tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post3508501383798932971..comments2024-03-27T20:48:39.389-04:00Comments on [Birth Mother] First Mother Forum: Birth Mothers Happy to ReconnectLorraine Duskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18285341379272250245noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-51379640066267919812008-12-03T08:01:00.000-05:002008-12-03T08:01:00.000-05:00Hi Kippa,I'd say it meant that 86% were in contact...Hi Kippa,<BR/><BR/>I'd say it meant that 86% were in contact of some kind, phone, letter,email if it existed when the study was done or face to face. 70% were face to face contact meaning they got together in person sometimes, the remaining 16% were just in touch by phone, letter, email. <BR/><BR/>That is my interpretation, but I am no numbers person!maryannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14820185286946511471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-54646814969021115302008-12-02T22:28:00.000-05:002008-12-02T22:28:00.000-05:00I made inquiries to a social worker when visiting ...I made inquiries to a social worker when visiting the UK in '72, and was assured that there was absolutely no possibility of finding. <BR/>I'm curious how women who'd surrendered to a formal closed adoption in the UK would have even gone about the business of searching in those days. <BR/><BR/>I'm also a bit confused. How come 70% were in face-to-face contact and 86% in indirect contact? It doesn't add up. Surely it must mean something else, like the 86% somehow including the 70%?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-55144758847376781592008-12-02T18:15:52.916-05:002008-12-02T18:15:52.916-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.The Improper Adopteehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04460201280334904431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-454642101502514552008-12-02T18:14:49.971-05:002008-12-02T18:14:49.971-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.The Improper Adopteehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04460201280334904431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-31456789925404433002008-12-02T14:25:00.000-05:002008-12-02T14:25:00.000-05:00Oh my....this is the first I have read that those ...Oh my....this is the first I have read that those of us who searched are less healthy than those found. That certainly fits me for the depression/low self-esteem category, and for the overall negative effect of surrender on my life. <BR/><BR/>Those of us who searched when our kids were young were really hurting right from the start, not a lot of denial or blocking out, much as we would have liked to. I think mothers in the closet for many years are dealing with a different dynamic that makes it hard to understand each other sometimes. <BR/><BR/>On the other hand my physical health has always been good, still is for my age, and the health problems I do have are ones my parents had and still lived long lives. So I do not see real negative effects there.maryannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14820185286946511471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-76178769816440599082008-12-02T14:00:00.000-05:002008-12-02T14:00:00.000-05:00Ack - that NYTimes article. It rankled me so much ...Ack - that NYTimes article. It rankled me so much I couldn't even submit it to digg. I'm looking forward to your take on it though. There's no way I could ever get a coherent word out about it.Ungrateful Little Bastardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08156483035844101714noreply@blogger.com