
12928863_given-in-love
by Maureen Connelly, Joy Johnson, Janet Sieff
Facing an unplanned pregnancy, mothers considering adoption find honest emotional guidance here—validating grief, affirming love, and reframing the adoption…
In Brief
Given in Love: For Mother's Who are Choosing an Adoption Plan (1989) offers guidance and emotional support to birth mothers navigating the adoption process. Drawing on compassionate insight, it helps women understand their feelings, affirm the validity of their choice, and find peace in the decision to place a child with another family.
Key Ideas
Commitment Must Precede Public Declaration
Chosen love requires a daily act of naming — Hazel's mistake and Alec's mistake are the same one: waiting for the right legal or social category before admitting what they already know to be true. The commitment precedes the declaration, not the other way around.
Specific Details Carry Emotional Weight
Small domestic moments carry the weight of the largest emotional claims. A pond swim instead of a bath, eight mushrooms in a wicker basket, a child hiding in a wardrobe of furs — the book does its most serious emotional work in its most specific physical details.
Rejection Reflects Others' Courage, Not Worth
The person who rejects you first is not evidence of your worth. Reece's 'she's no one' and Alec's clinical 'nanny and finest cook' are both failures of courage, not assessments of Hazel's value. Recognising that distinction is what makes her recovery possible.
Crisis Confirms Belonging Beyond Legal Status
Crisis ratifies belonging in ways that contracts cannot. Hazel's legal status in the household never changes in the course of the book — she is always technically staff — but what she does in the river and in the foyer means she is never really staff again.
Laughter Frees You From Past Pain
The past only loses its power when you can laugh at it. Hazel's laughter at Reece's proposal is not cruelty — it is the first moment she is fully free of him, because she is no longer hurt by his assumptions about who she must have become without him.
Children's Honesty Reveals Hidden Moral Truth
A child's plainspoken love is the book's most reliable moral compass. Every time Roo says what the adults cannot — 'Is she going to be my mama?' 'I don't want to be safe without her' — he is correct, and the adults who listen to him move forward while the ones who deflect stay stuck.
Who Should Read This
Readers interested in Family and Relationships, looking for practical insights they can apply to their own lives.
Given in Love: For Mother's Who are Choosing an Adoption Plan
By Maureen Connelly & Joy Johnson & Janet Sieff
11 min read
Why does it matter? Because the family you build by choice can be more real than the one you inherited by accident.
Two years of clipped photographs — church aisles, honeymoon coastlines, the exact shade of ivory she wanted for her dress — and Hazel feeds all of it to a rubbish fire in about thirty seconds. Not because she chose to let go, but because someone chose for her. What do you do after that? Not the graceful version of moving on that people perform for their families, but the actual thing — when the floor has dropped out and you're fifty miles from everything familiar, hired to cook for a stranger's grief while quietly drowning in your own. This book argues that what happens next matters more than the wound itself. That the roles we think define us — mother, permanent employee, person with a plan — are thinner than we believe, and that the people who shed them, who claim belonging without waiting for permission, are the ones who end up with something real.
The Moment You Realize the Life You Planned Was Built on Someone Else's Lie
Hazel stood on the train platform clutching a satchel full of magazine clippings — gown silhouettes, church flowers, honeymoon destinations she'd spent two years gathering while Reece fought overseas. She'd even kept a ritual going, dabbing his cologne on her pillow after every wash so she might dream of him. When the engine finally pulled in, smoke rising, the platform shaking, she fixed her hair and smoothed her dress and waited for him to come running.
He didn't come running. He stepped off the train and turned back to offer his hand to a woman who smiled at him the way you only smile at someone you've married. When Hazel pressed forward anyway — because what else do you do with two years of certainty — Reece looked at her like she was a problem to be managed. He told his wife not to worry. She was no one. A childhood crush. Something he was leaving behind now that he was grown.
The Stubbs family closed around Sierra without a glance back at Hazel, who stood there, face burning, satchel in hand, watching them go.
That evening, Hazel burned the satchel in a rubbish barrel. What took longer than the burning was absorbing the specific thing Reece had done: he hadn't just fallen for someone else. He'd kept writing. He'd kept her waiting and planning and believing, right up until the moment it was convenient to erase her entirely.
That discovery — that anyone can lie, that devotion offers no protection, that a man you loved since childhood can look at you and say she's no one — doesn't just break a heart. It rebuilds the person around the break. Hazel's story doesn't begin when she heals. It begins the moment she picks up the match.
You Cannot Grieve and Plan at the Same Time — So Hazel Chose to Plan
Choosing to plan is itself a form of grief work — it forces the mind forward when every instinct pulls it backward. Hazel understood this instinctively, even if she couldn't have named it. A week after Reece stepped off that train with a wife on his arm, her older sister Leslie sat across from her, knitting needles moving, and asked a question that cut straight to the bone: not what Hazel wanted from life, but what she wanted for herself. Not what she would cook for a husband, clean for a household, or sacrifice for children — what would she do if she had to earn her own way? Hazel's answer surprised her with how quickly it came: cook. She loved cooking the way some people love a language. Fluently, without thinking.
That answer led her to a folded newspaper on the coffee table and, inside it, a single advertisement from a ranch fifty miles east in a town called Twin Palms. A rancher had suddenly inherited his young nephew to raise after the boy's parents died and needed house staff. Within a month, Hazel had filled out an application, negotiated her duties, and received an acceptance letter. Her response — jumping up and down, vision blurring — wasn't the giddiness of escape. It was the feeling of authorship. She wasn't fleeing Reece. She was writing a sentence about herself that had nothing to do with him.
What she arrived to find was something no advertisement could have prepared her for: a man far too young and, frankly, far too handsome to match her expectations, sprinting across his property after a four-year-old who'd launched himself into a tree like he was born in the canopy. Hazel stood at the gate with her suitcase and watched them for a full ten seconds before she remembered she was supposed to knock. The job she'd applied for was already quietly becoming something larger. This wasn't the life she'd planned. It was hers.
A Child Who Has Just Lost Everything Will Tell You Exactly What He Needs
On the walk home from his parents' funeral, four-year-old Roo looked up at his uncle Alec and asked whether he was coming to live with him now — because Ma and Pa were in Heaven. Alec nodded, too wrecked to speak. Roo didn't cry. He just turned his face to the road ahead and kept walking.
When Hazel arrives at Bugbee Ranch fifty miles from everything she's known, it's Roo who orients her faster than any adult conversation could. Within weeks, at a picnic in a cow pasture with cracker bits flying through the air and everyone laughing, the boy looked between Hazel and Alec and asked whether Hazel was going to be his new mama, since Alec was his papa now. Alec fumbled the answer. Hazel stammered. Roo waited. Then, when they still hadn't quite said yes, he simply insisted: she's a nice lady, and he wanted her to be his new mama.
A four-year-old had just outpaced both of them emotionally. Hazel, who had spent two years planning a life around a man who erased her without a second thought, found herself cross-legged on a blanket being asked the most direct question anyone had put to her in years. She crossed two fingers and told him: yes, like this, we're going to be exactly like this. That image — the crossed fingers, the boy satisfied, the adults catching up — is the moral center of the whole story. Roo doesn't bury grief under plans or silence or excuses. He names the thing directly and makes room for whatever answer comes.
Roo is never a complication in this story. He's the one who keeps saying what's true.
Doing Every Motherly Thing Without Being Allowed to Use the Name
What does it mean to be asked to love a child completely — and then refused the word for it? Alec answers this at the dinner table one ordinary evening, in the least dramatic way possible: reflexively, before Roo has finished asking. The four-year-old looks between his uncle and the woman who wakes him, feeds him, takes him to the pond when he resists the bath, and invents bedtime stories on the spot — and asks, simply, whether she is his new mama. Alec says no before the sentence lands. Then he parcels Hazel out in careful syllables: nanny, finest cook in Twin Palms, possibly the whole state. Hazel finds her plate suddenly very absorbing.
The clinical label stings because it contradicts the assignment Alec himself gave her. He had promoted her from cook to full-time nanny and told her, without irony, to treat Roo as her own. He meant it. The promotion was real, the tenderness genuine. What he could not give her was the name — and that gap, between the feeling he authorised and the word he withheld, is where all the pain lives.
His parents are gone. His sister and brother-in-law died in a rigged stagecoach accident. Every person he has named as his has disappeared. To let Roo call Hazel mama is to make her departure, whenever it comes, unsurvivable. He is not withholding the word to diminish her. He is hoarding it because he knows what happens to the things he names and loves.
Hazel's counter-argument is just as true: she is already there, already doing it, already sick to her stomach at the thought of Roo's grief. Alec's protection theory only holds if she leaves — and she has no intention of leaving. Both of them are right, and wrong in the same direction: neither can see past their own fear long enough to notice the other person is standing in it too. Roo, meanwhile, had already solved this with two crossed fingers and a verdict about nice ladies. The adults are still catching up.
The Only Proof of Family That Actually Counts Happens in a Crisis
The fence rail is already broken when Hazel reaches it — three boards busted outward, an invitation no four-year-old could resist. She steps through without stopping, because stopping would mean thinking, and thinking would mean accepting that Roo has been in the river long enough for the storm to roll in overhead. She runs the slope down to the riverbed calling his name until she hears him answer from somewhere inside the branches of a fallen tree, his voice half-swallowed by the current. When she gets close enough to see him, he is dangling from a branch with his lower half in the water, his grip failing.
Alec arrives at the bank in time to watch what happens next — which is that he cannot help. His weight would collapse the dead tree and send both of them in. Hazel's smaller frame is the only thing that makes the rescue possible. She gets down on her stomach and crawls through the branches toward the boy, reasoning with him, joking with him, telling him firmly he will be doing heavy chores for years when this is over. Roo is paralyzed with fear, saying he can't, he can't. Hazel says he can, and keeps moving toward him until he believes her.
That's the moment. Not a legal filing or a formal role — the proof of family is a woman flat on her belly in the mud, branch after branch scraping her, choosing not to stop.
Later that same evening, a gunman fires through the porch ceiling and Hazel runs for the kitchen, where Roo is standing on his chair with terror on his face, arms already out to her. She scoops him up, carries him across the foyer, opens the wardrobe of furs near the grandfather clock and sets him inside. Her instructions are specific: not a sound, not a peek, she will come to him when it's safe. She closes the door and turns to stand in the foyer — alone, between the child and whatever comes through the front entrance.
Earlier that evening, before any of this, Roo had decided she should drop the formal title and just call her Hazel, because 'Miss' is what servants use for their masters, and that wasn't what she was. He figured it out before she did. She was still standing in the foyer proving it.
The Villain Who Was Always a Mirror
When Hastings finally breaks in the jailhouse — dragged there by Alec after a gunfight on the ranch porch — the confession that comes out isn't the admission of a calculating villain. It's the unraveling of a man who was drunk and distraught because a woman had turned him away, and who lost control of his horses because he was too destroyed by self-pity to hold the reins. Two people died. Alec's sister Danielle. Her husband Larry. Roo was orphaned at four. All of it traceable back to one man's refusal to absorb a rejection and drive sober.
Alec sits at a borrowed desk afterward, stunned — not because justice finally arrived, but because it arrived through a gunfight on his own porch rather than through any court that was supposed to provide it. He had watched the trial months earlier from a wooden bench, fists clenched, while Hastings blamed Danielle for her own death and walked out acquitted. The legal system let it go. What finally caught up with Hastings was Hazel, nearly shot on the same porch where his drinking had set everything in motion years before.
Reece and Hastings are the same man at different scales. Reece sabotaged a woman's future to protect his own convenience. Hastings destroyed a family because a woman wounded his pride. The story puts them side by side as a single argument: the men who cannot survive being refused are not outliers or edge cases. They just cost different amounts.
When Your Past Shows Up to Reclaim You, Laughter Is the Right Answer
He steps out from under a tree with a cigarette dangling from his fingers, its red tip the only thing Hazel can see clearly in the dark. Then comes the voice — warm, practiced, full of the old gravity — and before he has said ten words, she already knows where this is going. Reece Stubbs, the man who handed his last name to a richer woman while Hazel waited with a satchel of wedding clippings, has tracked her to Twin Palms to propose an arrangement: he cannot divorce Sierra without social shame, but Hazel might consider waiting — patiently, quietly — until something happens to her. The inheritance would be considerable. They could share it.
Hazel laughs.
Not a polite deflection, not a nervous cover. Genuine, free laughter — the kind that rises before you can stop it because the situation is simply too absurd. A man who erased her without a second thought has arrived on a ranch she has built her life around, in the dark, smelling of cigarettes, to pitch her a waiting game predicated on his wife's death. And he seems to think this is a reasonable offer.
The laughter tells you exactly where Hazel is. A woman still shaped by his abandonment doesn't laugh at this — she crumbles or rages. Hazel does neither. She finds it funny, says so, and then adds something she has only just discovered by saying it aloud: she is already in love with someone else. Not as a rebuttal. As the simple truth of her life as it currently stands.
When Alec confronts Reece later, man to man in the dark, Reece admits he had imagined Hazel waiting in some dim room somewhere, crying. Alec's response is quiet and direct: she is a grown woman, not a child. That assumption — that she would have stopped existing without him — is where Reece's entire plan collapsed before it started.
You Cannot Name the Love Until You Are Ready to Lose Everything for It
The declaration comes before the proposal does. Alec figures out he loves Hazel not in a moonlit moment or a dramatic confession but while standing in the kitchen watching her carry a soaking-wet Roo up from the river, her clothes muddy, her arms full of thirty-five pounds of exhausted, shivering four-year-old. She sets the boy down, turns to the stove, and asks — offhandedly, not even looking at Alec — whether they have any rum to put in her tea. That word, 'we,' is what breaks him open. She didn't reach for 'you' or 'the house.' She said 'we' because that's how she already understands herself to be located in this family, and she said it without thinking, which means it was true. Alec stands there and feels everything rearrange around that one syllable.
The proposal itself, months later, is the confirmation of what that pronoun already settled. It happens at one in the morning over hot cocoa — not a grand gesture, no candlelight, just the two of them at the kitchen table after the longest night of their lives, Hastings delivered to the jailhouse and Roo finally asleep. And here is where you see that Alec has moved past what section four showed us: a man so shaped by loss he could barely name what he wanted. He names it now. He tells Hazel he wants to restart his life, and then he names the terms plainly: her, Roo, the three of them as a family. Hazel says yes in a whisper and then repeats it at full volume, and she hops on her toes. She is not performing happiness. She is a woman for whom joy has started moving through the body faster than the mind can track it.
The book's quietest image of what all this means is the one that follows: Hazel moves from the third floor to the second. Up to that point she had slept on the servants' level. Now she takes a room on the family floor. Just a change of altitude that says everything the previous sections could only argue for.
Six Years Later, the Orphaned Boy Holds Out His Hand to the Little Girl
Rupert is ten years old and done with the nickname Roo — he has made this clear — when Hazel watches him cross the porch landing and hold out his hand to four-year-old Bella so she can navigate the stairs without stumbling. He doesn't announce it. He doesn't wait for thanks. He just reaches back, the way someone does when the gesture has become second nature.
That small thing is what the whole story has been building toward. A boy who lost his parents to a drunk man's carelessness at age four — who asked his uncle, on the walk home from their funeral, whether he was coming to live with him now — has become the child who steadies the youngest member of the family on the stairs. He learned protection by being protected. He absorbed it from the adults who refused to let grief be his whole story, and now he's handing it forward, one careful step at a time, to a little girl who has never known any arrangement but this one.
The ranch is restored by then — new cattle contracts, a full staff, two maids, the barn getting a proper metal roof. That's the logistical proof that the family survived. Rupert holding out his hand is the deeper proof. Chosen family doesn't just endure; it teaches. The boy who was carried up from the river, hidden in a wardrobe, cross-fingered into belonging, has internalized what was given to him so completely that he now gives it without thinking.
Hazel watches from the porch swing, toe tapping the ground to keep herself moving. She is carrying her second child, though no one knows it yet. The family is still growing.
What Rupert Knows That the Adults Took a Hundred Pages to Learn
There is no ceremony in this ending — just a ten-year-old boy and an outstretched hand. Rupert doesn't think about what he's doing when he reaches back for Bella on the stairs. That's the point. The gesture has become reflex, which means it has become character, which means everyone who chose him first did their work so thoroughly that the work is invisible now. That's what chosen family actually produces: not a touching origin story, but a person who extends protection without keeping score. Hazel moved from the third floor to the second. No announcement, just a change of altitude. Alec said we out loud at one in the morning and meant it permanently. Roo grew into Rupert. And somewhere behind all of it is the quiet truth the book keeps insisting on: belonging doesn't wait for the paperwork. It starts the moment someone decides to act like it's already true.
Notable Quotes
“Thank you for coming, everyone,”
“All right now, I think it’s pretty cut and dry. We all know the bulk of the estate has gone to Miss Chrissie Ripley, the eldest daughter.”
“…and the rest of the crew, to be distributed by Miss Chrissie Ripley at her discretion. There are a few sums bequeathed to friends around town but nothing else important to note.”
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is Given in Love about?
- Given in Love: For Mothers Who are Choosing an Adoption Plan is a 1989 guidance book by Maureen Connelly, Joy Johnson, and Janet Sieff. It provides emotional support and compassionate insight to birth mothers navigating the adoption process. The book helps women understand their complex feelings about placing a child with another family and affirm the validity of their choice. Through careful reflection on themes of love, commitment, and belonging, it guides readers toward finding peace in their decision. By acknowledging adoption as a profound act of love, the book creates a supportive space for mothers facing this life-changing choice.
- How does the book help women understand their adoption decision?
- The book centers on the principle that chosen love requires commitment and daily affirmation, rather than waiting for legal or social validation to feel confident in one's choice. It helps birth mothers recognize that the decision to place a child is a profound act of love, and that naming this truth is essential for processing complex emotions. By providing a framework for understanding and affirming their choice, the book enables women to find peace and move forward without shame or doubt. This approach acknowledges both the difficulty and the courage required to make this decision.
- What does the book teach about belonging and family?
- The book explores how true family bonds are created through chosen commitment and consistent acts of love, rather than through biological ties or legal status alone. It emphasizes that belonging is affirmed through daily moments—quiet gestures of care that may seem small but carry profound emotional weight. The book argues that what defines a family is not paperwork or genetic connection, but rather the willingness to show up for one another during both ordinary and crisis moments. For birth mothers, this perspective reframes their decision not as rejection, but as the deepest expression of parental love.
- Is Given in Love worth reading for women choosing adoption?
- Yes, this book offers invaluable guidance and emotional support for birth mothers navigating adoption. It provides both practical frameworks for understanding the decision and compassionate validation of women's complex feelings. For women who may feel isolated, judged, or ashamed, the book affirms that choosing adoption is an act of profound love, not failure. The three authors provide perspective that helps readers process grief, fear, and uncertainty while finding peace in their choice. This resource equips women with language, insight, and encouragement to move forward with confidence and dignity.
Read the full summary of 12928863_given-in-love on InShort


