This is a fascinating, well-written, and important paper discussing the implications of adoption--with both birth and adoptive parents--to genealogy and the construction of family trees. It is highly original and has the potential to make a major contribution to the future of genealogical research and to family studies generally. I have several comments which are primarily for the author/s' interest rather than revision issues:

1. Closed records: It might be worth noting that the various court decisions opening birth records now mean that the implications of adoption for family history and genealogy become even more serious. Adoptive offspring may not only be surprised to learn they are adopted, they now have full access to the records of their adoption including the identities of their birth parents in many states in the U.S., for example.

2. Nomenclature: The one edit I believe the author/s should make is with respect to p. 16, lines 419-432 discussing nomenclature. In the adoption literature, the most frequent term used to refer to the birth mother is exactly that: birth mother. This is not mentioned in this paragraph, and the term "birth mother" should be highlighted above other possibilities given that this term is descriptive, emotionally neutral, and in far more common usage internationally than any other.

3. Popular culture: The recent movie Return to Seoul was a relevant and fascinating look at the emergence of "ghosts" as a somewhat unwilling adoptee returns to her birthplace in Korea having grown up in Paris and adopted as an infant. The unraveling of preconceived ideas, uncomfortable discoveries, and complex emotions fits well within the scope of this paper.

4. Research on birth mothers and adoptions: An excellent book that might interest the author/s if not necessarily relevant to this paper is Ann Fessler's study of over 100 birth mothers The Girls Who Went Away: The hidden history of women who surrendered children for adoption in the decades before Roe v. Wade.

5. DNA testing: The implications of DNA tests available from Ancestry.com and 23AndMe should be noted as, again, it is almost inevitable that adoptees and siblings of adoptees who undertake DNA tests will become aware of previously unknown siblings and relatives.

6. Key points for the abstract: Two key points struck me as issues that should be highlighted in the Abstract (a) p. 11, lines 283-284 "Pretending that the birth family is of little or no importance... relegates them to the position of "hereditary ghosts". The abstract could actually emphasize the futility of this approach given the huge risk (open records, DNA tests, etc) of discovery; and (b) the urgent need to revisit traditional family trees to ensure they do not force choices that are not legitimate and create emotional conflict. Family trees, as the author/s point out, are not neutral (p. 15, lines 406-413). While the current abstract notes the challenge of traditional family trees (p. 1, lines 11-12), it does not reflect the urgency of resolving this situation.

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is an interesting and well written paper which tackles the issue of adoption in the study of family history and the creation of family trees. It justifies why the author calls the birth parents in this situation 'ghosts' and why they can haunt the various other people involved in an adoption scenario, and why trauma can be involved. It calls for greater awareness of adoption in the formulation of family trees and the search for family history. It is well argued and well referenced, and also include personal involvement in the area by the author.

My only caveat is that it would have been good to include some recommendation for how family historians can in fact include adopted members (whether adopted 'out' or 'in' to the family investigated) and indicate where alternative family trees 'shadow' the main one researched and in what ways. Thus some sources for finding out about adopted members, including maybe DNA analysis searches, and some way of incorporating this knowledge into a more standard family tree. Not an easy task, but a signal to others for further creative work in this arena.

Article Menu

“The Past Is Never Dead. It’s Not Even Past” (Faulkner, 1919 Requiem for a Nun p. 85): Mapping and Taking Care of the Ghosts in Adoption

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI