While attaining my degree in wildlife ecology, Professors expressed that adoption was a great option?

Stinky Pete

Well I guess it helps the population problem in a couple of ways. First the obvious less births. Then you can add in all the first parents that commit suicide.

Jennifer L

I hate it when college professors use the classroom to enspouse their own political agenda.

I had a basic sociology class like that once. Tests were easy. Just pick whatever answer villified white men, organized religion and the American military and government. Got an A in the class but it would have been nice to learn some actual sociology.

But, I'm guessing that this isn't the answer you're looking for.

I have to say that whenever a professor is using the classroom as an outlet like this, I automatically take whatever they have to say with a grain of salt.

niels

I don't see any value in the arguments made by this Professor.

Suppose we were able to instantiate the one biological child per family world wide. In that case there are no children available for adoption, unless you want to make massive amounts of families childless.

So I guess the one biological child per family is meant to only apply to rich countries, that don't necessarily contribute all that much to the overpopulation problems.

In that case poor countries will defacto become the suppliers of children for rich countries.

That scenario is not going to help one inch, because it won't decrease the birth rate, in fact it will likely increase the birth rate. Women that nurse an infant are less likely to become pregnant than women that don't. So in many cases once the child is relinquished, the next pregnancy will announce itself, leading to an increase of the birth rate instead of a decrease.

Let's for argument's sake assume the intended effect could be achieved (which i don't believe), it would mean an increase in orders of magnitude of the numbers of international adoptions.

Nowadays some 40,000 children world wide are adopted internationally, while the annual world wide birth figure is around 130 million. So with current practices the effect on over population (assuming such effect exists) would be close to zero.

Having to maintain standards of ethics in placement the needed increase in international adoption would mean that the vast majority of the current population would need to be retrained to become social workers, adoption lawyers etc.

I haven't even started to address the ethical issues involved, because simply on logical grounds and practicality these ideas make no sense at all.

Morgaine

I had a sociology professor last semester that in order to pass his class you had to write his ideas in your own words on the tests. You couldn't be critical of what he thought or he would get angry. I do not know if I learned any sociology. I did learn that I don't like professors who try to tell me what to think and who aren't open to the idea that there are many different opinions out there.

Anyway, I do not think the government should get involved in population control. I do think people need to be a little less self centered when having children, as any person born IS contributing to the population crisis. I think people like the Duggars are completely selfish by having a million kids.

One of the reasons we looked into adoption as a couple was because of the overpopulation of the earth. My sister and her husband have five children, which has basically replaced her and her husband, me and my husband and one other person. I think they should have stopped at two, but of course, I can't imagine my life without my three littlest nephews and nieces.

Now, because I don't feel okay about adopting, I don't really know what we will be doing. I think there are more problems with adopting than there are problems with overpopulation, so...we personally will probably have one child and maybe adopt a couple of teenagers, probably not in that order, since I do think birth order is important.

chelsea s

I completely agree with your professors. Adoption is a very ethical choice in my opinion. Our population has already exceeded the earth's capacity to sustain us. What gives anyone the right to bring in another mouth to feed? When one child dies of hunger related issues every 5 seconds*?

Also, I personally think it is acceptable for a couple to have no more than two children, replacing themselves. Any more than that is a contribution to the problem.

That said, I don't think its fair to tell people they aren't allowed to have children. But I do wish there was more awareness of overpopulation. Perhaps then more people would choose to do the right thing.

Very interesting question.

smurf_lou

I'm not convinced its irresponsible to have more then one biological child!!

But I would say that it might be a logical approach to things. Not necessarily from an ecologist/biologist point of view but from a human side.

I fully intend to adopt whether or not I can have my own biological children. Purely because there are too many children out there who would benefit greatly from a good home.

Mama

I wouldn't want to tell women they can't have their own biological children, but I will say it would be wonderful if more families would adopt, even 1 child.

Crucio

I can understand where your professor is coming from. Though I donâ€™t think I would consider having more then 1 biological child irresponsible. I do feel there is a certain number that can be too many kids. Like someone having 9+. It was more understandable in the olden days having a large number of children of 14 kids you might have 3 or 4 that made it to adult hood and went on to have their own families It would be nice if some people who want a big family would be willing to adopt a few kids.

Of course that said I also realize adoption is not for everyone and a child should not be adopted into a family that does not want him or her. However there are probably people out there who would not have a problem with adopting but they donâ€™t think about it they are under the false impression that adopting is solely for people who cant have natural children.

Lets also look at the fact that we are seeing more and more multiple births because of fertility treatments.

With our planet already overpopulated and people generally living longer. People really need to start thinking of the far future. Not just humans but all the creatures of the world that we share this planet with. There may come a time where it will have to be mandatory that person can only have so many biological children such as China enforces. .

Perhaps thatâ€™s why they want to colonize Mars and the Moon and eventually if possible go even further to other planets, other galaxies.

This is one reason why if i ever have biological children i will have no more then 1 or 2 , any other children will be adopted. Even then i wouldn't want more than 6.

Independ"ant"

Even professors have their personal interests/agendas/biases at heart.

How did "abortion" fit into his equation.

How did "education" fit into it as well.

I don't support it at all and it sounds like he's trying to justify his little theory of going against nature.

I had a professor in college make a comment to me about a show he watched that was about girls in gangs. They were being fostered/mentored after getting out of them. My professor scoffed at one of the girls comments about how she should become a doctor because blood doesn't bother her and should could handle it. He wrote it off like yeah, she will become a doctor. Needless to say, I corrected him and said well she's right. My people in med school have an aversion to it, at least at first. I told him just because she fell into a gang that doesn't make her less capable intellectually of getting thru med school but more so, just getting into one. I also reminded him that it takes an amazing teacher to even get her to consider such a profession.
Before I graduated he offered me a letter of recommendation and he was the Dean of the dept.
Sorry this is off topic but it just reminded of how professors are still learning themselves, in our ever changing world.

Sophie

I disagree with anyone preaching to anyone else about how many children to have and how to have them (adoption/biological).

parental unit

So you professor supports third world mothers being used as surrogate wombs for the "white" world.

I think its total bunk. I for one have never believed that we are doomed to a fate of overpopulation. In many countries there is an developing underpopulation crisis, where there are not enough children being born to support the aging adult population.

Benjamin is Due Feb. 25th!

It would be ideal to have one biological child and adopt as well. Unfortunately, the adoption process is difficult and very costly and not many families can afford to have that as an option. It is more convenient to have your own biological children (assuming you're able to) than to go through adoption.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: