In a recent case, I was asked to mediate in a growing heated conflict between a birth parent and an adoptive couple.

An adoption plan...
An adoption plan had been completed with the help of an attorney and agency with some visits between parties before the birth of the baby who was placed in the adoptive home at birth. At that time it was agreed that no post-birth contact would occur between birth mother and baby. All communications would take place through the adoption agency, which would act as an intermediary.

Months later .....
Months later the birth mother wanted quarterly photographs and face to face visits between her and her birth child. She stated that she was offered visits at her discretion. The couple stated that they were never told that this was part of the matching process and later claimed that they never would have accepted the baby under these circumstances. Also there was a differing in opinions as to what exactly was jointly agreed upon far as post birth contact via letters with photographs. As an adoption and family-formation specialist, I recognized the familiar themes and met with both parties separately in order to assess the conflict, learn about the circumstances of the placement and uncover what legal issues were present, before meeting with them together. I also wanted to get a feeling for the level of anger and emotional/mental stability of the involved parties, and the potential for danger to any of the individuals. The adoptive family was challenged by the idea that a birth family might interfere in their parenting and force a co-parenting relationship. I was not certain that mediating could help these individuals come to a meeting of the minds and that a lawsuit was not about to begin.

Sometimes Birth parents and or adoptive parent(s) change their minds about their decision to place a baby for adoption or about the level of openness in the agreement. In this case the agreements about the time of the transfer of parental rights from the birth mother to adoption agency and then to adoptive parents was discussed. This transfer was completed within 24 hours, with little time for any pre-adoption planning. The parties walked away with different interpretations of the agreements.

In my interviews I discovered...
In my interviews I discovered that the adoptive family initially felt terrified about the possibility of losing their child. Subsequently they became angry and spiteful. Unspoken feelings of loss and inadequacy leftover from their struggle with infertility were lurking just below the surface. When asked directly, the couple stated that they worried that if they succumbed to the request of the biological parent they would lose all control of the situation, and allow a close relationship to develop between their child and biological parent, thus leaving themselves in a situation where their child might love the biological parent more than they themselves.

They imagined their child eventually running away to join her birth family, and rejecting them forever. They lacked the insight that the birth parent is always a part of an adopted child’s life (either imagined or real) and the adopted child will often wonder about their biological connections, birth family history and will wish for someone who looks like them and posses familiar genetic traits. They do not trust that knowledge is not a threat, but can often strengthen their child’s developing sense of self, and that their child might become empowered with a more complete picture of who they are and where they come from, rather a life-sense that only includes bits and pieces.

This is not to say that sadness does not also exist within the experience of gaining this knowledge, yet not having the information does not preclude or avoid the sadness that life may bring. Parents can give their child the gift of allowing a full range of feelings in life, not just supposed happy ones.

The birth mother felt regretful and was scared that she would never see her child again. She was angry because she felt she had been lied to, and then realized all-too-late that she mistakenly gave up her right to directly know about her child’s whereabouts, development and life events. At the time of placement, she knew she did not want to parent, though she did not know how she would later feel about being completely cut off from her child, never to see the child again. She continued to claim that the agency and

The adoptive family’s promises were not being honored. She accepted her decision to place her baby for adoption but that did not stop her concern, curiosity, love and desire for some direct connection to her birth child, and that her maternal love did not end when the relinquishment was signed.

The more the adoptive parent fought the birth parent’s request to reunite with the child, the more the birth parent wanted to contest the adoption. More complexities of the conflict developed as new information about the biological father and another possible birthfather came to light.

In the mediation all parties were able to state...
In the mediation all parties were able to state their fears, and the anger was somewhat diffused as a result of adherence to the rules of friendly communication and etiquette.
Though good will was not initially evident, each party feeling victimized by circumstance and legal entanglements, eventually the discussion became more about which outcome would best serve the child through out her life.

Once the adoptive parents learned that they would not lose their privacy, and that a birth mother would not be on their doorstep unannounced, and understood that they are the legal and ‘forever parents’ of their child, freely able to make parenting decisions without interference, they were able to calm down and listen to the voice of their child’s biological mother. They began to visualize some of the ways their child might benefit from a face to face connection with their biological mother, because of the information provided about her genetic background, birth-family stories and having a physiological roadmap.

They also accepted that no matter how distant they became from their child’s birth family, it would not stop the child from possibly ruminating about her biological history. Satisfying that curiosity would be a major part of establishing a complete and strong self-image for their child. Though too young to participate in the actual discussion, the child’s best interest was being examined in new ways, thus opening the adoptive parents to other possibilities of connection with the birth mother.

The birth mother‘s anger and resentment began to lessen once she saw an opening for her needs to be considered. She became more relaxed when she understood there might be a possibility to see her child once again without a fight involving attorneys and costing her money she did not have.

We brainstormed as a group...
We brainstormed as a group about all the different ways a connection could be maintained and honored, keeping in mind the needs of all parties. The parties constructed a plan that included video and photos placed on an Internet website that all family members could log on to and view, thereby not intruding directly into the daily life of the adoptive family. The adoptive mother agreed to add a private e-mail with descriptions of the child’s development, accomplishments and milestones. All parties agreed to an annual face-to-face visit in a park or home, every 4th of July unless one party would be vacationing in which case the meeting would be held on Labor Day.

First and foremost I considered what was in the best interest of the child. Had the birth mother not been a safe person for that child to be near (i.e. drug involved or mentally unstable) then attempts to open a closed adoption would have been postponed till such time when the birth mother could present herself in a healthy way. At the same time, just because a biological parent is not able to parent, it does not mean that the biological parent cannot provide a positive impact on the child.

When anger is deflated, the uncovering of the fears takes place, which is then followed by educating the parties. This leads to brainstorming a solution where all parties can be at least partially accommodated.

These issues, as well as the inherent trauma and legalities make adoption a complex family experience. Whether the birth mother is near or far, emotionally close or distant, she is always a part of the adopted child’s family constellation.

The effectiveness of this mediation was due in large part to educating, and to bringing the unspoken emotions out in the open.