How would the reversal of Roe vs Wade affect adoptions? or would it?

Question

I have seen talk of its reversal. I wonder about the impact that it may play in society now that we have gotten so accustomed to the option of abortion.

Answer 1

1. it would destroy this country.

2. if you think about it the world is already overpopulated. how many deer did you hit or almost hit this year alone just because there isn't anywhere for them to go?

3. the crime rate will go up. ( most of the people that are in jail are adoptees or someone with some type of seperation disorder. father left etc.)

4. There will be more children not adopted which means more kids in the system.

5. due to the lack of placement adoption organizations will lessen the restrictions on wanting parents which recreates the problem that i went through of being adopted by an abusive family.

6.people won't want to adopt as much because the problems with adoption would be out in the open and it would deter people from wanting to adopt american kids. which will make the problem even worse cause they already don't want to adopt american kids.

7 right now there are about 135,000 children waiting to be adopted in the US and 1,328,000 abortions. Why in the h**l would anybody want 1,463,000 unwanted children waiting to find homes. that is almost half of the population of the US.bet not a lot of people took that thought into consideration.

Answer 2

I think there would be more babies in the world being parented by their families, to be honest.    I doubt very much it would increase adoption rates too much because the pre Roe vs Wade single motherhood stigma has lessened.  Besides, people who really want to abort will do so whether it's legal or not, just as they did before Roe vs. Wade

I can't foresee a reversal, I'd like to know who is talking of it's reversal

Answer 3

Here is a fabulous article on Roe vs. Wade and its impact its had on women. I believe that even if reveresed now, you wouldn't be able to take the empowerment, it has given women away with the law.

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/...

Answer 4

LaurieDB and Gershom gave good answers to this question not so long ago.  See the following link:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

Answer 5

Statistics on both adoption and abortion are iffy at best but most professionals agree that there has been a negative correlation between the legalization of abortion and the number of infant adoptions in the U.S. It would be a good guess that the reversal of Roe v Wade would increase the number of infant adoptions in this country. However, a number of other factors changed as well (including less stigma concerning motherhood outside of marriage, increased social services for single parents, etc) so the numbers (proportions) would not likely return to those prior to Roe V Wade.

Answer 6

By reversal, do you mean .... abortions would only be preformed when medically necessary?

I'm all for that.  Surly, there would be more babies up for adoption.  Problem?  No.  There is already a 7 year wait for adopting a newborn.

Answer 7

This is a excellent question.  If many of the right to lifers had their way, there would also be no medically necessary abortions.  No abortions for rapes or incest either.  If right to lifers also had their choice, contraception would also go out the window.  They are already arguing for it now.  

All of this would affect adoption.  If we go back to the fifties, sixties and seventies, single mothers won't be allowed to raise their children because they are considered as mentally ill for being pregnant. Being poor will be used to take children from their parents.  Women will be back to being considered property.  Women are now fighting the very right to automony over their bodies.  No I don't want my daughters to go back to that.  I came from that.  I want them to have the right to say no to s*x and pregnancy.  I want them to have the choice and freedom over their own bodies.

Answer 8

I am adamantly opposed to abortion but since it was passed into law in 1972, there has been discussion of its reversal and it has not happened.  Realistically, I don't think it will ever be reversed.  Once we opened that can of worms, I don't think we can get all the worms back in the can.  What has happened as a result of legalized abortion is that many women have used it as a form of birth control-- 1 in 5 pregnancies end in abortion.  I think that if it were reversed, women who could afford it would still get abortions illegally, just as before.  Women who couldn't afford it would still get them but cheaper and that would mean by untrained people and more women would die.  I think a reversal would make it too expensive to use as a form of birth control, though.  I'm not sure what affect it would have on the numbers of children available for adoption, though.  You'd almost think it would have to increase the number of adoptions at least a little since 1.3 million abortions are done annually.

Answer 9

More and more young woman are keeping their babies......so no I do not think it would have a major impact on adoptions.

Answer 10

Roe v Wade puts restrictions on abortions not on adoptions.

Answer 11

It will never get reversed.  And women who seek to abort will do so whether it is legal or not.  I highly doubt it will affect infant adoption.  And what the h**l does abortion have to do with adoption anyway?  Abortion is deciding to gestate a pregnancy to term.  Adoption is deciding whether to raise the child or not.  Those who want abortion banned only want it so because they can then control a woman's future.  It would mean, have a child and forgo everything they want to do.  Men would be back in control, women would be out of the job market.  Aren't you aware that the want for criminalized abortion is only an agenda for controlling women?  They don't give a rats butt about the kid once they're born.  Haven't you figured it out?

George Carlin said it best:  "When you're pre-born, you're fine......you're in pre-school, you're F***ed."

Answer 12

I asked a similar question last week in another forum. Asking what it had to do with adoption. I think it was just a major turning point where more women chose to keep their babies because of the freedom to choose.

Here was an answer from the forum...

"Roe vs. Wade is the legislation that legalized abortion.  It was a critical turning point in the history of adoption and adoption agencies.  It was also a cultural turning point.  After 1972 (Roe vs. Wade) the numbers of single women relinquishing their babies declined dramatically.  That didn't mean that they were having abortions.  The same ideology that went into Roe vs. Wade had an impact on our society's view of unwed pregancy, recognizing that women (regardless of age and marital status) had the right to make decisions regarding their own bodies (pregnancy).  The Civil Rights movement of the 1960's had a tremendous effect on social thought and legislation reform.  From a researcher's point of view (as in Ann Fessler), it would be impossible to compare experiences prior to 1972 (Roe vs. Wade) with after 1972 because too many contextual social variables changed.  So, the period up until 1972 provides the best insight into the experiences of young women who entered homes for unwed mothers."

Answer 13

I think that there would be a slight increase in adoptions from the current <2% of unmarried mothers who choose adoption.  I am certain the greatest change that would occur is a huge increase in the number of women who die from back-street abortions.

Regardless of whether abortion is legal or illegal, the prospect of being a baby breeder for people who cannot or do not want to conceive is not very attractive for most women.  I truly cannot understand why adoption is considered a viable option to abortion.  Are people so obsessed with getting a baby at all costs that they don't consider the feelings of women who they look at as convienient human incubators?

Answer 14

It would just mean about twice as many kids available to adopt.....unfortunately, many more people are looking overseas to adopt...which means twice as many kids here in the US won't get a family.

Edit - yes - there would be more infant adoptions.....that means once a kid is past, say, 3 years old, their chances of getting adopted decreases with each passing year.

Answer 15

Maybe 97% of abortions that are done today would not happen, and there would be more babies available for adoption.  Did you know that 4,000 a day are done in the USA alone- with only about 3% that are for rape and health of mother.  People should never have been given an option of taking the life of their child.

Answer 16

There will be more babies put up for adoption.  This will be a win win situation for everyone... Baby gets to live and have a family, birth mother doesn't have to raise unwanted child, and the adoptive parents get to be parents....

Answer 17

umm. not so much.

criminalizing abortion will not stop women from terminating their unwanted pregnancies. this has been tried in many countries and failed miscerably.  i think what we are most likely to see are more unsafe abortions.  primarily because women who don't want to be pregnant usually do not carry pregnanices to term.

my concern with this impending legislation is that it opens the door to forced gestating. and ethically, that doesn't sit right with me.

and...i think among those pregnancies brought to term, the same proportion will choose to parent that choose to parent now.

so no. i don't think it will have a major impact on the adoption rates.

Answer 18

The number of unadopted children would go up.  The stigma of adoption would return.  Infanticide would increase.  More women would die or be injured by illegal abortions.  More women would be forced from the workforce to live in poverty.  It would further involve government in our personal lives (more big brother).

Finally, the murder of pregnant women would rise higher.  In fact, murder is the primary cause of death in pregnant women in the US today and nearly always done by the father.