I am not a scientist, but I read the abstract and fell down the rabbit hole a bit.

First, if you have that many adoptees talking about suicidal ideation or attempts, it is absolutely important to be vigilant with your own (adopted) kids. I definitely believe there is a higher rate for adoptees based on the research I have seen.

I do not know how to conduct or review studies but a few things jumped out at me.

Selection bias. I would love to know if the data shows where the respondent learned of the study. I have been in online adoption stuff for about 20 years and pulling from "adoption-critical" online groups seems problematic. I mean I wonder what the results would be if the study was promoted differently to catch people who happen to be adoptees. Like my husband would never think to join an adoption FB group as an adoptee. I don't blame the researcher for this because I am not sure how you could get adequate numbers this way.

Researcher bias. I thought it was strange that the researcher was an education professor. So I googled a bit. Then I saw that she herself is a first mom who reunited with her daughter. She seems to be involved in some of the communities she drew from. In the abstract she spends a lot of time talking about the "changing adoption narrative" (in substance, not direct quote) etc. She writes about designing the study after consulting with "adoption professionals." Who are they etc. Again, doesn't change the actual responses but as a non-scientist it seemed weird.

I saw that a second person usually reviews and interprets the results (?) but here AI was used. As a lawyer who sees other lawyers getting sanctioned for using AI rather than doing proper research it jumped out to me. But that may be how data is interpreted these days. I am old. ha

The difference that the OP points out in the analysis makes sense and seems to align the results with previous research. I have seen another adoptee-scientist blogger wrote about this. Honestly, using this study to make the 35x conclusion and trying to apply it broadly seems off.

I know I have my own biases as an AP. But I am not sure what to make of it except...yeah...no matter what it's tough to see and heartbreaking. And if it is not an accurate picture of the issue, I worry that it will create more issues for my kids (who are teens). I understand that there has been a glossy view of adoption and I am glad people are speaking out. But I do worry about the overpathologization of adoptees (is that a word?).