The beginning of the adoption
quadrangle is the unplanned pregnancy, the single mother-to-be and her
choices that are limited, determined by the resources she does not have
at her disposal. The most obvious of these is an income and related
benefits sufficient to raise a child and also maintain a home, keeping
herself and her child in a reasonable standard of living for about 20
years.
If she cannot do this, or cannot
see a way to do this, then the so-called choice of whether
or not to raise her child herself, does not actually exist. The single
mother-to-be then becomes no more than a cog on the production line
of a national or international adoption industry that waits like a huge
impersonal monster, for the next unwanted baby to roll off
the line - at a price. Profit or non-profit, the result is the same
for the woman who must lose her child to satisfy the perceived economic
problem of her fertility.
Thus the adoption triangle
is really a quadrangle because the money aspect of arranged adoptions
has now become the cornerstone of evolved adoption law and practice,
particularly in Canada and the USA. Adoption is about money and also
about punishment of the woman who did have sex without the resources
necessary to raise a child, mainly a second wage earner, previously
known as a husband. In that famous slogan of feminist politics the
personal is political'; there is no more political situation for a woman
than to find herself trapped in a personal situation whereby her future
is about to be determined, dramatically, by her present fertility status.
Her choices are determined by her access or lack of access
to resources needed for the survival of herself and her infant. Perhaps
the most important of these is the personal resource of self-esteem,
a powerful belief in herself sufficient to withstand the disapproval
of family, friends and society in general, a belief strong enough to
enable her to strike out into a parenthood, alone.
The unbearable suffering of women
who have lost children to adoption is currently being documented. Reunion
organizations around the world are growing in strength, and sealed adoption
records are under political pressure from women no longer prepared to
always be the losers in the failed social experiment that is stranger
adoption. Mothers are searching for their children - children are searching
for their mothers - and fathers. Many are successful and can testify
to the loss of identity, the rage and the bottomless grief that adoption
introduced to their lives.
But where do feminists stand
in this tangle of forged birth records, this pseudo-choice of adoption
that is actually no choice at all?. During the second wave
of feminism that happened in the 1970s in New Zealand, I took
a stand for all single mothers including myself. At the time there was
a commonly used expression for the rare event of a woman refusing adoption
- she was described as keeping her baby. The pretence of
choice was even then well entrenched in the language of
adoption and single pregnancy in spite of the reality of a rare and
very limited choice that resulted in the vast majority of babies born
to single mothers being adopted to strangers.
Yes, a single woman could keep
her baby if she could overcome widespread social disapproval, abject
poverty with poor housing, associated poor health, an absence of any
personal or financial support and somehow maintain enough self esteem
to see her through whatever lay ahead; usually more of the same. It
was a daunting choice. It was a farce.
However, with the feminist revival
women's fertility was correctly identified as the core cause of gender
inequality. If women could control their fertility, the power relations
between men and women would change and all women would benefit. Sisterhood
was powerful indeed. Education and related career opportunities became
available to women who embraced the resulting lifestyle changes. Fertility
-and related marriage or less formal partnerships- could be postponed
and even put off indefinitely. This truly was choice for the first time,
and women, worldwide, embraced the economic chances for gender equality
that fertility control had brought.
And then came a previously unseen
problem for many of those women who had postponed their fertility too
long, a resulting infertility that could not be reversed. Many decided
too late, they wanted a child, or children. Where then, do they look
for a solution to this regret; a completion of their lives by the addition
of a child?. Adoption.
Does the woman who decides to
resolve her infertility by adopting really manage to kid herself that
the donor of an adoptable child has a choice?. Would any
woman with a choice put herself through nine months of pregnancy and
go into labor having made the decision to surrender her child, if in
fact there was another way? With the rare exception of surrogacy, carried
out for money, no woman would knowingly, willingly do this. Does the
infertile woman have the moral right to complete her family with another
woman's child? I think not.
Whatever happened to sisterhood,
that brave frontier of gender equality where women banded together to
fight the monster, that oppressor enabled by a structural inequality
that collectively used woman's fertility to keep her oppressed, uneducated,
downtrodden, poor. I put it to every woman, that any woman who expects
to exercise a choice to fulfill her maternal needs with
another womans child, has herself become that oppressor.
Adoption is the last resort for
fertile women too young, too poor, too oppressed to have fertility choices;
women lacking in self-esteem, in societal support, and in a belief of
themselves. They come from all ethnicities, all cultures, all countries.
The woman without choices - surrendering her child for adoption in 2003
- is actually the woman every woman could have been, had the feminist
revolution not happened.
Until every woman, everywhere,
has the right to raise the child she carried and birthed, the patriarchy
is alive and well, still using good women to punish bad
women - through the role of adoptive applicant. The personal remains
political; adoption is a feminist issue.
Copyright © 2003 Joss Shawyer