Post-Roe, will there be more infants available to adopt?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a woman with no interest in having a kid and who would otherwise have an abortion, what are the odds they eat well, take prenatal vitamins, or even do something simple like give up alcohol?

If she's white, the father was white, and the kid can be adopted within minutes of birth -- don't care if she consumed nothing but Twinkies and Vodka.

Why do you care?

Interracial adoption never goes well, unfortunately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a woman with no interest in having a kid and who would otherwise have an abortion, what are the odds they eat well, take prenatal vitamins, or even do something simple like give up alcohol?

If she's white, the father was white, and the kid can be adopted within minutes of birth -- don't care if she consumed nothing but Twinkies and Vodka.

Why do you care?

Interracial adoption never goes well, unfortunately.

Wrong again, as you know. I am so sorry, dear poster, that you were turned down/ could not afford an adoption. Your anger shows. But you do not need to post the same slime over and over.

[Anonymous]

I actually think the political backlash to overruling Roe is going to be such that it actually ends up improving abortion access in this country. Remember the decision didn’t restrict abortion but just gave states the power to do so. But by doing that it hugely energized choice advocates

[Anonymous]

I actually think the political backlash to overruling Roe is going to be such that it actually ends up improving abortion access in this country. Remember the decision didn’t restrict abortion but just gave states the power to do so. But by doing that it hugely energized choice advocates

Maybe but there are going to be a lot of dead or severely damaged women between now and then. And for years the Dems ceded state elections to the Republicans who then proceeded to gerrymander states to such a degree that the state legislatures even in red states are far more right wing than the general population at large. So the Dems are now in an uphill battle, even with public opinion over abortion access on their side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Think about this, OP. Really think.

A woman gets pregnant. Maybe she's young, maybe older. Odds are that she already has children at home she is raising, but for some this would be the first.

Even if she would have chosen to have an abortion, now she can't. So she goes through 9 months of getting bigger and bigger, having people ask if she is pregnant, people asking if she's chosen a name, asking if the big brother or sister at home is excited. Offering advice about strollers, breastfeeding, colors for the nursery.

Abortion often is a private event. (That is what pisses people off who feel it should be punished.) You can make the choice and sort it out without commentary on it by everyone around you, or without other people feeling they have input.

Pregnancy is a very visible and public event. Other people comment on, advise, offer help, and have opinions.

To stand up to that and say, "no, I (or we) don't want this baby, and we're going to give it up for adoption" is enormously hard. It's also not what many do after going through the labor and delivery and having that bonding moment.

Most people are going to try to make it work. And newborns are relatively easy! They stay where you put them. They don't get into trouble, or talk back, or run out the door into traffic. You can make do, even if you aren't ready.

The kids that are going to be given up or taken away are older. They are old enough to remember violence, to talk back, to bring that trauma with them.

It's a sick fantasy that you'll have a sweet, precious little "domestic supply of infants." You will, however, have a domestic supply of traumatized older kids who need to be cared for.

And it doesn't even need to be 5+ years. I have two friends dealing with really difficult situations with children (now teens) they adopted at 2-3 years old who have reactive attachment disorder and are violent. After seeing what they've gone through I could never adopt a child that is not a newborn.

Adopting a newborn does not preclude any of the issues you listed from arising. Being ripped away from your biological mother as an infant is traumatic & causes RAD to develop.

That's not what rad is and it's not normal in a newborn. It's usually with kids in institutions or bad prior situations.

This. I suspect the troll has no children, adopted or otherwise. Mental health issues from the biological line may be expressed, but that is not trauma or RAD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are indeed posters here who are clearly anti-adoption.

Adoption is quite traumatic to the birth mother and child. The only real winners are the adoptive parents.

This is the tiresome adopted person anti-adoption troll. They have made hundreds and hundreds of posts just like this. Ignore them.

Sorry, no. I’m a child-free non-adoptee who has seen a lot of harm done by adoption. Many people don’t think adoption is the inherent good you want it to be.

I don’t “want it to be” anything. You are hilariously off-base.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I actually think the political backlash to overruling Roe is going to be such that it actually ends up improving abortion access in this country. Remember the decision didn’t restrict abortion but just gave states the power to do so. But by doing that it hugely energized choice advocates

This is a very optimistic take and I find it highly unlikely. The people who were most energized were the ones in states where there are less likely to be draconian restrictions. There are not the same number of choice advocates in places like say Mississippi etc. and it’s already resulted in restrictions on abortive through the mail.

[Anonymous]

Perhaps the question should be, will there be more tax payer paid benefits.
Paid maternity leave, subsidized daycare, free medical care to uninsured or low income mothers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps the question should be, will there be more tax payer paid benefits.
Paid maternity leave, subsidized daycare, free medical care to uninsured or low income mothers?

Why would there be? Don’t get me wrong, I think there should be more support for families (+ access to safe affordable health care that includes abortion) but I don’t think the people who want fewer abortions actually want to help pregnant women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps the question should be, will there be more tax payer paid benefits.
Paid maternity leave, subsidized daycare, free medical care to uninsured or low income mothers?

Why would there be? Don’t get me wrong, I think there should be more support for families (+ access to safe affordable health care that includes abortion) but I don’t think the people who want fewer abortions actually want to help pregnant women.

So they want to help the fathers?

[Anonymous]

Probably not. Instead there will be an increase in single parents as more women will die from complications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Probably not. Instead there will be an increase in single parents as more women will die from complications.

Well then, the one who has superior morals can kick a pregnant woman

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are indeed posters here who are clearly anti-adoption.

I imagine so, and with good reason. Adoption shouldn't be a product of misogynistic baby trafficking practices. Restricting/ banning abortion shouldn't be supplying babies. Have we learned nothing from the baby scoop era? It's time to reevaluate adoption and practices.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are indeed posters here who are clearly anti-adoption.

I imagine so, and with good reason. Adoption shouldn't be a product of misogynistic baby trafficking practices. Restricting/ banning abortion shouldn't be supplying babies. Have we learned nothing from the baby scoop era? It's time to reevaluate adoption and practices.

Perhaps you think too highly of men and your countrymen

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are indeed posters here who are clearly anti-adoption.

Adoption is quite traumatic to the birth mother and child. The only real winners are the adoptive parents.

This is the tiresome adopted person anti-adoption troll. They have made hundreds and hundreds of posts just like this. Ignore them.

So you ignore any opinion that differs from yours. Understood.

No, just the tired, knee-jerk, rigid, boring biased ones being vomited all over every adoption thread for YEARS.

Get a hobby. Get therapy. If you have a therapist, get a different one, because it isn’t working.