The project studied the perceived levels of satisfaction of reunions between adult adoptees and birthparents of adult adoptees. The project attempted to identify contributing factors to the satisfaction of a reunion.

An Internet page and a volunteer post-adoption support group solicited the sample. The final participant sample included 46 birthparents and 40 adoptees from 24 states and two other countries. The participants varied in their involvement with adoption support activities. The survey instrument was divided between adoptees and birthparents. The questionnaires were delivered to the participants through an Internet interactive Web page and paper copy at support group meetings in February and March 1999.

The project categorically revealed that adoption reunions can be satisfying. The effects of reunion are significant and positive in areas of identity and autonomy for the birthparent and adoptee. All respondents were glad they had been found, or had searched and found.

This project could not have been possible without the one hundred twenty people who courageously responded to the questionnaires. The questionnaires asked very personal and difficult questions. I am very thankful to all of you who participated.

Additionally, I want to thank Dianne Kristensen May, Coco Skibinski Brush, and Curry Wolfe for their help in reviewing the questionnaires during development. I am thankful to Dianne of Adoptee Birthparent Connection, Eugene, Oregon, and Suzanne Apelskog of Children’s Home Society of Spokane, Washington for help in distribution of the questionnaire to a sample of adoptees and birthparents.

This participant’s summary is an abridged version of the one hundred sixty eight page final version approved by the faculty of George Fox University. I am submitting to you, the participants, the results in the tone as required by the University for their approval. Please note I was required to weaken the statements concerning satisfaction and positive effects of reunion. I apologize for this, but I would not have had my project approved, nor would I have been able to graduate without doing so. I plan to republish the results this research project to correct that error, and to include additional analysis of the responses received. I prefer that this version of the research project not get wide distribution because of the required changes made to the discussion chapter you are receiving and as published by the college. I do not feel it accurately represents the positive outcome of reunions, and does an injustice to those affected by an adoption. The amended version of the research will be available to participants and to the public.

Again, I thank all of you. I hope you find pleasure in helping others affected by an adoption through this research.

Purpose

The purpose of this project was to design and administer a survey to measure how satisfying reunions are to adult adoptees and birthparents of adult adoptees that have met after years of separation by a stranger adoption. Additionally, there was a desire to discover if there are contributing factors to higher or lower satisfaction levels. The survey hoped to identify measurable differences between reunitees’ satisfaction levels and the manner in which the participants were reunited, as well as the amount and type of post-adoption guidance they have had. The researcher felt the majority of reunitees were satisfied with their reunions. However, this conclusion came from observations by the researcher, rather than a formal survey.

November 3, 1998, Oregon voters passed Ballot Measure 58. This measure restored a pre-1957 law allowing for adoptees over the age of twenty-one years to receive a copy of the original non-amended birth certificate. The passage of this measure brought public attention to adoptee and birthfamily reunions, creating a need for the public to have a better understanding of reunion relationships.

Setting

The statistics on how many adoptees and birth relatives searching or have been reunited is limited. "With over an estimated eleven million adoptees in the United States today, not including the number of private and illegal adoptions, over six million are estimated to be in search. Searching refers to those individuals seeking information regarding their birth and/ or birthparents" (Giddens, 1983, p. 16). Geddiman cites an estimate of two hundred thousand to two million. This researcher only knows of two adopted persons who have not, nor intend to search (Geddiman, Brown, 1989, pp. 20-21). "The final quarter of the twentieth century is witness to an unprecedented phenomenon: the reunion of tens of thousands of adult adoptees with their birthmothers and families of origin" (Stiffler, 1992, p. 1).

The survey covers the United States, Canada, Scotland, Wales, and New South Wales, and participants from other countries. It is a worldwide issue. Adoption practices and laws are similar in the countries involved in the project. The laws vary from state to state and country to country, but are quite similar in effect. Adoption is taking a child from its birthfamily, then placing him or her with another family to be raised until an adult. Adoption in this sense has been happening since the beginning of time. The difference is in how adoption has been practiced this century.

Late in the 19^th century, enactment of adoptions laws gave adopted persons the same legal rights as children born into a family. Social services agencies felt this was necessary because some people adopting children did so to be a source of inexpensive labor. With statutory adoption came the practice of issuing an amended birth certificate showing the adoptee being born to the adoptive parents. In the middle of this century, laws were enacted to seal adoption records from public view to protect the adoptee from the stigma of illegitimacy.

Until modern social work, the adopted child’s original identity was not a secret. It was expected that adopted children would eventually know their birthfamily, if the birthfamily were not already a part of the adoptees’ life. With the sealing of records, expectations of adoptees and birthfamilies changed. Adopted persons were no longer supposed to need to know their birthfamilies. Society felt a birthmother could go on with her life, forgetting the child was ever born.

The reality is it made it a lot more difficult for adoptees and birthfamilies to find each other.

Importance

Reunions are a natural part of family separations. The process and outcome of reunions is what needs study. Are reunions satisfying to the reunitees? If not, why not? Can something be done to have them be more satisfying?

Adoption reunion in not a solitary incident, happening away from other activities and thought processes. Reunion involves many phases. It can start with the adoption affected person beginning to wonder consciously about his or her counterpart in adoption; learning more about that person, possibly searching for their counterpart, preparing to meet this person, to finally meeting their counterpart—a reunion. Only reunion does not stop there. There are post-reunion issues as well. This literature review tries to cover the areas surrounding an adoption reunion.

The Origin of Research

Those affected by an adoption have long been trying to have their needs met by speaking out. Still, adoptees and birthparents are not being heard. Jean Paton’s efforts to attract attention to concerns about the affects of adoption began over forty years ago and were impeded in one way or another; she felt there was a "resistance to the speech of the adopted people" (Kittson, 1968, pp. 41-42). Barbara Gonyo and Kenneth Watson (1988) assert, "those who are committed to adoption and its improvement must listen to what those who have experienced adoption have to say;" "We cannot ignore, however, the subjective reports of those who have searched and shared their experiences" (p. 21). Karen March (1995) was able to gain acceptance by her participants in the support group meetings she attended as a researcher, because as one of her participants put it: "We can tell the story, but no one will listen to it because we don’t have letters after our names. They will listen to you and what you have to say will carry more weight" (p. 18). This project was instituted because it was thought that there was not much done on the issue, but there is a great deal of research on the subject of adoption reunions, yet it remains generally unknown.

Paton did the first known research on the post-adoption effects of adoption in 1953. She began the Life History Study Center, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to study the effects of adoption on adult adopted persons. She advertised for participants in Michigan, her home state (Kittson, 1968, p. 25). This research became the book she published in the fall of 1953, The Adopted Break the Silence (Kittson, 1968, p. 39).

Triseliotis’ 1973 research is one of the most often cited studies on "adoption reunions." However, of his seventy participants, only four met their birthparents, and seven met other birth-relatives (p. 133). His study was significant in that it was used to help determine whether adoption birth records should be sealed in Scotland and Wales. It was determined that they should not be (p. 2).

March (1995) approached her research from an anthropologist’s methodology. "This type of research focus requires a ‘sympathetic understanding’ of the research participants’ social experience" (p. 15). March accomplished this by spending fifteen months attending meetings for two support groups in Canada, and following two adopted women through their search process and contact with their birthfamilies (pp. 15-16). Other Canadian researchers have contributed substantial data on adoption reunions, Sachdev (1992), and McColm (1995). Carlini (1992) interviewed 198 women from 1986 to 1992 in Canada and the United States for her research (p. iii).

There were also studies done by Gonyo and Watson in 1988 using Truth Seekers in Adoption (TSIA), a volunteer organization, and the adoption agency Chicago Child Care Society (CCCS) to draw the sample of respondents. Waner’s (1988) study only involved fourteen adoptees. She also required that the reunion be at least six months along, but not more than five years. Her respondent pool was drawn from PACER and ALMA; both are group meetings in the San Francisco, California, area (pp. 61-62).

Search

Searching is what adoptees and birthparents do to resolve their issues of loss surrounding adoption.

Sorosky, et al., and Lifton, found in their studies of reunited adoptees that, searching was not a indication of psychological maladjustment, pathology, or a poor relationship with the adoptive family. They feel that search is a healthy response to wanting to know about their past (Sorosky, Panor, Baron, 1978, p. 197; Lifton 1979, p. 74).

Research shows that adoptees often feel compelled to deny their need for a reunion, postponing searching for years. They cloak their needs in terms of wanting medical history, or to know siblings. Society makes them feel guilty for wanting to know their birthmothers; they fear appearing like a disloyal-ungrateful adoptee. An adoptee does not begin searching on impulse (McColm, 1993, p. 101; March, 1995, p. 48; Verrier, 1993, p. 154; Giddens, 1983, p. 37; Waner, 1988, p. 119). "Burying and denying their needs for information about their origins have by now become second nature" (McColm, 1993, p. 108).

Searching is more than eventually having a reunion with a counterpart in adoption. The search itself is a part of the healing. "As one adoptee explained, ‘I felt really good that I beat the system. I had taken control over my own life’ (author added emphasis)" (March, 1995, p. 128). It is not just adoptees searching for birthmothers. Birthmothers search for their child lost to adoption. "Many [birthmothers] begin to search, realizing in retrospect their inviolable right to the child they bore, and overturning the expectations of both the law and the society that imposed a closed adoption upon them" (McColm, 1993, p. 41). In adoption reform groups, it is believed that birthmothers have as much right to search as an adoptee does. These groups acknowledge how deeply birthmothers have been affected by the loss of their child (Aigner, 1986, p. 65).

Searching can become an obsession, with little else able to get the searcher’s focus, until the person of the search is found. Searching has a tremendous emotional impact, and "reunions are almost uniformly described as emotionally draining" (Gonyo, Watson, 1988, p. 20). Nevertheless, Geddiman and Brown (1989) found that those who search are the most reunion ready (p. 68).

Sealed Records

Secrecy has been the practice in adoption for about the last fifty years. Adoption professionals promoted it as being necessary to protect the parties involved from intrusion from their counterparts. "These claims are refuted by this study, which demonstrates that secrecy in adoption hardly serves the interest of the participants in adoption; instead, it promotes fears and misconceptions about each others’ motives" (Sachdev, 1992, p. 66). The Parliament of New South Wales also refutes this in an extensive study they did in 1989. They found that someone appearing on the doorstep was the exception (p. 36).

Another study finds this secrecy to be "a sadistic violation of their [adoptees] physical and emotional intactness" (Bertocci, Schecter, 1991, p. 192). "Research studies, including this one, consistently report that current adoptive arrangements based on secrecy cause needless grief, pain, and fears among members of the adoption triangle" (Sachdev, 1992, p. 66). Sachdev says the secrecy is contrary to the goal of adoption of serving the best interests of the child. He feels that secrecy is futile in light of the benefits coming from reunions (1992). Birthmothers are not seeking secrecy from their child; they want to know what happened to their child. They welcome the opportunity to talk about the experience after years of living in the closet. They found it therapeutic (Geddiman, Brown, 1989, p. xviii; Giddens, 1983, p. 37).

The Parliament of New South Wales contends that those fearing access to adoption and birth records have nothing to fear and consider it no longer justifiable, including allow birthmothers access to the information (p. x). The Privacy Committee provided evidence that led the Committee to conclude that:

Volunteer Post-adoption Services

Most of the post-adoption support and counseling comes from volunteer organizations.

Volunteer peer support groups have a vital place in providing post-adoption services. Mental health professionals do not know adoption issues.

Clinicians have little of the specialized knowledge necessary to handle the adoption issues of their clients (Winkler, Brown, vanKeppel, Blanchard, 1988, p. xv).

McColm explains in her research why support group meetings with both adoptees and birthparents were the most productive: "One group for both parties is helpful, because adoptees and birth mothers can give each other insights into the other’s experiences and help prepare each other for the road ahead" (1993, p. 120). Nonetheless, March explains that reunitees stop attending support group meetings. "Because meetings focus mainly on search techniques and early reunion contact . . ." (1995, pp. 21, 23). Although, some "Support groups can help in sorting out the new relationships and maintaining boundaries [of a reunion]" (Gonyo, Watson, 1988, p. 20).

Adoption Agency Post-adoption Services

One of the most contentious aspects of search and reunion is who is to be involved. Adoption professionals and the government agencies want a third party intermediary to do the search and make the initial contact. The United States volunteer support groups want self-directed search and direct contact. The volunteer organizations have membership dues and a person searching may have to pay for record searches, the intermediaries charge fees ranging in the hundreds of dollars. Other problems involve time. March’s research states that there are 9,000 adoptees waiting for three employees to begin work on a case (1995, p. 62).

Additionally, the intermediaries are not as successful at making contact and facilitating a reunion.

Parent Finders of Canada (a volunteer group) encourage their members to use an intermediary from the group to make contact. Yet, their success rate for face-to-face meetings and continued relationships is much lower than the United States volunteer groups with direct contact. In March’s Canadian study only thirty-eight (63 per cent) of the adoptees had a face to face meeting with their birth mothers when using an intermediary (1995, p. 97). "Three-fourths (76.4%) of the biological mothers who were contacted by adoptees reacted with moderate to strong enthusiasm" (Sachdev, 1992, p. 62).

On the other hand, Gonyo (1988) reports of the last seventy United States searches, with direct contact only three (4%) ended with a refusal by the found party to meet; a 96% success rate. However, Minnesota state intermediary workers were only able to facilitate 50% of their attempts at reunion. Additionally, during the four years Oregon has had an intermediary system available, intermediaries have failed 17% of the time to facilitate a reunion (Gianola, 1998).

Some jurisdictions require mandatory agency counseling for an intermediary or registry match to be facilitated. One of McColm’s research participants explains many adoptee’s feelings: "If requiring permission from your adoptive parents to register wasn’t bad enough, now I couldn’t help but feel patronized by being forced into "counselling." For what? Reunion wasn’t a problem – it was a solution" (1993, p. 133). Regardless, McColm felt the mandatory counseling and exchange of letters before meeting was advantageous (1993, p. 136). "Adoption does not necessarily imply pathology. The need for services is both normal and healthy" (Winkler, et al., 1988, p. 22).

The mandatory counseling was usually provided by an adoption or government agency. It was delivered face-to-face, by telephone, and through letters. The counseling covered updated non-identifying information, feelings towards their counterparts, type of relationship desired, and other such things. It was also reported that reunitees were recommended to exchange letters and pictures before meeting in person or even talking on the telephone. Gladstone thought the counseling to be useful (Gladstone, Westhues, 1992).

Effects of Reunion

Reunions are a way for healing through reconciliation. Still though, they can be very difficult. What rights and responsibilities does one have in a reunion? What does one do with intimate strangers? There are no relationships to which to compare a reunion (Verrier, 1993, pp. 175, 179; Geddiman, Brown, 1989, p. 66). Nevertheless, reunions are healing, the "Personal well-being, in both birth mothers and adoptees, is almost universally reported to be enhanced through a reunion (McColm, 1993, p. 104). It can take years after a reunion to surface all the repressed emotions. The reunitees must come to the acknowledgment that they can never regain what was lost. It takes years to undo all of conditioning for what each one’s expected role in adoption was (McColm, 1993, pp. 209-210). Before reunion, "Women who still lacked any information about their relinquished child showed significantly more negative affect and poorer psychological well-being than those who had at least obtained some non-identifying information" (Field, 1992, p. 233).

Adoptees and birthmothers develop a phenomenon known as a sub-self. This can begin to set up a pattern of expectations within the adoptee and they may have to take on what psychologists call a ‘sub-self’ in order to accommodate what is expected of them." "The ‘False Self’ [for the birthmother] was created by many birth mothers to accommodate the pain. She needed a new part that could pretend that she was doing fine, when she really wasn’t (Carlini, 1992, p. 18, 94).

Reunion for adoptees accomplishes many things. Many adoptees go into search to gain a more cohesive identity. Because they have been cut-off from their past there is a void, a missing piece. Reunion helps adoptees with this. To know someone they look like, have similar personality characteristics, talents, intellect, and are related to genetically (Sachdev, 1992; Waner, 1988, pp. 197-199). "All of the adoptees in the study were able to recognize some aspects of themselves in members of their birthfamilies" (Waner, 1988, pp. 196-197). Similarities found in reunion are intriguing. Thirty-two of the seventy families who participated in Stiffler’s study reported name coincidences. "Finding the frequency of similarities in names is noteworthy" (Stiffler, 1992, pp. 85, 92). Additionally, the relationships adoptees develop with their birthmothers are advantageous to the process of identity synthesis (Waner, 1988, p. 229).

Slaytor (1988) said search and reunion is a tortuous way to resolve identity conflicts, but can have a positive outcome. March (1995) explained it as the adoptee feeling more socially acceptable at knowing his or her birth history (p. 121). The bottom line is that for the adoptee it is a search for "self" rather than a search for "parents." It is a desire for growth, individuation (Waner, 1988, pp. 41-42). One of Waner’s respondents describes it well: "Now it feels like I can be a lot more myself, and not always trying to be perfect all of the time" (1988, p. 169).

Eighty six percent of Waner’s respondents were able to develop a stronger sense of identity (1988, pp. 196-197). Using standardized psychology instruments, Kauffman (1987) found no measurable differences between non-reunion adoptees and reunited adoptees concerning their sense of identity (1987, p. 18).

After reunion adoptees have a better sense of autonomy. They were more aware of their own needs and wants. The adoptees were more self-confident (Waner, 1988, pp. 204, 207). March reports it as feeling adoptees having more personal power (1995, p. 121).

Most adoptees in Waner’s research reported not fitting into their adoptive family but ". . . a sense of belonging was fostered [with their birthfamily]" (1988, pp. 110, 198). Sachdev (1992) reports nearly all of the adoptees in his study were "able to connect themselves for the fist time with their generational line and to share physical resemblances and interest with someone related by blood." The adoptees were finally able to feel born. Gonyo (1988) reports in their that study most of the searchers found that the experience was healing and they were more at peace.

Success and Satisfaction of Reunion

There are no bad reunions, because knowing is better than not knowing (Rillera, 1991 p. ii; Geddiman, Brown, 1989, p. 60). Searchers and reunitees have few regrets. Ninety-three percent of Sachdev’s (1992) participants and ninety-eight percent of Gonyo’s (1988) participants had no regrets. Giddens believes that reunions satisfy most participants (1983, p. 37).

Table.

Birthparent and Adoptee’s Perception of Reunion Success and Satisfaction

Success of a reunion can be related to the amount of information the adoptee receives. Three of March’s five dissatisfied participants found their birthmothers deceased (1995, pp. 122-123). Most adoptees and birthmothers were prepared for rejection when they went into reunion, but were unprepared for acceptance (Gonyo, Watson, 1988; March, 1995, 96).

Slaytor and McColm both found there could be too many people involved too soon (1988; 1993, p. 161). According to studies, success of a reunion is dependent upon openness to discussing the adoption, working through the related emotions, and taking time to negotiate the roles in each other’s lives (Waner, 1988, pp. 215, 243; Rosenzweig-Smith, 1988; Gonyo, Watson, 1988; March, 1995, p. 96; Geddiman, Brown, 1989, p. 65).

The relationships do not necessarily become mother-child relationships, but there is involvement in each other’s lives (March, 1995, p. 110). Other members of the birthfamily are an important part of the reunion process. Seventy-eight percent of Sachdev’s participants had a joyful and rewarding experience with other members of the birthfamily (1992). Birth-siblings are an important part of the reunion satisfaction. Many adoptees developed stronger relationships with birth-siblings than they did with their birthmothers or birthfathers (Sachdev, 1992; Humphrey, Humphrey, 1989; Geddiman, Brown, 1989, p. 195; Waner, 1988, p. 228; Verrier, 1993, p. 178).

There is a gender difference when it comes to search and reunion for adoptees. Geddiman (1989) feels that relationships are easier for female adoptees and their birthmothers because of the shared ability to bear children (p. 90). Most of the adoptees searching are women. March’s participants were 74% women (1995, p. 33).

McColm discovered anger and pain in the male adoptees’ reactions towards birthmothers. Additionally, there is a core attitude of blame based on the double standard believing the birthmother was a disgraceful woman who deserved to be punished. This same judgment is seldom directed towards the birthfather (1993, pp. 112-113). Male adoptees will say: "if she didn’t want me then, why would I want her now?"

Objectives

The purpose of this project was to study how satisfying adoptee-birthfamily reunions are to the parties involved. Are they satisfying to the reunited adult adoptees and the birthparents of adult adoptees after having been separated for years by an adoption? A research project of this nature including both adoptees and birthparents involving more than one or two sources for participants had not been done previously.

An underlying goal of the project was to discover contributing factors to higher and lower satisfaction levels. It was expected to identify measurable difference between reunitees’ satisfaction levels and the manner in which the participants were reunited, and the amount and type of post-adoption coaching the reunitees’ had been involved in before, during, and after reunion.

Participants

The sample in this study came from three sources. The primary source of participants came through self-selection. The researcher posted a "Call for Participants," on the World Wide Web (the Internet) soliciting adult adoptees and birthparents of adult adoptees to volunteer to complete a questionnaire. This opened participation to many people all across the world. It was felt this method would produce the broadest sample of people affected by an adoption, reducing biases that would come from small groups of subjects that had received similar post-adoption coaching. This opened the participants to those who possibly had not been involved in a volunteer support group, or adoption agency services.

The second source of participants came from a volunteer post-adoption support group, Adoptee Birthparent Connection (ABC) in Eugene, Oregon. The researcher was familiar with this group’s leader, Dianne Kristensen May, and felt the participants in this group received high quality post-adoption and reunion coaching.

One hundred twenty-four questionnaires were submitted to the study.

Materials

There were two survey instruments. To keep from constructing complex questions the questionnaire was divided between adoptees and birthparents. The questionnaires differed only in that the questions were asked from the appropriate perspective, and not in the intent of the questions. There was one questionnaire for adoptees, and one for birthparents. The adoptee questionnaire had 108 questions on ten pages, and the birthparent questionnaire had 83 questions on eight pages in the hard copy versions. The hard copy questionnaires had a cover letter explaining the questionnaire.

The leader of ABC distributed the questionnaires during two of her support group meetings. There was no discussion of questions while the group completed the questionnaire. However, after completion, she used the questionnaires as a catalyst for group discussion.

CHS distributed twenty adoptee questionnaires and nineteen birthparent questionnaires to thirty-nine of their clients through the US mail, complete with self-addressed stamped envelopes.

Additionally, both questionnaires were converted to interactive Web pages. These questionnaires were distributed by sending an electronic mail cover letter to those who had volunteered to participate in the research. The electronic mail cover letter included links to the questionnaires on the World Wide Web. Once a person responded to all of the questions, they clicked a "Submit Response" button on the Web page, and an email was sent to the researcher with his or her question responses.

The Questions

The questions were designed by the researcher from her experience working with adoptees and birthparents that were in search, reunion, and post reunion phases, and extensive study of the issue over a dozen years. All questions were structured. Although, there was an area at the end of the questionnaire for respondents to provide additional thoughts and to clarify responses. Fifty-four percent of the questions on the adoptee questionnaire and forty-eight percent of the questions on the birthparent questionnaire were Likert scales. There were verbal frequency scales and multiple-choice questions with single or multiple responses.

Procedures

A draft of the questionnaire was reviewed by post-adoption support group leaders, Dianne Kristensen May, Coco Skibinski Brush, and Curry Wolfe for its clarity and completeness of questions asked. The questions were refined and the questionnaires were given to a test group of adoptees and birthparents. With more refinements, the questionnaires were then distributed to the sample groups.

The World Wide Web version of the questionnaires went live on February 8, 1999. The questionnaires stayed active until March 31, 1999. Eighty-eight questionnaires came from this source, 42 adoptees, and 42 birthparents. Three birthmothers submitted more than one questionnaire.

ABC distributed questionnaires to those attending group meetings that were in reunion at two meetings in February and March 1999. Eight questionnaires came from this source, four adoptees, and four birthparents.

CHS mailed the surveys to thirty-nine people on March 3, 1999. The questionnaires were to be returned by March 31, 1999. Twenty-six questionnaires came from this source, 12 adoptees, and 14 birthparents. However, it was subsequently discovered that there was a miscommunication between the researcher and CHS as to the method for sample selection. The researcher found that CHS did not mail questionnaires exclusively to their "clients." At least one respondent was personally known to the researcher, and known not to be a "client" of CHS. CHS representative informed the researcher she chose to mail selectively questionnaires to who she thought would respond that included people who were not clients. Therefore, the CHS questionnaires could not be included in the research project.

Ninety-six questionnaires were accepted to the study. Forty-six of the questionnaires came from adoptees, and 50 questionnaires came from birthparents, 49 birthmothers, and one birthfather. Of these questionnaires, six adoptee questionnaires were not used because two were not infant adoptions, and four were relative adoptions. As well, two birthmother questionnaires were not used because they were not infant adoptions. Eighty-eight remaining questionnaires qualified: 48 birthparent and 40 adoptee questionnaires.

Note: The faculty of George Fox University would not allow me to make strong positive statements concerning the results of satisfaction and effects of reunion. This researcher’s primary instructor felt that there are "many" people who do not want a reunion, and these people were not represented in this project. There are at least two arguments against this fallacy.

Twenty-nine percent of the participants in this project did not search; rather they were found. These participants did not choose reunion, rather they had the opportunity presented to them from their searching counter-part. From this research project, it can be inferred that 3.5% of adoptees and birthmothers do not want to be found. Three of the 86 participants were refused contact by the found party. One birthmother (2.5%) told an adoptee no. However, that adoptee discovered who his birthfather was from his birthmother and had a satisfying reunion with his paternal birthfamily. Two adoptees (4.3%) told their birthmothers no. It is the adoptee who refuses contact more often than the birthmother.

The following is as approved by the University.

Findings

The objective of this research project was twofold. The primary objective was to determine how satisfying adoption reunions are, as perceived by the parties to a reunion. The secondary objective was to discover measurable contributing factors for feelings of higher and lower levels of satisfaction by the reunitees. A research project of this nature, including both adoptees and birthparents, from more than one or two sources had not been done previously.

Because adoption records are sealed, it is difficult, if not impossible, to get a true random sample of adult adoptees and birthparents of adult adoptees that have been reunited. Therefore, this sample was self-selected.

Satisfaction and Success

The first objective was easily met through direct questions to the project’s participants. There were questions asking the respondents if they felt they were satisfied with their reunion, and if their reunion was successful. The participants were given a definition of satisfaction:

Ninety-three percent (80 of 86) of the respondents were very satisfied or satisfied. In addition, 93% felt their reunion was very successful or successful. These findings are consistent with the literature review for research done in the United States. However, the findings are contrary to those of Canadian researchers.

Additionally, 100% of the respondents were glad they had been found, or searched and found. Seventy-seven percent of the respondents received much more or more than expected of something good from their reunion. Unfortunately though, two birthmothers found that their children had died before completing their search. In addition, adoptees found graves at the end of their search for nine birthmothers and six birthfathers.

Reunions are more than meeting an intimate stranger and learning of things you did not know previously. A reunion is part of the life-long adoption experience. As one birthmother said, "Reunion is not a ‘fix-all’ for the past."

Even in reunion, closure does not come to all. Fifty-eight percent of the participants had come to terms with things concerning their adoption experience. An adoptee who found her birthfather suffering from senile dementia, said, "I am unable to reach closure with this aspect because he is not able to either reject or accept me in his life." However, another adoptee whose birthfather denies the relationship said, "Although he does not want additional contact, I feel great sense of closure just knowing who he is and what his life is like."

Effects of Reunion

In understanding the effects of reunion one must understand the effects of adoption on the adoptee, birthparent, and adoptive parents. That is many other projects. However, there is a body of research published on the issues involved in adoption. Its effects remain a mystery for most of society. Some of the references used in this project contain other information concerning the effects of adoption. A birthmother brings this into light: "What I didn’t know then [at surrender] was that it would affect the REST OF MY LIFE." Nonetheless, adoption reunions are difficult for some in society to accept. There is a tendency in society to make adoptees feel guilty for wanting to know their origins. Adoptees will deny their needs to keep from appearing the disloyal-ungrateful adoptee. Some male adoptees hold anger towards their birthmothers that prevents them from wanting to know her.

When talking with a recently reunited person, many talk of feeling a peace they have never felt before; 86% of the respondents in this project felt this peace. Nearly all of the respondents (94%) felt they had changed for the better; none felt they had changed for the worse. A higher rate of birthparents felt a significant change in themselves than did adoptees, 76% compared to 67%, respectively.

Identity is an issue that usually comes up when discussing adoptees and the benefits of reunion; it is not usually mentioned when considering birthparents. This research project showed through its adoptee participants and the literature review that there was identity formation and self-esteem issues with adoptees, although one study reported no measurable difference. This contradiction could come from inadequate measurement instruments for adoptees. The literature review showed some adoptees (and birthmothers) develop a sub-self to deal with their adoptive status.

This project found through self-assessment that an overwhelming number of adoptees felt identity changes:

• 95% felt more complete after reunion,
• 88% felt they had a more complete self-identity post-reunion, and
• 83% felt they had a better self-understanding following reunion.

The surprise was how much reunion had to do with a birthmother’s identity completion:

• 100% felt more complete after reunion, and so did the one birthfather,
• 85% felt they had a more complete self-identity post-reunion, and
• 89% felt they had a better self-understanding following reunion.

With improved identity comes improved autonomy. Feelings of having more self-determination and control of one’s life. Birthmothers had a higher rate of improvement in this area than did adoptees. Eighty percent of the birthmothers felt they had more self-determination compared to 65% of the adoptees. Birthmothers (83%) felt more in control of their life, compared to 73% of the adoptees having the same feeling. "Finding my daughter has been the most empowering event of my life," is what a birthmother said in her comments. However, resolution with the past does not come to all. Only 52% of the birthmothers had come to terms with most things concerning their adoption experience, and 64% of the adoptees found resolution.

Connections

The respondents did not feel they made up for lost time. Separation loss continued as part of their lives. A birthmother expresses it well: "Reunion is a double-edged sword. Even when I am thoroughly enjoying my daughter’s company, I am aware of a sharp edge of loss." The adoptees felt there were similarities (likes/dislikes, interests, personality, emotions, mannerisms, etc.) between their birthmothers and themselves—70% strongly agreed and 25% agreed to the statement in the questionnaire. The feelings were not as strong for the birthfather similarities, but were strong for other birthfamily members.

Birthparents (92%) felt the adoptee looked like his or her side of the family; whereas 80% of the adoptees saw the physical resemblance to either side of the family.

Contributing Factors

The secondary objective of this research project, to discover contributing factors to higher or lower levels of satisfaction or success, was not so readily met. The literature review revealed little for contributing factors to what causes a reunion to be satisfying or successful.

This researcher only knows two adoptees who do not want to meet their birthmothers. One is a man who admitted the feeling common response, "if she didn’t want me then, why would I want her now." The other is a woman who is hostile about the issue of adoption and will not discuss it.

For the adoptees and birthparents that participated closely in this researcher’s emotional support group, there was a 100% success rate in reunion. All searchers met and formed a relationship with their counterpart in adoption, whether it was the adoptee searching or the birthmother searching. This was the researcher’s driving force to try to discover contributing factors for higher and lower levels of satisfaction.

The Canadian research revealed that reunions are not as satisfying to the Canadian participants as those of the research in the United States and this research project are. There are two identifiable differences between the two country’s research participants. The first difference is that approximately 60% of the Canadian reunitees used an intermediary for making the initial contact. In this project, some respondents incorrectly reported using an intermediary for the initial contact when in fact they had not. Yet, only 23% of this project’s respondents report using an intermediary, and this project’s overall satisfaction and success rating was higher than the Canadian research. In Canadian reunions, once the intermediary received permission for disclosure from the found party, contact between the parties was usually through letters and photographs for a period (often through the intermediary), before phone conversations were established. Eventually, an in person meeting was arranged, sometimes in the presence of an intermediary at an agency. However, only 63% of the adoptees in one Canadian study met their birthmothers in person once "reunited," compared to 87% of the adoptees in this project meeting their birthmothers in person.

The results from this project also infer that an intermediary can cause difficulties in a reunion. Fifty-percent (three of six) of the very dissatisfied or dissatisfied respondents in this project report intermediary involvement. Sixty-percent (three of five) of the reunions where contact has discontinued, are reunions where an intermediary was involved. An adoptee feels the intermediary is a cause to his reunion not going well: "If I had been encouraged to meet my mother directly from the get-go I believe things would have been better all around-not necessarily easier, just better, eventually."

The second difference is that the Canadian reunitees seem to hold an aura of taboo in their reunions. It does not appear they accept reunions between adoptees and birthparents as a natural part of the life-long adoption process. Often, the reunions are not open, where all parties to the adoption know one another. Birthparents maintain secrecy about their relationship to the adoptee. The literature review showed this attitude was promoted in the mandatory counseling and volunteer support group meetings.

In the United States the adoptees and birthparents are usually open about their adoptive or birthparent status, and are publicly open about their reunion, reflecting the philosophy of the grass-roots support groups in the United States. Ninety-two percent of the respondents in this project continue contact with their counterpart in adoption. More than 83% of this project’s respondents reported being open in their reunion and receiving support from family, friends, and their counterpart’s family. A birthmother reported that, "I had extraordinary support from my entire family and friends." Exempt from this openness in relationships was birthfather-adoptee reunions; adoptees report only 59% of the reunions being open with the birthfather’s family.

Relationships

One hundred percent of the birthmothers love their child and 96% like their child. Eighty-seven percent of the adoptees report loving their birthmother and 90% like her. Ninety-one percent of the birthmothers felt connected to their child. About half felt they have a close relationship, and half are satisfied with their relationship. Still three-fourths would like a closer relationship.

Birthmothers had a slightly higher ratio for a close relationship when finding a daughter versus a son. There is a high significance for gender difference in a reunion from the birthmother’s perspective. Birthmothers have a 50% chance of having a close relationship whether finding a son or daughter, and a 20.4% of not having a close relationship.

Birthmothers felt slightly higher overall satisfaction from their reunions when they found daughters rather than sons. Birthmothers have a 91% chance of having a satisfying reunion whether finding a son or daughter. There is moderate significance for gender differences in reunions from the birthmother’s perspective.

Seventy-three percent of the adoptees felt connected to their birthmother and 72% felt they have a close relationship with her. Seventy-six percent were satisfied with the relationship.

From an adoptee’s perspective, there was a much higher ratio of men feeling a close relationship with their birthmothers than the women. Yet, there was a low correlation (small, but definite) for gender difference in this research. There was not a sufficient sample of male adoptees having a reunion with their birthmothers to draw a stronger conclusion.

The women adoptees had a slightly more satisfying reunion experience with their birthmother than did the men. There was a high correlation of gender differences in this research. However, again there was insufficient sample of men having a reunion with their birthmothers to have stronger conclusions.

There was a substantial difference with the adoptee's feelings towards their birthfather. Only 42% report loving their birthfather, 22% did not love him, and 37% were neutral. Fifty-eight percent liked their birthfather and 42% were neutral. Forty- percent felt connected to him, and 27% felt close, yet only 34% want a closer relationship. Less than half were satisfied with this relationship.

There were not enough male adoptees having a reunion with their birthfathers to draw firm conclusions in gender differences for a close relationship or reunion satisfaction with their birthfather. Although the women did not have as close of a relationship with their birthfathers as they did with their birthmothers. 28.5% felt a close relationship to their birthfathers, where 69.6% felt close to their birthmothers.

The literature review indicated that relationships with other members of the birthfamily are important to the adoptee. An adoptee respondent from this project expressed her feelings about birth-siblings, "I feel much closer and much more accepted by my siblings and I feel much closer to them." The adoptee participants in this project like and/or love some of the people in their birthfamily (87%). Still though, only 63% have a close relationship with a birth-sibling and 69% want a closer relationship. This is less than Sachdev’s participants are. However, the similarities are still showing high at 93%.

The birthmothers report about the same number having a close relationship with grandchildren as they do with the adoptee. Fifty-five percent report having a close relationship, but 100% report loving their grandchildren. A birthmother tells of her experience, "The only slight problem in the reunion is that my granddaughter has been slower to bond than she could have been. She has a totally different personality and does not form close relationships easily."

Birthmothers are more likely to feel connected to the adoptee, than the adoptee feels connected to the birthmother. Yet, the adoptees are more likely to be satisfied with the relationship with their birthmother, than the birthmother is with her relationship with her child.

Not everyone reported having a close relationship with their counterpart in adoption, but only five respondents had not continued to have contact. An adoptee tells about her relationship with her birthfather: "Neither one of us broke off contact, we’re just busy people and neither of us wants to push the other one for contact. I am happy knowing that his alive and well and I know how to reach him if I need to. That’s more than I had 25 years ago!!" There is much more to a reunion than relationships. There are other benefits to a reunion that makes it satisfying or successful.

Adoption Support Activities

The researcher wanted to discover if adoption support activities had an effect on the satisfaction and success of reunions. The researcher had felt that support activities before and after reunion would improve the level of satisfaction for reunitees, as explained by this birthmother, "Books on reunions were helpful to help explain some of the emotions I was experiencing with meeting my son."

Less than half of this project’s respondents read adoption related books before reunion. Yet, 73% of the respondents initiated the search for their counterpart in adoption. After reunion, only 23% still had not read an adoption related book. There was no relationship between reading books before reunion and overall satisfaction. However, there is a moderate correlation for reading books after reunion to overall satisfaction.

Seventy percent of this project’s respondents had not participated in a search group before reunion, and 73.5% had not participated in a conventional emotional support group before reunion. There is a low correlation to overall satisfaction for participation in a search group before reunion. In addition, participation in a conventional emotional support group before reunion does not improve overall satisfaction. There is a moderate (substantial) correlation to overall satisfaction with participation in a conventional support group after reunion.

At the time many of the participants in this project started their searches or were reunited, online (Internet) activities were not as wide spread as they have become in the last few years. The project could be biased with participants having an inclination for online support activities; 93% of the questionnaires accepted into this study came through the Internet Web site. Still though, one birthmother accidentally met her daughter online:

Not participating in online emotional support group activities does not diminish the probability for overall satisfaction in a reunion. There is a high correlation for no effect before reunion.

When analyzing reunion overall satisfaction to any type of support activity more correlation became apparent. Two-thirds of the respondents participated in at least one type of support activity before reunion. Post reunion, only 16% of the respondents had not participated in any type of support activity. There is high correlation between overall satisfaction and at least one type of support activity before reunion. An even higher relationship exists between one or more types of activities and overall satisfaction after reunion.

Two-thirds of the respondents reported participating in some type of adoption reform activism. A little less than half of the project's respondents have worked in serving the post-adoption community. "Many folks as myself want to give back to those organizations who helped us," in the words of a birthmother. There is a moderate correlation between overall satisfaction and adoption reform activities and/or serving the post-adoption community. Some of those serving the post adoption community or are working for reforms, are those who reported their reunion as dissatisfying or unsuccessful.

Dissatisfying or Unsuccessful Reunions

A birthmother clarifies success in a reunion, "I believe my reunion is a success, but it did not live up to my fantasy. But the truth is, real life never lives up to our fantasies."

Two adoptees and one birthmother were very dissatisfied. Three birthmothers were dissatisfied. Two adoptees considered their reunion unsuccessful, one who also considered his reunion dissatisfying, and another adoptee who considered her reunion satisfying. Three birthmothers considered their reunion unsuccessful, and one very unsuccessful. Three are birthmothers who were also dissatisfied. However, one is a birthmother who considered her reunion satisfying, but unsuccessful.

Dissatisfaction or feeling the reunion was not a success only comes when the reunitees do not feel a close relationship between birthmother and child. However, not having a close relationship with your counterpart in adoption does not mean you cannot find satisfaction and success.

Conclusions

Reunions are not nice; they are part of the lifelong adoption experience. Even when people are found and had not sought a reunion there can be positive benefits. Even if relationships are uncomfortable, reunions can still be satisfying. Adoption reunions are overwhelmingly satisfying to the reunitees, and are successful. They do more than fulfill some "mere curiosity." Reunions are a positive experience for adult adoptees and birthparents of adult adoptees. There are many more positive attributes to reunions than negative ones in nearly every area of the reunion experience.

Relationships between birthparents and adoptees are not necessarily what make a reunion satisfying or successful. Even when respondents were dissatisfied or felt the reunion unsuccessful, reunitees still perceived many positive emotional benefits; all were glad to have had the experience. As the one very dissatisfied male adoptee wrote: "that hole in the soul is gone." Reunions can be are healing to the adoptee and birthparent. Reunions can have a significant emotional impact on the participants. The emotional impact may be beneficial to the adult adoptee and birthparent of the adult adoptee.

Reunions without an intermediary are more satisfying and successful. Contact should be direct by the parties to the adoption through the phone, followed by letters for a short period, then an in-person meeting. Reunions should be open to family and friends.

Recommendations

Immediate Actions

• Educate the public to know the satisfaction, success, and positive effects of adoption reunions.

Future Actions

• This research project did not cover all of the literature available on the issue of adoption reunions. This project should be expanded to include additional literature.
• There was a great deal more data obtained from this project than was analyzed and reported. This project should be expanded to include additional analysis of the data distribution. Compare satisfaction and success level responses to other question responses.

• The correlation of satisfaction compared to length of reunion.
• The correlation of satisfaction compared to age of adoptee at the time of reunion.
• The correlation of satisfaction compared to having searched and found or being found.
• The correlation of satisfaction by adoptees compared to finding a birthparent deceased.
• The correlation of satisfaction by adoptees compared to relationships with siblings.

• Further study of the effects of an intermediary on reunion should be done.
• It would be interesting to study the perception of satisfaction and other aspects of a reunion between related respondents. There were only two known pairs in this study. Their responses were not analyzed together.
• This research project excluded reunions between adult adoptees and birthparents of adult adoptees for relative adoptions, and adoptions where, as children, the adoptee was removed from his or her birthfamily for alleged abuse and/or neglect. These types of reunions also need to be studied. Four questionnaires were disqualified from this project because they were relative adoptions or older child adoptions.

Aigner Jr., H.J. (1986). Adoption in America coming of age. Greenbrae: Paradigm Press.

Bertocci, D., & Schecter, M. (1991). Adopted adults’ perception of their need to search. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 61, 179-196.

Carlini, H. (1992). Birth mother trauma A counseling guide for birth mothers. M. West (Ed.). Saanichton: Morning Side Publishing.

Field, J., (1992). Psychological adjustment of relinquishing mothers before and after reunion with their children. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 26, 2, 232-241.

Geddiman, J.S., Brown, L.P. (1989). Birth bond reunions between birthparents and adoptees what happens after. Far Hills: New Horizon Press.

Gianola, J. 1998, (October 26). Town Hall, KATU Television, Portland.

Giddens, E.L. (1983). Faces of Adoption. Chapel Hill: Amberly Publications.

Gladstone, J., Westhues, A. (1992 July/August). Adoption disclosure counseling as perceived by adult adoptees and biological relatives. Child Welfare, 71, 4, 343-355.

Gonyo, B., Watson, K.W., (1988, Winter). Searching in adoption. Public Welfare, 14-22.

Humphrey, H., & Humphrey, M. (1989). Damaged identity and the search for kinship. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 62, 301-309.

Kauffman, R.A. (1987). Reunion and non-reunion searching adult adoptees: A comparison of identity, physical self and family self. Arlington: University of Texas at Arlington. (Masters in Social Work Thesis)

Kittson, R.H. (1968). Orphan voyage. Philadelphia: Country Press.

March, K. (1995). The stranger who bore me, adoptee – birthmother relationships. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, Inc.

McColm, M. (1993). Adoption Reunions. Toronto: Second Story Press.

Parliament of New South Wales, Legislative Council, Standing Committee on Social Issues (1989, October). Accessing adoption information.

Rillera, M.J. (1991). The reunion book volume I. Westminster: Pure Inc., Triadoption Publications.

Rosenzweig-Smith, J. (1988, September/October). Factors associated with successful reunions of adult adoptees and biological parents. Child Welfare, 67, 5, 411-422.

Sachdev, P. (1992, January/February). Adoption reunions and after: A study of the search process and experience of adoptees. Child Welfare, 71, 1, 53-68.

Slaytor, P. (1988). Reunion and resolution: The adoption triangle. Adoption & Fostering, 12, 2, 46-51.

Sorosky, (1978). The adoption triangle Sealed or opened records: How they affect adoptees, birth parents and adoptive parents. Garden City: Anchor Press/Doubleday.

Stiffler, L.H., (1992). Synchronicity and reunion The genetic connection of adoptees and birthparents. Hobe Sound: FEA Publishing.

Triseliotis, J. (1973). In search of origins the experiences of adopted people. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.

Verrier, N.W. (1993). The primal wound Understanding the adopted child. Baltimore: Gateway Press, Inc.

Waner, J.S., (1988). A study of post-reunion adjustment in adoptees who have found their birthmothers. Berkley/Alameda: California School of Professional Psychology. (Ph. D. in Psychology Dissertation)

Winkler, R.C., Brown, D.W., van Keppel, M., Blanchard, A. (1988). Clinical practice in adoption. Elmsford: Pergamon Press.