Would a birth mom choose us? - Page 2

[veganjoy]

Some states/counties do allow you to give babies breastmilk (screened donor milk or milk from another "approved source"), though, as long as it comes from a bottle. Not the same as breastfeeding, but just FYI.

[Polliwog]

Ehhh, my kids are completely bonded and perfectly healthy. No need to feel sorry for them. Bottle feeding isn't the end of the world.

[Sierra]

Originally Posted by DoulaVallere

as well as just knowing that it's healthier,

Sorry, but that doesn't even get to come into the reasoning here.

The child in foster care in your state will not be breastfed whether you parent the child or not.

What you are saying, ultimately, is that you can't be associated with a non-breastfed baby...that you can't care for a child who isn't breastfed.

You're not talking about the child's interests, you are talking about your own. You have an ideology within which a certain child doesn't fit. This is about a particular type of child being, to put it crudely, beneath you.

Look, I reaaaaaaally get the commitment to breastfeed.

I am the daughter of a mother who extended breastfeed me and all my siblings. I am the daughter who only self-weaned from my own mother's breast because I didn't like the taste of the breastmilk after my mom got pregnant with my brother. I am the daughter of the mom who was chastized during a visit to "The Farm" (you know, Ina May Gaskin) because the other women there thought her kids were too old to be breastfed. ("Stephen says...")

I never knew anything about bottlefeeding. My mom and all her friends breastfed. I was there at the birth of one of my God-siblings, who was breastfed. All my mother role models breastfed. I never pictured myself parenting any other way.

In fact, when I was a teenager, I started babysitting these kids (kids of a colleague of my dad), and they were bottlefed. It was the first experience I ever had with bottlefed kids, and I was weirded out by their poops. In fact, the kids even had this salty smell in general that was so unfamiliar as to become a subject of discussion in our home...during which time my mom reinforced my desire to breastfeed my own future-children by emphasizing that it was just one of those weird things about formula-fed kids.

When I was around nine or ten, I became interested in fostering/adoption. I actually researched adoptive breastfeeding at that point...and this is back in the days when that was one of those unheard of things, so I don't even know how I had heard about it. Later on, when it looked like a friend might ask me to take care of her son, I started a pumping protocol just in case.

In my public health days I wrote a grant for a program whose purpose it was to increase the rate of breastfeeding in teen moms. I've taught breastfeeding classes when I was active in a childbirth education network. I've helped women learn to breastfeed back when I worked in the maternity unit of a hospital. I've written lactivist letters to businesses that didn't support breastfeeding mothers. I've written to my legislators about the importance of laws that protect the breastfeeding relationship between mothers and babies.

I get it.

When we decided to foster adopt, I really wondered how I would handle the whole bottlefeeding thing. I was afraid that I would be ashamed to feed my child in public, that I would be uncomfortable doing something that would contribute to normalizing bottlefeeding for young women and future mothers.

But adoption is about what is best for children, and there are children out there who simply will not be breastfed. I believe those children deserve families who are committed to attachment and bonding .

So I swallowed my pride, played the part of the adult, and decided to lose the baggage.

I learned about bottlenursing. It's great. Look it up.

I learned about fish oil and other supplements that can help make up for at least some of the missing components of formula. Formula will never be as great as breastmilk, but that doesn't mean we can't give our children every other advantage possible.

I learned how to be creative in creating attachment and bonding opportunities with my children. And its a good thing I did because they each came with unique needs that called for creativity.

You can think all the things you want about the inferiority of formula and bottlefeeding, but if you are going to reason that this means you shouldn't foster-adopt, then don't even try to claim that what you are thinking of is the best interests of children. In any way, shape, or form. This is not about what is healthiest. Nope. Sorry. (If by "it's healthier" you mean: children who might have more ear infections, or are 8 IQ points lower than they'd otherwise be, or who get the flu a couple times as babies, or whatever, are not for you, then I suggest you take a look at doing something other than adopting a child.)

And one more reason to sort through this kind of baggage before you make your way into the experience of adoption: adoptive breastfeeding is *not* the same as breastfeeding a biological child. There are all kinds of really difficult complications that can arise, including having a grieving baby who can't tolerate body contact with you (I had one of those...so I know). There is a reasonable chance that despite your commitment, there will be other plans for the feeding of your future-child, and if you haven't processed some of your baggage here, you could damage both of you when things don't work the way you intend and your attachments to this notion of the only way to be a good mother to your child start to unravel.

[Momma Moo Martin]

Originally Posted by Sierra

What you are saying, ultimately, is that you can't be associated with a non-breastfed baby...that you can't care for a child who isn't breastfed.

You're not talking about the child's interests, you are talking about your own. You have an ideology within which a certain child doesn't fit. This is about a particular type of child being, to put it crudely, beneath you.

Of course, this is just interpretation since I can't speak for DoulaVallere but I don't think that's what she was trying to say in that post. I think she is simply stating that she would like to breastfeed her future baby so foster-adopt may or may not be the journey she will take to bring her baby home. Foster-adopt isn't for everyone for multiple reasons - that doesn't make those children any less "good" than other adopted children. Sierra, it sounds like you have gone through a lot to be a great mom to your children! You must be a very strong woman. It's okay.

[MissinNYC]

Here, as well, you would not be allowed.

I do think it's unfortunate to choose to adopt privately rather than foster a child only because you wouldn't be able to nurse the child from birth. While nursing is absolutely wonderful (I nursed 3 of mine for over 2 years each), it's not the be all and end all of mothering.

The child in foster care in your state will not be breastfed whether you parent the child or not.

What you are saying, ultimately, is that you can't be associated with a non-breastfed baby...that you can't care for a child who isn't breastfed.

Bears repeating.

[Sierra]

Originally Posted by Momma Moo Martin

Sierra, it sounds like you have gone through a lot to be a great mom to your children! You must be a very strong woman. It's okay.

I'm not upset or anything. Honestly. I feel great about my experiences.

It was really crudely put to say what I said, and I acknowledged that when I posted it. I was having a difficult time articulating what I meant, and it was the best I could come up with at the time to express what I believe to be the sentiment underneath the justification that "breastfeeding is healthiest, so I can't foster-adopt."

If someone says, "I really want to have an opportunity to breastfeed [or breastfeed again]," I can't really judge that. If that's how you feel, that's how you feel. But if someone says, "I am not willing to adopt in any way that does not allow me to breastfeed because it is the healthiest way to feed a baby and is critical for bonding," then I have to question the presumptions behind the statement. Because there are some big issues in the reasoning there.

Since it involves values around the best interests of children, obviously I-- like anyone-- can get a little passionate .

[Smithie]

I think it might also be possible to come at it from the position of "I cannot work with an agency that will require to me to do things that I think are truly wrong." A state agency will most definitely require you to keep your boob out of a foster kid's mouth. I happen to think that is a poor policy to apply to infants removed at birth, and that it would serve the best interests of all infants with a case plan for adoption to be permitted to nurse from their prospective adoptive mothers, but I can see why the policy exists and it will certainly be a long hard road to change it.

Breastfeeding is nowhere near this important to me, but I can imagine that I'd say "heck, no" to a foster-adopt situation (or any adoption situation) that required me to circ an infant. You just shouldn't do enter into agreements with people who are asking you to do things to a child that you think are very wrong.

That said, I'm pretty certain that I'm going to end up parenting a child who has been formula-fed and circed by somebody else long before I came along, and these things are nowhere near the top of my worry list. Passing up an otherwise-suitable foster-adopt program just because nursing isn't allowed does seem strange to me - if for no other reason than the thousands of dollars being spent. I still can't figure out how regular people afford private adoption.

[RedOakMomma]

fftopic

Originally Posted by Sierra

I am the daughter of the mom who was chastized during a visit to "The Farm" (you know, Ina May Gaskin) because the other women there thought her kids were too old to be breastfed. ("Stephen says...")

Dang, Sierra! Those are some serious bf creds! Fun to hear that about you and your past....

And for what it's worth, related to breastfeeding and adoption, I did relactate for adopting our daughter, and she was one of those that (attachment-wise) seemed more harmed by my push/need to breastfeed than helped. Her bottle was her consistent comfort through the many transitions in her young life, and I could choose to be a part of that comfort, or choose to thwart that comfort by pushing for breastfeeding. Really, when it came down to it, it was an easy choice (despite being pro-extended bf with my other kids). Attachment is more important than the slight bump in health benefits. WAY more important...especially at that critical early stage. I learned about bottlenursing, embraced it, and honestly--loved it. I needed a conflict-free way of bonding with my daughter, too, and once we settled into her preference for a feeding routine, I could feel a lot of tension (from her, and from me) lift.

[curliemama]

Replying to a couple different threads here...

We are a large family by society's standards. Our fourth child is being adopted (we're hoping to finalize in July), and we were a CC family and she is AA. We went the birthmother/profile/agency route, but we also networked and that's actually how we found our little one. She was already born and was in a NICU; she had some severe health *concerns* which thankfully have not panned out thus far but for which we were prepared (are still prepared) to handle. Her bmom signed TPR when she was two months old and worked through an attorney. There wasn't so much a desire for a certain TYPE of family so much as a loving, stable family, and the bmom agreed with his choice (us). She just wanted a loving, stable family, and I hope that's what we are giving her daughter. I say all that to point out that you don't have to go through the song and dance that is private domestic adoption with the profile and everything if you are willing to wait and see if there are some health issues that you can put up with (and especially if you're wanting to adopt transracially, there are many children out there).

On the subject of BFing: my ds had only weaned about a month before we picked up our daughter and I had been pumping a little, so I had some milk left. We were able to have a nursing relationship of one "feeding" a day for nearly two weeks. I don't know how much she got; it was more for comfort than anything, but she did seem to want it. She didn't keep latched adequately to nurse exclusively due to some damage to her ability to suck from being on a ventilator after birth, so we stopped this after a couple of weeks. I did not want to make her waste precious calories trying to nurse only to get nothing. A friend sent me an SNS, but in the middle of all of this we found out we would be moving and life has just been one crazy thing after another ever since.

The biggest difference between my not nursing her and nursing my other three children is that I realize how little nursing has to do with bonding FOR ME. I am no less bonded to our little baby girl than I was to the other children, and in some ways (will I get kicked off mothering.com for this comment? ) I feel I can give her more because I'm not on a constant hormonal rollercoaster AND I don't have those twinges of resentment from feeling tied down to a baby all the time. Perhaps I've also cooled off realizing this is probably our last baby? Either way, I say all of that to give you a real life example of someone who is a hardcore BFer realizing that it's not all about the method of feeding. Bonding is a lot more than that, and to cut yourself off from children who need a family and would benefit from older siblings is sad to me. Our other children love our daughter, and I hate to think of what would have happened if I had put my desire/presumed need to nurse her above her needs. She wouldn't be here... and our life would be less than complete.

[DoulaVallere]

Originally Posted by Mama Moo Martin

Of course, this is just interpretation since I can't speak for DoulaVallere but I don't think that's what she was trying to say in that post. I think she is simply stating that she would like to breastfeed her future baby so foster-adopt may or may not be the journey she will take to bring her baby home. Foster-adopt isn't for everyone for multiple reasons - that doesn't make those children any less "good" than other adopted children.

Yes.

Originally Posted by Smithie

I think it might also be possible to come at it from the position of "I cannot work with an agency that will require to me to do things that I think are truly wrong." A state agency will most definitely require you to keep your boob out of a foster kid's mouth. I happen to think that is a poor policy to apply to infants removed at birth, and that it would serve the best interests of all infants with a case plan for adoption to be permitted to nurse from their prospective adoptive mothers, but I can see why the policy exists and it will certainly be a long hard road to change it.

Breastfeeding is nowhere near this important to me, but I can imagine that I'd say "heck, no" to a foster-adopt situation (or any adoption situation) that required me to circ an infant. You just shouldn't do enter into agreements with people who are asking you to do things to a child that you think are very wrong.

Thank you. THIS (bolded) is what I was trying to say. I certainly don't think a bottle fed baby is a "lesser" baby and I really am hurt that someone would think that about me. But I wouldn't do a private adoption with a family that insisted we circ or vax or public school the baby either. Because those aren't things that I, as a mother, would choose to do *off the bat, from birth, without an indication to do so*. I totally, TOTALLY, understand that - even if my intent is to breastfeed an adopted baby from birth - that circumstances could be that it is impossible. But that could happen with a bio kid of mine as well...I'm not garanteed that my bio kids won't have a cleft palate, or a chromosomal issue that prevents them from nursing. But it would still be my PLAN to do so, until circumstances dictated otherwise. I'm pregnant now. I fully intend to exclusively nurse and then CLW this baby the same way I did my first two. But I'm not naive enough to think that I WILL, because she could have an issue I don't know about that would necessitate bottle feeding. That wouldn't mean I would love her less, or that I wouldn't bond with her, or that I can't "care for a child that isn't breastfed" as Sierra said.

Everyone has their comfort level. Not everyone is open to special needs adoption, or transracial adoption, or international adoption...does that mean they should considder something other than adoption as well? Are people who would do foster-adopt, with no restrictions, the only people who truely care about the needs of the child? Does that mean everyone else that adopts in any other circumstance are just being selfish like me?

[marsupial-mom]

I think no matter how a child comes into your home (bio, step kids, adoption, etc) that both selfishness and altruism come into play. Sierras point is well taken, the decision to exclude adoption through the foster system is likely based on selfishness. And that's ok. You can decide how you want to adopt and how you want to parent.

Edit: Also though, please do not presume to know exactly what your county's foster-to-adopt program will or will not allow. Please make an informed decision. Some counties allow foster breastfeeding.