ISO Birth Mom M/A 1/2/70 Spence Chapin
Glen portela
Background Information for Glen Portela
Prepared by Melissa Abate, MSW
July, 2001
Below please find your non-identifying information.
This information has
been taken from the agency records and has not been verified.
I hope that
you find it answers some questions for you.
According to the social record, your birth mother
was 21 years old at the
time of your birth. She was further described
in the record as being a
petite, 5' tall young woman who normally weighed
100 pounds. She had blue
eyes, medium brown hair and appeared to be much
younger than her 21 years.
Your birth mother was of the Protestant faith
and of Irish and German
nationality. Your birth mother was a high
school graduate who had also
attended beautician school. At the time
of your birth, your birth mother
was employed as a hairdresser. According
to the social record, your birth
mother enjoyed all outdoor activities and was
in good health.
Your birth mother shared the following information
about her family with her
social worker. Your birth maternal grandmother
(your birth mother's mother)
was 44 years old at the time of your birth and
of Irish ancestry. According
to the social record, your birth mother's mother
was in good health at the
time of your birth and was employed in the delicatessen
of the local super
market. Your birth maternal grandfather
(your birth mother's father) was 45
years old at the time of your birth and was employed
in the business field.
There was no further information in the record
about your birth mother's
father.
Your birth mother shared that she was the eldest
in her family and had two
brothers and two sisters. Her
eldest brother was 20 years old at the time
of your birth, was a high school graduate and
was employed at the time of
your birth. Her next brother was 15 years
old at the time of your birth and
in the tenth grade. Your birth mother's
sisters were 14 and 13 years old at
the time of your birth and were both in the eighth
grade. Your birth
mother shared that she had a close relationship
with her mother, but was
afraid to tell her mother of the pregnancy because
she "did not want to hurt
her mother". Your birth mother also expressed
her desire to keep the
pregnancy from her younger siblings who she felt
looked up to her.
Ultimately, your birth mother did share the pregnancy
with her parents who
tried to be supportive of her. Your birth
mother shared that she felt
adoption was in your best interest as she would
not be able to provide for
you either financially or emotionally because
she was living on her own and
did not want to burden her family with a baby.
Your birth mother shared the following information
about your birth father
with her social worker. Your birth father
was described in the record as
being a 21 years old, Caucasian, Protestant,
Irish, young man who was a high
school graduate employed in construction.
Physically your birth mother
described your birth father as being 5'10" tall,
weighing 160 pounds with
blue eyes and blonde hair. Your birth parents
attended high school
together, but did not know each other well until
after high school. Your
birth mother shared that they had gone on a few
dates and she had not seem
him for 6 months when she learned that she was
pregnant. Your birth mother
felt strongly that she did not want your birth
father to know of the
pregnancy and decided not to share it with him.
There is no further
information in the record about your birth father
or his family.
You were born on January 2, 1970 at 9:43 pm after
5 hours and 53 minutes of
labor. At birth you weighed 5 pounds and
15 ounces and were 20" long. You
were circumcised at the hospital on January 3,
1970 and discharged from the
hospital on January 7, 1970 in good condition.
Your birth mother and your
birth mother's mother accompanied you to the
agency. At this point your
birth mother asked many questions about your
future and expressed concern
that you be placed in your permanent home as
quickly as possible. Your
birth mother expressed pride in the fact that
you were an attractive and
healthy baby and expressed her desire that
you grow up healthy and happy.
Your birth mother shared that she hoped to return
to work as soon as
possible as she felt it would be best if she
kept busy. Your birth mother
struggled with her decision to place you in adoption
but felt that you
should have two parents who could provide for
you.
On January 30, 1970 you met your adoptive parents
at the agency who
expressed immediately how beautiful you were.
You joined the Portela family
on that day.
I hope that this answers some of your questions
and I am available if you
have any additional questions. Please feel
free to call me at 212-360-0237
with any questions.
If this is you please feel free
to contact.
Love ,
Glen
helicon
"Glen portela" <gpor...@bellatlantic.net> wrote in message news:3BBE6A91...@bellatlantic.net...All I Know Is...................
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.282 / Virus Database: 150 - Release Date: 25/09/01
fiend
wrote:
>In article <RGzv7.4669$w5.3...@news.indigo.ie>,
> "helicon" <hel...@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>> Good luck with your search.
>>
>> Just an aside: Is it normal to circumcise newborns?
>
>Only the guys.
In the United States, most male babies born in hospitals have been circumcised
since, I believe, the 1930s or so, in part because it was believed to reduce
masturbation. The practice has come into question in recent years, and though
there are valid hygienic arguments to be made in its favor, I'm unconvinced of
the need for it. Others undoubtedly will disagree.
whoever
-------------------
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.
It is by the beans of java that thoughts acquire speed,
The hands develop shaking,
The shaking becomes a warning;
It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.
Adam
"fiend" <rev...@aol.compromise> wrote in message
news:20011006140710...@nso-fi.aol.com...
<snip>
> In the United States, most male babies born in hospitals have been
circumcised
> since, I believe, the 1930s or so, in part because it was believed to
reduce
> masturbation.
Doesn't work
Elizabeth
>In the United States, most male babies born in hospitals have been
>circumcised
>since, I believe, the 1930s or so, in part because it was believed to reduce
>masturbation. The practice has come into question in recent years, and though
>there are valid hygienic arguments to be made in its favor, I'm unconvinced
>of
>the need for it. Others undoubtedly will disagree.
>
>whoever
>
There's a definite trend away from unnecessary circumcision, with those for
whom it holds no religious significance. In some places in the U.S., it's
about 50-50 now. California comes to mind. I can't remember where I read the
stat, but I'll look it up if anyone insists.
Elizabeth
Lainie Petersen
Elizabeth wrote:
>
>
> There's a definite trend away from unnecessary circumcision, with those for
> whom it holds no religious significance. In some places in the U.S., it's
> about 50-50 now. California comes to mind. I can't remember where I read the
> stat, but I'll look it up if anyone insists.
>
Depends on where you live, I think. I didn't have my son circumcized in 1987, and
the doctor heartily approved of my choice. One difficulty in the states is that
it used to be pretty routine, and some men (and women) are uncomfortable with
having a son that is uncircumcized.
Lainie
Julia
It is an interesting contrast to Australia. It used to be routine
here also, but the tide turned dramatically about 20 years ago. My
stepson (26 yrs) was done, but not our five younger sons. It is so
rare now that when South Park showed the episode where Ike was to be
circumcised, my sons and their friend couldn't quite work out what was
going on. I had to explain the process to them. Soon after this my 13
yr old son acquired a South Park t-shirt that reads "Cutting of
wee-wees is uncool".
Julia
helicon
"fiend" <rev...@aol.compromise> wrote in message
news:20011006140710...@nso-fi.aol.com...
<donne...@snowball.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <RGzv7.4669$w5.3...@news.indigo.ie>,
> > "helicon" <hel...@eircom.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Good luck with your search.
> >>
> >> Just an aside: Is it normal to circumcise newborns?
> >
> >Only the guys.
>
> In the United States, most male babies born in hospitals have been
circumcised
> since, I believe, the 1930s or so, in part because it was believed to
reduce
> masturbation. The practice has come into question in recent years, and
though
> there are valid hygienic arguments to be made in its favor, I'm
unconvinced of
> the need for it. Others undoubtedly will disagree.
I can't imagine *anyone* deliberately inflicting pain on a newborn, for ANY
reason.
Helen
>
> whoever
> -------------------
> It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.
> It is by the beans of java that thoughts acquire speed,
> The hands develop shaking,
> The shaking becomes a warning;
> It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.
>
fiend
<adam...@sargant.net> wrote:
>Doesn't work
No kidding.
fiend
<lpet...@clapper.com> wrote:
>some men (and women) are uncomfortable with
>having a son that is uncircumcized.
Sorta like a red house.
fiend
wrote:
>I can't imagine *anyone* deliberately inflicting pain on a newborn, for
>ANY reason.
"Oh, but they don't *feel* pain the same way we do, you know." -- that was the
usual rationalization.
helicon
"fiend" <rev...@aol.compromise> wrote in message
> In article <pIKv7.4866$w5.3...@news.indigo.ie>, "helicon"
<hel...@eircom.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I can't imagine *anyone* deliberately inflicting pain on a newborn, for
> >ANY reason.
>
> "Oh, but they don't *feel* pain the same way we do, you know." -- that was
the
> usual rationalization.
Oh but they DO. (I know you know that!) I have heard the *shrieks* of agony
from babies who were being circumcised without anaesthetic (for religious
reasons it had to be done that way)
I thought it was barbaric. The babies were very shocked afterwards. Everyone
else was grinning - so proud of themselves, it made me sick.
Helen
>
> whoever
> -------------------
> It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.
> It is by the beans of java that thoughts acquire speed,
> The hands develop shaking,
> The shaking becomes a warning;
> It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion.
>
AdoptaDad
From: rev...@aol.compromise (fiend)
Date: 10/6/01 7:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: <20011006192247...@nso-ch.aol.com>
In article <3BBF7097...@clapper.com>, Lainie Petersen
<lpet...@clapper.com> wrote:
>some men (and women) are uncomfortable with
>having a son that is uncircumcized.
Sorta like a red house.
whoever
-------------------
That's er... umm... stretchin' it a little bit.
Johnson
SusanDyne
>From: rev...@aol.compromise (fiend)
>Message-id: <20011006192247...@nso-ch.aol.com>
>
>In article <3BBF7097...@clapper.com>, Lainie Petersen
><lpet...@clapper.com> wrote:
>
>>some men (and women) are uncomfortable with
>>having a son that is uncircumcized.
>
>Sorta like a red house.
>
>whoever
I'd be terribly uncomfortable if my son had a red house instead of a penis.
Susan
helicon
"AdoptaDad" <adop...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011006201450...@mb-fs.aol.com...
Ouch. I thought the idea was to shorten it!
Helen
>
> Johnson
SusanDyne
>Date: 10/6/2001 7:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <xFMv7.4908$w5.3...@news.indigo.ie>
>
>
>"fiend" <rev...@aol.compromise> wrote in message
>news:20011006192249...@nso-ch.aol.com...
>> In article <pIKv7.4866$w5.3...@news.indigo.ie>, "helicon"
><hel...@eircom.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I can't imagine *anyone* deliberately inflicting pain on a newborn, for
>> >ANY reason.
>>
>> "Oh, but they don't *feel* pain the same way we do, you know." -- that was
>the
>> usual rationalization.
>
>Oh but they DO. (I know you know that!) I have heard the *shrieks* of agony
>from babies who were being circumcised without anaesthetic (for religious
>reasons it had to be done that way)
>
>I thought it was barbaric. The babies were very shocked afterwards. Everyone
>else was grinning - so proud of themselves, it made me sick.
>
>Helen
>
people do. It is the first sacrament, which is why they are smiling. I don't
think they felt it was barbaric and I am sure they did not want to see their
child in pain.
Now, my least favorite religion has a seven year old girl dressed like a bride
to receive her first communion. Pretty scary and silly to me, but it is a
religious ritual and comes with the territory.
I am sure someone out there will say, "but there is no pain involved that
ritual". Other than psychological pain, I agree. My point, some people need to
follow religious customs.
Susan
Julia
You'd be uncomfortable? How do you think your son would feel!!
Julia
helicon
"SusanDyne" <susa...@aol.cometrue> wrote in message
news:20011006202643...@mb-mv.aol.com...
I know that, and I didn't mean to offend anyone. I feel the same about
female circumcision.
Not one that I chose to have, but most Jewish
> people do. It is the first sacrament, which is why they are smiling. I
don't
> think they felt it was barbaric and I am sure they did not want to see
their
> child in pain.
But the people of whom I am speaking would not permit any form of
pain-killer. I know that others most certainly DO, and don't feel that their
son is any less blessed.
>
> Now, my least favorite religion has a seven year old girl dressed like a
bride
> to receive her first communion. Pretty scary and silly to me, but it is a
> religious ritual and comes with the territory.
Yes - revolting to me too. But then you will always get people who go over
the top and it is often those who have least who seem to do it. In many
parishes in Ireland such ostentation is banned. There have been attempts to
introduce a simple plain white robe, to be worn over ordinary clothes. Some
parents object, because they love their 'day out'. I detest the frills and
flounces and the ridiculous parasols and gloves.
I remember my own dress as very plain and simple, made by my mother, as was
my jacket and veil. She crocheted my socks too! Simplicity was the thing -
and to this day that is what I prefer.
>
> I am sure someone out there will say, "but there is no pain involved that
> ritual". Other than psychological pain, I agree.
I don't see much psychological pain in *dressing up* - children love it -
however there IS the excruciating agony of Thin Wallet Syndrome!
My point, some people need to
> follow religious customs.
Of course they do, but if the symbolism is bathed in pain, then it is
tarnished somewhat in my view.
Helen
>
> Susan
Elizabeth
>> There's a definite trend away from unnecessary circumcision, with those for
>> whom it holds no religious significance. In some places in the U.S., it's
>> about 50-50 now. California comes to mind. I can't remember where I read
>the
>> stat, but I'll look it up if anyone insists.
>>
Lainie:
>Depends on where you live, I think. I didn't have my son circumcized in 1987,
>and
>the doctor heartily approved of my choice. One difficulty in the states is
>that
>it used to be pretty routine, and some men (and women) are uncomfortable with
>having a son that is uncircumcized.
>
>Lainie
>
Yes, I agree. I've also heard people say they chose circumcision so their son
would look like the other boys. The vast majority of boys born in California
these days are *not* circ'd (I looked it up <g>), so parents who want their
boys to look like the others will be choosing not to circumcise.
I've heard that many parents want their boys to look like the father in the
family. To me, what it "looks like" shouldn't even be a factor in the decision
whether or not to circ. Easy for me to say, since we didn't have a real choice
in whether or not either of our sons got the cut. Our older son came to us
uncirc'd at 16 months. Our younger son was circ'd at his birthmother's request
before she relinquished him. It doesn't bother us that they don't "look alike"
and that only one of them looks like his father. I hope it doesn't bother
them!
Elizabeth
Ron Morgan
"Don" <donne...@snowball.edu> wrote in message
news:trvl0aq...@corp.supernews.com...
> In article <20011006192249...@nso-ch.aol.com>,
> rev...@aol.compromise (fiend) wrote:
>
> > "Oh, but they don't *feel* pain the same way we do, you know." -- that
was the
> > usual rationalization.
>
>
> I'm really tired of women telling us men how it feels to be circumsized.
> We don't talk about your menstral cramps.
>
> Here's the deal:
>
> Not a single guy on this newsgroup can tell you that it hurt them one
> bit.
Didn't hurt me cuz my folks didn't have it done for some reason, I expect
because I sat around the hospital four days before they took me home and my
b-mom hadn't okeyed the procedure. I did watch a circumcision while I was in
the hosptial nursery with my oldest. Two gum-chewing nurses strapped the
little dude to a board, clamped and cut him. The little dude screamed about
how you'd expect to scream if two women casually tied you to a table and cut
a quarter inch off your dick.
What I find sort of pathetic are guys who have "foreskin restorative
surgery" and moan about how much sensation they've missed out on. How would
they know?
Ron
>
> Case CLOSED!
>
> - Don
Ron Morgan
"Elizabeth" <mem...@aol.comeondown> wrote in message
news:20011007000422...@mb-fm.aol.com...
> I've heard that many parents want their boys to look like the father in
the
> family. To me, what it "looks like" shouldn't even be a factor in the
decision
> whether or not to circ.
I've seen that rationale, and it's a strange one. It's not like fathers and
sons spend a lot of time comparing privates. I think I saw my dad's dingus
once in my life, while we were camping and taking a leak together.
Julia
wrote:
>
>"Elizabeth" <mem...@aol.comeondown> wrote in message
>news:20011007000422...@mb-fm.aol.com...
>
>> I've heard that many parents want their boys to look like the father in
>the
>> family. To me, what it "looks like" shouldn't even be a factor in the
>decision
>> whether or not to circ.
>
>I've seen that rationale, and it's a strange one. It's not like fathers and
>sons spend a lot of time comparing privates. I think I saw my dad's dingus
>once in my life, while we were camping and taking a leak together.
It doesn't seem to have made any difference to the boys here. We have
a generation of fathers who are nearly all circed, and sons who are
not. They seem to have survived the shock of looking dissimilar.
It always seemed odd to me that some thought their sons would feel
strange not looking like their fathers, but nobody gave a thought to
little girls - who all seem to cope with bodies that looking nothing
like their mothers.
Julia
SusanDyne
>Message-id: <FAPv7.4929$w5.3...@news.indigo.ie>
No comparison whatsoever. That is done under the shroud of 'religion' but it is
a malicious, sadistic act that causes women pain for life.
>
>Not one that I chose to have, but most Jewish
>> people do. It is the first sacrament, which is why they are smiling. I
>don't
>> think they felt it was barbaric and I am sure they did not want to see
>their
>> child in pain.
>
>But the people of whom I am speaking would not permit any form of
>pain-killer. I know that others most certainly DO, and don't feel that their
>son is any less blessed.
>
Typically, they put wine on gauze and feel it is enough to dull the pain. It's
not imo, but I am in the minority. I have seen them done, very close up, as
godmother, and it ain't pretty with or without anesthetic.
>> Now, my least favorite religion has a seven year old girl dressed like a
>bride
>> to receive her first communion. Pretty scary and silly to me, but it is a
>> religious ritual and comes with the territory.
>
>Yes - revolting to me too. But then you will always get people who go over
>the top and it is often those who have least who seem to do it. In many
>parishes in Ireland such ostentation is banned. There have been attempts to
>introduce a simple plain white robe, to be worn over ordinary clothes. Some
>parents object, because they love their 'day out'. I detest the frills and
>flounces and the ridiculous parasols and gloves.
>
>I remember my own dress as very plain and simple, made by my mother, as was
>my jacket and veil. She crocheted my socks too! Simplicity was the thing -
>and to this day that is what I prefer.
>
You have got to see what these girls and boys wear. She's in a veil with
flowers, he's in a tux.
>> I am sure someone out there will say, "but there is no pain involved that
>> ritual". Other than psychological pain, I agree.
>
>I don't see much psychological pain in *dressing up* - children love it -
>however there IS the excruciating agony of Thin Wallet Syndrome!
>
Susan
helicon
"Don" <donne...@snowball.edu> wrote in message
news:trvl0aq...@corp.supernews.com...
> In article <20011006192249...@nso-ch.aol.com>,
> rev...@aol.compromise (fiend) wrote:
>
was the
> > usual rationalization.
>
>
> I'm really tired of women telling us men how it feels to be circumsized.
> We don't talk about your menstral cramps.
>
> Here's the deal:
>
> Not a single guy on this newsgroup can tell you that it hurt them one
> bit.
Ah yes, Don, but it's the LONG TERM effect that is worrying. You know - the
rattiness, the difficulty in smiling, in relating to anyone outside the
fence (harks back to the bars of the cot/cradle and the perceived threat
from people *out there*) So it's not the *memory* per se of the pain of the
unkindest cut, but the *possibility* that there are more of *them* out
there, who are polishing up their scalpels to have another go. <eg>
Helen
>
> Case CLOSED!
>
> - Don
Sue Tretter
There is a body of scientific evidence which demonstrates that male
infants are traumatized by unmedicated (or under-medicated) circs.
Before the research was completed, most medical personnel who
were involved in circs held the same position you seem to, ie
the kids aren't hurt, and if they are, they don't remember it later.
I'm glad that most medical personnel have been enlightened.
For those about to ask me for a citation, I don't have that information
anymore, but if you do a Google search, you can likely find the
data, as well as those males who advocate for surgery that
is supposed to reverse the circ. (No, I'm not kidding.)
Don wrote:
> <snip>
> Okay!
>
> I'm really tired of women telling us men how it feels to be circumsized.
> We don't talk about your menstral cramps.
I don't think I've heard anyone talk about "menstral" cramps, but I have
listened to many boys/men discuss menstrual cramps, PMS, etc.
> Here's the deal:
>
> Not a single guy on this newsgroup can tell you that it hurt them one
> bit.
>
> Case CLOSED!
Perhaps, but I don't think so.
Best wishes.
Sue T.
Palms2pines
>>>having a son that is uncircumcized.
>>
>>Sorta like a red house.
>>
>>whoever
>
>I'd be terribly uncomfortable if my son had a red house instead of a penis.
>
>Susan
>
Oh, dear. Have we gotten off topic?
P2P
Palms2pines
>>ANY reason.>>
Shots? Eye drops? Pricking the foot for blood samples?
P2P
helicon
"Palms2pines" <palms...@aol.comh8spam> wrote in message
news:20011007135850...@mb-ck.aol.com...
> >>I can't imagine *anyone* deliberately inflicting pain on a newborn, for
> >>ANY reason.>>
>
> Shots? Eye drops? Pricking the foot for blood samples?
There is pain and there is......well use your imagination.
Helen
>
>
> P2P
Alex Wolfson
>
> In article <3BBF7097...@clapper.com>, Lainie Petersen
> <lpet...@clapper.com> wrote:
>
> >some men (and women) are uncomfortable with
> >having a son that is uncircumcized.
>
> Sorta like a red house.
My house is red.
Alex Wolfson
>
> I'm really tired of women telling us men how it feels to be circumsized.
> We don't talk about your menstral cramps.
We don't?
rkbose
> >> Now, my least favorite religion has a seven year old girl dressed like a
> >bride
> >> to receive her first communion. Pretty scary and silly to me, but it is a
> >> religious ritual and comes with the territory.
> >
> You have got to see what these girls and boys wear. She's in a veil with
> flowers, he's in a tux.
That must be the parents' idea. When the kids I knew had their First Holy Communion
(and yes, they capitalised it..) the girls wore frilly white frocks and the boys
wore long pants and jackets and ties. Anyway, since all little girls wore frilly
dresses for all formal occasions (mainly birthday parties) and little boys all wore
ties for similar events, it did not seem far out of line. IRC, the received wisdom
was that the little girls loved it, the little boys hated it, and the parents had
full length photographs taken to commemorate the event. No one had gloves,
parasols, or tuxes.
AFAIK, it would still be a valid religious even if the kids were wearing everyday
clothes.
Rupa
helicon
"rkbose" <rkb...@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message
news:3BC2E32D...@pacific.net.sg...
The sacrament is given to children *anywhere and everywhere* without
reference to the quality or colour of the clothes, or the wealth or poverty
of the family. It has absolutely nothing to do with it, at all.
As far as I know, in Quebec for example, it is usual for all the children to
wear a plain white alb over their street clothes. The white simply signifies
purity and innocence.
Helen
>
> Rupa
rkbose
> "Palms2pines" <palms...@aol.comh8spam> wrote in message
> news:20011007135850...@mb-ck.aol.com...
> > >>I can't imagine *anyone* deliberately inflicting pain on a newborn, for
> > >>ANY reason.>>
> >
> > Shots? Eye drops? Pricking the foot for blood samples?
>
> There is pain and there is......well use your imagination.
>
> Helen
I recall the doctor backing away very carefully when I grabbed my baby back
after he'd pricked her foot. I think his ears were hurting.
Rupa
helicon
Did you box them, or simply shriek? Or was it the squalls of the poor child?
Helen
>
> Rupa
rkbose
> In article <20011006140710...@nso-fi.aol.com>,
> rev...@aol.compromise (fiend) wrote:
>
> > In the United States, most male babies born in hospitals have been circumcised
> > since, I believe, the 1930s or so, in part because it was believed to reduce
> > masturbation. The practice has come into question in recent years, and though
> > there are valid hygienic arguments to be made in its favor, I'm unconvinced of
> > the need for it. Others undoubtedly will disagree.
>
> Nowadays it's just done because the results look better than an anteater.
>
Sort of like a pre-emptive nose job?