#threeidenticalstrangers

Back in 2018, it seemed as if there was going to be another surge in popularity for the documentary genre.  Won’t You Be My Neighbor?, RBG and Whitney gave us insight into iconic figures within the popular culture, Demon House put paranormal investigator Zak Bagans on a much bigger map, and a host of other documentaries on a wide range of topics found moderate box office success.  Out of this rush of releases, however, one documentary in particular piqued my interest more so than the rest : Three Identical Strangers. 

19-year old Bobby Shafran arrives at New York Community College for his first semester, but much to his surprise and confusion, a large portion of the student body seems familiar with him, with a few students even welcoming him back.  A chance encounter with a fellow student unveiled that Bobby was a dead ringer for former student Eddy Galland, and after a quick phone conversation, the two have a strong belief that they may have been twins separated at birth.  After meeting one another face to face, the story is reported by the New York Post, which brings knowledge of the twins to David Kellman, a third adopted individual which a striking resemblance to the now famous reunited twins.  Shockingly, it turns out that Bobby, Eddy and David are triplets born to an unexpectant young mother who puts them up for adoption via the Louise Wise adoption agency.  The trio forms an inseparable bond, but their unlikely reunion is quickly darkened when the history of their separation leads to revelations of an extremely dark and far reaching conspiracy.

When it comes to documentaries, the subject matter is of the utmost importance, and the nature of the tale that unfolds in Three Identical Strangers is one of those one in a million sets of reveals that is stranger than fiction.  Tales of lost twins separated at birth already stand out, but to factor in a set of triplets, the discovery of how many more sets of twins were impacted, and the overall diabolical nature of the reason for these splits is almost too much for the average individual to comprehend without an extreme emotional reaction.  Dr. Natasha Josefowitz attributes the inhumanity of the study to “a different time”, but even with the curiosity and blind devotion that was present in the 1950′s (which in itself opened the door for the counter-cultural revolution of the 1960′s), it’s still hard to fathom how a group of medical professionals and scientific minds could justify splitting up scores of twin brothers and sisters... while probably not the intention of their actions, it’s hard not to look at those who propagated the study as having a God complex of sorts.

As inhumane as the study was, the unofficial results that we are presented with obliterate any sense of grey area in the long-standing “nature versus nurture” debate.  While it was true that the brothers developed slightly unique sets of values from the different social classes that the families they were assigned to fell in, the genetic makeup of the triplets was strong enough to confuse peers who were only aware of one-third of the triplets... indicators like their mannerisms, vocal characteristics and distinct hands overrode their varied builds.  As the triplets learned about one another, elements of similarity were so obscure, yet so numerous, that it almost felt like their genetic roadmaps overrode their separation : each triplet wrestled in high school, smoked the same cigarettes, had interest in the same type of women and more, which was echoed in Elyse Schein and Paula Bernstein’s independent attendance of film school.

While fascinating, the ethical implications of what the Louise Wise agency did are damning, to say the least.  To take advantage of mothers in harrowing positions or with mental illnesses is one thing, but it becomes an entirely different can of worms when you consider that the adoptive parents were kept in the dark about both the familial history of their adopted children and the true intentions of the follow-up researchers sent by the Wise agency.  The irresponsibility of taking children from parents with health and mental risks, exposing those children to a cloak and dagger approach of research, and all the while, hoping the truth stays buried feels like a recipe for disaster, and while not directly attributed to the case of Eddy Galland’s passing, it’s hard to ignore those elements as key factors.  The fact that the results of the study are locked away from the public until 2066, which will be many years after all those impacted are dead and gone, feels grossly irresponsible as well, if not outright cruel and inhumane.