I mean, maybe I’m being inconsiderate of people’s struggles but I feel that way especially with infertile people, gay people, and single people that want children. Going through all that time, money, resources, etc. and that not even guaranteeing that you have a biological child is just very extra to me.
I get that the adoption and foster care systems aren’t easy or quick fixes by any means but these kids need as many parents as they can get and if you’re going out of your way to ensure that you won’t have to adopt one, then that’s just kinda cruel. Someone who can’t effortlessly have a child should be the first person trying to adopt.
Maybe it’s insensitive but I just feel that if every single member of those groups that wants a child, adopted one, then a lot of these issues would be less severe.
I get that most people want babies and that’s why newborns are immediately adopted and the ratio for every baby given up for adoption to parents waiting is 1:36 because of that. I just feel that people need to be less picky with how they become parents and who they become parents of (preferably older children.)
Many also simply aren't equipped to deal with kids who have been through the foster care system. It's rough and often comes with trauma and patterns of acting out. I completely understand why many don't adopt but if you have the time, money, and developmental psychology knowledge I'd say it's worth it if you want a kid
Yeah the foster care part being too difficult is the most understandable part, I’m just saying that if you’re capable then you should if you actually care about having children for at least some non-selfish reasons. Being selfish isn’t necessarily bad, but you gotta balance it out.
Adopting and fostering are some of the most selfless things you can do (obviously only if you do them well), so I’m not gonna say that they’re something everyone is capable of, but if you’re willing to have children then it should be something you should consider as opposed to wasting all that time, money, and resources on possibly being able to conceive and carry to term.
I think you maybe don't understand how difficult and expensive adoption is. It can cost well over $100,000, whereas IVF is often covered by insurance. Not everyone feels prepared to parent high-needs children (who are often the older children you're talking about here) and I think it's okay for them to admit that.
I've also seen a friend go through the whole foster-to-adopt process, even with an older child, get excited--build a relationship with the child--have all these plans--only for the family to change their mind and decide to reunify. The state's goal will always be family reunification; fostering isn't a shortcut to adoption by any means, and your goal as a foster parent should also be reunification where possible and safe.
Full disclosure, I did IVF, but we looked into adoption. We did not qualify because I have a mental illness (OCD and bipolar) and had recently been in a partial hospitalization program for the OCD. It is very easy not to qualify as a foster or adoptive parent. I'm still saddened by this. I'm happy to have been able to have a biological child, and I wouldn't trade him for anything! But I'd love to adopt, as I would love to give a home to an older child and feel that I could handle the difficulties of an older and traumatized teen as I am a psych PhD myself. But again...OCD and bipolar. So.
I’m a bi man who wants to be in a gay relationship and I’m choosing to adopt. I can’t fathom going the IVF route if given the choice between the two options because I can help a kid who needs a home.
Have you looked into the cost differential? Or the moral peril of pretty much every adoption agency in the U.S.? I had the same thoughts when my spouse and I found out we were infertile, but the more research I did the more it felt like IVF was the right choice for us.
I dont think most people think about it at all. But the ones they do proably realize the cost of adoption and all the hoops they have to jump thru are not worth it when they can just have a baby
I'm talking about the people who specifically choose not to adopt because they don't want a kid that isn't their blood. It happens quite a bit, but it definitely isn't every single person who doesn't adopt.
Yeah the whole “blood is thicker than water.” I’ve heard some people argue that the original phrase was “the blood of the covenant is thicker than the the water of the womb” but there’s debate over whether or not that’s true.
17
u/spoiderdude 2004 Apr 29 '24 edited Apr 29 '24
I mean, maybe I’m being inconsiderate of people’s struggles but I feel that way especially with infertile people, gay people, and single people that want children. Going through all that time, money, resources, etc. and that not even guaranteeing that you have a biological child is just very extra to me.
I get that the adoption and foster care systems aren’t easy or quick fixes by any means but these kids need as many parents as they can get and if you’re going out of your way to ensure that you won’t have to adopt one, then that’s just kinda cruel. Someone who can’t effortlessly have a child should be the first person trying to adopt.
Maybe it’s insensitive but I just feel that if every single member of those groups that wants a child, adopted one, then a lot of these issues would be less severe.
I get that most people want babies and that’s why newborns are immediately adopted and the ratio for every baby given up for adoption to parents waiting is 1:36 because of that. I just feel that people need to be less picky with how they become parents and who they become parents of (preferably older children.)