Would it be good if everyone adopted children instead of having their own until all children had families?

almost human

Philosophically, what defines a family?

most children put up for adoption already have families.
some are good, some need serious help.

most children adopted get second families.
some are good, some are no better than the original families.

some children nobody wants.
some are too old, some are broken.
who will take them?
it is a beautiful goal to get to ground zero. but it would be a short-lived balance.

in my perfect world, society would address the issues that create relinquishment or child protection in the first place, and provide support for parents with special needs, eliminating the need for adoption. except for true orphans who have lost their parents, adoption is a solution to social and family dysfunction that is totally preventable.

CrazyCatLady

Well first of all if we all stopped having our "own" children the world would end...like literally. There would be no children for people to adopt in the first place.

Jennifer L

The fact of the matter is, not "everyone" is cut out to be an adoptive parent. It's not the same thing as parenting a biological child. There are unique challenges related to adoption and not everyone is willing and able to meet those challenges.

Mom to Foster Children

With this scenario, I agree with tickled blue. If it were to get all of the children with families - why not spend the time / effort to get their parents the help that they so desperately need. Then and maybe then society would change and their wouldn't be the 1000's of children put into the system every year. While I am adopting (in November, we finally got a date) our son is coming out of foster care where he has spent 5 1/2 out of almost 7 years living in. The system is not perfect / Foster Care is not perfect / Adoption is not perfect. While I love my son and will always love my son - a part of me cries that his mother didn't get up and get her **** together when she had all of the resources available for her - just the initiative and drive wasn't there.

freckleface

Just because a child has a family does not mean it is a good one. I would much rather be raised by a single parent than an abusive family.

sunny

Sounds like my idea of hell.

tickled blue

No.

Most children DO have families. Their families simply weren't able/allowed to take care of them for a variety of reasons. It would be good if everyone supported families around the world....so that these families could raise their own children. It would be good if the billion dollar adoption industry were actually a billion dollar family industry....where we supported reunification and the first family.
http://www.adoption-articles.com/adoption_business.htm

MissT

I think it would be better if they didn`t make the adoption process a series of burning hoops to jump through. Like seriously, my friends spent two and a half years dealing with the adoption process. And countless amounts of time and money. For the amount of children in need of adoption, and the time it takes to adopt one, it is a losing battle. And that is sad to me.

RoadRunner

Well here's my take and some may get offended but here it is:
I think all fertility drugs and treatments show be outlawed or so incredibly expensive that only the ten richest oil kings could afford them. Adoption should be so much more prevelant than it is now because it is such a true karma and altruistic act that I'm shocked more people don't do it. Most children I see who are test-tubers or in-vitros or other non-traditionally created look sick to me and under developed, I think most have weaker immune systems too from what i've heard from others.
It would be a great thing if for a few years no children were allowed to even be created, traditionally or non, so that all kids could get the loving families who want children they need and a chance in life. I would gladly pick one up that called to me and take it home and raise it as my daughter or son.
Again with the possible offending but if you are someone who cannot reproduce on your own ie: shooting blanks, bad uterus, bad eggs, just plain infertile, I think you should accept that may be biologically your genes are not meant to go on out there for whatever reason. I am a Darwinist (biologist) and believe in survival of the fittest. Infertility is nature's way of saying maybe your genes are not fittest to go on.

Accept it and adopt if you really want to be a parent

Valerie O

I definitely think MORE people need to adopt, especially from foster care in the US, however I don't think *everyone* should. Some people would not be able to bond with a child that wasn't their own, and that isn't fair to the child. That's why some foster and adoptive kids are STILL subject to abuse even after they are taken out of their first homes. We also need to keep up the diversity in the gene pool and it would not be good to have a huge generation gap of no babies. I see what you're saying but there are many reasons why we need to keep having kids :)

Daisymay

Yes! If every adoptive parent was qualified and loving, then absolutely it woudl be the best thing for the children, in my opinion. They say that psychologically it benefits the child to be adopted instead of living with the same foster family forever.

Lily

It would be nice for the children adopted. However the whole purpose of life is to procreate and have YOUR genes live on.

Lindsay M

No, because that would take a long time and alot of hired people and tax dollars to work out (not that it would even be possible), and then in the mean time there would be a HUGE gap between generations where no babies were being born. Plus, how would you stop everyone from getting pregnant?? Sorry, totally insane idea.

Floozy Moonshine

Great idea, let's start with your kids Nathan, I bet I could easily get a good 30 grand for each of them. How many do you have?

sarah314

No, I don't think that would be a good idea.

Many (not all, but many) children available for adoption are older and have issues...have possibly been through abuse or neglect situations, perhaps have medical problems, etc.

Not all people who want to become parents are able/willing to handle those types of situations. Many people want to start with a "clean slate," and its also important to many people to have their own biological children.

There are people who would simply choose not to raise children, if having biological children weren't an option.

Littlechit

If bio parents had to go through what adoptive parents go through to parent their children, the species would die out. We chose adoption over infertility treatments, but it's not the right decision for everyone. Our son is biologically related to my husband (his cousin is his bio mom) so he has a child that shares his genetic material. I don't care if any of our kids are genetically related to me. Many people do though... and you can't take that away from them.

Jane

I wouldnt want to adopt a baby becausse her in australia the governement gives you some money to get prengant, its about $4000 and you can get some pretty cool stuff with it and help to pay for things for the baby and I dont think you get that stuff when you adopt a baby.

An Average Joe

Sure hand somebody a child that I have no biological bond, no emotional bond and what happens to the infant mortality rate.

At least with the current adoption system there is an emotional and dollar investment.

Island Gurl 79

Absolutely it would be good. Then these kids would have homes and families and happy lives rather than the hell they go through.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: