Which scenerio is in the best interest of a child who is:?

sizesmith

Our son's first mom had already signed papers for us to adopt, and then went and did a dose of meth the day he was born. He was almost taken by the state.

He's a very happy child, loved, well adjusted, and above average on target with all children his age (luckily he seems unaffected by the meth-THANKS GOD!). His biological sister on the other hand has been taken by the state after he was born, and their mom will get several chances to straighten out before being placed for adoption. It's not fair for her! I'd bet my life that overall, our son has a better attitude towards life in general and ends up happier than his siblings.

I've tried to help their mom so many ways, and she won't allow us to.

pinkdolphinbubbles

I gave a child up for adoption when I was 18. I chose the family. Mine was an open adoption. Her parents divorced and they had normal family problems, but they have always loved her. They thank me for her everytime we speak. She means everything to both of them and is being raised with great love. I am now 33 and she knows me and my family. She knows my husband, knows her brothers and sister. She can call me whenever she wants and I created a myspace account just to communicate with her. I am stable and I am capable of being a good mother to her now, but I was too young and irresponsible when she was born. Her biological father turned out to be less than desirable and had I kept her, I would have stayed with him out of obligation and fear. The best thing in the world was to do what I did and now I am happy to have her as a friend.

tish_part deux

does a "stable" family automatically mean they are prepared to parent a child not biologically theirs?? have these "prepared parents" dealt with their infertility, et al.? is adoption their "last resort" after failed biological parenting.

or

is a child born to "ill prepared" parents (i'm assuming you mean, unintended) automatically doomed for foster care? since greater than 2/3 of all pregnancies are unintended, there should be for more children "falling victim" and ending up in foster care, right?

this question is less hypothetical than bias.

MamaKate

Dear Cam,

Certainly no one is going to say that it is in ANY child's "best interest" to be abused!

There are also a few things you need to remember when this type of scenario is presented:

1. Most people who voluntarily relinquish their children do not do so because they are afraid of or would ever dream of abusing their children.

2. Most people who abuse their children would never voluntarily relinquish them - this is why Family Courts are full of cases where people's parental rights have to be terminated by the Court.

3. Just because someone is "ill prepared to parent" does NOT indicate that they WILL be a poor or abusive parent.

4. Are we also assuming that the child has absolutely NO biological relatives who are able to step in as guardians?

5. Is guardianship not an option?

6. There is NO GUARANTEE that adoptive/foster parents will not be abusive either.

Each and every family/case/child/parent is different and there is never a "textbook" scenario with a pat answer! It is important to differentiate the individual variables and explore all the possible options to truly decide what would be in the "best interest" of a particular child.

SJM

So the question is basically, if a child is predestined to be adopted, would it be best to drag it out or do it quickly?

How can someone hypothetically know that a child is predestined to be adopted? Are we born with a mark or something? This hypothetical situation requires knowing the future.

Opedial

Are you wanting people to say "Yay abuse?". A lot of people 'giving" their children up as newborns are likely not the people who would have abused anyway. So I am going to go with "none of the above"

Jaime m

I think it is better for the child to be adopted as an infant, they can be told later they are adopted and explained that their family just couldn't care for them. It is always better for a child to have one stable home

LovetheLORDfirst

Obviously it is better for a child to be adopted as an infant into a loving, stable home, as opposed to being abused/ going in and out of several foster homes. Lies are never okay, and anyone who thinks they can't raise their child probably just needs to try harder as well as GET HELP! It is really sad that anyone even need contemplate the above types of scenarios.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: