' [Birth Mother] First Mother Forum: The Persistence of Roots

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

The Persistence of Roots

The Persistence of Roots
Irene did no damage to our house but we were without power for three days, due to falling trees that pulled down power lines and hit transformers. The crew who worked on our street was from Georgia and they were great. For three days, I read on the back deck, gardened, swam in a friend's pool in the late
afternoon, had dinner with friends (one without power too, once in a restaurant with electricity). Tony, my significant other, and I played Scrabble by candlelight one night. Sadly, he beat me 259 to 267! Obviously, he had better letters.

One of the first things I heard on the radio, driving over to a friend's who did not lose electricity, was a guy on NPR saying how the storm had affected him: His Aeroflot flight was cancelled and he and his wife had been on their way to the Ukraine to pick up a child they were adopting...sometimes you just have to shrug and see the irony. I listened to the radio for about five minutes that day, and that is what the Powers That Be wanted me to hear?

The day after the storm, we drove around and came across this most unusual downed tree--the center core was so strong it did not break, though the tree fell over in the wind. You can imagine what it made me think of--right in line with what Jane has been writing about in the last two blog posts. --lorraine

Broken Tree


Is it a 'Birth' Certificate or Certificate of Title?
Father's Names on Birth certificates: More artifice than fact



  1. Utah stories

    While I totally support these first fathers in getting custody of their kids I am dismayed by the fact that the mothers say they WANT to give the child up for adoption. I wonder what is compelling them to give up the child? Is this what they really want? Are they being pressured by parents? Are they afraid if the father raises the child that they will have financial obligations? This just doesn't sit well with me. I think all of these children will be very hurt to know that their mothers didn't want them.

  2. Oh Robin, do I agree...it sucks but the fact that Utah prevents the father from raising their own children is an abomination. How can the good Mormons endorse such a policy? It's all for the numbers of the Church. And it's why we will be against any Mormon who runs for president.


  3. Don't know the stories of all the Utah Dads, and am sure some of them are worthy and the law is unfair, but yes, sometimes mothers just do not want to raise a child and do not want the father or other relative to raise the child either.

    Sometimes this involved vengeance and pettiness, sometimes it is with what the mother thinks is good reason. There has been a breakup of the relationship, there is anger, there are hard feelings.Sometimes there is danger to the child, or a lifestyle the mother does not want for her child.
    Many reasons, some good, some bad.

    Those of you who are mothers, at the time of surrender would all of you have handed your child over to the father if he wanted the child but not you ? Also, think of all the men you have ever been involved with. If you had gotten pregnant with some of the ones you now would cross the street to avoid, would you have wanted them to raise your child if you felt you could not?

    Utah laws are just wrong, but it it not a mystery that mothers do not always want to raise a child, or have the father raise it.

  4. Anon 8:55 wrote:"Utah laws are just wrong, but it it not a mystery that mothers do not always want to raise a child..."

    After reading Jane and Lorraine's stories, knowing my own mother's story, reading the comments here at FMF and even seeing the devastation on Teen Mom of the girls who went with adoption I am just very surprised that there are so many girls and women who WANT to give their child up for adoption. It seems they all seem to live in or travel to Utah. The impression I was getting is that it is the very rare expectant mother who truly wants to relinquish her child.

  5. Utah is a magnet for those who want to surrender and do not want to deal with the father because of the laws there. There is a good deal of pressure to surrender from Fundamentalist religions, and LDS and some strict Catholics. These people also do not believe in abortion, so girls and women who would have aborted had they or their families not felt it morally wrong go through with the pregnancy, but still do not want the child for a variety of reasons. These are not all "love children" by any means, and some who do not want the father involved have good reasons. Some are terribly young, under 14, some as young as 11, and it really is their parent or guardian's choice what happens.

    Very few women want to carry a baby to term and surrender it, but certainly many are in circumstances where it seems the better option at the time. How they feel later is another issue. Jane and Lorraine, by their own stories, made their own adoption arrangements and only later felt the impact of what they had done.

  6. Actually, Anonymous I felt the impact of surrender right away.

    I knew I was fucked, I knew I would never "get over" relinquishment. I felt trapped and without resources; my daughter's father was not YET leaving his wife, and by the time he did...it was too late.

  7. Lorraine -

    You said, "How can the good Mormons endorse such a policy?"

    As a temple recommend holding, tithing paying, Relief Society teaching, active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (AKA the Mormons), I wrestle with this question on a daily basis. It is the greatest trial of my faith, more so than any other issue of our time.

    I have heard of an adoptive parent who had a contested adoption. Her take on it was, "It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief."

    When asked what she meant by referencing that passage of scripture, she explained that it is better for the natural father to be cut off from the child and for the relationship to die than for the child to grow up outside of the church. By contesting the adoption, she was fighting for that child's eternal soul and welfare. That is how she justified her and her husbands actions. They truly believed they were protecting the child from the "horrors" of growing up outside of the LDS church.

    I can only assume others feel the same way, *justified* in their lies and deceitful behavior because somehow, they are "saving" these babies from their heathen fathers.

    I wonder what kind of good will would be fostered if some of these "good" Mormon couples returned these babies to their natural families and then built a relationship of love and trust with them, teaching them the gospel of Christ through action and not just words. Pipe dreams, I know, but it's all I have at this point.


  8. Thank you Melynda, for responding to my comment. It's interpretations of writings like the one you refer to that make be shy away from organized religions. There's usually a way to justify nearly anything, and in this case, what you describe is kidnapping. Because the child is an infant, he or she cannot escape and return to his rightful parents.

    Wow, I'm feeling weepy today.



COMMENTS ARE MODERATED. Our blog, our decision whether to publish.

We cannot edit or change the comment in any way. Entire comment published is in full as written. If you wish to change a comment afterward, you must rewrite the entire comment.

We DO NOT post comments that consist of nothing more than a link and the admonition to go there.