public
there is a public outcry. The bereft mother is seen on TV, surrounded
by grim faced police officers coaching her to beg for the rapid and
safe return of her stolen child. Public sympathy is with her. There
can be no doubt in the viewers mind that the mother is a victim
every bit as much as the child. Her suffering is apparent. No one questions
her anguish. The nation prays for the safe return of the abducted child
and rejoice when it happens. This does not happen with adoption crime,
which is carried out in private. But by not speaking out against adoption,
the public becomes just another category of perpetrator, by default.
Or perhaps they are planning to adopt?
Often the public abductor is
a woman who is infertile or has suffered the loss of her own child.
After being caught and the baby safely restored to the arms of its grateful
mother, this perpetrator is offered psychiatric treatment for the previous
loss that drove her to such deviant, anti-social behaviour.
But for all the horrified sympathy,
there is no doubt in the publics' mind that the kidnapper is quite mad
to have done such a thing. She must also be punished, but criminal court
judges tend to look upon such crimes with pity, on the premise that
anyone driven to such a desperate act as stealing the child of another
woman is mentally ill and quite deranged and needs firm correction,
tempered with a good dollop of compassion. It is understood that the
personal pain of irreversible infertility or child-loss is so damaging
that this kidnapper was driven to steal the baby. Clearly, overwhelming
personal pain explains this wickedness.
No one doubts the bereft mother
has suffered enormously. We identify with her - what loss we ourselves
would feel should our precious child be abducted. And in a normal, safe
place like a shopping mall, a maternity ward, a bank. But the kidnapper
is merely exercising a short cut to stranger adoption, cutting out all
the middle men and women, the retailers, those social workers and lawyers
and legislators, the adoption brokers, the fences of these stolen
goods. The role of the illegal kidnapper is therefore that of wholesaler
to the adoption industry.
The other perpetrators of adoption
must also be in some kind of personal pain. This may comprise guilt
presenting as denial. Perhaps they too have lost a child or are infertile,
and cannot face their grief. Another womans child becomes the
band-aid for their wound. This certainly applies to the receivers of
adoption crime. For the other perpetrators it may just be plain old-fashioned
greed, that heart-stopping moment at the traffic lights, when they look
out of the window of their elderly station wagon and the Porsche is
right there, with an engine so quiet you cant even hear it. I
can relate to that. And so can the judges in the family courts who bless
and bible these transactions of legalized kidnapping. But then all robbers
use distributors to shift their stolen property.
The health professionals,
the adoption social workers, clearly suffer from emotional problems.
They understand they were created in the image of God and therefore
like to imitate his works. They also have an income issue. They base
entire careers on a specialization that includes advancement and salary
increments. Imagine if you can, building your own future doing Gods
work, placing children almost in their own families, with the added
benefits of a guaranteed career path with guaranteed advancement, only
to realize that what you are doing is wrong.
Its like a person with
an overweight problem eating chocolate to deal with the depression they
feel when they remember how destructive they are being, opening another
box of chocolates to make themselves feel better. If adoption no longer
feels good, arrange another one quickly, to push the guilt away. Any
surfacing of guilt or regret at swindling defenceless young mothers
out of their babies, and all the brainwashing techniques that involves,
can only be assuaged by doing another adoption, and another and another.
The dynamics of adoption are remarkably similar to drug addicted behaviour.
It becomes compulsive behaviour, not to mention repulsive behaviour.
Having distanced their professional heads so far from any
sense of human decency, adoption social workers become unable to distinguish
between right and wrong. They have become amoral, along with their literature.
There is a huge, so-called body
of knowledge that has grown up around adoption social work that
allays any doubts an individual social worker might have as to the ethics
of what she is doing when she arranges an adoption. Yes, of course they
write it themselves - silly you!
But social workers come very
close to not taking the baby away from the mother - as close as they
can get without actually doing it. They match the characteristics
of the natural parents with those of the adoptive applicants to ensure
that this child is placed as nearly as possible into its own natural
family. Matching is promoted on the basis that the child is most likely
to be accepted and attach to substitute parents of similar genetic and
social aspects to the natural parents, which makes nonsense of adoption
at every level. If children are better off in their own families then
surely....Silly me, I keep forgetting the money.
Another consideration is that
carrying out adoptions creates a feeling better than Prozac, better
than religion, better even than late model cars. It gives the perpetrators
an adrenalin rush. Better than God. And the receivers are so grateful
to the judge, the social worker, and the lawyer. They may even thank
the mother nicely, if coolly, for her gift to them before
they send her on her way with a couple of letters and an out of focus
photograph that wont identify the ransom that they are, astonishingly,
allowed to keep.
The perpetrators of adoption
may be suffering from psychiatric and social dysfunctions that cause
their destructive, compulsive behaviour. Perhaps they are exhibiting
a psychiatric condition not yet diagnosed that includes a power need
so great they are prepared to destroy the new mother psychologically
in order to sell off her child to the highest bidder. But probably there
is nothing more to adoption crime than good old-fashioned human greed,
just like any old robbery planned and carried out for personal gain,
no different to any other criminal doing any other crime. The brokers
of adoption, the middle men and women, so empathetic with their clients
who pay and pay and pay for the child they believed they wanted, continue
to retail this traffic in human babies.
And like all armed robbers on
the way to the bank, they prefer not to think about the injuries they
are about to inflict. That would get in the way of the money. And thats
mostly what North American adoption is about.
If considered at all, the first
mothers of stolen children, many of whom now suffer from Post Traumatic
Stress Disorder amongst other serious conditions, as a direct result
of adoption kidnapping, are seen as just another bank guard who accidentally
got in the way. As any armed robber will tell you, they didnt
mean to hurt anyone. They just wanted the cash. The gun went off by
itself. Funny how they always claim they never touched the trigger.
Copyright © 2003 Joss Shawyer