Uncomfy as I feel opening such a squirmy can of worms when I'm not a mom myself, I do think parenting ethics ought to be covered by this blog, so I'm going to throw the story out there to you all.
Watch the Today Show clip and then weigh in...
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Would you make the same choice?
Personally, while I had a very strong reaction when I first read this essay a few weeks back in the Motherlode blog, my own feeling was more of a legal outrage than a lack of sympathy for her predicament. Ms. Tedaldi signed a contract. She shouldn't have done so if she couldn't hold up her end of the bargain. Biological moms don't get to hand back their unsatisfactory children; why should adoptive ones?
Then again, we make "forever" vows about marriage too, and so many of us divorce... but in that case, one of the parties isn't a helpless minor we've agreed to parent.
I'm glad she did due diligence finding "D" a new family, but who is to say they'll be able to bond with him any better?
My bottom line: I'm feeling judgmental about what Anita Tedaldi chose to do; mostly because I don't think she was emotionally prepared to handle the worst case scenario of an adoption, no matter what counseling she had leading up to it. (I also can't help wondering if a book deal is in the offing, considering that the essay was so controversial for her in the NY Times a few weeks ago, and now she is following it up with a TV appearance.... I smell a publicity stunt somewhere in here, and that doesn't do much to arouse my sympathies.)
But in the end, while I judge her, I don't judge her to the point where I want to throw stones and/or burn her at the stake. I'm sure the decision wasn't arrived at lightly, and I'm grieved for the pain suffered all around.
What's your take?
Subscribe to receive updates from Everyday Ethics or follow us on Twitter!
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
I fully understand your thoughts on this issue. This is an adoption that should have never taken place. Period. I say my thoughts from an adoptee's perspective. This former son of hers is going to be very damaged in the long run. He is going to read all of her stuff online and how she disrupted (abandoned) him again.
As an adoptee rights activist, I am in contact with many adoptive parents. Malinda is one of them but I also know an adoptive parent who adopted a child who was the result of an abandonment, disrupted adoption, and a removal from foster care. She has every reason to disrupt her adoption but she has chosen to stand by her adopted daughter even thought that adopted daughter will need care for the rest of her life. She was sexually molested and the agency knew it. The agency collected two adoption fees for this child. To me, this other adoptive mother is a mother. She is a real mother. Anita Tedaldi is not.
I've written about Anita's case also on my international adoption blog, and it is hard to talk about. Adoption disruptions do happen, and sometimes it's the best choice for all concerned. However, Anita's story in particular makes me uncomfortable. Even Lisa Belkin, the NY Times staff writer who edited Anita's piece for the Motherlode column, actually discouraged her from going on "Today" and has said she probably should not have been approved by an agency to adopt. I do think she's headed for a book deal. Yuck.
I did know another couple who "unadopted" their child after trying every possible recourse--after he set their home on fire multiple times, tried to attack them and other siblings with knives, and molested a sibling. They still grieve his absence, because the choice was not about them. The choice was about protecting him from himself and protecting the other siblings.
Baby D probably has bonding problems stemming from his earliest months. I don't know what the answer to this is, but I was disturbed by how facile Tedaldi seemed about it. I don't know what I want from her. DID Baby D get a new home? Or is he back in foster care? I wasn't clear on that.
This is such a tragic story in which Baby D is the main victim. Tedaldi's other children will have also suffered in the loss of their brother.
I am amazed that an adoption agency ever approved Tedaldi for adoption. Her comments demonstrate a total lack of understanding of the additional emotional needs of adopted children. She states that she put in the same amount of effort to bond with Baby D as she did with her biological children and seems to believe that this was enough. Baby D's early trauma means that he needs far more effort and bonding will be a more difficult process than with a biological child.
I live in Australia and, after any adoption, parents are not allowed to become pregnant for at least 12 months to assist with bonding between parents and their adopted child.
I adopted my beautiful 2 1/2 year old daughter and I would never consider giving up on her. She is as much my child as if I had given birth to her. She has had some attachment issues, but that has only meant that I need to give her more of myself. I am the parent. I chose to bring my daughter into our family. Being her 'forever mummy' is my responsibility and also a gift beyond measure. I am sad that Teraldi didn't put in the effort required to receive the gift - for herself or her son.
If a woman can choose to abort her own flesh and blood why is this woman being honest, saying this child was not working wrong? I guess the same women that would not give an innocent fetus 9 months and then adopt him/her out need to crucify Tedali for giving 18 months with a child she could not bond with. Yeah, that's really fair...
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.