Total Onslaught a Genocide in North America



Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group.[1] While a precise definition varies among genocide scholars, a legal definition is found in the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). Article 2 of this convention defines genocide as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

Genocide. Yep, I said it. Internationally, genocide is recognised as one of the worst and most heinous crimes of humanity. The punishment for genocide varies from where this was committed. I want justice under the Convention of Genocide guidelines published and entered into international law by the United Nations.

Article 2c states: Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

The intent to destroy a race, nation or other such group is defined by me as a group of unwed mothers. We were systematically discriminated against as a race unto ourselves and through this discrimination have formed a race or group of peoples. They (lawyers, agencies, medical staff, child services and the like) committed genocide based on our marital and/or social status or our age and have committed a crime that is punishable under international law. We (mothers of adoption loss) had our children forcibly transferred from one group (unwed) to another group (wed). Under the defined laws of genocide this is an act which defines genocide. We have lost the generations of offspring from the children which were forcibly removed from us by illegal methods and with no crime present that we, ourselves had committed.

Article 2b states: Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group. 

The amount of mental/emotional/psychological damage caused to a woman by giving her no other options but to surrender to “authorities” in the transferring of her child (her group) to adopters (another group) is astronomical. Mothers who have lost their children to adoption suffer from post-traumatic stress, unresolved grief, despair, anger, trust issues, suicidal thoughts or attempts and the list goes on. Please read here for a study done on the damage:

Article 2d states: Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group

Many mothers whom I have encountered have experienced medical rape after the birth of thier baby who was obtained for adoption. This medical rape has physically obstructed ANY possibility of future children. I have also encountered a very high number of women who were traumatized so horribly that they also experience secondary infertility on a physhological level. Surrendered mothers are 5 times more likely to experience secondary infertility.

So if we can define ourselves under the definition of genocide by all 5 of 5 defined acts that total genocide, WHY is no one being charge with the crimes that are clearly being committed?

If you are a mother who was coerced, lied to, intimidated, drugged, held against your will until you complied or the like into surrendering your child for adoption, please join in the complaints to the United Nations

Creative Commons License
Total Onslaught a Genocide in North America by vampporcupine is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Posted from WordPress for Windows Phone


I knew her

I knew her, intimately. What’s funny is that I never did. A young woman took her own life, she lived in another country, I never once emailed nor corresponded with her, ever. But, I knew her. Her blogs have haunted me since I first read them. One in particular Death by Adoption, as I read it, I knew. She was me and others like me. We are what is left over after adoption. We are the waste that is left over when this “wonderous” gifting happens. We walk around a shell of ourselves, bleeding to death and not one person sees us. We are told that we will move on and forget. How do you forget your own child? How do you move on after your chld is stolen from you and sold to people deemed more worthy than you? They are imprinted into our dna and our hearts. This is one thing adoption could never take as the adopters did not give birth to our children. One child is replaceable by another for an adopter, but not for the woman that bore them.

I feel the pain of Kristy’s loss of her daughter the same as I feel mine. She was coerced out of her daughter, like me. I wish she did not end her pain but I understand more than most of society, there is no way to heal the pain of losing your child by forced adoption. I feel like I’m walking in a living hell. Some days it is bearable, but most days it isn’t.

It has been more than 22 years for me. I have been in email contact with my daughter for 3 years. This last year it has gotten less and less. I have been told that I am a stranger to her so why would I expect a relationship with her. I know her though. To my core, I know her and long for her. I have not held my daughter since she was 4 days old. Yes, I did hold out that long in the hospital before I gave in. As time goes on, I doubt I will ever hold her again. She has become more and more distant to me. I know how Kristy felt. I dream of the nothingness of death too, but , I always hold out hope that one day I will get to hold her again. Unlike Kristy,  I don’t seek death but it is not an unwelcome guest to me. To no longer have the pain is like a dream.

Rest in peace Kristy and all the other mothers who could not bear the pain.

my tears Pictures, Images and Photos

Creative Commons License
I knew her by vampporcupine is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Family Preservation, Not Anti-Adoption

I didn’t write this, my friend Susie did. It was such a well written and well thought out article that I requested her permission to repost it on my blog. Her blog can be found at  Here is her wonderful article:

I Am For Family Preservation, I Am Not Anti-Adoption

What Is Family Preservation?

Family Preservation began in the 1890s, and in the 1909 White House Conference on Children it was the top ranked issue.  The movement was started to help keep children at home with their families.  Before this, children were often taken out of homes if parents did not make enough income to support them.  Many of the leading authorities of this time period argued that extreme poverty was reason enough to break up a family.  Support for family preservation can be traced back to the Orphan Train movement. ( 

Family Preservation has been seeing resurgence in the last decades.  Just a couple of the more recent organizations to take on this issue are Origins-USA ( and The American Adoption Congress (  Other signs of the growth of the Family Preservation movement are seen in the positions held by The United Nations, UNICEF, The UN CRC, the Hague Convention on International Adoption, and Save the Children – all of which call for family preservation first, then kinship care and stranger adoption as a last resort – with international adoption the very last resource after no domestic adoption can be found.

Does being for Family Preservation mean I am Anti-Adoption?

No.  I am not naive enough to believe that adoption will ever be unnecessary.  There are some women (and men) who truly have no desire to be parents.  Unfortunately, there are also parents who cannot overcome their addictions to alcohol and/or drugs, there are those who are with a violent partner and cannot break the hold their abusers have on them, or are themselves abusers.  Only in the cases of abuse or neglect, or the lack of desire to parent a child do I feel adoption should be necessary.  I believe that father’s have just as much right to raise their child as the mother does.  If a mother chooses to not parent her child, the father still has every right to raise the child.

I don’t like the term “anti-adoption”, as it is used with such deep negativity.  “Anti-adoption” brings the attention to someone who is perceived as bitter or angry instead of being about the best interest of children and their families.  There are some who see “anti-adoption” as being the extreme viewpoint that supports each and every mother raising their child.  In reality, I don’t think that even the most extreme “anti-adoption” advocates would support every mother keeping her child no matter the danger involved for the child. 

In Cases Where Adoption Must Exist ~ I Am Pro-Adoption Reform

I am against the billions of dollars per year profits that adoption agencies see.  Take a look at the top salaries in the adoption industry and tell me they are truly not-for-profit companies.  The adoption industry also spends millions of dollars every year researching how to best convince mothers to give their children up for adoption. 

I am against coerced adoptions.  It is impossible to list each and every way coercion exists ~ I consider adoption to be coerced if a mother is made to feel unworthy of being a parent when compared to an adoptive family.  It is coercive to tell a mother she is too young or too poor to raise her child.  Using the fact that the mother will be a single parent to feel “less than capable” of being a mother is also coercive.  I consider pre-birth matching to be coercive.  I consider the use of the label “birth mother” when referring to a pregnant woman who is considering adoption to be coercive.  I consider it coercive when a mother is not given any information regarding the life-long effects of adoption on her child, herself, her extended families, etc.  An un-informed choice is not a choice.  If there is no alternative given other than adoption, there is no choice.  There must be something else to choose in order to make a choice. 

I believe that we need to raise public awareness of the realities of the effects of adoption on all involved. 

I believe in the right to identifying information for all adopted persons and their birth and adoptive families through records access (adoption papers, original birth certificates).

I believe that all states need to legalize open adoption agreements.

I am not alone in my adoption reform ideas.  Here are just a few links for more information:   (one of our very own here on CM is on the board of CUB!)

Many states also have their own adoption reform groups.  Just google “adoption reform” with the name of your state to find more information.