I started to write a post a few weeks ago about my weight loss journey - and a very long one it has been too. But I am feeling a bit under the weather (I apparently had pleurisy, but not very badly - it sounds like something Victorian heroines die of, but it's really just one of those viruses, but in my chest). So I have done zero exercise as it hurts rather, or at least it did, then I felt OK and went up a mountain to somewhere with little oxygen and walked up a hill and my heart was about to burst, and then it started hurting again.
So I am not in a good place to talk about my newfound love of exercise. I actually feel bereft and cut off from exercise. Am I mad?
Thursday, October 30, 2008
This is very dangerous
I had an "explain myself" office visit with a random OB/GYN just yesterday and she suggested she refer me over to an RE but also, as it happened to be CD3, that we do FSH/estradiol (and I have no clue if I've spelled that correctly, but in real time I will be able to tell you). I just got an email saying the results were ready and they are...
(Only FSH is back. So my spelling could still be completely wrong).
FSH 8.1
Well - that's about what one would expect up from 6 point something 2 years ago. Could be worse.
I was as I think I said unsure about having these done earlier in the year but I think I'm easily persuadable as I just said "OK, whatever" when she suggested this. Infertility treatment is not covered under my particular plan but apparently I should be OK with investigations linked to recurrent miscarriage, if they think there is any point in doing any of them. I cannot remember the name of every single clotting test done by my previous clinic, surprisingly enough, though I did find one of the consultants' email address and begged for some results or summaries to be sent! To be honest the chances of us getting pregnant while we are here are low, so I'm seeing this as a just-in-case set of contacts to have on hand.
However, this doctor did suggest they may consider Clomid, which all the doctors in the UK have said is completely pointless if you are already ovulating. If it is going to cause me to release more than about 2 eggs per cycle (I don't know, I have no idea what Clomid does really) then it could be worse than useless. It seems to be about $75 for 30 tablets so it wouldn't be TOO expensive an experiment if it did nothing.
She also mentioned - a theory I've never heard before - that it's possible to have a long, but insufficient, luteal phase - so insufficient maturation but taking a long time to do it. I guess another question is in order for the RE.
(Later - estradiol is 17.5. It says it should be less than 80.)
(Only FSH is back. So my spelling could still be completely wrong).
FSH 8.1
Well - that's about what one would expect up from 6 point something 2 years ago. Could be worse.
I was as I think I said unsure about having these done earlier in the year but I think I'm easily persuadable as I just said "OK, whatever" when she suggested this. Infertility treatment is not covered under my particular plan but apparently I should be OK with investigations linked to recurrent miscarriage, if they think there is any point in doing any of them. I cannot remember the name of every single clotting test done by my previous clinic, surprisingly enough, though I did find one of the consultants' email address and begged for some results or summaries to be sent! To be honest the chances of us getting pregnant while we are here are low, so I'm seeing this as a just-in-case set of contacts to have on hand.
However, this doctor did suggest they may consider Clomid, which all the doctors in the UK have said is completely pointless if you are already ovulating. If it is going to cause me to release more than about 2 eggs per cycle (I don't know, I have no idea what Clomid does really) then it could be worse than useless. It seems to be about $75 for 30 tablets so it wouldn't be TOO expensive an experiment if it did nothing.
She also mentioned - a theory I've never heard before - that it's possible to have a long, but insufficient, luteal phase - so insufficient maturation but taking a long time to do it. I guess another question is in order for the RE.
(Later - estradiol is 17.5. It says it should be less than 80.)
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Someone is missing a trick
My name is Dr Spouse and I am a forum-aholic.
There, I've said it. I am addicted to several fora, including a very nice community of women which is primarily a UK-based forum. It has a bit of a history, and has come into being via another well-liked but creaky forum and a rather political sideways move into a parenting forum. Lots of the women are mothers, but not all, many many of them have had miscarriages, including recurrent miscarriage, and I love them all. Apart from the ones I have healthy debates with about vaccination (I'd be happy for it to be compulsory in the UK except for medical exceptions) and letting your husband give you housekeeping money that he expects accounts of (why? it's your joint house/kids so your joint money, no? we are not in the 1950s). And I love them too, really.
I still drop in to that forum but there are some things I'd usually ask there but can't. Where do I get fair-trade undies in the US? What about Hershey's seasonal flavoured Kisses, which stores have people seen them in? What's a good cookbook for Southern California? Do you need to cook the lasagna you buy here before putting it in the oven or did I just pick out a duff recipe that doesn't know you can get no-pre-cook lasagna? What can we use to air out our cold and poorly ventilated bathroom? How do we find out if the gas heater in our old rented house is safe? What are good clothing brands for women of my more top-heavy shape? What about running shorts, where can I find the kind I'm looking for?
Someone (perhaps the publishers of the magazines I seem to be reading here - mainly Real Simple but also Redbook) needs to cater for addicts like me. Sunset has a forum but it is poorly laid out and hardly has any recent posts. I found one "women"s forum but it hurt my eyes - if the signatures can be five times as big as the message, why would you read it? (it looked a lot like Babycenter and no, I am not going there either). There do seem to be lots of mothers' fora. Shame you have to be a mother to be a woman, isn't it?
There, I've said it. I am addicted to several fora, including a very nice community of women which is primarily a UK-based forum. It has a bit of a history, and has come into being via another well-liked but creaky forum and a rather political sideways move into a parenting forum. Lots of the women are mothers, but not all, many many of them have had miscarriages, including recurrent miscarriage, and I love them all. Apart from the ones I have healthy debates with about vaccination (I'd be happy for it to be compulsory in the UK except for medical exceptions) and letting your husband give you housekeeping money that he expects accounts of (why? it's your joint house/kids so your joint money, no? we are not in the 1950s). And I love them too, really.
I still drop in to that forum but there are some things I'd usually ask there but can't. Where do I get fair-trade undies in the US? What about Hershey's seasonal flavoured Kisses, which stores have people seen them in? What's a good cookbook for Southern California? Do you need to cook the lasagna you buy here before putting it in the oven or did I just pick out a duff recipe that doesn't know you can get no-pre-cook lasagna? What can we use to air out our cold and poorly ventilated bathroom? How do we find out if the gas heater in our old rented house is safe? What are good clothing brands for women of my more top-heavy shape? What about running shorts, where can I find the kind I'm looking for?
Someone (perhaps the publishers of the magazines I seem to be reading here - mainly Real Simple but also Redbook) needs to cater for addicts like me. Sunset has a forum but it is poorly laid out and hardly has any recent posts. I found one "women"s forum but it hurt my eyes - if the signatures can be five times as big as the message, why would you read it? (it looked a lot like Babycenter and no, I am not going there either). There do seem to be lots of mothers' fora. Shame you have to be a mother to be a woman, isn't it?
Woman's Hour - Egg Donation
Somewhat neutral programme but this is a little-talked-about issue in the UK so worth some publicity. Should be available here probably until Friday 31st (a week from its broadcast).
One particularly pertinent comment was about the rate of non-paternity - if all children with a risk of different genetic origins to their presumed parentage (a conservative estimate for the UK where paternity is not disputed is 1-2% i.e. vastly higher than the rate of donor conception) were to demand investigation into their genetic paternity, we'd be up for near-universal paternity testing.
One particularly pertinent comment was about the rate of non-paternity - if all children with a risk of different genetic origins to their presumed parentage (a conservative estimate for the UK where paternity is not disputed is 1-2% i.e. vastly higher than the rate of donor conception) were to demand investigation into their genetic paternity, we'd be up for near-universal paternity testing.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Of course
Cream trousers (the ones I've only recently been able to fit into) plus the white undies I have to wear with them = my period, two days early. What's with that? I'm not 100% sure when I ovulated, but I think it was on time, and it's rarely early. Don't tell me I'm starting to have short luteal phases (11 days isn't short, though, is it?).
And I need to have a repeat smear because the last one was done on CD3 and the sample wasn't good enough - and I have an early morning gynae appointment, just to familiarise the new people with my complex history, in 2 days' time. So I was kind of hoping it would hold off so I could get the smear the same day. But no. Gah.
And I need to have a repeat smear because the last one was done on CD3 and the sample wasn't good enough - and I have an early morning gynae appointment, just to familiarise the new people with my complex history, in 2 days' time. So I was kind of hoping it would hold off so I could get the smear the same day. But no. Gah.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Bizarre
Statcounter shows I have had no visits since late September. Clearly I have - not just IComLeavWe people and regulars but even someone who found a 2005 post where I reported a friend's doctor's recommendation for C.lomid, who clearly was on a mission to post her (what struck me as very mild and common) side effects Everywhere Possible On The Interweb That Even Mentioned C.lomid.
Anyone else found Statcounter is broken?
(It was the code - I realised I'd gone over to the new template and although it had brought over my links it hadn't imported the code).
Anyone else found Statcounter is broken?
(It was the code - I realised I'd gone over to the new template and although it had brought over my links it hadn't imported the code).
Sunday, October 19, 2008
The Kid (Spoilers - though what did you THINK happened??)
This book is nearly 10 years old now and it seems it was written when domestic open adoption was really new in the US. It's been an interesting and fun read and I've been wondering whether a fully accountable open adoption system (mother's choice of adoptive parents, full and frequent contact) would change the adoption culture in the UK, or whether it's too late for that.
Dan and his boyfriend are a very real couple and worry that they are too real. The birth mother who ends up choosing them is also very real. Having browsed a few "Dear Birthmother" letters, I can see that there must be a temptation (even if you are also a very real and down to earth couple) to paint yourself as cheesy and, at least socially, conservative. They worry that this will handicap them in being chosen by a birth mother; in fact, the mother that chooses them would almost certainly not have chosen a traditional couple, and certainly not a conservative couple.
Although this book is a personal story, I think what I got out of it most was information on how and why open adoption works, and in particular - and I suppose this slightly surprised me - how it can work well for mothers in really difficult situations, like the mother that chose this couple.
I suppose like Dan, I thought that birth mothers tended to be "nice girls" who wanted a "good Christian home"; the birth mother that chose them was actually afraid that her child would be taken away by Social Services and in some ways was quite desperate, and (it is clear, though I don't think she necessarily chose this couple because of this) needed a couple who would be accepting of her situation and make an effort to take care of her before the birth, and try and keep in touch although this might be very difficult, after the birth. Some of the couples I've either read blogs of* or read Dear Birthmother letters from, without being judgmental, would almost certainly not have the personal resources to understand an intentionally homeless girl and track her down thousands of miles away.
Dan Savage is, as many of you know, a sex columnist. Also (duh) gay. So if you are of a sensitive disposition then some of the asides and descriptions may be a bit much for you. I assume I'm not subconsiously being homophobic in saying this as I also find some of the descriptions in Belle du Jour a bit much for me. Aside from that (and it didn't really detract as you know who he is and what he does when you pick up the book) it's well written and an easy read. I've even recommended it to Mr Spouse who is not a very fast reader.
(Bother - realised just now after the post had gone up I forgot to say, one of my favourite parts was his assessment of the alternatives for them as a couple - I paraphrase - apart from adopting a kid, they could carry on partying until they were old and sad, travel loads and bore everyone with their travel pictures, or collect antiques. I often feel that the alternatives for a straight couple - especially one who like us was done with partying long ago - are somewhat similar).
*Note - not my regular blogs - just the odd one I come across that seems a bit clueless so tend not to read again...
Dan and his boyfriend are a very real couple and worry that they are too real. The birth mother who ends up choosing them is also very real. Having browsed a few "Dear Birthmother" letters, I can see that there must be a temptation (even if you are also a very real and down to earth couple) to paint yourself as cheesy and, at least socially, conservative. They worry that this will handicap them in being chosen by a birth mother; in fact, the mother that chooses them would almost certainly not have chosen a traditional couple, and certainly not a conservative couple.
Although this book is a personal story, I think what I got out of it most was information on how and why open adoption works, and in particular - and I suppose this slightly surprised me - how it can work well for mothers in really difficult situations, like the mother that chose this couple.
I suppose like Dan, I thought that birth mothers tended to be "nice girls" who wanted a "good Christian home"; the birth mother that chose them was actually afraid that her child would be taken away by Social Services and in some ways was quite desperate, and (it is clear, though I don't think she necessarily chose this couple because of this) needed a couple who would be accepting of her situation and make an effort to take care of her before the birth, and try and keep in touch although this might be very difficult, after the birth. Some of the couples I've either read blogs of* or read Dear Birthmother letters from, without being judgmental, would almost certainly not have the personal resources to understand an intentionally homeless girl and track her down thousands of miles away.
Dan Savage is, as many of you know, a sex columnist. Also (duh) gay. So if you are of a sensitive disposition then some of the asides and descriptions may be a bit much for you. I assume I'm not subconsiously being homophobic in saying this as I also find some of the descriptions in Belle du Jour a bit much for me. Aside from that (and it didn't really detract as you know who he is and what he does when you pick up the book) it's well written and an easy read. I've even recommended it to Mr Spouse who is not a very fast reader.
(Bother - realised just now after the post had gone up I forgot to say, one of my favourite parts was his assessment of the alternatives for them as a couple - I paraphrase - apart from adopting a kid, they could carry on partying until they were old and sad, travel loads and bore everyone with their travel pictures, or collect antiques. I often feel that the alternatives for a straight couple - especially one who like us was done with partying long ago - are somewhat similar).
*Note - not my regular blogs - just the odd one I come across that seems a bit clueless so tend not to read again...
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Reader advice - Halloween
So, Halloween approaches, and my last Halloweens in the US were a) as a small child (monster head anyone?) or b) as a young single with trendy friends who threw trendy parties.
Mr Spouse isan old fart shy and retiring and doesn't want to do mega dressing up. In the UK dressing up for Halloween is rare but if you do it is usually something scary. I did suggest a pirate (he's a fan of Talk like a Pirate Day and they had some costumes in a local thrift store that was selling Target overstocks) but he vetoed that. He's a bit portly for most of the Doctors or I'd suggest one of them.
We are probably going to go on a haunted walking tour mid-evening and have had a Firm Notice round from the local residents' committee stating No Porch Lights On After 8. So we may be handing out candy early evening but are more likely to be out (the other going-out alternative is with a friend's stepkids, who are old enough to be trick-or-treading in the post-6pm slot).
I'm looking for something appropriate to a) my age (no Playboy bunnies please) b) the weather (it will be a bit chilly outside, but not freezing) c) Mr Spouse's conservatism* in these matters (so nothing completely over the top for me if he'll only wear a thrift store suit or something) d) lack of dressing up box or sewing machine e) not unlimited funds f) preference for some of the items to be recycled/semi-homemade - it is fun putting these things together, so I'd rather not just rent a costume!
*NB that's a small c and not politically. Just to clarify.
Mr Spouse is
We are probably going to go on a haunted walking tour mid-evening and have had a Firm Notice round from the local residents' committee stating No Porch Lights On After 8. So we may be handing out candy early evening but are more likely to be out (the other going-out alternative is with a friend's stepkids, who are old enough to be trick-or-treading in the post-6pm slot).
I'm looking for something appropriate to a) my age (no Playboy bunnies please) b) the weather (it will be a bit chilly outside, but not freezing) c) Mr Spouse's conservatism* in these matters (so nothing completely over the top for me if he'll only wear a thrift store suit or something) d) lack of dressing up box or sewing machine e) not unlimited funds f) preference for some of the items to be recycled/semi-homemade - it is fun putting these things together, so I'd rather not just rent a costume!
*NB that's a small c and not politically. Just to clarify.
Happiness Sold Separately (Spoilers)
I just finished reading this book and at one level, felt it was so far, so predictable (couple can't have kids, couple do IVF, wife in deep depression, husband has affair). At some point in their assisted conception roundabout she had one pregnancy which ended in miscarriage very early, and which was kind of glossed over. By about a third of the way through the book, I was thinking "well, my life is rubbish, but at least it isn't that rubbish". Although I haven't done IVF, the author appears to at least have done her research well.
Later, following a brief reconciliation, in a fairly predictable "pregnancy as dramatic device" storyline, she gets pregnant and they have two successful ultrasounds and a very happy early pregnancy doctor. Those who have followed my own story will perhaps be able to see what is coming. At her 12 week scan they don't see a heartbeat; woe is everyone; a neighbour dares to say "some things aren't meant to be"; chromosomal analysis reveals a lethal trisomy.
So far so likely, but we then veer into Very Unlikely/Has Been Reading Julia's Blog. The main character is diagnosed with a balanced translocation ("It's as if you have a spoon in your fork drawer and a fork in your spoon drawer" - while a good analogy it didn't really explain the consequences of an unbalanced translocation, but no matter). Following this the husband was lured to meet his ex-girlfriend by the ex-girlfriend's pre-teen son, who was obsessed with the husband, and had probably deliberately told the ex-girlfriend's violent ex-boyfriend (hope you are keeping up) that they would all be in a certain place. So, they were, and violent ex-boyfriend stabbed husband.
Of course I am at this point (and it was the middle of the night, because I couldn't sleep) thinking even more "Gosh, I'm glad my life is only a minimum amount of rubbish!". But then I still couldn't sleep.
One line I especially liked, towards the end of the book, is when they see a counsellor who suggests they also discuss "living child-free" and the main character says she doesn't feel free. I'm not sure I will ever feel "free", not having children.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Oh dear
Have just found out that a friend's son - age 14 I think, adopted at the age of 6 after some time in foster care and, before that, neglect/abuse from his birth parents - has been arrested and is likely to be convicted, and is currently on remand (pre-trial) in what used to be called Borstal.
I feel strangely personally affected by this - we know L and her sons fairly well, but don't see them that often, and Mr Spouse and I have often noticed that while this son (the older one) is Trouble with a capital T, he comes across as rather childish in some ways, while the younger one seems to ingratiate himself with adults, and be The Good One. I know No 1 can be difficult and he has been in (minor) trouble before but I suppose we both feel that no 2 is not as innocent as he makes out, and have perhaps underplayed the troubles of No 1. But I have also I think invested slightly in "oh, what nice boys, see, adopted children with awful early backgrounds can turn out very nice" (the second one was placed with her at a younger age, with a slightly different background).
Without putting too much on our friend, I know that both boys have shown some problems at earlier ages, and some of the "therapies" that have been recommended to her are, at best, unproven. There is very little help available to families in her situation, but this does mean a vacuum in which dodgy therapies have room to grow.
And of course I also know of birth children (see: people I went to school with, see also: children of my parents' friends) who have had a loving family since the year dot and who have still got mentally ill/addicted to drugs/in trouble with the police.
And likewise I know (although they are still mainly young) of lovely children adopted by friends from foster care, who (so far) have no non-age-appropriate behaviour or developmental problems.
But it worries me.
I feel strangely personally affected by this - we know L and her sons fairly well, but don't see them that often, and Mr Spouse and I have often noticed that while this son (the older one) is Trouble with a capital T, he comes across as rather childish in some ways, while the younger one seems to ingratiate himself with adults, and be The Good One. I know No 1 can be difficult and he has been in (minor) trouble before but I suppose we both feel that no 2 is not as innocent as he makes out, and have perhaps underplayed the troubles of No 1. But I have also I think invested slightly in "oh, what nice boys, see, adopted children with awful early backgrounds can turn out very nice" (the second one was placed with her at a younger age, with a slightly different background).
Without putting too much on our friend, I know that both boys have shown some problems at earlier ages, and some of the "therapies" that have been recommended to her are, at best, unproven. There is very little help available to families in her situation, but this does mean a vacuum in which dodgy therapies have room to grow.
And of course I also know of birth children (see: people I went to school with, see also: children of my parents' friends) who have had a loving family since the year dot and who have still got mentally ill/addicted to drugs/in trouble with the police.
And likewise I know (although they are still mainly young) of lovely children adopted by friends from foster care, who (so far) have no non-age-appropriate behaviour or developmental problems.
But it worries me.
Niggle
Phew! I feel able to blog again after being worn out with IComLeavWe!
I blogged a few weeks ago about feeling quite refreshed and able to disconnect slightly from our horrible recent history while we are in a new place. I'm not sure it's quite that simple.
Most of the bloggers I read are from the US and I think I've been able to slightly distance myself from some of their stories and paths to parenthood, it now seems a lot more immediate, since I am here too. These people have done IVF with the fanciest, most famous doctors/been prescribed weird and wonderful miscarriage-prevention regimens/adopted perfect beautiful infant children. What if this could work for us, too?
Also, I'm catching up with some old friends from when I used to work here (I arrived here 10 years ago and stayed for 2 years, yet it seems like yesterday - how did that happen?). Of course they all have (more) kids, apart from one Very Dear Friend who has stepkids, and a nephew she actually sees frequently. And - very close to the bone for me - a sister who is pregnant, I was going to say for the second time, but actually for the fifth time after 3 miscarriages and one (I think) preemie (the nephew), at risk of early labour again but still Pregnant! and nearly having A Baby!* and with clotting problems, so of course I know people will compare us, and wonder why I can't do what she did, and how on earth can I feel jealous of someone who's had 3 miscarriages? Except, fortunately, Very Dear Friend will not do this as she is a) knowledgeable and b) very dear.
And on the stepkids and nephews/nieces front - I've been watching The Starter Wife which, by the way, Fun, it's The O.C. for adults - and it occurs to me that Mr Spouse very annoyingly didn't bother with a starter wife, and kids for me to be Not-Wicked Stepmother to - he went straight to Younger Model/Grownup Wife. And how dare my brother move to another country. I'd never do - er, oops.
I blogged a few weeks ago about feeling quite refreshed and able to disconnect slightly from our horrible recent history while we are in a new place. I'm not sure it's quite that simple.
Most of the bloggers I read are from the US and I think I've been able to slightly distance myself from some of their stories and paths to parenthood, it now seems a lot more immediate, since I am here too. These people have done IVF with the fanciest, most famous doctors/been prescribed weird and wonderful miscarriage-prevention regimens/adopted perfect beautiful infant children. What if this could work for us, too?
Also, I'm catching up with some old friends from when I used to work here (I arrived here 10 years ago and stayed for 2 years, yet it seems like yesterday - how did that happen?). Of course they all have (more) kids, apart from one Very Dear Friend who has stepkids, and a nephew she actually sees frequently. And - very close to the bone for me - a sister who is pregnant, I was going to say for the second time, but actually for the fifth time after 3 miscarriages and one (I think) preemie (the nephew), at risk of early labour again but still Pregnant! and nearly having A Baby!* and with clotting problems, so of course I know people will compare us, and wonder why I can't do what she did, and how on earth can I feel jealous of someone who's had 3 miscarriages? Except, fortunately, Very Dear Friend will not do this as she is a) knowledgeable and b) very dear.
And on the stepkids and nephews/nieces front - I've been watching The Starter Wife which, by the way, Fun, it's The O.C. for adults - and it occurs to me that Mr Spouse very annoyingly didn't bother with a starter wife, and kids for me to be Not-Wicked Stepmother to - he went straight to Younger Model/Grownup Wife. And how dare my brother move to another country. I'd never do - er, oops.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Some important definitions and why I think they matter
Sorry if this is patronising but I have to explain this to my students so I'm going into Lecturer Mode.
Self-help books:
Most parenting guides, and most books on adoption, trauma and the like fall under this heading. To use a health analogy, these are like either a well-written book on cooking for diabetics, or the Atkins guide. Some individuals may like both - may swear by both - but medically, one can be pretty harmful. Just because something is in a book does not mean it's right, or harmless, or based on any evidence. I hope you all know the same is true for web pages. All the authors in the links given fall under this heading except one (see below).
Peer-review:
When researchers do independent studies (not funded by an organisation with an axe to grind) they need to publish them. They can publish in a book, which could be either a scientific book (mainly intended for scientists), or in a college textbook (though rarely without publishing elsewhere first), or in a self-help book. They can also publish on a web page - but see above about web pages.
They can write in a scientific manner and include a lot of references to other people's work. But you're I'm sure all acutely aware it's really easy to misquote or selectively quote other people's work.
So unless another researcher has reviewed the first researcher's work, without knowing who they were (to avoid personal bias), then anything even well-known scientists write could be a misquote, could be based on no evidence, or could be based on anecdotes - on just one person (see below). Peer reviewed work has found that children do not suffer from a change of caregiver at birth purely due to the change of caregiver. The nice links that antiadoption gave me were in fact none of them peer reviewed. In fact, one of the authors (Bruce Perry) she links to is also quite a well-respected author who's written a lot of peer-reviewed papers. He writes on trauma due to maltreatment and severe neglect, and its effects on behaviour and on the brain. He has done absolutely no work that I'm aware of on separation at birth and placement with a loving replacement caregiver.
I think we're all in agreement that mothers who are trying to decide whether to place their newborn for adoption have not maltreated their child, nor have they neglected them. If the adoptive parents maltreat their child, this is awful, if a birth parent maltreats their child, this is also awful, but not really relevant to the question of whether separation at birth and continuing care by loving replacement carers is traumatic. As I said in my previous post, I've seen no peer reviewed work with evidence that it is.
Scientific evidence:
When one person tells you that blood type eating, propping their legs up, having their bumps read, or regression therapy works for them, you might be a bit sceptical. How do they know they weren't going to get thin/pregnant/sane anyway? The gold standard is to randomly compare different conditions in different groups of people - half in each condition - and see what the outcome is - which group improves more. You can do this with therapies for mental health problems. There is no point in comparing a child on a therapy with themselves before the therapy as children grow, and people get better on their own.
But you can't randomly allocate children to being placed for adoption at birth and not being placed. You can only look at naturally occuring situations. You can look at children who are cared for by relatives and neighbours, not their birth mother. You can look at children whose mother died at birth. You can look at children adopted at birth. And when you have two groups, you can look at what else was different (were the grandparents ill and frail? was the father wrapped up in his new wife? were the adoptive or birth parents unrealistic in their expectations, or overindulgent? was the birth mother a sufferer from mental illness so didn't take care of her health/think she could care for her baby?) and only after you've allowed for that can you conclude that separation at birth hurts children. And there is no evidence that it does.
Remember, boys and girls, if you read it on the web it isn't necessarily true. Hope that didn't shock you too much. Here's a large pinch of salt for you to read both my posts and everything else on the web with.
(An an aside - yes, there is a lot of evidence that adoption is traumatic for the birth mother in particular, though I don't know if anyone's looked at outcomes for the birth father. There is a lot that can be done to help people in this situation - and good and bad practices no doubt exist in a variety of places. A new parent's feelings for a child are usually called bonding rather than attachment, as they operate a bit differently - a lot faster, for a start. Even parents who must give up their child - in some cases, who are legally forced to because they have abused them - bond to their child).
Self-help books:
Most parenting guides, and most books on adoption, trauma and the like fall under this heading. To use a health analogy, these are like either a well-written book on cooking for diabetics, or the Atkins guide. Some individuals may like both - may swear by both - but medically, one can be pretty harmful. Just because something is in a book does not mean it's right, or harmless, or based on any evidence. I hope you all know the same is true for web pages. All the authors in the links given fall under this heading except one (see below).
Peer-review:
When researchers do independent studies (not funded by an organisation with an axe to grind) they need to publish them. They can publish in a book, which could be either a scientific book (mainly intended for scientists), or in a college textbook (though rarely without publishing elsewhere first), or in a self-help book. They can also publish on a web page - but see above about web pages.
They can write in a scientific manner and include a lot of references to other people's work. But you're I'm sure all acutely aware it's really easy to misquote or selectively quote other people's work.
So unless another researcher has reviewed the first researcher's work, without knowing who they were (to avoid personal bias), then anything even well-known scientists write could be a misquote, could be based on no evidence, or could be based on anecdotes - on just one person (see below). Peer reviewed work has found that children do not suffer from a change of caregiver at birth purely due to the change of caregiver. The nice links that antiadoption gave me were in fact none of them peer reviewed. In fact, one of the authors (Bruce Perry) she links to is also quite a well-respected author who's written a lot of peer-reviewed papers. He writes on trauma due to maltreatment and severe neglect, and its effects on behaviour and on the brain. He has done absolutely no work that I'm aware of on separation at birth and placement with a loving replacement caregiver.
I think we're all in agreement that mothers who are trying to decide whether to place their newborn for adoption have not maltreated their child, nor have they neglected them. If the adoptive parents maltreat their child, this is awful, if a birth parent maltreats their child, this is also awful, but not really relevant to the question of whether separation at birth and continuing care by loving replacement carers is traumatic. As I said in my previous post, I've seen no peer reviewed work with evidence that it is.
Scientific evidence:
When one person tells you that blood type eating, propping their legs up, having their bumps read, or regression therapy works for them, you might be a bit sceptical. How do they know they weren't going to get thin/pregnant/sane anyway? The gold standard is to randomly compare different conditions in different groups of people - half in each condition - and see what the outcome is - which group improves more. You can do this with therapies for mental health problems. There is no point in comparing a child on a therapy with themselves before the therapy as children grow, and people get better on their own.
But you can't randomly allocate children to being placed for adoption at birth and not being placed. You can only look at naturally occuring situations. You can look at children who are cared for by relatives and neighbours, not their birth mother. You can look at children whose mother died at birth. You can look at children adopted at birth. And when you have two groups, you can look at what else was different (were the grandparents ill and frail? was the father wrapped up in his new wife? were the adoptive or birth parents unrealistic in their expectations, or overindulgent? was the birth mother a sufferer from mental illness so didn't take care of her health/think she could care for her baby?) and only after you've allowed for that can you conclude that separation at birth hurts children. And there is no evidence that it does.
Remember, boys and girls, if you read it on the web it isn't necessarily true. Hope that didn't shock you too much. Here's a large pinch of salt for you to read both my posts and everything else on the web with.
(An an aside - yes, there is a lot of evidence that adoption is traumatic for the birth mother in particular, though I don't know if anyone's looked at outcomes for the birth father. There is a lot that can be done to help people in this situation - and good and bad practices no doubt exist in a variety of places. A new parent's feelings for a child are usually called bonding rather than attachment, as they operate a bit differently - a lot faster, for a start. Even parents who must give up their child - in some cases, who are legally forced to because they have abused them - bond to their child).
I'm beginning to regret this
but I feel I should follow through. I'm not going to post any more at the moment on trauma due to separation at birth. I think however I should explain some terms I used in my previous post as I'm not sure commenters have really understood them.
First consider this scenario. You are in your first day at school. Before going to school you knew there would be a teacher and you were told the teacher would be nice and school would be fun. You arrive at school and are waiting in the classroom. Someone puts their head in the door and waves at the class. "Hi!" they say. They leave and then shortly after someone else comes in. "I'm going to be your teacher!" they say. They are very nice and you enjoy school. Later you find that the first person was supposed to be your teacher. But you never knew them - so you didn't have a chance to miss them. You like your new teacher - you end up having the original teacher a few years later and you like them too. Everyone is happy.
If you had been a little child beginning school and had got used to the first teacher, you'd be sad if they left. If the second teacher had been mean, you'd be upset when you found they weren't really supposed to be your teacher. If you were the teacher and you had learned all the information about your class and felt like you knew them, you'd be sad. If you saw the teacher around the school, or met them when you were older, and no-one had told you they were first supposed to be your teacher, you'd be confused. The first teacher at school is a really important person, and children become extremely attached to their teacher, eager to please, and if they are a bad teacher, this really does get children off to a bad start.
But the child who never knew the first teacher - saw them for less than a minute - but has the whole situation explained to them properly, and gets to know the other teacher - is going to do just fine.
Right - that is the anecdotal post. I'm now going to start a new posts explaining some important definitions.
First consider this scenario. You are in your first day at school. Before going to school you knew there would be a teacher and you were told the teacher would be nice and school would be fun. You arrive at school and are waiting in the classroom. Someone puts their head in the door and waves at the class. "Hi!" they say. They leave and then shortly after someone else comes in. "I'm going to be your teacher!" they say. They are very nice and you enjoy school. Later you find that the first person was supposed to be your teacher. But you never knew them - so you didn't have a chance to miss them. You like your new teacher - you end up having the original teacher a few years later and you like them too. Everyone is happy.
If you had been a little child beginning school and had got used to the first teacher, you'd be sad if they left. If the second teacher had been mean, you'd be upset when you found they weren't really supposed to be your teacher. If you were the teacher and you had learned all the information about your class and felt like you knew them, you'd be sad. If you saw the teacher around the school, or met them when you were older, and no-one had told you they were first supposed to be your teacher, you'd be confused. The first teacher at school is a really important person, and children become extremely attached to their teacher, eager to please, and if they are a bad teacher, this really does get children off to a bad start.
But the child who never knew the first teacher - saw them for less than a minute - but has the whole situation explained to them properly, and gets to know the other teacher - is going to do just fine.
Right - that is the anecdotal post. I'm now going to start a new posts explaining some important definitions.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
OW OW OW OW OW OW OW
That was me yesterday before going to the Urgent Care facility with my Bartholin cyst.
OOWWWWWOWWWWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWW
TTHHHSSSSFFFFFFFFFFFFF
(that was me yesterday while being "numbed" with lidocaine before having the abscess drained. How do you spell that sound you make while sucking through your teeth?).
They tried to put a catheter in but the gland was quite small (perhaps why it gets blocked) and it just came out. So I may need to have this done again at some point, or have it stitched open.
(Can I just have another OW?)
I now feel much better, you'll be happy to hear. No-one could make me a gynae appointment with New Plan next week as far as I tell, though I'm going to ring back on Monday, and if nothing comes up, go back to Urgent Care.
(Wiki link for the lazy. I have had several cysts in the past and some have become abscesses - this was definitely an abscess).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Woke up early this morning and checked my email. Message from Best Woman who is losing the pregnancy (2nd FET after ICSI, lost the 1st FET, ICSI didn't work). They had seen the heartbeat and then she stopped feeling sick and started spotting at about 10 weeks. Scan on Friday showed no heartbeat. They've decided to "wait and see" but the hospital said come back in 2 weeks if it hasn't completed by then. I'm not sure they gave her enough information (I think I must be lucky in feeling I've had sufficient information at most points during my miscarriages - but then I'm nosy and ask questions like "what would happen in the old days before scans?" and "how come they say most pregnancies fail early when the first 12 weeks are all supposed to be dangerous?") and she said it was actually pretty helpful talking to me.
I'm not sure she realised how unlucky it is to have the pregnancy fail after seeing a heartbeat but I don't know if she would want to have any further investigations about causes of miscarriage - they can only have ICSI until next July, when she is 40, as they can't afford the fresh cycles themselves, so the clock is ticking on treatment and I happen to know the main miscarriage clinic in her area tells you to stop trying to get pregnant while undergoing investigations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not being lazy, honest, but am a bit blogged/commented out, so will blog a bit more about the comments on my "comment on another comment" post, another time. And very sorry to those who have not had comments returned/those participating in ICLW - have been a bit slack - in my defence, I've been in pain!
OOWWWWWOWWWWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWW
TTHHHSSSSFFFFFFFFFFFFF
(that was me yesterday while being "numbed" with lidocaine before having the abscess drained. How do you spell that sound you make while sucking through your teeth?).
They tried to put a catheter in but the gland was quite small (perhaps why it gets blocked) and it just came out. So I may need to have this done again at some point, or have it stitched open.
(Can I just have another OW?)
I now feel much better, you'll be happy to hear. No-one could make me a gynae appointment with New Plan next week as far as I tell, though I'm going to ring back on Monday, and if nothing comes up, go back to Urgent Care.
(Wiki link for the lazy. I have had several cysts in the past and some have become abscesses - this was definitely an abscess).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Woke up early this morning and checked my email. Message from Best Woman who is losing the pregnancy (2nd FET after ICSI, lost the 1st FET, ICSI didn't work). They had seen the heartbeat and then she stopped feeling sick and started spotting at about 10 weeks. Scan on Friday showed no heartbeat. They've decided to "wait and see" but the hospital said come back in 2 weeks if it hasn't completed by then. I'm not sure they gave her enough information (I think I must be lucky in feeling I've had sufficient information at most points during my miscarriages - but then I'm nosy and ask questions like "what would happen in the old days before scans?" and "how come they say most pregnancies fail early when the first 12 weeks are all supposed to be dangerous?") and she said it was actually pretty helpful talking to me.
I'm not sure she realised how unlucky it is to have the pregnancy fail after seeing a heartbeat but I don't know if she would want to have any further investigations about causes of miscarriage - they can only have ICSI until next July, when she is 40, as they can't afford the fresh cycles themselves, so the clock is ticking on treatment and I happen to know the main miscarriage clinic in her area tells you to stop trying to get pregnant while undergoing investigations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not being lazy, honest, but am a bit blogged/commented out, so will blog a bit more about the comments on my "comment on another comment" post, another time. And very sorry to those who have not had comments returned/those participating in ICLW - have been a bit slack - in my defence, I've been in pain!
Should I tell?
I have far too many blogs. I have this one, which doesn't have that much day-to-day stuff on it. I have my original one, a short-but-sweet blog with the odd photo, funny item and thought, some profound, but basically I do not mention this part of my life on there. It's not on blogger (it's on an independent system a friend set up) so it doesn't link in here.
I also have a blog under a different name that is a walk through the saints associated with each day of the church year (there are some gaps, to put it mildly, even though a few friends collaborate) and I have the blog of my 11-year-old diary, which also has a few gaps - though I left the diary itself in the UK so won't be finishing that this year.
My mum knows about the 11-year-old diary but doesn't really "get" blogs. No-one else in the family knows about my blogs except Mr Spouse, who knows this one exists but kindly doesn't read it, and reads the 11-year-old diary when it is updated, and also the independent chatty one, which is also rarely updated.
I would in some ways like to post more about the rest of my life here - it would be more interesting for my regular readers, and for any new readers I get. I have several friends whose blogs I read and for whom I log out as Dr Spouse to post a comment, so they can't see this one. Most would find it very much TMI. You can see this one, but not my other Blogger blogs, on my profile. I'm sure if you looked hard you could find me (though hopefully not under my full name as I removed the only comment with my name - when I became a media tart).
Do you have separate blogs? Who do you tell about your IF blog? Do they care??
I also have a blog under a different name that is a walk through the saints associated with each day of the church year (there are some gaps, to put it mildly, even though a few friends collaborate) and I have the blog of my 11-year-old diary, which also has a few gaps - though I left the diary itself in the UK so won't be finishing that this year.
My mum knows about the 11-year-old diary but doesn't really "get" blogs. No-one else in the family knows about my blogs except Mr Spouse, who knows this one exists but kindly doesn't read it, and reads the 11-year-old diary when it is updated, and also the independent chatty one, which is also rarely updated.
I would in some ways like to post more about the rest of my life here - it would be more interesting for my regular readers, and for any new readers I get. I have several friends whose blogs I read and for whom I log out as Dr Spouse to post a comment, so they can't see this one. Most would find it very much TMI. You can see this one, but not my other Blogger blogs, on my profile. I'm sure if you looked hard you could find me (though hopefully not under my full name as I removed the only comment with my name - when I became a media tart).
Do you have separate blogs? Who do you tell about your IF blog? Do they care??
Friday, September 26, 2008
Take-home
This post at Building Heavenly Bridges has made me think what I would like/have liked in a take-home pack from the hospital after having miscarriages 1 and 4 (the others happened at home).
The first time I got a leaflet from The Miscarriage Association, and I believe something that . The second time I got some hospital maxi pads, a compliment on my pyjamas, and a promise to carry out chromosomal analysis on the foetus.
I later got something about the annual church service that is held in my area for those that have lost a baby, which we did go to that year.
Although I've not felt a need to have such things, I know other women have found poems, prayers, and remembrance items such as bracelets to be helpful. I find more therapy in knitting and watching trashy TV. Perhaps women should be given vouchers for DVDs, and suggestions on where to get memorial jewellery. It might be nice to have a memory box or folder, and to be asked if you wanted scan pictures.
I think what I needed most especially in the first weeks and months after the first miscarriage, though, was someone to talk to. There is no local support group in my area, although hundreds of women must miscarry in the area every year (based on the birth rate which I know). There's someone available on the phone once a week at an inconvenient time (I suspect it's before her kids get home from school), about 50 miles away.
What would you have wanted?
(Comments left for:
Reservado para futura mama - sorry, a repeat
Bernardeena - not strictly an ICLW person
The first time I got a leaflet from The Miscarriage Association, and I believe something that . The second time I got some hospital maxi pads, a compliment on my pyjamas, and a promise to carry out chromosomal analysis on the foetus.
I later got something about the annual church service that is held in my area for those that have lost a baby, which we did go to that year.
Although I've not felt a need to have such things, I know other women have found poems, prayers, and remembrance items such as bracelets to be helpful. I find more therapy in knitting and watching trashy TV. Perhaps women should be given vouchers for DVDs, and suggestions on where to get memorial jewellery. It might be nice to have a memory box or folder, and to be asked if you wanted scan pictures.
I think what I needed most especially in the first weeks and months after the first miscarriage, though, was someone to talk to. There is no local support group in my area, although hundreds of women must miscarry in the area every year (based on the birth rate which I know). There's someone available on the phone once a week at an inconvenient time (I suspect it's before her kids get home from school), about 50 miles away.
What would you have wanted?
(Comments left for:
Reservado para futura mama - sorry, a repeat
Bernardeena - not strictly an ICLW person
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Finally
So a couple of weeks ago I was moaning to my doctor friend about having no insurance. "What if you get hit by a bus?" Well, we explained, we are OK if we get hit by a bus, but not if we get stomach flu or a nasty skin condition or need a flu jab or a new prescription for high dose folate or, briefly explaining the last few years, if I get pregnant. Turns out her sister is about 20w with her 5th pregnancy - one living child - factor V Leiden. A lot of it around.
But she pointed out that she knows lots of specialists (although as a psychiatrist it might look odd if she prescribed insulin for Mr Spouse!) and could no doubt find someone for us to see at a slightly reduced cost.
However in double quick time the HMO we had applied to and been rejected for regular coverage has - surprise! - approved us for the expensive, but roughly the same level of coverage, HIPAA plan. Hint for those in dire straits moving from another country - foreign coverage counts under HIPAA. And they didn't even need to check with my GP, so no expensive letter or snooty administrator telling them the wrong things on the phone. So I'm covered from the 1st (only problem - I have a Bartholin cyst recurring now. Ouch. Normally they last 3 days, 2 of which are a weekend, and so I never get them seen. This one's been about 5 days - I'm torn between hoping it goes away tomorrow and hoping it lasts long enough to be seen by the doc - not too sure I'd even get an appointment before the 1st anyway!)
Comments today
Baby Dust Diaries
To Baby and Beyond
From Such Great Heights
Hultman House
Mommy needs Therapy
Returned a comment from
Building Heavenly Bridges
(which has also given me a thought for a post)
But she pointed out that she knows lots of specialists (although as a psychiatrist it might look odd if she prescribed insulin for Mr Spouse!) and could no doubt find someone for us to see at a slightly reduced cost.
However in double quick time the HMO we had applied to and been rejected for regular coverage has - surprise! - approved us for the expensive, but roughly the same level of coverage, HIPAA plan. Hint for those in dire straits moving from another country - foreign coverage counts under HIPAA. And they didn't even need to check with my GP, so no expensive letter or snooty administrator telling them the wrong things on the phone. So I'm covered from the 1st (only problem - I have a Bartholin cyst recurring now. Ouch. Normally they last 3 days, 2 of which are a weekend, and so I never get them seen. This one's been about 5 days - I'm torn between hoping it goes away tomorrow and hoping it lasts long enough to be seen by the doc - not too sure I'd even get an appointment before the 1st anyway!)
Comments today
Baby Dust Diaries
To Baby and Beyond
From Such Great Heights
Hultman House
Mommy needs Therapy
Returned a comment from
Building Heavenly Bridges
(which has also given me a thought for a post)
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Can you say "Mommy"?
Because I can't! Apparently I called my mother "mommy" for the first two years of my life (as that's what she called herself) but then went to nursery and it became Mummy, and then later Mum, though it's switched back, but I refer to her as "my mum" or "my mother".
In US English the vowel sounds in "cot" and "caught" are the same - so words that are spelled as if they should be pronounced with a short /o/* are actually pronounced with more of an /a/. The sound isn't, however, quite like the British English "caught" so, as I notice that kind of thing, I notice that when I try to say "mommy" I don't sound like Americans do when they say the word. There are about 15 vowels in US English and 20 in British English, if you are interested. Unfortunately it doesn't make the job of learning to read or spell easier for US children as the phoneme**/grapheme*** correspondence is no more direct.
Since my mother gave up being Mommy quite some time ago, this wouldn't be a problem - if it weren't for the (no doubt annoying to mothers) habit of professionals who work with children of referring to the mother of the child as Mommy/Mummy. "Give it to Mum, now". "Let's see which doll Mummy has!". "Mummy, could you just open the box and show her what's inside?". I'm sure this grates just as much as "Ooh, you mustn't do X, it's bad for Baby". So shoot me, I can't always remember Mummy's name in the thick of a session. And you do need to use it to tell the child what to do: "Can you sit on Mummy's lap now and watch the pictures?".
So if you come across some confused children in this part of the world, it's probably because I'm getting involved in some assessment sessions with them...
Today's ICLW comments (it's I for International people NOT N for National, just saying!):
Elusive BFP
The Binky Diaries
Planning Doesn't Work
I Believe in Miracles
Production not Reproduction
If anyone knows of a way to track comments you have written - at least through Blogger - I'd be happy to hear about it. Just realised I commented on at least two of these already, not that it's bad but just like to spread it around!
*letters between slash marks = individual sounds in words, for the uninitiated.
**speech sound, which can be spelled with more than one letter
***representation of speech sound in letters, which can be more than one letter e.g. TH is just one sound, so is AW, and so is A_E as in GAME.
In US English the vowel sounds in "cot" and "caught" are the same - so words that are spelled as if they should be pronounced with a short /o/* are actually pronounced with more of an /a/. The sound isn't, however, quite like the British English "caught" so, as I notice that kind of thing, I notice that when I try to say "mommy" I don't sound like Americans do when they say the word. There are about 15 vowels in US English and 20 in British English, if you are interested. Unfortunately it doesn't make the job of learning to read or spell easier for US children as the phoneme**/grapheme*** correspondence is no more direct.
Since my mother gave up being Mommy quite some time ago, this wouldn't be a problem - if it weren't for the (no doubt annoying to mothers) habit of professionals who work with children of referring to the mother of the child as Mommy/Mummy. "Give it to Mum, now". "Let's see which doll Mummy has!". "Mummy, could you just open the box and show her what's inside?". I'm sure this grates just as much as "Ooh, you mustn't do X, it's bad for Baby". So shoot me, I can't always remember Mummy's name in the thick of a session. And you do need to use it to tell the child what to do: "Can you sit on Mummy's lap now and watch the pictures?".
So if you come across some confused children in this part of the world, it's probably because I'm getting involved in some assessment sessions with them...
Today's ICLW comments (it's I for International people NOT N for National, just saying!):
Elusive BFP
The Binky Diaries
Planning Doesn't Work
I Believe in Miracles
Production not Reproduction
If anyone knows of a way to track comments you have written - at least through Blogger - I'd be happy to hear about it. Just realised I commented on at least two of these already, not that it's bad but just like to spread it around!
*letters between slash marks = individual sounds in words, for the uninitiated.
**speech sound, which can be spelled with more than one letter
***representation of speech sound in letters, which can be more than one letter e.g. TH is just one sound, so is AW, and so is A_E as in GAME.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Comment on another comment
So as not to carry on another discussion in the comments section at Henry Street - I know Rachel doesn't really want to have more discussion on this...
The premise of the Primal Wound is, as I understand it, that separation from the birth mother is intrinsically traumatic, whatever age it happens at.
All the evidence from studies of child development is that it is not particularly traumatic for children to be separated from their main caregiver when this happens early enough - before they have time to form an attachment. Leaving unsubstantiated theory aside, attachment occurs at around 6-9 months of age. Before this age, babies view caregivers relatively equally - carers that are more sensitive to their needs are preferred, but babies do not seem to experience a feeling of loss when the caregivers leave, either temporarily or permanently, so long as another sensitive caregiver is present. This makes sense in evolutionary terms (according to attachment theorists) because even in relatively recent evolutionary history infants might well lose their mothers at or around birth. In most societies in the world, infants are cared for by many caregivers in the first year of life - in some an older child or grandmother is the main caregiver right from the start - and major psychological trauma isn't exactly prevalent everywhere that infants are cared for in this way.
Of course adoption can be handled badly, and can also occur after infants have had time to attach to their mothers or primary caregivers. But as many have commented (see emory2001's eloquent review on Amazon), things can turn out badly in birth families too. Adoption can be bad. It can lead to trauma. Overly high expectations, not explaining adoption, making children think they were not loved, having them live in fear of being given away again, negative portrayals of birth parents or lack of contact or information that the child is ready for - obviously these are all bad, and are likely to occur only when children are adopted - though very similar things occur following acrimonious divorces with sole custody by an aggrieved parent. Also bad is telling a child they are the ultimate in an amazing genetic line, that the first-born always has to be a doctor, that they need to carry on the family line. These are only going to occur in biologically related families.
I don't believe it's the trauma of separation at birth that causes problems in adoptive families. Adoption is a special situation, in that it is unusual (in many societies children are not raised by both their biological parents, but it is usually either a step-parent plus one biological parent, or a biological relative). It therefore needs special handling, and only special parents can really do it. But you'll find that academic researchers (those who publish in peer-reviewed journals - not those who publish non-academic books) do not agree that change of caregiver at birth is intrinsically traumatic. See, for example, if you are into that kind of thing, Adoption Losses: Naturally Occurring or Socially Constructed IG Leon - Child Development, 2002, from which I quote:
"Mainstream adoption researchers and specialists(Brinich, 1980; Brodzinsky et al., 1992; Nickman, 1985) do not believe that infant adoption constitutes
an immediate loss at placement that inevitably disrupts early attachments."
and
"No empirical evidence documents the formation of attachment prepartum or immediately postpartum. Although selective responsiveness to early, familiar stimuli may begin at birth (Schechter, 2000), regarding this selective responsiveness as the continuation of a prenatal attachment by the newborn violates empirical data documenting attachments that have been formed not due to consanguinity or prepartum experience, but via repeated, mutual interactions of nurturance provided by caregiver to infant during the first months of life (Bowlby, 1969; Karan, 1994)"
Feel free to comment here - I don't tend to respond to comments, laziness I think really, but unless the discussion gets nasty I'll be leaving it open.
(And Tues 23rd's IComLeavWe comments are at:
Barren Albion (cheating really as she's not on the list and I spend loads of time at her blog anyway!)
Creating New Life
The Binky Diaries
Mrs Spock
Returned a comment made on the 23rd by Elusive BFP
(That was actually returned on the 24th and I don't think I made 5 comments on the 23rd - slacker! But to be fair all my comments on the 23rd were either non-ICLW people, or were returns of my comments, or don't have a link to their blog!)
The premise of the Primal Wound is, as I understand it, that separation from the birth mother is intrinsically traumatic, whatever age it happens at.
All the evidence from studies of child development is that it is not particularly traumatic for children to be separated from their main caregiver when this happens early enough - before they have time to form an attachment. Leaving unsubstantiated theory aside, attachment occurs at around 6-9 months of age. Before this age, babies view caregivers relatively equally - carers that are more sensitive to their needs are preferred, but babies do not seem to experience a feeling of loss when the caregivers leave, either temporarily or permanently, so long as another sensitive caregiver is present. This makes sense in evolutionary terms (according to attachment theorists) because even in relatively recent evolutionary history infants might well lose their mothers at or around birth. In most societies in the world, infants are cared for by many caregivers in the first year of life - in some an older child or grandmother is the main caregiver right from the start - and major psychological trauma isn't exactly prevalent everywhere that infants are cared for in this way.
Of course adoption can be handled badly, and can also occur after infants have had time to attach to their mothers or primary caregivers. But as many have commented (see emory2001's eloquent review on Amazon), things can turn out badly in birth families too. Adoption can be bad. It can lead to trauma. Overly high expectations, not explaining adoption, making children think they were not loved, having them live in fear of being given away again, negative portrayals of birth parents or lack of contact or information that the child is ready for - obviously these are all bad, and are likely to occur only when children are adopted - though very similar things occur following acrimonious divorces with sole custody by an aggrieved parent. Also bad is telling a child they are the ultimate in an amazing genetic line, that the first-born always has to be a doctor, that they need to carry on the family line. These are only going to occur in biologically related families.
I don't believe it's the trauma of separation at birth that causes problems in adoptive families. Adoption is a special situation, in that it is unusual (in many societies children are not raised by both their biological parents, but it is usually either a step-parent plus one biological parent, or a biological relative). It therefore needs special handling, and only special parents can really do it. But you'll find that academic researchers (those who publish in peer-reviewed journals - not those who publish non-academic books) do not agree that change of caregiver at birth is intrinsically traumatic. See, for example, if you are into that kind of thing, Adoption Losses: Naturally Occurring or Socially Constructed IG Leon - Child Development, 2002, from which I quote:
"Mainstream adoption researchers and specialists(Brinich, 1980; Brodzinsky et al., 1992; Nickman, 1985) do not believe that infant adoption constitutes
an immediate loss at placement that inevitably disrupts early attachments."
and
"No empirical evidence documents the formation of attachment prepartum or immediately postpartum. Although selective responsiveness to early, familiar stimuli may begin at birth (Schechter, 2000), regarding this selective responsiveness as the continuation of a prenatal attachment by the newborn violates empirical data documenting attachments that have been formed not due to consanguinity or prepartum experience, but via repeated, mutual interactions of nurturance provided by caregiver to infant during the first months of life (Bowlby, 1969; Karan, 1994)"
Feel free to comment here - I don't tend to respond to comments, laziness I think really, but unless the discussion gets nasty I'll be leaving it open.
(And Tues 23rd's IComLeavWe comments are at:
Barren Albion (cheating really as she's not on the list and I spend loads of time at her blog anyway!)
Creating New Life
The Binky Diaries
Mrs Spock
Returned a comment made on the 23rd by Elusive BFP
(That was actually returned on the 24th and I don't think I made 5 comments on the 23rd - slacker! But to be fair all my comments on the 23rd were either non-ICLW people, or were returns of my comments, or don't have a link to their blog!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)