I have 2 boys, 3rd on the way... thinking of adopting a girl in a few years.. thoughts?

[Juniperberry]

Hi everyone,

I've just found out that I'm expecting my 3rd little boy. I love my kids to death and I will love this LO as much as well. But I won't lie... I was disappointed it wasn't the girl I was hoping for. I have often thought over the years that adopting would be a lovely way to bring a child into the family. I know my Mum wanted to adopt after having my sister and I but my Dad refused.

So basically.. We're thinking of in 2 years or so, adopting a little girl.

What are your thoughts on this? It's something I've had on and off my mind for a long time and thought I'd see what others think and see if anyone else has adopted a certain gender because you didn't have them yourselves?

thank you :)

[SundayCrepes]

A lot of agencies will not let you choose the gender of a baby. Also, for whatever reason, in the adoption world girls are preferred over boys. So, if you do find a place that allows you to gender select, you will likely have a lot of competition.

[LessTraveledBy]

Ok, I'll bite. ;)

I am not sure, first of all, if you are thinking of int'l or domestic. I think, either way, that I would start from what it is that you are expecting, and read lots. Mainly, do you want to parent a special needs child? Lots of children who come through int'l adoption could be considered special needs, and you won't always know the extent beforehand. The dream of "perfecting" your family may turn into the biggest life lesson you will ever have to work through.

I would suggest adoption only if you want to parent another child, and for some reason feel that the child should join your family through adoption. IMHO, it needs to be more about the child, not you, and I think there are good reasons behind the fact that many places don't let you choose the sex. Also, there are enough mental issues for the child to work through later on. To feel that she was adopted only because you had not managed to have a girl biologically, and that she would not have been chosen by you, had she been a boy, sounds like a pretty rough load to add.

I dunno... this just does not sound like a good idea to me. I cannot tell you whether I think you should adopt or not. However, the reasoning behind it right now does not sound right to me. If you come to the point that you would like a 4th child, whatever the sex, that is when I would give adoption more thought, if everything else about adoption sounds like your thing. To get your girl, no.

BTW, I want you to know that I don't mean to sound too harsh, so please forgive me if I did. This is just a very sore topic for me. You have been blessed (soon) with 3 children.... I think the majority of mamas in this section cannot say the same. In my brain the idea of needing to choose whether to have a boy or a girl is... well... I don't even know what to say. I do understand that we all come from a very different place, though. If you hang out here, you will probably come to see how hard it can be to adopt and how many disappointments there can be along the way. Some will never be able to adopt (and possibly also not have any biological children). But, since the responses you have received so far have been short and nice, I think I must be the only one having a very strong emotional response to your question.

[RedOakMomma]

We adopted a girl after having three boys. 

It is tricky, as others have mentioned...did we adopt our child because we wanted a girl, or because we wanted to adopt a child?  The honest truth is we wanted another child, and had always planned on adopting...but when you have three boys, you want to adopt, and one of the perks of (some kinds of) adoption is you can choose a girl?  Well, to us it seemed like the obvious choice.

Adoption is tougher than you might imagine (for some, not all, but the thing is you never know).  You do need to be careful about how you approach and think about it.  But I do think, if you walk into it with your eyes and mind open, you can do right by your future child and by your family.

One thing to consider is that, in most countries, girls are more wanted than boys (in adoption).  Korea is the program we know best, and there families can wait 3, 4, 5 times longer for the referral of a girl than the referral of a boy.  "Families wait for girls, but boys wait for families" is the saying.

If you wanted to adopt a girl, why not look into programs in countries where girls are less wanted and where orphanages have mostly girls?  India and China come to mind.  China is a bit of a mess right now, adoption program-wise, but in a couple of years you never know.  India has different programs and requirements based on what part of India you're adopting from, but with some diligence you may be able to find a program that's right for you.

We adopted our daughter from South Korea.  I won't ever regret adopting her, but I do sometimes regret not adopting from a country where girls were more in need.  I briefly inquired about India at the start of our adoption process, heard from one agency that "oh, you can't do India adoption," and thought that was it.  Now I know we probably could have adopted a child from India...and when I read articles like this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110504/ap_on_re_as/as_india_no_country_for_little_girls 

I wish I would have pursued my first interest in adoption more thoroughly.

International adoption is a wonderful thing, though there are a lot of losses (for everyone involved) and often many drawbacks to the process.  It's my opinion that, for some families, the ability to choose whether they'll parent a son or parent a daughter is one of the unusual perks.  You just need to make sure you're comfortable choosing a gender given the program/country you select. 

[SundayCrepes]

Originally Posted by LessTraveledBy 

Ok, I'll bite. ;)

 But, since the responses you have received so far have been short and nice, I think I must be the only one having a very strong emotional response to your question.

No, I just didn't know what else to say. I agree that adoption (and pregnancy) needs to be because you want another child, not because you want a child to be a specific way.

Also, from the scarcity perspective, if they would only be considering domestic newborn, people who are perfectly capable of making healthy biological children need to consider that they will be competing with lots of people unable to make healthy babies. That doesn't seem right to me.

But if the op decides she wants another child and is willing to parent a child who may have difficulties or challenges above and beyond what most families would be able to handle, then I don't have a problem with them saying what kind of situations do and don't work for them.

[RedOakMomma]

Originally Posted by SundayCrepes 

No, I just didn't know what else to say. I agree that adoption (and pregnancy) needs to be because you want another child, not because you want a child to be a specific way.

Also, from the scarcity perspective, if they would only be considering domestic newborn, people who are perfectly capable of making healthy biological children need to consider that they will be competing with lots of people unable to make healthy babies. That doesn't seem right to me.

But if the op decides she wants another child and is willing to parent a child who may have difficulties or challenges above and beyond what most families would be able to handle, then I don't have a problem with them saying what kind of situations do and don't work for them.

Am I reading that right?  That, if a family wants to request a gender, it's okay as long as they're willing to parent a special needs child?   Does that go for other requests and preferences, too?  Like age, ethnicity, health history, etc.?  If a family wants to adopt, but has specific ideas about the child they want to adopt, is that wrong?  ...Or should we all just put our names into the adoption hat and pull out a random child...with no consideration to age, history, health, or gender?  If someone wants to request an infant versus a toddler, should that only be okay if they're willing to adopt a special needs infant?

Families given choices about who they adopt makes for happier families and more successful adoptions, which makes for happier children.  If a family really gets excited at the thought of raising a daughter, then bless 'em.  Help them find their way to a daughter, in whatever adoption program makes that possible.  Since when is excitement about raising a specific child, versus any child, a bad thing?  We cheer and support moms who seek out children with specificities all the time...but if it's gender, it's wrong?

I don't think so.

[SundayCrepes]

Originally Posted by RedOakMomma 
Am I reading that right?  That, if a family wants to request a gender, it's okay as long as they're willing to parent a special needs child?   Does that go for other requests and preferences, too?  Like age, ethnicity, health history, etc.?  If a family wants to adopt, but has specific ideas about the child they want to adopt, is that wrong?  ...Or should we all just put our names into the adoption hat and pull out a random child...with no consideration to age, history, health, or gender?  If someone wants to request an infant versus a toddler, should that only be okay if they're willing to adopt a special needs infant?

Families given choices about who they adopt makes for happier families and more successful adoptions, which makes for happier children.  If a family really gets excited at the thought of raising a daughter, then bless 'em.  Help them find their way to a daughter, in whatever adoption program makes that possible.  Since when is excitement about raising a specific child, versus any child, a bad thing?  We cheer and support moms who seek out children with specificities all the time...but if it's gender, it's wrong?

I don't think so.

Yeah, I hear what you're saying, but I have problems with people adopting JUST to get a specific gender. That seems so wrong. Partly because it feels a bit like places that will abort/abandon if the child is the "wrong" gender. Partly because there are a lot of people who can't make healthy babies that would love to parent either gender child but they might not get to do that because someone with good reproductive abilities wanted to adopt a certain gender child. (And the reason I keep saying make "healthy" babies is I think it is appropriate for someone who carries genes for nasty conditions to have a priority at adopting healthy babies over someone who just wants a girl.)

I don't mean to put special needs kids into a category different from other kids. It just seems that these kids have a harder time finding families so more flexibility needs to be granted to the adoptive parents to make sure the kids find a home.

This is a complicated issue. I don't know if I totally even know what I think. But my gut reaction is there's something wrong about adopting JUST to get the "right" gender.

[queenjane]

This is a complicated issue. I don't know if I totally even know what I think. But my gut reaction is there's something wrong about adopting JUST to get the "right" gender.

It seems to me less potentially destructive than giving birth to baby after baby hoping the next time you "get your girl" which many people do. I dont think there is anything wrong with wanting a son or a daughter. Adoption seems a logical choice, and as long as you are comfortable with adoption and all of the many issues that come with adopting a child, if there IS a choice to be had whats wrong with making it? Obviously in domestic newborn adoption it gets much trickier and i think gender requests are less likely to be honored for logistics sake if nothing else. But i know in foster care adoption, no one would blink an eye at saying "i have three boys and we'd like to adopt a girl this time." I think sometimes people make this stuff way too deep and complicated. I've heard over and over the ONLY possible good reason to adopt is because you want another child (not to provide a family for a child in need, not to provide a sibling, etc). But then if someone wants a specific type of child too much...well then you've gone too far?

[FiveLittleMonkeys]

Okay, I just lurk here, because we are still undecided on adoption for our family, so maybe my opinion doesn't matter.  But I really fail to see how stating a preference for a certain gender (race, age, health, whatever qualifier it is) is so wrong?  It may make their wait for a child longer, or they might end up being offered a child that isn't of their preferred whatever and falling in love.

As for the statement about "making healthy babies" - I kind of find that offensive.  We can make healthy babies - via ART/IVF.  And the last time, I had serious pregnancy complications that nearly cost myself and my son our lives.  But he's healthy.  And I survived.  So I guess to you, we shouldn't get to adopt.....because we could just do IVF again and "make a healthy baby."  I think the point that at least my dh and I are looking at is that there are children already born who need homes.  Why should we make another that could cause me serious health problems (but might not) when we could open our home to one - or more?

I guess this attitude rubs me the wrong way a little bit.  It's almost like you have to not only meet an agency's criteria, but you have to meet some invisible standard of having the "right" intentions to adopt in the eyes of some adoptive parents as well.  

ETA: I forgot to say that regardless of whether we adopt or go the ART route, all we want to do is expand our family.  :)

[Drummer's Wife]

Something to consider, and all you wise mamas can correct me if I'm wrong, is that domestic adoptions are hard (and expensive!) especially if you already have 3 children.  By that, I mean, from what I can tell, a lot of agencies as well as birth mother's will not be as willing to work with you since you have children (plural - I believe if you have just one your chances increase).  So, from that perspective, adopting at all will be even more challenging than it already is, and then you add in the girl preference (and if we are talking healthy, white, newborn - it's will be even harder), it might be years and years and lots of money spent.  You would have better luck TTC again, with a 50/50 chance of having a girl for baby #4.  Of course, with 3 boys, I realize chances may be that you'll have another sweet baby boy - but I still think that every time you conceive your odds are pretty much half and half.  And I happen to be a mother of 3 boys and 1 girl, though the opposite order as my DD came first. 

If you are open to foster-to-adopt or international (which come with their own challenges and expenses - emotionally and financially), then you may have better luck adding a girl to your family.  If you want a newborn, I don't know that it's possible at all w/international, though I realize you aren't in the U.S. - so maybe it's different in other countries. 

I don't think it's selfish or odd to want to experience being parents to a daughter.  I crave another girl, myself, badly - after having 3 boys in a row.  I just don't think that adoption is an easy way at all to guarantee that.  heck, you could do gender selection fertility treatments and probably spend less time/money/etc., and get your girl.  But, if adopting is something you have decided you are wanting to pursue, and having another baby/child, regardless of gender, is something you can't imagine your family without, then it's worth looking into further. 

[LessTraveledBy]

I did not realize that the OP is in Europe. Unless she or her hubby is a US citizen, I dare guess than adopting is much more difficult than it is for US citizens and that there may be very little domestic adoption in her country. BUT, I suppose this differs even within Europe, I suppose.

I have to say that I agree with SundayCrepes, to be honest. In my perfect world domestic newborn adoptions could only be for those who cannot conceive, at least without medical help. I might even think of limiting it to those with no children (not sure). But those are just my thoughts, so who cares.

[queenjane]

 In my perfect world domestic newborn adoptions could only be for those who cannot conceive, at least without medical help. I might even think of limiting it to those with no children (not sure). But those are just my thoughts, so who cares.

In many if not most domestic adoption in the US nowadays, it is the expectant mother who chooses the family for her child. She states the preferences. Not all women want their baby to go to a childless couple, although of course some do. While i understand what you are saying (it hardly seems fair, given  how there are more people looking to adopt babies than there are babies available, that someone with multiple children would jump ahead in the line past someone with no children)....its not like babies are a reward, or there is some kind of point system. I bet there ARE agencies who show preference for childless couples or couples with medical issues that prevent having birth children. I guess ultimately i dont see it as a bad thing, for a woman who is considering placing a child for adoption to have MANY options available to her. If she thinks the family with multiple kids is the best fit for her child, more power to her.

[sugarandspice697]

I haven't adopted but I do have a child through assisted reproduction. Anyways, I think adoption is a wonderful way to add to your family and you should not be ashamed of wanting a girl. Everyone who adopts has a specific criteria and I'm disappointed in many of the parents on this thread are questioning your motives. I have never met an adoptive parent who said "yes" to every question in the Characteristics of Child section on the agency's application. With that being said, I think you need to dig a bit deeper and decide what type of child you think would fit your family. You already mentioned you wanted a girl but their are thousands of children available for adoption that are girls. You need to ask yourself these questions: Are you open to a child of a different race? Does a particular culture/ethnicity interest you? Do you think your parent a child with special needs? What type of special needs are you open to? How old do you want your daughter to be? Would you consider a sibling group? What about an older child? Next, find out which countries are open to international adoption and whether or not you can adopt domestically in your own country. Another good place to start is a website called www.creatingafamily.com. Finally, call some agencies that offer the type of adoption your are interested in and attend their information meetings.

[RedOakMomma]

Originally Posted by queenjane 

In many if not most domestic adoption in the US nowadays, it is the expectant mother who chooses the family for her child. She states the preferences. Not all women want their baby to go to a childless couple, although of course some do. While i understand what you are saying (it hardly seems fair, given  how there are more people looking to adopt babies than there are babies available, that someone with multiple children would jump ahead in the line past someone with no children)....its not like babies are a reward, or there is some kind of point system. I bet there ARE agencies who show preference for childless couples or couples with medical issues that prevent having birth children. I guess ultimately i dont see it as a bad thing, for a woman who is considering placing a child for adoption to have MANY options available to her. If she thinks the family with multiple kids is the best fit for her child, more power to her.

I totally agree with this.

It's the expectant mom, or expectant parents, who should determine who gets to adopt....and honestly, the fertility status of the adoptive parents seems (to me) to be a pretty minor issue in the big picture.  If you had to place your child with an adoptive family, where on the list of desired adoptive parent characteristics would you place fertility status?  For me, it would be way more about character, beliefs, home environment, family.... making it about fertility status doesn't make sense to me at all.  It's not how I'd want to place my kids, that's for sure.  If a family approached me, wanting a baby I had to place for adoption, and said they were more entitled because of their fertility status, I think I'd have serious questions about them.

As for wanting a girl....  We all go into adoption with expectations.  Adoption, as a way to build a family, has that advantage.  If you feel motivated to raise a child with a specific need, you can do that.  If you want to adopt a white kid or a brown kid, you can do that.  If you are really excited about having a baby experience, or (for some!) skipping the baby experience, you can do that.  If you feel able to help a child with challenges or special needs, you can do that.  And for many parents...parents who don't really mind how their child joins their family, but would like to experience a son or a daughter...they can choose the gender they're more excited about. 

It's human, normal, and totally healthy to be excited about adopting because you'll get some control or some say in what kind of child you're going to add to your family.  In all the uncertainties adoption adds to having a child, control over some of the uncertainties is great.  Like I said...I doubt many people would adopt if we all had to put our names into a big hat and pull out any kid, with no say on age/background/health/race???  Why should gender be any different?  Not every family cares or has a preference, but if you're really excited to adopt a boy, or adopt a girl, why not seek out the child you're most excited to add to your family? 

[RedOakMomma]

Originally Posted by SundayCrepes 

Yeah, I hear what you're saying, but I have problems with people adopting JUST to get a specific gender. That seems so wrong. Partly because it feels a bit like places that will abort/abandon if the child is the "wrong" gender. Partly because there are a lot of people who can't make healthy babies that would love to parent either gender child but they might not get to do that because someone with good reproductive abilities wanted to adopt a certain gender child. (And the reason I keep saying make "healthy" babies is I think it is appropriate for someone who carries genes for nasty conditions to have a priority at adopting healthy babies over someone who just wants a girl.)

I don't mean to put special needs kids into a category different from other kids. It just seems that these kids have a harder time finding families so more flexibility needs to be granted to the adoptive parents to make sure the kids find a home.

This is a complicated issue. I don't know if I totally even know what I think. But my gut reaction is there's something wrong about adopting JUST to get the "right" gender.

I don't think anyone (or anyone sane) would adopt JUST to get a specific gender. :)  Like the OP said, she's always thought adoption would be a great way to grow her family.  She has also thought that having a daughter would be great.  So why not adopt a girl?   She's not adopting JUST to get a girl.  She's adopting because she sees it as a good way to have another child.  The gender part, like age/race/health preference, is just that: a preference that will (probably) determine where and how she adopts a child. 

Determining what can and can't be done based on what's fair to infertile couples (for instance: if infertile couples can't make healthy babies, then how dare fertile couples be picky about who they adopt!!!) seems like more of a gut reaction than a good policy.  It should be about what's fair to kids, not what's fair to adoptive parents or infertile adoptive parents.   It seems to me that matching kids with parents who are excited to parent those kids is a win-win....and certainly better for the child.  Is there a child-centered reason why children in need of families shouldn't be matched with fertile couples?  ...Or is that just something that would make the universe feel more fair to people who have experienced infertility....making adoption the place where infertile couples get the best turf, and fertile couples have to settle for lesser status, lesser rights.  I totally get how it would feel nice, as an infertile couple, to get that kind of preferred treatment...but that's not kid-focused.  That's payback-focused, pain-focused, reward-focused....not exactly the best motivations, in my mind, for adoption placements, and certainly not child-focused.

(And true...my experience with infertility is limited...it took 12 months and treatments to conceive our first healthy child.  I can really only imagine what it's like by placing my own pain in a similar spot...that of having twins with severe special needs...and knowing very well how it feels like the universe should owe you something, or that SOMEWHERE, surely, you should get preferred treatment.) 

[Tigeresse]

We adopted a girl after 3 bio boys and I would not change one thing about how our family has grown. I totally agree w/ROM an others...there is little I can add except to do your research. When we adopted our dd, we did meet some resistance from agencies regarding specifying gender, as we did not realize girls were in greater demand than boys. Our daughter was born in China, which at the time seemed to be one place where the girls were in greater need of homes than boys, as ROM mentioned. It was also a very stable program at the time, which it is not now, unfortunately.

The spiritual side of me believes that in some ways we were guided to our dd and that perhaps having 3 boys was part of that process. Our family is complete now. Adoption has enriched our lives immensely, and I feel so lucky to be able to parent my 4 awesome kids.

[Tigerchild]

Ugh. Can we please not grossly objectify adoptees please?  (or potential adoptees)  Saying stuff like "only childless infertile couples should got those premium undamaged newborns!!!" is just...makes me feel totally gross, a totally visceral reaction.

These are real babies here.  They are not to be used as balm to an infertile person's aching heart, or as a consolation prize for having a womb/ovaries/testes that do not work as they "should". I am a person, not a consolation prize, and oh by the way, I couldn't heal my mom's broken heart.  That is way too much pressure to put on a child. 

I thought we left attitudes like this behind in the dark ages of adoption, when the only thing that mattered was what made the receiving parent "happy".  :(

Also, there are enough people who really WANT to adopt special needs kids but end up not being able to hack it--do we really advocate for *forcing* people to do so if their fertility tests come back okay?  How is that fair to the *children*?

Edited by Tigerchild - 5/20/11 at 10:37pm

[LessTraveledBy]

Actually, would I  make a policy that only infertile couples get to adopt or whatever... NO. That is why I said "in my perfect world"... it simply should be so. I do realize that it is not unproblematic. TBH, I have also met infertile couples who should never have adopted at all, because they were too broken and their expectations had become totally unrealistic.

I think my strong reaction to the op's reaction comes from the fact that she did not mention anything about e.g. how she has been interested in adoption. The pieces of information she gave us were that she is pregnant and disappointed this baby is not a girl and that she wants to get a daughter and thus adopt. Had she written that she has always felt that they would complete their family through adoption and then asked what people think about requesting a girl, it would have come across quite differently. I think my feelings around the topic were just about formed by the time she expressed that she would have liked her baby to have been someone else.

[Polliwog]

Originally Posted by Juniperberry 

Hi everyone,

I've just found out that I'm expecting my 3rd little boy. I love my kids to death and I will love this LO as much as well. But I won't lie... I was disappointed it wasn't the girl I was hoping for. I have often thought over the years that adopting would be a lovely way to bring a child into the family. I know my Mum wanted to adopt after having my sister and I but my Dad refused.

So basically.. We're thinking of in 2 years or so, adopting a little girl.

What are your thoughts on this? It's something I've had on and off my mind for a long time and thought I'd see what others think and see if anyone else has adopted a certain gender because you didn't have them yourselves?

thank you :)

But she did.

[Polliwog]

Originally Posted by Tigerchild 

Ugh. Can we please not grossly objectify adoptees please?  (or potential adoptees)  Saying stuff like "only childless infertile couples should got those premium undamaged newborns!!!" is just...makes me feel totally gross, a totally visceral reaction.

These are real babies here.  They are not to be used as balm to an infertile person's aching heart, or as a consolation prize for having a womb/ovaries/testes that do not work as they "should". I am a person, not a consolation prize, and oh by the way, I couldn't heal my mom's broken heart.  That is way too much pressure to put on a child. 

I thought we left attitudes like this behind in the dark ages of adoption, when the only thing that mattered was what made the receiving parent "happy".  :(

Also, there are enough people who really WANT to adopt special needs kids but end up not being able to hack it--do we really advocate for *forcing* people to do so if their fertility tests come back okay?  How is that fair to the *children*?

Thanks for your post. I've missed seeing you around here.