Ethics of adoption

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adoption should be a "Hobson's Choice," meani,g those wishing to adopt take the first child available irrespective of age, health, race, disabilities. If this were the case, adoptions would cease immediately.

What the heck is wrong with you? Children are not fungible. Why would you take away a birth parent's right to choose the family for her child? Why would you purposefully allow poor matches? For what purpose? You anti-adopters have nothing to ADD or help the situation, you just want to take away options for people who need them simply because you don't.

Birth parents have horrible things done to them, like ours did...once you have been in the other side, you will understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my goodness. Fourteen pages of trying to reason with a bunch of hateful ignoramuses? People, you know there's no getting the last word with these ya-hoos, no convincing them to admit to the slightest possibility that there might be room for considering other options besides "NO ADOPTION EVER. I WOULDN'T DO IT SO NO ONE ELSE HAD BETTER EVEN CONSIDER IT"...right?

Oh for heaven's sake! There are multiple people posting here about adoption, with varying degrees of reasonableness on both sides.

I posted way back when and said, AS AN ADOPTIVE PARENT, I think private infant adoption -- not talking about foster care, now -- is a solution in search of a problem -- the "demand" for healthy babies far outstrips the "supply," and the people who are eager to adopt are generally (not universally, but generally) more affluent, which means they are able to exert more influence over the process, which (I believe) does a real disservice to women who would like to parent but face obstacles.

During my adoption process, I encountered a ton of prospective adoptive parents who would say straight out, "We're paying the agency's fees, we're their client, they owe it to us to do x." And if, on the other side, the pregnant woman and/or the child up for adoption were also someone's client, that would be fair. But the kids aren't paying anybody anything, and plenty of adoption agencies will tell pregnant women things like, "You don't need to hire a lawyer, we take care of that for you!" like that's a good thing.

I don't think there should be NO ADOPTION EVER!

I think we need better services so women aren't forced by circumstance to place their child for adoption when they really want to parent. (I'm the one who posted the three-point list of resources. And I think it's ironic that the people who criticize that list by invoking "responsibility" are the ones trying to disclaim any responsibility for their fellow citizens.)

I think we should abolish private adoption, and all adoption should occur through the foster care system (which, granted, needs a LOT of improvement).

I would also say that IVF and similar procedures should be covered by insurance, as a matter of mandate, so that people who really want the infant experience can get that without contributing to an industry that subtly (and sometimes unsubtly) pressures women to relinquish their kids.

I love, love, love my adopted daughter. And if she gets pregnant at 16, I am going to back her to the hilt in whatever choice she makes, whether that's abortion or adoption or parenting her child. Because as much as I love my kid, I think it's awful that her mom didn't get that kind of support from her own family.

You are making the mistake of extrapolating your experience to all other adoption experience which shows a lack of mature and critical thought. You are also not looking beyond the limited scope of domestic adoption to address the needs of children in throw-away societies that culturally do not adopt and seem to be conflagrating private adoption experience with agency adoption. BTW, i have had experience with foster care and I would not wish that hell on any child no matter how flawed the private adoption system may currently be and I can't believe any moral, caring human being would wish that on any child. No amount of money or reform will fix this system to make foster care the preferable option. I am astounded and dismayed at your narrow view.

Yeah, except I adopted internationally, through an agency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my goodness. Fourteen pages of trying to reason with a bunch of hateful ignoramuses? People, you know there's no getting the last word with these ya-hoos, no convincing them to admit to the slightest possibility that there might be room for considering other options besides "NO ADOPTION EVER. I WOULDN'T DO IT SO NO ONE ELSE HAD BETTER EVEN CONSIDER IT"...right?

Oh for heaven's sake! There are multiple people posting here about adoption, with varying degrees of reasonableness on both sides.

I posted way back when and said, AS AN ADOPTIVE PARENT, I think private infant adoption -- not talking about foster care, now -- is a solution in search of a problem -- the "demand" for healthy babies far outstrips the "supply," and the people who are eager to adopt are generally (not universally, but generally) more affluent, which means they are able to exert more influence over the process, which (I believe) does a real disservice to women who would like to parent but face obstacles.

During my adoption process, I encountered a ton of prospective adoptive parents who would say straight out, "We're paying the agency's fees, we're their client, they owe it to us to do x." And if, on the other side, the pregnant woman and/or the child up for adoption were also someone's client, that would be fair. But the kids aren't paying anybody anything, and plenty of adoption agencies will tell pregnant women things like, "You don't need to hire a lawyer, we take care of that for you!" like that's a good thing.

I don't think there should be NO ADOPTION EVER!

I think we need better services so women aren't forced by circumstance to place their child for adoption when they really want to parent. (I'm the one who posted the three-point list of resources. And I think it's ironic that the people who criticize that list by invoking "responsibility" are the ones trying to disclaim any responsibility for their fellow citizens.)

I think we should abolish private adoption, and all adoption should occur through the foster care system (which, granted, needs a LOT of improvement).

I would also say that IVF and similar procedures should be covered by insurance, as a matter of mandate, so that people who really want the infant experience can get that without contributing to an industry that subtly (and sometimes unsubtly) pressures women to relinquish their kids.

I love, love, love my adopted daughter. And if she gets pregnant at 16, I am going to back her to the hilt in whatever choice she makes, whether that's abortion or adoption or parenting her child. Because as much as I love my kid, I think it's awful that her mom didn't get that kind of support from her own family.

You are making the mistake of extrapolating your experience to all other adoption experience which shows a lack of mature and critical thought. You are also not looking beyond the limited scope of domestic adoption to address the needs of children in throw-away societies that culturally do not adopt and seem to be conflagrating private adoption experience with agency adoption. BTW, i have had experience with foster care and I would not wish that hell on any child no matter how flawed the private adoption system may currently be and I can't believe any moral, caring human being would wish that on any child. No amount of money or reform will fix this system to make foster care the preferable option. I am astounded and dismayed at your narrow view.

Yeah, except I adopted internationally, through an agency.

I guess you didn't do your due diligence. This falls on you not the millions of people who do all the research necessary to ensure theirs are legal and ethical adoptions. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water because you made bad choices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my goodness. Fourteen pages of trying to reason with a bunch of hateful ignoramuses? People, you know there's no getting the last word with these ya-hoos, no convincing them to admit to the slightest possibility that there might be room for considering other options besides "NO ADOPTION EVER. I WOULDN'T DO IT SO NO ONE ELSE HAD BETTER EVEN CONSIDER IT"...right?

Oh for heaven's sake! There are multiple people posting here about adoption, with varying degrees of reasonableness on both sides.

I posted way back when and said, AS AN ADOPTIVE PARENT, I think private infant adoption -- not talking about foster care, now -- is a solution in search of a problem -- the "demand" for healthy babies far outstrips the "supply," and the people who are eager to adopt are generally (not universally, but generally) more affluent, which means they are able to exert more influence over the process, which (I believe) does a real disservice to women who would like to parent but face obstacles.

During my adoption process, I encountered a ton of prospective adoptive parents who would say straight out, "We're paying the agency's fees, we're their client, they owe it to us to do x." And if, on the other side, the pregnant woman and/or the child up for adoption were also someone's client, that would be fair. But the kids aren't paying anybody anything, and plenty of adoption agencies will tell pregnant women things like, "You don't need to hire a lawyer, we take care of that for you!" like that's a good thing.

I don't think there should be NO ADOPTION EVER!

I think we need better services so women aren't forced by circumstance to place their child for adoption when they really want to parent. (I'm the one who posted the three-point list of resources. And I think it's ironic that the people who criticize that list by invoking "responsibility" are the ones trying to disclaim any responsibility for their fellow citizens.)

I think we should abolish private adoption, and all adoption should occur through the foster care system (which, granted, needs a LOT of improvement).

I would also say that IVF and similar procedures should be covered by insurance, as a matter of mandate, so that people who really want the infant experience can get that without contributing to an industry that subtly (and sometimes unsubtly) pressures women to relinquish their kids.

I love, love, love my adopted daughter. And if she gets pregnant at 16, I am going to back her to the hilt in whatever choice she makes, whether that's abortion or adoption or parenting her child. Because as much as I love my kid, I think it's awful that her mom didn't get that kind of support from her own family.

You are making the mistake of extrapolating your experience to all other adoption experience which shows a lack of mature and critical thought. You are also not looking beyond the limited scope of domestic adoption to address the needs of children in throw-away societies that culturally do not adopt and seem to be conflagrating private adoption experience with agency adoption. BTW, i have had experience with foster care and I would not wish that hell on any child no matter how flawed the private adoption system may currently be and I can't believe any moral, caring human being would wish that on any child. No amount of money or reform will fix this system to make foster care the preferable option. I am astounded and dismayed at your narrow view.

Yeah, except I adopted internationally, through an agency.

I guess you didn't do your due diligence. This falls on you not the millions of people who do all the research necessary to ensure theirs are legal and ethical adoptions. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water because you made bad choices.

NP here. Very questionable logic. The onus shouldn't be on the prospective adoptive parents to vet the adoption agency to ensure it's acting ethically (difficult, if not impossible, to do at the outset). Unethical adoption agencies and practices should not exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adoption is truly awful. Sometimes love is unfair and people can't have bio kids. The solution is not stealing other people's children under the guise of giving them a better life. I'm sickened by the concept.

Huh? Wut?

Adoption is life saving, for both mothers and children. It's a gift to each party, and a tough choice on both ends.

I've been thinking a lot about my life planning and, as an older mom, what should become of my children if something ever happened to me prior to reaching maturity. I am blessed with a life long friend who would do a magnificent job of caring for my children. She'd love them as her own, make different choices, honor me, invest deeply in them. I'm not saying this is the same for women who are placing their children up for adoption, but I do wonder if this peace of mind is something we might share. What a comfort it must be to parents in difficult circumstances to place their child(ren) in loving homes, especially in the case of open adoptions.

If you didn't adopt, nor ever will or place a child, I'm not getting your point. It is not lifesaving for all. Not all are making the choice - but you clearly only look at the good in it. Open adoption is very different than someone being your child's legal guardian should you pass. I don't know why you'd even comment that. And, open adoption is dependent on the adoptive parents honoring their verbal and written promises and many don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one is advocating to get rid of adoption but there needs to be far more laws that are universal for all states and far more oversight to ensure ethical adoptions. We did not set out to adopt a special needs child. We did and it's no big deal.

Um, go back and read the thread. It's full of people advocating to abolish adoption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my goodness. Fourteen pages of trying to reason with a bunch of hateful ignoramuses? People, you know there's no getting the last word with these ya-hoos, no convincing them to admit to the slightest possibility that there might be room for considering other options besides "NO ADOPTION EVER. I WOULDN'T DO IT SO NO ONE ELSE HAD BETTER EVEN CONSIDER IT"...right?

Oh for heaven's sake! There are multiple people posting here about adoption, with varying degrees of reasonableness on both sides.

I posted way back when and said, AS AN ADOPTIVE PARENT, I think private infant adoption -- not talking about foster care, now -- is a solution in search of a problem -- the "demand" for healthy babies far outstrips the "supply," and the people who are eager to adopt are generally (not universally, but generally) more affluent, which means they are able to exert more influence over the process, which (I believe) does a real disservice to women who would like to parent but face obstacles.

During my adoption process, I encountered a ton of prospective adoptive parents who would say straight out, "We're paying the agency's fees, we're their client, they owe it to us to do x." And if, on the other side, the pregnant woman and/or the child up for adoption were also someone's client, that would be fair. But the kids aren't paying anybody anything, and plenty of adoption agencies will tell pregnant women things like, "You don't need to hire a lawyer, we take care of that for you!" like that's a good thing.

I don't think there should be NO ADOPTION EVER!

I think we need better services so women aren't forced by circumstance to place their child for adoption when they really want to parent. (I'm the one who posted the three-point list of resources. And I think it's ironic that the people who criticize that list by invoking "responsibility" are the ones trying to disclaim any responsibility for their fellow citizens.)

I think we should abolish private adoption, and all adoption should occur through the foster care system (which, granted, needs a LOT of improvement).

I would also say that IVF and similar procedures should be covered by insurance, as a matter of mandate, so that people who really want the infant experience can get that without contributing to an industry that subtly (and sometimes unsubtly) pressures women to relinquish their kids.

I love, love, love my adopted daughter. And if she gets pregnant at 16, I am going to back her to the hilt in whatever choice she makes, whether that's abortion or adoption or parenting her child. Because as much as I love my kid, I think it's awful that her mom didn't get that kind of support from her own family.

You are making the mistake of extrapolating your experience to all other adoption experience which shows a lack of mature and critical thought. You are also not looking beyond the limited scope of domestic adoption to address the needs of children in throw-away societies that culturally do not adopt and seem to be conflagrating private adoption experience with agency adoption. BTW, i have had experience with foster care and I would not wish that hell on any child no matter how flawed the private adoption system may currently be and I can't believe any moral, caring human being would wish that on any child. No amount of money or reform will fix this system to make foster care the preferable option. I am astounded and dismayed at your narrow view.

Yeah, except I adopted internationally, through an agency.

I guess you didn't do your due diligence. This falls on you not the millions of people who do all the research necessary to ensure theirs are legal and ethical adoptions. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water because you made bad choices.

NP here. Very questionable logic. The onus shouldn't be on the prospective adoptive parents to vet the adoption agency to ensure it's acting ethically (difficult, if not impossible, to do at the outset). Unethical adoption agencies and practices should not exist.

They should not exist but as long as they do the onus is on the prospective parents to do their due diligence just like they would for anything. Would you go to an obstetrician without check him/her out? Would you buy a house with out getting an inspection? Why would you go to an attorney or agency for an adoption without checking them out? If you did not, then you are at fault for the outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adoption is truly awful. Sometimes love is unfair and people can't have bio kids. The solution is not stealing other people's children under the guise of giving them a better life. I'm sickened by the concept.

Huh? Wut?

Adoption is life saving, for both mothers and children. It's a gift to each party, and a tough choice on both ends.

I've been thinking a lot about my life planning and, as an older mom, what should become of my children if something ever happened to me prior to reaching maturity. I am blessed with a life long friend who would do a magnificent job of caring for my children. She'd love them as her own, make different choices, honor me, invest deeply in them. I'm not saying this is the same for women who are placing their children up for adoption, but I do wonder if this peace of mind is something we might share. What a comfort it must be to parents in difficult circumstances to place their child(ren) in loving homes, especially in the case of open adoptions.

If you didn't adopt, nor ever will or place a child, I'm not getting your point. It is not lifesaving for all. Not all are making the choice - but you clearly only look at the good in it. Open adoption is very different than someone being your child's legal guardian should you pass. I don't know why you'd even comment that. And, open adoption is dependent on the adoptive parents honoring their verbal and written promises and many don't.

It isn't always the adoptive parents who do not honor the commitment. I have friends whose birthparents did not. You are choosing to only look at one side of things.

[Anonymous]

If you really want a child then you should be happy to take a chiild with disabilities because they need more love a,scare. The truth, however, is that very, very few would adopt a child with any kind of disability. Stop being such hypocrites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adoption is truly awful. Sometimes love is unfair and people can't have bio kids. The solution is not stealing other people's children under the guise of giving them a better life. I'm sickened by the concept.

Huh? Wut?

Adoption is life saving, for both mothers and children. It's a gift to each party, and a tough choice on both ends.

I've been thinking a lot about my life planning and, as an older mom, what should become of my children if something ever happened to me prior to reaching maturity. I am blessed with a life long friend who would do a magnificent job of caring for my children. She'd love them as her own, make different choices, honor me, invest deeply in them. I'm not saying this is the same for women who are placing their children up for adoption, but I do wonder if this peace of mind is something we might share. What a comfort it must be to parents in difficult circumstances to place their child(ren) in loving homes, especially in the case of open adoptions.

If you didn't adopt, nor ever will or place a child, I'm not getting your point. It is not lifesaving for all. Not all are making the choice - but you clearly only look at the good in it. Open adoption is very different than someone being your child's legal guardian should you pass. I don't know why you'd even comment that. And, open adoption is dependent on the adoptive parents honoring their verbal and written promises and many don't.

It isn't always the adoptive parents who do not honor the commitment. I have friends whose birthparents did not. You are choosing to only look at one side of things.

Its the birthparents choice - it may be too hard for them have contact. They are two very different issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adoption is truly awful. Sometimes love is unfair and people can't have bio kids. The solution is not stealing other people's children under the guise of giving them a better life. I'm sickened by the concept.

Huh? Wut?

Adoption is life saving, for both mothers and children. It's a gift to each party, and a tough choice on both ends.

I've been thinking a lot about my life planning and, as an older mom, what should become of my children if something ever happened to me prior to reaching maturity. I am blessed with a life long friend who would do a magnificent job of caring for my children. She'd love them as her own, make different choices, honor me, invest deeply in them. I'm not saying this is the same for women who are placing their children up for adoption, but I do wonder if this peace of mind is something we might share. What a comfort it must be to parents in difficult circumstances to place their child(ren) in loving homes, especially in the case of open adoptions.

If you didn't adopt, nor ever will or place a child, I'm not getting your point. It is not lifesaving for all. Not all are making the choice - but you clearly only look at the good in it. Open adoption is very different than someone being your child's legal guardian should you pass. I don't know why you'd even comment that. And, open adoption is dependent on the adoptive parents honoring their verbal and written promises and many don't.

It isn't always the adoptive parents who do not honor the commitment. I have friends whose birthparents did not. You are choosing to only look at one side of things.

Its the birthparents choice - it may be too hard for them have contact. They are two very different issues.

Well, it is pretty damn hard on the child when these "adults" cease contact, but I guess the kids don't matter, only the birth parents...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you really want a child then you should be happy to take a chiild with disabilities because they need more love a,scare. The truth, however, is that very, very few would adopt a child with any kind of disability. Stop being such hypocrites.

Have you adopted a child with disabilities? If not, thine you have no moral authority to speak on the subject. What is to happen to all of the kids with out disabilities? I suppose they should be thrown out on the streets to fend for themselves. You need a reality check.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you really want a child then you should be happy to take a chiild with disabilities because they need more love a,scare. The truth, however, is that very, very few would adopt a child with any kind of disability. Stop being such hypocrites.

There is nothing wrong with adoptive parents hoping for a healthy child, just as biological parents hope for a healthy child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adoption is truly awful. Sometimes love is unfair and people can't have bio kids. The solution is not stealing other people's children under the guise of giving them a better life. I'm sickened by the concept.

Huh? Wut?

Adoption is life saving, for both mothers and children. It's a gift to each party, and a tough choice on both ends.

I've been thinking a lot about my life planning and, as an older mom, what should become of my children if something ever happened to me prior to reaching maturity. I am blessed with a life long friend who would do a magnificent job of caring for my children. She'd love them as her own, make different choices, honor me, invest deeply in them. I'm not saying this is the same for women who are placing their children up for adoption, but I do wonder if this peace of mind is something we might share. What a comfort it must be to parents in difficult circumstances to place their child(ren) in loving homes, especially in the case of open adoptions.

If you didn't adopt, nor ever will or place a child, I'm not getting your point. It is not lifesaving for all. Not all are making the choice - but you clearly only look at the good in it. Open adoption is very different than someone being your child's legal guardian should you pass. I don't know why you'd even comment that. And, open adoption is dependent on the adoptive parents honoring their verbal and written promises and many don't.

It isn't always the adoptive parents who do not honor the commitment. I have friends whose birthparents did not. You are choosing to only look at one side of things.

Its the birthparents choice - it may be too hard for them have contact. They are two very different issues.

Well, it is pretty damn hard on the child when these "adults" cease contact, but I guess the kids don't matter, only the birth parents...

It depends on the age and actual child. My child had lots of visits with his birthfather early on and it stopped - he doesn't remember any of it nor cares.

[Anonymous]

This is a lovely article from a birthmother's perspective
http://www.scarymommy.com/articles/being-a-birth-mother?section=confessions&u=cvp3esTFna