Ethics of adoption

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read it. I found it to be pretty one-sided. I think changing the waiting period for adoption revocation is a terrible idea, and ignores the needs of the child. A baby needs to immediately bond with its parent- whether that is the birth parent or an adoptive parent- not be ping-ponged back and forth.
The article did not make any attempt to get alternate perspectives- it only looked at those who regretted adoption.

The fetus has already bonded in utero and studies have shown the baby suffers when birth mother and baby are separated. Women who have babies born out of wedlock are no longer ostracized and society should do all it can to keep these women and their babies together. It is not the job of any woman to be a brood mare for infertile couples. Adopting children from other countries is a travesty because these babies will never know or understand their hereditary culture, extended families or their mother tongue.

I somehow can't agree that being adopted by a nice U.S. family is worse than existing in a sub-standard third-world orphanage till about 18 and then fending for yourself the best way you can. No culture or tongue is worth it. Neither is extended family if they allowed the child to be raised by a public institution rather than accepting him into their family.

I was a high school volunteer at Georgetown in the ER and was pulled in to chaperone during a gyn exam with a male physician. The mother was blunt and straight up about us contacting an adoptive service and wanted out as soon as the baby was born (later that day). There was no evidence of any mystical bonding between that mother and her child. None. That baby would have been better off if I had taken her home with me at age 15, assuming it survived the withdrawal from heroin and crack the mother admitted to during the exam. Come on!

[Anonymous]

I'll be honest -- the thought of giving my child away makes me so queasy, I can't believe there are women who are strong enough to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids are better off with bio parents, and everyone knows this including the pro-adoption crowd. That is why adoptive parents always live in fear that their "child" will want to find their real parents and will love their real parents better, because they know in their hearts that bio families have a profound bond. As a woman who has carried and given birth to a child the whole idea of adoption fills me with a cold dread. I honestly think any woman who's done the same would be against adoption bc it is just so unthinkable to me.

Not true at all. I've told my daughter if she wants to look for her natural parents - I am more than willing to help her. Is it hard for me to think about? Sure. Is it the right thing to do? Absolutely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an honest question. How can parents be coerced into placing their child for adoption?

They are all coerced "in hindsight"

Hmm. Let's see. Vulnerable woman with little or no social support turns to a deceptively "neutral" agency that lauds the good act of placing one's child for adoption and warns of ruin should the woman choose to keep and raise the kid. Abortion, of course, is out of the question.

Seriously?

We met our birthmother AND HER MOM in the hospital room. I still can't figure out what all these sanctimonious people think should happen to the children if the parent isn't going to parent the child. Please, would one of you tell me, what option do you see? Are you advocating forcing women to be parents when they don't want to or can't?

Please see previous post regarding sex education and governments and societies doing all possible to ensure mothers CAN raise their children. Lack of resources shouldn't be a factor for parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an honest question. How can parents be coerced into placing their child for adoption?

They are all coerced "in hindsight"

Hmm. Let's see. Vulnerable woman with little or no social support turns to a deceptively "neutral" agency that lauds the good act of placing one's child for adoption and warns of ruin should the woman choose to keep and raise the kid. Abortion, of course, is out of the question.

Seriously?

You are ignorant if you think EVERY agency acts this way. I purposefully chose a Catholic agency b/c they approach this from a mental health perspective and are not for profit. They are not in need of babies to "sell" to stay in business. They actually DO try to find birth parents the resources they need to parent effectively if that is their choice and they explore that option with every client who approaches them.

You really think because an agency is Catholic they are any better? They are not and its all about placing to keep their doors open and a pay check.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids are better off with bio parents, and everyone knows this including the pro-adoption crowd. That is why adoptive parents always live in fear that their "child" will want to find their real parents and will love their real parents better, because they know in their hearts that bio families have a profound bond. As a woman who has carried and given birth to a child the whole idea of adoption fills me with a cold dread. I honestly think any woman who's done the same would be against adoption bc it is just so unthinkable to me.

Not true at all. I've told my daughter if she wants to look for her natural parents - I am more than willing to help her. Is it hard for me to think about? Sure. Is it the right thing to do? Absolutely.

Calling the birthparents "natural" parents is bizarre - so you are the unnatural parent? We have an open adoption - nothing to be scared of as we know the good and bad as does our child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an honest question. How can parents be coerced into placing their child for adoption?

They are all coerced "in hindsight"

Hmm. Let's see. Vulnerable woman with little or no social support turns to a deceptively "neutral" agency that lauds the good act of placing one's child for adoption and warns of ruin should the woman choose to keep and raise the kid. Abortion, of course, is out of the question.

Seriously?

You are ignorant if you think EVERY agency acts this way. I purposefully chose a Catholic agency b/c they approach this from a mental health perspective and are not for profit. They are not in need of babies to "sell" to stay in business. They actually DO try to find birth parents the resources they need to parent effectively if that is their choice and they explore that option with every client who approaches them.

sorry but Catholic agencies are the worst. They use a lot of guilt and shame to push women to place. what they do is actively promote adoption first over abortion and then when that fails move on to providing resources for raising the child.

I am an adoptive mom but I don't think any adoption agency is really going to provide the level of counseling or service truly needed to guide a woman to making a choice to place or not.

You obviously know nothing about catholic adoption agencies. Unless you are going on your knowledge of turn of the century adoption or what you saw on SOA.

Yes, they put raising the child and adoption over abortion, but they absolutely try to support the parents first in raising their child before placing them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an honest question. How can parents be coerced into placing their child for adoption?

They are all coerced "in hindsight"

Hmm. Let's see. Vulnerable woman with little or no social support turns to a deceptively "neutral" agency that lauds the good act of placing one's child for adoption and warns of ruin should the woman choose to keep and raise the kid. Abortion, of course, is out of the question.

Seriously?

Well if she has little to no social support, isn't it a good choice to place the child for adoption? I mean she is at an adoption agency. If she were at an abortion clinic they wouldn't talk about adoption and raising the child.

Isn't it better to ensure she has the *true* option to raise her child, including by providing social and financial support?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an honest question. How can parents be coerced into placing their child for adoption?

They are all coerced "in hindsight"

Hmm. Let's see. Vulnerable woman with little or no social support turns to a deceptively "neutral" agency that lauds the good act of placing one's child for adoption and warns of ruin should the woman choose to keep and raise the kid. Abortion, of course, is out of the question.

Seriously?

We met our birthmother AND HER MOM in the hospital room. I still can't figure out what all these sanctimonious people think should happen to the children if the parent isn't going to parent the child. Please, would one of you tell me, what option do you see? Are you advocating forcing women to be parents when they don't want to or can't?

Please see previous post regarding sex education and governments and societies doing all possible to ensure mothers CAN raise their children. Lack of resources shouldn't be a factor for parents.

You are conveniently ignoring the fact that not all people want to or are emotionally equipped to be parents. What is to become of these children? Just because you cannot fathom placing a child for adoption does not mean that it is often in the best interest of the child to be placed for adoption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lack of resources shouldn't be a factor for parents.

You're responding to me, and I agree that lack of resources shouldn't be the reason. But there are other reasons that a person can't raise a baby besides lack of money. Persistent drug use, being in prison, mental illness, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an honest question. How can parents be coerced into placing their child for adoption?

They are all coerced "in hindsight"

Hmm. Let's see. Vulnerable woman with little or no social support turns to a deceptively "neutral" agency that lauds the good act of placing one's child for adoption and warns of ruin should the woman choose to keep and raise the kid. Abortion, of course, is out of the question.

Seriously?

Well if she has little to no social support, isn't it a good choice to place the child for adoption? I mean she is at an adoption agency. If she were at an abortion clinic they wouldn't talk about adoption and raising the child.

Isn't it better to ensure she has the *true* option to raise her child, including by providing social and financial support?

Who is going to provide financial support?

When you choose to be a parent, you commit to financially supporting that human for 18 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an honest question. How can parents be coerced into placing their child for adoption?

They are all coerced "in hindsight"

Hmm. Let's see. Vulnerable woman with little or no social support turns to a deceptively "neutral" agency that lauds the good act of placing one's child for adoption and warns of ruin should the woman choose to keep and raise the kid. Abortion, of course, is out of the question.

Seriously?

We met our birthmother AND HER MOM in the hospital room. I still can't figure out what all these sanctimonious people think should happen to the children if the parent isn't going to parent the child. Please, would one of you tell me, what option do you see? Are you advocating forcing women to be parents when they don't want to or can't?

Please see previous post regarding sex education and governments and societies doing all possible to ensure mothers CAN raise their children. Lack of resources shouldn't be a factor for parents.

You are conveniently ignoring the fact that not all people want to or are emotionally equipped to be parents. What is to become of these children? Just because you cannot fathom placing a child for adoption does not mean that it is often in the best interest of the child to be placed for adoption.

I was responding to the "can't" not the "won't."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an honest question. How can parents be coerced into placing their child for adoption?

A variety of reasons from false promises, to saying it is only temporary, to doing back door ways of getting custody of a child, being lied to, not being told everything/explain process, etc. Or, them changing their mind within revocation and preadopt family refuses to return the child and because the courts take so long, they generally leave the kids with claiming the kids are bonded, etc. Or, not having a revocation period.

Are you actually aware of the laws governing adoption?

Very - we adopted and we helped our birth mom fight in adoption for her older child that she did not agree to. The other family took advantage of her and lied and the courts allowed it despite how inappropriate it was. We have spent $70,000 to get the child back and on appeals. Clearly you don't know who it works to think adoption are all proper and great. Ours is great, but the other situation is horrific. We will spend everything we have to help her get her child back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids are better off with bio parents, and everyone knows this including the pro-adoption crowd. That is why adoptive parents always live in fear that their "child" will want to find their real parents and will love their real parents better, because they know in their hearts that bio families have a profound bond. As a woman who has carried and given birth to a child the whole idea of adoption fills me with a cold dread. I honestly think any woman who's done the same would be against adoption bc it is just so unthinkable to me.

Not true at all. I've told my daughter if she wants to look for her natural parents - I am more than willing to help her. Is it hard for me to think about? Sure. Is it the right thing to do? Absolutely.

Calling the birthparents "natural" parents is bizarre - so you are the unnatural parent? We have an open adoption - nothing to be scared of as we know the good and bad as does our child.

natural is the preferred term of birth mothers - that is my understanding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is an honest question. How can parents be coerced into placing their child for adoption?

A variety of reasons from false promises, to saying it is only temporary, to doing back door ways of getting custody of a child, being lied to, not being told everything/explain process, etc. Or, them changing their mind within revocation and preadopt family refuses to return the child and because the courts take so long, they generally leave the kids with claiming the kids are bonded, etc. Or, not having a revocation period.

Are you actually aware of the laws governing adoption?

Very - we adopted and we helped our birth mom fight in adoption for her older child that she did not agree to. The other family took advantage of her and lied and the courts allowed it despite how inappropriate it was. We have spent $70,000 to get the child back and on appeals. Clearly you don't know who it works to think adoption are all proper and great. Ours is great, but the other situation is horrific. We will spend everything we have to help her get her child back.

Yes, lets throw out all the wonderful adoption placements because one birthmother was screwed over. Or didn't know her rights. Or didn't know the process. Or changed her mind.