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

(minimum 6 characters)

Question for those who are anti adoption...

If a young woman is on drugs,pregnant and alone should she try for a little bit to raise this baby? She relapses three months later and baby gets raised like that?If a woman who does not want to be pregnant or have a child keep her child if she has no intentions of being a parent? Would adoption have been better? Are we risking the chance that the child grew up into anothermin wage worker at a gas station verses the chance the child could have been a doctor because amom had a college fund and kept him in school and off drugs.

Answer Question
 
Anonymous

Asked by Anonymous at 11:30 PM on Jul. 11, 2009 in Adoption

Answers (25)
  • Who the hell would be against adoption? Sometimes adoptive parents are the best. Do you know how hard they have to try to be able to adopt? All of the adoptive parents I've known ahve been absolutely amazing...every single one.
    StefanieN84

    Answer by StefanieN84 at 11:35 PM on Jul. 11, 2009

  • Well there are a TON of anti adoption b moms on this site. They think all adoptions are wrong. And treat a moms like they are baby stealing garbage.
    Steff107

    Answer by Steff107 at 11:42 PM on Jul. 11, 2009

  • why is it every time someone thinks adoption, they paint some holy pic of the adoptive parents???and money does not mean everything either. i've known lots of low income moms who are extremely educated mothers. if this woman is a drug abuser then yes she should have the baby taken away. but also i think there should be some kind of sterilization or implanted birth control method used to prevent the same woman from getting pregnant again 6 months later. i grew up with 3 girls who where adopted and the adoptive parents literally beat them and used all the state money so the "mom" could get a tummy tuck and lipo. these girls never told anyone in office because they had already been abused by so many foster parents. NO, ADOPTION IS NOT SOME BED OF ROSES FOR THE CHILDREN AT ALL.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 3:33 AM on Jul. 12, 2009

  • Adoption isn't for everyone. Not ALL bmoms, not ALL amoms. But it IS supposed to be about the children.

    It bothers me when I hear about Aparents who abuse the children that they were entrusted with. (Because I am trying to adopt and I would never want someone to think that I could do that to a child! The sad reality is...it happens. But please do not think this of ALL aparents based on a few situations.)
    It bothers me when children come into foster care because the Bparents neglected and/or abused the children that they were able to give birth to. (However I don't believe that all birth parents neglect or beat their kids!)
    It bothers me when people generalize such a BROAD topic as either good or bad. A person has a right to choose adoption or oppose adoption, PERSONALLY. This is why it is a personal decision, and we don't take a vote to see if someone should parent or place their child. ALL are different situations. JMHO
    doodlebopfan

    Answer by doodlebopfan at 8:24 AM on Jul. 12, 2009

  • Again, we are confusing domestic adoption with foster adoption, there is NO STATE MONEY in domestic adoption. Instead the Aparents put up in many cases their life savings so they can adopt.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 10:20 AM on Jul. 12, 2009

  • Are we risking the chance that the child grew up into anothermin wage worker at a gas station verses the chance the child could have been a doctor because amom had a college fund and kept him in school and off drugs.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This could have been a serious discussion without that line up there^^^. There is NO shame in working a blue-collar job and just because one works a blue-collar or min. wage job doesn't make one a drug addict. Nor does being a doctor automatically make someone immune to drug abuse. This sort of elitist bull is what pisses people off about adoption. Would you be in favor of taking away children from ALL lower-class parents just so they can be given to more affluent parents?
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:56 AM on Jul. 12, 2009

  • I agree with the previous poster. Just because someone has a minimum wage job or works 3 jobs doesn't mean their baby should be taken from them. Adoption should not be about money. It should be about the child.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 12:38 PM on Jul. 12, 2009

  • Ask the poor child who never saw his mother because she worked alot of jobs, never got to spend time with her. Was always home alone b ecause of this. Had to raise his or herself because of this.

    I believe it DOES matter.

    That said, I do agree that a person who doesn't make alot, doesn't make them a bad parent. In fact, I'd rather someone keep their child that is actually WORKING to support their children instead of laying on their back, getting pregnant and seeking government help. In fact, birthmothers on here encourage it. I see it. It is WRONG to encourage an adult who is aware of birth control methods to keep her baby because she can get WIC, food stamps and a welfare check.
    Accidents happen? Right. And in most of the cases, this is not the issue. The issue is irresponsibility.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 5:55 PM on Jul. 12, 2009

  • Anonymous 2:33, your claims are irrelevant. Don't you know that all "anonymous" claims on the adoption section are irrelevant? Have you been paying attention to the previous topics, lately?

    It is also irrelevant because ALL people abuse children. Your paragraph of ppl you claim to have abused their adoptive children is a fraction of the abuse cases in America. You fail to provide a non biased, fact based knowledge, just what you feel someone should hear. I am sure you are aware of the millions of children who are murdered by their own mothers (and fathers) every year. Or did you not know?
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 5:59 PM on Jul. 12, 2009

  • Again, we are confusing domestic adoption with foster adoption, there is NO STATE MONEY in domestic adoption. Instead the Aparents put up in many cases their life savings so they can adopt. ____________Anon 9:20a.m.

    I don't understand what you are saying here. Are you saying that aparents who have used domestic or international adoptions have never been accused of abusing their children that they paid thousands of dollars to adopt? (tell that to some bmoms on here whose children were abused by the people they chose.) Or that aparents who adopt thru foster care are just "in it for the money?" Or something else entirely.....What are you saying & to whom?
    doodlebopfan

    Answer by doodlebopfan at 7:05 PM on Jul. 12, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.