Finding each other
My idea for some sort of register, to help birthparents and adoptees find each other, would begin with a form to fill out – date left/found, place left/found, what the child was wearing, male/female, and the estimated age when left/found. I will caution a-parents to not put much more information than was in the finding ad, and I will caution a-parents against posting pictures at this point in the process. Bio parents should ideally know some information on their own – birthmark, contents of a note, etc – as a way to show that they are really the birthparents. There may not be any information at all to act as “proof” in many cases, but if there is something that can be used to help provide some sort of assurance, then hold it back so the b-parents have an opportunity to provide it. It’s also important to realize that some SWI’s fabricate a note, or don’t tell of a note, so while the b-parents knowing of a note (that is not mentioned in a finding ad) is pretty concrete – them not knowing of one won’t necessarily exclude them.
Back to the form — birthparents will be instructed to put down more details than would have been in the finding ad, if they have any; so they’ll list the date and place the child was left/found, what the child was wearing, birthdate, male/female, any birthmarks, whether they left a note or not, any outstanding characteristics, etc.
Ideally, people doing a search would drill through the information by selecting province, then city (or county if it’s rural – have to figure out how best to do that), then by year and month. Once they get that far they would see a list showing descriptions or addresses of the place, the specific dates, what the child was wearing.
Realistically, I’m not sure I’ll manage to get it that organized with off the shelf software. It may be a matter of rooms for the year found, and within those rooms, rooms for provinces, and within those rooms, doing a search.
Ideally, you’d have to register and be logged in before you could search. All searches would be logged, and if you PM a person then that person would be able to see the log of all of your searches. Families could communicate through the PM system, which would give them their privacy and keep them from having to share email addresses until they are ready. Again, realistically, I may need to show families how to set up a gmail account specifically for this use and then set it to forward all incoming mail to their regular account so they will see anything that comes into it. Privacy should be maintained until the family is comfortable with the information given and is ready to give more information.
It has also been suggested that someone not be able to search until they enter information, and that once they enter information search results would be shown based on the information they entered. So, once they enter information then they will see a list of all entries in that province within three months of the date they entered. I understand why that suggestion is out there, as a way to try to cut down on scammers using the database as a fishing pond. I’m hoping that my idea of having people be logged in before they can search, and showing a list of all searches done, will do the same thing without being quite so restrictive. I don’t want people entering garbage information just so they can search, and that is likely what would happen.
I will keep the register free, and to start out I will not put ads on it. If it starts getting more than about a thousand hits a day then I’ll need to put ads on it so it can pay for itself.
Let’s use this post to throw around ideas about the best way to set this up. We’ve already debated searching versus not searching, and I’d really like to keep today’s comments about things that could be helpful, pitfalls to watch out for, possible software I don’t know about that could run this sort of thing, etc. If you know of free software – please share. At this point I’d also be interested in software available for purchase, as that would give me at least a starting point to either come up with a plan that would involve purchasing it, or possibly give me a better search point to find something more affordable that would work.
July 20th, 2011 at 10:59 am
It has been suggested that birthparents be instructed to enter “yes” or “no” in the birthmark, note, and further details places, so they would only share that information privately.
I understand the logic for that, but I’m undecided on whether that would be the best way to do it.
July 20th, 2011 at 11:47 am
I would be in favor of having as much information as possible directly on the site. More information on the front end means less time that either a birth parent or AP has to chase down false leads. This would be particularly true for children who have common finding spots, such as the CWI/SWI gate. I presume that the listings on the site would be essentially anonymous, so there’s not a lot of privacy concern anyway.
And in reality, if you are wanting to do a birthparent search, by its very nature you are giving up some privacy in order to do the search. There will be no way to maintain total privacy and do a search.
July 20th, 2011 at 12:06 pm
In my case, I would be entering GG’s info because she wants me to search. I will have her right there with me as I enter it, and we’ll talk about it. So I will feel comfortable with the privacy stuff on my end.
On the birthparents end – they will know where and when they left her, and what she was wearing. If they paid attention then they will know of more than one birthmark. Their posting that information would be fine with us, as none of GG’s friends would be looking there in the first place, but even if they did they wouldn’t be able to put two and two together and figure out that this family is talking about GG. We could, because we know what she was wearing, where she was left, the date, etc.
I won’t be entering TT’s data until she is old enough that I feel she is making an informed decision — and if at that point she asks me to search. I will be checking it occasionally to see if a family in China posts her information, and if they did then RK and I would have some deep discussing to do. The odds of that happening aren’t great enough that I think we need to be discussing it now. My first instinct is that of course we’d have to respond and tell them what an amazing little girl she is, and how happy she is… but my second thought is that I’d have to get TT’s input on it before I could do much of anything, and she’s so young emotionally – at six she’s supposed to be a four year old emotionally (2 years in an institution subtracted from age) but I think she’s closer to a three year old in some ways. So, if we found where TT’s family posted a listing, we would likely contact them and give them the basics of how she is doing, but beyond that is an unknown at this time.
In other words – I’m agreeing with you that we have to give up some privacy to do a search, but I’m also pointing out that the things we’d be posting as an adoptive family are pretty much exactly what was posted in the finding ad, which is already public knowledge. We’re just providing a way to contact the people who adopted that baby, we’re not giving any other information about the person that baby has become.
And the bio parents don’t know enough about our kids to post anything that would invade privacy. Sure, they can post birthmarks and notes, but the only people who can match what they post with our child is probably us… or perhaps people in our travel group.
We really can’t keep the two issues completely separate – whether we choose to search or not search, we’ll all still have to make a decision if we see our child’s birthfamily post their information.
The a-parents end, keeping back information isn’t for privacy, it’s so the b-parents will have an opportunity to share information they already know, to offer some sort of proof.
For the b-parents entering information, I get that if they post about a child with a special need that is unique that people may be able to match it to the child. Or if there is an obvious birthmark on a face or arm where it shows. But I still feel that having the birthfamily post what they know up front will be the easiest way for this to work.
July 20th, 2011 at 12:18 pm
This is not a perfect parallel, but there is a registry for children born using donor sperm, called the Donor Sibling Registry (www.donorsibling registry.com). There are thousands and thousands of participants, and I have been able to identify several of my older daughter’s half siblings using this mechanism. Because donors have numbers it is somewhat easier to match people. However, Wendy Kramer, who runs the DSR, might be a good resource for you. She is brilliant, as is her son Ryan, who helped her to create it. I would be happy to assist in making an introduction if that would be helpful.
By the way, Wendy ran the site for free for many years until it became too big to manage without greater resources. She now charges an annual membership fee. But like you, she wanted very much to offer the service for free, and kept it free as long as she could.
July 20th, 2011 at 12:32 pm
in a southern california fcc, we had an eye-opening lecture from a one-child policy researcher at uc irvine a year or so ago.
while many a-parents expressed hopes for some sort of registry/dna database etc. to locate birth parents, he basically told us it’ll never happen this desire was coming from our western sense of how the world works, and it will not translate in china.
regret, wistfulness, etc. etc…. he said the great majority of chinese parents who abandoned kids are likely not feeling these things. they did what they had to do; period. the line between birth and death just moved a little. to many of these parents, the children never existed.
certainly there are a lot of people DON’T feel that way, especially parents whose children were essentially confiscated from them by authorities to be placed in IA.
but his perspective certainly put the dampers on the shining hope of a reunion registry for me.
July 20th, 2011 at 12:37 pm
Abracadebra – yes, it sounds like talking with her could be helpful. I’d love to know what kind of software she uses to run the site, if nothing else.
I totally understand how expensive it can be to run an active site. I am so lucky that I’ve been able to get advertising to cover all of the costs so far. I hope that can continue, and I really see no reason why it shouldn’t be able to cover the extra server load that this new site would have on the servers I already have.
July 20th, 2011 at 1:00 pm
I was wondering if it would be useful to give information on the person who found the child and the foster parent/caretaker if known. I really wonder if some of the foster parents and birthparents know each other.
July 20th, 2011 at 1:14 pm
In rural areas I think it’s possible that some foster parents and birth parents may know each other. I don’t think it’s something that happens a large percentage of the time, though.
We aren’t really supposed to know the foster parent’s name, in the vast majority of cases. I realize many people have done some searching to find the foster family… I’m just not sure that would help in a search. Though, I suppose if you aren’t sure that the finding information you have is correct, then that’s another piece you could add to the puzzle.
Could it hurt anything to list the foster family? I can think of a few possible ways it could, but I think they are remote possibilities so I won’t mention them, but I’ll throw the question out for some of you to consider. My girls weren’t in foster care, so I don’t have a personal frame of reference on that one. I can imagine an SWI director getting upset if he saw that a whole lot of families knew foster family names that he’d been trying to keep a secret. And I suppose some foster families may not want to be listed. Anything else?
Finding person… I don’t think that would add anything to the search process. I could be wrong though, if you think I am then I’m open to hearing details.
July 20th, 2011 at 1:33 pm
Sounds like a great idea! I know about the DS registry because a board I belonged to had a forum for IF, and one of the forums was families who used DS. They were able to find out how many children their donor created.
July 20th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
tearoses – you are correct that culturally, the majority of birthparents will not search.
However, it is believed that siblings who find out that a child was abandoned and possibly adopted will go looking for them. The younger generation is being brought up in the technological age and they see the world differently than their parents.
But even if only ten percent search, that would make it worthwhile to put the registry together.
July 20th, 2011 at 2:04 pm
Back on the foster family – Our SWI shared this information freely with us (name, age, and how many other children they had fostered). I guess it just depends on the SWI. This tool could also help the foster families in finding the children they cared for. Brian Study located the foster mom based on the info I had from the SWI and she was very eager to hear from us.
July 20th, 2011 at 2:06 pm
So, maybe a spot for the family to list the foster family, with clarification somewhere that each family should consider the individual circumstance to decide whether to list that information or not?
I do like the idea of also matching foster families to adopted children.
July 20th, 2011 at 2:08 pm
I wonder if this would be advertised some way that the birth parents would know. Would there be a way on the site to translate? I am just curious about families in China and other countries besides the US might know? I think it is a great idea.
July 20th, 2011 at 2:15 pm
i think it is a great idea to have a registry like this, i look forward to using it.
here are just a few things to think about:
-would you have a section in chinese text for birthfamily to read?
-how would you “advertise” this in china for BF to find your site?
-would your search engine have to be turned off if you had too many people like on RQ ( i have no idea for the reason)?
-do you want people to have full access to the entire site or just their children’s province or “area/town”? kind of like you have special areas/rooms locked on RQ?
-could you have alerts to when a new BF posts to an area?
-how will you prevent fraud, or hackers from entering garbage or fake info?
-a special room for families to let us know they found the BF?
Thanks RQ!
hg
July 20th, 2011 at 2:20 pm
I hope to find a native Chinese speaker who can help put Chinese on the site – so all instructions will be in both English and Chinese.
As for advertising — many birthparents will start out at the local SWI and or Civil Affairs Office, so if we can get the word out to them, then perhaps they might say, “I’m sorry, I can’t give you that information but you can see if this site might help”. That would involve my asking all of you who are in contact with your child’s SWI to mention it to them, but that could be one way to get the word out.
Other than that, I’ll have to work to get it placed high enough on the Chinese search engines so that it will show up in a search. If I put ads up to pay for it then I wouldn’t be averse to paying for us to show up on a google search if the right terms were used.
July 20th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
RQ, I’ve reached out to Wendy to facilitate an introduction. Her email address is easy to find on the DSR web site, but give me a day to hear back from her. If I can remember how to PM you, I will do so.
July 20th, 2011 at 2:38 pm
Would your search engine have to be turned off if you had too many people like on RQ ( i have no idea for the reason)?
Search is only turned off on the forum for those who haven’t posted much. Some people were deliberately bringing it down, searching over and over to freeze the site. I’m told it was likely people trying to hack into the site, trying to create a situation where they can poke their way in. By only allowing people with a posting history to search, we stop that activity. There are a few add-ons that can be installed that will help, but the one I installed didn’t work well with our template and also brought the site to a crawl. My template is so old that I need to do a complete overhaul on the forum in order for some of the add-ons to work. In other words – we should be okay with searches on new software – it’s just the forum that is causing a problem at the moment.
Do you want people to have full access to the entire site or just their children’s province or “area/town”? kind of like you have special areas/rooms locked on RQ?
I’ll have to see what kind of software is available. Right now I’m thinking that if there is a log of the terms you’ve searched, and you know that anyone you have contact with can see that log, that you’ll restrict yourself so you won’t look like you’re just there to fish. The danger in restricting people to provinces is if 1) they have kids from different provinces or 2) they sign up with multiple accounts and enter garbage info so they can have access to multiple areas. We haven’t stopped them, we’ve just made them enter garbage in order to do what they wanted.
Could you have alerts to when a new BF posts to an area?
Good question – again, I’ll have to see what kind of software solutions I can find. Off the top of my head I think it might be better to have the software send something out once a week, or once a month, saying how many new postings there have been in that time period.
How will you prevent fraud, or hackers from entering garbage or fake info?
I’ll point out ways for families to be cautious. I hope to be able to provide the logs showing where that log in ID, or perhaps even where people from that IP address have searched (though with internet cafe’s in China, that might not mean much). Ultimately, there are going to be scam artists out there, and families will have to be aware of that and proceed with appropriate caution. By not requiring that people enter information in order to search, that will keep some garbage out. The fishers and scammers though… there isn’t much we can do to keep them out, other than warn families to be cautious.
A special room for families to let us know they found the BF?
If we have so many people posting about it that it’s taking over the general discussion room then sure, we’ll open up another room.
July 20th, 2011 at 2:49 pm
RQ, I pm’d you the relevant info. (That was easy!) Good luck!
July 20th, 2011 at 3:49 pm
RQ – Great idea! This is a large enough group that I would be willing to bet there are a few software developers out there that could work together to build this thing in their spare time. You acting as the PM.
We must figure out how to advertise in China. That is key.
Also, I agree that privacy is very important here. Don’t give out all the details. Let them do it. You know they might remember that they left the baby at a certain location but they may not remember the exact date. So we need to take foggy memory into account.
If someone ever came along and thought they were a match for my daughter I would not tell her until I was 99% positive. I would need to see pictures of them to look for family resemblance. Pictures of other siblings. My daughter has one trait (curly hair) that is very rare in China. If one of them had curly hair in the picture I would put more creditability to it. Finally I think I would insist on a DNA test. I don’t know how hard that is in China’s rural area but I have a little heart to protect.
Great idea! We appreciate all you do RQ!
July 20th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
I am very amazed that you are willing to undertake this and very grateful. I would advocate for allowing the names of people who found the child if known. The reason for this is that somewhere, someplace in the past, I read that people who were listed as “finders” may actually be agents of the birth parents who want to ensure their baby is found in a timely way. They may be a distant cousin or friend and so known to the birth parents. In this way, the name may be another fact that proves parentage on the BP side. Of course the AP, may or may not have been told this information. And, the finder may or may not be an agent of the BPs. Wow, this is complicated but if anyone can figure it out, I have great faith that it is RQ.
I am glad that the sperm donor registry idea may be helpful because I think it is directly relevant as a model. Good luck!
July 20th, 2011 at 7:58 pm
tearoses
I think publicaly out in the open in China, you wouldn’t here birth parents, announcing they are searching or planning to or even copping to have a child.
I think privately, I would expect more folks searching than one would think.
I also think as time goes on more birth parents will search.
And siblings as well.
July 20th, 2011 at 9:08 pm
As someone who has successfully located my daughter’s birth family in China, I am more than a little offended by the assumption that somehow Chinese culture negates human nature and caring about a lost child. My daughter’s birth parents made the choice to not parent her, but they suffered great emotional pain and thought about her all the time. My daughter’s parents are just like parents in any other country. They lived with great sadness and regret over their choice.
While I think a registry is a nice idea, the odds of it doing any good are low. It would make much more sense to partner with the Chinese organizations like Baobei hui jia who already have established databases online, widespread publicity in China and who are working with the Chinese government’s blessing. The odds of a database being blocked in China as soon as the wrong person in the gov’t gets wind of it is quite high.
Despite a few cases that have gained publicity here, I think it is incredibly naive to think an average Chinese birth family is going to come looking in the US or other western countries for their child unless they have some evidence he or she has been adopted abroad. As far as I know, most of the located birth families (including my daughter’s) had no idea such a thing was remotely possible.
In those cases in which birth families DO know their child was adopted abroad, it is most likely they will have some information about that child probably gleaned from someone with inside information –a helpful orphanage employee, a contact in the government, a foster family, etc. It would probably be much more helpful to them to make a chinese webpage with links to all the orphanage yahoo groups so they can target their searches rather than broadcasting their to the very small audience of adoptive parents who might be interested in knowing them.
It is also wise for all of us good-intentioned adoptive parents to stop being so adoptive parent – centric. Many chinese adoptees are entering adulthood or soon will and I am willing to bet they are not going to want a bunch of adoptive parents controlling their access to the information about their possible birth families.
I am afraid that a lot of the concerns I read about adopted children’s privacy are really nothing more than a smokescreen. I think what many adoptive parents are really concerned about is their own ability to control the access birth families have to their children. I can understand that impulse because our own reunion has rocked my world, but I can’t imagine keeping either information or contact with her birth family away from our daughter. I can’t imagine how you could look your child in the eye after you deny them the opportunity to know their own story or their birth family if that information falls in your lap. I have seen parents with birth family contact make that exact choice and it blows my mind.
All of this conjecture aside but in line with this current topic, I have been trying to locate the an adoptee from Qinzhou Guangxi. If anyone knows a child found in Dadong/Datong town, I may have valuable information for you. You can contact me at my blog http://american-family.org
July 20th, 2011 at 9:45 pm
Siblings are a big key in searching definitely, so are other relatives. I agree, privately birthparents will search.
My brother’s best friend is adopted, domestic adoption.
When he signed up on the registries he was amazed at how many were Aunts and Uncles searching for a niece/nephew, and especially siblings. Some siblings had no idea they had a brother or sister, they found out when they were older. Even the best kept secrets reveal themselves eventually.
Some do know like a girl I uses to work with. Her mother had a baby when she was 15, and placed him for adoption. Their mother told them when they were in their teens. She was one of four girls, and they started the search straight away for their brother.
I remember seeing a show on PBS about a boy’s journey to Korea to meet his birthmother. His adoptive mother came with him as well as his father. The person he connected with the most was his brother and that was the relationship that thrived via email. He chose not to continue a relationship with his birthmother. He was actually only 15 at the time.
I would love to know if my kids had siblings. Someone they could connect to as well.
July 20th, 2011 at 10:35 pm
On the foster family point, keep in mind that many AP’s are told that their children were never in foster care before their adoption when they actually were. I found this to be true with many of the children I cared for in the orphanage, once they were adopted and the AP’s made contact with me they would tell me their children were not fostered and some were children I knew for a fact were. I do not know why the officials would cover up the fact of foster care, but it has been done. Frequently. Of course, I have my theories but no substantial facts to back up my opinions.
July 20th, 2011 at 11:44 pm
i’m all for setting it up — i just hope people go into it understanding the limitations.
siblings might want to search — if they knew. that would require a parent (or someone) to tell them there was an abandoned child.
how much of that do you think is really going on?
that said, i plan to be one of those parents with a backpack traipsing with my 18-year-old all over anhui province looking for birth parents if that’s what she wants.
July 21st, 2011 at 6:30 am
So, I guess I’m the only person that thinks this whole thing is a bad idea? For multiple reasons? I will refrain from commenting further, other than to say that I hope if the CCAA finds out, they are okay with it.
July 21st, 2011 at 6:39 am
Kay – I’d be interested in hearing your theories.
July 21st, 2011 at 1:30 pm
Along the lines of Kay’s comment…it’s becoming clear that the finding locations given to APs are often not accurate. It seems to me that a system that is heavily based on birth parents and adoptive parents identifying a child based on a finding location is unlikely to work in many cases.
In my daughter’s case, her paperwork gives us three totally different finding locations — the finding ad, abandonment certificate, and orphanage care records each say a distinctly different place. This makes me suspect that NONE of the three are accurate, and she was probably not found at all, but brought to the orphanage by a birth family member or a “finder.”
That said, I would be very excited to have another tool available to me in my search for my daughter’s history. This problem with finding locations is just another thing to keep in mind as you ponder how you might design a website like this.
July 21st, 2011 at 2:13 pm
In my case, I’ve spoken with both of my children’s “finders”, so I know that the information we have is accurate. If that information is not accurate for someone then there may not be a way for those families to find each other. I mean, the birthfamily knows where and when they left them, we are supposed to know where and when they were found. It seems the perfect solution for those wanting to find each other. It’s not a perfect solution, but I think it may be the best we have with the information most of us have been given.
Realistically, at first we’ll probably have a whole lot of listings by a-parents and adoptees, and almost none from birthparents. I will be keeping an eye on search terms to see how people find us, and countries to see where our traffic is coming from, so we should have an idea if birthfamilies in China are finding us and doing searches once they arrive on the site. It will take a few months for the search engines to find us and give us a decent ranking, so it won’t happen overnight.
We will need to have a decent sized database, and we’ll need a lot of people linking to the new site and talking about it near the link, so the search engines can accurately figure out what search terms should bring us up.
It’s not like Field of Dreams – building it won’t be enough, it will take a community effort to make it popular. I’ll try to get a poll up in the next day or two so we can see how much interest we have in it.
Some of you are saying that since there will be such a small percentage of success for people who post a listing that we may as well not do it at all. I don’t get that. As the mom of a child who wants to find her birthfamily, I feel this is one resource that we need to have available. I want to create a site that will hopefully have enough listings to get the right kind of attention, enough of a database that people will take it seriously. I’ll be doing it for entirely selfish reasons – I’m doing it for my daughter. I’m in a position to build it and give it publicity, so I feel obligated to do so.
I’m not going to “control access to information” or in any other way hold information hostage. If anything I’ll be doing the opposite, since registration will be free.
July 21st, 2011 at 6:43 pm
How will you address the issue of identity theft if you aren’t going to control access to information. What will prevent anyone from logging in or joining who is not a parent or adoptive parent? What will be the verification process?
Have you considered that by requesting all this detailed information you not giving opportunity for verification of birthparent accuracy? Holding back pieces of information often is a way to verify birthparents identity?
I applaud your intent but there are many angles to consider when building a site like this.
July 21st, 2011 at 6:59 pm
As I’ve already stated in this thread – adoptive families will be advised to not put anything into the registry other than what is in their child’s finding ad. There is nothing to steal from that, as the finding information is already public information. Families will be advised to do what they feel necessary before assuming the family that contacts them is their child’s biological family. Any family claiming to be either of my daughter’s family should know something not in the public information – contents of a note, or knowledge of a birthmark.
The software I’m looking at has a PM function, so families will be able to communicate without sharing email addresses until they reach a point where they are comfortable doing so.
Like it or not, there are scam artists out there, and families will be advised to tread carefully.
Sure, it’s a lot safer to sit in our homes and not do anything at all. Searching has risks involved. I for one think the risks are worth it. I will welcome contact with my daughters’ birth families, but I will also need some kind of information that shows me that they are indeed her birth family.
You obviously have not read what is actually in the thread you are replying to, because I have not only considered what you are assuming we’ve not thought of, but I’ve spoken about it at length. The very first paragraph of my blog post says “I will caution a-parents to not put much more information than was in the finding ad … if there is something that can be used to help provide some sort of assurance, then hold it back so the b-parents have an opportunity to provide it.” Why on earth would you ask if I’ve considered it or not when I very clearly outlined it?
July 22nd, 2011 at 10:44 am
I would disregard criticism based on the likelihood of small numbers of successful connections. It isn’t about statistics, it’s about connecting families and finding roots for children who may need them. One successful connection is changing the lives of two families and giving a child insight into his/her place in the world.
We have the name of our daughter’s finder, and have tried unsuccessfully to locate her. Maybe that’s another field you could make available in the search data that APs fill in? I think it’s unlikely that the finder is ever going to log onto a website in search of a child she found, but the finder could be someone in the birth family. Or someone who does log on in China may recognize the finder’s name and reach out to me. Every bit of information is potential evidence and a crumb on the trail that leads to the birth family, IMO.
July 22nd, 2011 at 10:44 am
And the finder’s name IS in the finding ad, by the way…
July 22nd, 2011 at 1:51 pm
As of now I’m going to have a space for people to put the finder if they wish, but it won’t be mandatory.
Mandatory entries will be year, month, place (entered as address and/or description), clothes, approximate age when left/found. It will be acceptable to put in a “don’t know” or “information suspect”, but something will have to be put into those fields, as they will be the main search fields.
Fields that can be left blank will be finder, foster family, day of the month…
I’m hoping to be able to allow finding picture to be uploaded.
I’ll have a check box for who is entering the information – adoptee, adoptive parents, biological parents, biological siblings, some other member of the biological family, foster family.
And then there will be other fields for the biological family to fill out – birthmarks, whether a note was left and if so, some hint of what it said, and a field where they can put in anything else they want to add.
I’ll do another blog entry as I begin building the forms so we can all discuss which fields we want in there.
——
I am going to be very clear that adoptive families should safeguard private information. I, personally, won’t be putting anything out there that wasn’t in the finding ad. If a family comes forward then they are going to need to have information about GlitterGirl that would come from actually being the biological family. We’re lucky that there is an obvious birthmark, but I know that not all children have birthmarks.
Someone made the point that if someone had access to the child’s file at the orphanage then they would likely have enough information to make someone believe they were the bio family. And that is true. It’s one more thing to be wary of.