Why are people against adoption?

[Afternoonteaandcake]

My boyfriend and I were talking about a friend who has sadly passed. She wanted a family and felt time was ticking on. I said she could have fostered or adopted and he said it's not the same. My boyfriend already has his own children. He said later that the adoption process can be hard which I agree.

2 guy friends said this to me years ago that women should have their own children so men can carry on the family name and genetics. I never realised how much people were against adoption.

totally agree with you

Oh shut up what would you know?!

People aren’t as keen to adopt older children or children with trauma or disability because it’s a lot of extra work.

I actively chose two older children, both with extensive trauma history. I’m well qualified to care for them and I don’t find them hard work in the slightest. While they were considered hard to place, they aren’t hard to parent - I see friends with biological children with just as many parenting challenges as I have, in some cases many more due to disabilities and unforeseen additional needs.

Parenting is hard work, you just pick which hard you’re going for.

So well put

This thread is confirming what I already suspected - adoption really freaks some people out. I can't help thinking it has to do with ego. The idea that our genes are so important and that procreating is the be all and end all of human existence. There is no one human experience that is so much more special and exceptional than others. 100 years ago people were having 10 or 12 babies and hardly knew the names of the last 2 that were born. We have now elevated birth children to some hallowed status that little can compete with. Love is love wherever and with whoever you find it.

AUK’s Adoption Barometer shows that nearly two thirds of established adoptive parents have experienced CPV (child to patent violence). It’s good to see this recognised as a form of domestic abuse.

Yes child to parent violence can be an issue, which covers everything from a small child throwing toys or biting/hitting (which many parents, adoptive or otherwise experience), through to quite significant violence in older children (which many parents adoptive or otherwise) also experience. The other thing to remember is that families where everything is going well don’t tend to have involvement with support organisations like Adoption U.K. and so won’t be represented in their survey.

In 12 adoptive families I know as friends, there is one where violence is an issue.

More generally surveys tend to show that one third of adoptive families describe themselves as doing well with no particular issues, one third describe themselves as doing ok with no insurmountable issues, and one third describe themselves as having moderate to significant challenges.

The idea that our genes are so important and that procreating is the be all and end all of human existence.

I think too the trope that there’s no love like maternal love, that there’s a magical bond between mother and child, that biology in some way protects against having a child that is in some way challenging or difficult all play their part - you can see that played out in this thread.

I also think the very fact of adoption reminds people that some parents (usually meaning mothers) don’t care for their children, while there is often love that doesn’t translate into safe care for their kids, which bursts that idealistic bubble. Which can feel quite threatening.

@Thesonglastslonger you have no idea how gut wrenching that is to hear as an adopted person

Absolutely Jellycatspyjamas. So well said

Seems like we have a new area of bigotry.

Adoption.

So much for ‘woke’ culture eh? Imagine replacing some of the words relating to adoption with ‘disabled person’ or ‘person of colour’

Makes for shocking reading.

I was adopted into a family of 2 other children.

My brother was an alchoholic and my sister was violent. These were non adopted children.

l was the adoptee. I was the easiest to raise.

This is it. They're equal but different.

I strongly believe that people shouldn't just adopt because they're infertile, as a sticking-plaster solution for infertility trauma. It is a different experience to having a biological child, and an adopted child has specific needs and problems that you need to be prepared to face.

An adopted child shouldn't be a consolation prize - they're human beings and deserve more than that. You should adopt a child because you actively want an adopted child, not a biological one.

How do you want us to refer to the children that have the same genetics as their parents?

As for damaged children, the child protection department of the netherlands says this about adoption:

Children eligible for adoption are usually vulnerable children. They therefore often require extra or special care

Link: www.kinderbescherming.nl/voor-kind-en-ouder/kind-adopteren/

So reading that I would expect that the children are troubled in some way. Otherwise, why would they say it?

Birth Children or Adopted Children should
cover it @DuchessofSandwich

@DuchessofSandwich

vulnerable or requiring special or extra care is a world away from ‘damaged’

My son is vulnerable, his life is impacted by his early life but he is absolutely not damaged

Birth child or biological child.

The whole purpose of adoption is that the child legally becomes your "own", so there's no distinction in that regard between adopted and birth children. They're all your children.

So reading that I would expect that the children are troubled in some way. Otherwise, why would they say it?

Vulnerable or needing extra care isn’t the same as labelling a child as damaged or troubled. My children need a particular kind of parenting, they are neither damaged or troubled.

How do you want us to refer to the children that have the same genetics as their parents?

Birth child? If indeed a distinction needs to be made, which it rarely does.

Well that’s not entirely true.

I agree any adopted child is a vulnerable child, but there are far more babies up
for adoption than there used to be due to early intervention, a chunk of whom have been with a foster carer since birth.

@DuchessofSandwich
There is a world of difference between saying a child is vulnerable and may require extra support to saying they are damaged.
The later calls to mind the phrase, " damaged goods " which has typically been used to belittle someone ( usually female) who has fallen short of societies expectations as it were. So it was used for "fallen women " in eras past to denote that they were not worthy of love or acceptance any more so to apply it to.children implies that children who.are adopted are somehow sub standard and therefore less worthy .
And perhaps you could just refer to birth children or adopted children if you must or what the hell.you could just refer to them all.as children . Adopted children are not a separate species!
.

Thank you for your answer

@ivfbabymomma1

Just ignore. No one who knows anything about adoption would say that. Come to think of it no one who had any imagination would say that. I am not an adoptive parent but I have a couple of close friends who are - they went through a lot to get their kids, as I am sure your mum and dad did - and they love them as fiercely as any parent could love a child.

Must be my language skills. To me it sounds the same. English is not my first language though.