Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Lugg on February 27, 2013, 01:05:PM
-
Maggie...please...how on earth can you justify any aspect of your post as follows below.
I believe June was a totally unsuitable adoptive mother. I also believe she chose to adopt with ambivalent feelings. Imo this was selfish and unfair to all concerned and is reflected in the sad outcomes:
June mental illness requiring in-patient psychiatric care - *1959 and 1981
Sheila mental illness requiring in-patient psychiatric care - 1983 and 1985
Jeremy convicted of murdering 5 members of his adoptive family - 1985
*Caused solely by her decision to adopt Sheila as per Dr Ferguson's witness statement.
My criticism of June relates to June not adoptive mothers.
I might well criticise the mothers of Shannon Matthews and Baby P but I am not criticising birth mothers.
NN sorry to seem a bit thick. But which are your words and which are Maggie's?
-
Hi Lugg
I think basically N/N and Maggie have totally different views on the adoption issue. Maggie as we know is the Mother of two adopted children and N/N herself was adopted. I think maybe they are both seeing things from a different perspective and I know nothing about adoption so it would be unfair of me to comment further.
-
Hi Lugg
I think basically N/N and Maggie have totally different views on the adoption issue. Maggie as we know is the Mother of two adopted children and N/N herself was adopted. I think maybe they are both seeing things from a different perspective and I know nothing about adoption so it would be unfair of me to comment further.
Anything I have disagreed about with NN was many months ago, i disagree with her or anyone else making assumptions about June. NN believes June adopted reluctantly and every other assumption she makes follows from that. I say I dont know what June's feelings about adoption were and she very well may have longed for a baby. We dont onow the whole truth of Sheila' relationship with June...relationships are complex things. I believe Sheila was a happy child and all the troubles started in adolescance. We dont know when Sheila started showing early signs of her illness which probably would not have been recognised by june and ralph and may have been seen as wickedness by June.
That is my argument but it is only a point of view and as far as I am concerned I have the right to hold it. I have never felt any animosity to NN although her views are different, in fact I considered her a friend until she made it clear she didnt see me as a friend of hers.
I wont be commenting anymore about this you'll all be relieved to hear. ;D
-
Hello Maggie
as I said earlier I know nothing about adoption but do have the sense to know each individual case will be different. As with children born to parents they can grow up and be a big disappointment this can also apply to children who are adopted. Quite often birth/natural parents have great expectations for their children and quite often parents can feel let down. The most important thing with children they thrive on love and that can be given equally by a birth Mother or by a Mother who has adopted. We know this from the number of children abused by their own birth parents who are never given the chance to prove themselves. As far as June Bamber is concerned I am sure her intentions for wanting to adopt were she felt she had love to give and could give children a good home and upbringing. How it progressed from being babies to teenage children how would we know. I have a friend who has not seen her birth son for 20 years he had a good upbringing and education and when she asked him what the problem was he said you are not what I want as parents. So too children can have expectations of their parents and can be disappointed as they grow up. The children in my opinion have the same rights to opinions as the parents. This may sound rather harsh but parents bring children into this world to do their best and once the child becomes an adult they are allowed to make their own choices and as a Mother if my child is happy so am I.
-
Well said Susan. It makes no difference whatsoever, adopted or not and shouldn't remain an issue,,as to how a child " turns out " into the adult life.It can,and does happen to anybody.
I can't be doing with anyone who tries to make something of absolutely nothing.
If June had given birth to a daughter,,,who's to say she wouldn't have turned out like Sheila did anyway.?
-
Well said Susan. It makes no difference whatsoever, adopted or not and shouldn't remain an issue,,as to how a child " turns out " into the adult life.It can,and does happen to anybody.
I can't be doing with anyone who tries to make something of absolutely nothing.
If June had given birth to a daughter,,,who's to say she wouldn't have turned out like Sheila did anyway.?
lookout/susie I do agree with both of you. I get pretty tired with the playing of the adoptive card by some. Life is different for each one of us and we have to deal with it as best we can. Imo
-
Hi lookout I know a guy who lives not too far from me (I know some strange people) and him and his lovely son ran an engraving business and got on so well until the son confessed he was gay. The Father/son relationship was destroyed the son was disowned and thrown out of the house and business. Now is that what love is all about. No. We love our children unconditionally and the son has gone onto make a great success of a new business and a wonderful relationship with his partner. The Father will die a lonely old man. :(
-
Hi lookout I know a guy who lives not too far from me (I know some strange people) and him and his lovely son ran an engraving business and got on so well until the son confessed he was gay. The Father/son relationship was destroyed the son was disowned and thrown out of the house and business. Now is that what love is all about. No. We love our children unconditionally and the son has gone onto make a great success of a new business and a wonderful relationship with his partner. The Father will die a lonely old man. :(
You are so right susiex
-
NN sorry to seem a bit thick. But which are your words and which are Maggie's?
Morning Lugg
Yes I agree it is rather confusing!
The words in the main post are mine; the words in the attached word doc at the bottom of the post are Maggie's.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3966.msg163744.html#msg163744
-
Anything I have disagreed about with NN was many months ago, i disagree with her or anyone else making assumptions about June. NN believes June adopted reluctantly and every other assumption she makes follows from that. I say I dont know what June's feelings about adoption were and she very well may have longed for a baby. We dont onow the whole truth of Sheila' relationship with June...relationships are complex things. I believe Sheila was a happy child and all the troubles started in adolescance. We dont know when Sheila started showing early signs of her illness which probably would not have been recognised by june and ralph and may have been seen as wickedness by June.
That is my argument but it is only a point of view and as far as I am concerned I have the right to hold it. I have never felt any animosity to NN although her views are different, in fact I considered her a friend until she made it clear she didnt see me as a friend of hers.
I wont be commenting anymore about this you'll all be relieved to hear. ;D
Morning Maggie
You know my views on June/adoption/attachment disorders as I have stated them on this forum clearly and respectfully; I will not be changing them unless I see some firm evidence to the contrary :)
With regard to whether or not I see you as a friend I like to think that I can exchange posts on this forum with ALL posters in a friendly manner regardless of any differences in background, character, views held etc, etc :)
-
Well said Susan. It makes no difference whatsoever, adopted or not and shouldn't remain an issue,,as to how a child " turns out " into the adult life.It can,and does happen to anybody.
I can't be doing with anyone who tries to make something of absolutely nothing.
If June had given birth to a daughter,,,who's to say she wouldn't have turned out like Sheila did anyway.?
Morning Lookout
The crucial factor in the June/Sheila/adoption scenario is the fact that June suffered depression caused by her decision to adopt Sheila. Had the cause of June's depression been non-specific or caused by some other external factor eg loss of someone close, physical illness etc, etc I would probably think it quite unremarkable but the fact that Dr Ferguson states it was caused by June's decision to adopt Sheila strikes me as most remarkable especially given the outcomes. It also raises questions about the quality of care Sheila received during crucial periods, eg was she left crying for hours on end as apparently she recalled doing as stated in Colin's book? I would think it unlikely that June went from being non-depressed and meeting Sheila's needs to being so depressed she required in-patient psychiatric care overnight. In any event June's hospitalisation resulted in multiple primary caregivers during the crucial bonding period.
Biologists and psychologists etc now believe babies bond in utero and that disruptions in bonding can cause the sort of problems evidenced with Sheila ie low self-esteem, depression, under-achievement at school etc.
As I think you know I was adopted at 6 wks of age. However I went from my birth mother to adoptive mother (just a short car journey with a social worker from my birth mother to the adoption agency where I was handed over to my adoptive parents). As far as I'm aware my adoptive mother has never suffered from any mental illness and was therefore able to attend to my needs as a birth mother would with no further disruptions in bonding. According to my parents I was a good baby and rarely cried :). They've also stated that I was never any problem ie as a child, teenager or young adult.
However, with Sheila she went from her birth mother to June (possibly foster mother before June?) a.n other whilst June was in hospital and then back to June. I feel sure that if Sheila found herself today with the likes of Dr Ferguson with the full history ie adoption and June's depression c1959 the first thing that would scream out would be 'attachment disorder'. Had Sheila have been treated in her teens when issues first started presenting then she may not have developed full blow schizophrenia.
The above is my view but I accept that if Sheila had remained with her birth mother she may well have experienced the same issues and full blow schizophrenia. Basically what I'm saying is that Sheila's early start in life put her at risk of the types of issues and illness she went on to develop.
If Jeremy was being tried today I would imagine much more would be made of the above. I find it odd that 3 out of 4 family members, where none were genetically related, developed either serious mental illness or have been convicted of multiple murders. What would you say the statistical chances were of that happening based on randomness alone?
-
I have moved these posts from their original thread (and given them a new title) as they were not part of that topic.
-
Hi Caroline
I was simply responding to posts made by other posters so are you going to lift those too as they seem to have got left behind? :-\
I'm not too keen on threads being started in my name that I haven't actually started :-\. I really can't imagine this being a hot topic. I would imagine that the original thread would have gravitated back somewhere along its original theme as they do.
-
Hi Caroline
I was simply responding to posts made by other posters so are you going to lift those too as they seem to have got left behind? :-\
I'm not too keen on threads being started in my name that I haven't actually started :-\. I really can't imagine this being a hot topic. I would imagine that the original thread would have gravitated back somewhere along its original theme as they do.
Hi NN,
Sorry, I just didn't see the other posts but I will look back and move those too. There was lots of interest in the adoption debate last time, at least here it gives all those interested a chance to debate it rather than being wrapped up in another topic. I must admit, I find it hard to read through a topic that drifts from one thing to another - I get bored and end up moving on. Just give it a go!! :D
-
Hi Caroline
Yes ok thanks. Can't imagine we will stand much chance of 'pulling' on this thread though ie don't expect much through traffic from the male species save perhaps Steve_uk may venture in if we're lucky of course ;D.
It's interesting though that male posters rarely comment on the family relationships etc and tend to stick to the 'hard' evidence eg scene of crime, gun(s), silencer(s), blood, phone logs etc. Whereas female posters appear to consider both? :-\
-
Hi Caroline
Yes ok thanks. Can't imagine we will stand much chance of 'pulling' on this thread though ie don't expect much through traffic from the male species save perhaps Steve_uk may venture in if we're lucky of course ;D.
It's interesting though that male posters rarely comment on the family relationships etc and tend to stick to the 'hard' evidence eg scene of crime, gun(s), silencer(s), blood, phone logs etc. Whereas female posters appear to consider both? :-\
Hi NN, your right it is a topic that gets missed i think the reason being if you have not had any dealings with adoption its hard to comment on the subject does that make sense? My wife was fostered at 3 years old she hardly talks about it i think because it has never been a problem and we have always dealt with it jokingly, i keep reminding her how lucky she was to be fostered she would not have met me otherwise.
-
Hi NN, your right it is a topic that gets missed i think the reason being if you have not had any dealings with adoption its hard to comment on the subject does that make sense? My wife was fostered at 3 years old she hardly talks about it i think because it has never been a problem and we have always dealt with it jokingly, i keep reminding her how lucky she was to be fostered she would not have met me otherwise.
Hi Ralph
Yes I see where you're coming from but to be quite honest although I'm adopted up until about four years ago when I read Nicky Campell's book:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1161601.Blue_Eyed_Son
I couldn't have told you much about adoption myself. Nicky's book got me interested in the subject and I started reading other books about adoption and then read about JB's ccrc application in one of the papers. That's when I started looking into the WHF murders and adoption as a potential contributory factor.
I have noticed though that the male posters appear to post little about the relationships/adoption. I accept that most will not have any experience of adoption but then most probably don't have experience of blood in silencers, bullets etc, etc?
Hey yeah your wife was lucky she got to meet you :D
-
Hi Ralph
Yes I see where you're coming from but to be quite honest although I'm adopted up until about four years ago when I read Nicky Campell's book:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1161601.Blue_Eyed_Son
I couldn't have told you much about adoption myself. Nicky's book got me interested in the subject and I started reading other books about adoption and then read about JB's ccrc application in one of the papers. That's when I started looking into the WHF murders and adoption as a potential contributory factor.
I have noticed though that the male posters appear to post little about the relationships/adoption. I accept that most will not have any experience of adoption but then most probably don't have experience of blood in silencers, bullets etc, etc?
Hey yeah your wife was lucky she got to meet you :D
Would i be right in saying the younger a child is adopted, the less effect it would have in later life? Looks a good book by the way NN.
-
Would i be right in saying the younger a child is adopted, the less effect it would have in later life? Looks a good book by the way NN.
Hi Ralf
Yes its a good read. Its well written and funny.
No not necessarily. I think a lot has to do with the realtionship the adopted child has with his/her adoptive parents and the childs innate coping mechanisms. Apparently the core issues are as follows:
7 Lifelong Issues In Adoption
http://www.fairfamilies.org/2012/1999/99LifelongIssues.htm
Genealogical Bewilderment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_bewilderment
The Primal Wound
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Primal_Wound
All of the above are pertinent to Sheila and Jeremy who were adopted as babies in the 'closed' adoption system.
-
Well said Susan. It makes no difference whatsoever, adopted or not and shouldn't remain an issue,,as to how a child " turns out " into the adult life.It can,and does happen to anybody.
I can't be doing with anyone who tries to make something of absolutely nothing.
If June had given birth to a daughter,,,who's to say she wouldn't have turned out like Sheila did anyway.?
Good Morning Lookout
With respect I think you are wrong in your assertions above. Do you have any evidence to support your claims?
David Brodzinsky Ph.D is a world leading expert in adoption:
http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/whowe/fellows.html
based in the psychology dept at Rutgers University (ranked 99 out of 400 from WORLD universities):
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2012-13/world-ranking/range/001-200
Here is an excerpt from one of his books:
http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_Psychology_of_Adoption.html?id=0UW7AAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y
The fact is June did not give birth to Sheila and according to all the professionals fundamental differences exist between birth and adoptive families :)
-
Morning N/N
not sure what I said about adoption but I would probably be wrong as I really am quite ignorant about the matter and it is a subject I should not comment on just read the facts and learn. One thing I am certain of the way a birth Mother behaves etc whilst carrying a child does affect the behaviour of the child i.e. if the Mother is highly strung and tense it will reflect on the unborn child. Am I making sense. 8)
-
Good morning,NN.. I know that I'm right in my own personal view.
I haven't been involved in adoption in any way,,but the next best thing were/are step-children.
A lot depends on how the subject is broached ,when a parent/s takes on a child with a differing bloodline,,,,and to me this doesn't/hasn't posed a problem at all.
In fact,my situation was possibly a more difficult one,as when I married years ago,in the late 50,s,,I also found myself with a " ready-made " family of two children at 7 and 9 years respectively.
Their mother wasn't deceased,,,she just didn't want them,. So they'd,in effect,,been rejected by their birth mother,,,which could have proved to have been a nightmare,,,,but wasn't.
We had ups and downs like any other normal family,,,and as far as I was concerned,,we were a normal family,,and I didn't give any hints that they " weren't mine ",,,but also,I didn't deprive them from seeing their mother if they so wished,,,but that didn't happen as the children didn't want to do. Neither children received a Birthday or Christmas card from their mother. The children never once mentioned about that,,and neither did I.
When my own two girls came along,,my step-children were delighted,and as far as they were concerned,they had two little sisters. Again,,,there was no discrimination and I treated all the children the same. It was never a subject that I felt I needed to remind any of them until later on in years when my own blood children understood the situation.
There remains to be contact all round,and I'm nan to lots of children now.
Both step-children had had a pretty turbulent start in their young lives before I came onto the scene,and their father had been granted full custody of them when he'd divorced. So anyone might have expected big problems regarding the children,,,but it was one of my own who gave me the biggest headache during her teenage years.
My own advice would be that unless a child asks questions,,,then say nothing.Never remind them,,nor hint in any way that " they're different ",because they're not. Thank God I've held a balanced view.
Far too much emphasis is made on children " who aren't your own flesh and blood ", and with proper parenting, it's an acceptance of another child and the job of the parent is to integrate them with the minimum of fuss,,and not to make them feel " different ". Just get on with life and the job in hand.
-
Good Morning Lookout
With respect I think you are wrong in your assertions above. Do you have any evidence to support your claims?
David Brodzinsky Ph.D is a world leading expert in adoption:
http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/whowe/fellows.html
based in the psychology dept at Rutgers University (ranked 99 out of 400 from WORLD universities):
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2012-13/world-ranking/range/001-200
Here is an excerpt from one of his books:
http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_Psychology_of_Adoption.html?id=0UW7AAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y
The fact is June did not give birth to Sheila and according to all the professionals fundamental differences exist between birth and adoptive families :)
Would i be right in saying the mother who has given the child up for adoption would in my opinion suffer the most? I have sat and thought about all the people i have met that have been adopted, not once has any regret, remorse or traits of psychological damage shown up? I am with lookout on this who i find speaks from own life expeiriences and does not believe everything that is written by someone else. People in my opinion write books make money, plug ones name, then seem to move onto something else. Take Scott Lomax book well written but everyone on here could put our own version in the book, and i bet everyone who has been adopted would put a different version in any book on adoption?
-
Morning N/N
not sure what I said about adoption but I would probably be wrong as I really am quite ignorant about the matter and it is a subject I should not comment on just read the facts and learn. One thing I am certain of the way a birth Mother behaves etc whilst carrying a child does affect the behaviour of the child i.e. if the Mother is highly strung and tense it will reflect on the unborn child. Am I making sense. 8)
Morning Susan
Yes I believe lots of research is going on about the effects of stress hormones on the developing foetus. I suspect much more goes on in that womb that we are currently aware of :o :o ;D ;D ;) ;)
-
Morning lookout
you obviously did a great job with your step children but not all cases are such a success. The blood is thicker than water does apply in many instances and some parents differentiate between blood and step children not knowing they are doing it. In some cases the step children are aware of this and grow up with none or little love for their provider. Sad but true :(
Well done to you. ;D
-
Morning Ralph
with regard to adoption my knowledge is limited but I do feel some Mothers who give their child up for adoption will suffer in later life as opposed to the time they give their baby away. Children who are adopted will all react differently so we cannot generalise. I am a great believer that a child whether or not adopted inherits traits of behaviour from their birth parents. Jeremy and Sheila Bamber have genes from their birth parents and also will have emulated their adopted parents and their behaviour in general will stem from their upbringing hence the saying "give me the child and I will give you the man" Susanx
-
Good morning,NN.. I know that I'm right in my own personal view.
I haven't been involved in adoption in any way,,but the next best thing were/are step-children.
A lot depends on how the subject is broached ,when a parent/s takes on a child with a differing bloodline,,,,and to me this doesn't/hasn't posed a problem at all.
In fact,my situation was possibly a more difficult one,as when I married years ago,in the late 50,s,,I also found myself with a " ready-made " family of two children at 7 and 9 years respectively.
Their mother wasn't deceased,,,she just didn't want them,. So they'd,in effect,,been rejected by their birth mother,,,which could have proved to have been a nightmare,,,,but wasn't.
We had ups and downs like any other normal family,,,and as far as I was concerned,,we were a normal family,,and I didn't give any hints that they " weren't mine ",,,but also,I didn't deprive them from seeing their mother if they so wished,,,but that didn't happen as the children didn't want to do. Neither children received a Birthday or Christmas card from their mother. The children never once mentioned about that,,and neither did I.
When my own two girls came along,,my step-children were delighted,and as far as they were concerned,they had two little sisters. Again,,,there was no discrimination and I treated all the children the same. It was never a subject that I felt I needed to remind any of them until later on in years when my own blood children understood the situation.
There remains to be contact all round,and I'm nan to lots of children now.
Both step-children had had a pretty turbulent start in their young lives before I came onto the scene,and their father had been granted full custody of them when he'd divorced. So anyone might have expected big problems regarding the children,,,but it was one of my own who gave me the biggest headache during her teenage years.
My own advice would be that unless a child asks questions,,,then say nothing.Never remind them,,nor hint in any way that " they're different ",because they're not. Thank God I've held a balanced view.
Far too much emphasis is made on children " who aren't your own flesh and blood ", and with proper parenting, it's an acceptance of another child and the job of the parent is to integrate them with the minimum of fuss,,and not to make them feel " different ". Just get on with life and the job in hand.
Hi Lookout
Thanks for sharing that with me. You sound like a great mum, step-mum and nan.
Yes I agree with much of what you've said. Due to a set of personal circumstances (overseas and family illness) my niece (adopted brother's daughter) lived with me for about 6 months when she was about 2 yoa. In my heart of hearts I know I couldn't have loved her anymore etc,etc than I did my own birth children. In fact I probably felt more protective towards her as she wasn't "my own" child :).
Part of the problem with the adoptions of the so-called baby scoop era was imo the secrecy and denial. Adoptive parents were told to "tell" at a young age as most did including my own and Nevill and June. That then leaves lots of questions which adopted children were unable to have answers to as in the main the adoptive parents had no real knowledge of the birth parents, circumstances etc so that then can give rise to the issues in the following post which you may have already read:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3974.msg163871.html#msg163871
Its a natural outcome from the set-up I think :-\
Interestingly I have heard from a very reliable source that Nevill and June kept in touch with JB's birth parents via an intermediary/letters for the first four years of his life which was very unusual. They then shared this info with JB when he was about 8 yoa. This probably partly explains why he showed no interest in reuniting with his birth parents until he sought their help with his current situation. No such info existed for Sheila which in part may explain why she sought out her birth family.
The only thing I knew about my adoption until I was in my early 20's was that I was born in Cambridge.
-
Morning lookout
you obviously did a great job with your step children but not all cases are such a success. The blood is thicker than water does apply in many instances and some parents differentiate between blood and step children not knowing they are doing it. In some cases the step children are aware of this and grow up with none or little love for their provider. Sad but true :(
Well done to you. ;D
Morning Susan,,,a lot has to do with your own up-bringing as well,,because my parents were accepting of anyone,without question. Never made any fuss,nor stood on ceremony,and for that,I'm very thankful to them both. Truthful at all times.
My step-children often visit their younger sister ( my daughter ) and have remained probably closer than blood relatives. The other daughter is too far for them to visit---------------in Australia,,but they keep in contact just the same either through Facebook or e-mail.
-
Hi lookout
you sound as if you had a great childhood and this in turn made you into a brilliant Mum ;D ;D ;D
-
Would i be right in saying the mother who has given the child up for adoption would in my opinion suffer the most? I have sat and thought about all the people i have met that have been adopted, not once has any regret, remorse or traits of psychological damage shown up? I am with lookout on this who i find speaks from own life expeiriences and does not believe everything that is written by someone else. People in my opinion write books make money, plug ones name, then seem to move onto something else. Take Scott Lomax book well written but everyone on here could put our own version in the book, and i bet everyone who has been adopted would put a different version in any book on adoption?
Hi Ralf
Yes I agree birth mothers, and often fathers too, were often pressured some may say coerced into giving their child up for adoption and suffer lifelong consequences. I understand its very rare for a birth parent to reject a birth child when they attempt to reunite. My birth parents I'm pleased to say were delighted when I turned up and both were childless. Can't wait for the inheritances to roll in ;D ;D ;D ;) ;) ;).
There are numerous adoptees in the public eye eg the late Steve Jobs, Michael Gove, Kate Adie to name but a few. As you said these people don't seem to have any regrets, remorse or psychological damage. However, I do recall reading Kate Adie's auto-biog and she refers to certain issues relating to her adoption and did go on to reunite with her birth mother. And in fact wrote a book about foundling babies. I guess I'm pretty 'normal' ;D ;) well I'm sure that's how MOST posters see me ;D ;) but how can we be sure? ;D ;)
However, I can't be moved from all the scientific evidence and studies which do show that adoptees are at risk from a host of pscyhological and emotional problems. If you can find me some evidence to the contrary I would be most interested to read it. In fact the UK Government produced a report
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=rupert%20rushbrooke%20adoption&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ons.gov.uk%2Fons%2Frel%2Fpopulation-trends-rd%2Fpopulation-trends%2Fno--104--summer-2001%2Fthe-proportion-of-adoptees-who-have-received-their-birth-records-in-england-and-wales.pdf&ei=nI4wUY6ZDOXM0AXT3YHoDw&usg=AFQjCNFj1YZLotkd1Ax6AwlZ04HV8MPYLQ
Lol...what a link ;D ;D ;D. Anyway the conclusion states:
"There seem to be two overall conclusions. Firstly, the phenomenion of adoptees applying for their birth records is clearly mainstram adoption behaviour, and not all the peripheral activity that had been expected in 1975. Secondly, the patterns in the statistics are consistent with the theory that adoption causes deep-seated problems for at least a significant proportion of adoptees".
Here's a link to a book 'The Primal Wound' supposedly the adoptees bible :-\ If you're interested you can read the customer reviews which tend to be from adoptees who share their views on adoption:
http://www.amazon.com/Primal-Wound-Understanding-Adopted-Child/dp/0963648004
My interest in adoption is how it might be connected to the WHF murders and based on all the evidence eg witness statements, books etc Sheila's relationship with June and adoption experience were not positive ones :(. Although I don't believe the same can be said for Jeremy :). It strikes me as odd that no reference was made of this by Dr Ferguson at Jeremy's trial? After all he was the main line of defence ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
-
Hi Caroline
Yes ok thanks. Can't imagine we will stand much chance of 'pulling' on this thread though ie don't expect much through traffic from the male species save perhaps Steve_uk may venture in if we're lucky of course ;D.
It's interesting though that male posters rarely comment on the family relationships etc and tend to stick to the 'hard' evidence eg scene of crime, gun(s), silencer(s), blood, phone logs etc. Whereas female posters appear to consider both? :-\
That's not strictly true though. As Steve-uk is often commenting on those things. I personally do not know much about adoption families or adoption in general. So on the whole I leave it up to the experts
-
NN,,Sheilas' adoption would have had nothing to do with the WHF murders. It was a faulty gene that the girl had to start with,,as can happen to anyone,including blood relatives. Scientists are now finding out what causes a person to develop schizophrenia through the brains' " wiring process " and who's likely to be susceptible to the illness ( which is NEVER mild,,as Dr Ferguson put it )
Most likely,,the gene that poor Sheila had acquired may have skipped a generation or two,,but somewhere along the line,there could well have been someone in her family who had such a gene,,but wouldn't have known. It's a brutal act of nature which can strike the unsuspecting,,,though there's a trigger involved.
-
That's not strictly true though. As Steve-uk is often commenting on those things. I personally do not know much about adoption families or adoption in general. So on the whole I leave it up to the experts
Yes Steve_uk does comment on the adoption angle. He's often quite critical of June too. I'm not sure if he has any direct experience or he's just perceptive or something else :-\
Very sensible Lugg that's why I try to bring so many links in to hear what the professionals say no point in me sounding off about my own adoption experience :)
-
I somehow feel that Steve isn't enjoying life at the moment. Just a hunch.
-
I somehow feel that Steve isn't enjoying life at the moment. Just a hunch.
If he's on here every day then its a cert he isn't. ;D Some of this stuff is enough to depress anyone.
-
NN,,Sheilas' adoption would have had nothing to do with the WHF murders. It was a faulty gene that the girl had to start with,,as can happen to anyone,including blood relatives. Scientists are now finding out what causes a person to develop schizophrenia through the brains' " wiring process " and who's likely to be susceptible to the illness ( which is NEVER mild,,as Dr Ferguson put it )
Most likely,,the gene that poor Sheila had acquired may have skipped a generation or two,,but somewhere along the line,there could well have been someone in her family who had such a gene,,but wouldn't have known. It's a brutal act of nature which can strike the unsuspecting,,,though there's a trigger involved.
I have to disagree with you there Lookout. My belief is that the WHF murders were based on adoption psychology and an attachment disorder. Most psychologists and psychiatrists are now firmly of the opinion that schizophrenia is environmental. How do you know Sheila suffered from schizophrenia? We only have Dr Ferguson's word for that; a professional that had every reason to be conflicted and cover up. Colin firmly believes that Sheila's mental health issues were rooted in her adoption experience and relationship with June. So too does another very reliable source ;)
A while back I gained approval from Mike to do a 'locked topic' on adoption bringing together all the evidence eg extracts from witness statements, Colin's book etc along with links from the professionals. I will then personally contact numerous professionals eg psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers etc to join the forum specifically to comment on the matter and raise the profile. This will obviously take some time but perhaps we should defer an absolute decision until then ;)
-
If he's on here every day then its a cert he isn't. ;D Some of this stuff is enough to depress anyone.
In what way is it depressing? :-\
Anyway I must get on with some REAL work now.
The adoption show is now over for today. Here's a little something to keep you all going:
http://www.theadoptionshow.com/
That's ya lot for today folks ;D ;D ;D
-
I have to disagree with you there Lookout. My belief is that the WHF murders were based on adoption psychology and an attachment disorder. Most psychologists and psychiatrists are now firmly of the opinion that schizophrenia is environmental. How do you know Sheila suffered from schizophrenia? We only have Dr Ferguson's word for that; a professional that had every reason to be conflicted and cover up. Colin firmly believes that Sheila's mental health issues were rooted in her adoption experience and relationship with June. So too does another very reliable source ;)
A while back I gained approval from Mike to do a 'locked topic' on adoption bringing together all the evidence eg extracts from witness statements, Colin's book etc along with links from the professionals. I will then personally contact numerous professionals eg psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers etc to join the forum specifically to comment on the matter and raise the profile. This will obviously take some time but perhaps we should defer an absolute decision until then ;)
I personally think that Sheilas' " mental " problems stemmed from puberty. Then as her hormones developed and she became pregnant at 17 ( which was aborted ) the girl will have suffered post-natally,,excerbated by two miscarriages/terminations which added to her hormonal imbalance then giving birth to the twins and having to spend time in hospital prior to the births,,left untreated,,does lead to severe mental illness,in time,,,PND.. The more that Sheila ignored the signs of being unwell,,the more a "defence mechanism "would automatically kick,, in which is a chemical given off by the thyroid gland involved in the " fight or flight " situation and if left,,can lead to serious problems.
You would have to read up on Endocrinology to understand how the balance of Sheilas' hormones would have been tipped.
-
I personally think that Sheilas' " mental " problems stemmed from puberty. Then as her hormones developed and she became pregnant at 17 ( which was aborted ) the girl will have suffered post-natally,,excerbated by two miscarriages/terminations which added to her hormonal imbalance then giving birth to the twins and having to spend time in hospital prior to the births,,left untreated,,does lead to severe mental illness,in time,,,PND.. The more that Sheila ignored the signs of being unwell,,the more a "defence mechanism "would automatically kick,, in which is a chemical given off by the thyroid gland involved in the " fight or flight " situation and if left,,can lead to serious problems.
You would have to read up on Endocrinology to understand how the balance of Sheilas' hormones would have been tipped.
and for all the effects these prenacies had on her and she was considering having more around the time of the murders
-
and for all the effects these prenacies had on her and she was considering having more around the time of the murders
Was she, BG? Where did you learn that? I know she was found to have had an IUD fitted and that's not something she could have removed herself in order to conceive.
-
Was she, BG? Where did you learn that? I know she was found to have had an IUD fitted and that's not something she could have removed herself in order to conceive.
i believe she had spoken to her psychologist
-
i believe she had spoken to her psychologist
Presumably someone other than Dr Ferguson, who was a consultant psychiatrist. She seemed to have had no regular partner and I imagine it would not have been possible for her to raise a child without support. Why else would Colin have the twins?
-
Anything I have disagreed about with NN was many months ago, i disagree with her or anyone else making assumptions about June. NN believes June adopted reluctantly and every other assumption she makes follows from that. I say I dont know what June's feelings about adoption were and she very well may have longed for a baby. We dont onow the whole truth of Sheila' relationship with June...relationships are complex things. I believe Sheila was a happy child and all the troubles started in adolescance. We dont know when Sheila started showing early signs of her illness which probably would not have been recognised by june and ralph and may have been seen as wickedness by June.
That is my argument but it is only a point of view and as far as I am concerned I have the right to hold it. I have never felt any animosity to NN although her views are different, in fact I considered her a friend until she made it clear she didnt see me as a friend of hers.
I wont be commenting anymore about this you'll all be relieved to hear. ;D
Hi Maggie
I responded to this on Friday but it appears to have got lost somewhere :-\
I did not say that June adopted reluctantly I said ambivalently:
Psychology . the coexistence within an individual of positive and negative feelings toward the same person, object, or action, simultaneously drawing him or her in opposite directions.
I struggle to comprehend how a woman like June with strong religious beliefs and firm views on sexual morality reconciled her feelings with regard to adopting two illegitimate children.
As we know June took her religious beliefs seriously. The CoA document states the following:
14. June Bamber was also 61 years old. Religion had always played a strong part in her life. In her latter years her interest in this regard had to an extent come to dominate her thinking, to a point that might have been thought to be obsessive. In 1982, she received treatment at a psychiatric hospital in Northampton
(Note no ref to June's mental illness in 1959 :o
Given the above and my post as follows:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3955.msg164365.html#msg164365
and the following link referring to adoptive parents and religion I'm sure you will understand my thinking ;)
http://www.originsnsw.com/mentalhealth/id5.html
The above link quotes Dr Alexina Mcwhinnie from Dundee university as follows:
"Mc Whinnie also refers to her study about the conditions of religious affiliation for prospective adopters. Her study again shows that other factors are important here, and it should not be assumed that because the adopters are members of a church they would make sympathetic adopters. In fact it would seem important to assess particularly carefully the attitudes of those who hold very rigid religious beliefs since these, if unduly puritanical, might lead them to finding difficulty in accepting illegitimacy and the child born to unmarried parents"
Lol I have no idea how my adoptive parents manged to 'acquire' me given that my Dad is and always has been an ardent atheist and my adoptive mother not far behind. I'm sure they must have lied to the adoption agency ;D ;D ;D. I remember my Dad, brother and me loved those Dave Allen sketches about religion. Thank you Daddy for setting me on the right path :-*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxo81Ok9Urk
-
Nowt wrong with Atheism ;D
-
Nowt wrong with Atheism ;D
Too right ;D
-
Hi Maggie
I responded to this on Friday but it appears to have got lost somewhere :-\
I did not say that June adopted reluctantly I said ambivalently:
Psychology . the coexistence within an individual of positive and negative feelings toward the same person, object, or action, simultaneously drawing him or her in opposite directions.
I struggle to comprehend how a woman like June with strong religious beliefs and firm views on sexual morality reconciled her feelings with regard to adopting two illegitimate children.
As we know June took her religious beliefs seriously. The CoA document states the following:
14. June Bamber was also 61 years old. Religion had always played a strong part in her life. In her latter years her interest in this regard had to an extent come to dominate her thinking, to a point that might have been thought to be obsessive. In 1982, she received treatment at a psychiatric hospital in Northampton
(Note no ref to June's mental illness in 1959 :o
Given the above and my post as follows:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3955.msg164365.html#msg164365
and the following link referring to adoptive parents and religion I'm sure you will understand my thinking ;)
http://www.originsnsw.com/mentalhealth/id5.html
The above link quotes Dr Alexina Mcwhinnie from Dundee university as follows:
"Mc Whinnie also refers to her study about the conditions of religious affiliation for prospective adopters. Her study again shows that other factors are important here, and it should not be assumed that because the adopters are members of a church they would make sympathetic adopters. In fact it would seem important to assess particularly carefully the attitudes of those who hold very rigid religious beliefs since these, if unduly puritanical, might lead them to finding difficulty in accepting illegitimacy and the child born to unmarried parents"
Lol I have no idea how my adoptive parents manged to 'acquire' me given that my Dad is and always has been an ardent atheist and my adoptive mother not far behind. I'm sure they must have lied to the adoption agency ;D ;D ;D. I remember my Dad, brother and me loved those Dave Allen sketches about religion. Thank you Daddy for setting me on the right path :-*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxo81Ok9Urk
I think that you only think your dad started you on the right path only because you yourself agree with it? But you seem to unfairly judge those Christian parents who adopt children under similar circumstances? No doubt if those children who had been brought up in a Christian environment and had become Christians themselves you would say that they had been brainwashed?
Probably news to you. But my wife was an adoptee just after the war and her mother was an unmarried mother who was taken in by a Christian institution as she was rejected by her own parents.
My wife's parents were also Christians and they adopted her as a little girl and was also brought up in a Christian environment. She had a very normal life with her adoptive parents and as far as I know was very happy. So yes Christians also can have mercy and love towards unmarried mothers and their children. And also it is not right to say that only those with no religion can be acceptable parents.
-
I personally think that Sheilas' " mental " problems stemmed from puberty. Then as her hormones developed and she became pregnant at 17 ( which was aborted ) the girl will have suffered post-natally,,excerbated by two miscarriages/terminations which added to her hormonal imbalance then giving birth to the twins and having to spend time in hospital prior to the births,,left untreated,,does lead to severe mental illness,in time,,,PND.. The more that Sheila ignored the signs of being unwell,,the more a "defence mechanism "would automatically kick,, in which is a chemical given off by the thyroid gland involved in the " fight or flight " situation and if left,,can lead to serious problems.
You would have to read up on Endocrinology to understand how the balance of Sheilas' hormones would have been tipped.
Lol Lookout you've just stated it was a faulty gene:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3974.msg163906.html#msg163906
Please see my post as follows about Sheila's unplanned pregnancies:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3955.msg164365.html#msg164365
-
I think that you only think your dad started you on the right path only because you yourself agree with it? But you seem to unfairly judge those Christian parents who adopt children under similar circumstances? No doubt if those children who had been brought up in a Christian environment and had become Christians themselves you would say that they had been brainwashed?
Probably news to you. But my wife was an adoptee just after the war and her mother was an unmarried mother who was taken in by a Christian institution as she was rejected by her own parents.
My wife's parents were also Christians and they adopted her as a little girl and was also brought up in a Christian environment. She had a very normal life with her adoptive parents and as far as I know was very happy. So yes Christians also can have mercy and love towards unmarried mothers and their children. And also it is not right to say that only those with no religion can be acceptable parents.
Yes I agree Lugg. My sister-in-law is a regular church goer. Two of my best female friends are religious: one a Christian the other a Catholic. But they're not fanatical imo June was as stated in the CoA doc and Dr Ferguson's witness statements.
Most muslims are peace loving but some want to blow up anything that doesn't fit their warped view of Islam.
-
Lol Lookout you've just stated it was a faulty gene:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3974.msg163906.html#msg163906
Please see my post as follows about Sheila's unplanned pregnancies:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3955.msg164365.html#msg164365
NN,,Whether we like it or not,,we ALL carry genes. It's our makeup of what we are and who we are whether adopted or not. Whatever our genetic makeup consists of,shows itself in one form or another,,if not immediately,,then later on in life.
Family life at WHF,was very much the same as any other family life as far as I'm concerned,,,adopted or not. It's all hooey, this over-reaction about adoption--------------------sorry. A blooming excuse.
-
NN,,Whether we like it or not,,we ALL carry genes. It's our makeup of what we are and who we are whether adopted or not. Whatever our genetic makeup consists of,shows itself in one form or another,,if not immediately,,then later on in life.
Family life at WHF,was very much the same as any other family life as far as I'm concerned,,,adopted or not. It's all hooey, this over-reaction about adoption--------------------sorry. A blooming excuse.
Hi Lookout
This is true we do ALL carry genes from our birth parents.
I appreciate your personal views Lookout but I would respectfully point out that they do actually contradict all the evidence from professionals. Are you able to provide any evidence by way of links etc to support your assertions.
You often raise valid points but there appears to be a lack of supporting evidence ie links to witness statements, external websites etc. I recall once you liked some music Patti uploaded, Odyssey I think, and Patti said she was going to show you how to copy and paste etc?
Just going back to the genetics. How can you account for the following:
June - mental illness requiring in-patient psychiatric care 1959 and 1983 (might be '81)
Sheila - mental illness requiring in-patient psychiatric care 1983 and 1985
Jeremy - convicted of murdering 5 members of his adoptive family 1986
Lookout please can you give your opinion:
Genetics = n/a
Randomness/coincidence?
Environment?
-
Hi Lookout
This is true we do ALL carry genes from our birth parents.
I appreciate your personal views Lookout but I would respectfully point out that they do actually contradict all the evidence from professionals. Are you able to provide any evidence by way of links etc to support your assertions.
You often raise valid points but there appears to be a lack of supporting evidence ie links to witness statements, external websites etc. I recall once you liked some music Patti uploaded, Odyssey I think, and Patti said she was going to show you how to copy and paste etc?
Just going back to the genetics. How can you account for the following:
June - mental illness requiring in-patient psychiatric care 1959 and 1983 (might be '81)
Sheila - mental illness requiring in-patient psychiatric care 1983 and 1985
Jeremy - convicted of murdering 5 members of his adoptive family 1986
Lookout please can you give your opinion:
Genetics = n/a
Randomness/coincidence?
Environment?
First of all,,I don't refer to any information through links,,,it's purely lifes experiences coupled with my own views and not those of any" Doctor Spock "type gobbledegook.
As I've explained somewhere before,,,the pre-disposition to mental illness could well be already there,,,and any sort of trauma in your life will exacerbate that part of your brain,,as to whether you can control your feelings or suppress them altogether. It's all very complicated and in-depth that scientists haven't even worked out why some people act differently than others in a given situation.
Both Junes' and Sheilas' illnesses would have been hormonal,,,as an imbalance can and does cause all kinds of problems within the hormone producing glands in both men and women.
Pituitary,,,Adrenal,,,Thyroid,,,all produce hormones,,,the adrenal and thyroid give out the fight or flight hormone,,,and if these glands produce too much adrenaline and nor-adrenaline,left untreated,can go on to cause other problems round the body,,including the brain. Anxiety and depression are the two most common factors.
In women,during puberty,,those who suffer badly with PMT need to be treated asap,,as those sufferers have also been known to kill and their added strength can move mountains.
Junes' problen could have started from puberty,we don't know,,,but chances are,,she need not have been born to a family who suffered,,though it's usual on the maternal side for a daughter to inherit an ailment from the mother,,,but not always.
Sheila,we know,,was sexually active at 17, ( promiscuous I'd have said ) we've no information before then. When,in full view,she was caught by June,in the field with a farm worker. Inevitably pregnant,,,then whisked to the GP to make further arrangements. A further two terminations ,,,all added to a fragile mind of a young woman.Losing 3 pregnancies would be enough to make any young person " fall over the edge ",,,and whether Sheila ever had counselling after her " losses ",,I don't know.
Abortion isn't my idea of birth control. I find this part of Sheila difficult for me to understand.
To be quite honest,,,I would have said that having been in that situation alone,,,was enough to send her insane. She'd have wondered how those children would have turned out,etc etc,,,and part of her possibly had flashbacks. As life progressed,,she then got married and had a further pregnancy which resulted in the twins,,after having had to stay in hospital for a while beforehand.
There's no telling who can develop mental illness,,,except that it can be environmental,,,plus many other things combined,,drugs,alcohol,violence,abuse. It doesn't always show itself.People can be all smiles,but behind the smiles nobody can detect what's going on in the brain.
Jeremy is a different subject matter,,and so different. But that's not to say that his birth mother was different to Sheilas'. He is just a different character which you get in most blood-related families,as well as adoptive. My brother and myself both had the same parents,,but we're as different as chalk and cheese. As are both my daughters. They are individuals,,,not clones.
I have twin great/grandchildren who are also different in every way. Granted ,,they didn't share a " sac " ,,but even so,,when you say twins,,you expect mirror images,,,but no,,,,,,,,different pigmentations,,,,different characters altogether.
Jeremy on the other hand,,,because he must have been far easier to cope with,,,was probably revered a bit more than Sheila was,,and if Sheila had sensed this in any way,,there may have been ructions with her,,,but really,I think the Bambers did the best they could with both children. Probably better than some blood parents,,,as that's why I don't attach any importance to " adoption " because it's a part of natural life if you wish it to be so. Life is what you make it,,and not how someone else dictates it to be.
-
[quote author=lookout link=topic=3974.msg164509#msg164509 date=136241..............
Jeremy on the other hand,,,because he must have been far easier to cope with,,,was probably revered a bit more than Sheila was,,and if Sheila had sensed this in any way,,there may have been ructions with her,,,but really,I think the Bambers did the best they could with both children. Probably better than some blood parents,,,as that's why I don't attach any importance to " adoption " because it's a part of natural life if you wish it to be so. Life is what you make it,,and not how someone else dictates it to be.
[/quote]
Lookout, I so agree with what you have said that I could have written it myself :) I also agree that Jeremy was easier to cope with than Sheila partly, IMO, because June could have ignored his own burgeoning sexuality. She may not have approved of him having sex outside of marriage but any repurcussions wouldn't come quite as close to home.
I want to stress that what I say next comes ENTIRELY from my own experience. I can't say whether June's fixed views stemmed from faith in her all punishing, unforgiving God or her mental illness, but I suspect that she had lived in fear of Sheila going down a certain road, which may have resulted in pushing Sheila down it in a search for the validation she felt June withheld from her. I will agree that the Bambers both did the best they could. They were good people BUT Sheila and Jeremy weren't responsible for whatever were June's own private demons.
You attach no importance to "adoption." I have to. I was reminded of it on an almost daily basis, it was part of reminding me of the debt I owed and the reason my life couldn't be what I made it, it was what my mother told me it would be. In a strange way, it was almost a relief to learn how June was with Sheila. It cuts through moments when I can't believe it had been that awful and perhaps I exaggerated. I remember June and I know it was because it happened to Sheila, too. HOWEVER, Sheila is the only other adoptee I know who suffered the same mental and emotional abuse as I and two people do not a statistic make and despite my experience, I fully support adoption.
-
Thankyou so much for your response,,April........However I see and experience life,,I write it and don't feel the need for text-books. I've followed my own instincts having borne two children and " taken on " another two , as was the "bargain" when I got married,,,and continued with four children quite happily with no stigma attached,,and certainly no reminding them that they weren't mine.
What I meant to say about not attaching any importance to adoption,,is that integration shouldn't feel alien ,,,,,and acceptability of the child or children should be as natural as your own maternal feelings allow.
I understand that everyone is different,,,but I just know from a personal point of view that there are some things in life that require a duty to be carried out,,and that duty to me was to keep the family as one without discrimination,,or feelings of " being different ".
-
Thankyou so much for your response,,April........However I see and experience life,,I write it and don't feel the need for text-books. I've followed my own instincts having borne two children and " taken on " another two , as was the "bargain" when I got married,,,and continued with four children quite happily with no stigma attached,,and certainly no reminding them that they weren't mine.
What I meant to say about not attaching any importance to adoption,,is that integration shouldn't feel alien ,,,,,and acceptability of the child or children should be as natural as your own maternal feelings allow.
I understand that everyone is different,,,but I just know from a personal point of view that there are some things in life that require a duty to be carried out,,and that duty to me was to keep the family as one without discrimination,,or feelings of " being different ".
Hi lookout, I would imagine you forgot which were whose didn't you? I know I mostly forget I didn't bear my children and that they were adopted, having said that I hope I have also taught them to honour their natural mothers. As you say, they are children who they come from shouldn't matter.
-
First of all,,I don't refer to any information through links,,,it's purely lifes experiences coupled with my own views and not those of any " Doctor Spock "type gobbledegook.
As I've explained somewhere before,,,the pre-disposition to mental illness could well be already there,,,and any sort of trauma in your life will exacerbate that part of your brain,,as to whether you can control your feelings or suppress them altogether. It's all very complicated and in-depth that scientists haven't even worked out why some people act differently than others in a given situation.
Both Junes' and Sheilas' illnesses would have been hormonal,,,as an imbalance can and does cause all kinds of problems within the hormone producing glands in both men and women.
Pituitary,,,Adrenal,,,Thyroid,,,all produce hormones,,,the adrenal and thyroid give out the fight or flight hormone,,,and if these glands produce too much adrenaline and nor-adrenaline,left untreated,can go on to cause other problems round the body,,including the brain. Anxiety and depression are the two most common factors.
In women,during puberty,,those who suffer badly with PMT need to be treated asap,,as those sufferers have also been known to kill and their added strength can move mountains.
Junes' problen could have started from puberty,we don't know,,,but chances are,,she need not have been born to a family who suffered,,though it's usual on the maternal side for a daughter to inherit an ailment from the mother,,,but not always.
Sheila,we know,,was sexually active at 17,( promiscious I'd have said) we've no information before then. When,in full view,she was caught by June,in the field with a farm worker. Inevitably pregnant,,,then whisked to the GP to make further arrangements. A further two terminations ,,,all added to a fragile mind of a young woman.Losing 3 pregnancies would be enough to make any young person " fall over the edge ",,,and whether Sheila ever had counselling after her " losses ",,I don't know.]Abortion isn't my idea of birth control. I find this part of Sheila difficult for me to understand.
To be quite honest,,,I would have said that having been in that situation alone,,,was enough to send her insane. She'd have wondered how those children would have turned out,etc etc,,,and part of her possibly had flashbacks. As life progressed,,she then got married and had a further pregnancy which resulted in the twins,,after having had to stay in hospital for a while beforehand.
There's no telling who can develop mental illness,,,except that it can be environmental,,,plus many other things combined,,drugs,alcohol,violence,abuse. It doesn't always show itself.People can be all smiles,but behind the smiles nobody can detect what's going on in the brain.
Jeremy is a different subject matter,,and so different. But that's not to say that his birth mother was different to Sheilas'. He is just a different character which you get in most blood-related families,as well as adoptive. My brother and myself both had the same parents,,but we're as different as chalk and cheese. As are both my daughters. They are individuals,,,not clones.
I have twin great/grandchildren who are also different in every way. Granted ,,they didn't share a " sac " ,,but even so,,when you say twins,,you expect mirror images,,,but no,,,,,,,,different pigmentations,,,,different characters altogether.
Jeremy on the other hand,,,because he must have been far easier to cope with,,,was probably revered a bit more than Sheila was,,and if Sheila had sensed this in any way,,there may have been ructions with her,,,but really,I think the Bambers did the best they could with both children. Probably better than some blood parents,,,as that's why I don't attach any importance to " adoption " because it's a part of natural life if you wish it to be so. Life is what you make it,,and not how someone else dictates it to be.
Morning Lookout
I've highlighted above the sections I've responded to in your war and peace post ;D
I think you're being somewhat unfair to professionals who have spent years studying such matters under scientific conditions. Sure have your own views but those alone are not going to carry weight unless you can back them up with some evidence.
Of course Sheila could be pre-disposed to some mental illness due to her genetics but what are the statistical chances of both adoptive mother and adopted daughter both having mental illness when there's no shared genetics? In this case it is much more likely to be caused by the environement ie external rather than internal. The statistical likelihood of this not being the case is very unlikely. It might be worth noting that no such problems existed between PB and AE and as far as I'm aware between Sheila's birth mother and her children.
I know you don't like my links Lookout but tough because one's coming up now ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginity
You need to scroll down a fair way to see a table on the rhs re average age of losing virginity. The Durex gold survey in 2005 found the average age of a person losing his/her virginity was 17.3 years globally. However I accept back in the mid 70's this figure may have been slightly higher. Re the unplanned pregnancies and not seeing abortion as a means of birth control I agree given then that contraception was widely available but do you think June ever broached the subject of sexual relationships and contraception with Sheila and Jeremy? Probably not given that she expected them to remain virgins until marriage. Why would an attractive girl from a middle class adoptive family, well educated and genetically from a family of academics (I believe her birth parents were students) want to get pregnant at 17 and drift around aimlessly? You and others will blame it on her mental illness, gentic predisposition etc but I choose to believe in adoption psychology. I doubt if she had any counselling for her losses but did June have any counselling for her losses ie not having a birth child? Another link coming up...are you getting >:( >:( >:(? Plse see 'loss' section:
http://www.fairfamilies.org/2012/1999/99LifelongIssues.htm
What do you mean "that's not to say his birth mother was different to Sheila's"? They are just two people at random why would they have anything in common whatsoever? Other than having a child outside of wedlock and giving the child up for adoption which was the norm during that era.
I agree the Bambers had good intentions but I also agree with Wilkes when he states that they were totally unsuitable adoptive parents and I'm very thankful that I wasn't adopted into that family. I often wonder how I would have fared had I have been adopted by them. Can you see me getting on with June?
Jeremy was/is a much stronger character as evidenced by his stoic behaviour during his long incaceration. He was able to brush off June's bible bashing. Sheila on the other hand took it all to heart and was made to feel quite literally like the Devil's child until she met her birth mother a few weeks before the murders. Her view of June, and possibly Nevill, then started to change. My opinion of course.
-
NN,,I'm so glad that I'm not as sad a person as yourself,,using references to dictate what,and how your life should be mapped out.
Goodness me.
There's no handbook available for rearing children,you go by, and use your own instincts and not those of others. No two children are alike,,whether they be adopted or not. Why this unnatural attitude/obsession towards adoption anyway.? As I've said before,,life is what you make it.
There are probably more birth parents who are unsuitable,than adoptive ones,,,so that argument doesn't hold water,,,and how anyone purporting to be professional can say that the Bambers were unsuitable as adoptive parents,,,wants shooting. I think that's a despicable remark from anyone.
I would have got on with June,,,,but then I'm obviously a more tolerant person than yourself who expects the impossible in life,,and wants everyone to jump to your attention. Sorry,,but that's not for me,as I'm more than happy toddling along and fitting in with what others do. I've never craved attention,,and it gets on my nerves to those who do.
I personally think June was a lovely person in her own way. The fact that she was a depressive showed the sensitive side to her,,,and if Sheila had behaved herself,,the two of them could have been the best of friends...The poor woman had done her best in the most difficult of circumstances,,,,and I stress,,,it had nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that Sheila was adopted. Except,,,like yourself,,Sheila made a big issue of it until the whole process blew up out of all proportion.. Adopted or not,,,any family can have a " black sheep ",,,,I'm trying to stress here, that it doesn't just happen to adoptive families.
I also felt damn sorry for June as well having to be faced with what MOST of us went through with teenagers. Some of whom can be level-headed,,but others complete and utter monsters overnight. Again,,unless you've had dealings in that area,then I fail to see how you can pass comment. No matter what doctor,consultant,professor says,,,nobody on this earth can prepare you for a teenager who rebels in every way possible,,be it sexual,drinking,cigarettes or drugs. It's no easy feat by anyones' standards.
I will not,,and have never been dictated to on family matters whatever it might be. The PC brigade can take a running jump as far as I'm concerned. They know nothing.!
-
Thankyou so much for your response,,April........However I see and experience life,,I write it and don't feel the need for text-books. I've followed my own instincts having borne two children and " taken on " another two , as was the "bargain" when I got married,,,and continued with four children quite happily with no stigma attached,,and certainly no reminding them that they weren't mine.
What I meant to say about not attaching any importance to adoption,,is that integration shouldn't feel alien ,,,,,and acceptability of the child or children should be as natural as your own maternal feelings allow.
I understand that everyone is different,,,but I just know from a personal point of view that there are some things in life that require a duty to be carried out,,and that duty to me was to keep the family as one without discrimination,,or feelings of " being different ".
Lookout there's really no comparison between your family or that of the Bambers, mine, possibly April's ?, and most other adoptive families from the 'closed' adoption system.
Firstly, you had your own birth children so you were not left wondering about a birth child.
Secondly, your step-children did not have ?'s about their past. They knew who their ancestors were including their birth mother albeit she may not have been 'fit for purpose' according to you or as psychologists say she failed to meet the "good enough" criteria. No mother is perfect. They knew who their birth father was as they lived with him along with their siblings. They knew who they looked like as they saw reflections of themselves every day amongst family members. They no doubt shared many similar non-physical characteristics too due to their shared genetics.
I was told at a very young age I was adopted. I wasn't told explicitly this is off limits for futher discussion but implicitly that was how I understood it and the subject was very rarely broached again ever. The only thing I knew about my past was that I was born in Cambridge until I was in my early 20's and went to the adoption agency to look at my file.
This is how 'closed' adoptions were socially engineered Lookout. It was STRICTLY SECRET. Only social workers, courts and the register general were able to match the two ie adoptive family and birth family. Both parties ie adoptive and birth had very limited unidentifying information about one another. Adoptees even had new birth certificates!!! It was engineered 'as if' the adoptee had been born to the adoptive parents.
The law changed in 1975 allowing adoptees access to their original birth certificates which in turn allowed them access to their adoption file and obviously the possibility of reuniting with their birth families.
See geneaological bewilderment for the most common reasons why adoptees want to know about their past and most do:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=genealogical%20bewilderment&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FGenealogical_bewilderment&ei=W8o1UauUIaqa0QW3t4CIAg&usg=AFQjCNGja4-T6uX5okmZQu2EHOThNIx17g&bvm=bv.43148975,d.d2k
-
NN,,I'm so glad that I'm not as sad a person as yourself,,using references to dictate what,and how your life should be mapped out.
Goodness me.
There's no handbook available for rearing children,you go by, and use your own instincts and not those of others. No two children are alike,,whether they be adopted or not. Why this unnatural attitude/obsession towards adoption anyway.? As I've said before,,life is what you make it.
There are probably more birth parents who are unsuitable,than adoptive ones,,,so that argument doesn't hold water,,,and how anyone purporting to be professional can say that the Bambers were unsuitable as adoptive parents,,,wants shooting. I think that's a despicable remark from anyone.
I would have got on with June,,,,but then I'm obviously a more tolerant person than yourself who expects the impossible in life,,and wants everyone to jump to your attention. Sorry,,but that's not for me,as I'm more than happy toddling along and fitting in with what others do. I've never craved attention,,and it gets on my nerves to those who do.
I personally think June was a lovely person in her own way. The fact that she was a depressive showed the sensitive side to her,,,and if Sheila had behaved herself ,,the two of them could have been the best of friends...The poor woman had done her best in the most difficult of circumstances,,,,and I stress,,,it had nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that Sheila was adopted. Except,,,like yourself,,Sheila made a big issue of it until the whole process blew up out of all proportion.. Adopted or not,,,any family can have a " black sheep ",,,,I'm trying to stress here, that it doesn't just happen to adoptive families.
I also felt damn sorry for June as well having to be faced with what MOST of us went through with teenagers. Some of whom can be level-headed,,but others complete and utter monsters overnight. Again,,unless you've had dealings in that area,then I fail to see how you can pass comment. No matter what doctor,consultant,professor says,,,nobody on this earth can prepare you for a teenager who rebels in every way possible,,be it sexual,drinking,cigarettes or drugs. It's no easy feat by anyones' standards.
I will not,,and have never been dictated to on family matters whatever it might be. The PC brigade can take a running jump as far as I'm concerned. They know nothing.!
Well Lookout hopefully you did use references when you were working as a SRN and mental health nurse!!!
Since you have no experience of 'closed' adoption either practically or theoretically what makes YOU think YOU should be listened to? Do YOU honestly expect any poster to take YOUR comments seriously when it is quite clear that YOU have absolutely no idea what YOU are talking about. Other posters who have no experience of adoption, which are most, state they have no experience/knowlege but no not our Lookout the authority on everything!!! Lol ;D ;D ;D
Your comments highlighted above are sickening and disgusting. Sheila was brought up by a mentally ill adoptive mother who had ambivalent feelings about adopting illegitimate children partly bound up with her religious fanaticism all of which she projected onto Sheila resulting in low self-esteem, under-achievement at school, inability to form stable relationships, mental illness etc, etc. Sheila should have been removed from the Bambers in 1959 and placed with an adoptive family with a proven track record. The Bambers should have been prevented from ever adopting again. They were TOTALLY unsuitable and this is borne out by the sad outcomes.
You find me a psychiatirst, psychologist or social woker in the land that disagrees with the statement above?
Some of us Lookout are not taken in by outward appearances!!!
-
Packagebuilder hun I've scooped you up from another thread and dragged you kicking and screaming here with your post as follows:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3989.msg164644.html#msg164644
The above is interesting as there are other similarities:
Both were adopted at birth
Both had at one time been hairdressers (Sheila despite coming from a family of academics - no offence to hairdressers)
Both had been renuited with their birth mothers
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1376660/Leighton-Buzzard-train-passenger-grieving-killing-son.html
There's also much evidence from Dr Susan Gair that adoptees are at a greater risk of suicide than their non-adopted peers:
http://www.virtualmedicalcentre.com/news/exploring-links-between-past-adoptions-and-suicide/13426
-
surely the whole point to this arguement is that children growing up to become dysfunctional adults is not down to genes
both JB and SC grew up to have problems and it must have come from thier upbringing
-
Well Lookout hopefully you did use references when you were working as a SRN and mental health nurse!!!
Since you have no experience of 'closed' adoption either practically or theoretically what makes YOU think YOU should be listened to? Do YOU honestly expect any poster to take YOUR comments seriously when it is quite clear that YOU have absolutely no idea what YOU are talking about. Other posters who have no experience of adoption, which are most, state they have no experience/knowlege but no not our Lookout the authority on everything!!! Lol ;D ;D ;D
Your comments highlighted above are sickening and disgusting. Sheila was brought up by a mentally ill adoptive mother who had ambivalent feelings about adopting illegitimate children partly bound up with her religious fanaticism all of which she projected onto Sheila resulting in low self-esteem, under-achievement at school, inability to form stable relationships, mental illness etc, etc. Sheila should have been removed from the Bambers in 1959 and placed with an adoptive family with a proven track record. The Bambers should have been prevented from ever adopting again. They were TOTALLY unsuitable and this is borne out by the sad outcomes.
You find me a psychiatirst, psychologist or social woker in the land that disagrees with the statement above?
Some of us Lookout are not taken in by outward appearances!!!
First of all,,I do not profess to be an authority on adoption at all,,,,and neither do you by the sound of things for all your " studying ".
You have to get beyond the fact that ALL children are individuals for a start,,,not accessories that have to be moulded into your beliefs or way of thinking.
Guidance into adult life is vital,,and unless that's given,then you have a recipe for disaster. This applies to ALL children.
Discipline also goes hand in hand with security,,which is another vital ingredient in the bringing up of children too,,as unless that is meted out, the end product is the feral child that you see and hear about.
I would say that this could have been Junes' failing-----------discipline. The poor woman wouldn't/didn't know how to deal with Sheilas' monstrous behaviour as a teen,,,as I would have said then that the girl was on a downward spiral.
Just because June suffered from depression didn't mean that she wasn't a good parent. She had as much right as anyone else to have children,,,contrary to what you say. Where's your sensitivity.?
What of the mothers who develop Post Natal Depression.? Should they have their babies taken away.?
Lots of mothers suffer PND,,but it doesn't mean that they're bad mothers,or in fact,going to be. It's one of those phenomenons that happen to some and not others,,but is treatable if caught early enough. In Sheilas' case,the debility was left to fester into something worse.
Sad outcomes happen in ALL families,,not just adoptive ones. What is your problem.?
If I were you,,I'd go and see a psycho-therapist and get it out of your system,,as it appears to have taken over your life.
-
surely the whole point to this arguement is that children growing up to become dysfunctional adults is not down to genes
both JB and SC grew up to have problems and it must have come from thier upbringing
I think it is a bit more complicated than that BG and is rather dependent upon many factors. The Charles Bronson story shows this and he is by no means unique.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=mcOV2cZbKu4
-
surely the whole point to this arguement is that children growing up to become dysfunctional adults is not down to genes
both JB and SC grew up to have problems and it must have come from thier upbringing
BG,,it's not always " faulty parents " who have dysfunctional children. When children turn into adults,,they're responsible for themselves then and it depends what they've learned along the way,from their parents. If they choose to rebel,like Sheila did,,it has no bearing on her up-bringing,,it was HER choosing,nobody elses'. If she hadn't wanted to conform,,how can you blame the parents.? They did what they thought was best,like any other parent does.
Everyone has a choice in life,,,and you either choose to go on the straight and narrow or you don't.
-
First of all,,I do not profess to be an authority on adoption at all,,,,and neither do you by the sound of things for all your " studying ".
You have to get beyond the fact that ALL children are individuals for a start,,,not accessories that have to be moulded into your beliefs or way of thinking.
Guidance into adult life is vital,,and unless that's given,then you have a recipe for disaster. This applies to ALL children.
Discipline also goes hand in hand with security,,which is another vital ingredient in the bringing up of children too,,as unless that is meted out, the end product is the feral child that you see and hear about.
I would say that this could have been Junes' failing-----------discipline. The poor woman wouldn't/didn't know how to deal with Sheilas' monstrous behaviour as a teen,,,as I would have said then that the girl was on a downward spiral.
Just because June suffered from depression didn't mean that she wasn't a good parent. She had as much right as anyone else to have children,,,contrary to what you say. Where's your sensitivity.?
What of the mothers who develop Post Natal Depression.? Should they have their babies taken away.?
Lots of mothers suffer PND,,but it doesn't mean that they're bad mothers,or in fact,going to be. It's one of those phenomenons that happen to some and not others,,but is treatable if caught early enough. In Sheilas' case,the debility was left to fester into something worse.
Sad outcomes happen in ALL families,,not just adoptive ones. What is your problem.?
If I were you,,I'd go and see a psycho-therapist and get it out of your system,,as it appears to have taken over your life.
Given that I have lived the adoption experience for some 40 odd years and will continue to do so until my dying day I rather think I have a little more experience than most. But that is MY experience. My ability to comment further has come from studying pyschology at degree level during the 80's and much more recently studying adoption albeit on a non-formal basis.
'Closed' adoptions from the so-called baby scoop era produced poor outcomes in many cases. If you can find me any evidence to the contrary I am prepared to reevaluate my position. This will need to be more than YOUR opinion Lookout. Please put you views when your mind is ie produce the evidence. To dismiss professional opinion is imo a waste of time debating this with you further.
Again you make sickening comments about Sheila as highlighted above. What exactly in YOUR opinion Lookout constituted "Sheila's monstrous behaviour as a teen"? Imo the sole cause was having an unsuitable adoptive mother in JUNE BAMBER.
As Sheila spent much of her childhood at boarding school June did not have to concern herself with Sheila's discipline.
Adopting a child for most adoptive mothers is a time of great joy as it was for my adoptive mother; not a time when they became clinically depressed requiring in-patient pscyhiatric care due to their decision to adopt a child. I assume you have read Dr Ferguson's witness statement?
Yes birth mothers suffer post-natal depression but as you well know this is caused by fluctuating hormones. June did not suffer fluctuating hormones because she did not give birth to Sheila.
I have much empathy for the plight of others but I am afraid I have very very little for June Bamber who I see as a selfish hypocrite.
Your personal comments show you in your true colours. I will not lower myself to trading personal comments, bordering on insults, it's not the way I was brought up Lookout. I'm happy to debate the issues and have a bit of playful banter but I will not be drawn into personal comments/insults.
-
surely the whole point to this arguement is that children growing up to become dysfunctional adults is not down to genes
both JB and SC grew up to have problems and it must have come from thier upbringing
BG it is obvious to most that if you take the following scenario it is of course down to something in the environment. Only a fool would think otherwise:
June Bamber - mental illness *1959 and 1983 requiring in-patient psychiatric care
Sheila Caffell - mental illness 1983 and 1985 requiring in-patient psychiatric care
Jeremy Bamber - convicted of murdering 5 members of his adoptive family 1986
No genetic component!!!
*specifically due to her decision to adopt Sheila.
-
I think it is a bit more complicated than that BG and is rather dependent upon many factors. The Charles Bronson story shows this and he is by no means unique.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=mcOV2cZbKu4
i'm not claiming to know the dynamics of this but as JB and SC didnt come from the same gene pool then thier dysfunctionality must have come from elsewhere.
i'm guessing that as both were sent away to boarding schools and then learnt they were adopted , maybe they thought they weren't wanted by loving parents.
-
Given that I have lived the adoption experience for some 40 odd years and will continue to do so until my dying day I rather think I have a little more experience than most. But that is MY experience. My ability to comment further has come from studying pyschology at degree level during the 80's and much more recently studying adoption albeit on a non-formal basis.
'Closed' adoptions from the so-called baby scoop era produced poor outcomes in many cases. If you can find me any evidence to the contrary I am prepared to reevaluate my position. This will need to be more than YOUR opinion Lookout. Please put you views when your mind is ie produce the evidence. To dismiss professional opinion is imo a waste of time debating this with you further.
Again you make sickening comments about Sheila as highlighted above. What exactly in YOUR opinion Lookout constituted "Sheila's monstrous behaviour as a teen"? Imo the sole cause was having an unsuitable adoptive mother in JUNE BAMBER.
As Sheila spent much of her childhood at boarding school June did not have to concern herself with Sheila's discipline.
Adopting a child for most adoptive mothers is a time of great joy as it was for my adoptive mother; not a time when they became clinically depressed requiring in-patient pscyhiatric care due to their decision to adopt a child. I assume you have read Dr Ferguson's witness statement?
Yes birth mothers suffer post-natal depression but as you well know this is caused by fluctuating hormones. June did not suffer fluctuating hormones because she did not give birth to Sheila.
I have much empathy for the plight of others but I am afraid I have very very little for June Bamber who I see as a selfish hypocrite.
Your personal comments show you in your true colours. I will not lower myself to trading personal comments, bordering on insults, it's not the way I was brought up Lookout. I'm happy to debate the issues and have a bit of playful banter but I will not be drawn into personal comments/insults.
My guess is that June would have suffered hormonal problems after she reached puberty,,,and not knowing her background,I can't comment on her well-being during her 37 years,,nor the time of cessation which in itself can produce unwanted symptoms.
Studying is never the same as practical experience. This is why I don't follow books,,apart from when I did my exams many years ago. In between college I was also thrown feet first onto wards at 16 years of age,,,and from then on,look upon my many experiences as a privilege. I became more " hands-on " in all aspects of nursing,,as that was the way of learning back in the 50's. You learned as you went along,,which was much better than referring to books,,,as each patient was an individual and were treated as such,,and not clumped together with the same illness, as reactions,etc were different to medications and treatments in each individual. " One mans meat is another mans poison ". Trial and error. Much the same as bringing up children.
However,,my thanks should go to the matron at the time for her help and wisdom in giving me the ability to be able to study people and point out the strict discipline that was necessary in dealing with certain patients.
Yes,,Sheila did behave monstrously towards her mother,,and it wasn't fair. I think June was very tolerant,,as she must have been shocked at the way her daughter turned out. Difficult at school,,,difficult out of school and nobody to turn to as the family would have been horrified at having to admit to anyone that they were having difficulties with their daughter. I can both sympathise and empathise with June for having been in that situation,,where things like illness,especially of the mental kind,were unspoken.
I can't think of what else Sheila wanted,,as she was more privileged than others and didn't go short of anything. You're going to say " ah,but she did,,,,,,love ". That isn't always the answer either when you're dealing with someone who doesn't return it,,and you'd feel so let down.
Junes' " crutch " was her church,,,better than turning to drink like some mothers do,,to blot something out,,except that problems don't go away until they're solved,,,though in Sheilas' case they were only beginning.
It's easy to love a baby/toddler/child. It's a natural feeling which June would have shown initially,until alien behaviour showed itself,,,,and none of us could even begin to imagine what June endured.
The poor woman would have been too ashamed to tell anyone. Whether Junes' sister ever knew,we don't know,,,but whatever June did for Sheila,it would have been out of love in Junes mind,,without necessarily showing it. You don't have to " smother " your children to show you care. The very act of caring,,is love enough. If you have to keep repeating " I love you " to your children,,,there's some insecurity there along the way. A child automatically senses love the minute it is born,,and as it grows up,,and regardless of the childs' beginnings,,,as long as it's nurtured,fed and clothed,,,there shouldn't be any issues.
However,everyone's different,,thank the Lord. No clones in my family, only clowns,,,they've all gone their different ways,,,used different methods in bringing up their own children,,,and that's fine by me.
Poor Sheila didn't have that chance. You have to remain thankful and grateful for what you've got and keep your mind well occupied,,and travel too,as it also broadens your outlook on life.
My comments,,as you say,,,were reciprocated by your own.! You must accept " insults " back, as long as you're dishing them out in the first place. I think you forget what you say.!
-
There's another old saying-------------------"-Don't try and tell your grannie how to suck eggs".
-
My guess is that June would have suffered hormonal problems after she reached puberty,,,and not knowing her background,I can't comment on her well-being during her 37 years,,nor the time of cessation which in itself can produce unwanted symptoms.
Studying is never the same as practical experience. This is why I don't follow books,,apart from when I did my exams many years ago. In between college I was also thrown feet first onto wards at 16 years of age,,,and from then on,look upon my many experiences as a privilege. I became more " hands-on " in all aspects of nursing,,as that was the way of learning back in the 50's. You learned as you went along,,which was much better than referring to books,,,as each patient was an individual and were treated as such,,and not clumped together with the same illness, as reactions,etc were different to medications and treatments in each individual. " One mans meat is another mans poison ". Trial and error. Much the same as bringing up children.
However,,my thanks should go to the matron at the time for her help and wisdom in giving me the ability to be able to study people and point out the strict discipline that was necessary in dealing with certain patients.
Yes,,Sheila did behave monstrously towards her mother,,and it wasn't fair. I think June was very tolerant,,as she must have been shocked at the way her daughter turned out. Difficult at school,,,difficult out of school and nobody to turn to as the family would have been horrified at having to admit to anyone that they were having difficulties with their daughter. I can both sympathise and empathise with June for having been in that situation,,where things like illness,especially of the mental kind,were unspoken.
I can't think of what else Sheila wanted,,as she was more privileged than others and didn't go short of anything. You're going to say " ah,but she did,,,,,,love ". That isn't always the answer either when you're dealing with someone who doesn't return it,,and you'd feel so let down.
Junes' " crutch " was her church,,,better than turning to drink like some mothers do,,to blot something out,,except that problems don't go away until they're solved,,,though in Sheilas' case they were only beginning.
It's easy to love a baby/toddler/child. It's a natural feeling which June would have shown initially,until alien behaviour showed itself,,,,and none of us could even begin to imagine what June endured.
The poor woman would have been too ashamed to tell anyone. Whether Junes' sister ever knew,we don't know,,,but whatever June did for Sheila,it would have been out of love in Junes mind,,without necessarily showing it. You don't have to " smother " your children to show you care. The very act of caring,,is love enough. If you have to keep repeating " I love you " to your children,,,there's some insecurity there along the way. A child automatically senses love the minute it is born,,and as it grows up,,and regardless of the childs' beginnings,,,as long as it's nurtured,fed and clothed,,,there shouldn't be any issues.
However,everyone's different,,thank the Lord. No clones in my family, only clowns,,,they've all gone their different ways,,,used different methods in bringing up their own children,,,and that's fine by me.
Poor Sheila didn't have that chance. You have to remain thankful and grateful for what you've got and keep your mind well occupied,,and travel too,as it also broadens your outlook on life.
My comments,,as you say,,,were reciprocated by your own.! You must accept " insults " back, as long as you're dishing them out in the first place. I think you forget what you say.!
You're back for more ;D ;D ;D
Perhaps posters would like an informed view of adoption from Dr Nancy Verrier a psychotherapist specialising in adoption who also happens to be both an adoptive and birth mother:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI0M0w_cLT4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT8arjSziKk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roBa1YBdEC4
Hahaha Lookout I bet you're beginning to wish you could copy 'n' paste ;D ;D ;D
-
I've told you,NN,,I don't use quotes/links from others,,,as I've no need to.! Even if I could copy and paste,,or even be bothered to learn,,,I still wouldn't quote from anyone.
It's a pity you feel the need to to do so in order to " prove " your point.. I also pity you for finding it hilarious.? How old did you say you were.?
-
My guess is that June would have suffered hormonal problems after she reached puberty,,,and not knowing her background,I can't comment on her well-being during her 37 years,,nor the time of cessation which in itself can produce unwanted symptoms.
Studying is never the same as practical experience. This is why I don't follow books,,apart from when I did my exams many years ago. In between college I was also thrown feet first onto wards at 16 years of age,,,and from then on,look upon my many experiences as a privilege. I became more " hands-on " in all aspects of nursing,,as that was the way of learning back in the 50's. You learned as you went along,,which was much better than referring to books,,,as each patient was an individual and were treated as such,,and not clumped together with the same illness, as reactions,etc were different to medications and treatments in each individual. " One mans meat is another mans poison ". Trial and error. Much the same as bringing up children.
However,,my thanks should go to the matron at the time for her help and wisdom in giving me the ability to be able to study people and point out the strict discipline that was necessary in dealing with certain patients.
Yes,,Sheila did behave monstrously towards her mother,,and it wasn't fair. I think June was very tolerant,,as she must have been shocked at the way her daughter turned out. Difficult at school,,,difficult out of school and nobody to turn to as the family would have been horrified at having to admit to anyone that they were having difficulties with their daughter. I can both sympathise and empathise with June for having been in that situation,,where things like illness,especially of the mental kind,were unspoken.
I can't think of what else Sheila wanted,,as she was more privileged than others and didn't go short of anything. You're going to say " ah,but she did,,,,,,love ". That isn't always the answer either when you're dealing with someone who doesn't return it,,and you'd feel so let down.
Junes' " crutch " was her church,,,better than turning to drink like some mothers do,,to blot something out,,except that problems don't go away until they're solved,,,though in Sheilas' case they were only beginning.
It's easy to love a baby/toddler/child. It's a natural feeling which June would have shown initially,until alien behaviour showed itself,,,,and none of us could even begin to imagine what June endured.
The poor woman would have been too ashamed to tell anyone. Whether Junes' sister ever knew,we don't know,,,but whatever June did for Sheila,it would have been out of love in Junes mind,,without necessarily showing it. You don't have to " smother " your children to show you care. The very act of caring,,is love enough. If you have to keep repeating " I love you " to your children,,,there's some insecurity there along the way. A child automatically senses love the minute it is born,,and as it grows up,,and regardless of the childs' beginnings,,,as long as it's nurtured,fed and clothed,,,there shouldn't be any issues.
However,everyone's different,,thank the Lord. No clones in my family, only clowns,,,they've all gone their different ways,,,used different methods in bringing up their own children,,,and that's fine by me.
Poor Sheila didn't have that chance. You have to remain thankful and grateful for what you've got and keep your mind well occupied,,and travel too,as it also broadens your outlook on life.
My comments,,as you say,,,were reciprocated by your own.! You must accept " insults " back, as long as you're dishing them out in the first place. I think you forget what you say.!
You too!!!
May I remind you of one of your previous posts where you refer to boarding school and June's religious mania having an adverse affect on Sheila:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3456.msg136123.html#msg136123
Where's the evidence that Sheila was promiscous? She was certainly no more promiscious than Jeremy. As far as I'm aware Sheila had sexual relationships with the farmhand, Colin and Freddie. Do you know of others? Sheila was certainly no more promiscous than Jeremy and I haven't seen you make any adverse comments about his sex life. Are you so ancient that you believe in double standards?
If you want to trash Sheila in any shape or form you will find your match in me that I can assure you Lookout.
You want a 'hot' debate Lookout bring it on...
-
I've told you,NN,,I don't use quotes/links from others,,,as I've no need to.! Even if I could copy and paste,,or even be bothered to learn,,,I still wouldn't quote from anyone.
It's a pity you feel the need to to do so in order to " prove " your point.. I also pity you for finding it hilarious.? How old did you say you were.?
Not as old as you thankfully!!!
-
Not as old as you thankfully!!!
Ah,,I see. Being discriminatory goes nicely with your attitude.
You've answered a question that I didn't even have to ask.
It also suits you being disrespectful too,as it's all I expected from you.
I'm afraid you've got an awful lot to learn,,so get stuck into your links and books on how to be a " half-decent " person.
BTW,,,good luck on reaching my age.!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Ah,,I see. Being discriminatory goes nicely with your attitude.
You've answered a question that I didn't even have to ask.
It also suits you being disrespectful too,as it's all I expected from you.
I'm afraid you've got an awful lot to learn,,so get stuck into your links and books on how to be a " half-decent " person.
BTW,,,good luck on reaching my age.!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Yes of course...no doubt you see me as being disrespectful due to some fatal genetic flaw in the same way as you see Sheila as being promiscuous due to some fatal genetic flaw.
Your post as follows is sick:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3456.msg136123.html#msg136123
ie "Where did Sheila get her promiscuity from? It certainly wasn't June or Nevill". Where is the evidence that Sheila was promiscuous? You often accuse other posters of avoiding questions...please can you answer a simple question.
I wouldn't want to reach your age with your mindset ;D ;D ;D
-
Yes of course...no doubt you see me as being disrespectful due to some fatal genetic flaw in the same way as you see Sheila as being promiscuous due to some fatal genetic flaw.
Your post as follows is sick:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3456.msg136123.html#msg136123
ie "Where did Sheila get her promiscuity from? It certainly wasn't June or Nevill". Where is the evidence that Sheila was promiscuous? You often accuse other posters of avoiding questions...please can you answer a simple question.
I wouldn't want to reach your age with your mindset ;D ;D ;D
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.
-
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.
-
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.?
-
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!!!
-
Been looking at posts regarding promiscuity. One incident doesnt mean you are promiscuous.
Its having several sexual partners, well, more than several!
-
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.
-
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? :)
-
Morning Lugg
I thought it meant not keeping your promises. ;D Maybe it is nice being promiscuous wish I had tried it :'(
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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, 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.....
-
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 ;D ;D ;D
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 :o I think the pair of them need taking in hand and a few lessons taught ;) ;) ;) ;D ;D ;D
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 ;) ;) ;) ;D ;D ;D
-
Morning N/N I have tried all different types of cherries in my time so I have missed nothing ;D ;D ;D ;D 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 :(
-
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.
-
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 ;D ;D ;D
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 :o I think the pair of them need taking in hand and a few lessons taught ;) ;) ;) ;D ;D ;D
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 ;) ;) ;) ;D ;D ;D
Don't be so quick to judge. What you count ancient may be the right way to go, what with the increase of sexual diseases? Not only that, but all you need to do is go back in history to see that we have been down this road before. I'm afraid that whilst Christians have remained constant in their moral beliefs it is the world which rejects those morals that have been so changeable. Just go back to the Roman era and then judge those of today and you will soon discover who are the ancient ones.
-
Morning N/N I have tried all different types of cherries in my time so I have missed nothing ;D ;D ;D ;D 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 :(
Susie I know you used the word in an affectionate way to me. While it is unpolitically correct and understandably so, its also slang of certain generatio. Much of the slang of today can also be seen as at least if not more offensive.
You are a good person with a huge heart who would never willingly offend anyone. ;D
-
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, for "complex", I'm inclined to think MESSY!!! My own mother, and possibly, June, had never received unconditional love, which makes it more likely that she/they believed that a child would be the answer to all their problems. Unwilling/unable to have one biologically, they adopted-unlike Sheila, who I believe tried very hard to go down the biological route to achieve the same outcome for similar reasons. When the child proved NOT to give them what they were seeking, it became the child's fault. It didn't do as it was told, it wasn't like the rest of the family. I can't think there were many children more wanted than I and perhaps, Sheila, but possibly with unfulfillable expectations of us. My own mother countered my adult claims that I'd never felt loved by her by telling me that I'd never shown her any love when I was little!!!! How did she think I knew how to. I feel it makes little difference to that style of mothering whether the child is biological or adopted. I think the mindset of what a child will provide for the parent, as opposed to what the parent can provide for the child, doesn't bode well for happy relationships.
-
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 ;D ;D ;D
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 :o I think the pair of them need taking in hand and a few lessons taught ;) ;) ;) ;D ;D ;D
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 ;) ;) ;) ;D ;D ;D
And were not all unbalanced either,,,NN.
-
Maggie, for "complex", I'm inclined to think MESSY!!! My own mother, and possibly, June, had never received unconditional love, which makes it more likely that she/they believed that a child would be the answer to all their problems. Unwilling/unable to have one biologically, they adopted-unlike Sheila, who I believe tried very hard to go down the biological route to achieve the same outcome for similar reasons. When the child proved NOT to give them what they were seeking, it became the child's fault. It didn't do as it was told, it wasn't like the rest of the family. I can't think there were many children more wanted than I and perhaps, Sheila, but possibly with unfulfillable expectations of us. My own mother countered my adult claims that I'd never felt loved by her by telling me that I'd never shown her any love when I was little!!!! How did she think I knew how to. I feel it makes little difference to that style of mothering whether the child is biological or adopted. I think the mindset of what a child will provide for the parent, as opposed to what the parent can provide for the child, doesn't bode well for happy relationships.
Very true april, again unconditional love is the key. If the mother is so needy they need the child to fill their longing for love that is very different from a woman who longs to pass on her unconditional love to a child. As you and lookout state that can happen in any family, adopted child or natural child. There are many damaged people who are products of damaged adults, adopted or natural. This is a tragedy which can be passed from generation to generation unless the circle is broken. It's true some people have the ability to break the circle instinctively but many don't.
-
Hi Maggie
it is funny but in this part of the world they refer to a young lad as a loon or that wee loony. I get called a lunatic daily must be an affection word in Scotland for a nice young lady ;D ;D ;D ;) ;)
-
Hi Maggie
it is funny but in this part of the world they refer to a young lad as a loon or that wee loony. I get called a lunatic daily must be an affection word in Scotland for a nice young lady ;D ;D ;D ;) ;)
Susan, if a male is a loony and a female is a loona, a loonatic must be a loona who makes a study of loonys ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hello april
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;) ;)
-
Hello april
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;) ;)
HI, Susan ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :-*
-
Hi Maggie
it is funny but in this part of the world they refer to a young lad as a loon or that wee loony. I get called a lunatic daily must be an affection word in Scotland for a nice young lady ;D ;D ;D ;) ;)
Phew! Am I glad you cleared that up. I wondered why everyone down here in the south are always saying that Scotland is full of loonies. ::) ;D
-
Hi Lugg and the females are referred to as Dames and other things of course. Can you imagine the mixture of the local talk and me with the Yorkshire talk. :'(
-
Phew! Am I glad you cleared that up. I wondered why everyone down here in the south are always saying that Scotland is full of loonies. ::) ;D
Lugg, not all of us Southerners are Scottishists :) :) :)
-
Hello april
thought you may like to know that in the area where I live we have nearly as many Southerners as local people (all quite well heeled I may add) ;D ;D ;D and one from Yorkshire who can't spell ;D
-
Don't be so quick to judge. What you count ancient may be the right way to go, what with the increase of sexual diseases? Not only that, but all you need to do is go back in history to see that we have been down this road before. I'm afraid that whilst Christians have remained constant in their moral beliefs it is the world which rejects those morals that have been so changeable. Just go back to the Roman era and then judge those of today and you will soon discover who are the ancient ones.
Lugg what did I TELL you about lectures and sermons ::) Please spare me your bible bashing and any other sort of bashing you do ::) How you have the audacity for such a lecture given the recent child sex abuse scandals/*homosexual revelatons in church I've no idea :-\ (*I've no problems whatsoever with homosexuals just find the likes of Cardinal Keith O'Brien a wee bit hypocritical). Check the nuns out too Lugg:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01pvb7c
Sadistic/psychopaths.
I don't need a bearded man in the sky to think intellectually about what's right and wrong. You seem to see Christians as morally superior? I don't.
The Pope's condemnations:
The use of contraception particularly relevant in Africa with the spread of AIDS.
Stem cell research preventing medical breakthroughs and pioneering new treatments.
Right to die with dignity.
Homosexuality.
Equality for women.
The pope is imo the Devil incarnate.
I'm sure you think I need taking in hand and some discipline meted out...in your dreams Lugg :P
Lugg I loves ya really ;)
-
Hello april
thought you may like to know that in the area where I live we have nearly as many Southerners as local people (all quite well heeled I may add) ;D ;D ;D and one from Yorkshire who can't spell ;D
Susan dear, there's always one who lets the side down, isn't there. Bet you're glad it's not you :) :)
-
april you know me too well ;D ;D ;D
-
Phew! Am I glad you cleared that up. I wondered why everyone down here in the south are always saying that Scotland is full of loonies. ::) ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D
-
And were not all unbalanced either,,,NN.
Who? You, me, Sheila, Maggie? My post makes ref to all of us.
-
Maggie/Lugg When Scotland become a Free Nation Again no passports for you two ;) you will never get chance to Haste Ye Back my Bonnie Laddie and Lassie ;D ;D ;D ;D or loon and dame. ;D
-
Maggie/Lugg When Scotland become a Free Nation Again no passports for you two ;) you will never get chance to Haste Ye Back my Bonnie Laddie and Lassie ;D ;D ;D ;D or loon and dame. ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Who? You, me, Sheila, Maggie? My post makes ref to all of us.
To the author of the post.Who else.?
-
To the author of the post.Who else.?
Oh that's fine if its me. But aren't you stating the bloody obvious? Do you really think others posters need telling? Lol...I had you down as a bit smarter than that despite being elderly and a scouser!!! ;D ;D ;D
-
How old are you lookout?
-
How old are you lookout?
I'm as old as my tongue,,but younger than my teeth.
-
How old are you lookout?
This may give you some idea...at least she's honest ;D ;D ;D
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3665.msg144822.html#msg144822
-
This may give you some idea...at least she's honest ;D ;D ;D
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3665.msg144822.html#msg144822
Oh ok :D
-
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.?
Are you implying that Sheila was stupid now?
-
Can we stick to debating please and try not to get personal.....Thank you!
-
Sheila's behaviour was normal for a girl/woman of her age. June also did insist that Sheila terminate a pregnancy. She also miscarried.
She eventually fell on with the twins, who she adored. I dont believe for a moment that she would have killed them or Nevile. If she had, she would have did it at Maida vale, not WHF. Just my opinion.
-
Sheila's behaviour was normal for a girl/woman of her age. June also did insist that Sheila terminate a pregnancy. She also miscarried.
She eventually fell on with the twins, who she adored. I dont believe for a moment that she would have killed them or Nevile. If she had, she would have did it at Maida vale, not WHF. Just my opinion.
Hi Andrea
I agree Sheila loved the twins, she may have also still been in love with Colin. But, whether we like to hear it or not mothers do kill their loved ones, for one reason or an another. It is the same in wild life too.
Sadly Sheila did not have the children with her at Maida Vale so the likelihood of Sheila committing any crime there is not an option. I'm not sure if you have read Colin's book, but throughout his book he refers to the relationship of Sheila and her mother. I also get the gist that he disliked June because she had appeared to have controlled Sheila in such a way, that it made it impossible for Sheila to be happy in her company.....
I honestly don't know who killed that family that night, but I almost certain Jeremy didn't do it. I look at Sheila and sometimes I think it is not possible for a sweet young girl like that could have killed her family....but, then I look at other mothers who have done the same thing and asked the same question....
-
Sheila's behaviour was normal for a girl/woman of her age. June also did insist that Sheila terminate a pregnancy. She also miscarried.
She eventually fell on with the twins, who she adored. I dont believe for a moment that she would have killed them or Nevile. If she had, she would have did it at Maida vale, not WHF. Just my opinion.
Maybe Maida Vale didn't have the right compoments for it to happen. Maybe what happened at WHF was "The Perfect Storm." All the conditions necessary coming together at one time.
-
Hi Andrea
I agree Sheila loved the twins, she may have also still been in love with Colin. But, whether we like to hear it or not mothers do kill their loved ones, for one reason or an another. It is the same in wild life too.
Sadly Sheila did not have the children with her at Maida Vale so the likelihood of Sheila committing any crime there is not an option. I'm not sure if you have read Colin's book, but throughout his book he refers to the relationship of Sheila and her mother. I also get the gist that he disliked June because she had appeared to have controlled Sheila in such a way, that it made it impossible for Sheila to be happy in her company.....
I honestly don't know who killed that family that night, but I almost certain Jeremy didn't do it. I look at Sheila and sometimes I think it is not possible for a sweet young girl like that could have killed her family....but, then I look at other mothers who have done the same thing and asked the same question....
I fear that the human condition is so complex and also very delicately balanced that when these chemical imbalances happen within out brains, some can even be brought on by physical chemical imbalances by eating the wrong foods or not bein able to process certain foods (I've seen thin in my own daughter after her operation) things can go drastically wrong. I've even seen people who are ok during the day. But during the night when often these chemical imbalances take place they become delusional and unrecognisable. All through chemical imbalance.
-
I fear that the human condition is so complex and also very delicately balanced that when these chemical imbalances happen within out brains, some can even be brought on by physical chemical imbalances by eating the wrong foods or not bein able to process certain foods (I've seen thin in my own daughter after her operation) things can go drastically wrong. I've even seen people who are ok during the day. But during the night when often these chemical imbalances take place they become delusional and unrecognisable. All through chemical imbalance.
Hi Lugg :) I agree, its very complex and none of us on here has idea how this affects people and their families around them, unless you have witnessed it. It must be awful for families to have to cope with such a situation, my heart goes out to them. There is no quick fix to chemical imbalance, its there and that is that.
Oddly enough I have watched the documentary of Tracie Andrews tonight, with the understanding that I could relate to understanding why she did what she did.
She tried to cover up her crime by inventing a road rage situation, that was totally false. If it was not for a witness who claimed that the only car on the road was their's night she would have got away with it.
The witness was vital in the prosecutions case. The police found spatter on her jumper that could have only have been there if it was her that had killed her lover.
She tried to commit suicide a few weeks after....maybe she could not live with the guilt....Once she was found guilty she wrote her admission of the crime from her cell.
He famous words were....If can't have him, then no one else will...Now, where have I heard that before... :) :) :) :)
-
A topic i was going to observe but not enter, for myself i think too much focus is made to Sheila unstable, if she was that ill she would be in secure care, the effect on her mind then would be unbearable, we are looking in the wrong area, i think something happened that night that triggered the events, jeremy was no angel but i know he must have been aware of the outcome to even consider such acts no one is that stupid to think they would not get caught, only someone with nothing to loose could carry out such acts,case in point Anders Brevik i dont consider a madman, he carried out those shootings as a solution to the problem, he was aware of what he was doing, if jeremy bamber carried out those shootings then he is paying the ultimate price, his mind and soul have not been destroyed yet and that must mean something.
-
It is not true that schizophrenics are not more prone to violent acts. They are about 4 times more likely than the average population to commit violent acts. If you insist, I can dig out the links, I cannot be arsed right now.
In almost all instances, it was due to LACK OF MEDICATION OR MIXING IT WITH ALCHOHOL AND/OR ILLEGAL DRUGS. If a patient is properly medicated all is well, it seems.
IF Sheila did this, and I do say if, I blame it on that doctor who halved her very important medication.
-
It is not true that schizophrenics are not more prone to violent acts. They are about 4 times more likely than the average population to commit violent acts. If you insist, I can dig out the links, I cannot be arsed right now.
In almost all instances, it was due to LACK OF MEDICATION OR MIXING IT WITH ALCHOHOL AND/OR ILLEGAL DRUGS. If a patient is properly medicated all is well, it seems.
IF Sheila did this, and I do say if, I blame it on that doctor who halved her very important medication.
Hi Alias, totally agree!! I would just like to add that their behaviour is also highly unpredictable.
-
I too agree! Schizophrenia is not curable,only manageable.Ask any mental health doctor and they will tell you that Schizophrenics are fine so long as they are medicated.
-
It is not true that schizophrenics are not more prone to violent acts. They are about 4 times more likely than the average population to commit violent acts. If you insist, I can dig out the links, I cannot be arsed right now.
In almost all instances, it was due to LACK OF MEDICATION OR MIXING IT WITH ALCHOHOL AND/OR ILLEGAL DRUGS. If a patient is properly medicated all is well, it seems.
IF Sheila did this, and I do say if, I blame it on that doctor who halved her very important medication.
Alias, I absolutely agree. I've been pushing the cavelier way in which her meds were reduced since it first occured to me what was done. It was deemed SO not worth mentioning that one of the "GUILTY" side told me that they were content with how she was being cared for and the meds she was receiving!!! Would they, I wonder, have said the same had she been their family member? What was the point of her family GP writing to her specialist to request a reduction in Meds, something he agrees to, only to have a locum override /ignore his instructions and reduce them to a staggeringly dangerous level. She also seemed not to have checked that Sheila had follow up psychiatric care. She didn't. Can you imagine what would be made of this by the media if it happened today. There were certainly grounds for her family to raise these issues. Sadly, those who may have cared enough were dead and the rest chose to go down a different road.
-
One of the biggies for me in the case is the fact that Sheila met her birth mother for the first time during May 1985. This would have been some 10 to 14 weeks before the tragedy, dependent on when in May they met.
Nicky Cambell, radio and tv presenter, patron of British Association for Adoption and Fostering and author of book Blue-Eyed Son: The Story Of An Adoption, is interviewed about his adoption and reuniting with his birth parents:
http://www.videojug.com/interview/nicky-campbell-on-adoption
Nicky considers his adoption to have been very successful. Even so he still highlights issues that most if not all adoptees have to deal with. His adoptive parents already had a birth child and his adoptive mother was a psychiatric social worker. All these things indicate that the outcomes for Nicky/his adoption experience would have have been far more favourable than most 'closed' adoptions as indeed they were. No evidence of any dysfunction or mental illness either with Nicky's adoptive mother or Nicky.
In the 9th section re meeting his birth parents he states:
"You've got to protect yourself because its tough. It can be very, very tough. You're talking about raw emotional truths that you confront"
In the 11th section re advice he would give to others intending to meet their birth parents he states:
"Go into it knowing its going to be challenging." "Get advice from professionals and good counselling."
How might Sheila have coped with her fragile mind? Bearing in mind her view of her life/adoption etc relationship with June was unlikely to have been favourable? A complete contrast to Nicky's.
Again Sheila's life/adoption/relationship with her adoptive mother is a complete contrast to my own. I know how common mental illness is but I'm lucky enough never to have suffered from such an infliction. As such I feel I was perhaps better able to cope with reuniting with my birth parents than perhaps others were. Even so it was still a very, very emotionally draining experience despite the fact that the reunions were positive. Albeit I only have an ongoing relationship with my birth father.
Nicky highlights the fact that there was no counselling etc available when he reunited, which was the same for myself and no doubt Sheila. For an adoptee to obtain a copy of his/her birth certificate enabling a search and reunion a brief compulsory one-off counselling session was required as per The Children Act 1975 and the Adoption Act 1976.
When Dr Ferguson was asked what effect the reunion may have had on Sheila he said he didn't know but that the parting may have been painful. Lofl... ;D ;D ;D.
My view and I stress it is MY view is that Sheila finding out about her family eg academics, possibly happy and well adjusted, was unable to reconcile the two identities. That is the person she thought she may have been had she not have been adopted into the Bamber family and instead raised by her birth mother/family and the person she perceived she was as a result of being adopted by the Bambers. I believe her visit to WHF in August, a place she disliked visiting as a result of June according to Dr Ferguson, was the first since reuniting with her birth mother. This along with possibly other matters eg the welfare of the twins etc MAY have caused an adverse reaction resulting in the tragedy.
-
Maggie, for "complex", I'm inclined to think MESSY!!! My own mother, and possibly, June, had never received unconditional love, which makes it more likely that she/they believed that a child would be the answer to all their problems. Unwilling/unable to have one biologically, they adopted-unlike Sheila, who I believe tried very hard to go down the biological route to achieve the same outcome for similar reasons. When the child proved NOT to give them what they were seeking, it became the child's fault. It didn't do as it was told, it wasn't like the rest of the family. I can't think there were many children more wanted than I and perhaps, Sheila, but possibly with unfulfillable expectations of us. My own mother countered my adult claims that I'd never felt loved by her by telling me that I'd never shown her any love when I was little!!!! How did she think I knew how to. I feel it makes little difference to that style of mothering whether the child is biological or adopted. I think the mindset of what a child will provide for the parent, as opposed to what the parent can provide for the child, doesn't bode well for happy relationships.
Hi April
This may be true but PB had the same parents/upbriniging as June and as far as I am aware there's no evidence of any mental illness and/or difficult relationship between PB and AE.
There's also no evidence of June having any mental illness prior to adoptin Sheila.
-
Maggie, for "complex", I'm inclined to think MESSY!!! My own mother, and possibly, June, had never received unconditional love, which makes it more likely that she/they believed that a child would be the answer to all their problems. Unwilling/unable to have one biologically, they adopted-unlike Sheila, who I believe tried very hard to go down the biological route to achieve the same outcome for similar reasons. When the child proved NOT to give them what they were seeking, it became the child's fault. It didn't do as it was told, it wasn't like the rest of the family. I can't think there were many children more wanted than I and perhaps, Sheila, but possibly with unfulfillable expectations of us. My own mother countered my adult claims that I'd never felt loved by her by telling me that I'd never shown her any love when I was little!!!! How did she think I knew how to. I feel it makes little difference to that style of mothering whether the child is biological or adopted. I think the mindset of what a child will provide for the parent, as opposed to what the parent can provide for the child, doesn't bode well for happy relationships.
Hi April
Re the above in red apparently this is quite common please see attached/intimacy section which states: "Adoptive mothers indicate, for example, that even as an infact, the adoptee was "not cuddly". I think my adoptive mother said similar but I can't recall what as I never paid much attention to anything she said ;D ;D ;D
http://www.fairfamilies.org/2012/1999/99LifelongIssues.htm
-
Hi April
This may be true but PB had the same parents/upbriniging as June and as far as I am aware there's no evidence of any mental illness and/or difficult relationship between PB and AE.
There's also no evidence of June having any mental illness prior to adoptin Sheila.
Entirely true, NaNu, but maybe PB was made of sterner stuff than June and less tramelled by their mother, a tough lady, by all accounts. Speculative, I know, but might it be possible that June did suffer bouts of depression as a child? We will never know the answer. Did June believe Pam to be the favoured one? WAS Pam the favoured one? Pam is likely to have been an entirely different mother from June but she had probably been an entirely different daughter from June.
-
Maybe Maida Vale didn't have the right compoments for it to happen. Maybe what happened at WHF was "The Perfect Storm." All the conditions necessary coming together at one time.
Sheila did ask Freddie to keep an eye on her flat whilst she was at WHF as apparently there had been several break-ins in the area. On this basis it appears she did intend to return.
-
Entirely true, NaNu, but maybe PB was made of sterner stuff than June and less tramelled by their mother, a tough lady, by all accounts. Speculative, I know, but might it be possible that June did suffer bouts of depression as a child? We will never know the answer. Did June believe Pam to be the favoured one? WAS Pam the favoured one? Pam is likely to have been an entirely different mother from June but she had probably been an entirely different daughter from June.
Good morning April
We are of course speculating but based on Colin's book it appears that the June/Nevill marriage was on equal terms or if anthing June having the upper hand ie I don't see June as the 'little woman/wife' deferring to her husband/Nevill. According to the book Sheila never understood why Nevill remained with June and didn't leave. I don't have the book to hand at the moment but I think after the nude sunbathing incident when Colin and Sheila decided to leave WHF together, which was not the original plan, Sheila shouted out to Colin in front of her parents "Why does he stay with her" :-\
Could it be that June was more like her mother, Mabel Speakman, who when told of the tragedy sat bolt upright in bed and said "That'll be the Devil at work"? Perhaps Pamela was more like her father Leslie Speakman who appears to have been a kinder/softer person ie making a fuss of Jeremy and buying him bottles of fizzy pop? We will never know can only put our own interpretation on these matters :)
-
Just an afterthought perhaps that's why June was attracted to Nevill ie he remined her of her father, Leslie Speakman.
-
Morning N/N I have heard it said that women tend to pick a husband most like their Father my husband would be horrified if he heard me saying that ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Morning N/N I have heard it said that women tend to pick a husband most like their Father my husband would be horrified if he heard me saying that ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D Morning Susan well I've never had any man probs and I think that is probably a reflection on my adoptive father as a man and the relationship we had :)
-
Hi N/N first sign of madness talking to yourself ;D Quite often IMO girls have a closer relationship with their Dad and boys with their Mother irrespective of whether they are adopted or not.
-
Hi N/N first sign of madness talking to yourself ;D Quite often IMO girls have a closer relationship with their Dad and boys with their Mother irrespective of whether they are adopted or not.
I think the first sign of madness is talking to no one. ;D
-
Good morning April
We are of course speculating but based on Colin's book it appears that the June/Nevill marriage was on equal terms or if anthing June having the upper hand ie I don't see June as the 'little woman/wife' deferring to her husband/Nevill. According to the book Sheila never understood why Nevill remained with June and didn't leave. I don't have the book to hand at the moment but I think after the nude sunbathing incident when Colin and Sheila decided to leave WHF together, which was not the original plan, Sheila shouted out to Colin in front of her parents "Why does he stay with her" :-\
Could it be that June was more like her mother, Mabel Speakman, who when told of the tragedy sat bolt upright in bed and said "That'll be the Devil at work"? Perhaps Pamela was more like her father Leslie Speakman who appears to have been a kinder/softer person ie making a fuss of Jeremy and buying him bottles of fizzy pop? We will never know can only put our own interpretation on these matters :)
Just an afterthought perhaps that's why June was attracted to Nevill ie he remined her of her father, Leslie Speakman.
Well within the realms of possibility, NaNu.
-
Lugg ;D ;D ;D that is one thing that I can never be accused of ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi N/N first sign of madness talking to yourself ;D Quite often IMO girls have a closer relationship with their Dad and boys with their Mother irrespective of whether they are adopted or not.
Hi Susan how could you do this to me? You mean to say I can't blame it on adoption :'( :'( :'( ;D ;D ;D Yes I agree I see it in my own family. Also my brother was much closer to my adoptive mother than I was. I remember once rooting aound in my mum's bedroom and I found all these cards my brother had made for her. There was only one from me ;D Mind you I was hopeless at art and craft type things but even if I hadn't I doubt I would have bothered.
I had 3 boyfriends who were adopted (not all literally Lookout ::)) and they were all very fond of their mums.
-
Hi Susan how could you do this to me? You mean to say I can't blame it on adoption :'( :'( :'( ;D ;D ;D Yes I agree I see it in my own family. Also my brother was much closer to my adoptive mother than I was. I remember once rooting aound in my mum's bedroom and I found all these cards my brother had made for her. There was only one from me ;D Mind you I was hopeless at art and craft type things but even if I hadn't I doubt I would have bothered.
I had 3 boyfriends who were adopted (not all literally Lookout ::)) and they were all very fond of their mums.
Oedipus/Electra complex ;D ;D
-
Oedipus/Electra complex ;D ;D
Yes quite probably ;D ;D
I spent ages studying that in the 80's, reading and rereading, still to this day I don't know what to make of it :-\ Everything else I could get but I found most aspects of Freud difficult. Along with the stats of course. You once posted that you thought he might have been dominated by his mother...sounds a more rational explanation ;D ;D
-
Hello april have we two blue maggie's on the forum or am I seeing double ;D ;D ;D
-
Yes quite probably ;D ;D
I spent ages studying that in the 80's, reading and rereading, still to this day I don't know what to make of it :-\ Everything else I could get but I found most aspects of Freud difficult. Along with the stats of course. You once posted that you thought he might have been dominated by his mother...sounds a more rational explanation ;D ;D
Well, if I may, for a moment, be allowed free rein, I think it possible that "The Big Daddy" was a chauvinistic misogynist who was terrified of women. He seemed to think that world problems began and ended in female genitals, hysteria rooted in the womb and nymphomania, a sectionable disease, totally unsperm related, the reason for illegitimate birth. I can only imagine he came to this conclusion because of female domination. HOWEVER, despite mocking some of his beliefs, I truly feel we have much to thank him for. His theories became the wall off which everything else could be bounced. When he moved his thinking from genitals to brain he did pioneered wonderful work with post traumatic stress disorder. His methods may seem archaic now, but they probably prevented many being being branded as cowards.
-
Hello april have we two blue maggie's on the forum or am I seeing double ;D ;D ;D
Hi Susie
I am a split topic, it seems, maybe it's all the babysitting........I'm slowly disintegrating ;D ;D
-
Hello april have we two blue maggie's on the forum or am I seeing double ;D ;D ;D
Susan dear, please explain :D
-
Well, if I may, for a moment, be allowed free rein, I think it possible that "The Big Daddy" was a chauvinistic misogynist who was terrified of women. He seemed to think that world problems began and ended in female genitals, hysteria rooted in the womb and nymphomania, a sectionable disease, totally unsperm related, the reason for illegitimate birth. I can only imagine he came to this conclusion because of female domination. HOWEVER, despite mocking some of his beliefs, I truly feel we have much to thank him for. His theories became the wall off which everything else could be bounced. When he moved his thinking from genitals to brain he did pioneered wonderful work with post traumatic stress disorder. His methods may seem archaic now, but they probably prevented many being being branded as cowards.
That must have saved many lives, April. Execution of PTS sufferers in the I WW was shameful.
-
Susan dear, please explain :D
April, I logged off and then on, there is only one of me now which is probably more than enough for some ;D
-
Susan/Maggie, I'm so glad you got it sorted. Clever girls :)
-
april my dear I'm not clever all I did was go outside and bring in the washing then the two blue Maggie's had become one ;D ;D ;D
-
april my dear I'm not clever all I did was go outside and bring in the washing then the two blue Maggie's had become one ;D ;D ;D
Blue Magpie's....Is there something in the water up there.. ;) ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Blue Magpie's....Is there something in the water up there.. ;) ;D ;D ;D ;D
Yes Patti, with any luck, single malt ;D ;D ;D
-
Yes Patti, with any luck, single malt ;D ;D ;D
I'll have a double of that April.... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hello Steve_uk. Re a reply to your post transferred from another thread:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3990.msg165045.html#msg165045
It is generally accepted that IQ is largely inherited. Sheila's birth maternal grandfather was professor emeritus of theology @ McGill uni, Montreal. Her birth maternal uncle read English and Classics @ Oxford and is the founder of England's longest standing independent poetry publisher. Her birth father was a curate and met her birth mother whilst they were students. Pretty impressive I would say :).
Sheila, very sadly, was adopted by a TOTALLY unsuitable adoptive mother who became depressed due to her decision to adopt Sheila. Sheila had multiple primary caregivers during the crucial bonding period and suffered an attachment disorder.
http://www.attachmentexperts.com/whatisattachment.html
As you will see one feature of an attachment disorder is behavioural and academic problems at school.
There is also much evidence to suggest that adoptees are at risk of 'hypervigilance' which would make learning more difficult. So how would one fare with the added burden of the above?
http://nancyverrier.com/miscelleneous-information/
Kent County Council have put together an info pack for schools/teachers re this:
http://www.clusterweb.org.uk/UserFiles/CW/File/Policy/Childrens_Social_Services/Adoption_C_F/Practice_Tools_and_Checklists/Adoption_Information_for_Teachers_1207.pdf
Another feature of an attachment disorder, as stated above, is low self-esteem and this probably accounts for Sheila's inability to find a job rather than any inherent laziness etc.
Claire Powell's book states:
"Aware of her predicament, Sheila's girlfriends rallied round and tried to help her out. But it was not easy as she did not have the temperament or the qualifications which would have made her a potentially good employee. 'One of her boyfriends and I tried to get her this receptionist job with British Telecom, but it didn't work out,' said Kirstie. 'She just couldn't make it through that kind of interview."
Many will blame it on Sheila's *mental illness as it suits their narrative. I beg to difffer and go for attachment disorder and adoption psychology.
*Mental illness diagnosed by Dr Ferguson who I believe was incompetent and conflicted in his treatment of Sheila.
Just sayin like ;)
-
yes you're right April. There were connections with D'Arcy and the church. Possibly why she went to June and Neville? Wonder if Sheila was always naturally attracted to religion which became compounded by June's later obsession and her own illness? Although many schizophrenics seem to see devils a d demons and other worldly stuff?
Maggie from what I've read all this misguided religion between June and SC appears to have turned really toxic when June 'caught' SC having sex in a ditch with a farm labourer when she was 17 yoa which resulted in the "Devil's child" accusation. I wonder if SC was aware of all these birth connections to the church at this stage? Colin's book implies that SC's contact with her birth mother came about in the last months of her life via letters initially and then the meeting in May '85. Yet Wilkes' book seems to imply that the letters had gone on over a much longer period - I think his source for this was Barbara Brabick (not sure if I've got the surname right) who was Sheila's soical worker who helped her with the tracing and I believe sorted out the foster day-care for the twins. The reason I'm interested in this is trying to work out at what point SC might have found out about all these connections to the church and how this may have played out with her mental state. :-\
-
Yes I understand your thinking and I am interested too. I would imagine Sheila's natural mother would have told Sheila about her family very early on in their contact as that is the easy part but I havent any idea of when their initial contact happened, always thought it was shortly before her death but that may be wrong as you say. There's a possibility she was even told about her background by her social worker before contact. I don't know how the whole thing is dealt with.
-
Yes I understand your thinking and I am interested too. I would imagine Sheila's natural mother would have told Sheila about her family very early on in their contact as that is the easy part but I havent any idea of when their initial contact happened, always thought it was shortly before her death but that may be wrong as you say. There's a possibility she was even told about her background by her social worker before contact. I don't know how the whole thing is dealt with.
-
Yes I understand your thinking and I am interested too. I would imagine Sheila's natural mother would have told Sheila about her family very early on in their contact as that is the easy part but I havent any idea of when their initial contact happened, always thought it was shortly before her death but that may be wrong as you say. There's a possibility she was even told about her background by her social worker before contact. I don't know how the whole thing is dealt with.
Don't know when the letter contact started but the first face-to-face meeting was def May '85.
As I've previously stated the only thing I new about my background until I went to the adoption agency at 22 yoa was that I was born in Cambridge. I'm not sure if my adoptive mother volunteered this info or whether it was required for a passport. Think it may have been the latter. I was amazed at all the info in my adoption file about backgrounds of parents, grandparents and aunts etc, etc. But I got the feeling that there were no hard and fast rules and it was all down to the birth mother about how forthcoming she was. So yes SC may have known a lot from her file before she had any letter or personal contact or on the other hand not much at all :-\ Plus my adoptive mother always maintained the only thing she knew was that I was born in Cambridge and yet the adoption agency said no she would have had all the other info :-\ How forthcoming was June? I understand JB's birth parents kept in touch for the first 4 years of his life with June and NB via the adoption agency I assume :-\ They then shared this info with JB later on but I understand this info wasn't available for SC :-\
-
I always felt it was quite important for wellbeing that adopted kids needed to know as much about where they came from as possible some children seem to need the info more than others. Wonder if Sheila had known more about her roots if it would have helped? Jeremy seemed to take his adoption in his stride....who knows if that was because of his laid back personality or because he was more aware of who he was? I do believe By the time Sheila met her birth mum she was far too ill to be able to cope with this without professional support, particulary because of her unstable relationship with June.
-
Hello Maggie
I think Jeremy was so content with his adoptive parents who he considered his parents he was not interersted in his birth parents at all and proves he was at peace with his situation now I think Sheila was not at peace with herself or June :( just my take on things I have no hard evidence to prove this.
-
Hello Maggie
I think Jeremy was so content with his adoptive parents who he considered his parents he was not interersted in his birth parents at all and proves he was at peace with his situation now I think Sheila was not at peace with herself or June :( just my take on things I have no hard evidence to prove this.
I know what youre saying susie but I do believe however content an adoptive child may be and all are different, its still better if they know where they come from as it helps them understand their identity etc.
-
Hello Maggie whilst I know nothing about adoption I know the saying it is a wise child that knows its own Father. Many children are brought up with a man who they believe to be their Father as indeed the Father believes he is the Father the Mother may know or not know who the child's Father is. So in some cases some children think they know where they came from but only half know as their rellies on their Father's side are not really related at all. Hope I am making sense as quite often I don't. It is my opinion that some children are curious to know why they were given up for adoption others have no desire to know but I don't think it has anything to do with knowing who they are. You can tell me I am talking rubbish and I will still love you and worship you ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D What I am trying to say it is all in the mind ;D
-
Hello Maggie whilst I know nothing about adoption I know the saying it is a wise child that knows its own Father. Many children are brought up with a man who they believe to be their Father as indeed the Father believes he is the Father the Mother may know or not know who the child's Father is. So in some cases some children think they know where they came from but only half know as their rellies on their Father's side are not really related at all. Hope I am making sense as quite often I don't. It is my opinion that some children are curious to know why they were given up for adoption others have no desire to know but I don't think it has anything to do with knowing who they are. You can tell me I am talking rubbish and I will still love you and worship you ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D What I am trying to say it is all in the mind ;D
Well it is all in the mind that's true but I do think all people are interested in where they come from even if they don't bother to meet their natural families and meeting them can be a huge stress. However, in the end it's better to know you can if you want to than to live with lies and secrets imo.
My chldren enjoyed meeting people who looked and behaved in the same way as they did. Obviously, my kids don't look like me and I don't look anything like my Mum and Dad did or my sister but her daughter looks quite like me and I am surprised how much I like that although she may prefer she didn't ;D ;D .
-
Hello Maggie whilst I know nothing about adoption I know the saying it is a wise child that knows its own Father. Many children are brought up with a man who they believe to be their Father as indeed the Father believes he is the Father the Mother may know or not know who the child's Father is. So in some cases some children think they know where they came from but only half know as their rellies on their Father's side are not really related at all. Hope I am making sense as quite often I don't. It is my opinion that some children are curious to know why they were given up for adoption others have no desire to know but I don't think it has anything to do with knowing who they are. You can tell me I am talking rubbish and I will still love you and worship you ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D What I am trying to say it is all in the mind ;D
So are you saying Susan that it is the 'telling' that is a problem ie if an adopted child was not told and this could be kept a secret then they would be none the wiser? Perhaps I can agree to some degree but I do think it's a little more complex than that as the adoptive parents would know and I think this plays out as any 'differences' good or bad can be attributed to alien genes/birth family. Plus if the birth parents don't have a birth child they may subconsciously or consciously compare the adopted child with a fantasy birth child. All these potential complex interactions etc are not present in a birth family so surely the outcome must be different? :-\
I have a male friend who was adopted as a very small child and didn't learn of his adoption until he was in his 30's/40's, may have been when his adoptive parents died, but he said he had always felt different but didn't know why.
I have often wondered if I didn't know if I would suspect anything or not :-\ :-\ :-\ And yet I see so many physical and mental similarities with my birth family that I think there must be something quite profound about growing up without genetic markers which perhaps we are currently unaware of :-\ Your example above is based on the child having 50% genetic markers not 0% :-\
It seems to me that the more science moves on the thinking is more and more towards genetics winning out over nurture :-\
-
So are you saying Susan that it is the 'telling' that is a problem ie if an adopted child was not told and this could be kept a secret then they would be none the wiser? Perhaps I can agree to some degree but I do think it's a little more complex than that as the adoptive parents would know and I think this plays out as any 'differences' good or bad can be attributed to alien genes/birth family. Plus if the birth parents don't have a birth child they may subconsciously or consciously compare the adopted child with a fantasy birth child. All these potential complex interactions etc are not present in a birth family so surely the outcome must be different? :-\
I have a male friend who was adopted as a very small child and didn't learn of his adoption until he was in his 30's/40's, may have been when his adoptive parents died, but he said he had always felt different but didn't know why.
I have often wondered if I didn't know if I would suspect anything or not :-\ :-\ :-\ And yet I see so many physical and mental similarities with my birth family that I think there must be something quite profound about growing up without genetic markers which perhaps we are currently unaware of :-\ Your example above is based on the child having 50% genetic markers not 0% :-\
It seems to me that the more science moves on the thinking is more and more towards genetics winning out over nurture :-\
Hi NN
I have no doubt at all that genetics ie nature is far more powerfull than nurture. We all benefit from good nurturing as children but while that can bring out the very best in a child or indeed abusive nurturing the very worst the basic genetic character ie inherited genes have to be our default.
My children speak very much as I do and each other and have many learned characteristics of mine but when they are with their birth families they fit so well with them it's unmistakeable and it's lovely to see. 8) 8) 8)
-
I always felt it was quite important for wellbeing that adopted kids needed to know as much about where they came from as possible some children seem to need the info more than others. Wonder if Sheila had known more about her roots if it would have helped? Jeremy seemed to take his adoption in his stride....who knows if that was because of his laid back personality or because he was more aware of who he was? I do believe By the time Sheila met her birth mum she was far too ill to be able to cope with this without professional support, particulary because of her unstable relationship with June.
I agree with all the above Maggie.
My adopted brother must be the most laid back person in the world and he showed no interest at all in knowing until he had some genetic problem with his knuckles in his early 40's. (He didn't know anything about his background either) I on the other hand, when I hit my early 20's, really wanted/needed to know but then I'm very curious by nature as you know ;) Think it depends on the person's character and to some extent the relationship with the adoptive parents and how well they identify with the adoptive family overall. Think in SC's case she had a very toxic/dysfunctional relationship with June and I don't think she identified with her adoptive family at all. As I've said before the Bambers/Boutflours and Eatons appear to be practical farming types and if you look at SC's genetic family, academics and intellectuals, they are completely mismatched. I wouldn't have said that I was mismatched with my adoptive family but I was stunned by similarities with my birth family particularly paternal. I don't believe this is all coincidence or wishful thinking on my part I think it must be down to genetics but then would I think this if they were undesirables? ;D :-\ ;D :-\
-
Hi N/N/Maggie I am not saying adopted children should not be told about their adoption I am saying it is every individual's right to decide whether or not to trace their birth parents. Jeremy did not appear interested and I myself feel this would not have been detrimental to the way he lived his life and his thoughts on life. IMO we all become what we are to a certain extent from the genes we inherit and the way we are brought up hence give me the child and I will give you the man. My knowledge on adoption is limited to say the least it is just my take on it and I could be entirely wrong. :'(
-
Hello Maggie what if the hospital where I was born gave my parents the wrong baby and I am not their birth child it does happen. Maybe it would be a relief to them ;D
-
I agree with all the above Maggie.
My adopted brother must be the most laid back person in the world and he showed no interest at all in knowing until he had some genetic problem with his knuckles in his early 40's. (He didn't know anything about his background either) I on the other hand, when I hit my early 20's, really wanted/needed to know but then I'm very curious by nature as you know ;) Think it depends on the person's character and to some extent the relationship with the adoptive parents and how well they identify with the adoptive family overall. Think in SC's case she had a very toxic/dysfunctional relationship with June and I don't think she identified with her adoptive family at all. As I've said before the Bambers/Boutflours and Eatons appear to be practical farming types and if you look at SC's genetic family, academics and intellectuals, they are completely mismatched. I wouldn't have said that I was mismatched with my adoptive family but I was stunned by similarities with my birth family particularly paternal. I don't believe this is all coincidence or wishful thinking on my part I think it must be down to genetics but then would I think this if they were undesirables? ;D :-\ ;D :-\
Yes and my children came from a different culture and very different status but they are still very, very like their mothers and siblings...pretty amazing really . ;D ;D
-
Hello Maggie what if the hospital where I was born gave my parents the wrong baby and I am not their birth child it does happen. Maybe it would be a relief to them ;D
Hi Susie, sorry just been returning my princess. ;D ;D
I agree with you that no one should be forced to meet their natural parents. I suppose my children's case was more extreme for particular reasons but I did encourage them to find their roots. One always wanted to and one wasn't interested but still went looking so I suppose it's just really important that adoptees are given the facts and allowed to make up thier own minds.
-
Hi NN
I have no doubt at all that genetics ie nature is far more powerfull than nurture. We all benefit from good nurturing as children but while that can bring out the very best in a child or indeed abusive nurturing the very worst the basic genetic character ie inherited genes have to be our default.
My children speak very much as I do and each other and have many learned characteristics of mine but when they are with their birth families they fit so well with them it's unmistakeable and it's lovely to see. 8) 8) 8)
Its good for you and your children and their birth families that you can all meet up and no one has to 'own' anyone Maggie. Neither myself or my brother would dream of discussing our birth families with our adoptive parents particularly our adoptive mother. The thought of it fills me with horror. I can't imagine what her reaction would be, drama and guilt I imagine. Too much to contemplate. But then again you were always up front with your children whereas the only conversation I've ever had was the one when I was told at about 5 yoa :o I do have some sympathy with adoptive parents though as back then reunions were not a possibility and all that then changed with the law in 1975.
-
Maggie I totally agree children should be given choices in matters as important as adoption think my roots are somewhere down Lime Street ;D think I'll leave um there ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
My own view is that all adopted children should know about their backgrounds then they have the choice about whether they follow up or not on the received knowledge. It has been my experience that girls have a greater interest in their routes than do boys. NaNu, who is so good at turning up stats can probably give a more definitive view on that, than I.
-
Hey April and Maggie
Here's a link about gender differences/reasons etc why adoptees search out their birth famililes.
-
Hey April and Maggie
Here's a link about gender differences/reasons etc why adoptees search out their birth famililes.
Had a quick look NN but will look properly tomorrow. It looks really interesting, particularly about the identity. Am hoping my daughter's latest visit will help the two parts to merge and mature. Surely any mother should just want their children to be happy and secure within themselves.
-
Andrew Pierce. https://youtu.be/MF5HCNrl3LM