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.
I'm not trying to "shame" anyone. I'm saying if you can't special order exactly the child you want, maybe you shouldn't be a parent.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you, personally, were shaming anyone; I was speaking in general terms.
I will say, though, that people often do arrange things to improve the odds of getting the kind of child they want. Want an intelligent child? Have a baby with someone intelligent. Want an athletic child? Have a baby with someone athletic. Want a white baby? Have a baby with a white person (assuming that you, yourself, are white too). And so on and so on and so on. To an extent, "you get what you get" is true of all parenting. But people have their preferences, and will do what they can to improve the odds of meeting them. I don't see why adoptive parents would or should be different from anyone else in this regard.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you, personally, were shaming anyone; I was speaking in general terms.
I will say, though, that people often do arrange things to improve the odds of getting the kind of child they want. Want an intelligent child? Have a baby with someone intelligent. Want an athletic child? Have a baby with someone athletic. Want a white baby? Have a baby with a white person (assuming that you, yourself, are white too). And so on and so on and so on. To an extent, "you get what you get" is true of all parenting. But people have their preferences, and will do what they can to improve the odds of meeting them. I don't see why adoptive parents would or should be different from anyone else in this regard.
Adoption should be - always - about the child, not about the parent(s). It's not about getting just the right baby, it's about providing a home for children who have none, whatever the reason, and providing good parents for the child. It's not about providing a good child for the parents.
That is the problem with the modern adoption mindset - it's all about the parents and not about the child.
Adoption should be - always - about the child, not about the parent(s). It's not about getting just the right baby, it's about providing a home for children who have none, whatever the reason, and providing good parents for the child. It's not about providing a good child for the parents.
That is the problem with the modern adoption mindset - it's all about the parents and not about the child.
I agree with you . . . and yet, I also don't, quite. I think we all can agree that children need a loving, stable home with good parents. But the thing is, adoptive parents are people, and people come with all sorts of hopes and dreams and longings and needs and wants and preferences and peculiarities and hang-ups and so on. If adoption were totally 100 percent about what's best for the child, this would de facto mean that the parents would have no say at all into what they got. And I don't think it's in the best interests of a child to be placed with someone who would even subconsciously consider them to be "second choice" for whatever reason.
I'll be honest with you. When I was adopting, there were certain characteristics that I simply was not interested in, so I steered my search in such a way as to avoid those characteristics. (And no, I'm NOT going to tell you what they were.) Now, I don't for a moment think that there is ANY child who is not deserving of a good, loving home. But I also don't think that I, myself, would have been the best one to provide such a home, in certain cases.
The kids that I got have their pros and cons, just like every other child in the entire world. But in my eyes, they are perfect -- for me. I wouldn't trade them for any child anywhere in the world. (And in case you're wondering . . . they are not of the same race as I am.) But in my opinion, it helped that I was able to have some input into what I was looking for, or not looking for, and steer my search accordingly.
In any case, I sincerely hope that I am not coming across as antagonistic towards you in any way, as that is in no way my intention. I am an adoption proponent, and I believe you are too; and as such we are on the same side, even if we may not agree on every single particular.
I agree that children should not be put into an adoptive home if they have any traits that the adoptive parents think they will not be able to accept. Adoption is hard enough without forcing children into a home in which the parents are not truly able to accept them as they ARE. That is not fair to the parents or especially to the kids.
What is really disturbing about this article in particular is the practice of isolating the birth mother and creating an atmosphere of pressure, where she'll feel like she has no choice. And playing it off as giving her luxuries that she wouldn't otherwise have is truly despicable. As a birth mother forced to surrender back in the 70s (I was refused to even see my son until I signed papers), I can tell you that no, absolutely no, luxury in the world would ever make up for that loss.
These adoptions by the rich are baby brokering and are disgusting.
Outside of a situation where the children are removed from a home due to neglect and/or abuse and then placed into an adoptive home, it is all baby brokering. I sat in the office of an internationally respected organization and listed in amazement to the explanation of fees totaling ~$30,000 for a child from another country. Even more shocking was the "savings" represented by adopting a sibling group where the second child is literally half the cost.
From bribes on the other side of the world to wildly profitable schemes catering to the rich and shameless, the system is fraught with schemes, scams, and feel-good foolishness that frustrates those who want to really make a difference.
Outside of a situation where the children are removed from a home due to neglect and/or abuse and then placed into an adoptive home, it is all baby brokering. I sat in the office of an internationally respected organization and listed in amazement to the explanation of fees totaling ~$30,000 for a child from another country. Even more shocking was the "savings" represented by adopting a sibling group where the second child is literally half the cost.
From bribes on the other side of the world to wildly profitable schemes catering to the rich and shameless, the system is fraught with schemes, scams, and feel-good foolishness that frustrates those who want to really make a difference.
It is a fallacy to assume that fees necessarily equal baby brokering. In the case of international adoption, there are a whole host of laws that must be followed, in both the sending and the receiving countries. Adherence to these laws must be verified by a sizable crew of civil servants and bureaucrats . . . none of whom work for free. Their salaries have to be paid somehow, and it's done by the various fees that one must pay.
And as for the sibling "discount," that's easy to explain: it doesn't cost much more to verify one set of forms with two baby's names on it than it does to verify that same set of forms with just one kid listed.
I'm not saying that international adoption is free from corruption; and I certainly don't like the sky-high cost of adopting from overseas. But merely paying fees for services rendered does not mean that you are participating in cross-border baby trafficking.
It is a fallacy to assume that fees necessarily equal baby brokering. In the case of international adoption, there are a whole host of laws that must be followed, in both the sending and the receiving countries. Adherence to these laws must be verified by a sizable crew of civil servants and bureaucrats . . . none of whom work for free. Their salaries have to be paid somehow, and it's done by the various fees that one must pay.
And as for the sibling "discount," that's easy to explain: it doesn't cost much more to verify one set of forms with two baby's names on it than it does to verify that same set of forms with just one kid listed.
I'm not saying that international adoption is free from corruption; and I certainly don't like the sky-high cost of adopting from overseas. But merely paying fees for services rendered does not mean that you are participating in cross-border baby trafficking.
bro·ker
ˈbrōkər/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: brokering
arrange or negotiate (a settlement, deal, or plan)
I never used the word trafficking. It is brokering.
bro·ker
ˈbrōkər/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: brokering
arrange or negotiate (a settlement, deal, or plan)
I never used the word trafficking. It is brokering.
I apologize for attributing to you a word that you did not use. But the tone of your post, as I saw it, equated what is (if you remove the human element) essentially a business transaction with something much more sordid. If that was not your intent, please forgive me.
It is a fallacy to assume that fees necessarily equal baby brokering. In the case of international adoption, there are a whole host of laws that must be followed, in both the sending and the receiving countries. Adherence to these laws must be verified by a sizable crew of civil servants and bureaucrats . . . none of whom work for free. Their salaries have to be paid somehow, and it's done by the various fees that one must pay.
In addition, most countries don't have the government support that our does. So social service and medical fees as well as money for the orphanage or foster family may also be required of the adopting family.
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.
