Thread by @AmandaTDA

WOW @WIRED. This entire article is a dangerous, hyperbolic gishgallop of inaccuracies and stereotypes adoption scholars have labored decades to correct. And are easily disproven. I’m rarely speechless. But I don’t even know where to begin. #adoption #antiadoption #wired

https://twitter.com/WIRED/status/1367474916472332290

Most pressing is mid-defining the Adoptee Rights Movement and calling it the “anti-adoption movement.” There *is* no anti-adoption movement in the U.S. A few anonymous and individual accounts do not comprise a movement and are certainly not the Adoptee Rights Movement. @WIRED

#AdopteeRights is about 1) increasing post-adoption support; 2) establishing equity for dependent children; 3) modernizing adoption to current best practices; 4) rectifying injustices that hurt adopted people and their families. Does your author have an issue with that? @WIRED

Most notably, there are two major sub-movements under Adoptee Rights. OBC access and Adoptee Citizenship. 35,000 adoptees in the U.S. are without citizenship and 35 have been deported. Is your author serious in misrepresenting the movement to stop this as a bad thing? @WIRED

OBC access is a SIXTY year old restorative justice movement that is trying to rewrite laws Georgia Tann wrote in the 1930’s. Please look up who Georgia Tann was and let me know why opposing literally anything she did is a bad thing. @WIRED #adopteerights

#AdopteeRights is a REFORM movement. Advocacy movements maintain the status quo. Reform movements change the status quo. Abolition movements dismantle the status quo. Responsibly discussing these paradigms in adoption requires a level of scholarship well above this article @WIRED

And Adam Pertman? Seriously? Did he not tell you in his interview that he and The Donaldson were outspoken supporters on the Adoptee Rights Movement and OBC access? Did he know of approve of the author’s characterization of adoptees before agreeing to the interview?? @WIRED

Also, why Pertman? He’s a white adoptive father w/ plenty of time in the limelight speaking for adoptee issues. A far more recent ED of The Donaldson was an adopted woman of color. Through what process exactly did this author choose her interview subjects? @WIRED #adoption

The claims involving ethical, legal, and historical paradigm shifts and the representation of constellation members are just...... Line by line there are so many fallacies and blatantly incorrect statements. I am shocked this was published. @WIRED

The biggest red flag, @WIRED? The most fundamental faux pas of them all that informs us whether an author has the level of adoption fluency to write what they are writing? Look at the main subjects of the entire article: prospective adoptive parents. I have news for you....

Adoption @WIRED, is a service that finds parents for kids who need them - not find kids for parents who want them. The primary client of adoption is the child. If you’re not focusing on children & #adoptees when representing #adoption, you’re doing it wrong. Full stop.

I’m disappointed your author misrepresented adoptees this way. But I am also nauseated by the misrepresentation of first and adoptive parents, many of whom I am proud to call my friends. There are kick-ass folks who want to fix #adoption and they deserve your respect @WIRED

To be clear, I don’t stan adoptees verbally abusing others or engaging in unwanted contact with strangers. I don’t stan interpersonal violence in any form. That said, know that folx being #adopted doesn’t entitle you to use us to represent nor answer for each other either @WIRED