The term “birthmother” is adoption rhetoric for breeder. A breeder. This is what a pregnant woman is to an infertile individual/couple. When you devalue women, when you devalue motherhood, you devalue the very foundation of humanity. I will not use the term “birthmother” because of its derogatory invention and history. “Birthmother” was coined because jealous adopters took offense at the original term: natural mother. Also, properly calling moms natural mothers doesn’t look well for the legalese of child trafficking. Natural mothers are women who are biological mothers. Natural mothers gave birth. Take the emotional element out of the term “natural” as placed there by adopters and adoption/child trafficking advocates, and the urge to claim/purchase a baby that’s not yours is revealed as what it is – unnatural.
Let’s make one fact blindingly clear: Adoption is an industry – it is a business. Whether it’s ran by the state, private, or religious “charity” – Adoption is an industry fueled by consumer demand. In the early 2000s, adoption services were valued at 1.4 billion dollars. Billion. Now that number is 13 billion. This is newborn trafficking. Adoption is the selling of newborns from vulnerable, often disenfranchised girls and women who are young, single, and/or poor. These girls and women are not addicts or promiscuous, and their babies are not unwanted. These are very loved and very wanted babies stolen through lies, coercion, threats, manipulation, greed, legal fraud and politics.
Unfortunately, many cases of domestic adoption are child trafficking, and a very specific type of trafficking: infant trafficking. Just because infertile people of means are buying babies for different reasons than ISIS, doesn’t mean it’s not trafficking. Trafficking is the exchange of human life for money. Adoption attorneys and social workers are committing an American version trafficking to clients of means. Instead of sex, artificial parenthood is the goal. Until no profit – under or over the table – is made on human life, adoption will remain a form of child trafficking. And without the demand for the supply of babies, infants would not be sold. The crux of the problem is the sense of entitlement the wealthy has always exhibited toward the rest of the world, whether it’s resources or children.
The main tactic used to secure the purchase, guarantee a product, is the unethical pre-birth consent or contract. Alabama is one of the two states in which this abhorrent tactic is still explicitly practiced. However, private agencies and attorneys have find loopholes in other states. In theory and legal practice, a pre-birth consent can be rescinded at any stage before birth, as well as within the mother’s promised time frame after birth. However, cancelled consent/contracts are rarely acknowledged and honored. Also, these pre-birth agreements are NOT adoption contracts. Finalized papers are still signed after birth. The illegal suppression and denial of the mother’s legal right to null and void this contract is largely due to two factors: 1) The adoption attorney, hired by and representing the wanna-be parents, often misleads or misinforms the mother after she verbally rescinds. The mother is often threatened with lawsuits, manipulated, and verbally assaulted. She’s not informed that she must give written notification of her repeal. 2) The adopter(s) often are in vigilant contact with the mother. Often, they accompany her to doctor’s appointments and are present at birth. Yep, these creeps even in the room, staring at the mother’s vagina. Apparently, this is a trending thing in the adoption world. 3) The judge who presided over the pre-birth contract can – and often – over rules the mother, stating he had her best interest.
Often, mothers have to fight for their babies in court, even without finalizing a considered adoption. They are told that a pre-birth contract is preliminary, just a consideration – charity instead of demonized welfare. Their single status or low/lack of income is used against them in court, reducing these mothers to breeding serfs. Their integrity and mental health is questioned; yet, no one examines the unnatural and very sick motives of the people who have stolen her baby through lies and manipulations. It is sickeningly ironic how religious advocates of forced adoption, as well as the legal semantics used by adoption child traffickers, claim “hormones” to excuse away the mother’s unconditional and boundless love her child, when they know next to nothing about science, specifically endocrinology. In fact, most of the religious factions in the business of selling babies believe the world to be only 6,000 years old. But when it comes to a mother’s love, they’re going to blame it on science. Science is the study of the natural world. Pregnancy and birth hormones are natural. A natural mother’s love is natural. It is the unnatural, wanna-be “mother” or couple coveting and pursuing another’s child that’s mentally unsound and volatile. Kimberly Rossler of Alabama never signed final adoption papers; her baby boy was seized from her arms three weeks after birth. Most mothers never have the financial means to fight the courts, agencies, and baby-buyers. Thus, often, baby-buyers keep babies without a mother “finalizing” papers. Those “final papers” that Donna Ames assured Kimberly Rossler had to be signed for an adoption to be an adoption.
The blatant classism and sense of entitlement and privilege of the old Confederacy is still very much alive in the underbelly of regional Southern culture and politics. These people believe they can buy anything, anyone. The current regional case of child trafficking, Kimberly Rossler’s story, is an example of entitlement the wealthy, white, privileged class. A gag order has been placed on Kimberly Rossler, and at least one of the judges involved has served on the board of Adoption Rocks, the child trafficking organization behind the sell of her son to a single, older woman of means and status. Classism is the very foundation of this case, as the purchaser of Kimberly Rossler’s baby is a wealthy, SINGLE woman who has the bucks to buy a baby. Funny how all hypocrites of every ilk will get behind a single woman, playing at motherhood, if she has money and she’s not the mother of the baby.
Gag orders are all too common in forced adoption stories, and they should be declared unlawful. Money talks and bullshit walks. Judges are bought. Adoption attorneys line their pockets with money made by selling human flesh. For further reading on child trafficking via domestic adoption:
Personal note: I’m childfree. And I’m not an adoptee either. I have a conscience that won’t allow me to stay silent on injustices, especially injustices that affect the most ignored and trivialized group, which is girls and women. As stated on a previous post regarding adoption, the very real process of child trafficking, I’ve witnessed this shit go down before. I know firsthand how infertile people look to single, pregnant women as a host to a potential purchased newborn. The first link I provided above, exiledmothers.com, contains a personal account of a young, single mother being quietly profiled by the receptionist at her (OB/GYN) doctor’s office. This receptionist was on a mission to find a baby for her infertile friend. A friend who happened to be the wife of a judge. And, of course, she found a target mother. This is almost exactly what happened to my cousin. The difference is that it was dental hygienist in a dentist office. A dentist office…. This is indicative of how raptorial these baby snatching creeps are. If you’re a pregnant woman, regardless of your status or lifestyle, be careful. Recently, the crime of a desperate woman cutting an eight month fetus out of a pregnant woman made international headlines. This is the extreme side of the baby snatching mentality. But it’s still within the same paradigm of desperate, infertile people(s).