Confused—wealthy white women want supply of non-white babies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I understand the idea of having a cheap, plentiful labor force. But some are saying it’s ACB and her People of Praise or whatever that want a supply of babies for adoption is part of rationale for banning IUDs and condoms. I thought affluent infertile women just went to fertility clinics. Maybe it’s just some randos on Twitter spouting off but they are citing historic examples of white women taking indigenous and black babies. Why would they do that?

Look, I don't know anyone who is against abortion so that their friends can adopt babies. That's just not the logic. There are many couples out there who want to adopt, but that's a side benefit, not the reason for being against abortion. I can only speak about my immediate circle of friends, which is largely Catholic, but I personally know about eleven middle class and upper middle class families who have adopted children. Some of these children have been older, harder to place children (through their teenage years) and some have been babies. Very few of the adopted children have been white. Some of the babies have been exposed in utero to various substances and the parents knew this before adopting. A few of my Catholic adoptive mom friends have Ivy degrees, btw.

OP here. I’m Catholic too. My daughter goes to an extremely conservative Catholic school. The majority of them have very large families. They pray Novenas, pray 24/7 outside the “local abortion mill” for one month of the year, take the yearly trip to the pro-Life rally in DC and routinely refer to abortion as murder in school assemblies, even with the lower grades present. And they are staunchly against birth control. We went to weekly mass at the church affiliated with the school for a full year so our daughter could attend their formation program.

They are right in the demographic to celebrate the Supreme Court overturning Roe but only ONE of those families has adopted a bunch of kids and they were from Ethiopia and Ukraine.

So back to my original question, who are all the people who are looking for large amounts fresh American babies to adopt? I don’t see them. I think PP who said conservatives want to create a felon class for cheap labor that can’t vote is probably right. I just don’t know where this baby stealing stuff is coming from.

Many people gave up on adoption when it became harder to adopt healthy white babies without the potential interference of the birth mother in the kid’s life. Less people would feel compelled to commit the grievous sin of IVF if they could go down to a mother baby home and leave that day with a healthy white infant. The tens of thousands of dollars that are currently going to the IVF doctors would instead go to the Catholic Church and other religious entities facilitating the “adoptions”. The ever grateful parents would raise their kids in the church. The 1950s-1970s were the glory days of the Catholic Church in America, and no doubt what they are trying to bring back now that their own attendance is in the toilet and many people feel they lost any moral credibility long ago.

Roberts bought two children from Ireland himself. Who knows what their mothers were subjected to.

That is a disgusting thing for you to say. I don't care what your issues are with the Catholic church (and you can't seem to give it a rest) or Roberts, but keep his children out of it.

Ireland doesn't allow international adoptions. So how did two corporate lawyers get two Irish babies?

Square that peg.

They used the law to make it happen. How interesting.

English - do you speak it? It was and is illegal to adopt Irish babies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I worked in international adoption many years ago. There was an unspoken recognition that white Americans would rather adopt white or Chinese ("white adjacent") babies from overseas, with all of the hassle and expense that involves, than adopt U.S.-born Black children.

DH and I are just beginning to consider adopting (I’m pro choice, not one of these whackjobs who is hoping for an increased “domestic supply of infants”) and literally my only hesitancy in adopting a Black child would be that I would afraid that I would not do a good enough job connecting said child to his or her culture. It would be very important to me to not muck that up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I understand the idea of having a cheap, plentiful labor force. But some are saying it’s ACB and her People of Praise or whatever that want a supply of babies for adoption is part of rationale for banning IUDs and condoms. I thought affluent infertile women just went to fertility clinics. Maybe it’s just some randos on Twitter spouting off but they are citing historic examples of white women taking indigenous and black babies. Why would they do that?

Look, I don't know anyone who is against abortion so that their friends can adopt babies. That's just not the logic. There are many couples out there who want to adopt, but that's a side benefit, not the reason for being against abortion. I can only speak about my immediate circle of friends, which is largely Catholic, but I personally know about eleven middle class and upper middle class families who have adopted children. Some of these children have been older, harder to place children (through their teenage years) and some have been babies. Very few of the adopted children have been white. Some of the babies have been exposed in utero to various substances and the parents knew this before adopting. A few of my Catholic adoptive mom friends have Ivy degrees, btw.

OP here. I’m Catholic too. My daughter goes to an extremely conservative Catholic school. The majority of them have very large families. They pray Novenas, pray 24/7 outside the “local abortion mill” for one month of the year, take the yearly trip to the pro-Life rally in DC and routinely refer to abortion as murder in school assemblies, even with the lower grades present. And they are staunchly against birth control. We went to weekly mass at the church affiliated with the school for a full year so our daughter could attend their formation program.

They are right in the demographic to celebrate the Supreme Court overturning Roe but only ONE of those families has adopted a bunch of kids and they were from Ethiopia and Ukraine.

So back to my original question, who are all the people who are looking for large amounts fresh American babies to adopt? I don’t see them. I think PP who said conservatives want to create a felon class for cheap labor that can’t vote is probably right. I just don’t know where this baby stealing stuff is coming from.

Many people gave up on adoption when it became harder to adopt healthy white babies without the potential interference of the birth mother in the kid’s life. Less people would feel compelled to commit the grievous sin of IVF if they could go down to a mother baby home and leave that day with a healthy white infant. The tens of thousands of dollars that are currently going to the IVF doctors would instead go to the Catholic Church and other religious entities facilitating the “adoptions”. The ever grateful parents would raise their kids in the church. The 1950s-1970s were the glory days of the Catholic Church in America, and no doubt what they are trying to bring back now that their own attendance is in the toilet and many people feel they lost any moral credibility long ago.

Roberts bought two children from Ireland himself. Who knows what their mothers were subjected to.

That is a disgusting thing for you to say. I don't care what your issues are with the Catholic church (and you can't seem to give it a rest) or Roberts, but keep his children out of it.

Ireland doesn't allow international adoptions. So how did two corporate lawyers get two Irish babies?

Square that peg.

They used the law to make it happen. How interesting.

English - do you speak it? It was and is illegal to adopt Irish babies.

What I think PP is saying is that laws don’t apply if you’re rich, well-connected and White. IOKIYAR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worked in international adoption many years ago. There was an unspoken recognition that white Americans would rather adopt white or Chinese ("white adjacent") babies from overseas, with all of the hassle and expense that involves, than adopt U.S.-born Black children.

Really? Some of the religious nutters like to go into places like Haiti and steal black babies.

Some, yes. Not all, by a long shot. Eastern European (and Eastern European surrogacy) and Chinese adoptions are the A Ticket for Americans adopting overseas

[Anonymous]

I'm sure a woman who has no interest in being pregnant will be very conscientious about taking prenatal vitamins and eating the right things. In reality, you'll be lucky to get them to quit smoking and drinking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worked in international adoption many years ago. There was an unspoken recognition that white Americans would rather adopt white or Chinese ("white adjacent") babies from overseas, with all of the hassle and expense that involves, than adopt U.S.-born Black children.

DH and I are just beginning to consider adopting (I’m pro choice, not one of these whackjobs who is hoping for an increased “domestic supply of infants”) and literally my only hesitancy in adopting a Black child would be that I would afraid that I would not do a good enough job connecting said child to his or her culture. It would be very important to me to not muck that up.

I think you'll be fine. White moms have been raising black kids for decades in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I understand the idea of having a cheap, plentiful labor force. But some are saying it’s ACB and her People of Praise or whatever that want a supply of babies for adoption is part of rationale for banning IUDs and condoms. I thought affluent infertile women just went to fertility clinics. Maybe it’s just some randos on Twitter spouting off but they are citing historic examples of white women taking indigenous and black babies. Why would they do that?

Look, I don't know anyone who is against abortion so that their friends can adopt babies. That's just not the logic. There are many couples out there who want to adopt, but that's a side benefit, not the reason for being against abortion. I can only speak about my immediate circle of friends, which is largely Catholic, but I personally know about eleven middle class and upper middle class families who have adopted children. Some of these children have been older, harder to place children (through their teenage years) and some have been babies. Very few of the adopted children have been white. Some of the babies have been exposed in utero to various substances and the parents knew this before adopting. A few of my Catholic adoptive mom friends have Ivy degrees, btw.

OP here. I’m Catholic too. My daughter goes to an extremely conservative Catholic school. The majority of them have very large families. They pray Novenas, pray 24/7 outside the “local abortion mill” for one month of the year, take the yearly trip to the pro-Life rally in DC and routinely refer to abortion as murder in school assemblies, even with the lower grades present. And they are staunchly against birth control. We went to weekly mass at the church affiliated with the school for a full year so our daughter could attend their formation program.

They are right in the demographic to celebrate the Supreme Court overturning Roe but only ONE of those families has adopted a bunch of kids and they were from Ethiopia and Ukraine.

So back to my original question, who are all the people who are looking for large amounts fresh American babies to adopt? I don’t see them. I think PP who said conservatives want to create a felon class for cheap labor that can’t vote is probably right. I just don’t know where this baby stealing stuff is coming from.

You are seeing families who have children, not people without children. So of course there are no adopted children. Or maybe you just don't know the kids who were adopted. Very conservative Catholics are not likely to cross racial lines either. Join an adoption group and find out how difficult it is to adopt a child who looks like you (assuming white).

What is your basis for saying this? Im from a very conservative Catholic family that adopted across racial lines. ACB on the SCOTUS is a very conservative Catholic that adopted across racial lines. I dont think you have any basis apart from prejudice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems sensible to me, if clinical. America has a baby shortage, so restricting abortion increases the domestic supply. We need to sustain our population either through having babies or importing people. This isnt for wealthy white women, but for everyone. We will be in serious troyble as a nation, unable to sustain social security, unable to raise enough tax revenue, etc if we dont have more babies. To me, its an economic issue, not a racial one.

Wouldn't it make sense, then, to look at the economic issues that are causing people to have less children? Millennials and younger have been begging for relief and we've gotten none. We're drowning in education debt, wages have not kept pace with rising costs of living, we can't afford houses, healthcare costs even with insurance are out of control, and hardly any of us will be able to afford to retire.

At what point exactly are we supposed to responsibly bring more lives into this picture? Don't even get me started on the cost of childcare, let alone the fact that we can't even get any paid time off to birth the damn kid.

But yes, abortion restrictions should definitely solve the baby problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worked in international adoption many years ago. There was an unspoken recognition that white Americans would rather adopt white or Chinese ("white adjacent") babies from overseas, with all of the hassle and expense that involves, than adopt U.S.-born Black children.

DH and I are just beginning to consider adopting (I’m pro choice, not one of these whackjobs who is hoping for an increased “domestic supply of infants”) and literally my only hesitancy in adopting a Black child would be that I would afraid that I would not do a good enough job connecting said child to his or her culture. It would be very important to me to not muck that up.

Being conscious of the issue already puts you head and shoulders above many. All you can really do is try. Every parents mucks up parenting in some way at some point.

[Anonymous]

NP... barging in to this thread to say I think this whole thing is a cynical, sick right wing joke on America.

Let's do some math here:

In any given year there are CURRENTLY already over 400,000 American kids who are wards of the state, in foster homes, et cetera. That number will skyrocket with the overturn of Roe v. Wade, it could easily double.

But in any given year, how many kids are getting adopted? Only around 50-60,000. That number won't change with the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Why would it? How would it? Where do all these extra families wanting to adopt magically come from when they already didn't exist to adopt the 350,000 kids already in the system? Let alone adopt 700,000+ kids considering the increase that will happen with this SCOTUS decision and the slew of trigger laws in half of the states?

Where will all of the extra funding come from to take care of 700,000 kids?

Let's face it, "oh they will be adopted" is a big fat lie given the data only shows 50-60k kids being adopted each year. Getting adopted is something only around 8% will be able to see happen. The rest will remain wards of the state, or shuttled around between foster homes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Carrying a baby to term and then giving it up for adoption is a rough haul. As much as they want to drag women back, it's not pre-1973 anymore. Women can have a baby on their own, use dna testing to establish paternity and get child support deducted automatically from the biological father. Anyone who is fantasizing about all these babies being put up for adoption forgets that the technology and social mores around single parenthood and women's careers have changed. Pro-choice Dem lawyers should offer pro bono child support counseling to single pregnant women who have decided against abortion (or have restricted abortion) to match the 'adoption counseling' they get from the anti-abortion republicans. Make the men remember they have to pay for the children they want women to bear.

They’ll work on that next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I understand the idea of having a cheap, plentiful labor force. But some are saying it’s ACB and her People of Praise or whatever that want a supply of babies for adoption is part of rationale for banning IUDs and condoms. I thought affluent infertile women just went to fertility clinics. Maybe it’s just some randos on Twitter spouting off but they are citing historic examples of white women taking indigenous and black babies. Why would they do that?

Look, I don't know anyone who is against abortion so that their friends can adopt babies. That's just not the logic. There are many couples out there who want to adopt, but that's a side benefit, not the reason for being against abortion. I can only speak about my immediate circle of friends, which is largely Catholic, but I personally know about eleven middle class and upper middle class families who have adopted children. Some of these children have been older, harder to place children (through their teenage years) and some have been babies. Very few of the adopted children have been white. Some of the babies have been exposed in utero to various substances and the parents knew this before adopting. A few of my Catholic adoptive mom friends have Ivy degrees, btw.

OP here. I’m Catholic too. My daughter goes to an extremely conservative Catholic school. The majority of them have very large families. They pray Novenas, pray 24/7 outside the “local abortion mill” for one month of the year, take the yearly trip to the pro-Life rally in DC and routinely refer to abortion as murder in school assemblies, even with the lower grades present. And they are staunchly against birth control. We went to weekly mass at the church affiliated with the school for a full year so our daughter could attend their formation program.

They are right in the demographic to celebrate the Supreme Court overturning Roe but only ONE of those families has adopted a bunch of kids and they were from Ethiopia and Ukraine.

So back to my original question, who are all the people who are looking for large amounts fresh American babies to adopt? I don’t see them. I think PP who said conservatives want to create a felon class for cheap labor that can’t vote is probably right. I just don’t know where this baby stealing stuff is coming from.

Many people gave up on adoption when it became harder to adopt healthy white babies without the potential interference of the birth mother in the kid’s life. Less people would feel compelled to commit the grievous sin of IVF if they could go down to a mother baby home and leave that day with a healthy white infant. The tens of thousands of dollars that are currently going to the IVF doctors would instead go to the Catholic Church and other religious entities facilitating the “adoptions”. The ever grateful parents would raise their kids in the church. The 1950s-1970s were the glory days of the Catholic Church in America, and no doubt what they are trying to bring back now that their own attendance is in the toilet and many people feel they lost any moral credibility long ago.

Roberts bought two children from Ireland himself. Who knows what their mothers were subjected to.

That is a disgusting thing for you to say. I don't care what your issues are with the Catholic church (and you can't seem to give it a rest) or Roberts, but keep his children out of it.

Ireland doesn't allow international adoptions. So how did two corporate lawyers get two Irish babies?

Square that peg.

They used the law to make it happen. How interesting.

English - do you speak it? It was and is illegal to adopt Irish babies.

Tell me how you arrived at this declaration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP... barging in to this thread to say I think this whole thing is a cynical, sick right wing joke on America.

Let's do some math here:

In any given year there are CURRENTLY already over 400,000 American kids who are wards of the state, in foster homes, et cetera. That number will skyrocket with the overturn of Roe v. Wade, it could easily double.

But in any given year, how many kids are getting adopted? Only around 50-60,000. That number won't change with the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Why would it? How would it? Where do all these extra families wanting to adopt magically come from when they already didn't exist to adopt the 350,000 kids already in the system? Let alone adopt 700,000+ kids considering the increase that will happen with this SCOTUS decision and the slew of trigger laws in half of the states?

Where will all of the extra funding come from to take care of 700,000 kids?

Let's face it, "oh they will be adopted" is a big fat lie given the data only shows 50-60k kids being adopted each year. Getting adopted is something only around 8% will be able to see happen. The rest will remain wards of the state, or shuttled around between foster homes.

+1
The kids waiting for adoption are mostly teenagers and their online bios openly state that they need to be the only child or youngest child in the house. Reading between the lines, they have exactly as many issues as you’d think someone whose parents couldn’t care for them for nearly 18 years would have and it’s utterly heart rending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Adoption agencies are FOR profit. Of COURSE they want more product in which to sell.

Not exactly. But you know everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I understand the idea of having a cheap, plentiful labor force. But some are saying it’s ACB and her People of Praise or whatever that want a supply of babies for adoption is part of rationale for banning IUDs and condoms. I thought affluent infertile women just went to fertility clinics. Maybe it’s just some randos on Twitter spouting off but they are citing historic examples of white women taking indigenous and black babies. Why would they do that?

Look, I don't know anyone who is against abortion so that their friends can adopt babies. That's just not the logic. There are many couples out there who want to adopt, but that's a side benefit, not the reason for being against abortion. I can only speak about my immediate circle of friends, which is largely Catholic, but I personally know about eleven middle class and upper middle class families who have adopted children. Some of these children have been older, harder to place children (through their teenage years) and some have been babies. Very few of the adopted children have been white. Some of the babies have been exposed in utero to various substances and the parents knew this before adopting. A few of my Catholic adoptive mom friends have Ivy degrees, btw.

OP here. I’m Catholic too. My daughter goes to an extremely conservative Catholic school. The majority of them have very large families. They pray Novenas, pray 24/7 outside the “local abortion mill” for one month of the year, take the yearly trip to the pro-Life rally in DC and routinely refer to abortion as murder in school assemblies, even with the lower grades present. And they are staunchly against birth control. We went to weekly mass at the church affiliated with the school for a full year so our daughter could attend their formation program.

They are right in the demographic to celebrate the Supreme Court overturning Roe but only ONE of those families has adopted a bunch of kids and they were from Ethiopia and Ukraine.

So back to my original question, who are all the people who are looking for large amounts fresh American babies to adopt? I don’t see them. I think PP who said conservatives want to create a felon class for cheap labor that can’t vote is probably right. I just don’t know where this baby stealing stuff is coming from.

You are seeing families who have children, not people without children. So of course there are no adopted children. Or maybe you just don't know the kids who were adopted. Very conservative Catholics are not likely to cross racial lines either. Join an adoption group and find out how difficult it is to adopt a child who looks like you (assuming white).

What is your basis for saying this? Im from a very conservative Catholic family that adopted across racial lines. ACB on the SCOTUS is a very conservative Catholic that adopted across racial lines. I dont think you have any basis apart from prejudice.

Where did she say all? I don't see it.