What are our chances of being able to adopt a healthy infant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you really need to go to this expo, which is in 2 weeks:
http://freddiemacfoundation.org/expo/

When we were considering adoption, this was a fantastic treasure trove of information, almost too much to handle, but there were all sorts of agencies, both public and private, who performed just about any type of adoption, there were excellent workshops, including an amazing one by the aforementioned Peter Wiernicki, who is an amazing encyclopedia of adoption information. We ended up not adopting, but going with a surrogate (we are bad candidates for adoption), but this gave us the information we needed to get started with adoptions if that had been the right path for us.

It's unfortunate that it's only 4 hours. Get there as early as you can to make sure you make the most of the information.

PP posted the 2011 link. This year the adoption expo is on December 1.

PP here. Very sorry about posting last year's link. Here is this year's link:
http://www.freddiemacfoundation.org/news/adoption_expo.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish you had not mentioned money, it really sounds like you are out to purchase. What is your medical condition? Is it related to mental health, or someting cronic like ms or aids? I also think you are starting to be on the older side, not that that is a problem, but combined with the health issue. And of course the speed in which you started talking about money. You are also very specific about getting an infant

they are getting to be on the "older side"??? that's hilarious. I know people who have adopted children through their 40s and who are great parents.

OP - you should go for it. If you are open to race and gender - I think you will be fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish you had not mentioned money, it really sounds like you are out to purchase. What is your medical condition? Is it related to mental health, or someting cronic like ms or aids? I also think you are starting to be on the older side, not that that is a problem, but combined with the health issue. And of course the speed in which you started talking about money. You are also very specific about getting an infant

they are getting to be on the "older side"??? that's hilarious. I know people who have adopted children through their 40s and who are great parents.

OP - you should go for it. If you are open to race and gender - I think you will be fine.

This can be a valid argument. We are an older couple. We ended up using a surrogate because we were in our late 40's at the time we were considering adoption. Several agencies we talked to said they would eliminate any couples with one partner 50 or older. We knew that if we didn't match the first time or if a match fell through and we had to match a second time that my spouse would age out and we could be eliminated. We thought that if we aged out, we might have to give up on having a family which we didn't want to face. We opted for surrogacy and had our twins born when my spouse was 50. We could easily have aged out. But we have a happy and healthy family.

Really, if you are in your late 40's, adoption may or may not be the right option for you, but you'll have to know which agencies will still consider you a candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish you had not mentioned money, it really sounds like you are out to purchase. What is your medical condition? Is it related to mental health, or someting cronic like ms or aids? I also think you are starting to be on the older side, not that that is a problem, but combined with the health issue. And of course the speed in which you started talking about money. You are also very specific about getting an infant

they are getting to be on the "older side"??? that's hilarious. I know people who have adopted children through their 40s and who are great parents.

OP - you should go for it. If you are open to race and gender - I think you will be fine.

This can be a valid argument. We are an older couple. We ended up using a surrogate because we were in our late 40's at the time we were considering adoption. Several agencies we talked to said they would eliminate any couples with one partner 50 or older. We knew that if we didn't match the first time or if a match fell through and we had to match a second time that my spouse would age out and we could be eliminated. We thought that if we aged out, we might have to give up on having a family which we didn't want to face. We opted for surrogacy and had our twins born when my spouse was 50. We could easily have aged out. But we have a happy and healthy family.

Really, if you are in your late 40's, adoption may or may not be the right option for you, but you'll have to know which agencies will still consider you a candidate.

This may be the case for domestic. I am only famliar with China, b/c that is the country we adopted from, but the upper age limit is 55. OFfering this info in case it is helpful to anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish you had not mentioned money, it really sounds like you are out to purchase. What is your medical condition? Is it related to mental health, or someting cronic like ms or aids? I also think you are starting to be on the older side, not that that is a problem, but combined with the health issue. And of course the speed in which you started talking about money. You are also very specific about getting an infant

they are getting to be on the "older side"??? that's hilarious. I know people who have adopted children through their 40s and who are great parents.

OP - you should go for it. If you are open to race and gender - I think you will be fine.

This can be a valid argument. We are an older couple. We ended up using a surrogate because we were in our late 40's at the time we were considering adoption. Several agencies we talked to said they would eliminate any couples with one partner 50 or older. We knew that if we didn't match the first time or if a match fell through and we had to match a second time that my spouse would age out and we could be eliminated. We thought that if we aged out, we might have to give up on having a family which we didn't want to face. We opted for surrogacy and had our twins born when my spouse was 50. We could easily have aged out. But we have a happy and healthy family.

Really, if you are in your late 40's, adoption may or may not be the right option for you, but you'll have to know which agencies will still consider you a candidate.

OP said she and her husband were 37. They are pleny young enough.

[Anonymous]

One thing I'd like you to consider is having the adopted child being the only one in the family of a different race. We have 5 children, two of whom are adopted, and both are hispanic. We specifically wanted the second adopted child to "match" the first so they would each have someone who looked like them (a little bit) in the family. They're already different by virtue of being adopted.

The other thing I'd like you to consider is that many medical issues are chronic as long as the child stays in their foster/orphanage environment. Once their water supply changes or they're not sharing close quarters with other children, what medical documents say on paper is a permanent medical condition may diminish or disappear entirely. Our son, for example, was presented as having severe respiratory issues that require lengthy and frequent hospitalization. Because we knew we were having other children, we didn't want one parent to be stuck in a hospital multiple times a year, so he was - on paper - not a good fit for our family. However upon closer inspection, he simply had untreated asthma. He went from spending close to a month in the hospital 4-7 times a year to taking daily asthma treatments, to now having a few inhalers around the house, which he needs less than once a month.

Lastly, we adopted an "older" child, who was only 3. We hear older child and think like 11 or something. But even a 3 year old is considered "older." Please consider the preschooler set.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One thing I'd like you to consider is having the adopted child being the only one in the family of a different race. We have 5 children, two of whom are adopted, and both are hispanic. We specifically wanted the second adopted child to "match" the first so they would each have someone who looked like them (a little bit) in the family. They're already different by virtue of being adopted.

The other thing I'd like you to consider is that many medical issues are chronic as long as the child stays in their foster/orphanage environment. Once their water supply changes or they're not sharing close quarters with other children, what medical documents say on paper is a permanent medical condition may diminish or disappear entirely. Our son, for example, was presented as having severe respiratory issues that require lengthy and frequent hospitalization. Because we knew we were having other children, we didn't want one parent to be stuck in a hospital multiple times a year, so he was - on paper - not a good fit for our family. However upon closer inspection, he simply had untreated asthma. He went from spending close to a month in the hospital 4-7 times a year to taking daily asthma treatments, to now having a few inhalers around the house, which he needs less than once a month.

Lastly, we adopted an "older" child, who was only 3. We hear older child and think like 11 or something. But even a 3 year old is considered "older." Please consider the preschooler set.

I am not OP - but I would love to adopt a pre-school age child. Besides foster care - are there any options out there? I am single so many options are closed to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think those who adopt perfectly healthy infants with biological parents who are perfectly healthy with no mental health issues is actually rare. Most people are not going to describe the health background of the biological parents and they may never mentioned their adopted child's issues to prevent judgement.

Do you have any basis or source for this statement? Or do you just know a couple of adopted children who have physical or mental health issues? B/c I know plenty of seemingly-healthy people who have had biological kids who end up having problems too. It's not always something obviously hereditary. Sometimes it's just luck of the draw no matter how you come by your children.

I think pp is right. An agency is not focused on finding parents, but finding babies and doing the placements. If there is something in the background that the adoptive parents should know, they have no legal obligation to necessarily disclose.
Likewise they will disclose on some selected pieces of information on the prospective parents to potential birth mothers, so it works both ways.

OP here. So you're saying that if we work with an agency and they have relevant information about the child's health history, we are not legally entitled to know it? Can any BTDT parents tell me if this is true? I'm frankly finding it a bit hard to believe. But then again I've never done this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think those who adopt perfectly healthy infants with biological parents who are perfectly healthy with no mental health issues is actually rare. Most people are not going to describe the health background of the biological parents and they may never mentioned their adopted child's issues to prevent judgement.

Do you have any basis or source for this statement? Or do you just know a couple of adopted children who have physical or mental health issues? B/c I know plenty of seemingly-healthy people who have had biological kids who end up having problems too. It's not always something obviously hereditary. Sometimes it's just luck of the draw no matter how you come by your children.

I think pp is right. An agency is not focused on finding parents, but finding babies and doing the placements. If there is something in the background that the adoptive parents should know, they have no legal obligation to necessarily disclose.
Likewise they will disclose on some selected pieces of information on the prospective parents to potential birth mothers, so it works both ways.

OP here. So you're saying that if we work with an agency and they have relevant information about the child's health history, we are not legally entitled to know it? Can any BTDT parents tell me if this is true? I'm frankly finding it a bit hard to believe. But then again I've never done this.

Any good and ethical agency will share with you as much as they know. It benefits no one to hide medical information. I worked with Adoptions Together and for the most part I would recommend them. Do you homework when you chose an agency - some are not as good/ethical as others.

[Anonymous]

We used a surrogate. It ended up being cheaper and we had more control than an adoption. It was gestational surrogacy.

[Anonymous]

Your chances of adopting a healthy infant are good. Just don't try and do it around here; seems like the waits are longer. We are Christian and adopted in Kansas. It probably took about a year from the time we finished all our paperwork to when we brought home our child, but we had a failed one in between. As far as religion, it just depends. Some care and will specify they want a certain religion; some do not. Ours said she wanted Christian, but then she never asked anything about it.

[Anonymous]

Hey OP - have you let your friends and family know that you are attempting to adopt? I've heard some stories where perspective APs found a birthmom that way. The APs will let their immediate circle know and then as it turns out someone is aware of someone else with a daughter or niece looking to surrender. Maybe a longshot but worth a try. Good luck to you

[Anonymous]

We've known two separate families who have adopted 2 kids each as infants, in the US. Both families live in VA, but one adopted from Oklahoma (I think) and one adopted from Florida. In both cases, the families remained in the adoption state for approximately 2 weeks while the adoption was finalized, and once they were permitted to leave the state with the baby, there was no legal way for the birth mother to reclaim rights.

Neither family had to wait very long to adopt either child. In the case of the 2nd child for each family, they were approached by the adoption agency like, "Hey, ready for another? Because we've got one for you!" In all cases the waits were well less than the 42 weeks (each) I had to wait for my bio kids!

If I were to adopt, this is how I would do it.

[Anonymous]

I would be careful also with the private lawyer route. I went to a free clinic at Jefferson Hospital in Phila. for pregnancy testing when I was in college. After meeting with the doctor ( PG was confirmed), I met with a SW as a matter of clinic policy( comprehensive services). Despite the fact that I had not so much as even mentioned that I was interested in giving my baby up for adoption, as soon as the SW found out that I was a soon to be college grad, and that the father was a collge grad and neitehr of us used drugs ( I thought she was asking these questions to see what my social supports were), OUT came the card for the " nice lawyer I know". This SW called me every week until I had a misscarriage a few weeks later, at which point she promptly hung up the phone. This was in the 1990's.

Think carefully if this is the kind of industry you want to support before you contact a "private" lawyer. I thought how unethical and sleezy.

[Anonymous]

The child is only considered Jewish if the mother is Jewish namely the birth mother. Thus the child will have to convert.