And this...more of my critical analysis re: the language of Adoption and the failure of the INDUSTRY to acknowledge the harm done to millions - millions of mothers and babies - worldwide. This woman (Clothier) has much for which to answer.
'In 1943, American child psychiatrist Florence Clothier was the first in her field to claim trauma
is common to all “adoptees”. She argues those who grow up without knowing their parents or
any of their blood-kin have ‘lost the thread of family continuity’ (p. 222). She asserts our ‘deep
identification...with our forebears’ is originally experienced ‘in the mother-child relationship’
and it is our relationship to our mothers which provides us with ‘our most fundamental
security’. Clothier writes...
... every adopted child at some point in his development, has been deprived of
this primitive relationship with his mother. This trauma and the severing of
the individual from his racial antecedents lie at the core of what is peculiar to
the psychology of the adopted child. The adopted child presents all the
complications in social and emotional development seen in the own child. But
the ego of the adopted child, in addition to all the normal demands made upon
it, is called upon to compensate for the wound left by the loss of the biological
[sic] mother. Later on this appears as an unknown void, separating the adopted
child from his fellows whose blood ties bind them to the past as well as to the
future (pp. 222 - 223).
At first Clothier seems to empathise with the adopted child’s loss of ‘his mother’ but then,
according to her training and profession, she diagnoses the “adoptee” with a wounded ego and
turns to what her readers need to know about their patients. At one fell swoop, after
identifying the lifelong impact of separation trauma, the adopted child is defined as needing
assistance to compensate for the loss of ‘the biological mother’.
Clothier was influential in the training of mid-twentieth century adoption industry workers. She played a significant role in the development of the twentieth century adoption system – that is, implementation of the“clean-break” theory as maternity hospital policy and practice. Adoption industry workers’ training was ‘aimed at making it possible for mothers ‘to give up her baby’ and to “help” single mothers better ‘understand their neurosis’, even if that involved ‘suffering for the patient or the risk of untoward results’ (Clothier, 1941, p. 584, as cited by Cole, 2008, p. 16).'
So, the trauma and damage done has been known - from the beginning of modern Adoption legislation which developed and allowed the systemic theft of millions of new-born human beings from their mothers and families.
Infants only a few days old can record long term memories. “Infants do not think but they do process emotions and long term memories are stored as affective schemas” (Geansbauer, 2002). An infant separated from its first mother will record a memory of that event. Memories of this nature are called preverbal memory representations and they have a unique quality that must be understood by adoptive parents. “Infant memories are recalled in adulthood the same way they were recorded at the time they occurred. It is difficult possibly impossible for children to map newly acquired verbal skills on to existing preverbal memory representations” (Richardson, R., & Hayne, H. 2007). An older adoptee who recalls an emotional memory will experience it the same way it was felt as an infant. Adoptees can have troubling memories that they cannot identify in words. This means that they cannot understand what they are feeling and without a vocabulary they cannot even ask for help. This leads to a cognitive /emotional disconnection. “Children fail to translate their preverbal memories into language”(Simcock, Hayne, 2002).
This is very interesting. I know I had a sleep study before, and it showed that I never achieve deep sleep for long. I truly believe that separation from our First Mothers /Birth Mothers significantly affects adoptees. That bond is crucial.
When you start to dream at that time the trauma comes to the surface trying to get your attention. Then you wake up because you feel anxiety. Its an affective memory reaching out to you as a dream.
"The trackers are very helpful. I wear a Fitbit and have noticed that my sleep patterns are quite similar. I believe there is definitely a connection."I know it makes sense the more I’m learning…
This is whats happening when you sleep. The adoption trauma is held in the limbic system as emotion. Dreams are limbic process. When you dream your mind is reaching out to you trying to communicate. But dreams are metaphors, symbols. The LS isnt verbal. Its telling you it needs to heal. You wake up because youre getting anxiety as a message. You are unable to connect words to the emotional memory. The mind tries to heal beneath the level of cognitive awareness.
The mistake all f their poor research makes is they still believe an infant is tabula rasa. The fact is infants can make long term memory and will record a trauma when separated from the mother. This trauma drives the behavior and emotional problems we see later in life.
The wound can be healed I created an intervention that can do just that
“Due to the entirely nonverbal nature of the limbic brain, experiential rather then cognitive methods are required for successfully engaging and changing its schemas.” (Ecker, B., 2011). “A dynamic neural process now known as reconsolidation can actually unlock the synapses maintaining implicit emotional learnings” (Nader, K., et al. 2000). (Pansskepp, J., 1998). The amygdala compares current perceptions to these attachment related implicit memories triggering a self-protective response. When the child is at his/her worst behavior an opportunity for healing is created only if caregivers understand what is happening as a process. One can see how difficult this can be because the normal response by caregivers is counterintuitive. So then what is the solution?
“Further research has established that in order for synapses to unlock, the brain requires not just the experience of reactivation of the memory—it's also necessary for a second, critical experience to promptly take place while the memory reactivation experience is still occurring. That second experience consists of perceptions that sharply contradict and disconfirm the implicit expectations of the reactivated memory.
(1) Fully reactivate the target implicit memory so that the emotional experience is occurring.
(2) While the target memory is fully reactivated and the emotional experience is occurring, promptly create an additional, concurrent experience that sharply mismatches (contradicts and disconfirms) the expectations and predictions arising from the implicit memory.”(Ecker, B.2010, Psychotherapy Networker)
Reconsolidation. It’s reassuring to know that Dr Hafetz has a treatment because something healing must be needed by so many of these displaced children. It sounds quite complicated and tricky to get the right timing. And I suppose it's not something for adult adoptees. But it helps to know there’s a possibility of healing for people.
The process works on adult adoptees as well. I recall the memory with art then create the experience that contradicts the traumas expectations. Often all it takes is hug from a current loved one in that moment. A hug is an experience of secure attachment. Its counterintuitive because it works best when during an argument disagreement of some type. So I teach them to stop and say "Its OK to feel that way" and then hug each other. You see the behavior in all adoptees is nit the problem its our solution to our problem. Make me feel attached
Hi Barbara - another horrible biased "research" article focusing upon our tribe when we are still unable to speak - still either "in the fog" of cumulative adoption trauma in our adolescence - still SILENTLY conforming to what we have been led to believe about our mothers and labelled as carrying her inferiority - SUCH BS!!
Here's a paragraph from my PhD thesis re: the earliest of 20th Century Adoption research pointing to what "they" knew very early in the game and yet separation to feed adopters new born babies continued and now, here we are:
By mid-century, it was known that infant-maternal separation had devastating impacts upon
the adopted child. In 1937 American psychiatrist David Levy argued “adoptees” suffer from
“primary affect hunger,” which is now referred to as attachment disorder (p. 643). In Children
Without Genealogy—A Problem of Adoption, (1952) Enrich Wellisch coined the term
‘genealogical bewilderment’ to describe ‘maladjustment’ in adopted children as indication
‘that the deprivation of a child’s knowledge of his genealogy can have harmful consequences’
which may be expressed ‘in a vague feeling within the child that some injustice was done to
him’ (p.42). In Observations of the Adopted Child (1960) Marshall Schechter M.D., argues
“adoptees” are ‘100 times more likely than non-adoptees to present a range of serious
Thank you for sharing this. Yes, the evidence has been there for decades. There's also the work of David Kirk, director of the Adoption Research Project at McGill University from 1951 to 1961. In his book Shared Fate: A Theory of Adoption and Mental Health, he referred to adoption as a “role handicap.” He wrote a lot about how adoption did not resolve the "wound of infertility" experienced by the adopters.
Most adopters of the 20th century were though - but you are not alone of course. Some adopters report that they adopted because they wanted to "complete" their family - to add a girl to their two or three boys for example - like Cate Blanchett, who had three boys with her husband and then claimed they "wanted to adopt" as if rescuing a "poor, unwanted baby" but they not only cue jumped to get a baby in the USA (with their celebrity status and MONEY) but Blanchett received a baby girl with blonde hair and blue eyes - a pretty little girl pictured with her in an article some 10 years ago now, entitled and describing her as 'Cate Blanchett's Best Accessory' - disgusting - but there she was on the hip of her famous adopter, looking like she could be the biological child of the blonde haired and blue-eyed famous Australian. I speculate Blanchett wanted a girl but knew that she and her husband were likely to continue having boys, so she used her celebrity power and ordered a clone of herself via an American Adoption Agency and one which I also speculate specifically serves celebs and the mega wealthy.
I've also wondered whether these kinds of adopters make "better" parents than the infertile - speculating they MAY not expect the adoptee to perform as if they were not adopted - that they may do a better job of "adopting" - that they may nor expect the adopted to remain silent and that they might be better at nurturing and supporting an adopted child's innate talents for example.
I know many who were "placed" in homes in which biological offspring already existed as well as many who"fixed" their adopters infertility, because it is such a common experience to become pregnant AFTER adopting other peoples' children.
Consensus: No - those who've shared their experience with me report this didn't necessarily make them "better" parents at all - for too many the experience of living within a family in which ALL are blood-kin, can be, in a word, excruciating. Common in my findings is the adoptee suffered an accentuated sense of displacement and that they were more readily subjected to abuse from within - their difference being blatantly evident and the isolation of being adopted accentuated by the "family" dynamic.
I'm sure I'm not telling you anything you don't already know but for other reader of Barbara's Sub-stack I hope the above provides further insight.
hi Alison...yes I know about all this you have texted here and I have lived through it and more but it is all very sad and tragic of course. Thank you it is nice to be in contact with you too
And this...more of my critical analysis re: the language of Adoption and the failure of the INDUSTRY to acknowledge the harm done to millions - millions of mothers and babies - worldwide. This woman (Clothier) has much for which to answer.
'In 1943, American child psychiatrist Florence Clothier was the first in her field to claim trauma
is common to all “adoptees”. She argues those who grow up without knowing their parents or
any of their blood-kin have ‘lost the thread of family continuity’ (p. 222). She asserts our ‘deep
identification...with our forebears’ is originally experienced ‘in the mother-child relationship’
and it is our relationship to our mothers which provides us with ‘our most fundamental
security’. Clothier writes...
... every adopted child at some point in his development, has been deprived of
this primitive relationship with his mother. This trauma and the severing of
the individual from his racial antecedents lie at the core of what is peculiar to
the psychology of the adopted child. The adopted child presents all the
complications in social and emotional development seen in the own child. But
the ego of the adopted child, in addition to all the normal demands made upon
it, is called upon to compensate for the wound left by the loss of the biological
[sic] mother. Later on this appears as an unknown void, separating the adopted
child from his fellows whose blood ties bind them to the past as well as to the
future (pp. 222 - 223).
At first Clothier seems to empathise with the adopted child’s loss of ‘his mother’ but then,
according to her training and profession, she diagnoses the “adoptee” with a wounded ego and
turns to what her readers need to know about their patients. At one fell swoop, after
identifying the lifelong impact of separation trauma, the adopted child is defined as needing
assistance to compensate for the loss of ‘the biological mother’.
Clothier was influential in the training of mid-twentieth century adoption industry workers. She played a significant role in the development of the twentieth century adoption system – that is, implementation of the“clean-break” theory as maternity hospital policy and practice. Adoption industry workers’ training was ‘aimed at making it possible for mothers ‘to give up her baby’ and to “help” single mothers better ‘understand their neurosis’, even if that involved ‘suffering for the patient or the risk of untoward results’ (Clothier, 1941, p. 584, as cited by Cole, 2008, p. 16).'
So, the trauma and damage done has been known - from the beginning of modern Adoption legislation which developed and allowed the systemic theft of millions of new-born human beings from their mothers and families.
Infants only a few days old can record long term memories. “Infants do not think but they do process emotions and long term memories are stored as affective schemas” (Geansbauer, 2002). An infant separated from its first mother will record a memory of that event. Memories of this nature are called preverbal memory representations and they have a unique quality that must be understood by adoptive parents. “Infant memories are recalled in adulthood the same way they were recorded at the time they occurred. It is difficult possibly impossible for children to map newly acquired verbal skills on to existing preverbal memory representations” (Richardson, R., & Hayne, H. 2007). An older adoptee who recalls an emotional memory will experience it the same way it was felt as an infant. Adoptees can have troubling memories that they cannot identify in words. This means that they cannot understand what they are feeling and without a vocabulary they cannot even ask for help. This leads to a cognitive /emotional disconnection. “Children fail to translate their preverbal memories into language”(Simcock, Hayne, 2002).
This is very interesting. I know I had a sleep study before, and it showed that I never achieve deep sleep for long. I truly believe that separation from our First Mothers /Birth Mothers significantly affects adoptees. That bond is crucial.
Interesting. I sometimes use a sleep tracker and my deep sleep is around 8 minutes. I wonder if I’ve ever slept ‘soundly.’
When you start to dream at that time the trauma comes to the surface trying to get your attention. Then you wake up because you feel anxiety. Its an affective memory reaching out to you as a dream.
Thank you for describing it as "affective memory reaching out to you in a dream." This helps me to understand my lifetime of poor sleep.
"The trackers are very helpful. I wear a Fitbit and have noticed that my sleep patterns are quite similar. I believe there is definitely a connection."I know it makes sense the more I’m learning…
You’re right to believe that.
Have you seen Paul Sunderland’s [youtube] talk on adoption & addiction ? He has no skin in the game but explains pre verbal trauma and its effects.
Yes, his work is vital.
This is whats happening when you sleep. The adoption trauma is held in the limbic system as emotion. Dreams are limbic process. When you dream your mind is reaching out to you trying to communicate. But dreams are metaphors, symbols. The LS isnt verbal. Its telling you it needs to heal. You wake up because youre getting anxiety as a message. You are unable to connect words to the emotional memory. The mind tries to heal beneath the level of cognitive awareness.
I wonder if other adopted people struggle with sleep?
I'm female and no longer a child Florence Clothier
The mistake all f their poor research makes is they still believe an infant is tabula rasa. The fact is infants can make long term memory and will record a trauma when separated from the mother. This trauma drives the behavior and emotional problems we see later in life.
Yes, the science is clear about this. Maternal separation damages both mother and child. And for the person taken for adoption, that damage is lifelong. https://drbarbarasumner.substack.com/p/maternal-separation
The wound can be healed I created an intervention that can do just that
“Due to the entirely nonverbal nature of the limbic brain, experiential rather then cognitive methods are required for successfully engaging and changing its schemas.” (Ecker, B., 2011). “A dynamic neural process now known as reconsolidation can actually unlock the synapses maintaining implicit emotional learnings” (Nader, K., et al. 2000). (Pansskepp, J., 1998). The amygdala compares current perceptions to these attachment related implicit memories triggering a self-protective response. When the child is at his/her worst behavior an opportunity for healing is created only if caregivers understand what is happening as a process. One can see how difficult this can be because the normal response by caregivers is counterintuitive. So then what is the solution?
“Further research has established that in order for synapses to unlock, the brain requires not just the experience of reactivation of the memory—it's also necessary for a second, critical experience to promptly take place while the memory reactivation experience is still occurring. That second experience consists of perceptions that sharply contradict and disconfirm the implicit expectations of the reactivated memory.
(1) Fully reactivate the target implicit memory so that the emotional experience is occurring.
(2) While the target memory is fully reactivated and the emotional experience is occurring, promptly create an additional, concurrent experience that sharply mismatches (contradicts and disconfirms) the expectations and predictions arising from the implicit memory.”(Ecker, B.2010, Psychotherapy Networker)
Reconsolidation. It’s reassuring to know that Dr Hafetz has a treatment because something healing must be needed by so many of these displaced children. It sounds quite complicated and tricky to get the right timing. And I suppose it's not something for adult adoptees. But it helps to know there’s a possibility of healing for people.
The process works on adult adoptees as well. I recall the memory with art then create the experience that contradicts the traumas expectations. Often all it takes is hug from a current loved one in that moment. A hug is an experience of secure attachment. Its counterintuitive because it works best when during an argument disagreement of some type. So I teach them to stop and say "Its OK to feel that way" and then hug each other. You see the behavior in all adoptees is nit the problem its our solution to our problem. Make me feel attached
what is all this psychobabble? groan!
Ill simplify it. Recall the memory then create an experience that contradicts the trauma's expectations. Its called a hug
love that!
Hi Barbara - another horrible biased "research" article focusing upon our tribe when we are still unable to speak - still either "in the fog" of cumulative adoption trauma in our adolescence - still SILENTLY conforming to what we have been led to believe about our mothers and labelled as carrying her inferiority - SUCH BS!!
Here's a paragraph from my PhD thesis re: the earliest of 20th Century Adoption research pointing to what "they" knew very early in the game and yet separation to feed adopters new born babies continued and now, here we are:
By mid-century, it was known that infant-maternal separation had devastating impacts upon
the adopted child. In 1937 American psychiatrist David Levy argued “adoptees” suffer from
“primary affect hunger,” which is now referred to as attachment disorder (p. 643). In Children
Without Genealogy—A Problem of Adoption, (1952) Enrich Wellisch coined the term
‘genealogical bewilderment’ to describe ‘maladjustment’ in adopted children as indication
‘that the deprivation of a child’s knowledge of his genealogy can have harmful consequences’
which may be expressed ‘in a vague feeling within the child that some injustice was done to
him’ (p.42). In Observations of the Adopted Child (1960) Marshall Schechter M.D., argues
“adoptees” are ‘100 times more likely than non-adoptees to present a range of serious
emotional problems’ (Ingram, 2024, p. 103).
Thank you for sharing this. Yes, the evidence has been there for decades. There's also the work of David Kirk, director of the Adoption Research Project at McGill University from 1951 to 1961. In his book Shared Fate: A Theory of Adoption and Mental Health, he referred to adoption as a “role handicap.” He wrote a lot about how adoption did not resolve the "wound of infertility" experienced by the adopters.
the people that adopted me were not infertile
Most adopters of the 20th century were though - but you are not alone of course. Some adopters report that they adopted because they wanted to "complete" their family - to add a girl to their two or three boys for example - like Cate Blanchett, who had three boys with her husband and then claimed they "wanted to adopt" as if rescuing a "poor, unwanted baby" but they not only cue jumped to get a baby in the USA (with their celebrity status and MONEY) but Blanchett received a baby girl with blonde hair and blue eyes - a pretty little girl pictured with her in an article some 10 years ago now, entitled and describing her as 'Cate Blanchett's Best Accessory' - disgusting - but there she was on the hip of her famous adopter, looking like she could be the biological child of the blonde haired and blue-eyed famous Australian. I speculate Blanchett wanted a girl but knew that she and her husband were likely to continue having boys, so she used her celebrity power and ordered a clone of herself via an American Adoption Agency and one which I also speculate specifically serves celebs and the mega wealthy.
I've also wondered whether these kinds of adopters make "better" parents than the infertile - speculating they MAY not expect the adoptee to perform as if they were not adopted - that they may do a better job of "adopting" - that they may nor expect the adopted to remain silent and that they might be better at nurturing and supporting an adopted child's innate talents for example.
I know many who were "placed" in homes in which biological offspring already existed as well as many who"fixed" their adopters infertility, because it is such a common experience to become pregnant AFTER adopting other peoples' children.
Consensus: No - those who've shared their experience with me report this didn't necessarily make them "better" parents at all - for too many the experience of living within a family in which ALL are blood-kin, can be, in a word, excruciating. Common in my findings is the adoptee suffered an accentuated sense of displacement and that they were more readily subjected to abuse from within - their difference being blatantly evident and the isolation of being adopted accentuated by the "family" dynamic.
I'm sure I'm not telling you anything you don't already know but for other reader of Barbara's Sub-stack I hope the above provides further insight.
Nice to be in contact Hinayni.
hi Alison...yes I know about all this you have texted here and I have lived through it and more but it is all very sad and tragic of course. Thank you it is nice to be in contact with you too
sad face