Re: Adoption Debate

[killingeve]

Dear me,,you really have got it bad,,haven't you.? Promiscuity happens from goodness knows who,or why,,but it develops more in girls,,and sooner than boys,,so I would therefore say it was due to hormones,,and NOT the fact that the girl was " adopted ". 
I would call  being caught in a field with a farm-worker,promiscuous. No protection.? A pregnancy.? No regular boyfriend.? What would you call it.? Normal behaviour,I suppose.!

I've never had any complaints regarding my " mindset ",,strange,that.

Promiscuity is defined as sexual activity with multiple partners.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=promiscuous&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPromiscuity&ei=UR02Ue-uKPKR0QWZ3oAY&usg=AFQjCNHna3Xqw-DTBd4WYod3HSm3mhxJOQ&bvm=bv.43148975,d.d2k

The point being Lookout there's no evidence of Sheila being promiscuous in accordance with accepted definitions of the word/meaning.  But as per normal we have Lookout's interpretation which we are expected to fall for hook, line and sinker.

Imo a 17 yoa who fell pregnant in the mid-70's was lacking basic awareness of sexual relationships and contraception.  If June failed to discuss such matters with Sheila then I think it reflects as badly on June as it does Sheila and was no doubt indicative of their overall relationship.

I'm afraid I have other things to do now but will respond to any further posts on this later.

[lookout]

Promiscuity is defined as sexual activity with multiple partners.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=promiscuous&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPromiscuity&ei=UR02Ue-uKPKR0QWZ3oAY&usg=AFQjCNHna3Xqw-DTBd4WYod3HSm3mhxJOQ&bvm=bv.43148975,d.d2k

The point being Lookout there's no evidence of Sheila being promiscuous in accordance with accepted definitions of the word/meaning.  But as per normal we have Lookout's interpretation which we are expected to fall for hook, line and sinker.

Imo a 17 yoa who fell pregnant in the mid-70's was lacking basic awareness of sexual relationships and contraception.  If June failed to discuss such matters with Sheila then I think it reflects as badly on June as it does Sheila and was no doubt indicative of their overall relationship.

I'm afraid I have other things to do now but will respond to any further posts on this later.

Since when have I asked you,or anyone else to agree in any way with what my views are.? I couldn't care less what you or anyone thinks,,it's immaterial.

It wasn't Junes' fault that her daughter got herself pregnant at all. Sheila,at 17 would have known the whys and wherefores of sexual relationships. It would have already been discussed at school,and from other girls. Sheila would have had full knowledge of how to become pregnant,,,she wasn't that stupid.
For all we know,June may have spoken in this way,,so it's unfair of you to keep blaming the woman at every opportunity you can. I don't know how you can speak in such a way when there's little or no information pertaining to Junes methods of bringing up a family. It's totally unfair.

It would appear that it somehow reflects your own way of life the way you speak,,,or you wouldn't appear so bitter against a woman who clearly did her best in trying to bring up two children,,,not having had any experience to start with. As I've said before,,there are no manuals for this task. 
I think that both June and Neville were very lenient with Sheila when she became familiar with cannabis,,,as many parents today would shun that habit. Also the cocaine habit that they knew about,,there didn't appear to be any objections,,or if there were,it was never mentioned.

My word,,if you're as objective and bitter now,,what are you going to be like when you are OLD like me.?

[killingeve]

Since when have I asked you,or anyone else to agree in any way with what my views are.? I couldn't care less what you or anyone thinks,,it's immaterial.

It wasn't Junes' fault that her daughter got herself pregnant at all. Sheila,at 17 would have known the whys and wherefores of sexual relationships. It would have already been discussed at school,and from other girls. Sheila would have had full knowledge of how to become pregnant,,,she wasn't that stupid.
For all we know,June may have spoken in this way,,so it's unfair of you to keep blaming the woman at every opportunity you can. I don't know how you can speak in such a way when there's little or no information pertaining to Junes methods of bringing up a family. It's totally unfair.

It would appear that it somehow reflects your own way of life the way you speak,,,or you wouldn't appear so bitter against a woman who clearly did her best in trying to bring up two children,,,not having had any experience to start with. As I've said before,,there are no manuals for this task. 
I think that both June and Neville were very lenient with Sheila when she became familiar with cannabis,,,as many parents today would shun that habit. Also the cocaine habit that they knew about,,there didn't appear to be any objections,,or if there were,it was never mentioned.

My word,,if you're as objective and bitter now,,what are you going to be like when you are OLD like me.?

Dr Ferguson's witness statements:

"I also treated Sheila's adopted mother, Mrs June Bamber at St Andrews Hospital, Northants.  I can say that June after suffering a long period of childessness was examined and eventually an ovarian cyst was removed.  She made a decision to adopt and having done this suffered severe depressions.  This was around 1959.  She required ECT as an inpatient and made a full recovery".

"She [Sheila] said she felt as if she was caughty up in a "coven of evil".  These feelings appeared to be involved with her relationship with her adoptive mother, and her standards of good and evil".

"She [Sheila] did see that Mrs Bamber was a threat to her, and did not want to visit the Bambers at their farm in Essex.  Sheila felt that Mrs Bamber had been over-protective towards her and found it difficult to express warm feelings towards her".

What went on between the late 50's and early/mid 80's who knows but if the above is indicative of the June/Sheila relationship it doesn't sound good to me.

I find it quite remarkable that you are prepared to highlight what YOU perceive as Sheila's anti-social behaviour and yet turn a blind eye to Jeremy's eg drug dealing/using, sex life/number of partners, OCP break-in.

But as YOU'VE stated Lookout its all in their genes nothing to do with adoption psychology/their upbringing.  We do of course have a control group for Jeremy ie his full birth siblings:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2531.msg77872.html#msg77872

Very interesting contrast!!!

[andrea]

Been looking at posts regarding promiscuity. One incident doesnt mean you are promiscuous.
Its having several sexual partners, well, more than several!

[Jane]

Over the past days, I have watched with interest as this thread has grown. Posters clearly have strong views but thus far NOBODY has touched on the most important point of all. There is a basic desire/need in all of us to be loved.

How bewildering it must be for the victim of marital abuse to be told "I love you, but you made me do it because.........." How much MORE bewildering might it be to the child who has to EARN love through its' perfefect behaviour. It's all well and good if the parents own behaviour demonstrates unconditional love, I am certain that under those conditions verbal affirmation, whilst being a lovely "extra," isn't neccesary. The important, and IMO, the ONLY thing, is that the child FEELS itself to be loved. It is not enough to tell a child that a nice home, lovely clothes, the "right" school, a bike/pony/car/generous allowance proves love. It is pshchological/emotional abuse when the child feels it has to EARN it parents' love and the first step on the road to them becoming an adult who tries to gain approval/love if they act in a certain way.

I believe Sheila was looking for the positive affirmation she may not have had during her childhood. I think it highly likely that at some point she felt that if she could hold her own baby she would find what had been missing. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn that she had deliberately attempted to become pregnant. I'm not surprised that her lovers were numerous. We have it in her own words that she was tired of the men who used her, but each one of them represented the promise of feeling herself to be loved. I suspect she never learned to love herself. How could she if she had never had unconditional love, never felt herself to BE lovable. Children are not mini adults in that they don't understand the implicit. At some point, in order to become healthy and whole adults, they need to have love demonstrated and to HEAR that they are loved.

The tragedy is, that unless the parent has experienced this in their own childhood, they will have no idea of how to give it to their own children, biological or adopted. Both may experience difficulties in bonding with their children but the adoptive parent MAY blame it on the child and the genes that come with it.

[Lugg]

Been looking at posts regarding promiscuity. One incident doesnt mean you are promiscuous.
Its having several sexual partners, well, more than several!

I thought it meant reading too much?

[susan]

Morning Lugg
I thought it meant not keeping your promises.   Maybe it is nice being promiscuous wish I had tried it

[susan]

Morning april

what an excellent post.  I have often said on this forum whatever your roots as long as you were given plenty of love by your parents that is all that matters.  If children need to prove themselves to their parents then surely the parents need to prove themselves to the child it is not a one way thing.  I think Sheila needed to be loved and by having sex with various men she thought this would make them love her but of course that is not the case an old saying women give sex in return for love and men give love in return for sex it is a very true saying but I am not generalising here.  Women of June's era did not know how to show love.  I can't elaborate further on the June/Sheila relationsip as I don't understand it and I would be just guessing.

[maggie]

Hi April, it is such a complex subject I find it difficult to post on it. It is so tied up with the human condition. I feel the difference between adopted and natural children is in the wound left after loss of the birth mother. A child in a biological family brought up with unconditional love will not have to deal with the conscious or unconscious belief that they were not wanted by their natural mother. An intelligent child loved and loving in an adopted family can still struggle,and need psychological help. I believe genetics do play a part in how any child, or adult copes with the difficulties of life therefore while some children cope quite easily with adoption others will always find it and life more difficult. Unconditional love is a massive gift to any child because it moulds coping skills for life. June, is possibly an example of a natural child who maybe never knew unconditional love but only expectations of good levels of behaviour.  This would have left her with no  learned coping skills leaving her struggling to cope with her own needs and emotions never mind a vulnerable and headstrong child. I don't personally feel Sheila was unwanted and we really do not know what the phrase June became depressed 'because of 'adopting Sheila' meant. It didn'necessarily mean she didnt want or love Sheila imo.

[Jane]

Morning april

what an excellent post.  I have often said on this forum whatever your roots as long as you were given plenty of love by your parents that is all that matters.  If children need to prove themselves to their parents then surely the parents need to prove themselves to the child it is not a one way thing.  I think Sheila needed to be loved and by having sex with various men she thought this would make them love her but of course that is not the case an old saying women give sex in return for love and men give love in return for sex it is a very true saying but I am not generalising here.  Women of June's era did not know how to show love.  I can't elaborate further on the June/Sheila relationsip as I don't understand it and I would be just guessing.

Susan HELLO You have it in a nutshell. We ALL, biological and adopted, are born "tabula rasa" A clean slate. The love of a parent for its' child is unconditional, the only human relationship in which it is, and unless it can demonstrate this to the child, the child will never learn how to give it. It is NEVER the child's responsibility to prove to the parents that he/she loves them by speaking/dressing/acting in ways the parent dictates. Biological or adoptive, there are those out there who should NEVER be parents but nevertheless, see it as a Godgiven right.

[Jane]

Hi April, it is such a complex subject I find it difficult to post on it. It is so tied up with the human condition. I feel the difference between adopted and natural children is in the wound left after loss of the birth mother. A child in a biological family brought up with unconditional love will not have to deal with the conscious or unconscious belief that they were not wanted by their natural mother. An intelligent child loved and loving in an adopted family can still struggle,and need psychological help. I believe genetics do play a part in how any child, or adult copes with the difficulties of life therefore while some children cope quite easily with adoption others will always find it and life more difficult. Unconditional love is a massive gift to any child because it moulds coping skills for life. June, is possibly an example of a natural child who maybe never knew unconditional love but only expectations of good levels of behaviour.  This would have left her with no  learned coping skills leaving her struggling to cope with her own needs and emotions never mind a vulnerable and headstrong child. I don't personally feel Sheila was unwanted and we really do not know what the phrase June became depressed 'because of 'adopting Sheila' meant. It didn'necessarily mean she didnt want or love Sheila imo.

Maggie, I agree. However, I maintain that ANY child bought up to understand its' own worth, how valued and loved it is, is going to find making its way through the world and forming relationships with others, much easier that ANY child who feels worthless.

[maggie]

Maggie, I agree. However, I maintain that ANY child bought up to understand its' own worth, how valued and loved it is, is going to find making its way through the world and forming relationships with others, much easier that ANY child who feels worthless.

I  agree April, unconditional love and the coping skills you learn through it are so important for life and stability and security. My point about Jne is that she appears to have no self worth, probably due to a cold, unloving childhood.  I have a friend who was born in the early 60s., her childhood was fostering and childrens homes...certainly no unconditional love. She had NO coping skills and spent years of her life on anti depressants. She was a single mum and a fantastic one but that is all she could manage.  Shes getting slowly better now with lots of CBT and support. She didnt even know how to have a friend and hid herself from offers of friendship.....

[killingeve]

Been looking at posts regarding promiscuity. One incident doesnt mean you are promiscuous.
Its having several sexual partners, well, more than several!

Of course...Sheila's sexual behaviour for the era was entirely 'normal'.  I'm afraid some on here are so ancient they're from a different world; thankfully one we don't recognise.  One can't help but wonder if there may be some jealousy ie only one pop at the cherry 

However it isn't just limited to the above...oh no...we have mention of "poor demented soul" and "looney" and all from people in the 'caring' profession...supposedly    I think the pair of them need taking in hand and a few lessons taught

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3267.msg127332.html#msg127332

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3267.msg127324.html#msg127324

Anyway that's my lot for today must get on with some work now we're not all retirees on here 

[susan]

Morning N/N  I have tried all different types of cherries in my time so I have missed nothing Just read the threads and I used the word looney and it was directed at Maggie in jest of course.  Sorry Maggie   I would never disrespect a person with a mental illness in that way maybe I have picked you up wrong N/N

[lookout]

Again,,some very good and varied posts,,but it comes down to the individuality of the child.
You can shower a child with all the love you can muster,,but there's still that something which is missing and which can't be pin-pointed.
An example----------------I have a very dear friend,,who loved,and still loves her children ( adults ) dearly.
Finances were hit and miss over the years,,but love was plentiful,,,yet,,one of these children ( adult ) is becoming pretty unwell,,mentally. My friend knew all wasn't as it should be,,but was in denial that anything serious was going on.
 I'm not sure of the length of time that the person has been unwell,,but present day,,things are worse. To try and get help is the most difficult task within the system as far as mental health is concerned.

I fear for my friend,,,and might I add,,for myself too,,as I know that somewhere along the line I'm going to be involved. The person rang me at 11pm last night with no concept that " it was getting late ",,then went on to say that she had forgotten what she was going to say ( repeated about a dozen times ).
I felt utterly helpless and desperately wanted to help her,,because I know that she doesn't sleep at night,,,and I'd have been there with eyeballs hanging on my cheeks,listening to a load of nonsense until the early hours. There are also signs of drugs as well. I'm going to have my work cut out for me because my friend is moving at the end of the month,,and I'll be the nearest contact ( practically on the doorstep ) but because this person doesn't converse with her mother ?,,I'll be left " holding the baby ".

My friend continually says that she loves that person,,both of her and to her,,but it's fear of the unknown that is holding my friend back,,also fear of betrayal on the part of her own flesh and blood in having to admit  that all is not well.  It is indeed a difficult situation.  Years ago,,the person would have been " committed ".

My dear friend is literally" running away " from the situation,,absolutely brokenhearted.
What I'm saying is that this is the other end of the spectrum where love was abound,,but not material things so much.
 Can you love a person too much.? In a situation such as this,,what are your views as to what went wrong.?
As you will appreciate,,there is far more to this than I'm prepared to post,,but in part,,it's like Sheila all over again,even down to the fact that my friend has sole charge of the grandchild,via the authorities,,the only difference being that my friend is the biological mother.