Did anyone skip all secondary interventions and go straight to adoption?

[Anonymous]

13 years ago we did 3 AIs with no results, waited a year, and went straight to adoption. We're practical people. We were told 25% success rate with IVF and I didn't want to risk multiples. At that time we knew our money would be better spent on adoption. We adopted a child through private adoption a short time later. No regrets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ethics?

Yeah, I've basically decided the kids who actually NEED homes are the older ones in foster care. I think most (not all, but most) women who carry a pregnancy to term would probably prefer to parent, but there's some obstacle (usually financial) in their way, and I think the best response to that situation is not to place their child with another family but to provide better services for women and children. And by adopting an infant (through anything other than foster care), I'm putting in a lot of money that helps to perpetuate adoption as the solution (versus other services).

It was really hard when we got the referral for our daughter (we adopted internationally; she was in foster care in her birth country). It was very clear from the background info we received that her mom wanted to raise her and just didn't have the wherewithal (bad job, no family support) to do it. And I had this horrible moment where I thought, all the money we paid to the various intermediaries to makes this adoption happen (the US agency, the overseas facilitator) -- if that money had gone to her mom, would she have been able to raise our daughter herself? I love my kid, and I am SO happy that she is my kid, but it's hard knowing my happiness comes at the cost of breaking up the family she was born into.

Anyhow, I wish that we were prepared to bring an older child into our family, but we just aren't. So we're going with donor egg IVF for #2.

[Anonymous]

I think you should choose adoption when you know it's right for your family. For us it was after two or so tries with AI, no IVF. We figured out that being parents was the important part, not having bio children. I wouldn't change a thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ethics?

Yeah, I've basically decided the kids who actually NEED homes are the older ones in foster care. I think most (not all, but most) women who carry a pregnancy to term would probably prefer to parent, but there's some obstacle (usually financial) in their way, and I think the best response to that situation is not to place their child with another family but to provide better services for women and children. And by adopting an infant (through anything other than foster care), I'm putting in a lot of money that helps to perpetuate adoption as the solution (versus other services).

It was really hard when we got the referral for our daughter (we adopted internationally; she was in foster care in her birth country). It was very clear from the background info we received that her mom wanted to raise her and just didn't have the wherewithal (bad job, no family support) to do it. And I had this horrible moment where I thought, all the money we paid to the various intermediaries to makes this adoption happen (the US agency, the overseas facilitator) -- if that money had gone to her mom, would she have been able to raise our daughter herself? I love my kid, and I am SO happy that she is my kid, but it's hard knowing my happiness comes at the cost of breaking up the family she was born into.

Anyhow, I wish that we were prepared to bring an older child into our family, but we just aren't. So we're going with donor egg IVF for #2.

I find that position bizarre. First, it's unlikely that the $10 or $20K you spent would have provided a lifetime of support for your child by her birthmom. Second, although you're not choosing adoption, you're spending your money on IVF, not donating it to some needy family to prevent an adoption. Third, families aren't made with ifs and would'ves. The reality was that your child needed a home, there is no mechanism for your money to go to a needy birth parent, you wouldn't have spent your money that way anyway, and some other couple would have adopted your child. I really cannot get to any rational conclusion that there's any ethical concern with adopting an infant.

Also, your first bolded statement above is borderline offensive.

[Anonymous]

We did as it was the best choice for us. Love our child and love being a mom but trying to adopt was one long nightmare. I would do it again for one child but I would not do it if I had kids or again. In the end it was worth it but the adoption industry is corrupt and needs huge reform.

Do what is best you for. It does not matter how your child joins your family. It only matters that they are in your family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ethics?

Yeah, I've basically decided the kids who actually NEED homes are the older ones in foster care. I think most (not all, but most) women who carry a pregnancy to term would probably prefer to parent, but there's some obstacle (usually financial) in their way, and I think the best response to that situation is not to place their child with another family but to provide better services for women and children. And by adopting an infant (through anything other than foster care), I'm putting in a lot of money that helps to perpetuate adoption as the solution (versus other services).

It was really hard when we got the referral for our daughter (we adopted internationally; she was in foster care in her birth country). It was very clear from the background info we received that her mom wanted to raise her and just didn't have the wherewithal (bad job, no family support) to do it. And I had this horrible moment where I thought, all the money we paid to the various intermediaries to makes this adoption happen (the US agency, the overseas facilitator) -- if that money had gone to her mom, would she have been able to raise our daughter herself? I love my kid, and I am SO happy that she is my kid, but it's hard knowing my happiness comes at the cost of breaking up the family she was born into.

Anyhow, I wish that we were prepared to bring an older child into our family, but we just aren't. So we're going with donor egg IVF for #2.

I find that position bizarre. First, it's unlikely that the $10 or $20K you spent would have provided a lifetime of support for your child by her birthmom. Second, although you're not choosing adoption, you're spending your money on IVF, not donating it to some needy family to prevent an adoption. Third, families aren't made with ifs and would'ves. The reality was that your child needed a home, there is no mechanism for your money to go to a needy birth parent, you wouldn't have spent your money that way anyway, and some other couple would have adopted your child. I really cannot get to any rational conclusion that there's any ethical concern with adopting an infant.

Also, your first bolded statement above is borderline offensive.

point by point: First, in the end it was closer to $30K, which certainly wouldn't have provided a lifetime of support, but it could've paid for a few years of child care until her daughter was school-aged, enabling her to continue to work to support herself & her child. Second, you're right that I'm spending the money on IVF, but in doing that I'm -not- contributing it to the adoption industry; I'm not giving anyone an economic incentive to place children versus supporting moms. Third, the fact that some other family would've adopted my daughter supports my point that there isn't a need for people to adopt infants -- absent legal prohibitions (such as in mainland China), people are clamoring to adopt infants, it's unlikely any infant will ever go without a home. It's the older kids who languish in foster homes (domestically) & orphanages (overseas).

YMMV. I wouldn't tell anyone else how they should or shouldn't go about building their family. Infant adoption presents ethical issues to -me-, but I would not have elaborated on those issues if a PP hadn't asked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ethics?

Yeah, I've basically decided the kids who actually NEED homes are the older ones in foster care. I think most (not all, but most) women who carry a pregnancy to term would probably prefer to parent, but there's some obstacle (usually financial) in their way, and I think the best response to that situation is not to place their child with another family but to provide better services for women and children. And by adopting an infant (through anything other than foster care), I'm putting in a lot of money that helps to perpetuate adoption as the solution (versus other services).

It was really hard when we got the referral for our daughter (we adopted internationally; she was in foster care in her birth country). It was very clear from the background info we received that her mom wanted to raise her and just didn't have the wherewithal (bad job, no family support) to do it. And I had this horrible moment where I thought, all the money we paid to the various intermediaries to makes this adoption happen (the US agency, the overseas facilitator) -- if that money had gone to her mom, would she have been able to raise our daughter herself? I love my kid, and I am SO happy that she is my kid, but it's hard knowing my happiness comes at the cost of breaking up the family she was born into.

Anyhow, I wish that we were prepared to bring an older child into our family, but we just aren't. So we're going with donor egg IVF for #2.

I also adopted internationally and, from the sounds of your comment (you don't have to answer), quite possibly from the same country as your daughter. The reason my son was adopted had nothing to do with poverty or someone not having a job. I agree that for those for whom lack of money/poverty is the reason they place, there should be more supports in place to enable them to parent their children. But sometimes, there are reasons that have nothing do with poverty and those children need homes. In fact, families in my son's home country had the chance to adopt him and keep him in a domestic adoption, but they didn't (I suspect they were skittish about the reasons why he was placed), so he was made available for international adoption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ethics?

Yeah, I've basically decided the kids who actually NEED homes are the older ones in foster care. I think most (not all, but most) women who carry a pregnancy to term would probably prefer to parent, but there's some obstacle (usually financial) in their way, and I think the best response to that situation is not to place their child with another family but to provide better services for women and children. And by adopting an infant (through anything other than foster care), I'm putting in a lot of money that helps to perpetuate adoption as the solution (versus other services).

It was really hard when we got the referral for our daughter (we adopted internationally; she was in foster care in her birth country). It was very clear from the background info we received that her mom wanted to raise her and just didn't have the wherewithal (bad job, no family support) to do it. And I had this horrible moment where I thought, all the money we paid to the various intermediaries to makes this adoption happen (the US agency, the overseas facilitator) -- if that money had gone to her mom, would she have been able to raise our daughter herself? I love my kid, and I am SO happy that she is my kid, but it's hard knowing my happiness comes at the cost of breaking up the family she was born into.

Anyhow, I wish that we were prepared to bring an older child into our family, but we just aren't. So we're going with donor egg IVF for #2.

I find that position bizarre. First, it's unlikely that the $10 or $20K you spent would have provided a lifetime of support for your child by her birthmom. Second, although you're not choosing adoption, you're spending your money on IVF, not donating it to some needy family to prevent an adoption. Third, families aren't made with ifs and would'ves. The reality was that your child needed a home, there is no mechanism for your money to go to a needy birth parent, you wouldn't have spent your money that way anyway, and some other couple would have adopted your child. I really cannot get to any rational conclusion that there's any ethical concern with adopting an infant.

Also, your first bolded statement above is borderline offensive.

point by point: First, in the end it was closer to $30K, which certainly wouldn't have provided a lifetime of support, but it could've paid for a few years of child care until her daughter was school-aged, enabling her to continue to work to support herself & her child. Second, you're right that I'm spending the money on IVF, but in doing that I'm -not- contributing it to the adoption industry; I'm not giving anyone an economic incentive to place children versus supporting moms. Third, the fact that some other family would've adopted my daughter supports my point that there isn't a need for people to adopt infants -- absent legal prohibitions (such as in mainland China), people are clamoring to adopt infants, it's unlikely any infant will ever go without a home. It's the older kids who languish in foster homes (domestically) & orphanages (overseas).

YMMV. I wouldn't tell anyone else how they should or shouldn't go about building their family. Infant adoption presents ethical issues to -me-, but I would not have elaborated on those issues if a PP hadn't asked.

I understand and agree with all your points pp. That said, I am also guilty of only wanting a healthy baby or toddler so if I thought we had a chance of getting either through adoption I would have pursued it. As I stated before, I didn't think we had a chance so I decided to stick with fertility treatments.

[Anonymous]

I adopted from a country where it is absolutely unacceptable for unmarried women to give birth. One of us is from that country and the other is from a similar culture, so we understand the culture well. So in our situation the issue was not economic (although there is great poverty in our DCs birth culture). The best chance for the birth moms is to place their children for adoption and move on with their lives. I think of my DCs birthmoms often. It would have been wonderful if they could have raised the children they gave birth to, but that is not reality in that country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I adopted from a country where it is absolutely unacceptable for unmarried women to give birth. One of us is from that country and the other is from a similar culture, so we understand the culture well. So in our situation the issue was not economic (although there is great poverty in our DCs birth culture). The best chance for the birth moms is to place their children for adoption and move on with their lives. I think of my DCs birthmoms often. It would have been wonderful if they could have raised the children they gave birth to, but that is not reality in that country.

Curious PP- what country is this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I adopted from a country where it is absolutely unacceptable for unmarried women to give birth. One of us is from that country and the other is from a similar culture, so we understand the culture well. So in our situation the issue was not economic (although there is great poverty in our DCs birth culture). The best chance for the birth moms is to place their children for adoption and move on with their lives. I think of my DCs birthmoms often. It would have been wonderful if they could have raised the children they gave birth to, but that is not reality in that country.

Curious PP- what country is this?

Not the PP, but I am thinking it may be Korea?

[Anonymous]

I would have moved to adoption sooner were it not for DH. I probably would have done a few rounds with Clomid and then moved to adoption. DH wanted to make sure we had "tried all options" before we moved to adoption and so we did 3 IUIs and 1 IVF. I hated every second of doing these.

[Anonymous]

Not Korea. It is a country that it is pretty difficult to adopt from unless you have ties to that country. For privacy concerns, I won't state what country it is.


I think the broader point is that we shouldn't assume things about birth moms - they are not necessarily poor or young or manipulated. They may well be, but not necessarily. I think in talking about birth moms to our kids, we need to be careful not to make assumptions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not Korea. It is a country that it is pretty difficult to adopt from unless you have ties to that country. For privacy concerns, I won't state what country it is.


I think the broader point is that we shouldn't assume things about birth moms - they are not necessarily poor or young or manipulated. They may well be, but not necessarily. I think in talking about birth moms to our kids, we need to be careful not to make assumptions.

I'm 10:34 -- and you're right, it varies from situation to situation. I would never say every instance of infant adoption is inappropriate/unethical. I do think it can be hard to tell whether a specific adoption is an ethical situation or not when you're in the thick of it.

[Anonymous]

We decided against both interventions and adoption. It is very rare to meet someone who didn't try any interventions.