Who should not or should be allowed to adopt an infant
By suspenseful
@suspenseful (40193)
Canada
August 11, 2008 10:51pm CST
We adopted our sons at three months because we did not qualify. It was not our ages, but my past. I had already given birth to a child out of wedlock and that put me in the offing even though I gave her up for adoption. And now i find that my friends are nervous because they know I did not adopt an infant and think I am unable to hold an infant properly. Oh I know perfectly well that you have to support the infant's head.
Now what should disqualify a person from adopting an infant? Lack of experience with babies? Bad character in the past? Bad character now? Being over a certain age?
And who should qualify to adopt an infant? Those who are under thirty? Those who are under twenty five? Those who did not have a past?
You see, just because a person has a past, was a bad girl etc. does not mean that she will likely to harm an infant. If you think she would harm an infant think of the danger she would poise to an older child. That is why adoption agencies should not assume. And there are some women who never had a past, were pure as the driven snow when they married, and yet would not be good mothers.
The only thing a child needs is love. And adoption should be about love, not a punishment that if you are older than a certain age, or had a past that you hae to adopt a child of special needs.
Some of the best people I knew who adopted children of special needs had already birth children of their own and they were not overwhelmed.
2 people like this
6 responses
@fcangel9 (51)
• United States
13 Aug 08
I think that if a person is able bodied and does not have a criminal past they should be allowed to adopt an infant. There are so many children out there that need good homes. First time parents dont have the experience to have a child, but you dont see social services whisking away those children because the parents arent sure how to support their head or how often they should be fed. That is something that is learned with time, not even experienced parents know everything there is because all children require different care. Sorry for your situation, I think that what happened to you is wrong, all children deserve a loving family and every family deserves a child to love.
@Lakota12 (42600)
• United States
12 Aug 08
I have never understood the reasoning behind who get s the child and who dont.
I always wondered why the people they adopted my sons out to was my moms age not close to my age at all .
I couldnt see that x had any idea what he did.
But am sure his mother did.
and all the familys had thier own kids. Never understood this at all.
Dont think it has anything to do with love at all they must look at the money the people make! and those arent always the best to give a child too as they sometimes use them as toys or just adopt so theyu can say they have kids.
2 people like this
@Lakota12 (42600)
• United States
13 Aug 08
To me that would be wrong of them to do that. sounds dumb to hold that against you for you were young and thqats all you could do . you was thinking of her haveing a better life that way . It was done all the time back then and now.
BUt when ya older nope shouldnt be against you.
and I had nothing to feel bad about he did it all on his own! and took me and daughter 27 years to find them!
1 person likes this
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
12 Aug 08
Well I do not feel that having money makes you less loving as a parent than a poor couple. Adoption agencies should not assume that if a girl or a man has a past that they will act that way forever and will make bad parents. It should be based on what they are now and allowances should be made for those who have been hurt. I would suggest that if you were bad and feel guilty, that counseling should be allowed and once it is done, you should be allowed to adopt either an infant or an older child.
When I was in Vancouver, in order to adopt since I was a former bad girl, I had to work in a home for the mentally retarded. So they assumed that because of that and because of what I did, gave my baby up, I had to work in a school to prove I was fit. Oh and we had to move to Saskatoon to adopt.
2 people like this
@slickcut (8141)
• United States
12 Aug 08
I think they make it too hard for a person to adopt..I think if the people who adopt love children & are able to give them a loving home that is the most important thing..The natural mothers are not disqualified because of their past so i do not think anyone that adopts should be disqualified for thei past,but it does sometimes depend on what it was....I would not suggest that anyone with a bad record be chosen,but just for a past mistake ,thats not really fair...If you had a child out of wedlock & put it up for adoption that was a choice & should not be held against you,it sounds like you made a grown up decision...You were young & unable to care for a child so you did not have a choice,especially back then,it was such a shame & disgrace back then,people were so condeming at that time,i think you did what you did for the benefit of the child & should be considered a wise decision & not a negative...
2 people like this
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
12 Aug 08
Back then there were movies that showed how loving a girl was in giving up the baby, but at the same time there were movies that showed the girl was rather cold and heartless. So there were too views, the one in which a nice couple received a new born baby = like in the Glen Miller Show and the other in which the girl who gave the baby up in that movie about that girl who was searching for her birth mother - it was in the forties or fifties and was on TCM so I have no idea what it was called right now.
And it seemed that the latter view was more likely believed. It is a shame because society could have done more to help the girls like me. And when we could not adopt a new born because of my past, it made me think that something was wrong with me.
So I think that your past should not be counted against you. I did not loose my ability to care for a new born because I had to give up my new born.
2 people like this
@slickcut (8141)
• United States
12 Aug 08
When a young girl has a baby out of wed lock like you did,it was not an easy decision for you,it was not done lightly,you did what was best at the time...You have to forgive yourself & move forward..I know that these girls suffer enough &i am sure you have suffered enough about the decision you had to make without people trying to rub your face in it...I have seen so many stories about girls adopting out their infants & it is a thing that stays with you the rest of your life,i think thats enough ,no one has the right to judge what you did...
2 people like this
@maximax8 (31053)
• United Kingdom
16 Aug 08
I think that it is very challenging to adopt a baby or a child that that the process of adopting should become easy. Single people and couples should fill out an application form with a reference, have a surprise home visit from a social worker and then have an interview to discuss becoming an adoptive parent if successful. Adoptive parents should be between 20 and 55 years old but that would be flexible. The person or the couple should be of good character now and not be judged for past mistakes. I think a teenager adopting her baby should be thought of favorably if she wants to adopt a baby when she is thirty. Yes, a child needs love and care. If a lady has a first baby the new mother learns how to feed her baby, change her nappy, bath her and as her child grows older her knowledge too will grow. Adoptive parents may get a young baby or an older child and will adapt their home to suit the needs that they have. I admire people that adopt special needs children and give them a secure future. One lady plans to adopt a baby with Down Syndrome so that is wonderful. The social workers should ask adoptive parents what they would like and give them that. A young baby, a toddler, a child, a teenager, a boy, a girl are the sort of choices adoptive parents should have.
@wachit14 (3595)
• United States
12 Aug 08
I'm not sure where you live, but where I live there are very strict rules about adoption that must be followed. Both my kids were adopted at birth. My husband and I both had to go through very stringent steps that included three very long visits with a social worker and of course, there were criminal background checks and other rules regarding our age and where we lived.
I really don't see how you giving birth and then surrendering your baby for adoption would stop you yourself from adopting. I know of adoptive moms who are also birth moms. However, if you are dealing with a private adoption agency, they are free to make up their own rules above and beyond the state where you reside.
There are other ways to adopt, like becoming a foster parent first or going through a private adoption. I certainly don't think that anyone should be denied the right to adopt because they themselves gave a baby up for adoption.
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
13 Aug 08
We went through the province to adopt and we got twins, but they were three months and we were the third choice, but we also wanted a newborn after that, but we were refused. We could not afford private adoption. In provincial adoption, the past of the couple is considered important as well as the combined ages. So in Saskatchewan and in British Columbia, if you have a past, had a child out of wedlock, either kept or did not kept, you cannot get a newborn. to get a newborn, you have to live a good life, and be young enough so if you die at fifty, your child will be old enough to make a living.
2 people like this
@dragon54u (31636)
• United States
17 Aug 08
I would think that people who made mistakes in the past would be good candidates, because they could teach the children to avoid those mistakes.
I think a couple should present a stable marriage and commitment--no more celebrities adopting then splitting up, that's not fair to kids so maybe no celebrities!--at least one person should have a stable job in a professional trade or field so there would be some financial security. I'm not sure, though, I've seen kids raised better by very poor parents than some of these well-to-do yuppies.
I don't know! Anyone that genuinely wants to adopt should be able to unless they're a child abuser, maybe. What a confusing question, you've addled my brain for the day!
