Hi Everyone,
So, I don't advertise this information but, my daughter was adopted. I adopted her after years of unsuccessfully having a biological child. I bring this topic up in our blog discussion to look at a gender issue that exists currently in adoption. One of the things that I came across was the selectiveness of adoption agencies and adoption websites. There are certain agencies and websites that will not take on gay couples as clients. They limit their services strictly to heterosexual couples only. I used a wonderful agency and they acted as agents for all couples, even singles. The website that I used to advertise was strictly for heterosexual couples. It was through their website that I built webpages and found my daughter. (It was the world wide web but, our birthmother lived in the same county!)
There were websites that were not selective and all people regardless of race, sex, age, maritial status were allowed to advertise their web pages. And, there were websites that strictly were used by gay couples. It was interesting as I read the profiles of the gay couples how long they had been committed to each other. Many were career oriented, and had interesting hobbies and travel experiences, etc. So, their biggest flaw was their marital status? Was it because they were unmarried or was it because they were gay? Or, both? (They also did not take on single parents either.)
Another interesting note: I would check back on the websites of gay couples and often, times, I would see that they found a child faster than my husband and I or, were back looking for a second couple. The stereotypes on gay couples adopting is still a strongly a negative one from my experience, and yet, I have witnessed many gay couples finding parenthood.
One of the things that upset me most through the process were people's expectations and stereotypes. My husband and I are more about what we feel and think and love than our outer exterior. A child knows no color, or sex, or race only love. They have no predetermined stereotypes and respond to being loved. Shouldn't the guideline be how much love you have to give and one's capability to nuture a baby into a kind, loving, responsible adult be the priority when adopting?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
I certainly feel thats a interesting topic to discuss. I personally don't think that sexual orientation or maritial status should be such vital roles when it come to adopting a child. Whether theres a gay couple or hetersexual couple does not measure whether they will be good parents or not. In fact a gay couple may be better parents than an heterosexual couple. Growing up with a single mother makes me look at the maritial status different as well. Though it must be nice to have two parents, a single parent can surely fulfill a child needs just as well. I certainly don't think these two status should play a vital role in adopting children when there are so many children who need parents or a parent to nourish and love them.
This is an interesting issue. A co-worker of mine is currently going through the adoption process (she is getting two boys from Columbia) and when she tells me what she goes through I can't imagine. I know it's worth the trouble but you really have to jump through hoops. I did find myself wondering if the process is so difficult because she is single and she is taking on two kids. I also wondered why she picked boys over girls. Even though I know her I guess I have some stereotypes of my own. I thought that single people couldn't adopt (unless you were really wealthy).
She advised my that she decided to take on twp siblings because she wanted the children to be able to have someone they could relate to because she does not come from the same background as they do. I totally understand that because every child is in need of love but I think it's important for them to have someone in the household they are relate to. It makes me think about Brad Pitt and Angie. They seems to understand how important it is for there kids to have a "face” they can relate to. I would not surprise me if they got another child that was similar to Zahara so she can have someone in the house that looks like her.
WOW Professor! thanks for sharing!
Where do I start??? I have a daughter (as you can see) and I was not married but engaged. Althoug, we were a couple, that status can change with a blink of the eye. That can include death, separation, etc.. where the child will be affected. So to me, regardless of the situation, it is about LOVE that people are able to bring and share. Who cares if you are gay or single, that is the new fad now! Being gay does not change the person it is what they want to do, whether a preference or a belief, it is their life. Who is anyone to judge someone becasue of their sexual preference. I do want to have more kids, when I find the right person which hopefully will be for life, and adopt as well. I think there are too many children that need homes and there are loving people out there to give it to the kids!
I think this goes back to the original post of caregiver definition. Who is to say that "traditional" couples are a better option for raising a child then a gay couple? Its an assumption that straight couples make better parents yet when one looks at how many problems there are with teens and preadolescent kids you have to wonder. This is a barrier that will not likely be removed soon. But its one that will not last. There are too many children needing love and too many loving people waiting for them (regardless of their sexual preference)
First I must commend you for adopting your daughter. So many children are passed over and fall victim to what I believe is a broken system for many reasons including gender issues which we are exploring here. However there are other issues that agencies choose to use to reject clients. I personally do not think its fair for adoption agencies to tell single parents or gay couples they are not worthy of adopting a child. They might really have a lot to offer children however are not even considered because of their marital status and/or sexual preferences. Just think about the single parent aspect; what if someone was so wrapped up their career that they didn’t make time for a relationship or had so many failed ones that they just stopped trying. But then they became established in their life and wanted to have a child. Yet they still have no partner; does this mean they are unfit to be a parent? No, I wouldn’t think they are. I just think it would be a different perspective for the child with just one parent. And as long as the parent balances that child’s life out I don’t see what the big deal would be. I do agree that how much you love, and nurture a child is what is important. One’s sexual preference has nothing to do with anything. As long as a person is responsible and has something to offer that child that would be worth while nothing else should matter.
Rachel I must say I agree with your post and you point out some very important points. The love that people share for one another will allow that child to be raised in a stable environment. Gay or straight, single or married, blind or deaf if one is able to love that child and provide what they need I dont think it should matter at all. I am married and I have a beautiful son, and I am expecting another child. Does my marital status make me the "ideal parent"? No it does not because just as Rachel pointed out this could chage with the blink of an eye.
Great post Prof. M. Thanks for sharing it with us.
I completely agree with you, I think that love, and having capability of bringing a child into a kind, loving environment with people who know exactly how to demonstrate that should be the agencies 1st things they look for. If people who are either gay, straight, single, married whatever their status may be, are loving and compassionate people and only want to provide for and love a child I do not see anything wrong with them being able to adopt. Like Rachel said being gay does not change a person so why should anyone judge because of someone’s sexual preference? There are so many innocent children out there, who need a home and parent(s) to show them love, but because people (adoption agencies) are judging others those children are left waiting till the agency find their “perfect-normal” parents. So I ask this question: Are they (adoption agencies) really thinking about the child’s well being or are they going by what society has planted in our minds that a child should only be with heterosexual couples?
-Johanna
The primary function of the family is to reproduce society, either biologically, socially, or both. From the children’s perspective, the family is a family of orientation; family serves to locate children socially, and plays a major role in their life.
However, producing children is not the only function of the family .The family is considered to encourage love and trust and a place where warmth, tenderness and understanding can be expected from a loving mother, a loving father or whomever is the caregiver.
We can’t say that traditional couples are a better option to raise a child. There are many children who lost their parents and they are waiting for somebody to love them and take care of them. The ability for one to adopt should not be based on one’s sexual orientation. If the child can be given a good home, than it should not matter.
Prof. M.,
I agree entirely with what you said and feel, especially with your last paragraph. Adoption should be an easier process, more streamlined. I know other couples that have adopted and it took then around two years the second time. Your right on when you say that its all about love. A child knows no stereotypes and has no real long-term socialization so it shouldn't matter who adopts as long as its all about loving the child and sharing in their life.
Thank you for sharing that with us Professor.
Personally, I feel the same way everyone else does. America cannot be this free if gays and singles cannot adopt. It really is a shame though because there are so many children out there that need homes. There are adoption agencies that service only gays and/or singles, but there are very few. There should be no reason why orientation, race, or marital status would be a factor in adoption. Clearly this country, more so the agencies, cares about who would be better as a parent and not about who can give the love and support for the children.
Thanks for this post. I too have been unable to conceive naturally and me and my husband may be faced with the choice of adoption. I would actually love to adopt a child. However it seems like a vigorous process that I don't know if I can go through. Because of the stereotypes you described, I'm very uncomfortable with the thought of having to fit into someones catergory of being "good enough". I think that a persons ability to care for and love the child should be priority. Gender, marital status,race or sexual orientation should not be the deciding factor in adopting a child. However I can understand the viewpoint of someone faced with the decision to pick adoptive parents. The children are being put into the hands of strangers and there is actually no way of knowing how loving and caring someone is going to be with a child. Anybody can say anything about themselves, but it doesn't mean that it's true. The only real knowledge that the person making the decision has about the adoptive parent or parents are those things such as gender, marital status, race and sexual orientation, so how do you decide?
This is a very interesting topic. I know this one person who is on the waiting list for adoption,she is financially,physically and emotionally very capable of nurturing a child along with her husband, but unfortunately they have two disabled biological children of their own,which is becomig a weak point for them to get any child so far.
The guidelines for adopting should depend on how much love, care and affection you can give physically,emotionally and financially as well, regardless of race,color or sex.
In my culture we have to know the heritage of the child as well, because of the future marriages and their children's health.
Well first of all..congratulations!! you have a beautiful little girl and she is lucky to have such an awesome mom as well. I think it is awesome that you adopted your daughter. While I know that some people feel it is probably a special experience to give birth to your own flesh and blood child and know that you created that baby, there are so many little children out there who need homes. Part of me feels like we should start caring for those that are already in this world and providing them with love and homes before bringing even more children into the world. Just because a child is adopted doesn't mean that its not your own child..if you love the child with all your heart than it may as well be your own flesh and blood. It does not matter if the color of your skin is the same or not..of ir you were both born in the same country..it is all about what is on the inside that counts. If you can provide for the child and meet their needs and love them than that is all that matters. Race, ethnicity, gender, sexual preference, religion....it doesnt matter. If you have love in your heart to share than that is all you need. I hope to adopt a child one day a well.
I'm glad things worked out for you -- your daughter is a real cutie!
It was interesting that you said gay couples seemed to be able to adopt quickly. I wonder if this means that the adoption agencies are the negative factor and people putting children up for adoption are not so narrow-minded. I would think most parents putting children up for adoption would be most concerned with, as you said, the love you have to give and the capability to nurture a child.
Professor, I loved your post. My husband and I discuss adopting just for the mere fact that many homeless children already exist. I do not think that sexual orientation or marital status should be a reflection on the adoption process. The concern should be upon who will be a good, loving and caring parent. That's what is in the best interest of the child. Being selective only narrows the child's chances of finding a home. So if it is with a hetereosexual couple, a gay couple or a single person, so be it. It should be who will treat the child well and give the child a great home!
I have gay friends that adopted a child over seven years ago. They worked with an agency geared toward gay couples but intially were turned down by numerous agencies. Both guys are very successful, young, healthy and loving and the relationship with their adopted son is awesome. They are excellent parents. To think that just because they are both men that their son may not have been a part of their lives. It's crazy. I also think that because the agency they used specialized with assisting gays to adopt, they spent A LOT of money to adopt their son.
There are so many kids that need loving, supportive families, I don't know why the adoption process is so costly and cumbersome.
It should be the only requirement ask but unfortunely Love is hard to measure. Imagine this world if we could measure everyone for how much love they have…It would be paradise and probably we won’t have so many children in foster care or for adoption. The downside is that people who would like to adopt wouldn’t have the opportunity to do so. One of my good friends had her second baby thru a surrogate mother. That could be a good option too for so many women but the actual gift of carrying a baby for someone else should be done out of love and not money. Helping carry a baby for someone else, like in the Bible, when women used to have babies for others to let the blood line of the father continued could be such a nice solution. Technology is changing so many of these choices for everyone. I also know that 1 in 5 women in their upper twenties are having problems conceiving a baby. This is so odd the prime time when I women should get pregnant and they can’t. Once you make a decision to have a baby or adopting one, you are becoming responsible of your actions.
Professor, I like this concept a lot. I would hope to have a child one day with cartoons being the way they are now I think my child will learn early in life that no matter your gender you can be in a lead position. I think it’s a good thing for a young girl to see a girl not be in a cartoon but star in one. It shows that we are important and we can hold things down for ourselves. As a child I had shows like the smurffs and even though I loved the show the only girl was smurffette and she was a supporting role with the show evolving around the men. This was common but today is a new day and as time goes on I think we will see many more cartoons where women (girls) are in charge. Soon there will be cartoons where the only character is a girl where no supporting actor (character) will be needed. This will make so when a young girl goes to grade school she will feel no limitations on her potential.
Post a Comment