What is with the assumption a baby is going to be better off being adopted?

Julie R

Jill said "... I was DEFINITELY better off - I know my birth mother and her family so I can say this as a fact."

Actually, you can not say this is a "fact," Jill. Until you learn and understand what losing a child does to a mother, you cannot be one to judge her years later. What became of your mother after losing you is very likely to have been CAUSED by losing you.

Seriously, it is really important for us all to understand the devastating effects of losing one's child. Some have unexplained secondary infertility, many suffer depression, some take their own lives, many go on to question their worth as a mother and so have trouble mothering their subsequent children. Many marry abusive men to punish themselves... etc.

You really cannot know "as a fact" how your life would have been because you are looking at the RESULTs of your mother losing you.

This is not to say that I don't understand the anger and hurt over the sense of having been abandoned - it's very common and, sadly, very natural among adoptees.

Possum

A child's life will be DIFFERENT if adopted.

No one can ever truly say that the child's life will be BETTER.

(no one really has a crystal ball - do they??)

ALL children deserve to have a good life - with security, fun, laughter and loads and loads of unconditional love - and definately a life free of abuse.

Sadly my own mother bought into the - BETTER THAN - myth.

She married my father just 6 months after my birth - and had 3 more wonderful children.

There are WAY too many assumptions and generalizations when it comes to adoption.

Sad really.

As what's best for a child - and should be the number one choice - IF AT ALL POSSIBLE - is to stay with the mother they grew inside.

If that can't happen - then other plans must be made.

That's what happens in Australia.
And it's why we have under 500 adoptions per year - where as USA has over 120,000.

Sad really - that Americans just don't want to think about what is really in the BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD.

Edited ----------------------------------------...

I was a product of the 'baby scoop era' of the 60's.
Australia also had shocking figures of adoption back then.
We have since woken up to the effects of separating mother and child - and today we are more about family preservation.

The adoption figures I quoted above are based on the last few years.

Joy M

If this myth were true, all parents should be looking for richer parents, or other parents to raise their child.

The myth that there are uberparents who are rich and infertile is the reason for many unnecessary adoptions, I like what MikeyG says, it is not about if "a baby" is better adopted but rather "this baby"

As much as I would like to believe that "permanent guardianship" is a viable alternative to adoption, I don't see how that is different than foster care at this point. Adoptive parents are more invested in their children because they do expect a payback in the form of grandchildren, and care in their old age. I am not blaming them for this, I think it is natural, I hope for grandchildren and care in my old age from my natural son.

I would rather see adoption become a social service to serve children who truly need homes, not see their identity changed, not see their records sealed, and being a social service I think adoptive parents should receive life long services, at least until their child is 21 for the unique needs of the adoptive families by people who understand these needs, how adolescence can be particularly rough on adopted children and their parents, how inferitility can (if that was the impetus for adopting) raise its ugly head years down the line, how to put structure and respect into a family that is family by law, by choice, but without the physical bond. If infertility is not the issue, how adoptees cope with bio sibs.

I think adoptive families need a lot of support, I think kids should retain their ties if at all possible to their bio families, as this will help both them and their adopters.

Adoption is always hard, in my opinion there are times where it is the lessor of two evils, but that doesn't mean the child in question cannot be treated with dignity and respect, not an "as if" band-aid child.

I also think that there would be a lot of adoptive parents who would be willing to fit into the above described paradigm, it just hasn't been offered to them thus far.

NOODLESFORCATS: or whatever you are calling yourself now, you formerly posted as adopt-with-love didn't you, listen up prospective relinquishing parents, that is the kind of person who wants your baby, she is a prospective adoptive parent, would you want your child talked to like that, especially if they experienced sorrow over being adopted?

MikeyG

I would venture to guess that most of the assumptions and generalizations are simply being repeated by people who have heard them spoken at one time or another. It would certainly always be far better to actually uncover the specifics of a particular case than to simply judge it by the outcomes of another.
Youâ€™re asking the question as a generalization too, though - not â€œthis babyâ€ but â€œa baby,â€ which in itself invites the same problem. I would no more want to assume that any baby would be worse off than to assume it would be better off. The more I research the more I find that no "idealized assumptions and generalizations" can be inferred from any experience, rather cases must be observed exclusively on an individual basis.

Heather B

If adoption always gives a child a better life why isn't everyone giving away their kids?

My mother wanted me to have a good life. And I did. But it was not 'better' than if I'd stayed with her

mamulechka

Oh, for heaven's sake, the adoption industry has to make money somehow, doesn't it!?
Lol

and_y_knot

Simply put, the prosective adoptive parents want this child now, and the relinquishing parent feels inadequate for her child now.

Of course, that is overly simple, but the odds still probably play out that way.

But I do agree with you about "the grossest myth". No one has the right to say that. Every situaltion is unique.

Laurel J

The idea that my mother "loved me so much she gave me away" has, in spite of the best efforts of a wonderful family, shaped my ideas about love. I don't trust it. I always end the relationship so the person who loves me won't leave me first just as my mother did.

On what planet is raising your own child an act of selfishness? And when is it? When you're poor? When you're unmarried?

This is an illogical, hurtful stupid idea. I hope people don't still say such things to adoptees.

As for where it comes from, I suppose it was a great way to talk women into relinquishing their babies back when giving birth out of wedlock was considered a shameful act.

mizorange22

There is a lot of slick advertising aimed at pregnant women who maynot haave the fmaily support they need to financially raise their child. Without the resources or support to investigate what it would take to keep it, investigating 'adoption' becomes the emotional equivalent of having an abortion, because it will be over, and done.
Later, when it comes closer to the time when they will actually be having the 'baby' (rather than the idea of an 'it' or idea they are in denial of) it becomes more difficult to deal with the finality of losing out on a lifetime of knowing one's own child.
Other countries have women-friendly, family-friends services allowing parenthood for single women to be much easier than in America. In Scandinavian countries, both parents can share 14 months of paid absence from work after baby is born. In France, women get 3 years to stay at home with their kids. Only in America do we expect women to have to do ti all, or make the sacrifice and give their kids up if their families won't help them. Note the comment from the gal from Australia who mentioned the skyrocketing adoption rates here vs in her country.
I think the desirability of adoption as an option is also shown by the fact that less than 1% of pregnant women choose adoption. Since abortion became legal there are 1,000 times as many abortions as adoptions. But even if we forced all those women to carry their fetuses to term, many or most would probably end up keeping them, the maternal bond is just that strong.
So in a word,
CAPITALISM

treepeople88

Ever notice most pro-lifers only care up to the point of birth. after that..eh.whatever happens happens.

mlassi65

The idealized proadoption assumptions are from the agencies, lawyers and those who profit from adoption. No one tells mothers, we will help you with your child, no they are told the child is better of without their mother. As Possum said, adoption does not always promise a better life. This discussion was not about children removed due to abuse in their home. That is completely different.

concerned

The NCFA...oops, I mean, um, God. Adoption is God-ordained and Biblical and therefore always right and therefore always a good thing for a child.

Here, have a swig of kool aid. It'll help you understand.

Edited to add: Oh for heaven's sake, here we go with the assumptions again. Newsflash people--my choice was between relinquishing for adoptoin and PARENTING. Abortion was never an option for me. And had I chosen to parent, my daughter would not have been abused or neglected, and I've never been on drugs in my entire life; at the time I relinquished, I was 22 years old, a senior in college with a 3.8 GPA, engaged, and employed.

So just take your stereotypes and STUFF THEM.

tish

marketing and propaganda.

Mark B

it is what they tell people so that they can sleep at night after they give there child up....

if they know that it was just a lode of junk then really why would they do it ever

rachael

two words, blind faith. under the assumption there is something lacking in the birthparents lives (stability, money, whatever) they give their children to a home that in theory has more opportunities than they can offer.
simple blind faith. christians believe there is a heaven, have they ever seen it? is there any guarantee? no, but blind faith forms the decisions they make. birthparents hope their decisions are for the best. sometimes they are, sometimes they turn out poorly. no one knows for sure when this all starts.

for me, it was the right choice, my birthparents gave me up for a number of reasons, and it turned out wonderful FOR ME. others, sadly enough, have nothing but strife. unfortunately their birthparents blind faith turned out bad.

i feel in most cases it is done for the right reasons, but no one can see into the future, and there are plenty of stories that have unhappy endings.
i personally praise my birthparents for their choice, but i do not condemn anyone that doesnt have the happy ending like i do. and to those i wish for them understanding. understanding from society about their anger, loss, remorse and pain. but also understanding in their own mind that they were innocents in a broken system.

beeboppergirl

I have to agree with Jill on this one. The only ones who can determine if it was better for them is the adoptees. In my case I WAS better off being adopted. I look at my birthfamily and my adoptive family and there is a HUGE difference. It doesn't mean I would have been loved any less but emotionally better off in an adoptive family.

melissa s

this question is too general in some cases the child is better off i was,

tessa

i was adopted. i have 2 other siblings..ones 17, and the other died when he was 9 but he should be 14 now...um i was the one given up over the other two, i dont erally know why except my real mom said, she also wanted to give me a better life...but i think its retarded, the whole thing is so retarded.

trhwsh

I am adopted, and I have had a good life. It is not always the best thing. However, I do not believe in abortion. I care about what happens to the child though, so if you do have the baby and you don't want it, what other option do you have but adoption?

HeatherMarie

Because not all people are good parents.. I think the baby that was recently put in the microwave in Texas would have been better off if placed for adoption.

*Kala*

people who adopt have gone through very strict screening and are good people who can afford to support a child financially and emotionally. also the person giving the baby up for adoption gets to pick the parents that they feel is best.

Charter Mage

I was adopted and it saved my life. I now live in a nice home with a mother and a father. I was born into a third world country (China) to a raped mother. She was only 14. She had no other choice. The assumptions come from all the success stories. I can agree though the reality is sometimes hard to deal with. It hurts not to know who your father and mother are, but when you look at the whole picture it is better than dieing or being thrown into a river.

Crucio

Lets face it no one can predict what kind of life any child will have. Whether their adopted or not. It really comes down to the child when they older deciding how their life was. You could have child that isnâ€™t adopted but suffers from verbal abuse or some other type of abuse from their parents. This child might look back and think â€˜I would have had a much better life had I been adopted. â€™ Or you might have the adopted child who is abused in some manor and they will think â€œI would have had a better life had I stayed with my birthparents/family.â€ In either scenario sure they could have had a better life, but they could have also had a worse life or even just the same. Thatâ€™s the thing about life its not predicted you just have to deal with the cards you have been dealt in life.

â™¥GinaBeenaâ™¥â„¢

It comes from people who have children and are CLEARLY not fit parents. Some children are better off being adopted if their biological parents dont really want them and cant provide at least the necessities for them.

Ashley- Advocate for Christ

If you have a child that you cannot support, financially or emotionally, wouldn't you want the best for that child? It is assumed that the people who are adopting children really want to have a child and will love and care for the child. They are taking a child who is not their flesh and blood and treating him or her as such. I know this doesn't always happen, but in the great majority of cases it is better for the child. Where does your assumption that adoption is bad come from?

mulvazombiapolis

The assumptions come from mothers who have been confronted with the prospect of an unwanted pregnancy and who have been forced to give their babies up for adoption. Sometimes the birth mother is not always the best choice of parent. In that case, it is best to give the child up for adoption. If the birth mother realizes she wouldn't be a good mom, then more power to her.

Lauren P

First of all, adoption can be great. My fiancee was adopted and has a better life here than he could have ever had in Korea, but here's the thing: not all children get adopted. Some live in the foster system, being shuffled around from house to house until they turn 18 and are left out on their own with no money and no support.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: