How are AP's who adopt internationally different from AP's from the baby scoop era?

Question

It just occurred to me that both sets of AP's are benefitting from a social system that attempts to control women's fertility (by telling them they're not good enough to be a mom, or can't be a mom, or not having any assistance for women who need it, or medical care, etc.). That sounds strangely similar to the BSE to me.

On a side note, how exactly did the BSE end? Was it adoptees speaking out about being shoved off onto different families because of this social mess? Was it lack of PAP's? I'm just curious.

Answer 1

Aparents of the BSE had far more dignity (including my crazy parents) than current PAPs who fly around the world and pay tens of thousands for children.

My parents truly did just pay a nominal fee for me.  I think if they'd have been told there were no babies available, they'd have accepted their fate and moved on.

This current crop of Gen X PAPs know NO bounds.

iPhone? Check.

Granite counter tops? Check.

SUV? Check.

Baby?  What?!  I'll leave no stone unturned!  

No Third World country is safe!

Answer 2

The Baby Scoop Era (BSE) was a time when an unmarried pregnant women was shunned from society because it was not proper to have illegitimate children.  Many were sent to maternity homes and were forced to sign relinquishment papers because society believed that was the "right thing to do".  

That was a sad sign of the times.  Not much has changed in that aspect...  now, it's acceptable to kill your unborn children, instead of parent or place them in adoption.  How did the BSE end?  The legalization of abortion.

How does it relate to international adoptions?  Well, all countries are different.  Many countries aren't saying you can't parent a child, except for China perhaps, but in most other cases, the natural parents can't/don't think they can give their child the life they want their child to have.

So if your country has a rule that you can only parent one child, such as China, or a natural parent says I want my baby to have a different life than what I can give him, then adoption is a great option.  Nothing wrong with that.  I don't judge the natural mothers when they make a respectable decision.  China's laws are different, I don't agree with it but how can you change that kind of country?  anyway, if a woman can choose to kill her unborn child, she should also be allowed to choose to place that same baby with another family (or raise them).

Many people think there is no correlation between abortion and adoption.  In my opinion they're wrong.

Adoptive parents haven't changed that much, but oh how society has!

PS: I am not in favor of an unethical foster or adoption system...  but I do support women who want to place their child through adoption if they feel they can't parent.

Answer 3

In China it has nothing to do with telling women they are not good enough to parent, nor does it have anything to do with poverty. There is a one-child policy that was created, not to be a******s, but because the population exploded and they could not feed their own people. Birth control and abortion is easily accessible in China and sadly infanticide still exists and is rarely prosecuted. None of which occurred in the BSE. The BSE was the social climate of the time that felt married couples were more deserving than young single women. Not the case in China. Most of the first moms are married and have jobs. Many of them could keep their daughters, however, because a male heir is so steep in their culture, they choose to abandon them in favour of a boy. If their were no PAPs to adopt in the BSE, the babies would have been raised by their families. If their were no PAPs in China, the babies would languish in orphanages under conditions you could not even begin to contemplate.

Answer 4

I have been thinking about this a lot actually. When we adopted, I had never heard of the BSE, nor read any accounts of women who lived through it. (I have now.)

There are certain similarities, but there are also differences -- especially with so many countries and programs lumped together as "international adoption" (as though they're all the same.) The situation of mothers in China is different than the situation of mothers in Guatemala, which is different than that of mothers in Russia, which is different than that of mothers in Ethiopia.

My experience is with Russia, so I will only speak to that (and that only to the best of my knowledge.)

Similarities: there's a stigma about raising another man's child, so a woman might have to choose between parenting her child or potentially getting married in the future. Lack of social programs (although I think it's a lack of programs across the board. I do not think single mothers are excluded from programs that exist.) In some cases, shame/lack of family support for keeping child (interferes with studies, ruins marriage potential, another mouth to feed.)

Differences: Single mothers are accepted by society as a whole (not denied housing/jobs). Birth control is inexpensive and abortion is free, and accessible to most women. I do not think mothers are pressured because other women are "more deserving" of raising their babies. (Only a small number (3%-ish) of children in orphanages are adopted at all... About half of the adoptions are domestic and about half are international. I do not think a mother could expect that her child would be adopted just because she placed him in the orphanage. Chances are much greater that he would live in the institution till he aged out. That still might be the best option she could find (which is sad), but I don't think it's the same as the BSE.)

Some additional factors at play: There's a stigma against raising a "sickly" child. I have heard reports of parents who give birth to sickly children being encouraged to relinquish that child and "try again." A woman could be pressured by her husband or doctor to give up her baby. There is a lot of poverty in parts of Russia and a woman might feel that "three meals a day and a roof over their head" in an orphanage is better than the alternative. (However, Russian families who place their children in orphanages do not have to sign relinquishment papers. Many children who live there are unadoptable because they have *not* been formally relinquished.)

One thing that IA parents share with BSE adoptive parents is that we are the beneficiaries of a sad situation in which women had (or at least perceived that they had) few other choices. However, I think that is true of almost all adoptions, including foster care (where addiction, mental illness, etc. may prevent women from taking advantage of other options available to them.) I do not think any woman *wants* to be in a situation where she has to relinquish her child.

Are there some IA parents and some BSE parents who adopt for the wrong reasons? I'm sure there are. Are there some IA parents and some BSE parents who are unprepared for issues that their adopted children will face. Sure, more education is definitely needed. Are there added issues that IA parents have to deal with that BSE parents did not (like loss of language, culture, etc.). Yes. Are there some issues that BSE parents dealt with that IA parents might not. Yes. (My son's adoption records are sealed to the "general public" but they are not sealed to him.) Are most of us (BSE and IA) trying to do the best job we know how... I think so.

Answer 5

I thought the big adoption boom ended in the US partially because there were more resources and social support for single moms and low-income families, but mainly because abortion was legalized (Roe vs Wade was 1973) and became an option for many women.

I think we'll be seeing less adoptions from other countries as women there are given more resources and support to either raise children or terminate pregnancies.  I think it's sad that in a perfect social system there will be no unwanted children, but there will still be people who want children but are unable to conceive them.

Answer 6

High five to Kazi!

BSE   Many moms had families that could have supported them but felt it was best to send them and the children away.

Do you think that China should come up with a social system that allows woman to have as many children as they want and China will assist them and pay for everything? Ya that will work!

Answer 7

not only do i agree with your theory... i think it's also unfair that these women are not provided with contraception nor safe terminations. many remain pregnant (those who don't go and take a risk at an unsafe procedure) because they have no other options..

and i find it ironic that the international family planning polices by the US prohibit emergency contraception and termination. and many of these source countries do not allow for family planning services.

hey...got to protect that investment..can't have women "controlling" their fertility by the the use of bc, ec or termination.  after all, there are people across the water willing to pay goo goobs of moola for these "unintended pregnancies."

the whole practice is sick...

Answer 8

It even worse than that era considering more women have higher education levels or at least access to it as well as independence. You would think that ethics and morals would correlate with it but its been the exact opposite.

Just want to be clear I'm referring to the PAP's.

Edit: OP its like talking to a brick wall. I agree.  By contributing  and taking advantage of another woman who wants to raise her child  is in fact telling her she's not good enough but some people only want to understand "whatever" makes them feel better about their dirty deeds. Its sad that these people would support an "adoption" system that is not a solution and destroying souls and lives.