Tell me about adoption

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If she couldn't live and support her child which is why it appears "she wasn't forced into it" means that her circumstances forced the decision. Your argument is very surface level comparing unwed mothers of previous decades to women today. Society no longer judges unwed mothers and forces them and underage women and "forces" them to relinquish a child, but now it's financial and life circumstances. As a country, we don't even support families, any kind of family, on any level. .health care, family leave, flexible working schedules, the list goes on.

Women graduate college with unprecedented loans, and before you indicate that they could have gone to community college or a state school ( also not cheap) , perhaps a woman in veterinary or med school or any higher learning-might have to give up a child because she can't take a break due to the loans already incurred. My point is that the rich and unencumbered win children from these situations.

These women aren't forced into it by circumstances because there are plenty of women in the same circumstances who choose something else, whether abortion or raising their children. Moreover, as a woman who graduated with a ton of debt (you are responding to my post, and I believe that I already mentioned that my parents were poor and also I am in the first generation to go to college, so I know about college debt!), there are deferral periods and forbearances if you are not working, you can tie payments to income level, you can even just not pay -- are those good choices? Of course not, but those are choices that people have. No one is forced to place a child for adoption.

That kind of debt is not really the issue. Its far more complicated than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We adopted our kids privately though our attorney. There is no planned contact wit the birth fmaily unless the kids want to on their own when they are 18.

I think this is often the least traumatic. We're seeing problems with our family member's open adoption and the full inclusion of the child's birth family. There are real concerns arising about how this will affect both the adopted child and other children in the family.

It’s more traumatic for kids not to know as well as the birth family.

How do you know this - can you cite a reference? Please show me some longitudinal studies which show that fully integrating the birth family into the child's life is psychologically healthy? I'm not talking about an occasional letter/photos or a visit once or twice per year. I'm talking about full-on involvement - contact at least weekly, birth parents choosing/deciding which clothing child will wear, having their extended family involved and visiting regularly and posting info on SM of "their baby." It's all happy family now while child is young but what happens when conflict arises? Where are the studies which show those impacts on the adopted child and the rest of the families? That information MUST be made available to birth families AND adopters if they want to fully understand the decisions they are making.

Wait, are you saying anything less than fully integrating the birth family is a closed adoption? Because I would call anything where the child knows who there birth family is (not even contact, just a name/birthdate/identifying info available to the child) an open adoption. I know a couple people who don’t have anything at all and I am extremely against hiding birth info from kids but I think there’s a lot of (healthy) space between nothing and fully integrating the birth family. There are studies showing that hiding birth info is unhealthy, but I don’t know of any assessing the degrees of openness and relationship between birth and adoptive families.

An open adoption is not just telling the child information about the birth family. It ranges from xx of pictures/letters a year to visits, phone calls, and emails. Telling my child about their birth family is a closed adoption. Emailing, talking to and seeing them regularly is an open adoption.

What is the term for an adoption where there is no contact between the families but the child is given information about them? If that is “closed” what is the term for an adoption where the child has no way of finding their birth family and the birth family has no way of knowing what happened to the child?

I think it has varied by era, for example:

My family member born in 1940s was issued a birth certificate with his adoptive parents' names. He wasn't even told he was adopted, but found out as an adult. He had to go to the courthouse to get his original birth certificate. Then he knew his birth mother's name. The birth mother had hired a private investigator to find her biological son, but she was unsuccessful. They didn't find each other while she was alive.

A family member who was born in the 1970s - his adoptive parents were given paperwork that described his birth parents appearance, health, hobbies, etc, but not their names. His parents gave him the papers when he was old enough, and the way it was set up, by agreement between parties and the agency, was that at 18, he could go to the agency and ask to get his birth mother's information, which he did.

I don't know enough about open adoptions, but someone upthread said that basically, only the adoptive parents have legal rights over the kid, so they can decide whether the kid has contact or not, at the end of the day. So if a family is practicing an "open" adoption in which they share pictures and accept visits, that's just a choice on their part, or maybe something they negotiated with the birth mom to seal the deal. I guess there's also the matter of whether the adoptive parent is willing to be found -- in the past, I think they could say no, but now because of DNA they don't necessarily get to choose.

[Anonymous]

I adopted internationally as a single woman. It wasn't that difficult, just a lot of prep and paperwork. My daughter is now 9 and we are the best-est family you've ever met! Go for it, OP. Plus, you get to make your parents grandparents and they will love you even more for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We adopted our kids privately though our attorney. There is no planned contact wit the birth fmaily unless the kids want to on their own when they are 18.

I think this is often the least traumatic. We're seeing problems with our family member's open adoption and the full inclusion of the child's birth family. There are real concerns arising about how this will affect both the adopted child and other children in the family.

It’s more traumatic for kids not to know as well as the birth family.

How do you know this - can you cite a reference? Please show me some longitudinal studies which show that fully integrating the birth family into the child's life is psychologically healthy? I'm not talking about an occasional letter/photos or a visit once or twice per year. I'm talking about full-on involvement - contact at least weekly, birth parents choosing/deciding which clothing child will wear, having their extended family involved and visiting regularly and posting info on SM of "their baby." It's all happy family now while child is young but what happens when conflict arises? Where are the studies which show those impacts on the adopted child and the rest of the families? That information MUST be made available to birth families AND adopters if they want to fully understand the decisions they are making.

Wait, are you saying anything less than fully integrating the birth family is a closed adoption? Because I would call anything where the child knows who there birth family is (not even contact, just a name/birthdate/identifying info available to the child) an open adoption. I know a couple people who don’t have anything at all and I am extremely against hiding birth info from kids but I think there’s a lot of (healthy) space between nothing and fully integrating the birth family. There are studies showing that hiding birth info is unhealthy, but I don’t know of any assessing the degrees of openness and relationship between birth and adoptive families.

An open adoption is not just telling the child information about the birth family. It ranges from xx of pictures/letters a year to visits, phone calls, and emails. Telling my child about their birth family is a closed adoption. Emailing, talking to and seeing them regularly is an open adoption.

What is the term for an adoption where there is no contact between the families but the child is given information about them? If that is “closed” what is the term for an adoption where the child has no way of finding their birth family and the birth family has no way of knowing what happened to the child?

I think it has varied by era, for example:

My family member born in 1940s was issued a birth certificate with his adoptive parents' names. He wasn't even told he was adopted, but found out as an adult. He had to go to the courthouse to get his original birth certificate. Then he knew his birth mother's name. The birth mother had hired a private investigator to find her biological son, but she was unsuccessful. They didn't find each other while she was alive.

A family member who was born in the 1970s - his adoptive parents were given paperwork that described his birth parents appearance, health, hobbies, etc, but not their names. His parents gave him the papers when he was old enough, and the way it was set up, by agreement between parties and the agency, was that at 18, he could go to the agency and ask to get his birth mother's information, which he did.

I don't know enough about open adoptions, but someone upthread said that basically, only the adoptive parents have legal rights over the kid, so they can decide whether the kid has contact or not, at the end of the day. So if a family is practicing an "open" adoption in which they share pictures and accept visits, that's just a choice on their part, or maybe something they negotiated with the birth mom to seal the deal. I guess there's also the matter of whether the adoptive parent is willing to be found -- in the past, I think they could say no, but now because of DNA they don't necessarily get to choose.

You don't know anything about adoptions but keep posting as you do. A 1940's or 1970's adoption is very differs than today. Those are closed adoptions. Not everyone does DNA testing so the only way for someone to match is if both parties do the DNA testing or close relatives. You are talking in topics you know nothing, NOTHING about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do a lot of research about (domestic) open adoptions. Realize the life-long implications of having the birth parent(s) and their extended families involved in your child's life, and if that is something you are willing to take on.

We only want to do closed adoption.

Is it only possibly trough international adoption?

Why do you only want to do closed adoption? Children who are actual orphans are…almost nonexistent. Except in the most extreme cases of abuse, it is horrific to sever the natural bonds of family completely, not just from natural parents, but from extended family/kin/clan. If you are not prepared to accept that you are family to a child who already has a family, you should not be adopting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a friend who is adopted — private, international — who always knew she wanted to adopt herself (didn’t want to be pregnant and doesn’t like babies). She preferred to go with an open adoption through foster care with an older child. Her own experience and all the research suggests that open adoptions are much healthier for adoptees and I know not having the option to find her birth family has been difficult for her even though she loves her adoptive parents very much. She fostered two siblings and has since adopted one of them. I think she’s an excellent parent and adores her daughter but I do know it was harder than she expected. She currently lives with her husband and her parents and says having four adults to one child feels like the right ratio to her. So y’know. Definitely can be a challenge. As with any parenting journey having help (family or paid) can be helpful.

If you have sources for this please post links! Open adoptions are relatively new and I'd be interested to see longitudinal studies especially those that include input from now young-adult adoptees. Also any statistics on the relevance of how open adoption was. (Was it just knowledge of who birth family is, occasional contact with birth family via photo/visits/phone, or full-on immersion with birth family throughout their lives.) Interesting to know how the level of openness affects outcomes for entire family including adoptive parents, not solely adoptees.

My comment was based on a foster-adopt info session I attended and internet research I did several years ago and the experiences of a friend (above) and family member who had totally closed adoptions and wanted to seek out their birth families as adults. But I found this paper just now that seems to get into some of what you’re asking: https://health.uconn.edu/adoption-assistance/wp-content/uploads/sites/68/2016/07/2012_03_OpennessInAdoption.pdf. My understanding is the research suggests that not having the option to learn about your birth family is not ideal. Beyond that, I think degrees of openness might depend on all the people involved and what’s healthiest for everyone? Obviously infant adoption is quite different than adopting eg a tween or teen.

Actually it is closed adoptions that are relatively new. The concept as a widespread practice dates back only to the Georgia Tann days of baby stealing at the early part of the Baby-Scoop era. That’s less than 100 years ago. Before that, the vast majority of “adoptions” were family members or other extended kin or community members who might take in a more direct parent role while the actual biological parent was unable or unavailable to parent, or dead. But kinship ties would be maintained. Sometimes surnames would be changed, for legal reasons or inheritance, but there were no falsified birth certificates, no secrets.

Adoption as a widespread method of “treating” infertility by obtaining infants completely stripped of their identities and kinship bonds is VERY new in humankind, and has been shown to be very traumatic and deeply damaging yo many adoptees and to the families whose members were lost to them through adoption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:International adoptions are more often closed while domestic adoptions are more often open.


https://www.americanadoptions.com/adopt/closed-adoption

Potential Pros of a Closed Adoption
• Emotional closure: For some prospective birth parents, an open adoption might be too painful to pursue; they may feel that a closed adoption will provide a better sense of closure for them as they process their feelings of grief and move forward in their lives. (On the other hand, it should be noted that most birth parents actually find the opposite to be true — seeing their child growing up happy, healthy and loved in an open adoption can provide this sense of closure, reaffirming that they made the right decision for their child. It all depends on the birth parent’s personal perspective!)
• Safety: If the prospective birth parent is considering a closed adoption because of a toxic or abusive environment, it might be in everyone’s best interest to have less contact.
• Privacy: For any number of reasons, a prospective birth parent may choose to keep their pregnancy and adoption plan secret from certain people in their lives. A closed adoption may make it easier for them to keep this secret long-term (though prospective birth parents are advised to confide in their loved ones about their adoption whenever possible).
• Less effort from the adoptive family: Like any relationship, maintaining a bond with your child’s birth parent(s) requires effort, patience, clear communication, healthy boundaries and more. When you don’t have a relationship with your child’s birth family, you obviously won’t need to remember to stick to a contact schedule or put in the effort to work through any complications that arise. However, this doesn’t necessarily mean closed adoption is easier — in fact, there are a number of challenges that can arise from a lack of a relationship, which we’ll outline below.
As you can see, the advantages of closed adoption are few — and most of them apply only in specific situations. However, if a prospective birth parent truly feels that a closed adoption will be best in their situation, it is their right to make that decision, and the adoptive family should respect those wishes.
Cons of a Closed Adoption
While a closed adoption might seem like a good idea at first, there are generally more drawbacks than benefits of this type of adoption:
• Identity challenges: This type of adoption may make children more likely to struggle with their self-esteem and identity as they grow up. Adoptees will have questions about their biological parents and personal history throughout their lives, but they won’t have anyone to answer them. These unanswered questions can lead to many emotional challenges, such as feelings of rejection or abandonment, a sense that they were “unwanted” or unloved by their birth parents, and more.
• Emotional challenges for birth parents: Similarly, a lack of information about their children can leave birth parents with lifelong questions and can lead to feelings of guilt, shame and depression. Birth parents in closed adoptions often struggle to fully grieve their loss and move forward in healthy ways. In an open adoption, on the other hand, some of these feelings can be relieved when birth parents receive updates showing them that their children are growing up happy, healthy and loved. Birth parents in closed adoptions often do not receive the reassurance they need to feel good about their adoption decision.
• Lack of medical history: Even in closed adoptions, adoptive parents will be provided medical background information about their child and his or her birth family — but this information is often limited to what is available at the time of the adoption. Without ongoing contact, adoptive parents have no way of knowing if and when new medical concerns arise in the birth family. If a serious hereditary condition is discovered in a biological family member, adoptive parents could be missing out on potentially life-saving information for their child.
• Challenges answering questions: When adopted children have lingering questions about their personal history, it doesn’t just affect them — it can affect their parents, too. Adoptive parents often have a hard time watching their children struggle with the identity issues that are common in closed adoptions. Not being able to provide their child with the information and reassurance they need can be heartbreaking and may even strain the parent-child relationship.
• Difficulties establishing contact: Over time, it is not uncommon for birth and/or adoptive parents to wish to open up their relationship. However, when the initial arrangement was a closed adoption, it can be difficult to make this happen. Similarly, many adult adoptees in closed adoptions eventually choose to conduct a search for their birth parents on their own, which can be an extremely logistically and emotionally challenging process.
• Missed opportunities: If you do not have a relationship with your child’s birth family, you won’t have the opportunity to get to know the people who made the selfless decision to give you the greatest gift of your life — your child! Many birth and adoptive families end up creating a unique, lifelong bond stronger than they would have ever imagined; the opportunity to form this relationship is lost in a closed adoption.
• Challenges of keeping adoption closed: Finally, closed adoptions are simply becoming increasingly difficult to maintain. In today’s world, social media and at-home DNA tests are making it relatively easy to quickly discover the identities of biological relatives and reconnect with them — whether or not they wish to be found.

It is worth noting that none of the advantages of closed adoption here actually benefits the adopted child. They are for the convenience of the adopters or the first parents. But the person whose needs are paramount are the child’s. Every child has a fundamental right to her own identity and to access to her first family, in my opinion. Where that is impossible, such as in cases of true orphanhood, connection may be impossible, but even in those cases a child should know to whom he was born and whatever info can be known about the family.

[Anonymous]

Can you stick to the topic and not just what you google to rant about because you are anti-adoption?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We adopted our kids privately though our attorney. There is no planned contact wit the birth fmaily unless the kids want to on their own when they are 18.

I think this is often the least traumatic. We're seeing problems with our family member's open adoption and the full inclusion of the child's birth family. There are real concerns arising about how this will affect both the adopted child and other children in the family.

It’s more traumatic for kids not to know as well as the birth family.

How do you know this - can you cite a reference? Please show me some longitudinal studies which show that fully integrating the birth family into the child's life is psychologically healthy? I'm not talking about an occasional letter/photos or a visit once or twice per year. I'm talking about full-on involvement - contact at least weekly, birth parents choosing/deciding which clothing child will wear, having their extended family involved and visiting regularly and posting info on SM of "their baby." It's all happy family now while child is young but what happens when conflict arises? Where are the studies which show those impacts on the adopted child and the rest of the families? That information MUST be made available to birth families AND adopters if they want to fully understand the decisions they are making.

Wait, are you saying anything less than fully integrating the birth family is a closed adoption? Because I would call anything where the child knows who there birth family is (not even contact, just a name/birthdate/identifying info available to the child) an open adoption. I know a couple people who don’t have anything at all and I am extremely against hiding birth info from kids but I think there’s a lot of (healthy) space between nothing and fully integrating the birth family. There are studies showing that hiding birth info is unhealthy, but I don’t know of any assessing the degrees of openness and relationship between birth and adoptive families.

An open adoption is not just telling the child information about the birth family. It ranges from xx of pictures/letters a year to visits, phone calls, and emails. Telling my child about their birth family is a closed adoption. Emailing, talking to and seeing them regularly is an open adoption.

What is the term for an adoption where there is no contact between the families but the child is given information about them? If that is “closed” what is the term for an adoption where the child has no way of finding their birth family and the birth family has no way of knowing what happened to the child?

I think it has varied by era, for example:

My family member born in 1940s was issued a birth certificate with his adoptive parents' names. He wasn't even told he was adopted, but found out as an adult. He had to go to the courthouse to get his original birth certificate. Then he knew his birth mother's name. The birth mother had hired a private investigator to find her biological son, but she was unsuccessful. They didn't find each other while she was alive.

A family member who was born in the 1970s - his adoptive parents were given paperwork that described his birth parents appearance, health, hobbies, etc, but not their names. His parents gave him the papers when he was old enough, and the way it was set up, by agreement between parties and the agency, was that at 18, he could go to the agency and ask to get his birth mother's information, which he did.

I don't know enough about open adoptions, but someone upthread said that basically, only the adoptive parents have legal rights over the kid, so they can decide whether the kid has contact or not, at the end of the day. So if a family is practicing an "open" adoption in which they share pictures and accept visits, that's just a choice on their part, or maybe something they negotiated with the birth mom to seal the deal. I guess there's also the matter of whether the adoptive parent is willing to be found -- in the past, I think they could say no, but now because of DNA they don't necessarily get to choose.

You don't know anything about adoptions but keep posting as you do. A 1940's or 1970's adoption is very differs than today. Those are closed adoptions. Not everyone does DNA testing so the only way for someone to match is if both parties do the DNA testing or close relatives. You are talking in topics you know nothing, NOTHING about.

Hey, I am not exactly sure what your problem is, maybe you're not very smart. I have posted in this thread a couple times, but I am not every voice on this thread. I was explaining how closed adoptions used to work in earlier eras. In fact that's exactly what I said I was explaining.

Not everyone does DNA testing, of course. But many birth mothers and fathers have been identified through their family members who did. Ask me how I know!!

What are you so triggered about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the worst places to seek advice on adoption as the threads always attract people who are anti-adoption. As an adoptee and adoptive parent, I just want to say that:

- not all birth parents want to maintain contact long term. Our social worker told us that often birth parents will request some meetings/communication then fade away within a few years; this was our experience after my child turned two.

- Adoption agencies have information meetings that will answer your questions, and the screening/training process for agencies like adoptions together will thoroughly prepare you to be an adoptive parent

- personally our infant adoption process was relatively short; we matched with a prospective birth mother about three months after we completed all the training and screening, and our daughter was placed with us 45 days after her birth

- if you adopt from states with longer time periods for birth parents to change their mind about placing the child for adoption (like MD's 30 day period), you may have a failed placement if the birth parents change their mind after you match. Those longer time periods are absolutely in the best interest of the birth parents, and are fair, but practically speaking that means that the infants are not truly 'available' until that time period ends.

- many people choose adoption after infertility and the training/screening will help you work through that loss of your hope to have a biological child.

- Literally every adoptive parent I know is absolutely thrilled with their decision to bring their child(ren) into their family.

- not every adoptee feels a need to track down biological relatives. I have a wonderful family and see no need to expand it based on genetics. Many people do feel a need for that tie but it is not as inevitable as the press makes it sound.

Please not that the team “failed adoption” refers to a situation in which a family is preserved. This is a GOOD thing, though understandably heartbreaking and disappointing for the prospective adopters. But choosing a state with draconian revocation periods means that you have to live with the possibility that you have stolen a child from a mother who deeply, desperately wants that child, and who may have been scared or coerced into relinquishment but then changed her mind a day or two after the birth. Imagine the maelstrom of emotions and hormones and fears and exhilaration and fear right after birth, especially for a very young mother. To take her infant from her and then refuse to give it back if she changes her mind the next day or the next week is IMO the epitome of evil. And that is the true rot at the core of the infant adoption industry, because this (mostly) for profit system requires a supply of women who are convinced that giving up their babies is the greatest way to love them, or the only way to afford medical care and housing during pregnancy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a friend who is adopted — private, international — who always knew she wanted to adopt herself (didn’t want to be pregnant and doesn’t like babies). She preferred to go with an open adoption through foster care with an older child. Her own experience and all the research suggests that open adoptions are much healthier for adoptees and I know not having the option to find her birth family has been difficult for her even though she loves her adoptive parents very much. She fostered two siblings and has since adopted one of them. I think she’s an excellent parent and adores her daughter but I do know it was harder than she expected. She currently lives with her husband and her parents and says having four adults to one child feels like the right ratio to her. So y’know. Definitely can be a challenge. As with any parenting journey having help (family or paid) can be helpful.

If you have sources for this please post links! Open adoptions are relatively new and I'd be interested to see longitudinal studies especially those that include input from now young-adult adoptees. Also any statistics on the relevance of how open adoption was. (Was it just knowledge of who birth family is, occasional contact with birth family via photo/visits/phone, or full-on immersion with birth family throughout their lives.) Interesting to know how the level of openness affects outcomes for entire family including adoptive parents, not solely adoptees.

My comment was based on a foster-adopt info session I attended and internet research I did several years ago and the experiences of a friend (above) and family member who had totally closed adoptions and wanted to seek out their birth families as adults. But I found this paper just now that seems to get into some of what you’re asking: https://health.uconn.edu/adoption-assistance/wp-content/uploads/sites/68/2016/07/2012_03_OpennessInAdoption.pdf. My understanding is the research suggests that not having the option to learn about your birth family is not ideal. Beyond that, I think degrees of openness might depend on all the people involved and what’s healthiest for everyone? Obviously infant adoption is quite different than adopting eg a tween or teen.

Actually it is closed adoptions that are relatively new. The concept as a widespread practice dates back only to the Georgia Tann days of baby stealing at the early part of the Baby-Scoop era. That’s less than 100 years ago. Before that, the vast majority of “adoptions” were family members or other extended kin or community members who might take in a more direct parent role while the actual biological parent was unable or unavailable to parent, or dead. But kinship ties would be maintained. Sometimes surnames would be changed, for legal reasons or inheritance, but there were no falsified birth certificates, no secrets.

Adoption as a widespread method of “treating” infertility by obtaining infants completely stripped of their identities and kinship bonds is VERY new in humankind, and has been shown to be very traumatic and deeply damaging yo many adoptees and to the families whose members were lost to them through adoption.

Very interesting points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I adopted internationally as a single woman. It wasn't that difficult, just a lot of prep and paperwork. My daughter is now 9 and we are the best-est family you've ever met! Go for it, OP. Plus, you get to make your parents grandparents and they will love you even more for that.

Congrats, PP. That is super amazing. I adopted as a single person, too. I have a daughter who is 8. My adoption was domestic. Best wishes to your "bestest family!" I.agree; Go for it, OP!
Y

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If she couldn't live and support her child which is why it appears "she wasn't forced into it" means that her circumstances forced the decision. Your argument is very surface level comparing unwed mothers of previous decades to women today. Society no longer judges unwed mothers and forces them and underage women and "forces" them to relinquish a child, but now it's financial and life circumstances. As a country, we don't even support families, any kind of family, on any level. .health care, family leave, flexible working schedules, the list goes on.

Women graduate college with unprecedented loans, and before you indicate that they could have gone to community college or a state school ( also not cheap) , perhaps a woman in veterinary or med school or any higher learning-might have to give up a child because she can't take a break due to the loans already incurred. My point is that the rich and unencumbered win children from these situations.

These women aren't forced into it by circumstances because there are plenty of women in the same circumstances who choose something else, whether abortion or raising their children. Moreover, as a woman who graduated with a ton of debt (you are responding to my post, and I believe that I already mentioned that my parents were poor and also I am in the first generation to go to college, so I know about college debt!), there are deferral periods and forbearances if you are not working, you can tie payments to income level, you can even just not pay -- are those good choices? Of course not, but those are choices that people have. No one is forced to place a child for adoption.

That kind of debt is not really the issue. Its far more complicated than that.

It's just an example, not the whole story. The basic fact is that adoptions are largely transactional. They have been, and still are. Some of the parameters have changed over the decades, but the one constant is $$. Always.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do a lot of research about (domestic) open adoptions. Realize the life-long implications of having the birth parent(s) and their extended families involved in your child's life, and if that is something you are willing to take on.

We only want to do closed adoption.

Is it only possibly trough international adoption?

Closed adoption doesn't mean the child won't need to know they are adopted and it won't shield them from being adopted or feeling different.

Most international adoptions are considered closed but not really as you can hire someone in country to find the birth parents.

Domestic adoption - if you are offered a closed adoption scenario which is very rare these days I would think long and hard about it and assume there is some issue with one or both of the birth parents.

If you want to adopt an infant or young toddler, than international adoption is not for you.

Poke around social media for adult adoptee accounts to get a better idea of the lifelong issues some adoptees faces. You can be wonderful, loving, caring and perfect and still your child could end up resenting the fact they are adopted. So just know that going in.

It's much better to have some connection with the birth family. (I say this as an adoptive parent btw)

Don't adopt a bi-racial child because they won't really be Black. Agencies often say this and it's easy to get caught up and believe it. They will really be viewed by society as Black.

Lastly, it's ok to decide that you don't want to adopt. It isn't a cure for infertility and some people simply can't truly accept adoption over a biological child or one they birth.

If you can carry a child, you could consider other methods - egg donor, sperm donor, or embryo adoption. These might be a better fit.

This is just not true for all adoptees. I hate blanketed statements like this. Two people can have the exact same adoption history and have completely different reactions to it. Adoption is nuanced and all your statements are very black and white.

This. Please don’t listen to all that.

No regrets. It was a long, hard and difficult process. But, so worth it.

Yes but you are the adoptive parents.

Years from now when your kids are teens and young adults, they will get to have their own ideas and feelings about adoption. It's just so hard when the kids are young to think they or you will ever see adoption as anything but wonderful and rosy.

Nothing I wrote is black and white except that adoption isn't a cure for infertility.

It's just the kind of things that adoptive parents don't want to think about especially when their kids are young. Instead of getting upset and defensive, just accept that like the PP said every person's experience being adopted is different and your child might not have the same feelings about adoption as you do.

Every biological parent's experience is also unique. You are obviously biased against adoption.

I would put more weight on parents who have actually raised children through adoption. Not onlookers who are judging it from the outside.

I would put more weight on the voices of adoptees, who are central to adoption and the main people whose needs, opinions, and concerns should be heard, especially because they had no voice in adoption if they were adopted as infants. Adoptive parents will almost always say they are glad they adopted since it was to their benefit and suited their wants. The other voices in the adoption circle often feel very differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do a lot of research about (domestic) open adoptions. Realize the life-long implications of having the birth parent(s) and their extended families involved in your child's life, and if that is something you are willing to take on.

We only want to do closed adoption.

Is it only possibly trough international adoption?

Totally closed adoption is not considered best for the child. Not sure how hard it would be to find an agency that allows it.

The child is likely to have questions down the line, and it is best if they have a road to getting them answered.

Some birth parents opt for little contact.

The worst is when it could be open, but birth parents just fade away (of their own choosing). Because then they knew the child and rejected them.

Trust me, that is far from the worst in open adoption. The unthinkable happened to us.

IMO our family member's open adoption situation is a ticking time bomb. Bio family was welcomed to be involved from birth and they blew that door wide open with extreme involvement. They've made it publicly clear over and over that this is THEIR family's child. It's almost as if the adoptive parents are nothing more than caregivers.

The child IS their family’s child. It is also the adoptive family’s child. That is not a ticking time bomb. That is TRUTH. It can be as fraught as blended families or divorced families or dealing with in-laws. But it is worth it when it goes well. And it is worth it even if it doesn’t go smoothly, because it is reality. Legal fictions like falsified birth certificates do not negate the reality that family is family. My two sisters lost yo me through adoption came into my life when I was in my 20s and 40s respectively. I am closer to my 2nd sister now than any other family member, after only knowing her a few years. We connect. Our families click. That doesn’t always happen, just like families raised together don’t always mesh, but it’s family.