Adoption: Not The Solution To Infertility
edited: Thursday, February 03, 2005
By Lady By The Lake55
Rated "PG" by the Author.
Posted: Thursday, February 03, 2005
Become a Fan
This article Addresses The Answer To Infertility and It Is Not Adoption.
"Adoption was created to provide homes for orphans. These by definition are children without parents. Car crashes, war, natural disasters. It was never created to provide children to 'poor infertile couples'. When did the wires get crossed? I guess when someone started making money. Children are not a commodity!!!! Get a puppy."
- An adoptee
"Follow the money" - Deep Throat
I am opposed to the adoption for many reasons. Adoption by any other name is
the buying and selling of another woman's child.
The adoption industry is a multi-million dollar industry and it does not only exploit women. It also exploits the children.
It is sad and tragic when a couple finds out one or both of them are unable to have their own "true and natural" children.
However, I am convinced that The Lord, in his infinite wisdom did not want that couple to have children of their own.
The Lord who creates all of us saw something in the person or persons that he has created infertile.
Adoption is not scriptural or biblical.
It has no merit and one must get confused with an spiritual adoption verses an adoption of another woman's child.
The adoption industries main agenda is to try to convince a "true and natural" single mother to give up her child because it is in the "best interest of the child" if she does.
There is no one state that has the same interest of the child standard.
Each state has their own definition and sometimes it is not in the child's "best interest" to give up the child.
There has been psychological studies about The Adoptive Child Syndrome.
This study clearly states that a child that is adopted has an identity problem and psychologoical problems as they grow and they find out that they are not the "true and natural" child of the people who adopt them.
There is a website created to provide information to people about adoption and the industry which is at BirthMothers Exploited By Adoption.
This site is recommended because it is written by many "true and natural" mothers that were exploited and cocerised by the Adoption Industry, Adoption Workers and The Adoption Facilitators.
When a "true and natural" mother gives up her child. It is proven that the mother does not move on in the case of A Murder In BearLake: A Child Lost Forever which tells the tragic story of a 16 year white teen age "birth" mother, Jerri Sherwood, who is forced to give up her child in the 70's because her parents signed away parental rights of her child to the State Adoption Agency.
Jerri Sherwood later finds out that the adoptive mother, Lois Jurgerson, murders her son, Dennis, when he is only three years old. Jerri is persistent to find out the truth behind her son's death.
To make this story short and to get to the point, the adoptive mother could not accept Dennis as he was and so when he did not live up to her high expectations of Dennis . She abusing so severely that he dies in result of the abuse.
Lois is sentenced to 25 years in prison in Minnesota after Jerri takes the case to court.
We must look at the New York Case about a Jewish Doctor and his girlfriend, and how they abused their adoptive daughter, Elizabeth. This very same couple were allowed to adopt a son, who actually saw how they mistreated Elizabeth and testify against his adopters.
I not only speak against domestic adoption but also foreign adoption as well.
It is true that there is not many healthy aviailable "white" infants under the age of 5 years of age.
For this very reason due to Roe Vs Wade and the waiting list for a healthy available white baby is long.
Many White couples will go overseas looking to adopt a white baby from one of the countries where poverty is so abundant.
Cave't Emp'tor means "Buyer Beware".
Babies and Children are not returnable. However, all across this great land of ours, "wrongful adoption" litigation is going.
Adopters are screaming "wrongful adoption" practices and due to the fact that most Adoption Agencies don't have all the background information and health information of the child's "true and natural" families .
The adopters are able to bring law suits against the adoption agencies.
Adopters are also given the chance to relinguish their own parental rights and claim damages due to the fact they had to spend an excessively large amounts of money out of their own pockets for either physical health problems or mental and emotional health problems.
When an adopter does relinguish their parental rights to the child they promised to "take as their own" as adoption once meant. What happens to the child they do relinguish.
The child is placed back into the same child welfare system that they were taken out of.
What happens to the child is a big question.
Children that are returned to the child welfare system are now once again "legally created" orphans. This means that the child has no parents on record.
Children that are placed into the foster care system and linger there until they reach the age of 18. They often have psychologoical problems and
learning disabilities. They are not well adjusted and they have poor self esteem.
Some "true and natural" mothers seem to think that an "open adoption" is the answer to their problem. However, there is certain legal ramifications when it comes to agreeing to an "open adoption".
First, the only difference between a "close" adoption and an "open" adoption is that the "true and natural" mother is able to select from a large portfolio the couple who she wants to adopt her child.
Yet still, the "true and natural" mother has to surrender her parental rights over to her child.
No "open" adoption is guaranteed to work and the "true and natural" mother loses all her rights to her child when she surrenders her parental rights over to her child.
An "open" adoption is not a legal agreement and there is no binding contract. If for any reason the adopters don't want the "true and natural" mother to see their child anymore. There is nothing that can be done about it.
So, it is recommended that the "true and natural" mother realizes that once she signs over her parental rights . She is at the mercy of the adopters and what they say goes. She has no leg to stand on.
The adopters are not under any obligation -legal or moral- to keep in contact with the "true and natural" mother and to keep in contact with her by exchanging letters and pictures of the child she relinguished.
Many a "true and natural" mother have had problems with an open adoption.
It really does not matter if one is able or not to pick and choice who they want to adopt and raise their child.
Most states do not give adoption subsidy payments to adopters who adopt a child if the parents surrender their parental rights voluntarily. This is because the child is not a part of the child welfare system.
The adopters are on their own. They do not get reimbursed for legal fees.
However, if the adopters chose a child that has been forcibly removed from their "true and natural" parents care, custody and control, for any reasons such as abuse, neglect, a child in need of services and dependency and the "Best Interest of the Child" .
Most states do pay adoption subsidy payments if the child is found to be
1- disabled i.e. physically, emotionally, or mentally or a combination of both.
2- If the child comes from a group of siblings of 3 or more
3- If the child comes from a minority group i.e.Afro-American, Mixed Races,
4. If the child is over the age of 13.
The amount that each state pays is up to the very state one lives in and if the family qualifies for these adoption subsidy payments.
The State also reimburses the adopters for legal fees. How much varies from state to state. It is a one time payment.
Many "White" couples are looking to adopt a healthy white baby under the age of 3 years old. However, due to a shortage their wait may be as long as 7 years.
Foreign Adoptions are not a good idea.
They are very expensive and ideally couples don't know anything about the child's family background i.e. health and other pertient information.
Couples who adopt an international white child due to the shortage here in the United States don't know what they are really getting themselves into.
These very same white couples don't know what they are getting into and any adoption is able to be terminated.
The adopters are still able to terminate their own parental rights to a child they have adopted internationally.
Infertility is heart breaking. There are self help groups such as resolve to help couples come to term with the fact that they are infertile.
Every child has the right to be loved and to accept as is, and to be loved for who and what he/or she is and to be molded into what the adoptive parents expect out of a child they adopt.
My daughter is one of those children. She was adopted after my second ex, she and I became victims of the 1980 Child Protection Witchhunts that were so big across the United States.
When they determine the Juvenile Court and the Guardian Ad Litem determined it was not in our daughter's "Best Interest" to have her returned to us due to "substantial Risk of Harm" which CPS equivalent to Poverty.
Our daughter was placed into an adoptive home and many years the adopters did scream "wrongful" adoption. They also subjected her to a life of poverty by taking her down to Social Security and applying for Social Security Supplementary Sercuity Income.
They live a comfortable life-style but my daughter does not.
The "Best Interest" of The Child is not always in the Best Child of The Child. Juvenile Judges, Child Protection Services, and The Social Workers and Guardian Ad Litems don't care what is the "Best Interest" of The child.
When ever The State is able to terminate the parental rights of parents and find what the State considers a more sutiable home in their eyes for a child. If the child is able to be successfuly placed in to an adoptive home.
The State reaps the awards from the Federal Government and so does the foster care givers and adopters. There is no help for the "true and natural" family and to preserve it.
Infertilty is a fact of life and it is sad fact of life. Some times it can be remedied by new technology and fertility treatment does open up new hope for those couples to be able to have their own children.
Fertility is expensive and many insurances and HMO's and PPO's only cover up to $50,000 per person for the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of infertility.
Adoption is not the answer. Acceptance is.
Web Site: Exiled "Birth" Mothers
Want to review or comment on this article?
Click here to login!
Need a FREE Reader Membership?
Click here for your Membership!
|Reviewed by Laurie Frisch
|Adoption Not the Solution to Infertility is an interesting article.
I've noticed many websites defending adoption as a "Christian" thing to do. With adoption we have people taking in a child that has no one and giving that child a home, right? No that's not the kind of adoption these "Christian" websites were referring to - these websites were providing tips on how to get healthy desirable babies away from single parents. In other words, the babies they want to get already have someone - most of these babies have a mother, father, grandparents and some even had existing siblings who will miss them and be affected by the loss.
Mary the mother of Jesus agreed to a pregnancy when she was a single teenager. Joseph stood by her, but even if he did not, would that mean that Mary was just a "birth thing" meant to be used as the source of a baby for adoption?
Would honor Mary as the "birthmother" (aka "incubator") of Jesus and honor God as the "birthfather" of Jesus? Some people say Joseph adopted Jesus. Joseph did apparently take on the responsibility of supporting and raising Jesus. But when Jesus claimed God as His Father, there is no account in the Bible telling us that Joseph got angry about it. Joseph was a step-father, secure in his role. He did not pretend to be the "real father" like people who adopt usually do.
So why is adoption considered "Christian"? To start with, "Christian" religious groups often state that marriage is for reproduction. In fact, it used to be that a marriage would be annulled when a man or woman was unable to reproduce - THERE WAS NO MARRIAGE if the marriage was not blessed by God with babies.
Eventually, social workers began trying to sneak a baby in - right past God's nose - helping a barren couple appear "fertile".
Of course they used the infant sons and daughter of "sinners" to do this "charitable" work.
Thus infertile people - and now gay people and unrelated single people, too - are all blessed with new babies by social workers and adoption lawyers. "Christian" adoption agencies and attorneys provide the "services" needed to get a baby away from a vulnerable mother. They slyly coerce the mom to take God's most precious gift to her - her own son or daughter - and re-gift "it" to some stranger.
Of course some people go out and "find" a baby with which to bless themselves.
Learn more about single and teen mother myths and the adoption industry: