Ethics in Adoption » The Chronicles of Munchkin Land

Things That Are Not Okay: Spam-Soliciting the Internet for Expectant Mothers

Ethics in Adoption, Stupid, Stupid People, Television 8 Responses »

Sep 302011

I woke up to an email from someone informing me that she had been contacted by someone casting for a new “adoption show.” The email was forwarded to me complete with her name, so I checked her out on LinkedIn and Facebook. When I found her on Facebook, I was pleased to see her most recent commenting activity on other pages and walls was visible and click-able.

But I was also appalled.

She’s been spamming quite a few places to get her message out about the casting of this adoption “documentary.” One of them is, arguably, a spam page for “Expectant moms thinking of adoption.” But one of them that got caught in the spam fun was Open Adoption Bloggers’ Facebook page.

Text: I am casting a docu-series for a major cable network. A new show that will be very inspirational and empowering to Birth Mothers and Adoptive Families. Looking for women 16-30 years old who are expecting and looking to place their child in an Open Adoption. Please message me ASAP if you are interested or know someone who might want to share their story.

This is not okay. It’s also stupid and evidence that people in traditional fields do not understand how to use social media even though there’s story after story of people doing it wrong that they could learn from (see also: most recently Ragu). If you’re going to use Facebook to spam your message, do a little research and see if the group you are spamming is going to be remotely interested in your message. This goes beyond being annoyed by spam, of course, as many of the Open Adoption Bloggers are in favor of ethical adoption reform — which also includes taking these adoption documentaries to task. Following a woman around with a camera while she attempts to make a decision of this nature is coercive. She is left feeling like she has no option but to place since she will “ruin” the documentary if she doesn’t. It is the definition of non-verbal coercion. No one says it, no one threatens the expectant mother, but it is understood what the outcome has to be.

Sadly, this is the second “documentary” of this nature that I’ve heard of in the last month. Apparently the OXYGEN Network is also working on their own, but they were “smart” enough to spam Adoptive Families Circle which isn’t filled with people like me who will take them to task. Though they did email Dawn, which is laughable. I don’t know why we’re seeing a resurgence of interest in the documentary aspect of the adoption process. It’s been overplayed for years, and isn’t anything “new” or out of the ordinary. Maybe these documentary people are playing off of what they’re seeing on television, which as we know from my Parenthood and Glee reviews, is non-stop-adoption all the time. It’s a possibility.

But I’m here to tell you: We don’t need another adoption documentary that follows an expectant mother around with cameras. We DO need a big-network documentary that follows around those who are fighting for their Original Birth Certificates. THAT is what society needs to learn about adoption right now. Not more 16 & Pregnant, overplayed, unoriginal, unimaginative, coercive faux-documentary bullcrap.

So, POP Magnet Entertainment, unless you have one of those up your sleeves, the adoption blogosphere really doesn’t want to hear what you have to say — especially in spam form. At the very least, teach your employees not only proper etiquette for promoting your casting search but some common sense. Catch a clue.

Why I Won’t Write for Your Adoption Agency Blog

Adoption, in General, Ethics in Adoption 8 Responses »

Mar 242011

Over the past few years — and more frequently in the past few weeks — adoption agencies, facilitators and attorneys have contacted me and asked if the could “syndicate” a recent post of mine on their website. Despite my FAQ specifically saying that — hell to the no — I won’t write for your adoption agency blog, people keep asking. I thought I would share my specific reasons for refusing to do so. In the future, I will just reply with this link.

1. First and foremost, no, you cannot copy/paste my post on your site with a mere linkback and call it “syndication.” My writing takes time, effort and skill. You may think that you’re offering me a great deal; exposure via more hits on my site and more name recognition within the adoption community. But I don’t care about hit stats and I am quite fine building my own name recognition in the ways that I find appropriate. If you want bloggers to share a post they have already written on their site, research syndication standards. For an example of a good syndication offer and program, please view BlogHer’s awesome program.

2. Secondly, I will not take the time, effort and skill to create a post of original content for your agency site. My time is precious. If I am taking the time to create original content, it will be for my sites or for someone who is paying me — with rare exceptions. I have been known to write for free on certain websites (big name sites, friends’ blogs as a guest post, charity), but trust me, I won’t make an exception for an adoption agency. Why? See below.

3. Most importantly, I don’t trust you. There are very, very few adoption agencies currently in “business” whom I consider ethical. I’m talking under five. And even for those very few, I wouldn’t write for them. Why? Until ethical reform happens and turns the table on the business of adoption, a chance exists that a previously ethical agency could get greedy and ruin their previous ethical standing. If something like that happened — and my name was on their website as a contributing writer — it would be perceived that I was approving of their lack in ethics. And I’m not. Even if you offered me lots of money (see issue #1), I do not want my name to be associated with an agency that isn’t on the up-and-up. So, in the end, I won’t chance writing for your agency just in case you decide to trample on expectant parents’ rights, fathers’ rights, adoptee rights, adoptive parent rights or feel like charging adoptive parents crazy amounts of money — just because you can.

It’s pretty simple.

Maybe someday, when ethical reform comes along (because it will) and agencies are forced to adhere to laws and codes of conduct, I’ll reconsider. Until then, the answer is no.

Because you can still charge a different amount of money for a “healthy white baby” and a “healthy black baby.” Because you can move an expectant mother to a different state to avoid dealing with the biological father and his pesky rights. Because you refuse to believe that having the same attorney for birth parents and adoptive parents is a conflict of interest. Because you have unlicensed employees offering biased counseling to expectant mothers — who often turn around and tell the potential adoptive parents what was discussed during said counseling. Because you use coercive language (do you have a section for “birth mothers” on your site?) and tactics (presenting adoptive parents as perfect and reinforcing that single parents are somehow less than). Because you force adoptive parents to pay for expectant parents’ expenses (which is legal in some states, but not ethical, thus forcing a form of obligation on the expectant parents’ part and a totally unfair burden on the part of the adoptive parents. Because you still sell semi-open/semi-closed adoptions as real open adoption. Because you neglect to tell expectant parents considering relinquishment the laws about openness in their state. Because your education about the trials and tribulations and awesomeness of openness are lacking, setting families up to fail. Because you neglect to offer post-placement options for families, setting them up to fail. Because you are not involved or — at the very least — supportive of adoptees’ fight for the Original Birth Certificates. Maybe you’re not doing all of those things. Maybe you’re only doing one. But one is still unethical.

And sadly, the list goes on.

I don’t fault you for not understanding blogging as a real medium, thus worthy of pay and consideration of the author. Many agencies are new to the blogging world and lacking a knowledge of proper etiquette. I will let you know that linking to a blogger and using a fair use snippet of their piece is acceptable practice. (For more on that, see “The More You Take, The Less Fair Your Use Is Likely to Be” section in this very important piece at NOLO. PS: See how I did that?) I approve of agencies, facilitators and attorneys linking to and appropriately citing bloggers, especially when they are discussing ethical reforms and issues.

But, no, I won’t write for your agency (or your facilitator or your attorney) until you can prove to me that you are acting above and beyond what is legal and have moved into an award-worthy ethical way to conduct adoptions. Until then, please understand and respect my desire not to be associated with your “brand.”