Our oldest, bio adult kid has been struggling to understand her adopted siblings' attack against our family. She's stumbled upon two books by Nancy Verrier that she highly recommends.
One book is "The Primal Wound: Understanding the Adopted Child"
The other is a book bio daughter gifted me at Christmas time...
Coming Home to Self: The Adopted Child Grows Up
Yesterday was a fantastically wonderful day at work... lots of AWESOME, HARD work with plenty of "standby" time allowing me to delve seldomly interrupted into my new gift.
Wow... so far I LOVE parts of the book,
other parts not-so-much,
but I'm at the beginning and willing to give it more time.
It seems to me the author is opposed to using psychiatric diagnoses for adoption-related "disorders" (I'm very loosely paraphrasing based on my first impressions....) because while the adopted brain may function differently than the non-adopted brain... the adoptive brain is not "disordered" because it has has only responded normally, predictably-normal even, to the various traumas related to adoption.
My nonRAD keeps telling me what she loves most about Ms Verrier's books is she discusses adoption issues yet avoids "labeling" the adopted individuals.
I know my adopted children have an illness... they are not their illness. I have asthma. I am not asthma. I am also not offended when people concerned for my physical well-being call me asthmatic.
I'm not enjoying the identifying common symptoms and labeling them under one diagnostic name is a negative thing. To me adopting that theory falls into the category of vilifying adoptive parents and the team of people working hard to seek healing for children we love.
How are adoptive parents, the the mental health community and educational team to recognize/identify/communicate patterns of very disturbing behaviors, tendencies, etc... "common and normal to adopted individuals" without calling it something?
Certainly we can all agree the very disturbing behaviors, tendencies, etc... are not out-and-out "normal" by any means without certain imperative qualifiers... and who are we helping/hurting by promoting calling it normal?
I "get" while the behaviors are very disturbing they are "normal" (perhaps common is a better word?) responses to the tragic experiences the adopted individual experienced before adoption.
I don't appreciate vilifying the individuals most active to promote healing in the adopted child's life simply because they make lists of "symptoms" and call "disorders" by a medical "name" as a communication tool... and education tool... one that seeks to identify, and promote healing in the "disordered" individual.
Disordered.... yeah, I said it. My adoptees do have a disorder, and I love them.
Do you care for the health and well-being of an adopted individual?
Are you opposed to medical terminology to discuss the condition?
One book is "The Primal Wound: Understanding the Adopted Child"
The other is a book bio daughter gifted me at Christmas time...
Coming Home to Self: The Adopted Child Grows Up
Yesterday was a fantastically wonderful day at work... lots of AWESOME, HARD work with plenty of "standby" time allowing me to delve seldomly interrupted into my new gift.
Wow... so far I LOVE parts of the book,
other parts not-so-much,
but I'm at the beginning and willing to give it more time.
It seems to me the author is opposed to using psychiatric diagnoses for adoption-related "disorders" (I'm very loosely paraphrasing based on my first impressions....) because while the adopted brain may function differently than the non-adopted brain... the adoptive brain is not "disordered" because it has has only responded normally, predictably-normal even, to the various traumas related to adoption.
My nonRAD keeps telling me what she loves most about Ms Verrier's books is she discusses adoption issues yet avoids "labeling" the adopted individuals.
I know my adopted children have an illness... they are not their illness. I have asthma. I am not asthma. I am also not offended when people concerned for my physical well-being call me asthmatic.
I'm not enjoying the identifying common symptoms and labeling them under one diagnostic name is a negative thing. To me adopting that theory falls into the category of vilifying adoptive parents and the team of people working hard to seek healing for children we love.
How are adoptive parents, the the mental health community and educational team to recognize/identify/communicate patterns of very disturbing behaviors, tendencies, etc... "common and normal to adopted individuals" without calling it something?
Certainly we can all agree the very disturbing behaviors, tendencies, etc... are not out-and-out "normal" by any means without certain imperative qualifiers... and who are we helping/hurting by promoting calling it normal?
I "get" while the behaviors are very disturbing they are "normal" (perhaps common is a better word?) responses to the tragic experiences the adopted individual experienced before adoption.
I don't appreciate vilifying the individuals most active to promote healing in the adopted child's life simply because they make lists of "symptoms" and call "disorders" by a medical "name" as a communication tool... and education tool... one that seeks to identify, and promote healing in the "disordered" individual.
Disordered.... yeah, I said it. My adoptees do have a disorder, and I love them.
Do you care for the health and well-being of an adopted individual?
Are you opposed to medical terminology to discuss the condition?
3 comments:
These behaviors are not the "normal" adoptee response to trauma because most adoptees (as in more than half) are not RAD. You are right, RAD is a disorder. Out of my five adopted kids, two show no signs of RAD, two are full blown RADishes, and the jury is out on the fifth.
I spoke with our NonRAD about her gifted book and she corrected me... she explained what she loves most about this book is it gives tools for the adoptee to overcome many of the struggles they have.
Our NonRAD is not opposed to diagnoses.
***
GB's Mom... I always appreciate your comments!!!!
Both my adopted kids are RAD. We NEED the diagnoses to get them the help they need. Without the validation of their diagnoses, and without the explanations that go with them, my kids would not get the care they need (of course, even WITH all their diagnoses, very few people really "get it.").
Mary
Post a Comment