Adopted Children And Birth Parents

Today, more than ever, it seems that the definition of the word 'family' has taken on many meanings. As it pertains to adoption, one of the questions that comes up from time to time is the desire for children that were adopted to meet their birth parents. This is something that needs to be addressed so that both the adoptive parents and the adopted child can be prepared ahead of time should this come up.

For many adopted children, they see their adoptive parents as their real parents and have no desire to 'fulfill' an inner need to meet their birth parents. For others, the opposite is true. One cannot rule out genetics playing a big roll in this scenario. As the adoptive child ages, they can experience a 'calling' of sorts to find and meet their birth parents, if only to satisfy a curiosity as to what their genetic mother or father looks like. Either way, the question is: Just because the adoptive parents are not 'genetically' related, does that not qualify them to really be the parents more than the biological ones?

As the saying goes "blood is thicker than water", does this apply to adopted children? Genetically speaking, it most likely does have an effect since there is a definite 'connection' established due to the genetic relation that binds the adopted child with the biological parents. Even though they were given up at birth and made available for adoption, there is still this connection that was established at birth. There’s something special about giving birth to your own children, and seeing the similarities they have to members of the family. That’s the “normal” course of things; but there are always exceptions to this rule.

There are times you’re separated from your family, there are times parents and relatives aren’t there for you, or there are even times you’re not able to conceive children. There are a variety of reasons why it happens that birth parents aren’t able to take care of their children or that the parental role would be taken up by someone who isn’t part of your “real” family. So, the question is asked again:
Can it be said that birth parents are the “real” parents more than the adoptive parents?

The answer is obviously difficult to come up with, and the best we can think of is “yes or no”.

So, why would the answer be “yes”?

It is likely because the primary role of parents is to nurture and raise children to be self-sufficient, capable adults. And anyone who does this should be considered a parent according to this rationale.

Why would the answer be “no?”

Because the biological parent and child share genes, and genetics make up a significant part of who we are. Our lives are heavily influenced by our genes, which determine how we look, certain mannerisms we exhibit, any conditions we might have, as well as all environmental factors that interact with our genes.

It would be hard to say that abusive birth parents are really parents, but at the same time it’s difficult to stop acknowledging them as parents altogether. This could then be considered nothing more than a symbolic sense of being the parent. In the end, the most important thing is that the parental role is filled in a child’s life, and once the child has 'come of age' it is then up to them to decide who the “real” parents are.

And any 'real' parent will understand.