What's wrong with adopting an infant rather than a child in foster care?

Question

I see a lot of negative feelings about adopting an infant when there are children in foster care that also need to be adopted & I'm wondering, why? Why shouldn't infants be adopted as well?

Answer 1

Because infant adoption is not a social service for children.  It is a business and the way that business is operated leaves alot to be desired.

Answer 2

I think people's point is that infant adoption is a for profit business, which can make people act unethcially, putting pressure from agencies to pressure birth mom's to giving up children.

When adopting from the state, these children are already without families, therefore no one is soliciting these children for adoption. You can also adopt infants from foster care as well.

Answer 3

You have to do what is right for you. Yes it would be wonderful to give a foster child a home, but if you want to raise a baby from birth, that is what you should do. You only get one life to experience what you want to.

Answer 4

i think the negative feelings you are seeing are not directly at just infant adoption.  they are more detailed than that.  mothers are made to believe there is no other option than to place their unborn child for adoption.  they are not helped or shown how they can parent their child.  and they make a decision and they do not have all of their options presented to them beforehand.  agencies that specialize in these types of adoption thrive on the money that exchanges hands between them and the AP's, and none goes to help this mother.  just my opinion, but i think that's where you're getting the impression many have negative feelings toward infant adoption.

i don't think anyone has negative feelings toward an infant placed for adoption that's coming from an abusive home or unstable environement.  

as a PAP it is your duty to decide how to build your family, but you should do so in an informed and logical mannor.  you need to try and put yourself in that child's place.  sadly though that information is not readily available to PAP's the same way it is not available to these mothers placing their children.   most agencies will tell each person what they want to hear so the placement actually takes place.

Answer 5

It's not that infancts should not be adopted. But there are all these kids waiting to be adopted and all these parents just want to wait around to give their love to an infant when there is a child who could be benefitting from what they have to give now. I think its very selfish to deny any child love and comfort. These people who are waiting for an in fant are, in my opinion, selfish. I would actually preferr to adopt an older child.

Answer 6

I don't see anything wrong with it... it may keep some kids out of foster care, eventually.  It's a social service for babies, birth parents and adoptive parents.

Answer 7

I think people get so caught up in the way that THEY feel about the issue, that they feel the need to completely bombard other people with their opinions.  Adoption is wonderful.  I don't care if you adopt a newborn, a toddler, a teenager, a foreign baby, an inter-racial child, a handicapped child..... it doesn't matter.  Its one more child that has a loving and caring family.  Period.

**Saw your profile pic.  Lots of *baby dust* to you my dear!

Answer 8

there is nothing wrong with it.   geuss its just sad to see all of those children without families.  and not to sound mean or anything but i think its kind of like how people always want to get kittens, they rarley want to get cats.  that sounds awful but you no what i mean.

Answer 9

I used to take offense to people who were against infant adoptions or who spoke out against it because we adopted our son when he was six months old.  I didn't realize the point that some people here were trying to make at first.  Once I began listening to the argument, I realized that they do have a point in some cases.

Adopting an infant who needs a home is not necessarily frowned upon.  It is the cases where pre-birth matching occurs since a bio parent cannot fully know or understand the magnitude of their choice prior to the child being born.  Also if the bio parent(s) change their mind, they need to be able to do that, and with pre-birth matching it can get pretty coercive if there is an adoptive family waiting in the wings.

Answer 10

No matter who you adopt, you are changing the life of a child.  Don't let people make you feel guilty.  It shouldn't even matter if the child is from out of the country.  I don't understand why people think that we should ignore the poverty in other countries just because we have poverty here too.  People are people,,,,or should I say children are children.  Good Luck

Answer 11

Maybe the fact that there are so many people fighting over the infants while so many children in care sit around longing for a family.

Answer 12

Infant adoption in the US normally involves pre-birth matching and the opportunity for the PAP's to pay for the medical (and other) bills for the mother.  These are a real setup for helping to ensure that the mom won't change her mind about relinquishing.  

If the mother was able to give birth and then make a decision about whether or not she can/wants to parent WITHOUT having received financial assistance from the PAP's and WITHOUT having had a relationship with the PAP's that has been based on the her giving her baby to them when it's born, then it would be better.

The decision to relinquish one's own flesh and blood is huge.  A mother needs to be able to go through pregnancy and birth without all of this "adoption plan" hoopla and pressure guiding her.  She can make a decision after the birth and without feeling like she's obligated.

There are plenty of PAP's who would like to adopt an infant.  The child is certainly not going to "rot" in foster care because the mom doesn't make a pre-birth match adoption plan.  Until these came into vogue, infants weren't getting stuck in foster care.

Australia doesn't allow pre-birth matching.  They don't have tons of babies stuck in foster care because of it.

Answer 13

I agree with you!  Why would anyone think it's wrong to adopt a baby over adopting a grown child.  Both are necessary but neither is worse than the other.

Answer 14

I always thought it was the other way round-too many couples wanted infants and there not being enough to supply the demand. Maybe some couples don't need/want the greater time needs that an infant would need. Kids a little bit more independent than infants

Answer 15

I don't answer a lot of these questions because i'm still processing where i stand with this very issue myself.

I think Laurie hit the nail on the head.  I couldn't have said it better myself.  Just by dumb luck we didn't have contact with the first mother before birth.  She picked us and went into labor the next day.  In our state there is 4 wks before the first mother signs her rights away.  During this time the baby was in foster care and the first mother could see her whenever she wanted.

I think with infant adoption there are just so many things that could be unethical.

1)meeting pap's before birth, so first mother feels guilted into giving her baby up for adoption.

2)not giving the first mother enough time. And time alone with the baby before first mother signs her rights away.

3)first mother being coerced into adoption by family members, or the adoption agency saying want the baby back?   Fine pay back all the bills.

4)the counseling you pay for the first mother to have.  Is it skewed?  Making her lean towards adoption?  An outside counselor would be better b/c no hidden agenda.

5)First mother not properly informed of the loss and pain that she will endure the rest of her life.

6)First mother is promised open adoption and once aparents get the baby they go back on their word.

7)The adoption agency is a business and sadly they are making money off of your adoption.

8)aparents not well informed to the loss the child will feel by breaking ties with first mother.

I'm sure i'm missing alot.  By the time we tried foster care, they would not adopt out of birth order and our youngest was one.  We checked back when youngest was 2 but there were no infants that young who didn't have siblings.  Which would change the birth order of our family.  So we adopted a toddler internationally once 3 almost 4 adoptions fell thru domestically.

I would truly consider foster care adoption of a sibling set.  They are some of the healthiest kids in the foster care system.  You could adopt an infant and a two year old and be done having children if you wanted.  Some kids the first parents rights are already signed away and the only reason they are sitting in the foster system is b/c they are a sibling set.

I wish you the best no matter what you decide.  My kiddos are back so i have to go. Take care.

Answer 16

There's nothing wrong with it.  Adoption isn't like buying a car; it's probably one of the biggest events in the lives of both the adoptive family and the adoptee and should never be entered into lightly.  Every adoptive family needs to make whatever adoption choice is best for them.  For some families, that's an infant, for others, an older child.

Answer 17

Nothing is wrong with adopting an infant rather than a child.

The negative feelings arise from people thinking an infant will be their child, whereas an older child will have reached milestones without them, think of their natural parents as parents, will KNOW they are adopted, or have some issues with their early learned behaviour . . .

Answer 18

I don't think age has anything to do with it.  When I answer the question in this way I am referring to all aged children in foster care.  It just is irritating to me when people look out side of our country for a child to adopt.  There are so many children here in our home land that need homes.  There are kids of all ages, races, and with a wide range of history.