by John Brooks
I now see a very different person on the other side of that battered bedroom door. Not an angry, misbehaving teenager bent on tormenting her parents, but a child suffering unfathomable pain for whom comfort was out of reach.
She tried to speak to us but couldn’t get through. We couldn’t hear her, couldn’t understand her, or tuned her out as the decibels rose. Likewise, we tried to speak to her, but our words never reached her. Erika and I were desperate to love her but she had trouble letting us in. We reacted to our communication void with frustration, shutting each other out. That was a fatal mistake whose consequences we couldn’t possibly know. We had no idea how far out on a ledge Casey was.
On the surface, everything appeared normal; in fact, better than normal. She’d gotten into her dream school, yet that wasn’t enough to dent the iceberg of agony that sat below the surface, that she kept hidden from everyone. Only occasionally did she give a hint of her true feelings. Her cries for help were too faint for people to hear, so she weighed the options—live in pain or choose death.
Erika and I were blind from the outset. I thought about the morning we picked Casey up from the orphanage. We were so intent on changing her into some nice, clean girlie clothes that it never dawned on us to ask if she had something she clutched in her crib—a pillow, a stuffed animal, a blanket? For all I know now, we’d left something behind that was indispensable to her, further compounding her distress. To ease the shock of this transition, we should have asked for an article of clothing, a plaything, something she might have snuggled with to keep her company and have something familiar to hold on to, but we didn’t.
In their two books, Adopting the Hurt Child and Parenting the Hurt Child, Dr. Gregory Keck and Regina Kupecky note that adoptive parents want to believe that a sound attachment had formed with former caregivers, in a sort of turnkey process that was readily transferable to them. The adoption becomes a cure-all for the child’s difficulties.
So it was for us, we thought. Overjoyed at her astonishing progress in our first few days together, camped out in a cramped hotel room in Warsaw, Erika and I became convinced that Casey wasn’t a special needs child at all. She had just been understimulated in the orphanage; nothing that two loving parents couldn’t fix. We were part of a fairy tale—two able-bodied Americans rescuing a Polish orphan from her caring but impoverished birth mother, who wanted a better life for her daughter.
We treated Casey as if she were our new pet. She was in good American hands. Just feed her, burp her, change her diaper, bounce her around, and park her in front of the TV when Mom and Dad need a rest. Then there were the outbursts.
I know now that adoptive parents who view their children’s disruptive behavior as just normal growing pains are ignoring a time bomb. They need to distinguish between the physical and emotional age of their child and adapt their parenting expectations to the child’s emotional age, that emotional immaturity I’d read about and, of course, had seen in Casey.
We should have had her assessed. Ray Kinney, a director and staff psychologist at Cornerstone Counseling Services in Wisconsin, spoke to me about the importance of assessment for children who have lived in orphanages. Having seen hundreds of deprived children over thirty-five years of clinical practice, he said that this was a crucial prerequisite to determining an appropriate intervention strategy.
That first night in the hotel room in Warsaw, when she was inconsolable, rocking herself to sleep, we just wanted her to quiet down so that we could get some rest. Instead of parking her in her stroller in front of a blaring TV—something she’d probably never seen before—we should have taken her into bed with us, held her and soothed her. If it were possible, we should have held her for our whole first month together without putting her down. Maybe we would have had a different result. What she needed then was lots of human touch.
From the moment we brought Casey into our home, it seemed as though we did everything wrong. We assumed that the past would fade into oblivion; nurture would prevail over nature. We took our parenting cues from the pop culture experts.
As a toddler, we tried to teach Casey manners, patience, and independence. When she acted out inappropriately and threw temper tantrums, we scolded and punished her. But we failed to see what was at the root of her outbursts, and our reactions only made matters worse. Rather than sending her off by herself, we should have stayed with her, helped her calm down and self-soothe. She needed to know that Mom and Dad would always be there for her unconditionally.
When Casey entered school, we were mystified by what appeared to be a split personality—a perfect angel at school and a defiant, immature brat at home. We consulted family, friends, teachers, and guidance counselors, and were told that Casey was strong-willed and a bit high-strung; she’d grow out of it.
Erika and I felt that we were the problem. We spoiled her. We were inconsistent. We needed to be tougher with her. So we read books such as Raising Your Spirited Child, tried reward systems and used TV, the computer, and playdates as leverage for good behavior. We blamed each other for our lousy parenting skills and our inability to get our daughter to mind her parents like everyone else’s kids did. We didn’t realize that the provocation and aggression we saw in her may have been caused by her anxiety about further rejection, something she may not have understood herself.
Nancy Verrier told me that the adopted child can push for rejection even though that’s the opposite of what she wants. She constantly tests her parents to see if they’ll reject her, just to get the inevitable over with. As she tests her parents’ commitment, often playing into their own insecurities about being good enough, the parents become defensive and retaliatory instead of understanding and steadfast. Their reactions can provoke the very outcome she feared in the first place—being sent to a residential treatment center or boarding school, or being kicked out onto the street.
A 2008 white paper, “Therapeutic Parenting,” prepared by the Association for the Treatment and Training in the Attachment of Children (ATTACh), begins with the following message:
. . . Parenting a child who has a disorder of attachment is the hardest job you will ever have. . . . It requires you to give and give, without receiving much in return. . . . It requires rethinking your parenting instincts. . . . It means making conscious, therapeutic parenting decisions . . . [and having a] constant focus on the deeper meaning of your child’s behavior, so that you respond to the causes, needs, and motivations of your child. It is exhausting. It is isolating, as family and friends tend to keep their distance, uncomfortable with the drama that surrounds these children.
Heather Forbes is an internationally published author and consultant, adoptive mother, and cofounder of the Beyond Consequences Institute in Boulder, Colorado. She said that her work is geared toward healing the parent-child relationship, with emphasis on the parents, because she believes that the child’s healing process must come from them rather than the therapist. “Parents who are strong in who they are, even if the child is rejecting or defiant, don’t have to take things personally and can love unconditionally.”
Like the other experts I talked to, she urged parents to focus on the child’s perspective rather than their own. What is driving my child’s behavior? Why is she stressed out and acting this way? No matter how unpleasant the message, parents should give the child free rein to vent, because it’s important for her to be heard. Good manners and appropriate language can be worked on later.
“All these kids feel like Casey,” she told me. “Hopelessly flawed. They can’t be fixed. These feelings never go away. It wasn’t that you didn’t love Casey; she just didn’t get it the right way.”
In the early 2000s, Dr. Marvin, along with several colleagues from the Marycliff Institute in Spokane, Washington, developed the “Circle of Security,” a protocol to diagnose attachment disorder and design individualized intervention programs aimed at attachment-caregiving relationships for both toddlers and preschool children. The process, which takes place over twe
nty weekly group sessions, is designed to help parents gain a deeper understanding of their children and themselves, and to become more accurate and empathic in reading their children’s complex and subtle cues—anger at a parent when the truth could be entirely different, or defiance masking an inability to adapt to a new routine. With a better understanding of their children’s behavior, parents are shown how to apply more “user-friendly” attachment techniques.
“Our coaching helps parents shift their focus from stopping undesirable behavior to moving in to calm the child when she’s out of control and can’t self-soothe,” Dr. Marvin explained. For example, instead of isolating the child as punishment for misbehavior, stay with her, acknowledge the upset, let her be herself. Sometimes, on some subconscious level, this behavior may be a reaction to her early abandonment. Adoptive parents need to understand and acknowledge that first loss.
“When parents follow that approach they start to see these behaviors decrease very quickly.” He insisted that children, when distressed, respond much better to parents when they take charge and soothe rather than discipline, as one would a baby—the baby that child used to be and, in a way, still is.
Jane Brown is an adoption therapist in Ontario, Canada, who encourages adoptees to explore through playful group activities what it means to be adopted, how to build a self-concept as an adoptee, and how to be in the world. In a safe group, the children are more willing to take risks and model for one another, sometimes participating simply by listening and watching. She gives the youngsters exercises to encourage them to explore their beliefs about what happened to them, how they felt about their birth parents, why they’d adopted a baby, all in an attempt to lower their defenses and get their story out.
We’d spun tales about Casey’s adoption from the very beginning. When she showed no curiosity about her past or birth family, we took her at her word. It never occurred to us that Casey’s rages might’ve been rooted in suppressed feelings about her early abandonment. We tried to protect her from the pain of knowing about her stillborn twin, but maybe deep down she knew.
We looked at her birthdays through our eyes, not hers. They might have been yet another reminder of loss, not celebration. That would have explained her tendency to sabotage the entire occasion. It was probably Casey’s instinct to run from strong emotions, but what she really needed was help from an understanding professional to piece together the narrative of her past and provide a healthier sense of herself as a whole person.
Ray Kinney claimed that, all too often, parents sugarcoat the adoption story to avoid inflicting more pain on their child. He takes a different approach—helping the child reconstruct her adoption story. She needs to know that her experience was real, and her constant and conflicting feelings about it are appropriate and legitimate. By getting the story out honestly—even if it isn’t pretty—the child has a more complete sense of herself.
“They want the whole story, and when they hear it, maybe they can understand what it was like to be in their mother’s shoes,” he said. “When we let the child understand the trauma she’s had, what happened to her as a baby, and how that’s played out for her entire life, she can start to gain control over her emotions.”
The onset of adolescence, middle school, and high school adds another layer of intensity into the mix. When Casey’s tantrums became profanity-laced rages punctuated with I hate you, we tried to control her with endless groundings and withheld privileges until we admitted defeat. The fact that she seemed impervious to discipline we took as a personal failure. But her rages may have had little to do with us. Her inner existence was a toxic stew of fear, stress, loneliness, and self-hatred that she hinted at only on LiveJournal and the message board.
Dr. David Brodzinsky, a professor emeritus at Rutgers University, founding director of the Donaldson Adoption Institute, and a coauthor of the 1992 book Being Adopted: The Lifelong Search for Self, wrote about the effects of long-term institutionalization:
For children placed early, the sense of loss emerges gradually as the child’s cognitive understanding of adoption begins to unfold. For children adopted later, feelings of loss can be more traumatic and overt, particularly by middle school when the youngster begins to reflect on what it means to be adopted, perhaps associating it with feeling odd, different.
At the extreme, resentment and rage against the adoptive parents may erupt from feelings of shame and guilt about who she is—unlovable—to which she may respond with destructive outbursts. As one adoptee said: “Being chosen by your adoptive parents means nothing compared to being un-chosen by your birth mother.”
Dr. Brodzinsky cautions that there is a wide range in the expression of adoption-related grief, from only a slight recognition of pain to something more frequent and intense. Often the sense of loss can be masked by intense anger, denial, emotional distance, and exterior bravado. But beneath that tough suit of armor lies a child who has been deeply hurt by life. She is the most vulnerable and difficult to reach.
TWENTY-FOUR
I began to understand what it might have felt like to be Casey—the baby screaming her outrage from her crib at being left behind, thrust into the arms of two strangers from a foreign country who couldn’t comfort her no matter how well intentioned they were.
She despised them for their lack of understanding, and for being so foolish as to love someone like her. So she put on a show of bravado, suited up her armor, and pretended that she needed no one, especially them. But at the same time, she might have looked at her behavior—something she just hinted at with Dr. Palmer—and asked herself, “What the hell is wrong with me?”
She hid behind that suit of armor, lashing out at the only two people who were safe—her adoptive parents. I’d come to learn that parenting a child who had suffered so much trauma in infancy was completely counterintuitive. The time-tested methods of raising and disciplining a securely attached child that we’d learned from Dr. Spock, T. Berry Brazelton, and Dr. Phil were woefully inadequate for a child like Casey. “Sometimes you have to parent in a way that’s good for your child even if it doesn’t feel good to you,” Ray Kinney said.
Dr. Keck recommended that infants shouldn’t be left alone to “cry it out.” As I’d heard from others, the parent should stay with her if she was screaming, crying, and inconsolable.
There was that disastrous trip to the Yerba Buena skating rink when Casey was eight. We left her alone in her room to cry it out because that’s what she said she wanted. If we’d known better, we would have overridden her.
Erika could have rubbed her back and massaged her feet, cooing in a soft voice the way she did when Casey was younger, chanting a Polish verse that Casey loved as an infant. It was about a little spider sneaking up on her, crawling up her tummy. Erika learned it from her mother, and my mother had a similar verse, but instead of a spider it was a creeping mouse. I imagined Casey’s face lighting up in anticipation of what was to come when Erika’s fingers would pounce on her neck with the dreaded spider tickle, eliciting her delicious laugh: Ha ha ha!
Dr. Keck wrote that the child should be fed on demand to establish a pattern that her needs will be met and help her develop a sense of trust that relief is there when she’s distressed. Day care was to be avoided, if possible, as it could reinforce the pattern of abandonment by the primary caregiver.
Thank God, we got one thing right.
We continued to send Casey to therapists who treated her as they did their other patients, repeatedly focusing on corrective behavior rather than getting to the core—until Casey had had enough.
Now I don’t blame her. She was right. Their kind of therapy was a waste of time.
Unfortunately, in our blindness, Erika and I were enraged. We saw this as just one more of her infuriating acts of defiance and our failure to control her. We didn’t realize that she might have just given up on herself.
Children like Casey have to be treated differently—different therapies, different parenting—if they are to
survive and thrive. The professionals to whom we’d dragged her over the years were not equipped to understand, deal with, or even recognize her unique life experience. They resorted to the only treatments they’d been taught. After all, they’d worked for their other young patients. Why not Casey?
A blog post titled “When Therapists Don’t Get It,” on a Bay Area adoption website, recounted the frustration of an adoptive mother seeking help for her son through traditional therapy channels. She reported that even therapists skilled at working with troubled children couldn’t help and may have made matters worse. As I’d heard before, they focused on her son’s undesirable behavior, as if correcting the symptoms would cure the disease.
She wrote: “Parents seek out experts because they want to help their child to be happy and emotionally healthy. To constantly go to therapists and be told that what is ‘wrong’ with their child is the parents’ fault is infuriating. Finding a therapist who gets it is the key to helping everyone in the family.”
I talked with Heather Forbes about our disappointments with therapists.
“Unfortunately, I hear stories like this all the time,” she assured me. “If you don’t get to that emotional place—the depth of the heart and soul where she felt rejected—you’ll probably never have success.”
There are thousands of public and private adoption agencies and attorneys available to prospective parents in the United States, but postadoption resources are sorely lacking. In the San Francisco Bay Area, the fifth-largest metropolitan area in the United States, with more than eight million people and a large international adoption community, there are only a handful of specialized adoption therapists. I’d learned from my own quest that finding them is a challenge.
If only I could have found someone who truly understood Casey and connected with her in a way none of our therapists had, maybe she would have developed some trust and opened up. If Casey had been willing to participate in group therapy with other adopted teens, maybe she wouldn’t have felt so alone, even if she did nothing more than listen. The few clues we found after her death suggested that she had searched for a community of similarly troubled teenagers. She wanted to connect with others. I talked at length with Jane Brown about her adopted daughter from China. When she was nine years old, her psychiatrist put her on a mood stabilizer to manage her violent mood swings. Within a week, the medication took the edge off her rages and her tantrums subsided. Once she was calm, the psychiatrist was able to work on her psychological and behavioral issues.
