Question for those who oppose Adoption?

AdoreHim

I cannot understand that either. I am thankful that my birth mom did not oppose adoption. There was absolutely no way that she could have raised me, so what would have been the other alternative. For those who think it is never a good idea to place a child for adoption, would it be better for that child to stay in a family that knows beyond a shadow of a doubt it would be better for their child to be adopted? I also have 2 adopted children, and I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt that their birth moms were not "forced" to adopt their children out. As a matter of fact both of them told us that friends and family wanted them to abort. I am thankful for a birth mom that cared enough about me to place me for adoption. The most horrible part of it all, is some of those same people that oppose adoption, think abortion is a better idea. NEVER WILL UNDERSTAND THEIR REASONING.

H******

I don't think anyone opposes finding homes for needy children

Plenty, though, oppose hunting down babies for needy adults. It's a multi-billion dollar business making money off the backs of babes - THAT I oppose

cruzgirlz3

Adoption is sometimes necessary, but surgery is sometimes necessary too and we don't candy-coat it and celebrate it. Losing one's family is a tragedy no matter how wonderful the replacement family is.

DevonChaos

Very, VERY few women are going to be staunchly against raising their own children. Sure, some women never want children, and there is nothing wrong with that. However, many of these women feel that they are not going to be good mothers for a plethora of reasons. Sometimes they just need some help with finding resources to aid in raising their children. Sometimes they just need encouragement to keep their child. Many of these women are worthy mothers, and would make great mothers with a bit of help.
For the children who are born to mothers who refuse to raise them, I would say look to other family members before going to strangers to adopt.
There will always be a small number of cases where the child truly needs a new home, but those are pretty few and far between. If you remove outside influences and pressures from adoption agencies, these women might have a chance to decide to parent and do a great job.

Adoption should be a "worst case scenario" deal for children who would be abused in their own families. There is no need to erase a history, and remove a child from a family because they have temporary issues that would make raising a child more difficult.

Cleopatra

We have to ask ourselves, "why are there some who cannot raise their own children" and look at things like class, culture, international politics... etc.

The means of applying an "alternative" should not justify in the shuffling of ones biology and place of residence. To "oppose adoption" is to understand its ramifications. Experience doesn't bottom out to an opinion - but to a right to protest for what is wrong.

LindseyTaylor

There is nothing wrong with adoption. It is very necessary at times. Sometimes there are cases of abuse/neglect or drug use, situations where parents are selfish, self destructive and mentally unstable. Some parents have decided that they, in their heart, do not want their children (see: selfish, self destructive and mentally unstable)

The problem is that people extend beyond the necessary to take advantage for their own personal interest. A large portion of the world are so concerned with their own ambitions to become parents that they are willing to throw other people that are in need under the bus.

Taking advantage of the fact that there are women who are scared, overwhelmed and in need is not a commendable action. It's despicable. Instead of telling these girls "You're not fit to be a mother, this couple is..." "You can't do this, don't worry, we'll take care of the baby for you" why is no one telling them "You can get support ______, ______ and ______" "You can do this! Support is out there!"

THAT is the problem. Families and pregnant mothers being pushed into a corner rather than shown all the doors....

Sunny

Adoption is a last resort--social construct. It should be employed for the children of addicts, abusers, or the profoundly neglectful.

I heartily disagree with your assertion that there are "lots" of babies who are unwanted by their parents. There are 40-50 infertile couple's willing to pay 20-30K for newborns.

For people who don't want children--birth control or abortion should be employed. Children are not meant to be outsourced to needy prospective adopters. Mothers are not interchangeable. Rearranging families is not the responsibility of paraprofessionals in high-dollar, commission based "non-profits". There are no check and balances in this industry.

ETA: Well, I guess they'd go into foster care. So going backward--I don't believe that there are many kids whose parents are not ADDICTS, ABUSIVE, or PROFOUNDLY NEGLECTFUL (aka mentally ill) who don't want to raise their own children. You're imagining a large population that doesn't exist. And for the ones that do fall into this slim category--why not care from extended family? And who says all adoptive families are "loving"? And even if they're loving--who says love is enough?

ETA2: This is 'chatting', which is against Y!A TOS...but I never had a problem (nor do most here) with older kid adoption. It's baby selling we're opposed to (we were once the sold product) not older kid adoption. But as another popular poster here says...everyone wants a kitten, no one wants a cat.

Pip

Parents can and do change so maybe just maybe working the family would encourage parents to be better parents to keep the family together. Some parents will never change but others will if they are encouraged to change.

I wasn't physically abused but I did suffer many years of emotional abuse from my mother that went into adulthood. The only reason it stopped was because I made the decision to distance myself from my family. Would I have preferred to be adopted? Hell no.

Carrot-Top Fun((:

I am not against adoption. I just would never consider it for a child of mine.

John C

Taking another person's child is never a good idea! It comes with a whole host of psychological and physical problems. They should remain with their own biological relatives. If the parents cannot take care of them, help the parents, don't steal their child from them!

Confused Hal

This is an argument I hear all the time from people who support adoption, mostly from people who convince themselves that they are doing it for the sake of the child. Most of whom cannot conceive themselves and if they could would not give adoption a second thought.

That is the first point why I anti adoption - it is not about the needs of the child (in most cases) but about the wants of the adoptive parents.

You say that the parents are unable or unwilling to raise their child, yes that maybe the case today and tomorrow, but what about next year, or the year after or 18 years down the line? Adoption is a permanent solution for what in many cases is a temporary solution. You wouldn't suggest chopping off an arm if you get a deep cut in it, you would suggest a bandage for a short while? Same thing.

Currently we trade children like slaves, those with the money pick a child go in front of a judge and the judge awards ownership of a small human to other humans - really is that the best we can do?

For me I would like to look at long term or semi permanent fostering. A child whose parents are unable or unwilling to care for their child surrender it to foster parents who care for that child for as long as is needed until the birth parents are able to care for it and can prove it to an independent body. If can not care for the child or prove that they can the child stays with the foster parents.

It would stop many of the issues that adopted children have - it would also stop those parents who adopt for selfish only reasons (if it was genuinely about the well being of the child they wouldn't care for the child - proving that they are doing it for their needs only). The first parent has an opportunity to sort their lives out.

Every one is a winner.

Josh

Some people think bio-parents are perfect little angels.They're not.Biology in itself does not make one a parent.Adoption sometimes is necessary.

Brooklyn

They should deal with the consequesces. It was their mistake not the baby's so why should the baby have to be punished by being given to some other family?

siriusb23

I'm shocked to find out there are people who oppose adoption. That doesn't even make sense. If you find anyone responding who does oppose adoption, I don't know if you'll learn anything from it, other than that there is at least one completely insane sociopath using Yahoo Answers.

Chemique

I don't oppose adoption because there are WAY more pros than cons, and it is the most healthy alternative once the baby is bornâ€“ but i think i can understand why some people might disagree with it.
A lot of children who are adopted end up having some extreme issues when they are older, and they are at more risk for mental disorder.
Also I guess people operate under the moral code "you make it, you take it" :/

Although, I do oppose putting your child in an orphanage because you don't have control over who takes your childâ€“ and for all you know someone who is as equally incapable as the original parents may adopt them.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: