Let the reader beware - making sense of medical stories in the news

Most infertile couples are aware of the dramatic advances reproductive technology has made in the recent past, and many of them rely on the media (TV, radio, newspapers, magazines) to remain updated with the latest news about infertility treatments.

However, many news stories about infertility treatment are often misleading and incorrect, and there are many reasons for this. Remember that news, by its very definition, implies something new and unusual. The media is often guilty of oversimplifying or exaggerating results , and headline writers may focus on an angle that gives a distorted impression, which often means that facts are sacrificed at the altar of readability or circulation figures. Since space is limited, many reporters do not provide a balanced perspective, and often focus only on the success stories, so that pictures of doctors and couples holding newborns are very common. While these do provide excellent photo-opportunities, the sad stories of the many failures never sees light of day. Newspaper articles usually paint a very rosy picture – but these often lead patients to have false hopes and unrealistic expectations. Many reasons can be attributed to the somewhat shoddy standard of reporting in the lay press with respect to infertility. Editors crave for stuff which is ‘new’ and doctors and hospitals are only to happy to tom-tom their latest gadgets and gizmos. Reporters are often not specialised enough to understand the medical technical background. Often, they do not do their homework properly, which results in misreporting, which is, unfortunately, a common occurence in India.

The outcome is that patients are often confused and are not sure how the latest advances in reproductive technology apply to them, so that they often rush to their doctor’s clinics with the cutting in hand ! The report often raises false hopes and gives them unrealistic expectations. As a result, the media loses credibility, so that they often end up performing a disservice to patients and their doctors. Because the public is eager, for any scrap of medical news, the media often reports individual studies out of context, as if each study could stand alone. However, single studies rarely yield a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer to a medical question. One ought to realise that scientific discovery is a process that often takes years to unfold, and an individual medical report or isolated success story means little. Remember, that new does not always means better ! For example, many doctors have started using lasers in the IVF laboratory. However, whether these actually help to increase pregnancy rates is still unproven. Nevertheless, patients get carried away easily by the glamour of this "new technologic advance", and are happy to pay more for the use of the laser, even though it may not help them increase their chances of conceiving. This is why some cynics have suggested that the term LASERS should stand for "Latest Advanced Source for Extra Remuneration for Surgeons" !

What can you do to separate the wheat from the chaff ?

First of all, identify the source of the story. Does the information come from a reputed publication (such as The Lancet) or a leading medical professional organisation (such as the American Heart Association)? Second, look beyond the statistics. When reports hurl at you statistics like ‘a 50 per cent pregnancy rate ‘, take a closer look at the exact numbers. Many of us get ‘turned off’ by numbers, but this attitude can prove dangerous: you need to ask yourself what the numbers really mean and how they apply to you? Benjamin Disraeli once remarked that there are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics. Remember that statistical methods are simply tools, and they can produce blatantly wrong conclusions unless sensibly used. How many patients were treated ? How were they selected ? Have these results been consistent ? Have these results been confirmed in other studies and other centers ?

One important safeguard against imperfect or flawed scientific reporting is peer review; i.e., scientists scrutinize each other's work in advance. Almost all well-respected scientific journals rely on peer review to select papers for publication. Any study that has not undergone peer review should be regarded with the utmost scepticism. For example, one should be wary of findings announced at a press conference that are not accompanied by publication in a journal or by a presentation at a scientific forum. Many doctors and clinics will send out press releases to get media attention, in order to attract more patients, even though the information they provide to the press may not be reliable or trustworthy.

Inappropriate use of technology

While it is true that reproductive technology does represent one of modern medicine’s success stories, the wide range of technological advances in reproductive medicine can leave many infertile patients feeling completely confused. How is a patient to make sense of which technology may be useful for his particular problem? New technology can be dazzling, and undoubtedly, when reproductive technology is used properly, it can help many infertile couples to have a baby. However, technology can be a two-edged sword; and we need to remember that every rose has its thorns! For example, growth hormone was introduced as an adjuvant for superovulation in the early 1990s with great hopes and expectations, and leading doctors announced at many conferences that growth hormone helped to improve pregnancy rates dramatically. Unfortunately, these claims were found to be unfounded, and no one uses growth hormone anymore. However, many patients ended up wasting large sums of money.

What can you do to protect yourself ? Remember that fashions come and go in medicine as well, and many doctors are happy to jump onto the latest bandwagon, so that they can present papers at conferences and give lectures, to show that they are the leaders in the field. When you read a report of a new advance, it’s usually a good idea to let the froth and the hype to settle down before accepting it. If it is in fact a real advance, it will be replicated in many centers all over the world – remember that the best way to assess the true value of a treatment is to see whether it can withstand the test of time !

You need to be aware of the following inappropriate uses of technology in reproductive medicine today, so that no one uses you as a guinea pig .

1. Excessive use of technology, even when it is not required. A prime example of this ‘folly’ is routine ultrasound scanning to "time " intercourse. While no one will dispute the fact that ultrasound scanning can provide extremely useful information on ovulation, to use this simply to time intercourse only adds to the infertile couple’s stress !

Use of technology which is not suitable for a particular patient. An example of this would be advising IVF (in vitro fertilization) for all infertile patients, just because the equipment and expertise are available and because the procedure is technically feasible. However, for most infertile patients there are many simpler treatment options available, which should be fully explored before considering IVF.

Misuse of technology by unqualified doctors. A common example is the use of lasers or endoscopic equipment for complicated surgery. Just attending a two-day workshop and acquiring a certificate do not make a doctor sufficiently expert in using this technology; a number of mishaps have been reported because of operator inexperience.

There are many reasons for the inappropriate use of medical technology. For instance:

The major factor, of course, is money or the need to generate income. Doctors need to justify the purchase of expensive incubators and micromanipulators, and as hospitals have become profit-oriented organizations, doctors are becoming increasingly answerable to the management regarding the profitability of their services. Nowadays, once a piece of equipment has been purchased, it needs to be ‘utilised’ to make it ‘cost-effective’. Woe betide the doctor who does not generate enough money through the latest gadgets! He may find that his contract is not renewed!

The glamour and the dazzle of the latest medical gizmos tend to lure most doctors, and this can be as tempting as wanting to drive the latest model car! One gains prestige by being the first to adopt the latest technique; or by being the only one in the world/country/city to possess the latest and newest ‘toy’.

The pressure from manufacturers to buy the ‘latest and newest’. ‘New and improved’ versions prove attractive, not only to toothpaste consumers, but also to doctors, and the medical industry (both equipment manufacturers and pharmaceuticals) has developed powerful tactics and techniques to induce doctors to prescribe and use their newest products. The companies involved can afford to spend large amount of money on advertising, and they use this capability very effectively to maximize their profits.

The most crucial question is: how can you intelligently apply what you have read to your treatment ? Make sure you are well-informed, so that you can critically assess the reported advance, and judge its relevance (as it relates to your problem ) for yourself. Make it a point to ask your doctor as well ! Your own doctor can help you make sense of the technology, and put it in the right perspective.

[Previous Page][Next Page]

Network of Websites

adoptionagencysearch.com - adoptionprofilesearch.com adoptionbb.com - adoptionprofilesearch.com - adoptiveparentsonline.com - birthdaycakesite.com - conceptioncentral.com - doadoption.com - fertilityeshop.com - goadopt.com - goadoption.com - gositedesign.com - homesonlinesearch.com - infertility123.com - infertilityadoption.com - infertilitybb.com - ivfbb.com - listhouseonline.com - ms-city.com - myadoptionprofile.com - ourgamessite.com - reproductivemagazine.com - templatesscripts.com - usadoptivefamilies.com - zerotarget.com - mississippi website - columbus mississippi website - macon mississippi website - starkville mississippi website - macon ms church

Openness in adoption In most jurisdictions, the adoption process begins with the decision of the birth mother (or in some cases, both parents) to place the child for adoption. Birth parents may be able to choose what family will adopt their child. Depending on jurisdiction and local law, they may already know of a family that want to adopt, or they may find people who want to adopt by going to a lawyer, social services, or by finding a private or state adoption agency (though privately arranged adoptions are illegal in some jurisdictions). The birth parents may have the option of choosing whether they want an open, semi-open, or closed adoption. They may be given Parent Profiles to look at and choose from, or the agency may choose a family for them. In addition, some states have passed laws allowing birth mothers to leave their unwanted infants at any nearby hospital, fire department, or police station within 10 days after birth, with no questions asked. However, such laws have been criticized by adoptee advocacy organizations as being retrograde and dangerous.[1] [edit] Open adoption Main article: Open adoption Open, or fully disclosed, adoptions allow adoptive parents, and often the adopted child, to interact directly with birth parents. Communication may include letters, emails, telephone calls, or visits. Direct access to birth parents and history has advantages of answering identity questions ("Who do I look like? Why was I placed?") and lessening fantasies (birth parents are "real"). There are also disadvantages such as no clean break for assimilation into family and the potential for feelings of rejection if contact stops, or for playing families against each other. Arrangements regarding contact are typically informal. Even in an open adoption, the birth parents' legal rights of guardianship are terminated, and the adoptive parents become the legal parents. Another aspect of openness in adoption is an adoptee’s access to the original birth certificate that identifies his birthparents. In some jurisdictions such access is automatic, whereas in most the birthparents identities remain confidential. Semi-open adoption In a semi-open adoption, the birth parents may meet the adoptive parents one or several times and then have no more physical contact. Non-identifying letters and pictures may be exchanged directly or via a third party, such as an adoption agency, throughout the years.[2] The relationship may remain semi-open or may evolve into open or closed. Closed adoption Main article: Closed adoption In some closed adoptions, non-identifying information is shared between the parties involved, such as medical history, up to the point of placement. After the adoption is legalized, no further information is shared between the adoptive and birth parents.[3] In other closed adoptions no information is shared between the parties involved. This may occur because of the law in the jurisdiction concerned, or court order, such as when a child is removed from the home by the state because of abuse or neglect. It may also occur because the parties involved do not want any contact. Types of adoption by location and origin Domestic adoption This section requires expansion. A domestic adoption is the placement of a child for adoption within the country in which he or she was born and normally resides. A special case is an interstate adoption - where an adoption occurs across state lines in the U.S., or within different Canadian provinces. In such cases, additional regulations may apply.[4] Foster care adoption See also: Foster care Foster care adoption is a type of domestic adoption where the child is initially placed into a foster care system and is subsequently placed for adoption. Children may be placed into foster care for a variety of reasons, including removal from the home of the birth family by a governmental agency because of maltreatment of the child by the birth family. Maltreatment can take the form of neglect or abuse. In most adoptions regarding foster children, the foster parents decide to adopt and become the legal parents. In some jurisdictions, adoptive parents are licensed as and technically considered foster parents while the adoption is being finalized. Altogether, of the 127,500 adoptions in the U.S. in 2001,[5] about 51,000 occurred through the foster care system.[6] Children with histories of maltreatment, such as physical and psychological neglect, physical abuse, and sexual abuse, are at risk of developing psychiatric problems.[7][8] Such children are at risk of developing a disorganized attachment.[9][10][11] Studies by Cicchetti et al (1990, 1995) found that 80% of abused and maltreated infants in their sample exhibited disorganized attachment styles.[12][13] Disorganized attachment is associated with a number of developmental problems, including dissociative symptoms,[14] as well as depressive, anxiety, and acting-out symptoms.[15][16] Intra-family adoption Not all adoptions are from outside of the family. An intra-family adoption occurs when a child is adopted by an existing close family member and/or his or her partner. A common example is a "stepparent adoption", where the new partner of a parent may legally adopt a child from the parent's previous relationship. Intra-family adoption can also occur through surrender, as a result of parental death, or when the birthparent cannot care for the child and a family member agrees to take over. International adoption Main article: International adoption International adoption is the placing of a child for adoption outside that child’s country of birth. The laws of different countries vary in their willingness to allow international adoptions. Some countries, such as China and Vietnam, have relatively well-established rules and procedures for foreign adopters to follow, while others, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for example, expressly forbid it. Some countries, notably many African nations, have extended residency requirements that in effect rule out most international adoptions. And some countries such as Romania are closed to international adoption altogether, with the exception of adoptions by close relatives (such as grandparents). Recognising some of the difficulties and challenges associated with international adoption, and in an effort to protect those involved from the corruption and exploitation which sometimes accompanies it, the Hague Conference on Private International Law developed the Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, which came into force on 1 May 1995. To date it has been ratified in 70 countries. Reasons for adoption Adoptions occur for many reasons.[17] Adoptive parents may wish to adopt due to infertility, compassion for adoptees and to avoid passing on inheritable diseases. A minority of adoptees are orphans. Another reason could be where a child is found abandoned and the birth parent is never traced. Birth parents may place their child for adoption because they are unable to adequately care for the child, because they have failed to receive the resources they need to parent, or because they are pressured by their own parents or others. Birth family Children fall into three groups according to the reason for their adoption: relinquished infants (15%) (see pregnancy options counseling), those whose parents had requested adoption in complex circumstances (24%), and those children required by social services and the courts to be adopted (62%).[18] Children may be permanently removed from a family due to abuse or unfitness. In some cases, parents' rights have been terminated when their ethnic or cultural group has been deemed unfit by the controlling government. Historically, the Stolen Generation of Aboriginal people in Australia were affected by such policies, as were Native Americans in the United States and First Nations of Canada. Moreover, unwed mothers in many countries still are (and in many more countries used to be) pressured or forced by families, religious bodies or governments to relinquish their children for adoption, due to the social stigma attached to illegitimacy. These practices of the past have become emotionally-charged social and political issues in recent years, and many cases the policies have changed. The United States, for example, now has the 1978 Indian Child Welfare Act, which allows the tribe and family of a Native American child to be involved in adoption decisions, with preference being given to adoption within the child's tribe.[19] Adoptive Parents The reasons why people want to adopt children vary, as well. The inability to biologically reproduce is a common reason, often due to infertility. In many Western countries, step-parent adoption is the most common form of adoption as people choose to cement a new family following divorce or death of one parent. Many prospective parents believe that adoption is an equally valid form of family building, neither better nor worse than the biological child. There are many reasons that fertile couples or individuals adopt children; often people adopt out of compassion, sometimes motivated by religious or philosophical conviction. Others may choose to adopt instead of creating a new life, to avoid contributing to perceived overpopulation, or out of the belief that it is more responsible to care for otherwise parent-less children than to reproduce. Others may do so to avoid passing on inheritable diseases (e.g., Tay-Sachs disease), or out of health concerns relating to pregnancy and childbirth. Some people feel that given the challenges of carrying a baby to term, adoption is the best way to grow a family. After adopting, some parents face judgement over the validity of their parenting and may feel pressure to "prove" themselves causing them to increase their parental involvement. A study, evaluating the importance of biological ties for parental investment indicates strengths in adoptive families. The data was part of a detailed survey called the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education and other agencies. The study was funded by the National Science Foundation, the Spencer Foundation and the American Educational Research Association. It suggests that parents who have adopted may invest more time in their children than others.[20] Applying to adopt This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2007) National Adoption Week is used in the United Kingdom to encourage new adopters to come forwardMethods of becoming an adoptive parent also vary from one country to another, and sometimes within a country, depending on region. Many jurisdictions have varying eligibility criteria, and may specify such things as minimum and maximum age limits, whether a single person or only a couple can apply, or whether it is possible or not for a same sex couple to apply. In some countries, applications must be made to a state agency or agencies responsible for adoption. There may also be private, licensed adoption agencies, who may operate either on a commercial or on a non-profit basis. Agencies may operate only domestically, or may offer international adoptions, or may facilitate both. Some jurisdictions allow lawyers to arrange private adoptions, and some allow private facilitators to operate. On applying to adopt, the potential adoptive parent(s) will generally be assessed for suitability. This can take the form of a home study, interviews, and financial, medical and criminal record checks. In some jurisdictions, such studies must be carried out by an independent or state authority, while in others, they can be carried out by the adoption agency itself. A pre-adoption course may also be required. Infants are more commonly sought than toddlers or older children, and many adoptive parents seek to adopt children of the same race. As a result, governments, as well as agencies, actively seek families who are interested in adopting older children and children with "special needs." In this context, "special needs" can mean a variety of things including children with specific chronic medical problems, mental health issues, behavioral problems, and learning disabilities. Often, the adoption fees for adopting a special needs child are either waived or significantly reduced. Adoption by same-sex couples Main article: Adoption by same-sex couples Individuals can adopt in most countries worldwide under certain circumstances. The discussion question is in many countries, if same-sex couples can adopt. Legal status of adoption by same-sex couples in Europe Gay adoption legal Step-child adoption legal Gay adoption illegal Unknown/AmbiguousCertain jurisdictions prohibit homosexual couples from adopting children,[21] or have a policy of considering applications made by heterosexual couples before those of homosexual couples. The issue of adoption by nonheterosexual couples is tied in with the debate on homosexuality. Preference to heterosexual couples may be given in the belief that heterosexuals who adopt often have fertility problems and therefore must be given preference on medical grounds. Opponents[who?] say this system is untenable in a free society and can leave needy children with limited access to a family structure. Adoption by same-sex civil unions or marriages are allowed in Australia (regions: Western Australia, Tasmania, ACT), the United Kingdom, Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium, Iceland, Sweden, Spain and in some of the USA (see Adoption by same-sex couples). As adoptions are mostly handled by local courts in the United States, some judges and clerks accept or deny petitions to adopt on criteria that vary from other judges and clerks in the same state.[22] Only stepchild adoptions within same-sex couples, i.e. where one of the partners in the relationship has children of his or her own, are allowed in Denmark, Norway, France and Germany. Ireland (which does not recognize same-sex unions) does not allow joint applications to adopt from same-sex couples, but does permit applications from one of the partners. According to the adoption laws in India, same-sex couples are not allowed to adopt. In January 2008, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that homosexual persons have the right to adopt a child.[23] Cost of adoption For the adoptive parents, adoption costs and assistance vary between countries. In many countries, it is illegal to charge for an adoption, while in others, adoptions must be facilitated on a non-profit basis. On the other hand many adoption programs will give financial assistance to adoptive parents, especially with their expenses. Some jurisdictions offer tax credits to offset the cost of adoption. In the United States there is a $10,390 tax credit for adoption. Adoptions through the child welfare system typically do not cost the adopting family anything beyond minor legal or other types of documented fees. In some states, families adopting from foster care may also receive yearly reimbursements for educational or therapeutic expenses up to a preset limit as well as have the adopted children retain Medicaid coverage even if they are covered by other insurance. The same is true in Canada. Regulations specify to whom payments may or may not be made, e.g., in some jurisdictions, no money may be paid to a birth mother above her medical expenses. There may also be significant expenses, such as legal fees and fees associated with searching for possible adoptees. International adoptions tend to be more expensive and often incur additional costs, as the adoptive parents may be required to travel to the source country. Translation fees may also apply to legal documents. Adoption numbers The number of children available for adoption inside Western nations has dropped considerably in recent years, in part because of lower fertility rates, legalization of abortions, and the increased acceptance of single parenthood. In the USA, the number of children awaiting adoption has dropped from 132,000 to 118,000 during the period 2000 to 2004[24] This is a list of adoptions recorded (alphabetical, by country) in recent years. Country Adoptions Notes Australia 443 (2003-2004)[25] Includes known relative adoptions England 3,800 (2005)[26] Children adopted from care only Iceland between 20-35 year[27] Ireland 263 (2003)[28] 92 non-family adoptions; 171 family adoptions (e.g. stepparent). 459 international adoptions were also recorded. Italy 3,158 (2006)[29] Norway 791 (2004)[30] 124 of these were national adoptions, including stepchild adoptions. The rest were international adoptions, mainly from China (269), South Korea (93) and Colombia (86). Sweden approx 1,000[31] 10-20 of these were national adoptions of infants. The rest were international adoptions. United States approx 127,000 (2001)[32] This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it. Issues surrounding adoption Reunion Some adopted people and birth parents who were separated by adoption have a desire to reunite. Brodzinsky & Brodzinsky reported in 1990 that only about twenty percent of adoptees engage in an "active search" to find their birth parents.[33] In countries which practice confidential adoption, this desire has led to efforts to open sealed records. In the United States, for example, there are organizations such as the International Soundex Reunion Registry,[34] an Adoption reunion registry that allows people who register to be matched with their missing parent or child, and Bastard Nation, which seeks to change state laws in order to establish the right of adoptees to access their sealed birth records. For German-Born Adoptees,[35] German Birth Register, the central birth register for Germany is the most efficient means of locating their German Birthfamilies. In the United Kingdom, adoption law has been amended to allow for open adoptions, the right to access one's records, and a state-run adoption reunion registry has been established, while in Ireland, a National Adoption Contact Preference Register was launched by the state Adoption Board in 2005.[36] This Register, set up in consultation with organizations representing adopted people, natural parents and adoptive parents, is unusual in that it was widely advertised on both radio and print media, and an explanatory leaflet, with contact details for the Adoption Board and the voluntary support organizations, was delivered to every household in the country. This register allows adopted people over the age of 18 and natural parents to state their preference for contact, what form that contact may take (e.g., post, e-mail, telephone or meeting), and/or their willingness to share medical or background information even if they do not wish actual contact. Reunions can bring a variety of issues for the adoptees, adoptive parents, and birth parents. The degree of wanting to reunite and the reasons why a reunion is desired depends on the individuals involved. This can often lead to disappointment for all three parties. Since adoption isn't part of regular society's function on views of family[citation needed] anxieties about identity can surface at this point for all three parties that were not an issue before.[citation needed] The most common reasons an adoptee wants to meet their birth parents are cited as wanting to find out more about themselves and to recover medical records. However, despite these two being cited there are often other reasons that they do not cite. This can be for emotional or personal reasons. There are also reasons that an adoptee may reject the idea of finding their birth parents or even reject birth parent or birth family's advances to reunite. Many of these stem from emotional reasons or fears of recategorization of personal identity. Many adoptees have a hard time dealing with the issues of identity and loss and would rather not deal with it.[citation needed] Not all reunions go well. There are some cases where the adoptee has a hard time reconciling their three identities and reject one side for another. This can be for a variety of reasons, such as emotional load, disillusionment towards one culture or the other, or discovery of political reasons. There are some organizations that often try to help adjust to this and go beyond the reunion. Such organizations as GOA'L for Korean adoptees often act to try to minimize the shock. Adoptive parents may go through the fear that their child will abandon the family once they find their birth parents or even may become distant. This can even manifest by not telling the child that they are adopted, refusing to help with the search, hindering the search, and even may extend to after the search where they refuse to acknowledge the birth parents. Not all adoptive parents are like this. Some have mixed feelings or even think its their duty to help their child with the search. Some adoptive parents also want to meet the birth parents to personally thank them. Birth parents often also go through the same kind of fear of rejection. Often seeing their child is a reliving of the events that lead up to the adoption, regret, and even fear that the child that they were forced or had to give up will reject them. There are often fears that the adoptee will be angry, will not forgive them. Some birth parents do not want to deal with the emotional burden and reliving of events and will reject the adoptee on these bases. Some birth parents also face cultural taboos in reuniting. For example in Korea a birth mother may face the stigma of having a "foreign" child. The degree of contact that a birth parent may want with their child can vary from situation to situation, which can be influenced by the manner in which the child was surrendered. Because there is often a lack of communication between these three groups and the combination of these needs can vary, reunion can cause strain in relations between the three groups. This is not always the case. But because reunion brings a variety of issues to the table, and the three groups have a tendency not to communicate, or be able to this can often cause rifts that become more apparent at this time.[citation needed] In other ways it can also unite the identity of the adoptee as well. Family heritage Preserving the adopted child's biological heritage has become an issue in adoption. Recent work on openness in adoption has attempted to address this issue. These efforts are relatively recent, and full openness, while on the upswing, is still not the norm in adoption. International adoptees face additional challenges. Some adoptive families in international adoptions commit to integrating the child's birth nation cultures, traditions, stories, languages and relationships. Some countries require that adoptive parents keep the birth names of their adoptive children. German-born children are allowed full access to their birth and adoption records.[37] In many cases, biological family genealogical research is possible. For adopted people in adoptions where information about the family of origin is withheld, secrecy may disrupt the process of forming an identity.[38][39] Family concerns regarding genealogy can be a source of confusion.[40] Another common concern is the lack of a medical history, which can affect the adopted person and also his/her subsequent children. In most U.S. domestic adoptions, medical information is not withheld from the child. However, if the adoption is closed, such information becomes out of date unless a trace is undertaken in adulthood. Adoption may also pose questions for adoptive parents. There are various schools of thought about openness, maintaining connections to the child's birth family, answering a child's questions and helping a child deal with biological parents who may not maintain regular contact. A study, published in the American Sociological Review, found that couples who adopt invest more time in their children than do biological parents. The researchers said that their findings call into question the long-standing argument that children are best off with their biological parents.[41] Adoption in schools Adoption rights organizations often focus on the adoptees rights in school and advocate for change in the system to accommodate the adoptee in the classroom.[42] Familiar lessons like "draw your family tree" or "trace your eye color back through your parents and grandparents to see where your genes come from" are viewed as hurtful to children who were adopted and do not know this biological information. New lesson plans can be substituted easily, that focus on "family orchards" or steer away from personal medical histories. Discussions about these sensitive topics, advocates argue, are the same as those that were conducted around issues of disability, race, and gender, and foster respect for differences in the same way as these earlier national conversations. Adoption in the media Adoption experts complain that too much of the media coverage of adoption goes to one extreme or the other. There is favoritism in portraying the reunion rather than looking at the adoptee's life. In movies and TV the representation of adoption is often[citation needed] viewed as unfair by adoption advocates. Adoption blogs, for example, criticized Meet the Robinsons for using outdated orphanage imagery [43][44] as did advocacy non-profit The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute.[45]: "On the reverse many countries that are the source of adoptions internationally put emphasis on the biological parents where the adoptee is spending their entire life (or the length of the movie / TV show) searching for their biological parents. In both cases the feelings and thoughts of the adoptee are downgraded and one participant group is favored, ignoring the two other participants in the adoption process." This also is in news reports covering adoption as either stories of failed adoptions, troubled children, adoption scandals, and even "baby buying" or saccharine stories of “perfect” children and families. Only a very few news programs have treated the subject in a serious way and in its full breadth. Ignorance about adoption leads to representation of children in foster care as being so troubled that it would be impossible to adopt them and create “normal” families.[46] The result is that many children who would thrive in a loving family instead wait years in foster care, and even “age out” of the system at 18 without a family. A 2004 report from the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care has shown that the number of children waiting in foster care doubled since the 1980s and now remains steady at about a half-million a year."[47] Adoption in the wake of disasters After disasters such as hurricanes, tsunamis, and wars there is often an outpouring of offers from adults who want to give homes to the children left in need. While adoption is often the best way to provide stable, loving families for children in need, it is also suggested[48] that adoption in the immediate aftermath of trauma or upheaval may not be the best option. Moving children too quickly into new adoptive homes among strangers may be a mistake because with time, it may turn out that the parents have survived but were unable to find the children, or there may be a relative or neighbor who can offer shelter and homes. Providing safety and emotional support may be better in those situations than immediate relocation to a new adoptive family.[49] There is also an increased risk, immediately following a disaster, that displaced and/or orphaned children may be more vulnerable to exploitation and child trafficking.[50] Adoption reform Two important influences on the reform of voluntary infant adoption have been Nancy Verrier and Florence Fisher.[51] Verrier describes the "primal wound" as the "devastation which the infant feels because of separation from its birth mother. It is the deep and consequential feeling of abandonment which the baby adoptee feels after the adoption and which may continue for the rest of his life."[52] However, this theory has been criticized by other supporters of adoption reform for being extremely sexist, somewhat naïve, as well as cruel towards those women who would make an adoption plan for her child.[53] Proponents of adoption reform argue for increased open adoption rather than closed adoption, with the latter only being used where absolutely necessary. They also argue for open records, the provision of supports for adopted people and natural parents, and facilitation for search and reunion. Adoptism This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2007) Adoptism is a prejudice against adoption. This can be the belief that adoption is not a way to build a family (which is different from the preference for any other way or the personal free choice of not to do so spending time and resources without a self-preservation purpose). This may not be in blatant forms, but by assuming that the individual's abilities come from their family's abilities and all abilities, like other physical and psychological traits (and also because of those), are "inherited" rather than learned, which actually has scientifical basis to be the rule though learning has equally proven influence over some hereditary abilities. This can also be the belief that birthing children is preferable to adopting (which is different from preferring to birth and raise children for the sake of self-preservation and sense of belonging). This can extend to the idea that one should not adopt anyone that does not "look" like the parents and can hide forms of racism and sometimes sexism. Also it can be that making an adoption plan is never a preferable option for biological parents who are unable or choose not to raise their children. This also extends to the idea that it's alright to tell the adoptee should only love either their biological family or their adoptive family and they cannot love both, inclusively denying or limiting any contact with or denigrating his birth family or heritage or the one of his adoption. Usually this form is a hidden form of prejudice on the environment or biology makes the child. Sometimes adoptism is not conscious. For example, with international adoption, there is often the idea that it's not right to adopt internationally when there are kids domestically that need to be adopted. This idea isn't blatantly adoptism but rather a matter of priority for children of one's own country are closer or simply for a nativist sense of belonging. This can also be subtle as telling an adoptee that they don't have an accent. With domestic adoptions it's often extended through language choice that the adoptee, adoptive parents or the biological parents can find offensive, such as "real" parents or when an adoptee plans on finding their biological parents or the idea that they can now ask many personal questions that the adoptee may not be equipped or ready to respond to. These can sometimes be prejudices against actual adopted people. Sometimes this only is limited to certain kinds of adoption. Adoption is often used to cover other social issues in the society. For example, with adoption to gay and lesbian couples, many who are against it are also against gays and lesbians - the idea that a child needs a father and mother to function properly is an issue. This also can extend to race where the idea that whites should not adopt children of color because it's "unnatural". [edit] Disruption Main article: Disruption (adoption) Disruption is the term most commonly used for ending an adoption. While technically an adoption is disrupted only when it is abandoned by the adopting parent or parents before it is legally completed (an adoption that is reversed after that point is instead referred to in the law as having been dissolved), in practice the term is used for all adoptions that are ended (more recently, among families disrupting, the euphemism "re-homing" has become current). It is usually initiated by the parents via a court petition, much like a divorce, to which it is analogous. While rarely discussed in public, even within the adoption community, the practice has become far more widespread in recent years, especially among those parents who have adopted from Eastern European countries, particularly Russia and Romania, where some children have suffered far more from their institutionalization than their parents were led to believe. [edit] The language of adoption The language used in adoption is changing and evolving, and it has become a controversial issue. The controversy arises over the use of terms which, while designed to be more appealing or less offensive to some persons affected by adoption, may simultaneously cause offense or insult to others. This controversy illustrates the problematic nature of adoption, as well as the fact that coining new words and phrases to describe ancient social practices does not alter the feelings and experiences of those affected by them. The two contrasting sets of terms are commonly referred to as "Positive (or Respectful) Adoption Language" and "Honest Adoption Language." Positive Adoptive Language (PAL) It is believed that social workers in the field of adoption, most notably Marietta Spencer, created and began the promotion of what they termed "Positive Adoption Language" around the mid 1970s.[54]. The terms contained in ""Positive Adoption Language" include the terms "birthmother" (to replace the terms "natural mother" and "first mother"), "placing" (to replace the terms "relinquishment" or "surrender"), and restricting the terms "mother" and "father" to refer solely to the parents who had adopted. It reflects the point of view that (1) all relationships and connections between the adopted child and his/her previous family have been permanently and completely severed once the legal adoption has taken place, and that (2) "placing" a child for adoption is invariably a non-coerced "decision" the mother makes, free of coercion or pressure from external circumstances or agents. The reasons for its use: In many cultures, adoptive families face adoptism. Adoptism is made evident in English speaking cultures by the prominent use of negative or inaccurate language describing adoption. To combat adoptism, many adoptive families encourage positive adoption language. The reasons against its use: Many natural parents see "positive adoption language" as terminology which glosses over painful facts they face as they go into the indefinite post-adoption period of their lives. They feel PAL has become a way to present adoption in the friendliest light possible, in order to obtain even more infants for adoption; ie, a marketing tool. These people refer to PAL as "Adoption Friendly Language" or AFL. Honest Adoption Language (HAL) "Honest Adoption Language", on the other hand, refers to a set of terms that reflect the point of view that: (1) family relationships (social, emotional, psychological or physical) that existed prior to the legal adoption often continue past this point or endure in some form despite long periods of separation, and that (2) mothers who have "voluntarily surrendered" children to adoption (as opposed to involuntary terminations through court-authorized child-welfare proceedings) seldom view it as a choice that was freely made, but instead describe scenarios of powerlessness, lack of resources, and overall lack of choice.[55][56] It also reflects the point of view that the term "birthmother" is derogatory in implying that the woman has ceased being a mother after the physical act of giving birth. Proponents of HAL liken this to the mother being treated as a "breeder" or incubator".[57]. Terms included in HAL include the original terms that were used before PAL, including "natural mother," "first mother," and "surrendered for adoption." The reasons for its use: In most cultures, the adoption of a child does not change the identities of its mother and father: they continue to be referred to as such. Those who adopted a child were thereafter termed its "guardians," "foster," or "adoptive" parents. Most people use "Honest Adoption Language" (HAL) because it is the original and most widely-used terminology. Many of those directly affected by adoption loss believe these terms more accurately reflect important but hidden and/or ignored realities of adoption. It also has the advantage of not excluding further contacts, sometimes even allowed since the beginning and never totally severed by adoptive parents between birth parents and their children, as well as after they reach majority. The reasons against its use: The term "Honest" implies that all other language used in adoption is dishonest. Terms used in Positive Adoption Language: Non-preferred: PAL term: Reasons stated for preference: your own child birth child; biological child Saying a birth child is your own child or one of your own children implies that an adopted child is not. child is adopted child was adopted Some adoptees believe that their adoption is not their identity, but is an event that happened to them. ("Adopted" becomes a participle rather than an adjective.) Others contend that "is adopted" makes adoption sound like an ongoing disability, rather than a past event. give up for adoption place for adoption or make an adoption plan "Give up" implies a lack of value. The preferred terms are more emotionally neutral. real mother/father/parent birth, biological or genetic mother/father/parent The use of the term "real" implies that the adoptive family is artificial, and is not as descriptive. natural parent birth parent or first parent The use of the term "natural" implies that the adoptive family is unnatural, and so is not a descriptive or accurate term. Although it can be seen as unnatural to conceive and relinquish children, the purpose is to present the adoption of those children in need as natural. The term "natural" in its origin means a family by the natural means of conception and birth and its primal bound which exists by itself since the beginning unless it's severed. your adopted child your child The use of the adjective 'adopted' signals that the relationship is qualitatively different from that of parents to birth children. surrender for adoption placed or placed for adoption The use of the adjective 'surrendered' implies "giving up." For many parents placing a child for adoption is an informed completely voluntary choice. For others, there is no choice as the parent's rights were terminated because the parent was deemed to be unfit. Terms used in Honest Adoption Language: Non-preferred: HAL Term: Reasons stated for preference: birth mother/father/parent mother, natural mother, first mother (or father/parent) HAL views term "birth mother" as being derogatory, limiting a woman's purpose in her child's life to the physical act of reproduction and thus implying that she is a "former mother" or "breeder." HAL terms reflect the point of view that there is usually a continuing mother-child relationship and/or bond that endures despite separation birth child natural child, child of one's own HAL views the term "birth child" as being derogatory, implying that the adoptee was a "birth product" produced for the adoption market, and having no relationship or connection with his or her natural mother past the event of having been born. It also implies that the mother is a "birth mother" with no connection to her child or interest in her child past this point place for adoption give up for adoption surrender for adoption (have) lost to adoption (are) separated by adoption, HAL acknowledges that past adoption practice facilitated the taking of children for adoption, often against their mother's expressed wishes. Many women who have gone through the process and who lost children to adoption believe that social work techniques used to prepare single mothers to sign Termination Of Parental Rights papers closely resembles a psychological war against natural motherhood; hence the term "surrender."[58] "Surrender" is also the legal term for the mother's signing a Termination of Parental Rights. "Make a plan" and "place for adoption" are viewed by HAL proponents as being dishonest terms which marginalize or deny the wrenching emotional effect of separation on the mother/child dyad.[59] and imply the mother has made a fully-informed decision. mother/father/parent (when referring solely to the parents who had adopted) adoptive mother/father/parent Referring to the people who have adopted the child as the mother or father (singular), ignores the emotional and psychological (and often physical) presence of a second set of parents in the child's life. In contrast to RAL, HAL reflects the opinion that there are two sets of parents in the adopted person's life: adoptive parents and natural parents. adopted child adopted person or person who was adopted The use of the adjective 'adopted' signals that the relationship is qualitatively different from that of parents to other children. The use of the word "child" is accurate up until the end of childhood. After that the continued use of "child" is infantilizing.