"can't get approved for adoption" ? - Page 5

[queenjane]

Originally Posted by marsupial-mom 

I just want to say that you can adopt from fostercare without fostering. There are children in the system who are already cleared for adoption and have their parental rights terminated. They are literally just waiting to be adopted.

And just to expand on this a bit...in many places you can adopt a child who is already a state ward but isnt really a "waiting child" in the sense that its a photolisted child or something like that. With my previous agency, it wasnt like they had a pool of these kids "waiting" however they knew what kids were in the process of TPR and would likely be "coming up" for adoption, and whether or not any relatives/foster parent would be seeking to adopt. With my next adoption i am going to ask for a child younger than my boys (preferable a baby or young toddler) and if we have to wait awhile, we will wait. Generally if you call an agency and say "i want to adopt a child under three without fostering" they will say they dont have any...but they usually DO. its just that those kids are placed very quickly. And you might have to wait awhile. But it DOES happen. Sometimes even with very young children (babies)...it really just depends. you could luck out and a foster parent with your agency just happens to have a recently TPR'd 1 yr old they dont want to adopt (maybe they feel they are too old, or dont want to close their home to fostering or just dont feel its "their" child) and boom, you have a baby. It honestly really just depends on your area, your agency, and lots of luck.

[Mom31]

So when people trot out these wacky myths about adoption and then use those myths to justify inaction and to absolve themselves of society's duty to these children, it really makes my blood boil.

I know we are talking about foster adoption here ( I think) but maybe instead of adoption these people who do not feel the need to bring an unrelated child into their homes could instead be encouraged to work for the social change that is needed to keep families intact.

Say- you have a friend who has an extra 100,000 and she does not feel a duty to adopt a child- maybe she could say- give that 30,000 that would have been spent on adoption to support keeping a mother and child together.  say send her 1,000 a month for oh- I don't know- 30 months- to help get her thru college or job training.

Say- maybe they could teach a free course in how to get a job, how to have an interview, how to fill out a FAFSA- maybe they want to tutor low income families on how to budget or how to cook easy inexpensive meals... maybe they could give a low income mother a ride to the dr.

There are way more ways to help induce social change then just "helping" one child at a time thru adoption... $30,000 could go a long way to help impoverished countries keep their own kids.

It's okay if people don't want to adopt- I don't.  I know all about adoption and I don't want to adopt.  Not one bit- and I think it is totally okay for people to not want to adopt.  I am one of them.

[Smithie]

I very much DO want to adopt - but I see where you're coming from. When I'm done fostering (either because we adopt or because we burn out), I can't imagine unengaging from this issue. I'm hoping to become a GAL or work with an organization that supports at-risk moms and babies. I was surprised and thrilled to find out recently that a bunch of people I know socially are involved with a program that keeps women in drug rehag together with their babies in a safe environment as they work a program. I live in a conservative state, I hardly knoew such things existed here, much less that my friends were behind them. 

[marsupial-mom]

Originally Posted by Mom31 

It's okay if people don't want to adopt- I don't.  I know all about adoption and I don't want to adopt.  Not one bit- and I think it is totally okay for people to not want to adopt.  I am one of them.

Absolutely, if people don't want to adopt then they shouldn't.

I wasn't talking about those people. That is, unless they go around LYING and saying that they "can't adopt" when the truth is they don't want to.

Originally Posted by Mom31 

There are way more ways to help induce social change then just "helping" one child at a time thru adoption... $30,000 could go a long way to help impoverished countries keep their own kids.

Of course there are many ways to change society and help needy children. Maybe we could talk about that in a thread called "How to help needy children." But this thread is about people who say they "can't adopt". This thread is about the little lies people tell themselves and each other regarding adoption. Have you read Lying by Sam Harris and Annaka Harris? The mini book makes a strong case that we ought not lie to each other, even when we think we're merely being kind.

[Tigerchild]

I think people say all sorts of stupid things when they're trying to connect with people.

When my twins were babies, I seriously had to tighten my body to avoid punching people who would warble at me "ooOOOOoooOOoo I always wanted to have TWINS, zOMG you are SoooOOOOoOOOooo lucky!!!!eleventyone1!".  Don't get me wrong, I wanted to punch people who said "Haha, you poor thing," too.  Multiple moms get all the nice whose vagina, if any, did these creatures come out of invasive questions too.  People would tell me stories about their great aunt Mabel's dead twin at birth and how her life was hell everafter, ect.  How they "never could" or "how wonderful" it would be.  Ultimately, though, they were just wanting a brief connection with the "exotic" I think.

And whether we like it or not (most of us don't), adoptees and adoptive families are going to be seen as exotic by many, if not most, people.  Even if it's NOT a transracial or foster care or international adoption.

I think the "I always wanted to adopt but oh dear, I just couldn't" is very much like, "I always wanted twins, I'm so jealous, did you cheat and go on inferility drugs?" type of asshat unthinking comments that people make.  In general, I find people who truly are grieving over something do not intrude upon other people they don't know (though they may very well feel safe/connected enough to mention their experience to someone they are close to--I'm talking about acquaintance level people here though).

Some people just can't help their diarrhea of the mind/mouth.  It's annoying, but there's not really anything you can do to stop it.  It's not education or misunderstanding or even ignorance per se--it's just people not thinking too hard about how they're trying to connect with you.

[queenjane]

Originally Posted by Mom31 

So when people trot out these wacky myths about adoption and then use those myths to justify inaction and to absolve themselves of society's duty to these children, it really makes my blood boil.

I know we are talking about foster adoption here ( I think) but maybe instead of adoption these people who do not feel the need to bring an unrelated child into their homes could instead be encouraged to work for the social change that is needed to keep families intact.

Say- you have a friend who has an extra 100,000 and she does not feel a duty to adopt a child- maybe she could say- give that 30,000 that would have been spent on adoption to support keeping a mother and child together.  say send her 1,000 a month for oh- I don't know- 30 months- to help get her thru college or job training.

Say- maybe they could teach a free course in how to get a job, how to have an interview, how to fill out a FAFSA- maybe they want to tutor low income families on how to budget or how to cook easy inexpensive meals... maybe they could give a low income mother a ride to the dr.

There are way more ways to help induce social change then just "helping" one child at a time thru adoption... $30,000 could go a long way to help impoverished countries keep their own kids.

It's okay if people don't want to adopt- I don't.  I know all about adoption and I don't want to adopt.  Not one bit- and I think it is totally okay for people to not want to adopt.  I am one of them.

I definitely think helping people is a good thing. And personally i hate when people adopt solely to "save a child" or "help the world" rather than primarily because they want to be a parent. But (and this might not even be what you meant) i also hate when people have this idea that if only a birthparent had more money, resources, help they could have (or would have) parented their children. Once, when i was in college, a friend said that wouldnt it be great if instead of giving foster parents a stipend the state would just give that money to the birthparent and then they would be able to parent their child! um, no. In my experience with foster care adoption, most kids are in care because of the parent's inability to parent due to addiction, mental illness, etc. Not just because they are poor. Or "dont know how" to parent. Certainly those cases exist...but i know with my agency, resources were thrown at these parents left and right. Counseling, parenting classes, help with addictions, therapy and more therapy, bus fare, job counseling, housing help etc etc etc. I imagine these resources help that parent that just needs a helping hand, needs education, needs pointed in the right direction to find proper supports. But if a person is so mentally ill they are not a safe parent, or if a parent is so damaged emotionally from their own messed up childhood that they simply do not possess the empathy it takes to love and care for their child....no amount of support will fix that.

[Mami2701]

This is a very interesting thread.

I have an open DCFS case. I was charged with "neglect". The allegations were mostly false, but I went through the system. I have completed all the "services" and my daughter is in the process of returning home... the case will be closed this year.

I am thinking about adoption in several years from now. Would this history automatically bar me from adoption? Would it depend on the agency? TIA

[marsupial-mom]

An abuse or neglect conviction would automatically bar you from adoption but unsubstantiated allegations would not.

There are plenty of things can can make adoption difficult for some people, but very few things that completely exclude it as a possibility.

[Mami2701]

I have a neglect allegation. It's causing some problems for me. It has prevented me from getting 2 jobs so far. After the case is closed I'm hoping there won't be as many obstacles. It sounds like adoption won't ever be a choice for me, though. I'm considering calling an adoption agency and asking.

[marsupial-mom]

Originally Posted by queenjane 

I definitely think helping people is a good thing. And personally i hate when people adopt solely to "save a child" or "help the world" rather than primarily because they want to be a parent. But (and this might not even be what you meant) i also hate when people have this idea that if only a birthparent had more money, resources, help they could have (or would have) parented their children. Once, when i was in college, a friend said that wouldnt it be great if instead of giving foster parents a stipend the state would just give that money to the birthparent and then they would be able to parent their child! um, no. In my experience with foster care adoption, most kids are in care because of the parent's inability to parent due to addiction, mental illness, etc. Not just because they are poor. Or "dont know how" to parent. Certainly those cases exist...but i know with my agency, resources were thrown at these parents left and right. Counseling, parenting classes, help with addictions, therapy and more therapy, bus fare, job counseling, housing help etc etc etc. I imagine these resources help that parent that just needs a helping hand, needs education, needs pointed in the right direction to find proper supports. But if a person is so mentally ill they are not a safe parent, or if a parent is so damaged emotionally from their own messed up childhood that they simply do not possess the empathy it takes to love and care for their child....no amount of support will fix that.

Thank you for saying this.

There are some problems that can be solved simply by throwing money at them or giving someone more education. But not all problems.

When it comes to the reasons that children become available for adoption, the situations are often...

a) not always "problems"; some women do actually make the free choice to make an adoption plan rather than parent their own biological child. And that's fine. There is nothing wrong with the decision!

b) issues that cannot be solved through the actions of one individual donating $30k (eg war, famine, drug addiction, mental illness, etc). There are actual orphans in this world - children without parents. Either those parents are dead or they're missing or they're literally incapable of functioning as parents regardless of the resources available to them.

Sometimes, it would be better if our society functioned a bit differently, for example if all prisons had childcare facilities so that small children and babies born to incarcerated women could stay with their mothers (if the mothers wanted that). It would be better if refugee camps had unlimited time and resources to help reunite families. But you know what? That's not reality right now. There are kids who need someone to parent them - right now.

[shesaidboom]

Thank you for starting this thread! I have learned so much through reading it and it has helped me feel more confident about looking further into adoption. I am one of those people who say something along the lines of "I can't adopt" (I normally say 'adoption isn't for us', or we wouldn't be approved by most agencies), although I don't go around just spouting that. It's always in response to people asking me or DH why we "don't just adopt" when people find out we are doing fertility treatments. In our case the reason we believed we couldn't was because I take anti-anxiety medication for a mild case of PTSD (without the medication I have occassional panic attacks, with it I have been 100% fine all the time) and I occassionally see a psychiatrist to keep tabs on the med situation. We formed this thinking from hearing it all over the place online (I think this is part of those spreading myths that you were talking about) and we looked into several agencies who either listed no history of being on anxiety medication or needing to be off medication for a certain number of years. After that the situation felt hopeless to us so we stopped looking into it. I know after reading this thread, I'm definitely going to be more careful in infertility forums when talking about why we had thought we'd automatically be denied from most agencies.

Anyway, the point of my comment aside from the thanks for making me really think, is that I know for me and DH, saying we "can't" adopt is almost a defense mechanism for us, and one that is easier than going into a long explanation of why we chose the path we did. We've been outright told that we're bad people for not adopting or "saving a child" when so many children in the world need homes, and that maybe we're infertile because God meant for us to save one of those children. While I wouldn't bring up our struggle with someone just out of the blue, especially someone who didn't already know our situation, it's possible that some people who have heard the things we have so many times feel like they have to justify their choices (even though they don't), even to people who haven't asked, because after hearing something so many times it can feel like everyone is judging even when they aren't. I don't know if I'm making sense here. The only comparison I can think of, although maybe not the best one, is the formula vs breastfeeding thing. Someone who chose to use formula may automatically feel that they have to justify their choice to someone who breastfeeds because there are a lot of people who will automatically judge someone for not breastfeeding even if that specific person is not one of them. Sometimes it can feel like you have to prove that you're not a bad person for doing something different (even though that's not remotely true), whatever your reasons are. After experiencing what we have, as soon as we even hear the word 'adopt' our defenses go up, and I'm sure we're not alone. It's definitely not an excuse for someone to expect you to play therapist for them, but it may be why it is happening.

[Mamma Mia]

When I say I "can't" adopt, I mean I can't afford it.  I could probably be approved, and at some point I will probably try to be approved and figure it out, but the reality is that I will probably have to stop halfway because I will run out of money.

Meanwhile, my health insurance covers extensive (traumatic, intense, painful) fertility treatments at almost no cost to me.

I will not participate in a system that takes children away from their mothers because of poverty and poverty related issues. I am aware that it's cheaper, but I will not adopt a child whose mother did not consent to it free from coercion by the state or by her own poverty. That doesn't mean I am simply unwilling to adopt, giving up, spreading misinformation, fooling myself, or any other thing. It means I cannot afford to adopt according to my own ethical standards.

[queenjane]

Originally Posted by Mamma Mia 

I will not participate in a system that takes children away from their mothers because of poverty and poverty related issues. I am aware that it's cheaper, but I will not adopt a child whose mother did not consent to it free from coercion by the state or by her own poverty. That doesn't mean I am simply unwilling to adopt, giving up, spreading misinformation, fooling myself, or any other thing. It means I cannot afford to adopt according to my own ethical standards.

Would you adopt a child who was removed from birthfamily due to abuse? Neglect? What should happen to those children?

Do you think a parent who hits their child, prenatally exposes their child to drugs/alcohol, or lives in filthy/dangerous conditions does so simply because they are poor? Thats a pretty big insult to poor people everywhere. Heck, my own family has an income below the poverty level but you can bet *I* am not running a meth lab out of my home, allowing a boyfriend to rape my daughter, leaving my infant child alone for a long period of time in a car in cold weather. No matter how poor i get, it wont force me to set an infant in a tub of too-hot water and then not seek medical care for that child.

I realize addiction is a big issue, as is mental illness. But you cannot help people who do not want to be helped. Services were thrown at the bparents of my children left and right and in the end they STILL were unable to parent the children for various reasons. The state has really LOW standards...basically provide for the basic minimum needs of the child. Poverty was not the issue in any of the cases. (Granted, had the parents been WEALTHY they mightve been able to hire a private lawyer which may have helped turn the outcome in their favor, i dunno. I would not be able to hire a private lawyer myself either, financially. I sat in court for the entire 5 mo long trial for the last kids and from what i could tell all the lawyers present were competent counsel and the judge went above and beyond to make sure the legal rights of the parents were protected (which is why the trial took so long.)

Where i live, the decision to terminate...and the adoption process...are totally separate. The judge does not terminate based on whether their are homes ready and willing to adopt. So me adopting a child does not "support the system" that removes parental rights...it just provides a home for a child that needs one.

Years ago, before i was ever a parent, a friend of mine said that if only the foster care system would take the money they give to the FP and instead give it to the bio parents, then they could keep their kids. As if the kids are taken because they dont have a place to live, or need more food on the table. That is so naive, and not at all what i've seen in my experience.

[Smithie]

Everybody has their differing standards. Personally, I wouldn't feel good about adopting a child who HADN'T been removed from their birthparents' care for good and sufficient reasons - and poverty is not a good and sufficient reason, nor does our court system treat it as such. Children in foster care are the children in my community who need adoptive homes. And since I can have babies, I would not be comfortable pursuing the adoption of an infant when so many other women who are infertile or have serious health or genetic issues that preclude pregnancy are waiting to be matched for infant adoption.

But I'm not sure MamaMia was talking about those kind of ethical considerations, Perhaps she was alluding to international adoption? Assuming (incorrectly) that parentless children in other countries could all get their families back if our country just gave their country money?

[queenjane]

Originally Posted by Smithie 

But I'm not sure MamaMia was talking about those kind of ethical considerations, Perhaps she was alluding to international adoption? Assuming (incorrectly) that parentless children in other countries could all get their families back if our country just gave their country money?

I would think so except she said that it was "cheaper" to adopt that way so i assumed she meant foster care adoption. And if thats not what she meant then she completely left foster care adoption out of her post.

[pumpkingirl71]

Then don't say you can't.  Say you choose not to.  I would never say I "can't" adopt internationally because I have ethical issues with international adoption.

Originally Posted by Mamma Mia 

I will not participate in a system that takes children away from their mothers because of poverty and poverty related issues. I am aware that it's cheaper, but I will not adopt a child whose mother did not consent to it free from coercion by the state or by her own poverty. That doesn't mean I am simply unwilling to adopt, giving up, spreading misinformation, fooling myself, or any other thing. It means I cannot afford to adopt according to my own ethical standards.

[marsupial-mom]

Mamma Mia

It's all about priorities. If you want to afford an adoption, then you will find a way. There are tax credits, grants, loans, and fundraising programs to reduce or eliminate the costs of adoption. There's even a new book out now that gives specific examples of how to afford adoption: http://www.amazon.com/Adopt-Without-Debt-Creative-Adoption/dp/0983539820 (I haven't read it yet and can't vouch for it but it sounds like it gives some solid financial advice.)

About fostercare adoptions: even if you believe that the majority of children in the system are there due simply to "poverty" and should remain with their bio parents, there are some parents who do actually abuse or neglect their children. That's reality. To ignore that fact is to discount all the experiences of foster children who have the physical and emotional scars to proove that you're generalizations about fostercare are wrong. How dare you define their reality for them. They have lived it. They have experienced the trauma. And how dare you call your refusal to acknowledge their need for permanent adoptive homes "ethical."