|
A new Product is to be
marketed - to benefit the Child?
Anonymous Birth
Regula Bott
In several welfare hospitals and institutions of different European countries, have recently started to install devices called "Baby Flaps", which are similar to incubators, where babies can be deposited 24 hours a day, without the person being recognised or seen. For some people this is the possibility of saving unwanted babies' lives, others believe it is senseless and could even be dangerous.
The idea seems irresistible
at first glance: "Baby flap" and anonymous births in the safety of hospitals
with ensuing adoption as opposed to abandonment and death at a young age.
In rare agreement it is communities and parties, doctors, politicians and
bishops, who have given in to an excessive desire for action without thinking
twice.
Both methods must be
differentiated from incognito adoption: here the adoptive child following
the original birth certificate, gets a new birth certificate, which proves
that it is the natural and legitimate child of its adoptive parents. The
original birth certificate is however kept, and in this manner it is possible
to get to the roots of family secrets. However, with anonymity there is no
trace of the previous history. Baby flaps and places for anonymous births
are springing up like mushrooms in some countries. They are being set up
in places where for many years no abandoned children have existed. The political
background: all over the world churches are hoping again for the tightening
up on legal possibilities for abortion. In particular development in the
USA is encouraging them, as politics under Bush junior are again closely
linked with religion - the life protection movement is getting fresh impetus
and the Adoption slogan as opposed to abortion is being spread again - without
any scientific support. The churches see this as an opportunity to improve
their image and on the State side there is saving through partial privatisation
of social work.
It is totally unclear whether the number of abandoned children in the last few years has really increased; but a "new" offer is leading to an enquiry. No limits have been set for abuse, whoever anonymously abandons the children or gives them away - mother, father, friend, grandparents, pimps - is also of no interest because a "new product" must be pushed through. According to a supplier: "one brand needs about two years to establish itself on the market", hence the reason for the sticker on dustbins "Please do not fill with fresh babies..
Everything for the good
of the child?
No person that abandons
a child via baby flaps or anonymous birth, should have any illusions about
getting the child back. The hurdle is even greater than with the incognito
adoption due to feelings of shame, fear and guilt and understandably reservation
in the face of bureaucratic proof. After the baby flap or anonymous handover
there are further stops - hospital, emergency care, adoptive family.
In this respect the interim placement in a foster care unit is in contradiction to the recognised practise of arranging an adoption, which encourages as little change as possible in relationships for the child. The repeated interim placement is therefore not in the interest of the suppliers nor their supporters in the photo, film and advertising sectors, as product marketing is crucial. The presswork during the interim placement of the child does not serve to search for mothers/parents, but for the advertising of the "Foundling Project" and the search for adoptive parents, who have stated that they agree to be "publicly" accompanied by the media until the "foundling" is of majority age. Income through sale of photos and film material over many years is of great interest to the marketers.
Compassion or harmful
to human dignity?
The spectacular putting
on show of the "foundlings" openly attaches a stigma to the children because
of being different. The portrayal in a "Big Brother manner" is harmful to
human dignity and rights of these "foundlings" with foreseeable negative
consequences for their psychological development. In this respect the apparent
"compassionate" concealment of origin cannot hide reality. The unavoidable
silence of the adoptive parents supports "inner" knowledge and suspicion.
As this can cause worsening psychological problems, development has for about
20 years been towards more transparency and "open adoptions".
All forms of anonymity tend to exclude the Mother's distress "We can meet" says the advisor of the emergency telephone service hastily, "You can hand over your baby to us, names are of no importance, the baby will be well looked after." However this does not help the woman making the call. She has nowhere to go when the birth pains begin. At home the birth would be noticed and in a hospital it would be registered. "Where must I go then?", she asks crying. The social worker keeps quiet for a long time. "I cannot help you", she says. "Go somewhere where you have water, the best is the toilet." An appropriate and concrete offer to come round to see the woman, to supply expert care through a midwife, doctor, ambulance is not provided, for it is not the mother in distress who is to be assisted, but simply the baby who must be "rescued".
The solution of the baby flap/anonymous birth has not taken into account the father's responsibility. Even relations, acquaintances and friends cannot be relied on to discuss the matter. After appealing to their responsibility the women are made invisible, pushed away, their helplessness and their lack of rights being even more enforced.
Is a child actually
saved?
If adoptive children cannot
be found in one's home country, because it is well known that there are more
applicants than there are children available, many people want to adopt from
abroad. The placing of babies from poor countries with rich families in
industrial nations is increasing as a business, and the international baby
trade over the Internet is booming - further impetus for the baby flap business;
for it is cheaper and takes less time for applicants to get children from
baby flaps at home. It is the people conducting the business and the marketing
sectors involved, who make the profit.
No child, who would otherwise
have been abandoned or killed, is saved by the baby flap! A woman in such
an isolated and threatening situation is totally incapable of reasoning.
Fear takes over; she finds herself in a psychological state of emergency,
which in no way ends with the birth! It is absurd to assume with the "baby
flap" that one can appeal to reason and the motherly instinct of such a woman!
A woman in panic will either suffocate the first cry of a child with a pillow,
thus killing it without meaning to, put it into a rubbish bag alive or dead
or throw it out the window. Or she will leave it lying wherever it is - in
the cellar, in the garden shed or the shopping centre toilet. All these are
actual examples of behaviour because they get into a panic, and are they
are not conscious, deliberate, purposeful killings. They act "mindlessly",
in other words without reason. A mother in panic will not look for the next
available baby flap - apart from the fact that a baby flap network must provide
facilities within a 2-4 km radius of each area.
Which mother would therefore
use the anonymity of the "baby flap"? They are women who otherwise would
give up their child for adoption or care, but who are afraid of bureaucracy,
being handed over to the youth welfare office, etc. These women act consciously
and with a purpose. The woman (if it is really the mother and not an unwilling
father of a child, grandmother or other person, who wants to get rid of the
child), will know the facility beforehand, the address and how it operates.
She will have obtained information. The baby flap advertisers are aiming
at women, who at some point in time before or after the birth know that they
do not want to or are unable to keep their child, who act purposefully, who
can even enlist the assistance of youth assistance facilities. It is not
a case of rescue due to absolute desperation, but an act of abandonment,
which could just as well take place within the framework of an adoption,
with less serious consequences for the child, the adoptive parents and the
mother handing over the baby.
Here it must be pointed out that more information on existing help options
is necessary, with adequate advertising of specially youth help facilities.
These facilities must become user-friendly and with lower ramps. In the interest
of all those involved clarification is required, not seduction through seemingly
easy solutions.
Regula Bott is a Psychologist and works in a State adoption mediation agency in Hamburg, Germany