Is adoption a woman on woman crime?

Question

Women (natural mothers) are often taken advantage of when giving their children up to adoption. Many have few resources to parent their children.

Adoption seems to be motivated BY infertile women who want to 'have a family' or 'parent' a child, often against the husband's wishes.

Adoption facilitators (SWs) are often women.

Anyone see the irony here?

Answer 1

yes, it is.  it's also as simple as being a money making crime.  for some sad reason, a lot of times, women are easier to rip off.

Answer 2

Ah, no. And the generalizations you are making are downright rude. Adoptive mothers aren't running around coersing mothers to give them their babies. Most of them are as equally concerned for the mother's emotional and physical health as the child.

Another Answer stated: "We should not be expected to abstain from s*x just because we do not want a child."

Ummm, that is how babies are made. If you don't want a child at this time in your life, then don't have s*x. It's a very simple and free solution.

Answer 3

what? Fortunately,it's legal for women to decide if they want to carry a pregnancy and give the child up for adoption. Birth control and abortion are legal, and nobody forces them to give the child up.

Some decide to give their child up because they can't support it, some never wanted to get pregnant at all but couldn't go trough an abortion. do you suggest it's better to have poor and malnourished children, or kids who are despised by their birth mothers? Or have me support them with my money?

Forced by the wife? Against the husband's wishes? All couples  that I know who have adopted had to go trough so much to get approved, and both parents wanted to have a child.

There's nothing wrong with giving a child a loving home.

You don't make any sense.

If you regret giving up a child, get counseling

Answer 4

It is not a crime to give a baby up for adoption. It is not a crime to adopt.  So, really, how can this be a woman on woman crime.  This is implication is insulting  to women who make the difficult decision to put their babies up for adoption, and it unfairly perpetuates a negative stereotype of adoptive mothers.

This question basically says: Adoptive mothers are criminals and birth mothers are victims.  How insulting to BOTH.  

I think most women, regardless of their circumstances, posess the intelligence and strength to make difficult choices for their lives.  Why are birth mothers always portrayed as victims rather than as informed women who made exceptionally difficult choices for their lives.  

The irony is that many on this site who seek to support birth mothers,  end up stereotyping them as weak and vulnerable instead.  This, and the notion that adoptive mothers are crazed women who are captive to their maternal instincts, is insulting to all women.

Please, women need to work together to insure that those who face unwanted pregnancies make fully informed decisions.  Pitting birth mothers against adoptive mothers and perpetuating negative stereotypes seems counterproductive to improving the system.

Answer 5

One part of our homestudy was to determine if my husband and I were both interested in adopting, and whether we were on the same "wavelength" so to speak.  In other words, we wanted to adopt for the same reasons, had the same "amount" of desire to adopt, were interested in the same type of kids (foster care/special needs, which special needs we felt we could handle as a family, were we in agreement, etc.).  This was a pretty big deal, at least when we went through the process.

As for the rest of it...social workers and whatnot...well, yes, many social workers are women.  But the rest of the "triad" involves biological mothers AND fathers, and adoptive mothers AND fathers (usually - or two mothers/two fathers, or single people).  Men don't just get dragged along, most of the time.

I'm not infertile (well, ok, I don't KNOW if I'm infertile, and don't really care), and I'm not waiting around for a young pregnant woman to give up her child.  I know I'm not the norm, but we can't all be lumped together.  We're adopting from foster care because we have a genuine desire to make a positive contribution in the world.  

I get that many social workers are women...but the rest of the question doesn't ring true for me.  And the stereotyping in this question leaves a lot to be desired, as far as accuracy.

I have great respect for you and your point of view, and I love learning from you...but I can't see the reality in this particular question.

Answer 6

at the end of the day a child can be adopped due to have not family if family is dead or if ill or have disabillitys and family doesnt want or if the birth mothers is not capable to look after the cild

Answer 7

Yep.

Women have fought long and hard for equality, for our rights, for all the things we now take for granted.  Yet look what we are doing to one another?

It's sad, really; when we should be supporting one another, holding each other up, we are instead taking advantage of those who are less fortunate and exploiting them to the advantage of those who have the power.  Women are doing to each other what we fought so long and hard to win freedom from...repression, inequality, even sexism!  

Look how many times...by fellow WOMEN!...it is tossed about on here that "she should have kept her legs closed!"  I mean, what century IS this?  And really, I wonder how many of these people were virgins when they walked down the aisle themselves?

Yes, Sunny, I totally agree.  Women are exploiting women in order to get what they want.  For some, it's a baby...for others, it's a profit.  I guess it's our price for freedom...we won the freedom to do to ourselves what we used to have to put up with from the "rule" of men.

Answer 8

What crime?  No crime is committed.

This question is offensive and meant to inflame. Shame on you.

Answer 9

Some women don't want their babies (or are unable to adequately care for them), and other women who can't have babies adopt them. Where is the problem? No-one holds a gun to anyone's head. There are plenty of resources and help for single mothers these days. The mother's who give them up make a very difficult decision and do what they think at the time is in the best interests of their baby, or themselves. They may regret it later, but it's not the adoption facilitator's or the adoptive parent's fault.

Adoptive parents are NOT infertile women acting "often against their husband's wishes". (I don't know where you get your statistics)

It's a pretty extensive screening process to adopt children. Most of these adoptive parents are genuine people who are able to provide a loving family life for children who may otherwise have missed out this.

Answer 10

A very interesting viewpoint, Sunny, it's really made me think and  I have to say it has a lot of validity.  Women are definitely being exploited by other women in many cases of adoption.  

I thought of one other group of women that participate in this crime...the mothers of the pregnant teens.  Often who is putting the most pressure on a young pregnant woman to place her child for adoption is her own mother. It's so sad that the one person that she should be able to turn to in a time of crisis is her mother.  But instead of support the pregnant teen is made to feel ashamed, guilty and like an irresponsible loser for having gotten pregnant in the first place.  

I recently read a question here posted by a woman, that ranted about how she wishes that teens who get pregnant could be punished for having 'spread their legs' when they shouldn't have.  She actually asked for suggestions of how they could be punished.  

I think that adoption is already being used as a type of punishment in many cases.

Answer 11

So, you're saying adoptive parents are seeking out pregnant women and making them give their babies up?  I'm pretty sure that's not how it works.  Do you know these things first hand?  Do you know several people who have had these experiences?  You should get involved in the foster care system and see what it's really like.

Answer 12

I think you're right on Sunny.

Adoption is a crime committed by women against women. Is this thanks to the women's movement? I don't know, but women have been told that they can have careers and families - they can have it all - and adoption is one way that some women CAN have it all.

If they go on to get their degrees and well paying jobs, and forego pregnancy during their prime child-bearing years, I hope that they are educated about the consequences of a possible reduction in their fertility. Some women can become pregnant well after 35, but the rate of success does fall as they become older. Why should young women and their children pay for this?

To me, infant adoption seems MUCH more motivated by women wanting an infant first; they create the demand for infants. Agencies recognize the demand and facilitate it - they make infants marketable to paps, they make paps marketable to young pregnant women; young women in crises pregnancies are told that relinquishing their children is not only acceptable but wonderful!

Few women who adopt really look at the long-term effects on the mother who relinquishes or the child. They want what they want, and quite often, they want an infant. End of story.

Oh, and for social workers, yeah, most are women. Many are right out of a 4 year degree (if we're lucky). So, we have a lot of women in their mid to late 20s with little or no life experience of their own "counseling" other women on adoption. Great. Recipe for disaster. Yep, that's about where we're at.

ETA: Ummm MsCrawdad: "At any time for nine months and then another six months after the child is born these women do have a choice to change their mind..."

You're kidding, right? I was dragged out of the hospital by the private adoption lawyer >>>3 DAYS<<<after my son was born and taken to sign irrevocable termination of parental rights in front of a judge. No, 6 months is what it SHOULD be, but that is not the law in most (any?) state in the US. In fact, it is even less than 3 days in some situations.

"ETA: Confidentgal: It was only when she actually had the little girl that she said she wasn't fit or equipped to be a mother and she decided she didn't want the baby."

I would think that a woman in this amount of denial (because she is scared to death?) might need a bit of help and a lot of time to actually consider what her her situation was and what her options were. And I bet you will tell me that she had all of that, but somehow I really doubt that she did. I was in denial for a long time during my pregnancy because no one was forthcoming with real information. I just think that women COULD and should be assisting women in this situation, instead of pushing the adoption option on them. I don't think that women who have never been in a crisis pregnancy are the best people to counsel women in this situation.

Answer 13

Ahhh, Sunny, reading your question, I see a definite bias. I just watched "Juno" last night and while the mom was the one who wanted the baby more than her hubby, he deceived her into thinking he wanted a baby just as much as she did. He didn't say anything until Juno's baby was just about ready to be born.

Adoptive mothers have been taken (think "Dateline", where several hopeful adoptive families were conned by the same woman who had no intention of giving her baby up. All she did was tell them she needed money for bills, rent, etc.) advantage of, as well.

The women who think they have no resources are the ones who don't look around and ask questions about the agencies available to help them facilitate a placement of their child with a family who will love and raise that child. Many times, those babies end up in dumpsters.

I used to be a CPS social worker (touched a nerve there, huh?) and one case I had (no names, sorry!) involved a mom who didn't realize she was pregnant until she ended up in the hospital with "stomach cramps" (labor), then when she was told she was in labor, denied being pregnant. It was only when she actually had the little girl that she said she wasn't fit or equipped to be a mother and she decided she didn't want the baby. Our state agency ended up taking placement of this little angel and placing her with a family who wanted to adopt her. I was the one who got to tell daddy he was a daddy. He was completely floored, had had a very short term fling with the mother of his daughter while he and his girlfriend were on the outs with each other. Make a very long story short, he also decided he couldn't be a parent to the girl either, and begged us not to tell his girlfriend (they had gotten back together at that time). He decided to voluntarily relinquish his parental rights (went through short term counseling with one of our clinicians, then attended the relinquishment hearing in family court, where he signed the paperwork that permanently terminated his rights.

So, you see, it isn't us "fiendish women" who have this evil plot to take over the world or cause pain and harm to innocent women. These women got caught in a tight bind and literally saw no way out. I rather suspect you are one of these women that got caught by your own sexuality and got together at the wrong time of the month with someone, are you not? If you are, I hope you get over the pain of having to give up your child, and I hope your child found a really good, loving home.

Be careful, next time, about accusing people of crimes.

Answer 14

could be so in the long run.

Answer 15

No

Answer 16

women on women crime... that's an interesting take ;-)

i have known a few women who start the "adoption process" then get their husbands on board.  so i do agree with you that women are generally the "primary facilitators."

regarding the "taken advantage of..." i would think to some degree, yes.  especially when it comes to how many infertile women approach issues such as:

1-pre-birth matching,

2-feeling entitled to be in the delivery room,

3-being "upset" if the fmom breastfeeds or wants more time with the baby;

4-not understanding if the fmom is ambivelant about the placement, or changes her mind,

5-calling EVERY pregnant woman a "birthmother" and

6-closing adoptions at the first sign of "emotions" by the fmom.

regarding the lack of resources: i do believe that many paps would care less if pregnant women have no resources.  in the minds of some, not having resources increases the probability that a struggling pregnant woman will not keep her child.

to me, i see it as marginalization.  i really believe (this is based on some of the posts i've read on infertility blogs and on here) that there is some degree of "i'm more deserving then her" attitude by SOME amoms regarding fmoms.  an at it's cure, it's jealousy and entitlement.

regarding the female SW; i think it's simply that this field is an adjunct to childcare and social work fields, which historically have attracted women.

Answer 17

Sunny, ever notice the ones that are truly uneducated start off by saying:  "well, she had s*x.....at least she chooses life.....what about birth control...."etc etc.

People, a lot of us are sick to death of the whole Adoption is better than Abortion argument.  It's tired and there is no correlation between the two.  Abortion is deciding to gestate a pregnancy or not.  Adoption is deciding to parent a born child or not.  HUGE DIFFERENCE.  And S**t happens even when on birth control.  We should not be expected to abstain from s*x just because we do not want a child.

To answer your Q Sunny, I honestly think it is a case of education and power taking over someone who has no clue of what the h**l is going on.  But this is just my opinion....might be wrong.  Peace, girl!

Answer 18

Hi Sunny,

Although I've never looked at it that way before - woman on woman crime, yes it could be.  Interesting thought.  

I have considered what would happen if every woman who wanted a baby was able to conceive & deliver her own, then how that might change the face of adoption as it's practiced today.  Sure, there might still be some children, particularly older ones, out there who might be in need of new homes & they would go to families that already have children.  There would not be that push to find newborns for every family that could not have one.  That would totally eliminate the baby trollers online, the ads for pregnant women, the agencies with their checklists of what every baby "needs," and the profit aspect of baby trafficking.  Just the fact that it would change, leads one to believe that some women with babies may be being taken advantage of within the present system.

There is some truth to what you are saying that it is usually the women, not the men, who drive the adoption market.  It is rare to see a man soliciting for a baby online, or a man trying to talk his wife into adopting a baby.  Granted, by the time a decision to actually adopt is made, they are both on board with the idea, and they both love the baby once he/she arrives.

By saying crime, you are going to hear some resistance because technically adoption is legal in most cases, so many feel that any way to achieve that end is acceptable.  Saying something is a crime does not always refer to the legal aspect of it.  Crime has many meanings, & legal doesn't mean it is totally right, moral, and ethical.  Anyone can see that & many are working on improving that.  Even though adoption can come about by shady means, many will justify it by saying the baby is loved by adoptive families so it's all worth it.  There are still victims in adoption whether that's acknowledged or not.

I think you have given us some things to think about.  Thanks.

julie j

reunited adoptee

Answer 19

No, I do not see the irony. Natural mothers were taken advantage of by their baby's father.

This is a desperate and lame excuse for a question.

Answer 20

EXCUSE me-  what are you talking about.  I am adopted and I can tell you my adopted dad wanted me just as much as my mom did- and I have 2 adopted children- and their birth moms were not coerced into placing their babies- as a matter of fact our attorney wanted them to be very sure that it was the right decision for them.  PLEASE would people who believe like you do- stop for just a moment and think- what if you could not have children, and really desired a child, would you be asking this question- of course not-  and if you were a birth mom, and could not raise your child and ALL people believed as you do, that adoption is not a good thing- would you abort?  I think that  this is one reason abortion is becoming more popular then adoption these days, for the women who cannot raise their children- it seems more people lay guilt on people that adopt then on women who abort,  I am sorry if I am harsh , but really can we look at adoption from a positive stand point here- because I have life because my mom chose to place me, and so do my 2 children.

Answer 21

I don't see adoption as a crime at all, woman on woman or in any other capacity.  However, those women who feel forced to give up their children or coerced to give them up certainly have valid grievances.  Unfortunately, the fact that these women have few resources is not the fault of the adoptive parents or the agency they go through.  It all comes down to personal choice.  If a person chooses to give up their child because they feel they cannot adequately provide for that child, does that change the fact that it was their choice.

At any time for nine months and then another six months after the child is born these women do have a choice to change their mind and figure out a way to provide for them.  Some of them may not feel that way.  I do agree that teens and poor young women are sometimes coerced into giving up their child using tactics such as telling them that their child will be better off with a financially stable family.  So, I think that reforms in the adoption laws are needed to provide anyone considering adoption with an education of the laws and their rights.

But, I disagree that the taxpayers should provide for women and children just so they don't choose to give their child up for adoption.  Where do you draw the line?  Anyone considering bringing a baby into their home needs to know where that home is and how they are going to support themselves.  Adoption is a very personal choice, just as abortion is.  I don't see the answer being throwing more money into the welfare system to increase the number of children being raised in poverty.

Don't get me wrong.  There is nothing wrong with being poor and raising a family.  As long as there is a lot of love, a child would choose his own family over a stranger any day of the week.  There is nothing wrong with hand-me-downs or not eating at McDonald's three nights a week.  But, there is something wrong in refusing to recognize your complete inability to put a roof over your child's head, clothes on their back, and food in their tummy.  Being a parent comes with those awesome responsibilities.

So, while a 16 year old may complain later that her parents wouldn't let her keep her child, we all know in the US that the parents have no legal right to keep that baby from her.  But, they also have no legal responsibility to provide for that child.  So the choice's may stink, but it doesn't mean that they don't have a choice.  It means they didn't like the choices they were given.

Anyway, it is just my opinion.  I can't imagine giving up a child and the loss and grief that goes with that decision.  On the other hand, I never would have dreamed of asking my family to take on the burden of raising me and my baby no matter how young I was.  I knew as young as 12 years old how hard it was to care for a child.  I babysat all the time.  I also knew that I didn't want one of my own until I could afford to pay someone to babysit for me!  lol.

Last, but not least, I disagree that adoption is motivated by potential adoptive parents.  If there were no children to adopt their wouldn't be anything to discuss.  The overcrowding and horrible situations facing American children in the foster system is the motivation for adoption.  There are people out there that took the time to look into it and in good conscience couldn't walk away.  The need started there.  Then it evolved to include families that could not have their own children and saw a way to become a parent.  Also, from personal experience I can tell you that I've never known an adoptive father that wasn't as excited as the adoptive mother.  In fact, many have told me that getting to be included in the entire experience made them feel the way a woman must feel when expecting a child.

Anyway, I don't see any crimes here, but a lot of needed education.  Thanks for the question.

Answer 22

I think you are way off base. Couples are screened before they adopt and the HUSBAND and wife are screened to determine if they can parent a child. There are a lot of resources for single parents or parents with low income. I commend women who get pregnant and choose adoption over abortion. So, no I don't see the irony.

Answer 23

First of all I take offense to your generalizations....

As an infertile woman I do not just think I deserve to be a mother at someone else's expense. I am not waving money around hoping to steal someone's baby.

The people to blame are the LAWYERS who charge thousand in fees. It is akin to the buying an selling of human beings....that went out with the 13 Amendment.

Our adopted child was the baby of a relative who was going to place her unborn child with an agency....upon meeting a family they were uninterested because the child was biracial.

She was devestated.....she loves (present tense) her daughter and we have contact on her terms.

And by the way my husband qually wanted our child.....when I approched him about adopting dd....he did not even let me finish when he said YES!

Here we go again.... the adoption haters!!!

When you give me a thumbs down your only affirming how much you hate yourself.   ((( hugs )))

Answer 24

Yes, it is woman against woman. When an infertile woman wants a baby, all rational and compassionate thinking goes out the window. Where a woman would normally advocate for another women help her get support to keep her child, the infertile woman instead takes her child and severs the connection and bond between mother and child. How could a woman do that to another woman? How could a woman do that to a child and its mother? Yes, there are situations where mothers are not properly caring for their children, but the adoption insudtry as we know it - profiting from selling babies and children, turns women into uncaring selfish creatures who will rip a child away from its mother to fill her own motherhood void.

Answer 25

You sound like you have a personal problem and you are projecting your own feelings of antagonism on this subject.  That's the irony.

Answer 26

No, crazy lady. There is something wrong with you. Sounds like you're pretty bitter. Hope you can open up your mind and decide that everyone deserves to be happy, with or without children.

I had plenty of resources and using my resources I made the best choice for myself and my son. If I thought I couldve handled keeping him I wouldve, but I made the best choice for both of us.

Answer 27

Wow. This is the first question I've ever seen in this section that has made me stop and think in a totally different direction. Never considered this before.

I can see what you're saying. Not in every single case, but in general, how women are manipulating women to get what they want, to the point where laws are being broken, or re-written to favor one class of women over another.

There are still only certain paradigms of womanhood that are acceptable. Women working for poverty wages as social workers or in other "caring" professions, where there is no time or money to provide effective care. Women victimized by the people and poverty in their lives, left with only Hobson's Choice instead of real choice when it comes to their children. Women fighting for "equality" that isn't, really, and discovering too late how much of their life dreams they've had to give up in the process.

I don't have an answer, Sunny, but thank you for making us all think a little harder!

Answer 28

It can be. Ever notice how when a man cheats a woman will most often blame the mistress or how teenage girls so often gang up on each other? Women are not taught how to interact with each other they are taught how to compete and when infertility strikes that competition extends to procreation as well.

I'd love to see women unite together instead of fighting each other but I don't see that as a probable reality.

Answer 29

Absolutely I see the irony.  I get what you are trying to say here perfectly.

I've seen alot of predatory behavior displayed by women upon other women and it shocks me

Most recently I've seen some harsh judgements passed against women by women, right here on this forum.  I find it amazing how the women get the bad rap, mostly from other women; wheras there is no mention that the man actually has 50% responsibility for an unplanned pregnancy!  They do seem to escape the scorn and the women get it all landed on them with lectures about birth control and distasteful references to 'spreading their legs'  yee gods, the man had some part of the situation, surely! kwim?

Answer 30

Adoption is not a crime!

Kidnapping is a crime.

Buying a baby is a crime.

Taking children from their family without a valid reason (eg. the Stolen Generation) is a crime.

Coercing a mother into giving up her baby is a crime (or should be).

Adopting a child out who has not been relinquished by BOTH parents in a LEGAL and ETHICAL way is a crime.

Adoption is not a crime.

Answer 31

I most definitely see the irony in it.  Years ago when CUB was actually the tiger that OriginsUSA is today, they approached NOW.  They got spurned by them. NOW would not help out natural mothers on any level.  They were more concerned with other issues than helping mothers.  I honestly think they have ignored the women who have chosen to be mothers