My book was published this week: “Weaving a Family: Genetics, Identity and Adoption.”
My husband and I have three absolutely wonderful children each adopted internationally. Two of them are now in high school. Parenting has been quite the journey, big challenges and small. As I note in the ebook, it seems to me that the traditional adoption literature sometimes understates the role genetics can play in a person’s life, and I've watched that unfold in our family.
One way it happened was around reading. One of my favorite places at DK, one where I’ve commented the most, is on book diaries. I recall Wednesday mornings where I would eagerly await the “What are you reading” diaries. I’ve always been a huge reader, and was probably almost addicted in my teen years to the escapism books gave me. When my children outgrew picture books they showed less appetite than I expected they would for chapter books. I sought out advice from websites that tell you how to raise readers. One thing pointed out is the correlation found between children who are great readers and the number of books in their homes.
My husband is a scientist, and to understand his work (and also for some personal family history reasons) I had read some of the more accessible books on the science of genetics. And I found myself wondering, as I looked around my house with books toppling off shelves, did those studies consider whether these book-rich homes of children who loved to read actually considered biological parents that also liked to read? I’m really not sure, and would love insight if you know. But I began to suspect a faulty correlation/causation assumption here.
The other reason I wrote this book is the pace of the change in science. When the first human genome was sequenced my husband and I went to the major gala celebration. It was an amazing achievement for the scientists gathered: listing all the letters in one person’s DNA had taken 13 years, and cost an estimated $3 billion dollars. Today a human genome can be sequenced in as little as one day and private companies offer that service for as low as $6,000.
As a society we will be having more discussions that touch on issues related to genetics. I think adoptive parents have a special responsibility to have some grounding to have conversations in a factual and supportive way.
Frankly, I think those of us on the liberal side of the political spectrum have a similar responsibility.
I think there are two dangerous fallacies: that genes are all that matter, and that genes don’t matter at all.
These issues can be highly charged. Even though I’m responsible for publicity on this book I was hesitant to write this diary, because I think there are some here who might see the word genetics and immediately jump to conclusions about what I believe. (And let’s face it, this hasn’t been the friendliest place lately). So let me say very explicitly genetics tells us nothing about groups of people. It has been misapplied when used that way. But, I think it can account more than we’d like about who we are.
It is a very difficult thing to talk about, but let me try. As a society at this point in history I think we value verbal intelligence highly. That’s worked out well for me. But some skills I have don’t come as easily to some people as they did to me. Likewise I suck at spatial intelligence, but luckily for me I have a GPS.
And I do mean lucky, because thank goodness I was born in a time and place where I’m able to use my gifts and adjust for my shortcomings in a way that builds a very satisfactory life. But a few generations ago or in another place where women were expected to be quiet and subservient or valued based on small, precise quilt stitching I wouldn’t have fared as well.
One place I think this comes into current debates is that there’s been such a push on encouraging college, and even graduate school for almost everyone. I feel like students are pushed to take on loans that are not in their interest. And we value certain careers over others that may not be in the best interest of the students.
At least in the hyper-educated community I’m part of kids aren’t really encouraged to explore different aspects of themselves. By third grade all the kids know who is in the “TAG” program. None of my children qualified as “talented and gifted,” under the rubric used, but they are all talented and gifted. What does that say to them that they know they are not TAG-identified? At the same time, the community list serve is always asking for recommendations for plumbers and electricians, never for people with high SAT scores.
The book doesn’t go into the political ramifications for education or any of that stuff, but I’m happy to discuss it here. (Nervous, but happy.)
The other reason I hesitated to do a diary on the book is that my true identity will now be revealed. If you go to Amazon and look up,Weaving a Family (please do!) you’ll know who I am in the real world. You can piece together my diaries and my professional life and learn more about me. That would be a boring use of a Saturday night, but feel free.
I have written as part of my job for many years, but this is my first book. Please be kind.