Against infant adoptions, and pro foster to adopt?

Question

I often hear it said that instead of infant adoption taking place, birthmothers should be encouraged to parent their children first to see if they can do it. The same people very often also advocate for foster to adopt, or at least foster care.

Ok, two questions.

1) Where do you think the children in foster care have come from? They are the result of people thinking they could be parents, but couldn't.

2) How many chances do you think a person is reasonably entitled to decide if they can be a parent? Do you really consider it fair to a child to disrupt their lives and attatchments for as long as necessary until a woman decides she wants to be a mother?

Answer 1

i think it's the mother's right to decide to adopt if she knows she's not capable of raising a baby or she just doesn't want a baby then let some other family that can't have children raise and love that baby...

i also don't think birth mothers have the right to come back after so many months and decide all of a sudden they want the child back...once you sign those papers you have no rights to that child...i watched a friends family ripped apart because the birth mother came back after 2yrs and wanted "her" child back..and she got custody of the baby...that almost killed my friend and her husband having to give the baby they'd raised and loved for 2yrs back to that person...

Answer 2

I am sure there will be a few who disagree, but I think it's just as bad to coerce a person to parent, as it is to coerce a person to relinquish.  

As to whether or not the original post is a question, if it opens up dialogue, what the big deal?

Answer 3

I think it's the best choice for all parties involved if the parent gives up the baby immediately. If she "fails" as a parent- then what does that mean for the baby? Neglect? Abuse?

Also, a mother that "tries it out" may be more inclined to keep the child out of guilt or social pressures. I don't think that is fair to the child at all.

Many children are in the foster care system because of abuse and neglect. Most infants willingly given up are through private adoption.

Answer 4

I personally think whoever says that the birthmom should try to parent her child first doesn't know a thing about adoption.  

A) My birthmom didn't want a child at that time her life.  Could she have done it?  Probably, but she didn't want to.  She felt I could have a better life elsewhere

and

B) it is traumatic enough for a child to leave their birthmom after  nine months in the womb, why would anyone want to just let the child continue bonding knowing full well the birthmom likely won't be able to handle the responsibility?

Silly is my opinion lol.

Answer 5

this isn't a question, more a rant.   But I don't blame you.

Amen.  

I see too many mothers who obviously should have given their children up for adoption.  

I feel like some keep their babies becuase they think they'll be looked down on if they give up their baby.

So they keep it,  and a child not wanted is the saddest thing in the world.

Watching a single mother with a child she doesn't want is enough to convert me to abortion.  Almost.

The ppl that are against infant adoption are nuts!  

If you don't want your baby,  dont' want to raise it,   that doesn't mean your'e a bad person.  If you give your baby up for adoption  you're a hero!    You did what was best for the baby.

But if you keep the baby when you dont' want to,  and know you shouldn't,   THAT  makes you a bad person!

Answer 6

This isn't a question it is trolling to stir things up

Personally I am not against adoption when it's done ethically.  Unfortunately from what I've seen of adoption practices in the USA there is little regulation, too much money involved and unethical practices all round

I'm not against adoptions.  I'm against unethical adoption practices

ps.  I WAS in foster care and it wasn't because my educated middle class mother couldn't parent - it was because society dictated she didn't qualify as a mother because she had no 'Mrs.' in front of her name.  She was never given ANY chance

Answer 7

I am a foster parent and I think that you have made a lot of statements which are to tough to deal with in a three second response.  

I will however answer the initial question you ask - pro- foster to adopt?  

Yes, but not for the reasons that you state, rather the concept of "fostering to adopt" means that there are many fewer transitions for the children.  The child if taken at birth will only know one parent and if they are taken later the attachment will be divided only between the birth family and the foster-to-adopt family.  This is a MUCH smoother transition since the world in foster care can be very unforgiving when the foster parents do not have adoption in mind, because children are moved and moved without too much consideration of the long term consequence.

Answer 8

I think this is a legitimate question. We had two little girls in foster care earlier this year who were the 14th and 15th children taken from their bio-mom. Most of the kids went to relative placements, and we were praying that their relatives were tired of dealing with her kids, because they were adorable, and we bonded with them almost immediately. However, she got them back shortly after we got them, and left the state with them, most likely into another relative placement.

Answer 9

i am ALL for mothers giving away there children IMMEDIATELY.  i think it is better for her, the child and the WOMAN who actually WANTS a child.

i think SOCIETY put too much pressure on a woman to be a 'mother'.

this is anonymous here... be honest how many woman here WANTED the child WHEN they had the child.

yeah, yeah, i know, i can hear the INDIGNATIONS now... 'i love my kids and i wouldn't trade them for a millions dollars'.

but, how much TIME are YOU investing in your child now?

children need more that food, water, shelter & clothing.& shoes.  kids need more than cell phones. nikes, prada, PS2 and x-box.  they need YOU. your attention.  not the THINGS you provide.  

do you know your child's friends.  when is the last time you sat down at the dinner table with them ALL together & asked how was school, or so, tell me ABOUT the show you watched on tv.  kids have changed from being beautiful flowers we cultivate in our garden to weed that just grow & grow.

personally i think we ought to have the "unofficial" policy they have in the orient.  2 kids per family.

common with single parents, or both parents working how much time is each child really getting?  

yes, kids are time consuming.  BUT, once youh ave committed to KEEPING the child (don't even get me started on the IRresponsible use of birth control- oh, imagine this to AVOID the UNwanted pregnancy in the FIRST place??) your RESPONSIBILITY is TO the child.. not to your s/o, your sister or even your mom. your primary concern is to be a REAL parent (not necessarily a friend just yet) and raise a emotionally secure & productive member  of society.

chances.  how many chances.

i realize people CAN change.  i realize that parents have turned their parenting around & turnout to be okay.

but, i am NOT so sure the RISK is worth it.

what price can you put in the death ofeven one child BECAUSE society thinks the parent(s) should geta 2nd chance.

let's bring this home.... if YOU were that child would you WANT to go back to an abusive or neglectful parent.i wouldn't. so why should they?

Answer 10

To me this is a rant looking to stir up trouble.  As two to three people pointed out, natural mothers who place their children are responsible women.  Not the women who have their children who had their children taken into foster care.  Foster care and Infant adoption are two very very different topics.  I too am all for foster care adoptions.  I too am only for ethical adoptions.  When I was adopted, my mother was forced.  She and my father had no choice.

Once an agency finds out that a mother is considering adoption, they hound her.  I see agencies who violate the rights of fathers consistently

Answer 11

I can only tell you what happened with our situation.

The birth mother was on drugs while carrying both of the boys (our adopted sons).  Both of them were born with drugs in their system, one of them with sufficient levels that he had go through withdrawal while in a NICU.  Her husband had left her and she wasn't holding down a job.  The state case worker, the volunteers, and family members all worked with her to help her get clean, get a job, and become a responsible parent.  She refused to take regular drug tests and often missed appointments, including some court hearings.

Almost a year after the boys were removed from her care the state case worker asked her to put the boys up for adoption.  She agreed.  She had been given dozens of chances and significant help, but she never took those opportunities.  

Due to neglect and drug use, both boys have developmental issues and will need special education and medical care.

Answers to your non-questions:

1 - You are correct

2 - In our state, they are given one year.  They can ask for an extension, which is usually granted if they can prove they are making progress.  I think that is sufficient.

One final note, we felt very bad throughout this processes.  We were placed in a position of wanting someone to 'fail' so we could adopt the boys.  She was not a bad person, just someone ill equipt to be a mother of two little boys.

Answer 12

I feel that some are meant to be parents and some are not.  Some are ready to be parents and some are not.  It's not a fine line.  It's pretty cut and dry.

These poor kids that are in foster care carry so much baggage with past things that happened to them.  People wonder why they stay in foster care.  Probably because the person who they should have been able to trust the most deceived and hurt them (either emotionally or physically) yet these same mothers want another chance.  Nope.  The kids should be first and foremost.

Answer 13

I agree. There are so many people on this site who hate infant adoption. However, they act like they are advocates of foster to adopt. Then they gripe at people who don't adopt these kids. But doesn't it make more sense to adopt them as infants, before they have to be in the system for a long time.

It doesn't make any sense. From what I've seen, most people who attack other people about adoption had a bad adoption experience. They need the validation that all adoptees experience the same thing because it makes them feel better. It's a misery loves company scenario. You wouldn't believe some of the horrible things I've seen ont his website.

I've seen grown up adoptess tell parents that their adopted kids are secretly miserable and secretly hate them. I've seen grown up adoptees tell mothers to have an abortion instead of putting their child up for adoption. I've had countless people tell me that I shouldn't call my child my son until I formally adopt him even though I've had him since the day he was born. What am I supposed to call him? I've seen grown up adoptess tell pregnant mothers that they would have rather been aborted than put up for adoption. Why Would I ever respect the opinion of people who feel this way? Obviously they are mentally unstable.  

I can feel sorry for children but I can't feel sorry for adults who spew out this hatred and use their abuse as an excuse to do so. There are far to many people in this country who have overcome such obstacles and turned out to be very loving, caring, successful people.

The best thing you can do is to be happy with yourself and your life. I am. Unfortunately, people who are unhappy can't stand this and have to attack us to try to make us feel as bad as they do. It's like the old playgound bully you had to endure in elementary school.

Answer 14

Great question and I have asked that in the past myself with the same points you make!  

Interestingly enough and VERY coincidently, I JUST answered a question that can validate your very question.....go see it..

Answer 15

really? there are people that think this way?

think that mothers who are in doubt about raising a baby so much that the adoption process was begun but should be encouraged to "try" to raise the baby? no no no you are messin

nobody, besides a small minority like adults who think that the tooth fairy is true, believes that to be a good idea....wow no no no you are messin

edited to add

well i guess thats two that believe.lol.....wow that horrible think of all the hurting children out there being "raised" by a mother who is "giving it a go" ....what is best for the child is what is most important not the mother...imo...i dont see any debate i guess i am closed minded on this topic...you cant mess with a baby...wow i had no idea i guess i live in a bubble where people dont think this way

Answer 16

"Trying out" being a mother is a TERRIBLE idea!  If you know you're not ready to be a mom when you go into labor, you're not going to be ready two months later.  Babies are hard work.  I wanted my son, and even I was almost sure I'd made a mistake a few days after I got him home.  It got easier, eventually, but that's only because I was committed to it.  How many children are we willing to have die because someone unprepared wanted to "try it out" and flung the kid accross the room in frustration?  

I also think there should be a maximum number of kids that you can give up (or have taken from you) before mandatory sterilization.  My brothers' mother had SEVEN kids before a social worker finally convinced to her to be steralized.  The first five were boys (my brothers are number 3 and 5...  we know nothing about the others).  All these boys were Fetal Alchohol Syndrome - and possibly other things.  The older of my two brothers was kept on the street with his "parents" for the first six months of his life.  I'm still not sure if he was given up or taken by social services.  My parents adopted him right after he turned 3.  By then, he'd been in more than 7 different foster homes (if you count group homes - orphanages).  SEVEN!  in less than three years.  I remember the last one, the one he was in when we adopted him.  There were so many kids there, in such a tiny house, it was crazy.  The "dining room" had high chairs lined up against one wall and a picnic table with benches set up because there wasn't enough room otherwise.  

The younger of my brothers had it a "little" better.  He was born pre-mature, in a public toilet.  His biological mother did take him out, and to a hospital, and left him there.  That's the most I can say for her.  Foster parents were called in as soon as it was sure he would live.  Luckily, the foster family he was placed with was very good.  It was an elderly couple with several grown suns, and a young daughter they had recently adopted.  They were very loving, and had him until my parents adopted.  It was hard for them to give him up even then (obviously) but they had not had any intention of adopting him, so they'd hoped it would happen.  We stayed very close to them during my childhood though.  They were like another set of grandparents to my younger brother.  \

However, after the adoptions, the biological mother gave birth to two more children.  First a girl, then less than a year later, a boy.  The girl had some symptoms of FAS, but wasn't as severe as her older brothers.  A social worker found the biological mother when she was pregnant with the boy, managed to get her to stay clean and in a shelter, and to have her tubes tied afterwards.  The biological mother gave both babies up as soon as they were born, and they were placed with the same foster family as my younger brother had.  

My parents considered adopting that pair as well.  However, before they had started the process, the foster mother became very ill and the children were moved (and seperated) to two different foster families.  This turned out to be a blessing in disguise, as both the new foster families were younger couples interested in "foster to adopt" and adopted the children.  

However, two years later the biological mother came back and decided she wanted "her" daughter!!!  Can you believe that?  The child was almost five-years-old and had never seen this woman!  This woman, I might add, had born 7 children she had not been interested in raising, and had ruined the lives of at least 5 of them by drinking heavily and doing drugs while she was pregnant!  There was a long court battle, and for a while it looked like the court might decide in favor of the biological "parents" because of a technicality with the father not having signed the termination papers (though he had been served with them, and the time period for contesting was more than expired).  

Luckily, the biological parents could not prove they were fit to take care of a child, and the adoption was able to stand.  It was still a sad outcome however, because after that, the adoptive parents wanted to just "start over" and moved away, severing contact with both my family and the family of the last brother.  

I know this is a long story, but it goes to support your point.  There are some people who should not be parents, and if they are wise enough to know that up front, then adoption is the best thing for those children!  I know not all families are perfect, and sometimes adoptees find it easy to think the reason they don't feel "right" in their lives is because they are adopted.  The truth is that alot of people feel like misfits even biological children, and that for most kids, adoption is much better than living with a parent who is either not ready, or permanently unfit.  It simply is not fair to kids to give chance after chance for blood to work out while they pay the consequences!

Answer 17

I think if they know at birth they can't /don't want to be a mother... then it is in the best interest of the child to give them up for adoption at birth... that is too hard to rip away a child from what they know.... its a sad world out there.....

Answer 18

I only know of two kids that have been in foster care.. Both of their parents couldn't provide for them because they literally couldn't. Both got arrested for different charges.

One of them was a crack addict and the other was really heavy on pills.

Neither of them wanted to give their kids to foster but had no other choice in the matter.

My friend was put in foster care at 5 yrs old, she was still able to be adopted tho and was shortly after by her mother's sister... then when she was about 13 yrs old her mother showed up to take her back...

The other girl JUST got put in foster care recently (at the age of 14) because her mom was deemed a neglectful parent. (took em long enough)

My answer to "is it fair to the kids?".. h**l NO... BUT it's a lot safer than being with a mother that cant/wont care for them like a mother should.

Oh and I only think they should get ONE chance.

Answer 19

Okay, the problem with this is, the women whose children end up in foster care by and large DO NOT consider relinquishing at birth. And the women who do relinquish at birth, by and large, their kids WOULD NOT have ended up in foster care.

Of course there are exceptions, but on the whole, the WRONG WOMEN are relinquishing their babies.

I worked as a caseworker in state adoption for a while. And let me tell you... the kids who ended up in care?... their moms never considered placing them for adoption at birth.

I, on the other hand, DID relinquish my daughter at birth, and never ever would have abused or neglected my daughter had I parented. Just two years later I was successfully parenting my second daughter.

I'd be all for infant adoption if women who TRULY NEEDED to relinquished... and I AM all for it in those cases. But in a lot of cases, women who relinquish newborns simply don't need to. The common demographic of moms who relinquish newborns is this:

age: early to mid twenties

educational status: on the way to college or in college, with advanced educational goals

socioeconomic background: middle class

Are these the women who are likely to end up abusing their children, are these the women who are likely to have their kids removed if they don't relinquish? Um, no.

That's the problem. If you can figure out a way to get the women who are abusive to relinquish BEFORE they abuse, go for it. But at this point, that's not what's happening.

Answer 20

Many of us adult adoptees WERE in foster care.  That;s the way they used to do it.  I spent three months there against my firstmom's wishes.  She insisted I be placed immediately with my adoptive parents and was promised that by her case worker and then the minute she signed the papers, I was off to foster care for THREE MONTHS while they terminated her rights early and illegally.  Boy was she pissed when she found out I was in foster care!  Of course it was 30 years after th fact so there wasn't much she could do about it anyway.

So I spent three months in foster care even though I was always slated to be adopted.  A lot of us did.  Maybe you did.  Nobody had a problem with it then.  Nobody worried about how my precious little psyche would be affected back then.  What's the big deal now?

You know, we get to change our minds on a lot of things in life.  Did I say ham?  No I wanted tuna, that's ok right?  But  a woman can't change her mind on whether or not she can parent her own child?

Contrary to society and the media, not all "birthmothers" are horrible, terrible people.  They are human beings who realized they may have made a mistake when they relinquished their child.

That is why most states have a period where a woman CAN change her mind legally.  Because it is a huge decision.

And the reality is that most of the children who do end up in foster care are not the ones whose mothers ever considered relinquishing them as infants.  There are documented studies on this.  It's apples and oranges really.

P.S. I did NOT have a "bad adoption experience" but I still have many questions about infant adoption in America and it's ethics.