Adopting after secondary infertility

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a for profit adoption industry? Yes of course there is, but there are also plenty of women out there that simply aren't ready to parent the children they give birth to. It's very arrogant to assume that parenting and reunification is best for all women. Some women will never be good parents no matter how many resources you provide them. Assuming that providing financial resources to people will solve all of their issues is ridiculous.

I adopted my son through a semi-family member (his birth mother is the mother of my cousin's child). His BM was a teenager on her 3rd child. The 1st was/is being raised by another relative, she had the 2nd in her custody (later removed due to neglect and parental misconduct) and her 3rd child was my son.

Shortly after my son's birth she went on to commit a crime that caused her to be incarcerated. Now, she has been released and has yet another child that she is apparently parenting well. But, if she had kept a hold of all 3 of the previous children, what situation would they have found themselves in?

Adoption is a blessing. My son knows his biological siblings, has met his biological mother, grandfather and great-grandmother. Good luck OP, I hope you find a solution that works for you.

Any adoptive mother who feels this way shouldn’t adopt. Seriously. It’s rare that the primary reason for adoption isn’t age and financial.

The old saying supports the data. Adoption is a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

But you can't put the child's development on hold for the years it might take the birthparents to get their act together. It is extremely damaging for children to b passed around, have inconsistency in how their parents treat them or whether they can rely on their love and nurturing WHILE THE CHILDREN ARE FORMING AS HUMAN BEINGS. I definitely think this re-occurring poster was traumatized somewhere along the way...but I believe that children's rights and welfare should be put before adults'. And sometimes that means that the adult who had them loses their chance to raise them...because it would be too damaging for the child to wait out their recovery and/or maturation.

Actually you can and that is what is done. Kids belong first with biological families and parents have ever right get themselves together first.

You are a loon.

That's ok as you are a selfish loon who does't understand that kids should be with biological families and you are really selfish to think you are entitled to that child. I feel bad for your kids if you don't understand that most kids would prefer to be with their biological families, even bad ones given the choice. Most people who adopt do it for their needs, not the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a for profit adoption industry? Yes of course there is, but there are also plenty of women out there that simply aren't ready to parent the children they give birth to. It's very arrogant to assume that parenting and reunification is best for all women. Some women will never be good parents no matter how many resources you provide them. Assuming that providing financial resources to people will solve all of their issues is ridiculous.

I adopted my son through a semi-family member (his birth mother is the mother of my cousin's child). His BM was a teenager on her 3rd child. The 1st was/is being raised by another relative, she had the 2nd in her custody (later removed due to neglect and parental misconduct) and her 3rd child was my son.

Shortly after my son's birth she went on to commit a crime that caused her to be incarcerated. Now, she has been released and has yet another child that she is apparently parenting well. But, if she had kept a hold of all 3 of the previous children, what situation would they have found themselves in?

Adoption is a blessing. My son knows his biological siblings, has met his biological mother, grandfather and great-grandmother. Good luck OP, I hope you find a solution that works for you.

Any adoptive mother who feels this way shouldn’t adopt. Seriously. It’s rare that the primary reason for adoption isn’t age and financial.

The old saying supports the data. Adoption is a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

But you can't put the child's development on hold for the years it might take the birthparents to get their act together. It is extremely damaging for children to b passed around, have inconsistency in how their parents treat them or whether they can rely on their love and nurturing WHILE THE CHILDREN ARE FORMING AS HUMAN BEINGS. I definitely think this re-occurring poster was traumatized somewhere along the way...but I believe that children's rights and welfare should be put before adults'. And sometimes that means that the adult who had them loses their chance to raise them...because it would be too damaging for the child to wait out their recovery and/or maturation.

Actually you can and that is what is done. Kids belong first with biological families and parents have ever right get themselves together first.

You can't be serious. You really, truly believe that, no matter how much the child is neglected, abused, or unwanted, no matter what kind of dangerous situations that child might be exposed to, it is always better for them to remain in the custody and supervision (or lack thereof) of the biological parents while they work on (maybe) getting themselves together? What on earth kind of life experiences gave you that perspective?

Majority of kids go back to their families. It’s called reunification. Yes, I am a strong supporter of it. Adoption in foster care is the last resort and only if they cannot be with any family. You are selfish. My life experiences. Foster care social worker and adoptive parent.

I dont see how you think I'm selfish. For what it's worth, I'm not a parent through adoption. Reunification should be the goal, in cases where it is in the best interest of the child. I find it disturbing that, as a social worker, you dont seem to believe that there are any situations in which the child is better off NOT being left in the care of their birth parents. Whatever happened to putting the child's welfare first?

There are multiple kinds of adoption. Foster care, which is what a lot are referring to, children are rarely voluntarily placed and the majority of the parents do want their kids back. Newborn adoption is different. If a person does not want to parent, its a different situation.

Its impossible often to say what is best for the child and the social workers and courts very easily get it wrong. Good enough is usually best and I've seen some pretty horrible foster and adoptive parents where the kids would be far better off in the bad situations they came from vs. the ones they were put into. In those cases, its clear the child's needs didn't come first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a for profit adoption industry? Yes of course there is, but there are also plenty of women out there that simply aren't ready to parent the children they give birth to. It's very arrogant to assume that parenting and reunification is best for all women. Some women will never be good parents no matter how many resources you provide them. Assuming that providing financial resources to people will solve all of their issues is ridiculous.

I adopted my son through a semi-family member (his birth mother is the mother of my cousin's child). His BM was a teenager on her 3rd child. The 1st was/is being raised by another relative, she had the 2nd in her custody (later removed due to neglect and parental misconduct) and her 3rd child was my son.

Shortly after my son's birth she went on to commit a crime that caused her to be incarcerated. Now, she has been released and has yet another child that she is apparently parenting well. But, if she had kept a hold of all 3 of the previous children, what situation would they have found themselves in?

Adoption is a blessing. My son knows his biological siblings, has met his biological mother, grandfather and great-grandmother. Good luck OP, I hope you find a solution that works for you.

Any adoptive mother who feels this way shouldn’t adopt. Seriously. It’s rare that the primary reason for adoption isn’t age and financial.

The old saying supports the data. Adoption is a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

But you can't put the child's development on hold for the years it might take the birthparents to get their act together. It is extremely damaging for children to b passed around, have inconsistency in how their parents treat them or whether they can rely on their love and nurturing WHILE THE CHILDREN ARE FORMING AS HUMAN BEINGS. I definitely think this re-occurring poster was traumatized somewhere along the way...but I believe that children's rights and welfare should be put before adults'. And sometimes that means that the adult who had them loses their chance to raise them...because it would be too damaging for the child to wait out their recovery and/or maturation.

Actually you can and that is what is done. Kids belong first with biological families and parents have ever right get themselves together first.

You are a loon.

That's ok as you are a selfish loon who does't understand that kids should be with biological families and you are really selfish to think you are entitled to that child. I feel bad for your kids if you don't understand that most kids would prefer to be with their biological families, even bad ones given the choice. Most people who adopt do it for their needs, not the kids.

Take a powder. You’re embarrassing yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a for profit adoption industry? Yes of course there is, but there are also plenty of women out there that simply aren't ready to parent the children they give birth to. It's very arrogant to assume that parenting and reunification is best for all women. Some women will never be good parents no matter how many resources you provide them. Assuming that providing financial resources to people will solve all of their issues is ridiculous.

I adopted my son through a semi-family member (his birth mother is the mother of my cousin's child). His BM was a teenager on her 3rd child. The 1st was/is being raised by another relative, she had the 2nd in her custody (later removed due to neglect and parental misconduct) and her 3rd child was my son.

Shortly after my son's birth she went on to commit a crime that caused her to be incarcerated. Now, she has been released and has yet another child that she is apparently parenting well. But, if she had kept a hold of all 3 of the previous children, what situation would they have found themselves in?

Adoption is a blessing. My son knows his biological siblings, has met his biological mother, grandfather and great-grandmother. Good luck OP, I hope you find a solution that works for you.

Any adoptive mother who feels this way shouldn’t adopt. Seriously. It’s rare that the primary reason for adoption isn’t age and financial.

The old saying supports the data. Adoption is a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

But you can't put the child's development on hold for the years it might take the birthparents to get their act together. It is extremely damaging for children to b passed around, have inconsistency in how their parents treat them or whether they can rely on their love and nurturing WHILE THE CHILDREN ARE FORMING AS HUMAN BEINGS. I definitely think this re-occurring poster was traumatized somewhere along the way...but I believe that children's rights and welfare should be put before adults'. And sometimes that means that the adult who had them loses their chance to raise them...because it would be too damaging for the child to wait out their recovery and/or maturation.

Actually you can and that is what is done. Kids belong first with biological families and parents have ever right get themselves together first.

You are a loon.

That's ok as you are a selfish loon who does't understand that kids should be with biological families and you are really selfish to think you are entitled to that child. I feel bad for your kids if you don't understand that most kids would prefer to be with their biological families, even bad ones given the choice. Most people who adopt do it for their needs, not the kids.

x100000

I honestly believe that adoption will be one of the big civil rights issues of the next 50 years. Adoption as we know it will not exist two generations from now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a for profit adoption industry? Yes of course there is, but there are also plenty of women out there that simply aren't ready to parent the children they give birth to. It's very arrogant to assume that parenting and reunification is best for all women. Some women will never be good parents no matter how many resources you provide them. Assuming that providing financial resources to people will solve all of their issues is ridiculous.

I adopted my son through a semi-family member (his birth mother is the mother of my cousin's child). His BM was a teenager on her 3rd child. The 1st was/is being raised by another relative, she had the 2nd in her custody (later removed due to neglect and parental misconduct) and her 3rd child was my son.

Shortly after my son's birth she went on to commit a crime that caused her to be incarcerated. Now, she has been released and has yet another child that she is apparently parenting well. But, if she had kept a hold of all 3 of the previous children, what situation would they have found themselves in?

Adoption is a blessing. My son knows his biological siblings, has met his biological mother, grandfather and great-grandmother. Good luck OP, I hope you find a solution that works for you.

Any adoptive mother who feels this way shouldn’t adopt. Seriously. It’s rare that the primary reason for adoption isn’t age and financial.

The old saying supports the data. Adoption is a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

But you can't put the child's development on hold for the years it might take the birthparents to get their act together. It is extremely damaging for children to b passed around, have inconsistency in how their parents treat them or whether they can rely on their love and nurturing WHILE THE CHILDREN ARE FORMING AS HUMAN BEINGS. I definitely think this re-occurring poster was traumatized somewhere along the way...but I believe that children's rights and welfare should be put before adults'. And sometimes that means that the adult who had them loses their chance to raise them...because it would be too damaging for the child to wait out their recovery and/or maturation.

Actually you can and that is what is done. Kids belong first with biological families and parents have ever right get themselves together first.

You are a loon.

That's ok as you are a selfish loon who does't understand that kids should be with biological families and you are really selfish to think you are entitled to that child. I feel bad for your kids if you don't understand that most kids would prefer to be with their biological families, even bad ones given the choice. Most people who adopt do it for their needs, not the kids.

x100000

I honestly believe that adoption will be one of the big civil rights issues of the next 50 years. Adoption as we know it will not exist two generations from now.

It will change but I doubt it will change that much in less the feds get involved and make laws for the country rather than each state having their own rules and laws. Likewise, in less we bring placements back to the government and get rid of private agencies, agencies and facilities, it will continue to be a business. It is now much harder to have closed adoptions and records with DNA tests, so that is one positive change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a for profit adoption industry? Yes of course there is, but there are also plenty of women out there that simply aren't ready to parent the children they give birth to. It's very arrogant to assume that parenting and reunification is best for all women. Some women will never be good parents no matter how many resources you provide them. Assuming that providing financial resources to people will solve all of their issues is ridiculous.

I adopted my son through a semi-family member (his birth mother is the mother of my cousin's child). His BM was a teenager on her 3rd child. The 1st was/is being raised by another relative, she had the 2nd in her custody (later removed due to neglect and parental misconduct) and her 3rd child was my son.

Shortly after my son's birth she went on to commit a crime that caused her to be incarcerated. Now, she has been released and has yet another child that she is apparently parenting well. But, if she had kept a hold of all 3 of the previous children, what situation would they have found themselves in?

Adoption is a blessing. My son knows his biological siblings, has met his biological mother, grandfather and great-grandmother. Good luck OP, I hope you find a solution that works for you.

Any adoptive mother who feels this way shouldn’t adopt. Seriously. It’s rare that the primary reason for adoption isn’t age and financial.

The old saying supports the data. Adoption is a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

But you can't put the child's development on hold for the years it might take the birthparents to get their act together. It is extremely damaging for children to b passed around, have inconsistency in how their parents treat them or whether they can rely on their love and nurturing WHILE THE CHILDREN ARE FORMING AS HUMAN BEINGS. I definitely think this re-occurring poster was traumatized somewhere along the way...but I believe that children's rights and welfare should be put before adults'. And sometimes that means that the adult who had them loses their chance to raise them...because it would be too damaging for the child to wait out their recovery and/or maturation.

Actually you can and that is what is done. Kids belong first with biological families and parents have ever right get themselves together first.

You can't be serious. You really, truly believe that, no matter how much the child is neglected, abused, or unwanted, no matter what kind of dangerous situations that child might be exposed to, it is always better for them to remain in the custody and supervision (or lack thereof) of the biological parents while they work on (maybe) getting themselves together? What on earth kind of life experiences gave you that perspective?

Majority of kids go back to their families. It’s called reunification. Yes, I am a strong supporter of it. Adoption in foster care is the last resort and only if they cannot be with any family. You are selfish. My life experiences. Foster care social worker and adoptive parent.

I dont see how you think I'm selfish. For what it's worth, I'm not a parent through adoption. Reunification should be the goal, in cases where it is in the best interest of the child. I find it disturbing that, as a social worker, you dont seem to believe that there are any situations in which the child is better off NOT being left in the care of their birth parents. Whatever happened to putting the child's welfare first?

There are multiple kinds of adoption. Foster care, which is what a lot are referring to, children are rarely voluntarily placed and the majority of the parents do want their kids back. Newborn adoption is different. If a person does not want to parent, its a different situation.

Its impossible often to say what is best for the child and the social workers and courts very easily get it wrong. Good enough is usually best and I've seen some pretty horrible foster and adoptive parents where the kids would be far better off in the bad situations they came from vs. the ones they were put into. In those cases, its clear the child's needs didn't come first.

Child welfare worker here. Direct PP is absolutely correct. If bio parents are "good enough" kids fare better. Its a fact backed up by countless studies.