Confused—wealthy white women want supply of non-white babies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worked in international adoption many years ago. There was an unspoken recognition that white Americans would rather adopt white or Chinese ("white adjacent") babies from overseas, with all of the hassle and expense that involves, than adopt U.S.-born Black children.

DH and I are just beginning to consider adopting (I’m pro choice, not one of these whackjobs who is hoping for an increased “domestic supply of infants”) and literally my only hesitancy in adopting a Black child would be that I would afraid that I would not do a good enough job connecting said child to his or her culture. It would be very important to me to not muck that up.

But you're confident that you won't f^ck up connecting an Asian or Eastern European child to their cultural heritage? Or just won't care as much?

Where I live, the children available tend to be Black or White. There aren’t many Asian children, Native children are generally not available to White families for adoption and we’re not considering international adoption. So you can take you weird attempts at gotcha and sit quietly.

[Anonymous]

DC has kids available for adoption and good incentives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I worked in international adoption many years ago. There was an unspoken recognition that white Americans would rather adopt white or Chinese ("white adjacent") babies from overseas, with all of the hassle and expense that involves, than adopt U.S.-born Black children.

This is true.

Especially in regards to adopting Chinese baby girls. I was shocked to learn that over 95% of people that adopt Chinese children are white Americans. Adopting from China and South Korea is a primarily a white American phenomenon.

There was a study that showed white European families are far far more likely to be open to adopting U.S. Born black children than white Americans.

https://www.cnn.com/2013/09/16/world/international-adoption-us-children-adopted-abroad/index.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP... barging in to this thread to say I think this whole thing is a cynical, sick right wing joke on America.

Let's do some math here:

In any given year there are CURRENTLY already over 400,000 American kids who are wards of the state, in foster homes, et cetera. That number will skyrocket with the overturn of Roe v. Wade, it could easily double.

But in any given year, how many kids are getting adopted? Only around 50-60,000. That number won't change with the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Why would it? How would it? Where do all these extra families wanting to adopt magically come from when they already didn't exist to adopt the 350,000 kids already in the system? Let alone adopt 700,000+ kids considering the increase that will happen with this SCOTUS decision and the slew of trigger laws in half of the states?

Where will all of the extra funding come from to take care of 700,000 kids?

Let's face it, "oh they will be adopted" is a big fat lie given the data only shows 50-60k kids being adopted each year. Getting adopted is something only around 8% will be able to see happen. The rest will remain wards of the state, or shuttled around between foster homes.

This is one of the most important points in this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some say that is reasoning behind Amy Comey Barrett’s “supply of domestic infants” remark.

Why would rich white women be interested in creating a supply of non-white babies to adopt? I thought it was less likely for a non-white baby to be adopted than a white one? If these whites women are infertile, wouldn’t they just go to a fertility clinic? This is 1940 anymore.

Doesn’t make sense to me.

Not sure what you’re talking about but if you think it’s easy to adopt a healthy infant or baby in this country, join the years long queue.

[Anonymous]

Why would there be more foster kids if abortions are limited to 15 weeks and before?

Is the mom still holding out and negotiating a relationship with her boyfriend/ father of the fetus?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would there be more foster kids if abortions are limited to 15 weeks and before?

Is the mom still holding out and negotiating a relationship with her boyfriend/ father of the fetus?

15 weeks? What are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP... barging in to this thread to say I think this whole thing is a cynical, sick right wing joke on America.

Let's do some math here:

In any given year there are CURRENTLY already over 400,000 American kids who are wards of the state, in foster homes, et cetera. That number will skyrocket with the overturn of Roe v. Wade, it could easily double.

But in any given year, how many kids are getting adopted? Only around 50-60,000. That number won't change with the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Why would it? How would it? Where do all these extra families wanting to adopt magically come from when they already didn't exist to adopt the 350,000 kids already in the system? Let alone adopt 700,000+ kids considering the increase that will happen with this SCOTUS decision and the slew of trigger laws in half of the states?

Where will all of the extra funding come from to take care of 700,000 kids?

Let's face it, "oh they will be adopted" is a big fat lie given the data only shows 50-60k kids being adopted each year. Getting adopted is something only around 8% will be able to see happen. The rest will remain wards of the state, or shuttled around between foster homes.

This is one of the most important points in this thread.

And most ignored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some say that is reasoning behind Amy Comey Barrett’s “supply of domestic infants” remark.

Why would rich white women be interested in creating a supply of non-white babies to adopt? I thought it was less likely for a non-white baby to be adopted than a white one? If these whites women are infertile, wouldn’t they just go to a fertility clinic? This is 1940 anymore.

Doesn’t make sense to me.

Not sure what you’re talking about but if you think it’s easy to adopt a healthy infant or baby in this country, join the years long queue.

It’s easy and no wait if you’re open to a black child. There is only a shortage of you want a nonblack baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worked in international adoption many years ago. There was an unspoken recognition that white Americans would rather adopt white or Chinese ("white adjacent") babies from overseas, with all of the hassle and expense that involves, than adopt U.S.-born Black children.

DH and I are just beginning to consider adopting (I’m pro choice, not one of these whackjobs who is hoping for an increased “domestic supply of infants”) and literally my only hesitancy in adopting a Black child would be that I would afraid that I would not do a good enough job connecting said child to his or her culture. It would be very important to me to not muck that up.

What culture? Im black—White and black Americans pretty much have the same culture. Yes there are slight differences but there are more similarities than differences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would there be more foster kids if abortions are limited to 15 weeks and before?

Is the mom still holding out and negotiating a relationship with her boyfriend/ father of the fetus?

You can find out about complication post 15 weeks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some say that is reasoning behind Amy Comey Barrett’s “supply of domestic infants” remark.

Why would rich white women be interested in creating a supply of non-white babies to adopt? I thought it was less likely for a non-white baby to be adopted than a white one? If these whites women are infertile, wouldn’t they just go to a fertility clinic? This is 1940 anymore.

Doesn’t make sense to me.

Not sure what you’re talking about but if you think it’s easy to adopt a healthy infant or baby in this country, join the years long queue.

It’s easy and no wait if you’re open to a black child. There is only a shortage of you want a nonblack baby.

Not understanding. You mean people are not allowed to wish to parent a child who looks somewhat like them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some say that is reasoning behind Amy Comey Barrett’s “supply of domestic infants” remark.

Why would rich white women be interested in creating a supply of non-white babies to adopt? I thought it was less likely for a non-white baby to be adopted than a white one? If these whites women are infertile, wouldn’t they just go to a fertility clinic? This is 1940 anymore.

Doesn’t make sense to me.

Not sure what you’re talking about but if you think it’s easy to adopt a healthy infant or baby in this country, join the years long queue.

It’s easy and no wait if you’re open to a black child. There is only a shortage of you want a nonblack baby.

Not understanding. You mean people are not allowed to wish to parent a child who looks somewhat like them?

Uh-huh, and you want us to "understand" your desire to endanger the lives of women who do not wish to be pregnant so that you can satisfy your Aryan dreams? And ignore your dancing around the issue that GERMANY adopts AA children from US because of, e.g., your internalized racism in the name of your desire for said Aryan baby? Seriously?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some say that is reasoning behind Amy Comey Barrett’s “supply of domestic infants” remark.

Why would rich white women be interested in creating a supply of non-white babies to adopt? I thought it was less likely for a non-white baby to be adopted than a white one? If these whites women are infertile, wouldn’t they just go to a fertility clinic? This is 1940 anymore.

Doesn’t make sense to me.

Not sure what you’re talking about but if you think it’s easy to adopt a healthy infant or baby in this country, join the years long queue.

It’s easy and no wait if you’re open to a black child. There is only a shortage of you want a nonblack baby.

Not understanding. You mean people are not allowed to wish to parent a child who looks somewhat like them?

Uh-huh, and you want us to "understand" your desire to endanger the lives of women who do not wish to be pregnant so that you can satisfy your Aryan dreams? And ignore your dancing around the issue that GERMANY adopts AA children from US because of, e.g., your internalized racism in the name of your desire for said Aryan baby? Seriously?

Ok crazy lady/troll man. Whatever you say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some say that is reasoning behind Amy Comey Barrett’s “supply of domestic infants” remark.

Why would rich white women be interested in creating a supply of non-white babies to adopt? I thought it was less likely for a non-white baby to be adopted than a white one? If these whites women are infertile, wouldn’t they just go to a fertility clinic? This is 1940 anymore.

Doesn’t make sense to me.

Not sure what you’re talking about but if you think it’s easy to adopt a healthy infant or baby in this country, join the years long queue.

It’s easy and no wait if you’re open to a black child. There is only a shortage of you want a nonblack baby.

Not understanding. You mean people are not allowed to wish to parent a child who looks somewhat like them?

Uh-huh, and you want us to "understand" your desire to endanger the lives of women who do not wish to be pregnant so that you can satisfy your Aryan dreams? And ignore your dancing around the issue that GERMANY adopts AA children from US because of, e.g., your internalized racism in the name of your desire for said Aryan baby? Seriously?

NP -- I do not have the answer to this, so I will ask. Do people think it is ok for people of one race to adopt kids of another race? Will that ruin the child's identity?