The most rough loss is that of a child?
My Grief and Loss counseling professor said, "the most painful loss is that of a child."
Do you agree or disagree?
And, if so...why isn't this talked about beside women who are relinquishing their children?
Grieving a loss is a very personal thing. No two people will grieve alike way. So why all the comparisons. Who says their stomach-ache isn't recognised? (first mothers.) Most pain people go through isn't something specifically a dinner time conversation topic. But ask anyone what they think of how a woman must feel who's given up a baby for adoption and uncommonly will you someone say something like. "indifference, or who cares."
For years not a soul talked about women at the pain the feel who had lost babies. Whether through adoption, still births or miscarriages. It was a taboo subject to be ignored. (My grandmother spoke of her loss of a newborn newborn hours old for the first time 60yrs after the event. I was the first person ever to ask her around her son. She still grieved for him, and hated it that she was told never to talk roughly it.) She was told to get over it. Deal with it silently, get hold of on with raising other children, she'll have more etc.
So can we respect adjectives women who have had loss relating to children in their vivacity, and not demean it simply because its not spoken about all the time and not play these kind of mind games.
That's my answer, hold from it what you wish. Source(s): Me-life and loss.
I can't even imagine what kind of distress that would be. I don't think I could continue to function after such a loss.
The pain is not brought into the wishy-washy for first mothers before the adoption because it would not be conducive for the agency to have the mother back out after audible range how painful that part of her life will become.
I agree that the stomach-ache should not be negated no matter what the circumstance of the surrender were. But good luck convincing the nonspecific public who sees first mothers as people who bring it upon themselves.
I do agree that the most rough loss is that of a child. I lost both parents and a baby in an 18 month period and while you expect to soon loose your parents (which is horrible) you don't expect to loose your child.
That being said, I don't agree that birth mothers are not told that it will hurt to relinquish 100% of the time. I am sure that sometimes and somewhere greed plays a part and people are trying to speak them into it but any reputable agency is not like that. I have worked with and visit several agencies and I have seen first hand the counseling that they receive.
I know my post will win a lot of thumbs down b/c it seems that so many of you own so much hate and anger and you are so narrow minded that you cannot see past that and know that adoption can be a dazzling experience for all involved. I feel sorry for the ones like that. Go ahead and bash me...it does not effect me. All this effects you so much more.
I read somewhere that the "most sensitive loss" is that of the spouse. That the statistics for depression, suicidal ideation, etc are higher after a spouse dies than even after a child dies.
I'm not sure I agree or disagree with that. I don't think there's any psychologist or grief and loss professor that can quantitatively prove what is THE most rough loss for EVERYONE.
People are different.
I do not know, and I hope I never have to know. I own had 2 friends who have lost children, one child was 18, the other be 6. They were never the same. I sometimes think the solely reason they survived was because they had other children. I also enjoy 2 friends who have had stillborn babies.
All of them went through grief counseling, and be encouraged to speak about their losses, and that by talking going on for them, it would help them. One friend still signs her deceased son's name on their home Christmas cards.
The first Moms I have talked with (including my own) be not told of the all consuming grief they would have. Agencies would not dare tell a mother how she would be artificial by relinquishing a child, because adoptions as we know it would cease.
First Moms were and are still held up on a dais before giving birth, and are touted as being heroes, unselfish and brave. But once the ink is dry, they are expected to shut their mouths. If they do try to voice their grief, they are usually met near, "It was your decision, you should have used birth control, (or even worse)...it be for the best". It doesnt matter if it was her choice to surrender, or if there be massive coercion. they have still lost their child.
Many first Mothers who have also had abortions enjoy said that the emotional (and physical) pain was smaller quantity with termination versus relinquishing, because it was over in an instant. Not a lifetime of not knowing..
I dont have an idea that we will ever see the adoption industry handing out pamphlets about how a first Mother will grieve for her child, nor will they provide modest and NON-biased counseling before and after giving birth. Its a billion dollar industry. The truth would bankrupt them. Source(s): reality
The most painful loss is the one which is most painful for you.
Yes, your backache should be acknowledged, but the "my pain is worse than your pain" game is just obnoxious. You also shouldn't be trying to make people feel guilty if they _don't_ discern the same pain you do. It's not a requirement. We all grieve differently and for different things. Telling someone who have decided of their own free will to give up their child for adoption (and yes, some people do, even if some don't) and who _isn't_ attitude pain that they should be in dreadful pain is a horrible article to do.
Maybe it isn't acknowledged because women feel unable to say they have a feeling it - and that is wrong. But it's also wrong to tell them they should feel it.
I agree.
However, as for why it isn't talk about with women who are relinquishing their children, one could 'assume' that the woman knows how she is response already... and ofcourse, the fact that unless someone's gone through it, they can't explain it properly.
I agree beside that statement 100%. I think it SHOULD be discussed in detail with mothers who are considering relinquishment. It isn't discussed because they agencies lone care about getting the mother to sign away her rights ASAP.
It's an industry and no one care about the grief of the mother and her child.
i agree with her. a domestic friend lost their son and its the hardest thing they've gone through, they said no parent should experience it
I lost a child in an accident, and I can tell you it is the worst piece that can happen. Even years later, it still haunt every aspect of our enthusiasm. Unlike a 'relinquished' child, our child is GONE. They aren't living somewhere else... there is no chance they will come back... nearby was no decision made... THEY ARE GONE.
I can understand how a biological mother may regret the verdict to relinquish or be angry that the courts took away her rights, but IT IS NOT the same as having a child die.
NEVER, NEVER EQUATE THE TWO.
Answers: AGREE
I hear that getting our tonsils out as an adult is horrid. Because adult have a harder time than children, my doctor explained the features of pain I will experience. For me, I still HAVE to get it done, but I will be better prepared and will arrange support.
I think that some agencies want to diminish the twinge the mother expects to have and are less than supportive if she has a revision of heart. I think the even the change of heart come with vibrations of guilt.
My opinion is tell them what others have feel. If the adoption is truly NEEDED and a last option, her grief won't be a deciding factor, but she may own a better chance at seeking support. If she does feel a huge amount of grief, she need to be told that those vibrations are typical and to not hold it in.
If knowing how much grief she may be in makes her feel twice about placing, then adoption was probably not the best likelihood for her anyway.
I think the same goes, when explaining the grief the CHILD may be aware of. For those adoptions that are unneeded it could make a difference, but for those that were bound to happen or the mother is determined to place, the change of the "Primal Wound" may not be enough for her to decide to parent and within some cases she may not have the right to parent.
I agree, I've had a miscarriage and I know it..
Yes, I agree.
I think the phrase is more of an unintentional loss or death though, not a mother freely and freely relinquishing her rights to a child. That being said, in many situations, it IS discussed. Before a woman give her child up for adoption, has an abortion or any other willing act of giving up a child, they are repeatedly asked and even counseled to product sure they understand what they are doing. At least, in the little experience I own with the topic, that's how it is.
*In my personal experience, those women DO have the opportunity to grieve and are encouraged to do so. Everyone I've ever certain that gave a child up for adoption went through counseling and grief seminars. I also go with a friend to her abortion consultation and she was counseled both before and after her finding. She attended 2 weeks of counseling after the procedure as well. They offer it even longer where I lived, but she chose not to attend. Source(s): Personal evaluation
I agree, but I'd also put the loss of a spouse/significant other on that same level.
In a way though for me I think it would be most tender to loose a child because a child has just barely begin to live. I do know the pain of miscarriage, which I believe to be on the same level of losing a child.
However if a woman relinquishes her child, it depends on why she is relinquishing the child. Mom birth mom give me up for adoption and it was a painful decision for her.
I don't think it's false, but I focus it's overly simplistic. I don't think it's wrong in that I don't believe there's something else that's always more bloody, but I think how painful something is depends on a lot of factor: personality, support system, prior experiences, state of mental health at the time, etc. There is no "always worst" when it comes to subjective personal emotion and reactions.
I think the focus on what causes the MOST stomach-ache is misguided, because ultimately, it doesn't matter-- pain is bad. Whether losing a child is the most painful, or simply painful, is semantics-- it's pain. THAT is what should be conveyed to women considering relinquishment. That it's horribly, crushingly painful. Whether it's more or smaller amount painful than, say, losing a mother is really just an researcher discussion. Any unnecessary loss should be prevented.
I don't think ranking pain is beneficial, because it creates nothing but a "My time is worse than your life" contest that no one ever wins. I think trying to prevent ANY unnecessary niggle is more productive.
Yes I agree I have kids and loseing them would be REALLY hard for me. If a woman relinguishes her child later she is not a true mother.
I agree. I am a first mother that has lived it. If I had be informed of the pain I would suffer forever, I never would've surrendered my child. Of course, that is why agencies don't give the veracity to young unmarried mothers, like I was. They would not own a baby selling business anymore. It is not about humanity with adoption agencies. It is in the region of making profits.
Related Questions:
Does any one hold any Huskies or German Shepherds for sale/adoption?
Since relinquishment of newborn babies are low...?
Not to nouns sick or demented.Have adoptees ever wondered if they might shutting up dating a relative?
Do you agree or disagree?
And, if so...why isn't this talked about beside women who are relinquishing their children?
Grieving a loss is a very personal thing. No two people will grieve alike way. So why all the comparisons. Who says their stomach-ache isn't recognised? (first mothers.) Most pain people go through isn't something specifically a dinner time conversation topic. But ask anyone what they think of how a woman must feel who's given up a baby for adoption and uncommonly will you someone say something like. "indifference, or who cares."
For years not a soul talked about women at the pain the feel who had lost babies. Whether through adoption, still births or miscarriages. It was a taboo subject to be ignored. (My grandmother spoke of her loss of a newborn newborn hours old for the first time 60yrs after the event. I was the first person ever to ask her around her son. She still grieved for him, and hated it that she was told never to talk roughly it.) She was told to get over it. Deal with it silently, get hold of on with raising other children, she'll have more etc.
So can we respect adjectives women who have had loss relating to children in their vivacity, and not demean it simply because its not spoken about all the time and not play these kind of mind games.
That's my answer, hold from it what you wish. Source(s): Me-life and loss.
I can't even imagine what kind of distress that would be. I don't think I could continue to function after such a loss.
The pain is not brought into the wishy-washy for first mothers before the adoption because it would not be conducive for the agency to have the mother back out after audible range how painful that part of her life will become.
I agree that the stomach-ache should not be negated no matter what the circumstance of the surrender were. But good luck convincing the nonspecific public who sees first mothers as people who bring it upon themselves.
I do agree that the most rough loss is that of a child. I lost both parents and a baby in an 18 month period and while you expect to soon loose your parents (which is horrible) you don't expect to loose your child.
That being said, I don't agree that birth mothers are not told that it will hurt to relinquish 100% of the time. I am sure that sometimes and somewhere greed plays a part and people are trying to speak them into it but any reputable agency is not like that. I have worked with and visit several agencies and I have seen first hand the counseling that they receive.
I know my post will win a lot of thumbs down b/c it seems that so many of you own so much hate and anger and you are so narrow minded that you cannot see past that and know that adoption can be a dazzling experience for all involved. I feel sorry for the ones like that. Go ahead and bash me...it does not effect me. All this effects you so much more.
I read somewhere that the "most sensitive loss" is that of the spouse. That the statistics for depression, suicidal ideation, etc are higher after a spouse dies than even after a child dies.
I'm not sure I agree or disagree with that. I don't think there's any psychologist or grief and loss professor that can quantitatively prove what is THE most rough loss for EVERYONE.
People are different.
I do not know, and I hope I never have to know. I own had 2 friends who have lost children, one child was 18, the other be 6. They were never the same. I sometimes think the solely reason they survived was because they had other children. I also enjoy 2 friends who have had stillborn babies.
All of them went through grief counseling, and be encouraged to speak about their losses, and that by talking going on for them, it would help them. One friend still signs her deceased son's name on their home Christmas cards.
The first Moms I have talked with (including my own) be not told of the all consuming grief they would have. Agencies would not dare tell a mother how she would be artificial by relinquishing a child, because adoptions as we know it would cease.
First Moms were and are still held up on a dais before giving birth, and are touted as being heroes, unselfish and brave. But once the ink is dry, they are expected to shut their mouths. If they do try to voice their grief, they are usually met near, "It was your decision, you should have used birth control, (or even worse)...it be for the best". It doesnt matter if it was her choice to surrender, or if there be massive coercion. they have still lost their child.
Many first Mothers who have also had abortions enjoy said that the emotional (and physical) pain was smaller quantity with termination versus relinquishing, because it was over in an instant. Not a lifetime of not knowing..
I dont have an idea that we will ever see the adoption industry handing out pamphlets about how a first Mother will grieve for her child, nor will they provide modest and NON-biased counseling before and after giving birth. Its a billion dollar industry. The truth would bankrupt them. Source(s): reality
The most painful loss is the one which is most painful for you.
Yes, your backache should be acknowledged, but the "my pain is worse than your pain" game is just obnoxious. You also shouldn't be trying to make people feel guilty if they _don't_ discern the same pain you do. It's not a requirement. We all grieve differently and for different things. Telling someone who have decided of their own free will to give up their child for adoption (and yes, some people do, even if some don't) and who _isn't_ attitude pain that they should be in dreadful pain is a horrible article to do.
Maybe it isn't acknowledged because women feel unable to say they have a feeling it - and that is wrong. But it's also wrong to tell them they should feel it.
I agree.
However, as for why it isn't talk about with women who are relinquishing their children, one could 'assume' that the woman knows how she is response already... and ofcourse, the fact that unless someone's gone through it, they can't explain it properly.
I agree beside that statement 100%. I think it SHOULD be discussed in detail with mothers who are considering relinquishment. It isn't discussed because they agencies lone care about getting the mother to sign away her rights ASAP.
It's an industry and no one care about the grief of the mother and her child.
i agree with her. a domestic friend lost their son and its the hardest thing they've gone through, they said no parent should experience it
I lost a child in an accident, and I can tell you it is the worst piece that can happen. Even years later, it still haunt every aspect of our enthusiasm. Unlike a 'relinquished' child, our child is GONE. They aren't living somewhere else... there is no chance they will come back... nearby was no decision made... THEY ARE GONE.
I can understand how a biological mother may regret the verdict to relinquish or be angry that the courts took away her rights, but IT IS NOT the same as having a child die.
NEVER, NEVER EQUATE THE TWO.
Answers: AGREE
I hear that getting our tonsils out as an adult is horrid. Because adult have a harder time than children, my doctor explained the features of pain I will experience. For me, I still HAVE to get it done, but I will be better prepared and will arrange support.
I think that some agencies want to diminish the twinge the mother expects to have and are less than supportive if she has a revision of heart. I think the even the change of heart come with vibrations of guilt.
My opinion is tell them what others have feel. If the adoption is truly NEEDED and a last option, her grief won't be a deciding factor, but she may own a better chance at seeking support. If she does feel a huge amount of grief, she need to be told that those vibrations are typical and to not hold it in.
If knowing how much grief she may be in makes her feel twice about placing, then adoption was probably not the best likelihood for her anyway.
I think the same goes, when explaining the grief the CHILD may be aware of. For those adoptions that are unneeded it could make a difference, but for those that were bound to happen or the mother is determined to place, the change of the "Primal Wound" may not be enough for her to decide to parent and within some cases she may not have the right to parent.
I agree, I've had a miscarriage and I know it..
Yes, I agree.
I think the phrase is more of an unintentional loss or death though, not a mother freely and freely relinquishing her rights to a child. That being said, in many situations, it IS discussed. Before a woman give her child up for adoption, has an abortion or any other willing act of giving up a child, they are repeatedly asked and even counseled to product sure they understand what they are doing. At least, in the little experience I own with the topic, that's how it is.
*In my personal experience, those women DO have the opportunity to grieve and are encouraged to do so. Everyone I've ever certain that gave a child up for adoption went through counseling and grief seminars. I also go with a friend to her abortion consultation and she was counseled both before and after her finding. She attended 2 weeks of counseling after the procedure as well. They offer it even longer where I lived, but she chose not to attend. Source(s): Personal evaluation
I agree, but I'd also put the loss of a spouse/significant other on that same level.
In a way though for me I think it would be most tender to loose a child because a child has just barely begin to live. I do know the pain of miscarriage, which I believe to be on the same level of losing a child.
However if a woman relinquishes her child, it depends on why she is relinquishing the child. Mom birth mom give me up for adoption and it was a painful decision for her.
I don't think it's false, but I focus it's overly simplistic. I don't think it's wrong in that I don't believe there's something else that's always more bloody, but I think how painful something is depends on a lot of factor: personality, support system, prior experiences, state of mental health at the time, etc. There is no "always worst" when it comes to subjective personal emotion and reactions.
I think the focus on what causes the MOST stomach-ache is misguided, because ultimately, it doesn't matter-- pain is bad. Whether losing a child is the most painful, or simply painful, is semantics-- it's pain. THAT is what should be conveyed to women considering relinquishment. That it's horribly, crushingly painful. Whether it's more or smaller amount painful than, say, losing a mother is really just an researcher discussion. Any unnecessary loss should be prevented.
I don't think ranking pain is beneficial, because it creates nothing but a "My time is worse than your life" contest that no one ever wins. I think trying to prevent ANY unnecessary niggle is more productive.
Yes I agree I have kids and loseing them would be REALLY hard for me. If a woman relinguishes her child later she is not a true mother.
I agree. I am a first mother that has lived it. If I had be informed of the pain I would suffer forever, I never would've surrendered my child. Of course, that is why agencies don't give the veracity to young unmarried mothers, like I was. They would not own a baby selling business anymore. It is not about humanity with adoption agencies. It is in the region of making profits.
Related Questions: