Re: So...Molly...just what is the solution?

I've heard these questions many many times before. The following was written by a good friend of mine, and I think it is move eloquent than what I could have said:

This thinking is based on not being able to think outside the box and being caught in the old paradigm. Most people tend to think it's adoption-as-it-stands-today vs. languishing in foster homes/orphanages/abusive homes. Those of us who are anti-adoption are NOT anti-children. The reason we have come out against adoption in the first place is FOR the children.

Most people don't think much about adoption, unless they want a child or they are themselves adopted or receive their livelihood from the industry, and are usually surprised when someone suggests it is less than all roses and rainbows. People can also get quite hostile when you suggest that. I think adoption is one of those nice myths we carry in our heads as examples that the world is really a good place - it's a sacred cow - so we really hate being challenged on it. But there are REAL people - REAL CHILDREN - being hurt by it daily. So the time has come to stop clinging to fairy tales. Adoption as we know it has not existed for that long in time, and sealed records/amended birth certificates have existed for even a shorter amount of time. It arose in our western society - it is not an ancient tradition, as some religious adopters would have you believe. People have probably always taken in those in need, but adoption as we understand the word is something pretty new. It is, in fact, this large experiment with human subjects. The results of this experiment, in the form of adoptees reaching adulthood and speaking out, are now coming in. Anyone who really cares about children will not dismiss these voices, as we have LIVED it and can tell you firsthand about what needs to change.

For those children adopted domestically - first of all, whenever possible, yes, a child should remain with FAMILY. This should preferably be the PARENTS or PARENT, but, if this is not possible, then some extended family member who loves the child and is willing to raise him. Our Western culture is the only one that sees something wrong with being raised "with relatives." Most other cultures always have extended family around and involved in the child's life - nuclear families are usually not isolated from them and are not placed above them in importance. Therefore, there is much more support available. When you consider that most of the issues that lead to child placement are *temporary* - parents are young, poor, inexperienced, stressed out - you can see that having a child stay with extended family is a much better solution. As has been said by others, "adoption is a permanent solution to a temporary problem." And many, many families live to regret it. It takes it's toll on parents, grandparents ... any family member that truly cares about the family. Even if the problem is permanent - mom or dad (or both) suffer from some mental illness, on-going addiction, whatever - the child is much better off growing up inside his own family as long as there are stable, loving caretakers available. It is the child's RIGHT to be with his family. He needs this more than a better neighborhood, his own room, mounds of toys, fancy schools, etc and so forth. If this were not the case we should all be giving our kids to Bill Gates and his peers.

If there are absolutely no family members available to step up and do the job, then - and only then - should thought be given to placing the child with strangers. Such placement should always be to find a home for a child in need and NOT to find children for couples that want them. Adoption should not be a supply and demand capitalistic endeavor. It should always, first and foremost and ONLY, be about the child. Some things that need to change about this process include:

(1) Possible placement families should be more carefully screened than they are at present. There are WAY too many horror stories of adoptees growing up in abusive or neglectful situations. And some people will say "Well, that happens in natural families, too." Yes, it does. But adoption is not supposed to be the crap shoot natural families are - we are supposed to have professionals in charge creating a better life situation for the child. Abuse or neglect should be VERY rare. But it's not - if you don't believe that, do your own research - there are many voices out there telling you otherwise. But the focus is on getting more kids adopted and adopted quickly. That's where the profit lies.

(2) All monetary gain should be stopped. Don't kid yourself, adoption is BIG BUSINESS and people make money. It's not done solely out of the goodness of people's hearts. If you look at places like Australia where profiting from adoption was made illegal, adoptions have gone way down. The chance to make money is always corrupting - you will always see a push from adoption agencies to procure more children. Unfortunately, that seems to be human nature. So do away with any sort of payments, fees or donations, do away with any private adoption agencies at all and leave it to the state.

(3) There should be no sealing of records and no falsifying of documents (= amended birth certificates.) This is not, and never was, in the child's best interest. This was another industry ploy to lure customers with the promise of having "a child of their OWN." This is very easily demonstrated by the fact that if a relinquished child is never adopted, but instead grows up in foster care, the records are never sealed and the birth certificate is never amended - this was started purely for the adoptive parents. In states and countries where records were never sealed nothing dire has befallen any of the children. Give the child some respect and leave their records - history, heritage and NAME - intact. It's theirs by right, just as your identity is YOURS.

(4) Whenever possible, allow the child full access to family members. Let them grow up knowing who they are and where they came from, who they look like, act like, and think like. Don't let them feel like an alien that dropped out of the sky as so many of us adoptees have felt growing up. Is this situation worse than some horror of an abusive home? No. But it takes its toll and has long-lasting effects that can seriously cripple the grown adoptee's efforts to make a successful life for themselves. Not ALL adoptees will have problems, as everyone is an individual, but enough will that you can never be sure that YOUR adopted child won't be one of them. Do you really want to take that chance? They will have to live with the fallout long after you're gone. If you truly love them open your heart to their families - your child is part of them.

All of these changes will certainly lead to something much different than adoption as the industry stands today (yes, it IS an INDUSTRY like it or not.) I myself prefer to go to the term "legal guardianship" which contains the idea that adoptive couples are not "owners" of the child but loving guardians, who do it all for love of children, not for any self-serving motivations. However, I have no problem keeping the term "adoption" as long as it becomes something that truly serves the children.

As for international adoption, there are many more eloquent voices on the subject than mine - voices of those who lived the experience. Some of them have returned to their country of original and are trying to fight this system. If you are truly interested in hearing about international adoption from the SOURCE I suggest googling as their blogs are out there. I will say that it is SO easy to find examples of corruption, abuse, profiteering, and a vicious feedback loop that actually perpetuates the very situations adoptive parents claim to be "saving" their child from that I am amazed that anyone, in good conscience, can still adopt internationally. Please educate yourself for the children's sake.
Tweet