Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Why does there seem to be such a strong belief with some that children can be "interchanged" between parents?

Okay, off the bat, I'm not personally touched by adoption. My mom was adopted and that is the only link I have but I've been reading a lot about adoption and it seems weird the way people talk about babies in adoption.

I was raised with the belief if you were blessed with more than your neighbor than you helped your neighbor and shared your blessings. You didn't take from them because you had "more" and they had "less."

And yet it seems many here think when it comes to babies and their mothers, the best thing to do is take instead of help and pass the baby off to the "better" candidate.

I just wonder, does anyone else feel sometimes that we are getting to lax in our belief of what is best for a child? It just seems to me that being born to your mother no longer has any meaning and is replaced with the belief that children can be passed on to the next best candidate to be raised.


Asked by Anonymous at 12:51 PM on Jul. 1, 2009 in Adoption

This question is closed.
Answers (41)
  • I tend to agree with you that family ties and the signficance of the mother-child bond has lost much of its significance in America. Many cultures protect and realize the importance of the mother-child bond, but we seem to dismiss it as not all that important. In America, we have become so materialistic that we do sometimes have a cavalier attitude about transferring babies from poorer families to wealthier ones. In adoption, people often talk about what a child "deserves" to convince a mother she cannot parent her own child. Plus, we encourage women to relinquish so they can finish school, as though that were more important than mothering your own child. I know many women who were warned that their lives would be ruined if they kept a child from an unplanned pregnancy. Instead, losing their children to adoption nearly destroyed them. Strong and motivated women can complete their educations and still raise children.

    Answer by Southernroots at 2:19 PM on Jul. 1, 2009

  • I agree with you. The friends I have that were adopted grew up broken and missing part of their lives. I also have one friend who never met or spoke to her father, she also grew up broken and missing part of her life. Her father died before she was able to meet him.
    But, I do think adoption is much better then abortion.

    Answer by Anonymous at 12:56 PM on Jul. 1, 2009

  • The analogy you use is weak. Babies aren't property and they aren't "taken" during adoption. Birth parents choose to have someone else parent the child. I'm an adoptive mother. The agency we used did whatever they could to help the birth mothers make a decision that was right for them. In some cases, it was helping them to find the support they needed to parent the child. IN other cases, they helped them through the adoption process and often afterwards. Are there cases where the adoption adversely impacted either the birth parent or the child, absolutely. however, there are also many, many cases in which both felt it was the right thing. Our birth mother was in her early 20s, had several other kids, was unemployed and conceived a child as a result of rape. She knew she couldn't raise this child. Adoption was the right option. There is no absolutely right/wrong in adoption. One choice doesn't fit all.

    Answer by Anonymous at 4:43 PM on Jul. 1, 2009

  • Adoption isn't about taking a child away from the mother, it is about a mother making the best decision for their child. A selfless, loving gesture to give the child a better life than the birth mother can provide. Being with a birth mother doesn't gurantee a mother child bond, love or proper care. A child can still bond with an adoptive mother. My friend was adopted as a baby and has a very strong and loving bond with her adoptive mother. You can't say that all children that are adpoted are abused or don't develop a bond with their adoptive parents. Just like not all birth children develop a bond with their biological parents.

    Answer by tyfry7496 at 5:31 PM on Jul. 1, 2009

  • I am an adoptive mother, and I find your question to be one of lacking knowledge, not of offense.

    I adopted my twins in their teens. Until then, they were bounced between family members, group homes, and foster parent becasue their drug addicted mother would not give up custody, and the courts could not provide sufficeint proof. Thei biological mother didn't care where they were, as long as they were still legally hers.

    Since I have apoted them, they have become repsonsible adults with children of their own, they anjoy that they have 2 moms, and their biological mother has been better to them. All are happy.

    Hope this helps.

    Answer by Mama_Tuscano at 7:28 PM on Jul. 1, 2009

  • Correction... I was their foster mother for several years, they just refer to me as their adoptive mother, and I refer to them as my adopted children They call their biological mother Mom, and call me Ma. Their mother even considers me to be their 2nd mother. I treat her with respect, and make sure she knows that I know she is first. But when my girls need help/advice/etc, they turn to me. Mom is emotional drama, and I am logical and calm.

    Answer by Mama_Tuscano at 7:39 PM on Jul. 1, 2009

  • I did not "take" my child. I in fact did help her mother provide for even though I have no relation to her. She was just a stranger to me and I bought her kid clothes, shoes, car seat, and toys. She'd call at least once a month asking me to buy food, even though she recieved food stamps and WIC. She's the one that showed up to my house wanting me to adopt her child....Every situation is different....Maybe you should read up a little more about it or look at some situations before you assume things like this... My daughter had NO bond with her birthmom; you mention her name and she crys she doesn't want to go!!....I'm not trying to sound mean or rude but as Mama Tuscano said "I find your question to be one of lacking knowledge"

    Answer by Anonymous at 8:56 PM on Jul. 1, 2009

  • I assume you are talking about domestic infant adoption. Note that this is only one type of adoption. MANY MILLIONS of children NEED families and WAIT for them for many varying reasons. Your question seems callous toward those that have been neglected, abandoned, or unaccepted by a society that frowns on birth outside of marriage to such a degree that the children are shunned and considered second class citizens.  These children need mothers and fathers to step up to the plate and make them their OWN!


    Answer by Anonymous at 9:21 PM on Jul. 1, 2009

  • As other posters have pointed out, it is very hard to talk about adoption and lump infant adoption in with foster adoption. The two types of adoption are so completely different I wish there was a different word for each.

    In the case of infant adoption I have to totally agree with OP. We are way too cavalier about it, even now when the effect of genetics is a scientific study and adult adoptees are talking about the effect that being passed from one family into another can have. People talk about how the child will be "better off" without thinking about what is lost.


    Answer by onethentwins at 9:46 PM on Jul. 1, 2009

  • I did not just take my child from another woman's arms and think that I can raise this baby better. It was a decision she made as the birthmother to place her child with another family that she believed could provide the best environment possible. It was about her choice to use her neighbors and reach out for support. It was her choice to have her child bond and attach to another woman and have that baby grow up to call me mom. I think that adoption is certainly misunderstood all the way around andthis specific section on CM is no exception.


    Answer by Anonymous at 9:53 PM on Jul. 1, 2009

Next question in Adoption
Where is that statistic from?

Next question overall (Pets)
Dog question?