Ethics of adoption

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You keep saying "more support". What exactly do you want? We already have WIC, food stamps, Head Start, etc. There are millions of single moms out there, far more than in previous decades. Some of these mothers are using the resources I just listed, and some have sufficient financial means to support themselves. That seems to indicate that there are plenty of women who feel that raising the child themselves is a viable option.

But we can just leave open a blank check. I have a responsibility to myself, my family, and the society. That means I utilize the resources that are available to me (roads, public schools, etc.) but that doesn't mean I get whatever I want, just because I want it. I live a comfortable middle class lifestyle. I would not be able to do that if I decided to have 8 kids, so I don't.

Not the PP, but I would say:

1. Long-term paid parental leave (say, 12 months after a child is born)
2. High-quality, affordable child care until kids are school age
3. Accessible, affordable mental health care, including better options to treat substance abuse & addiction

Those three things would probably go a long way toward enabling women in precarious situations to parent their kids. As an added benefit, they would help a TON of people who aren't pregnant or poor or even female.

Personal responsibility. It is amazing how generations in the past managed to raise their kids... Setiously, what the hell happened to feminism and women's liberation? All I see anymore are a bunch of women want to be treated like helpless children.

Your foolishness does not even justify a response.

Ahh, the response of someone without a decent counter argument.

+1

[Anonymous]

I'm all for improved services for mothers and families--paid maternity leave, affordable child care--woo hoo!

I just find it bizarre that some of PPs see that the primary goal for increasing these kinds of resources is to create a world where adoption never happens. That the primary goal is to end the horror that is adoption, when adoption is a perfectly viable option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You keep saying "more support". What exactly do you want? We already have WIC, food stamps, Head Start, etc. There are millions of single moms out there, far more than in previous decades. Some of these mothers are using the resources I just listed, and some have sufficient financial means to support themselves. That seems to indicate that there are plenty of women who feel that raising the child themselves is a viable option.

But we can just leave open a blank check. I have a responsibility to myself, my family, and the society. That means I utilize the resources that are available to me (roads, public schools, etc.) but that doesn't mean I get whatever I want, just because I want it. I live a comfortable middle class lifestyle. I would not be able to do that if I decided to have 8 kids, so I don't.

Not the PP, but I would say:

1. Long-term paid parental leave (say, 12 months after a child is born)
2. High-quality, affordable child care until kids are school age
3. Accessible, affordable mental health care, including better options to treat substance abuse & addiction

Those three things would probably go a long way toward enabling women in precarious situations to parent their kids. As an added benefit, they would help a TON of people who aren't pregnant or poor or even female.

Personal responsibility. It is amazing how generations in the past managed to raise their kids... Setiously, what the hell happened to feminism and women's liberation? All I see anymore are a bunch of women want to be treated like helpless children.

Your foolishness does not even justify a response.

Ahh, the response of someone without a decent counter argument.

Want a response? Fine.

Clearly we have different ideas of what society's responsibility to itself is. Me? I am a socialist. I believe civilized society operates best on a (mostly) level playing field - that is, when all citizens have access to certain resources. Parenting shouldn't be an insurmountable challenge for those with few resources (high personal income, strong social support, or acquired wealth). Providing comprehensive health care, childcare, and paid parental leave is, in my view, a way to ensure that individuals are operating from a place of choice and empowerment, not of desperation, in deciding how to proceed with a pregnancy. (Not PP who provided suggestions, btw.)

If you live in the United States you don't live in a socialist country. So proposing socialist ideals does nothing to help the impoverished or disadvantaged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an honest question. How can parents be coerced into placing their child for adoption?

They are all coerced "in hindsight"

Hmm. Let's see. Vulnerable woman with little or no social support turns to a deceptively "neutral" agency that lauds the good act of placing one's child for adoption and warns of ruin should the woman choose to keep and raise the kid. Abortion, of course, is out of the question.

Seriously?

Well if she has little to no social support, isn't it a good choice to place the child for adoption? I mean she is at an adoption agency. If she were at an abortion clinic they wouldn't talk about adoption and raising the child.

Isn't it better to ensure she has the *true* option to raise her child, including by providing social and financial support?

Who is going to provide financial support?

When you choose to be a parent, you commit to financially supporting that human for 18 years.

Right. Some women are in vulnerable situations during pregnancy - are minors, are victims of rape, are homeless, or are victims of sex trafficking/forced prostitution or domestic violence. Their vulnerability and lack of resources should not mean that their only option is to place their child/ren for adoption. More resources must be dedicated to supporting these women in motherhood.

Minors okay. If you are an adult, life happens. You get through it the best way you can like everyone else. I don't want to pay for you to raise a child, you have resources to do that on your own.

Wow, what a big heart!

You know nothing of my heart. Where I volunteer my time or where I give my money. Just because I think people should be responsible for themselves, no matter their circumstances doesn't mean I'm some evil being.

Beyond emergency shelter, food and basic medical care - you should be able to seek out the resources you need on your own if you are a functioning adult.

I think it's actually evil that you think that women who've been through the above aren't entitled to resources beyond shelter, food, and medical care. Seriously.

I didn't say that, at all. I said they "should be able to seek out the resources" they need. Because there are resources out there.

You should learn to read, seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You keep saying "more support". What exactly do you want? We already have WIC, food stamps, Head Start, etc. There are millions of single moms out there, far more than in previous decades. Some of these mothers are using the resources I just listed, and some have sufficient financial means to support themselves. That seems to indicate that there are plenty of women who feel that raising the child themselves is a viable option.

But we can just leave open a blank check. I have a responsibility to myself, my family, and the society. That means I utilize the resources that are available to me (roads, public schools, etc.) but that doesn't mean I get whatever I want, just because I want it. I live a comfortable middle class lifestyle. I would not be able to do that if I decided to have 8 kids, so I don't.

Not the PP, but I would say:

1. Long-term paid parental leave (say, 12 months after a child is born)
2. High-quality, affordable child care until kids are school age
3. Accessible, affordable mental health care, including better options to treat substance abuse & addiction

Those three things would probably go a long way toward enabling women in precarious situations to parent their kids. As an added benefit, they would help a TON of people who aren't pregnant or poor or even female.

For that to work with the population the US has would entail a disproportionate amount of taxes and a great deal of big government intervention. There are smaller countries and socialist countries like that, if you'd like to live there.

I'd be thrilled if our government put less money into war and business and more into the American family. No change of tax rate needed.

I'd rather the government have a little to do with the personal lives of their citizens as possible. Do you really want the government decided what the American family is, how it should look, what resources it should have? Because that is exactly what would happen.

[Anonymous]

We need a system that enables all mothers to raise their child. Adoption and abortion ate equally abhorrent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have read through these posts and I am astounded by the one sided ignorance. Do any of you actually know anyone who has recently placed a child for adoption? I do. These are not women who have been coerced. These are not women who keep their child if only their were more resources and social services. These are women who do not at this point in their lives want to raise a child. They screwed up and got pregnant, chose not to have an abortion but do not want to raise the child. What is exactly to become of these children? You need to adjust your narrative to today's reality.

Can we all get back on track. This is not the 1950's and there are options. Adoption is just one of the options and a pretty darn good one at that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need a system that enables all mothers to raise their child. Adoption and abortion ate equally abhorrent.

Grow up and get your head out of your ass. Not all women want to or should (e.g., abuse and neglect) to raise their own children. Your narrow-minded view on this subject is abhorrent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need a system that enables all mothers to raise their child. Adoption and abortion ate equally abhorrent.

The mother who chooses to abuse drugs? How about the mother who is abusive herself? How should we enable them?

What about a woman who can in no way parent because of all those unlikely "what ifs" that were posted before?

What about the woman who doesn't want to be a parent? Should we force her to raise her child?

And hey... what about the fathers? But f*ck them right because fathers don't count, they are the bastards that get us vulnerable women pregnant in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need a system that enables all mothers to raise their child. Adoption and abortion ate equally abhorrent.

The mother who chooses to abuse drugs? How about the mother who is abusive herself? How should we enable them?

What about a woman who can in no way parent because of all those unlikely "what ifs" that were posted before?

What about the woman who doesn't want to be a parent? Should we force her to raise her child?

And hey... what about the fathers? But f*ck them right because fathers don't count, they are the bastards that get us vulnerable women pregnant in the first place.

. +1. Once again, dcum demonstrates its community is not based in reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for improved services for mothers and families--paid maternity leave, affordable child care--woo hoo!

I just find it bizarre that some of PPs see that the primary goal for increasing these kinds of resources is to create a world where adoption never happens. That the primary goal is to end the horror that is adoption, when adoption is a perfectly viable option.

That isn't going to fix why many place. They are minimizing the true issues. We have supports in place for low income with affordable child care and more but not everyone has access to all that nor has the skills to raise a child. If life were only that simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for improved services for mothers and families--paid maternity leave, affordable child care--woo hoo!

I just find it bizarre that some of PPs see that the primary goal for increasing these kinds of resources is to create a world where adoption never happens. That the primary goal is to end the horror that is adoption, when adoption is a perfectly viable option.

That isn't going to fix why many place. They are minimizing the true issues. We have supports in place for low income with affordable child care and more but not everyone has access to all that nor has the skills to raise a child. If life were only that simple.

Life isn't simple but isn't it amazing that billions of people have been able to navigate it without having their hand held?
How mothers in third world countries without access to clean water or a stable government are able to raise their child?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think those of you that are anti all adoption are hateful and its sad.
Should adoption be less expensive? certainly. Are there people out there who make money off it? yes.
We could certainly do more to get more children out of foster care and into permanent loving homes.

And adoption is not only for rich people. If you adopt from foster care I think its free or they even pay you a stipend. Private adoption costs more but is not unreachable.
Our HHI is $110, not wealthy but not poor either. Our total costs for a domestic infant adoption were just over $22,000. The feds give you $10,000 of that back. So that leaves $12,000, Thats less than most people spend on a car. You can always get a loan and pay it off.

No one that I know that adopted thinks they did it to do a great thing, or expects kudos for doing it. We all did it because its the way we wanted a family.
Our DD's birth mother was 22, had 2 kids already, and got pregnant accidentally. She did not want a 3rd kid. No help from an outside source would have made her want to want a 3rd kid.
Adoption is open so that when/if DD wants to meet her when she is older she can do so.

We got taken by several agencies, a facilitator and several attorneys. We spent about 3 times as much as you. The tax credit is a joke. Professionals raise their prices using it as an excuse to charge a fortune saying you will get it back. You don't take a loan to become a parent. You were very lucky... we were not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for improved services for mothers and families--paid maternity leave, affordable child care--woo hoo!

I just find it bizarre that some of PPs see that the primary goal for increasing these kinds of resources is to create a world where adoption never happens. That the primary goal is to end the horror that is adoption, when adoption is a perfectly viable option.

That isn't going to fix why many place. They are minimizing the true issues. We have supports in place for low income with affordable child care and more but not everyone has access to all that nor has the skills to raise a child. If life were only that simple.

Life isn't simple but isn't it amazing that billions of people have been able to navigate it without having their hand held?
How mothers in third world countries without access to clean water or a stable government are able to raise their child?

+ 1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an honest question. How can parents be coerced into placing their child for adoption?

A variety of reasons from false promises, to saying it is only temporary, to doing back door ways of getting custody of a child, being lied to, not being told everything/explain process, etc. Or, them changing their mind within revocation and preadopt family refuses to return the child and because the courts take so long, they generally leave the kids with claiming the kids are bonded, etc. Or, not having a revocation period.

Are you actually aware of the laws governing adoption?

Very - we adopted and we helped our birth mom fight in adoption for her older child that she did not agree to. The other family took advantage of her and lied and the courts allowed it despite how inappropriate it was. We have spent $70,000 to get the child back and on appeals. Clearly you don't know who it works to think adoption are all proper and great. Ours is great, but the other situation is horrific. We will spend everything we have to help her get her child back.

Yes, lets throw out all the wonderful adoption placements because one birthmother was screwed over. Or didn't know her rights. Or didn't know the process. Or changed her mind.

One unethical adoption is far to many. If it happened to us, don't think it will not happen to someone you know. She knew her rights. She knew the process. This child was not up for adoption. Our child was previously placed but this was a sibling she was raising. You are kidding yourself to think most adoptions are wonderful. But, please keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better. One has to assume you did something questionable if you feel that way. A good adoptive family will make sure the birthparents have their own attorney paid for, know their rights, including revocation.