Mother wants adoption father does not what happens child support? (biological, baby)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And then when the child reaches adulthood, his loving afamily will not be able to comprehend why junior or ms. juniorette is not eternally grateful for being saved from being drowned in the toilet, or left to be abandoned at the local Walmart parking lot in the dead of winter. ::extreme sarcasm::
That is a pretty distasteful comment and reflects your bias towards APs in general. Pretty disappointing since you are usually a pretty level headed poster.
Now that you've prompted me to think about it longer, it may be best if this mother utilized the safe haven laws in her state. It's a win-win for her and her unborn child...oh wait, it's another win for the adopting family!
Typically a win does not mean you simultaneously have to lose things that may be very important to you.
Last edited by thethreefoldme; 04-28-2013 at 03:35 PM..
Mother wants adoption father does not what happens child support?
Mother wants to put baby up for adoption. Father does not. Father just got a job paying $15 an hour. He has 5 other children ages 2,3,4,7,9 all different mothers. He is behind on child support. Mother does not have any children was a student in college but ran out of money and currently not working on bedrest doctors orders. She has no family support. I'm a mutual friend of both the mother and father. The father wants the baby and tells her he will put her on childsupport. He told her that if she keeps the baby and puts him on childsupport she won't get much money because he is already paying support for 5 kids. This is really stressing her out. I went to visit her today and she was so nervous about him getting custody and making her pay childsupport she was shaking and crying. She says she just wants to put the baby up for adoption and move on with her life. I feel bad because I convinced her to put the baby up for adoption instead of abortion. Now the father is trying to block the adoption. I'm moving out of town next week so I won't be around to help her. What should she do? He also smokes weed.
I think this lady needs to contact a human services type agency which can help sort out her immediate problems. She is fairly obviously under stress and is not really in a position to be making permanent decisions about her unborn child's future. She really needs to talk to someone who can help her get to a better place.
Quote:
I feel bad because I convinced her to put the baby up for adoption instead of abortion
.
When it comes to reproductive choices and parenting choices, they should be kept separate. It is not really responsible to tell someone that they can have their child adopted instead of aborting it because one is mixing the reproductive choices with the parenting choices. If one wants to counsel a woman against abortion, one needs to make it a choice between not continuing with the pregnancy and continuing with the pregnancy. One can let the woman know that adoption is a valid parenting choice along with parenting but really all prolife counselling re continuing or not continuing a pregnancy should be about just that. Once she has decided to continue the pregnancy, counselling should involve helping her get her life to the best place possible and then she can make her parenting decision.
It may be better to think of the woman with an unplanned pregnancy as a woman who is pregnant in unwanted circumstances rather than a woman pregnant with an unwanted baby and counsel the woman accordingly.
That is a pretty distasteful comment and reflects your bias towards APs in general. Pretty disappointing since you are usually a pretty level headed poster.
It's been my experience that some adoptive parents/prospective aparents want to keep their heads buried in the sand. I meant no offense to those that don't, and those who at least try to keep an open mind about the issues inherent with relinquishment. My hat goes off to adoptive parents who sincerely try to empathize as to how a baby would someday feel to learn his mother left him as a foundling and his country legally sanctioned it. But all this aside, I did warn the reader that I was using sarcasm to make a valid point. IMO, and I can't stress this enough.... Adoptive parents who think that it's cool for a kid to feel grateful to have been SAVED by an afamily after being DUMPED at a safe haven aren't really my cup of tea. I have no bias toward anyone unless they are willfully blind to the fact that adoption is built on a LOSS. Why compound that loss by encouraging women to use these things? These are not the women who will commit infanticide. Women who kill their babies are in denial that they are even pg. The baby comes, they panic, they kill. Women who know they are pregnant are encouraged to tell, reach out to a trusted person, receive prenatal care, and make a responsible adoption plan.
Typically a win does not mean you simultaneously have to lose things that may be very important to you.
One would have to have the mental capacity to be aware of and acknowlege that which is "very important" to them to feel it has been lost. Infants don't have this loss. Instead, it is usually an adult who tells them that they need to grieve a loss they otherwise may have never known.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avery_Harper
It's been my experience that some adoptive parents/prospective aparents want to keep their heads buried in the sand. I meant no offense to those that don't, and those who at least try to keep an open mind about the issues inherent with relinquishment. My hat goes off to adoptive parents who sincerely try to empathize as to how a baby would someday feel to learn his mother left him as a foundling and his country legally sanctioned it. But all this aside, I did warn the reader that I was using sarcasm to make a valid point. IMO, and I can't stress this enough.... Adoptive parents who think that it's cool for a kid to feel grateful to have been SAVED by an afamily after being DUMPED at a safe haven aren't really my cup of tea. I have no bias toward anyone unless they are willfully blind to the fact that adoption is built on a LOSS. Why compound that loss by encouraging women to use these things? These are not the women who will commit infanticide. Women who kill their babies are in denial that they are even pg. The baby comes, they panic, they kill. Women who know they are pregnant are encouraged to tell, reach out to a trusted person, receive prenatal care, and make a responsible adoption plan.
None of us live on Fantasy Island. We live in the real world. There are no rose-colored glasses being worn here.
After reading your posts it is clear that you are against Safe Haven Laws because it denies those who are against infant adoptions the opportunity to persuade a birth mother to keep and parent her child. A child I might add, that she clearly does not want to parent.
Why else would you care? You are not being burdened by the relinquished infant. You are not facing any criminal charges for the act. You don't even know any of the women who may use safe haven laws. You don't even know the reasons they use them. NOTHING is happening to YOU when women/young girls use this law. So, why do you destest it so much? For someone who is essentially unharmed by safe haven laws, you seem to protest much.
Until we start placing mothers who expose their unborn children to drugs in jail instead of "treatment" programs designed to reunify innocent babies with drug addicts; then we should not stop offering safe haven laws to mothers who choose to safely relinquish their babies. How is the former acceptable yet the latter not?
Prenatal care? There are plenty, I mean plenty, of poor and/or undereducated women - even women who are simply selfish - who do not receive adequate or any prenatal care, and still show up at a hosptial and deliver their babies. These women also choose to parent.
You do realize that ALL 50 states have safe haven laws? All 50. This is the truth about safe haven laws; from the source, not a 10-year old study. National Safe Haven Alliance.
One would have to have the mental capacity to be aware of and acknowlege that which is "very important" to them to feel it has been lost. Infants don't have this loss. Instead, it is usually an adult who tells them that they need to grieve a loss they otherwise may have never known.
Infants do become adults. And, no, no-one has ever told me I have to grieve some loss - what losses I have grieved came out of the blue and really hit me after reuniting with bfamily - I didn't realise what I'd lost until I'd done so. And no, I am not so much talking about wanting to live with bfamily - I'm talking about other things like being able to put things in context etc. Maybe "loss" isn't even the right word a lot of the time, sometimes it might be more like having had numerous compartments without names on them to say what they are for or without keys to open them and now being able to open them or name them. Reunion often involves a range of emotions for everyone in adoption and they should be allowed to feel them.
No doubt, I could have gone to my grave without reuniting and been perfectly but, by golly, I'm glad I haven't. I don't envy any so-called "well adjusted happy adoptee" - I ain't adjusting myself for anyone!
Last edited by susankate; 04-29-2013 at 09:00 AM..
None of us live on Fantasy Island. We live in the real world. There are no rose-colored glasses being worn here.
After reading your posts it is clear that you are against Safe Haven Laws because it denies those who are against infant adoptions the opportunity to persuade a birth mother to keep and parent her child. A child I might add, that she clearly does not want to parent.
Why else would you care? You are not being burdened by the relinquished infant. You are not facing any criminal charges for the act. You don't even know any of the women who may use safe haven laws. You don't even know the reasons they use them. NOTHING is happening to YOU when women/young girls use this law. So, why do you destest it so much? For someone who is essentially unharmed by safe haven laws, you seem to protest much.
Until we start placing mothers who expose their unborn children to drugs in jail instead of "treatment" programs designed to reunify innocent babies with drug addicts; then we should not stop offering safe haven laws to mothers who choose to safely relinquish their babies. How is the former acceptable yet the latter not?
Prenatal care? There are plenty, I mean plenty, of poor and/or undereducated women - even women who are simply selfish - who do not receive adequate or any prenatal care, and still show up at a hosptial and deliver their babies. These women also choose to parent.
You do realize that ALL 50 states have safe haven laws? All 50. This is the truth about safe haven laws; from the source, not a 10-year old study. National Safe Haven Alliance.
If you don't like my opinions about this topic, please skip them. I was very clear to state exactly the type of parents/aparents who continue to keep their heads buried in the sand. I was clear to state that IMO, baby safe haven laws are irresponsible legislation and the reasons why. My opinions are backed by reputable source; the Adoption institute who came to many of the same conclusions. Never did I personalize my opinions. There is no reason for you to be so defensive. Take what you can from my posts, respect that I have a right to share my opinion and leave the rest behind. You also have a right to your opinion, and I have a right not to agree.
Again, my opinion stands... It's been my experience that some adoptive parents/prospective aparents want to keep their heads buried in the sand. I meant no offense to those that don't, and those who at least try to keep an open mind about the issues inherent with relinquishment. My hat goes off to adoptive parents who sincerely try to empathize as to how a baby would someday feel to learn his mother left him as a foundling and his country legally sanctioned it. But all this aside, I did warn the reader that I was using sarcasm to make a valid point. IMO, and I can't stress this enough.... Adoptive parents who think that it's cool for a kid to feel grateful to have been SAVED by an afamily after being DUMPED at a safe haven aren't really my cup of tea. I have no bias toward anyone unless they are willfully blind to the fact that adoption is built on a LOSS. Why compound that loss by encouraging women to use these things? These are not the women who will commit infanticide. Women who kill their babies are in denial that they are even pg. The baby comes, they panic, they kill. Women who know they are pregnant are encouraged to tell, reach out to a trusted person, receive prenatal care, and make a responsible adoption plan.
Warning: Fourteen pages in length, but so worth the read. I always find critical thinking is necessary to address the real issues. Baby safe haven laws are a feel good type fluffy legislation meant to put a band-aid on the wound but in effect, they do not address the wound, or get to the root of the problem; the root causes of child abandonment/infanticide. As some of us full well know, there's lots of legislation enacted by congress every year that is like this.
The devil is in the details. I think this study, (if scrutinized in full), will help the reader to discern why that is...
I ask you to ponder the short brief below before reading this report in its entirety:
Quote:
"If the ultimate goal is to prevent unsafe abandonment, which it should be, then any solution also must address the problem’s underlying causes – which current “safe haven” laws do not even pretend to do. It is clear that a lack of anonymity and a fear of prosecution (the two issues these laws focus upon) do not motivate women to leave their infants in dangerous circumstances – denial and desperation do"
One would have to have the mental capacity to be aware of and acknowlege that which is "very important" to them to feel it has been lost. Infants don't have this loss. Instead, it is usually an adult who tells them that they need to grieve a loss they otherwise may have never known.
I'm not sure how you came to this assumption, but it couldn't be farther from the truth:
Losses do not cease to exist simply because you were adopted as a newborn.
Last edited by thethreefoldme; 04-29-2013 at 10:19 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
