Do you think adoption is a crapshoot?

Post Reply New Topic

There are lots of bad biological parents to....also kids without parents who end up not getting adopted don't have it so great typically from what I hear. So what do you do....ban adoption or enforce rules against abuse of children whether they have adoptive or biological parents? the latter seems to make more sense.

If you have insufficient knowledge of the genetic background of the adopted child, you may be in for a possibly unpleasant surprise.

ruveyn

No, I just feel like it. If I were, it would explain some of the differences between me and my parents, for instance.

Sometimes I used to wish my parents would sell me at a garage sale to a family that wasn't so nutty.

There are biological parents out there who have abused, kill, and hurt their own children or abandoning them so adoption is no different. By your logic, you will mind as well be against people breeding because of bad apples as well.

I've considered writing something adoption-related, given my passion for fiction. The problem is that I have nothing to say about it, and no way of making a good story out of the subject matter. I don't want to offend anyone.

Any female child brought up in the absence of her natural mother has a much higher chance of being sexually abused in childhood. I am adopted and have worked for/with lots of adopted women and the abuse rates are horrific. As to judging how together the adopters seem viewed by outsiders, that's explained by overcompensation, they try harder to impress you, they want you to think that adoption is all roses.

Romanticising adoption is supposed to hide the underbelly of abuse, the trafficking of children, straight out exploitation and abuse of children by adopters. For aspies, adoption is another significant degree of difference and risk factor for being marginalised/bullied/despised by the normative group.

Good adopters exist? Yes, about 5 percent in my experience. So adoption is one hell of a lottery to throw children into. Adoption exists primarily to serve adults needs. The child's needs almost always come second (and sometimes much further down the list than that).

I'm very glad to hear it. Being adopted also raises your chance of commiting suicide at an early age. Promulgators of the adoption romance don't cite those scientific studies, though. Stay alive! Don't let your voice be silenced by the shaming that the adoption romanticists consistently throw at people who dare to question the romance. It's your truth and you have earned the right to speak it.

When parents can't or won't parent, there are still two extended families - the mother's and the father's - and options for care within them. When there aren't, arrangments can be made - legal forms of guardianship - for permament care, without all the baggage that goes with adoption - the secrecy, lies, taking away the child's identity, the pretence that adoption is "no different" from parenting biological children. There are alternatives. But they don't make huge profits for adoption brokers and agencies. Not all cultures practice adoption, and they don't practice infanticide as an alternative.

I dont know about your countries laws, but around here, kids are not offered for adoption, if there are relatives, offering to care for them, that are capable to do so.

Legal form of guardianship is nothing but creating a word for the same thing? Yes, other cultures dont know the word "adoption" but do care for lost kids as well, by doing whatever adopting is named in their culture. O_o

Do you think, that possible troubles, adopted kids might suffer, are caused by the term "adoption" and if we just name it instead "Woozahbagoozah" or "legal form of guardianship" or call adoption parents instead "master guardianship directors" will make a difference? O_o

And I dont know what you mean with all secrecy, lies or whatever. A mother and a father is simply the person that has the actual responsibility to raise a child. So what about telling a kid, that the actual person that is responsible for raising the kid IS the actual responsible person for raising it = by law the parents, is a lie?

Do you think, that if my one is born, that I will spend the first 6 months with teaching it to call me "BIOLOGICAL mom"? I am simply the one caring for it, so I will be his mom. So if I dont give a f**k about teaching that kid from the day he can realize it, that I am as well his superimportant BIOLOGICAL mom as well, why should another mom force her kid to teach it by all means that its his LAWFUL mom.

As well that I offered my partner, that because of my Asperger, it would have been ok for me if he would have like to conceive a kid with the cell donation of another woman and me carrying the pregnancy. So should I then as well be forced to teach my kid from the first day of living, that I am not his BIOLOGICAL mum, because of me only carrying the pregnancy but not sharing the DNA and chromosomes with it? Do you think I have nothing else to do, then teaching an 9 month old kid, scientific biology knowledge of lower high school, to make it understand what I am talking about? O_o

Specially, when it wont change a thing about the basic fact, that I am in general his mum?

And what adoption brokers and agencies? Where the hell do you live that kids seem to be sold? Kasachstan? Southern Sudan? O_o

Dont blame the word adoption, if the way adoption is done at your place, is done sh***y. Instead of thinking to invent other funny names for the same process, maybe instead focus your thoughts on improving the way adoption is done in your country. (First idea that came to my mind, is caring that adoption is not about profit at all. I think that will help more then finding new fancy names as "legal form of guardianship". Calling an roomcleaner instead "Master manager of professional floor and surface hygiene and facility maintenance", will not have much impact about the given tasks.