Do you think adoption should be a profitable business?

Question

Where part of the revenue collected is used to care for the children, and the rest is pocketed.

I support it more than abortion.

Answer 1

No I don't, I mean I understand the adoption industry needs to feed and clothe these children, but (because of the outrageous) costs, they are just hurting them more, because on top of the potentially emotionally problems they have, the children are (often) bounced between numerous foster homes until (if ever) someone wants to adopt them.

Answer 2

The only payment to a birth mom, should be living expenses, and medical expenses while pregnant- and if you use an attorney- he should have a fee-  I don't think that they should gouge the public however the people who work in the adoption field need to get paid somehow=  a doc gets paid to deliver your baby, so.....................

Answer 3

NO it should not be. The fees paid should be for services rendered.  Home studies and attorney fees.  Adoption would run about $7,000 to $10,000.

Answer 4

No. I think the only payments should be towards the childcare. No one should be making a profit.

Answer 5

Buying a child?  Are you insane???

Answer 6

Oh, I get it.  "Kid".  You're talking about goats, not humans.  Yeah, that's fine.  Happens all the time.  The human flesh market, however, needs to be shut down.

Answer 7

Who says it isnt a profitable business currently. Just becasue organisations are registered as non profit organisations does not mean they don't make a lot of money for those who run them. Many adoption agencies are headed by extremely well paid staff. Six figures seems average.

Answer 8

Orphan infants in India are in a poor state....I have seen some private parties taking good care of these kids...and it needs money to do so...

Answer 9

Most agencies claim it's for the care of the infant after it's birth, but after I talked to a SW friend of mine she told me that ALL children placed in the agencies care (or just outside of thir biological home) Qualifies for Medicaid which also qualfes them for WIC, Help me grow and other federal programs.

I hate liars.

Oh yeah, I dont think there should be incentives for placing children for adoption.

Answer 10

Well first off. My parents didnt actually pay for me and they got me through the adoption service I work for!! 22years ago.

We are funded by the british government, and DO NOT charge fees from adoptive parents or anyone involved in the adoption. The only fee that Is paid, is the fee to the courts from the adoptive parents. THATS IT.

My wages are paid by the service due to the funding we recieve.

We make NO MONEY at all from anyone. Its wrong to accuse all social workers of being greedy.

But then again..........This is a site based mainly on american adoption rather than english adoption, where there is no corruption. No one on here seems to take the time to have alook at other countries and the way they do adoption. Adoption isnt a bad thing in the UK and is nothing like america.

Look around you.

Answer 11

No.  That would put babies on the market up for the highest bidder.  Then the wealthiest individuals would be the only folks able to afford to adopt.  And the welfare of the child may dim from the spotlight as greed takes over.

Answer 12

I can say it shouldn't exist as it does right now. That's because the most desired babies often go off to the highest bidders rather than the most qualified people and those children who aren't desired are often doomed to a life in foster care and group homes.

Answer 13

Yes. It has been my sole means of support for the past several years. Send them to the food bank, or to neighbours houses when then get hungry, give them your old hand-me downs when they need clothing, keep them home from school to do your house and yard work, and you've got it made. Not to mention the Mexican family I bought young Pedro from profited heavily, I gave them an entire $8,000. Pedro's still working that off!

Answer 14

Not really.  I think it should be non profit.  Even if it non profit, the government or whoever is running, will still make money.  What ever is left after expenses, the profit, could be put in to some form of saving with a high to medium % intrest.  Any intrest made, I think, is not part of the money and free to go to whom ever.  But I could be wrong.

Answer 15

No.  I believe agencies and attorney adoptions need to be eliminated.  They haven't always been a part of adoption and do not need to be so now.  The Department of Children and Family Services can handle all adoptions.  If parents/family cannot or do not wish to raise the child, they can take the child to DCFS where adoption plans can be made.  Exorbitant fees for adoption would be eliminated this way.  Considering the number of people who wish to adopt, finding a home right away certainly wouldn't be a problem, so these children wouldn't be hanging out in foster care.  

This would also greatly eliminate the incentive to skew counseling for pregnant women in the direction of placing her child, since agencies/lawyers make their money when an adoption takes place.

Answer 16

No. I think they should charge the bare minimum required to cover the adoption costs, and run as a non-profit taking in donations to cover the care of the children. I believe many, many more children would be adopted if you didn't have to shell out $50,000 and pass such a ridiculous screening process.

It really isn't fair that the poor woman who doesn't even know who the father is gets to have a ton of babies, and the middle class working couple who want a child more than anything get denied because they make more than enough to raise a child, have all the love needed to care for the child, but they don't have the insane adoption fees.

Answer 17

No . . .that is why we are going through a non profit agency.

Answer 18

BUYING the kid?!?!?!

U have got to be kidding me.

Answer 19

No, everbody needs to make a living.

Answer 20

BUYING the kid?!?!?!

U have got to be kidding me.

Here is adoption...

You jump threw some hoops..

You pay money...

You get a child..

Money is exchanged for a child..

That is selling children...

The other party is receiving money and handing you a child..

I thought their were supposed ot be laws in place to stop this from happening..

Answer 21

What planet are you from? Come on, babies ARE NOT merchandise up for sale to the highest bidder! That is just plain ludicrous! "selling" babies opens the door for black market babies, so to speak. Human life should not be bought and sold, only to benefit someone that is financially at an advantage. There is enough money involved in the process of adoption, let's not put a market value on it! Sure, some of the money could be used to help raise the child but, that could run into the tens of thousands of dollars! Please, rethink your question and the moral implications that it raises, didn't we do away with the selling of human lifes when we abolished slavery?

Answer 22

Why is it so expensive to adopt?when they child welfare i dont think is being considered.My brother was adopted and given to us in card board box from the nuns he is 35 now.

I just really feel as though everyones out to make money off it except the mother who cares the child and emotional abuse she goes through...she deserves the money more than lawyers and hosptials.

I do feel as though bills need to be paid and lawyers for drawing up paper im not into lawyers making 2,000 for signing one page already preprinted up..in which most cases is all they do.they deserve 50 bucks maybe..lawyers are way over paid for what they do ask anyone!!!money making gimmicks they are.