Are AP's held to a higher standard of parenting, and should they be?

Mei-Ling

Sly: I just edited the last line, I forgot a word! 0.0

It does seem that way.

But I'll quote someone else here, non-verbatim:

Of course some biological families are abusive, just like some adoptive families are abusive. But then I thought the whole point of adoption was to give a child a better life, you know, and NOT get abused by this new adoptive 'family'?

Freckle Face

Dear Sly,

Yes, ap's are held to a higher standard of parenting. Yes, ap's should be held to a higher standard of parenting because we are raising someone else's child by choice.

I fully acknowledge and accept this responsibility.

***are ap's held to the highest standard possible here, yep. Are we judged too harshly sometimes. Is everyone here judged too harshly yes. I try not to take it personally. Not everyone is going to fully understand what it is like to be an aparent, adoptee or a mother who lost her child to adoption. I think we are all more alike than we think:)

Mom to Foster Children

I don't think I am held to a higher standard of parenting - I think I am held to be the best parent I can be to my own children / adopted children / foster children.

Jennifer L

Yes, APs are held to a higher standard.

No biological parent has to undergo the screening process that an AP does. Their lives and motivations aren't picked apart by a social worker. They don't have to submit financial records or describe to a third party why they feel they would make (or are) good parents.

The mere fact that there is a screening process means that there will be some that are "weeded out", thus the onus is on the PAPs to prove to the state, or a social worker that they are fit to be parents.

Is this a perfect process, of course not. There are some APs who make it through the process that leave me utterly perplexed and baffled.

But no process at all exists for biological parents. Biological parents don't have to prove they are fit, the state has to prove that they are unfit. I'm not suggesting that there should be some kind of license to have a baby, but I am pointing out that there is a difference.

So there is also a difference in how adoptive parents that fail to live up to those expectations are perceived. A biological parent leaves a baby unattended in a car (this was a question on this forum awhile back) and everyone presumes that she was overwhelmed and just needed some support. If an AP does this, that assumption is not made because APs should never be overwhelmed or need support... they proved they would be fit parents, remember?

Same thing with abuse cases. How abuse is perceived differs, if the home was an adoptive home or a non-adoptive home.

Every parent has a responsibility to be the best parent they can be. That comes with taking on the responsibility of another life, whether through birth or adoption. That doesn't mean that APs might not need some help once in awhile, just like biological parents. It's just that APs aren't supposed to need it.

Shelly P. Tofu, E.M.T.

EVERY parent should be held to the highest standard of parenting.

But to answer your questions, HERE on this forum, yes, they are held to a hypocritically higher standard. Abortion is okay for a firstparent who finds out their child has a defect, but GOD FORBID a PAP feels they can only handle such-and-such amount of special needs and is "picky" in whom they adopt..

God FORBID that I want a child while I'm still in my 20's, but don't feel I'm the right parent for a teenager (having never been a parent before)....

Meilien

Yes, adoption agencies (the reputable ones at least) have a duty of care to ensure that their children get the best possible homes and the best possible starts in life so they will do all kinds of things such as background checks and home visits, some will even do credit checks.

99% of this is out of love for the children, but they also do it because if they were to hand a child over to a pedophile or a junkie they would be in deep dodo.

State legislation also mandates that they do certain things, but I'm not certain what the extent of these things are.

And yes they should old adoptive parents to a higher standard. Orphanages are handing other people's children over to new parents. This will potentially be the most important choice ever made on behalf of that child so it should not be taken lightly.

almost human

i'll be the lone voice of dissent here.

i'm not talking about screening, because the question was not about screening, but about PARENTING. because of course anyone taking on somebody else's child should be screened thoroughly.

sadly, i have seen some adoptive parents do things that natural parents would never do, like put their children in a rainbow spotlight and lap up all the attention they bring. like talk about their children as if they were objects.

but that aside, i think there IS a double standard socially, in that everyone will be horrified if a parent slaps a child's hands in public, but that if everyone knew the parent was adoptive, that would be even more disturbing.

instead of viewing this as a negative, however, i believe this is part of the bargain. children who need to be adopted are adoptable because they have had difficult beginnings. so the hope and expectation is that anyone who adopts them will always look to their higher nature when parenting. a higher standard than what the children are used to experiencing is what is sought, and why adoptive parents were given the opportunity.

yes. this higher standard is a positive. i'm glad there is a higher standard! you should be proud that the bar has been raised since the dark ages when orphans were nothing more than free labor or whipping boys. you should take this higher standing as an oath that you are fulfilling the best interests of the child. it should be embraced instead of resented.

PhilM

The argument (as even some adoptive parents here have laid it out) is that adoption is a chance for a child to have a better life. If adoptive parents can't provide a better life, then why do we have adoption?

No one expects a couple in their 20s to adopt a teenager. But when adoptive parents only want one gender or the other "to complete their family," it's clearly not about what the child needs.

If adoptive parents want to be held to the "same standard," then they need to give up on the argument that adoption is for the children.

Sophie

I agree with Shelly and will quote her here:

"EVERY parent should be held to the highest standard of parenting.

But to answer your questions, HERE on this forum, yes, they are held to a hypocritically higher standard. Abortion is okay for a firstparent who finds out their child has a defect, but GOD FORBID a PAP feels they can only handle such-and-such amount of special needs and is "picky" in whom they adopt..

God FORBID that I want a child while I'm still in my 20's, but don't feel I'm the right parent for a teenager (having never been a parent before)...."

kateiskate

Yes. Adoptive parents are always held to a higher standard because they have chosen to give a home to a less fortunate child. Prospective adoptive parents have to go through mandatory classes, interviews, and home studies done by social workers in order to gauge whether or not they will make good parents. Personally, all parents should be held to these standards before being allowed to have children. We'd have fewer abandoned, abused, and neglected children that way.

luckyturtle

Most prospective adoptive parents are held to a higher standard when going through the adoption process than other parents who get pregnant because the agency they are going through is looking out for the child. Adoption, in my opinion, should be child centered. Look out for the welfare of the child, which means getting the FBI checks, the background checks, the health records, everything to ensure the safety and love of that child. As to the actual parenting, I agree with some of the comments here that every parent should be held to a high standard. I think that one reason adoptive parents may be held more accountable is because of the process they went through to be able to be the ones to raise that child.

monkeykitty83

I do think that prospective adoptive parents should be held to a higher standard of preparedness than expectant parents. Adoptive parents need to have done their research, and I definitely think it's good to have interviews and homestudies to weed out potentially dangerous or emotionally damaging homes. Expectant parents get more of the benefit of the doubt in trying to get ready; they should not be assumed to be a bad home unless they demonstrate actual unfitness to parent.

Once the children are actually in the home, the playing field levels out. All parents should be held to the standard of loving, nurturing, encouraging, supporting, accepting, and providing for their children as best they can. Adopted children may end up needing different things for those goals to be accomplished, but all parents should be parenting to meet the needs of their individual children anyway. Good parents make sure their children are loved, safe, and free to express themselves-- whether the children are adopted or biological.

Andraya

Sure, we all know that PAPs and APs are far better people in general than the poor, misguided girls that birth their children... So if they are so far superior to you or I shouldn't they automatically be better parents than us? And if they are automatically better parents than us shouldn't they be held up to that standard? After all they are the ones claiming to be the better choice for our children.

Randy B

I agree with Shelly, everyone should be held to a higher standard. If that was the case there may be less need for adoption, or perhaps there could be more need, I don't know. I do know that anyone with hormones can create a child but if you want to adopt you have hoops to jump through like most people wouldn't believe.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: