As the (nominally) jewish, white adoptive father of a Korean-born 2-year old daughter, I feel that it is easy to miss the point of the story about Cece. As I read the story in the Times, she is part of a loving family, and is, appropriately, making herself the main character of her own life story. Why should she be the subject of even mild hand-wringing by jews, chinese or anyone else? If she has the main criteria of an emotionally successful life--love and self-respect--she is already ahead of the game. Adults should do everything in their power to protect and sustain these vital assets in our society's children, not undermine them, as we do if we examine a heritage as if it is a troubling oddity of modern life. Those who are made uncomfortable by this or question how it can fit into a self-identity are saying more about themselves than about Cece. The evolution of our communities should be towards acceptance, love, respect and support for the individual, with all her complexities. None of these are the exclusive domain of religion; in fact, religion in my view is frequently the main obstacle.
Everyone grows up in a family and context that is unique to them, forms a large part of who they are, and has to be examined and re-examined throughout a hopefully long life. The meaning is not fixed, but fluid. Adopted children have histories that are arguably more unique than children who were not adopted, but in the end the journey of life is about coming to terms with ourselves and others. Judaism, adoption and racial identity are overlays on this mission, and though they can be highly influential, in the end should not be central. Indeed, I believe that the emerging culture in the US, in which intermarriage, interfaith, intercultural relationships are becoming common, is the natural trend for human society, and the greatest hope we have for not destroying one another in senseless wars of politics, resources, religion or anything else.
I write this as a Buddhist-inclining atheist married to a former Catholic atheist. I recognize that among jews in particular suggesting that judaism need not be the central organizing fact of life is an unpopular, possibly incomprehensible, stance. But it is precisely these experiences in my life that enable this perspective. Think about it--are the best relationships in your life really based on common religious belief, or are they on a deeper, purely human level?
Being a parent by adoption only reinforces this insight. The relationship that my daugher and my wife and I have formed as a family transcends genetics and culture. As a parent, I feel it is my responsibility to provide my daughter with any opportunities that my means and ability can achieve. I want her to know and understand Korean culture, and will send her to Korean cultural schools and programs so that she has the chance to connect authentically with her homeland if she chooses to do so throughout her life. In my view it is no different than providing her with an education, or teaching her to swim or play soccer or to cook or to sing. These are all things that have value in themselves, but none except education are required for an emotionally satisfying life. She has no obligation to enjoy or continue them. Why should a religious heritage be any different? Embrace it if it provides value to you, but do not be bound by it.
As the (nominally) jewish, white adoptive father of a Korean-born 2-year old daughter, I feel that it is easy to miss the point of the story about Cece. As I read the story in the Times, she is part of a loving family, and is, appropriately, making herself the main character of her own life story. Why should she be the subject of even mild hand-wringing by jews, chinese or anyone else? If she has the main criteria of an emotionally successful life--love and self-respect--she is already ahead of the game. Adults should do everything in their power to protect and sustain these vital assets in our society's children, not undermine them, as we do if we examine a heritage as if it is a troubling oddity of modern life. Those who are made uncomfortable by this or question how it can fit into a self-identity are saying more about themselves than about Cece. The evolution of our communities should be towards acceptance, love, respect and support for the individual, with all her complexities. None of these are the exclusive domain of religion; in fact, religion in my view is frequently the main obstacle.
Everyone grows up in a family and context that is unique to them, forms a large part of who they are, and has to be examined and re-examined throughout a hopefully long life. The meaning is not fixed, but fluid. Adopted children have histories that are arguably more unique than children who were not adopted, but in the end the journey of life is about coming to terms with ourselves and others. Judaism, adoption and racial identity are overlays on this mission, and though they can be highly influential, in the end should not be central. Indeed, I believe that the emerging culture in the US, in which intermarriage, interfaith, intercultural relationships are becoming common, is the natural trend for human society, and the greatest hope we have for not destroying one another in senseless wars of politics, resources, religion or anything else.
I write this as a Buddhist-inclining atheist married to a former Catholic atheist. I recognize that among jews in particular suggesting that judaism need not be the central organizing fact of life is an unpopular, possibly incomprehensible, stance. But it is precisely these experiences in my life that enable this perspective. Think about it--are the best relationships in your life really based on common religious belief, or are they on a deeper, purely human level?
Being a parent by adoption only reinforces this insight. The relationship that my daugher and my wife and I have formed as a family transcends genetics and culture. As a parent, I feel it is my responsibility to provide my daughter with any opportunities that my means and ability can achieve. I want her to know and understand Korean culture, and will send her to Korean cultural schools and programs so that she has the chance to connect authentically with her homeland if she chooses to do so throughout her life. In my view it is no different than providing her with an education, or teaching her to swim or play soccer or to cook or to sing. These are all things that have value in themselves, but none except education are required for an emotionally satisfying life. She has no obligation to enjoy or continue them. Why should a religious heritage be any different? Embrace it if it provides value to you, but do not be bound by it.