To think that adopting a child isn’t like going shopping

[Cheeseplease73]

Friend of mine probably can’t have kids so has decided to adopt. I spoke to her about it recently and she basically said she only wants to adopt a boy, around 2 years old as they won’t be too damaged (her words) and will still belong to them even though they are adopted.

Aibu to be slightly by her attitude. She made it sound like adoption was like going shopping.

I think you sound awful OP.
Almost gloating.
As pps have said: drop her. You are clearly not a friend

Also pencob. I very much hope you’re not a social worker. It was clear to me from colditz* post that she was perhaps on the receiving end of DV whilst pregnant, or someone close to her was, and they are now doing the very best to bring baby up well. But also worried about what baby went through in utero.

I think you saying to her “your response made me smile” is appalling.

A lot of people on here are talking out of their arses whilst condemning this completely made up woman for doing the same thing.

On the off chance this person does actually exist it’s actually quite likely that she has made a pretty realistic assessment of who she could potentially adopt, if she could adopt at all.

Adoption isn’t like it was in the 1970s where it was primarily a service for childless people to have children, it’s more geared towards finding the right home for the child rather than the most deserving parents and often this means people who already have kids, not the childless, as they are experienced parents.

If someone who cannot have children wants to adopt and is approved they would most likely be approved for the very rare under 2s who come up for adoption only.

That’s for a very good reason, because a person who has longed for their own tiny, snuggly, perfect baby is probably not going to be able to cope parenting a five year old who is a complete fucking mess because their parent’s got that lovely, snuggly, perfect baby and then abused it and fucked off to leave someone else to pick up the pieces.

It would take an extremely dedicated and selfless person to face having no children of their own yet could dedicate their lives to dealing with the horrendous fallout of parenting a child who had already been practically destroyed by their natural parent. And normally SS won’t take the gamble.

So actually in terms of potential adoptees, she’s pretty much bang on the money.

But, hey, when did that ever stop Mumsnetters from taking the opportunity to give the childless or infertile a damn good kicking?

she basically said she only wants to adopt a boy, around 2 years old as they won’t be too damaged (her words) and will still belong to them even though they are adopted.

I think the 'basically' here is interesting - I'd like to know the gap between her actual words and this summary.

Adopters overwhelmingly do have a preference for younger children, and since girls are favoured (it's thought due to a fear that behavioral problems in boys are more likely to manifest as physical violence) she may have calculated that she is more likely to get a younger boy than a younger girl.

She's allowed preferences. If social services think she's unprepared for the reality then she won't be approved for adoption, but that doesn't mean she has to be someone with no preferences, limits and hopes for the child she's matched with: being infertile doesn't suddenly make you a saint with no normal human feelings.