HAPPY update to "Would you let her keep the child" - Page 5 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#121 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 07:50 PM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roar View Post
So, do you see any age at which someone won't be a good parent? You have no feelings of age discrimination whatsoever? Nine year olds can give birth so okay they are ready to parent?
Can nine year olds really give birth? I've never heard of it, IRL, so I think it's a bit of a strawman.

I would say there is no age at which I think it is okay to remove a baby from its mother, becoz we have decided arbirtarily that she is "too young."

I think if we want children of young mothers to have good childhoods, we have to provide the supports to help that happen. It is not ethical to remove children from their mothers via non-consent or coercion. I see it as a very basic human rights violation, for both parties.

If we get nine year olds becoming pregnant, well I could see that being a really good area of specialization for social workers. The ethics around how we approach it, what constitutes consent, what supports to child-mothers need, etc etc. Splitting up families becoz someone is young or poor is not okay. This very quickly turns the young and poor into babymaking machines for an industry which sells babies to the rich and 'upstanding.' Kwim?

It's a real and serious ethical issue IMO.
thismama is offline  
#122 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:00 PM
 
Roar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by A&A View Post
Read it before you judge it.

The setting may be decades old, but the themes are timeless.
To say it is timeless is to suggest it makes no difference that we now live in a culture where:
women are much more likely to be accepted as teen parents.
open adoption is a possibility.
the most frequent reason women lose custody is for drug problems rather than "shame".
access to birth control and abortion are legal.

If you think it makes no difference then yes, what was happening in 1950 is totally relevant to right now. I'd suggest though that it is a lot more complicated than that.
Roar is offline  
#123 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:05 PM
 
Roar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
Can nine year olds really give birth? I've never heard of it, IRL, so I think it's a bit of a strawman.
Yes, nine year olds can give birth. Girls get their periods younger and younger and it is unfortunately not that uncommon for preteens to be sexually active.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
I would say there is no age at which I think it is okay to remove a baby from its mother, becoz we have decided arbirtarily that she is "too young."
Is any understanding of child development arbitrary? Is it artibitrary that we don't hand the car keys to a seven year old and tell them to feel free to take a drive? Is it arbitrary that we don't want ten year olds having sex? No, this is based in a meaningful and honest understanding of child development.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
I think if we want children of young mothers to have good childhoods, we have to provide the supports to help that happen. It is not ethical to remove children from their mothers via non-consent or coercion. I see it as a very basic human rights violation, for both parties.
What about having the mothers have a good childhood themselves? It sort of sounds like folks are suggesting that girls are babymaking machines. We have to protect these newborns against a "primal wound" from separation but what about the 10 or 11 year old? Do we owe her no protection? I'd suggest that girls who are getting pregnant that young more than likely DON'T have a decent support system.

Please explain to me what support we need to provide to a young girl to make it so she can be a parent when she's not developmentally ready to be one?
Roar is offline  
#124 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:05 PM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roar View Post
open adoption is a possibility.
Open adoption is not legally enforceable. Aparents can say they will do open adoption, and then reneg. Mama has no recourse. This has happened to one of our own mamas here.

Quote:
the most frequent reason women lose custody is for drug problems rather than "shame".
The social system is paltry, pathetic, and in shambles. Mamas who are forced to rely on it must live in desperate poverty, leave their babies to do workfare, and are called welfare queens despite all that. I'm willing to bet that is one of the most frequent reasons women *give up* custody. It is not a very walkable road.

Quote:
If you think it makes no difference then yes, what was happening in 1950 is totally relevant to right now. I'd suggest though that it is a lot more complicated than that.
Yes it is more complicated. And yet it is the same, yk? The way it plays out has changed some, but the themes remain.
thismama is offline  
#125 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:11 PM
 
Roar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post

The social system is paltry, pathetic, and in shambles. Mamas who are forced to rely on it must live in desperate poverty, leave their babies to do workfare, and are called welfare queens despite all that. I'm willing to bet that is one of the most frequent reasons women *give up* custody. It is not a very walkable road.
Absolutely which makes me wonder why you want to sentence the baby of this 13 year old who isn't ready to parent to that life. It is a hard enough life for someone who is ready to parent and who wants to make it happen.

This makes me wonder why instead of directing your attention to reforming the welfare system you seek instead to bash adoption and the many people who are pleased with having placed a child for adoption or having been an adoptee.
Roar is offline  
#126 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:13 PM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roar View Post
Yes, nine year olds can give birth. Girls get their periods younger and younger and it is unfortunately not that uncommon for preteens to be sexually active.
True, theoretically. I just don't ever hear of it actually happening, in any kind of numbers at all. So... kind of a strawman IMO.

Quote:
Is any understanding of child development arbitrary? Is it artibitrary that we don't hand the car keys to a seven year old and tell them to feel free to take a drive? Is it arbitrary that we don't want ten year olds having sex? No, this is based in a meaningful and honest understanding of child development.
It is based in a meaningful, honest, and *culturally biased* understanding of child development. Women all over the world become mothers in what we call the teenage years. It's a social construct that teenagers are big children. Which is fine, until we use it to violate their human rights.

Quote:
What about having the mothers have a good childhood themselves? It sort of sounds like folks are suggesting that girls are babymaking machines. We have to protect these newborns against a "primal wound" from separation but what about the 10 or 11 year old? Do we owe her no protection? I'd suggest that girls who are getting pregnant that young more than likely DON'T have a decent support system.
It's pretty much the end of childhood to get pregnant, grow a life in your body, give birth, and then have your child, that brand new being, taken from you against your will or coerced away, or to be forced to give up that new being becoz of guilt or deperation.

As I have said many times on this thread, I am in no way advocating forcing young mothers to keep babies. I simply assert that it should be a CHOICE she gets to make free from coercion or desperation.

Simple as that. I'm shocked there is an argument really.

Quote:
Please explain to me what support we need to provide to a young girl to make it so she can be a parent when she's not developmentally ready to be one?
Not developmentally ready is an opinion, not a statement of fact. Fact is, as I said, women around the world give birth at ages we consider scandalous.

I have already listed the supports I believe we should provide: Income, housing, educational and employment opportunities, support to stay home with babies during the early years, respectful non-coercive counselling, and the opportunity to participate in and co-create community with young mothers and others.

If we care about the babies as we all assert we do, allowing their mothers a free choice, and providing supports to them as they grow, is really the least we can do.
thismama is offline  
#127 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:13 PM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roar View Post
Absolutely which makes me wonder why you want to sentence the baby of this 13 year old who isn't ready to parent to that life. It is a hard enough life for someone who is ready to parent and who wants to make it happen.

This makes me wonder why instead of directing your attention to reforming the welfare system you seek instead to bash adoption and the many people who are pleased with having placed a child for adoption or having been an adoptee.
If that is what you are reading, you are misreading me.
thismama is offline  
#128 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:23 PM
 
gracesmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 84
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I haven't heard anyone mention the role of the babies' fathers. It used to be that if you got "in trouble" it was shotgun wedding time. Now that has turned into single motherhood as the default, which is less ideal financially.

Of course, at one point a kid with a high school education or less could go to work in factory and earn enough to support his little family, and that ain't happening now. And there was a stigma if he didn't do the right thing, which doesn't seem to be there anymore. Still, why is this only a mother's problem?

Now I have to go sing my DD the "C is for Condom" song. Maybe if I start early...
gracesmommy is offline  
#129 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:24 PM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Good points gracesmommy, both about fathers, and how hard it has become to just get by.
thismama is offline  
#130 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:32 PM
 
Sarahbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 799
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm confused. Did this 13 year old WANT to parent? From what I have seen in this thread, in the op post, she did not. So why do people seem to feel she is mature enough to parent (though it appears she didn't want to) but not mature enough to make the decision she made? I know this thread is all about a certain 13 yo, but some posts seem at such opposites with one another that I had to check twice to see if there were 2 situations - 1 with a mama who was trying to parent and 1 with a mama who was not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by moonbeem View Post
Confusing sentiment...an adoptive mother IS raising someone else's child, (and lots of adoptors feel they were the rescuers.) There are other ways to express nurturing, loving, mothering behaviors than gaining someone else's baby

As for the adoptees that say they don't miss their mothers life is grand blah blah blah...it reinds me of all the men circumcised in infancy who don't miss their foreskins.
I agree with the first half of your quote Moonbeem. DH and I are raising OUR child - DH's, mine and DD biomama's child. She's a part of all of us and will gain both good and bad things from all of us.

I don't understand the second half of your post though. Could you clarify?
Sarahbunny is offline  
#131 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:35 PM
 
Sarahbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 799
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
If we care about the babies as we all assert we do, allowing their mothers a free choice, and providing supports to them as they grow, is really the least we can do.

I agree that every mama should have a free choice - and not be looked down upon for whatever decision she makes.
Sarahbunny is offline  
#132 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:35 PM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I do not know if this 13 year old was able to parent. I know she said she wanted to. I know there seems to have been some neglect. I also know that it seems people did not exactly rally around with practical support and encouraging messages, and I wonder if the outcome could have been vastly different had that occurred.

That is where I am coming from. I'm not: Oh no THIS particular mother should DEFINITELY have kept that baby. Which is what ppl seem to be wanting to hear.

These conversations can get a lot more polarized than they actually need to be, methinks.
thismama is offline  
#133 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:46 PM
 
anubis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by moonbeem View Post
The attitude that eventual abuse may occuar is completly dismissive of the primal wound which is caused by disrupting the continium of the birth/infancy stage. That is an emotional wound which forever effects ones relationships and developement. (like circ is a physical wound that forever effects the penis function) A mother's pregnancy prepares her baby to be attuned to her movements, smell, taste, her voice. Newborns recognize their mothers. Only her body is primed to provide the perfect breastmilk for that baby. An infant is capable of bonding only with his mother. After that attachment is secure trusting others will be the next progression. Some are better able to bond to substitutes than others, but it is a loss when mother/baby separation occuars. No matter how good the substitutes are, it is not the same.
I asked this before and got ignored (the story of my life ):
How exactly does a mother that isn't there with the baby not inflict that wound? Assuming the primal wound theory is valid (I haven't read enough to have a proper opinion about it, but I'm assuming it is an issue that some adoptees have, I've met enough people who talk about it), how does a mother who neglects the child help protect from that wound? I mean, bio-mother who chooses not to bond vs. adoptive mother who does bond. I don't really see how the bio-mother is creating a secure attachment here, in this particular case.

I mean, you say it's a loss when mother/baby separation occurs. Okay, we'll go with that. The mother in this case chose to separate herself from the baby. She chose to neglect the baby and sneak out to go joyriding or whatever. The separation has occurred. Loss has occurred. Wound has been inflicted. Being the mother in the eyes of the law hardly matters to the baby. She was not acting like a mother. She was not bonding. How is giving the baby a stable family that will bond with him, will not neglect him, a bad thing? Would it be better to keep the baby waiting until mother comes around, if ever, when she hasn't shown any interest in making that change? Or would the wound heal better if there was a constant set of caring parents in the baby's life?

I mean, the primal wound theory isn't about being united with a set of adoptive parents. It's about being separated from the bio-mother. That separation had already occurred. The adoption is more the consequence, not the reason.
anubis is offline  
#134 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 08:53 PM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by anubis View Post
I mean, bio-mother who chooses not to bond vs. adoptive mother who does bond. I don't really see how the bio-mother is creating a secure attachment here, in this particular case.
You are assuming an unhealthy attachment between bio-mama and baby, and then assuming a healthy one between adoptive mama and baby.

I don't think anyone is saying it is better for a baby to be with a neglectful bio-mama than a loving and attentive adoptive mama. I think we are questioning the assumptions generally re: young and poor mamas and whether they can be good parents. And specific to this situation, I think we are questioning whether this young mama might have done a better job had people rallied around her.

I also don't think adoptive parents are necessarily always fabulous. I think they can be just as dysfunctional as everyone else. Adoption does not automatically = a fabulous life and perfect parenting.
thismama is offline  
#135 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 09:00 PM
 
Sarahbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 799
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
I do not know if this 13 year old was able to parent. I know she said she wanted to. I know there seems to have been some neglect. I also know that it seems people did not exactly rally around with practical support and encouraging messages, and I wonder if the outcome could have been vastly different had that occurred.

That is where I am coming from. I'm not: Oh no THIS particular mother should DEFINITELY have kept that baby. Which is what ppl seem to be wanting to hear.

These conversations can get a lot more polarized than they actually need to be, methinks.
Oh. Thank you for clarifying and I agree that it can get polarizing. Like I said, I think any mama who wants to and is able to parent should be encouraged and supported. No disagreement from me there.
Sarahbunny is offline  
#136 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 09:06 PM
Banned
 
MillingNome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: hunting in Gilead
Posts: 6,414
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am stunned that mamas would advocate that this baby should stay with this mama. Seriously, I wouldn't even want her to babysitt my kids. Judgemental- you betcha. I just keep coming back to how long the baby should have waited for the mama to grow up or even make some attempt at parenting. Please, give some me some idea. Does she have to leave him, no one realize and he gets physically hurt or worse? Since when is leaving a baby ok? \

And anyone who says that the system is flawed and does not do enough, that the adoptive parents should have taken them both in, she deserves another and another and another chance (which she does but not at the expense of her baby's welfare)- please act upon those beliefs. Take in a teen mom and her baby. Make sure it is one who has been in at least other settings. Make sure she has no respect for the consequences of her actions. Make sure her mouth is as foul as a sailor

Anyone who says the world is slanted to adoptive parents- go read the adoption forum here. It hardly seems like they are snatching babies from poor unsuspecting teens. They are going out of the country. They are adopting foster children. They are using private adoption. All are waiting and hoping that they are finally chosen. Not the other way around where they are chosing which birthmother they want to take a baby from. You should see all the paperwork and personal questions... and home visits that are involved.

In my line of work, it is often that there is pressure to keep a baby at all cost. You should hear what is said to the *very* few that choose to place their children with other parents. It can get pretty bad. And yet, it is not the same the other way around. Keeping the baby is the default now.
MillingNome is offline  
#137 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 09:22 PM
Banned
 
MillingNome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: hunting in Gilead
Posts: 6,414
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
You are assuming an unhealthy attachment between bio-mama and baby, and then assuming a healthy one between adoptive mama and baby.
Actually, I think it is an unhealthy attachment or no attachment between mom and baby BASED ON the details given by the op. I am assuming the adoptive parents will be able to bond well with the baby due to the fact the baby is still so young. Time does become important when it is used to set up an untrusting relationship with a baby. Each new wound goes deeper.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
I don't think anyone is saying it is better for a baby to be with a neglectful bio-mama than a loving and attentive adoptive mama. I think we are questioning the assumptions generally re: young and poor mamas and whether they can be good parents. And specific to this situation, I think we are questioning whether this young mama might have done a better job had people rallied around her.
Young and poor does not equal a bad parent. Being neglectful does. I do know a few moms who were moms at 13. They did ok by their kids. They stayed in school, connected to the many social services avaliable, and relied on support groups to learn how to be a good parent. I know it can be done... but only if there is effort put forth by the mother. You can lead a horse to water but...

Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
I also don't think adoptive parents are necessarily always fabulous. I think they can be just as dysfunctional as everyone else. Adoption does not automatically = a fabulous life and perfect parenting.
LOL- nothing does. That said, it is a very lengthy process that if it goes correctly, works to weed out unfit people. I sure didn't go through that when I became a parent.
MillingNome is offline  
#138 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 09:27 PM
 
Roar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
True, theoretically. I just don't ever hear of it actually happening, in any kind of numbers at all. So... kind of a strawman IMO.
The suggestion was that to consider age is discrimination, period. The bond is from birth and by giving birth someone is a mother. Okay, is there a limit to that? People want to defend that 13 years are ready to be moms. What about 9 year olds? If you want to be consistant about it and not be discriminatory based on age then you need to support any girl capable of giving birth as being ready to parent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
It is based in a meaningful, honest, and *culturally biased* understanding of child development. Women all over the world become mothers in what we call the teenage years. It's a social construct that teenagers are big children. Which is fine, until we use it to violate their human rights.
How silly. The suggestion isn't that in all civilizations in all times that age is fixed. Rather that we operate in the here and now for people in the culture they live in. What happens to 10 year olds in the Amazon isn't really particularly relevant. What I'm concerned about is does this individual have what it takes to function as an adult in this culture in order to be able to provide a safe, nurturing home for this child. Her behavior clearly suggests otherwise. Knowing that some 13 year old in some other culture in some other time could do it has zero to do with the wellbeing of this baby.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
It's pretty much the end of childhood to get pregnant, grow a life in your body, give birth,
Most of the time with preteens and young teens who get pregnant there is some degree of sexual exploitation involved in that. Curious, do you consider when the girl gets raped the end of childhood or just when she gives birth.

If anything rather than railing against adoption, I'd think that some of this energy would be better spent speaking out against the sexual exploitation of children.
Roar is offline  
#139 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 09:30 PM
 
anubis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
You are assuming an unhealthy attachment between bio-mama and baby, and then assuming a healthy one between adoptive mama and baby.

I don't think anyone is saying it is better for a baby to be with a neglectful bio-mama than a loving and attentive adoptive mama. I think we are questioning the assumptions generally re: young and poor mamas and whether they can be good parents. And specific to this situation, I think we are questioning whether this young mama might have done a better job had people rallied around her.

I also don't think adoptive parents are necessarily always fabulous. I think they can be just as dysfunctional as everyone else. Adoption does not automatically = a fabulous life and perfect parenting.
I'm assuming an unhealthy attachment between bio-mother and baby based on the information we've been given of this particular mother's actions. There are certainly reasons she is behaving that way and I'm not saying she's some sort of an evil monster or anything, just that at this point it wouldn't in my opinion be in the baby's best interest to let him wait for the mother to come around. I do hope that the mother gets suitable help. I also hope that adoption was the right choice for her. Nevertheless, I can't say I don't see this as the best choice for the baby, given the options available.

Yes, I would like to see better resources for young mothers (heck, I was raised by a young single mother). It would be great if someone could take in both the mother and the baby, turn the mother into a different direction, "save" them both, as it were. However, there are precious few people willing and able to take on a task that huge. I know I could not do that. Would I like to be able to do it? Yes, I would love to give the people involved the help they need. That would be ideal, obviously.

Sadly, what is ideal is not always practical. And sacrificing a child's wellbeing just to be idealistic isn't something I'm comfortable with. I fully agree that in an ideal world things would go as many have suggested in this thread. In reality, the resources aren't there. And given then circumstances, given the resources available, I still can't help but think this might just have been the best way things could have worked out for the baby.

I do see your point that if she had been told she could do it, things might have turned out differently. I agree, they might have. She should have been encouraged in her decision, no matter what it was. I can't remember anyone out and out saying that she was discouraged, but it's a fair assumption, there is a definite bias against young parents. That might well have played into why she made the kind of decisions she did. I mean, I subscribe to the theory that people do what is expected of them. If she was told that she'd be a crappy parent, it's no wonder she did what she did. I suppose I did overlook that earlier, it just seems like such an old-fashioned way of talking about young mothers. Where I come from (Finland originally), the support system is fairly good for parents, young or old, single or not. The stigma has faded. I guess I filtered the story through my own background and experiences. It must depend so much on where the whole thing takes place.

Heh, I started this post disagreeing and ended up agreeing (well, to a certain extent anyway). With thismama of all people, that's a first
anubis is offline  
#140 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 09:43 PM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roar View Post
The suggestion was that to consider age is discrimination, period. The bond is from birth and by giving birth someone is a mother. Okay, is there a limit to that? People want to defend that 13 years are ready to be moms. What about 9 year olds? If you want to be consistant about it and not be discriminatory based on age then you need to support any girl capable of giving birth as being ready to parent.
I've already addressed what I think should be done for 9 year old mothers, if they in fact exist. So I won't re-hash.

Quote:
How silly. The suggestion isn't that in all civilizations in all times that age is fixed. Rather that we operate in the here and now for people in the culture they live in. What happens to 10 year olds in the Amazon isn't really particularly relevant. What I'm concerned about is does this individual have what it takes to function as an adult in this culture in order to be able to provide a safe, nurturing home for this child. Her behavior clearly suggests otherwise. Knowing that some 13 year old in some other culture in some other time could do it has zero to do with the wellbeing of this baby.
What I am saying is that we create the climate based on our beliefs. And our beliefs about what age someone is developmentally ready to be a mother are subjective, biased. Then we construct a reality in which it is very damn difficult to be a mother, becoz nobody believes young women can do it, so supports are not there, trust and encouragement is not there, role models are not there.

Unless you look for them. Then they are there in spades. www.girl-mom.com comes to mind, what a fabulous network. But social programs are not there, that is the concrete reality.

I am saying this woman's behaviour does not exist in a vacuum. It is clear there was not enough support for her to parent her baby. Also clear she neglected the baby. I wonder if the support had existed, would we be seeing a different outcome now? Maybe. And tragic that we cannot know that.

Quote:
Most of the time with preteens and young teens who get pregnant there is some degree of sexual exploitation involved in that. Curious, do you consider when the girl gets raped the end of childhood or just when she gives birth.
I don't believe that for a minute. Yes women of all ages get raped, sadly. But I do not believe that teenage women are not sexually autonomous beings, but mere passive victims of others sexually. I do not think most teenage mothers became so via rape.

Quote:
If anything rather than railing against adoption, I'd think that some of this energy would be better spent speaking out against the sexual exploitation of children.
You choose what you spend your energy on, and I shall choose where I spend mine.
thismama is offline  
#141 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 10:02 PM
 
pearlgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 215
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post

I think there are ethical ways to find homes for children who need them, children for would-be parents who want them. I don't think what is currently happening is ethical, and I don't think it's the only way we can do things.
This is in no way an attack on you specifically thismama, but just a good example of what I was saying when I said there was generalizations going on that some one said were not being made. Generalizations are being made. This statement is one of the types of generalizing statements that is hurtful. "I don't think what is currently happening is ethical". Our adoption was ethical. When some one talks about adoption and says what is currently happening isn't ethical without specifying the adoption situations they find unethical, their generalization hurts the children that need families. They insult the families built through completely ethical adoptions. There are many differing adoption experiences, many different reasons a child might find themselves in the position to be adopted. Ethical adoptions do happen and they happen more frequently than not. Do certain areas of the adoption world need reform? I think so. But it doesn't negate the parts that are working fine, just like the drunk woman who rolled on her baby and suffocated it doesn't negate co-sleeping being a perfecting acceptable and safe way to night-time parent. The term "Anti-Adoption" does not differentiate and there are distinctions to be made.

Sarah
pearlgirl is offline  
#142 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 10:05 PM
 
pearlgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 215
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by moonbeem View Post
An infant is capable of bonding only with his mother.

What I would like to say in response to this wouldn't be appropriate so I'm just going to say that I disagree.


Sarah
pearlgirl is offline  
#143 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 10:11 PM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 14,356
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pearlgirl View Post
This is in no way an attack on you specifically thismama, but just a good example of what I was saying when I said there was generalizations going on that some one said were not being made. Generalizations are being made. This statement is one of the types of generalizing statements that is hurtful. "I don't think what is currently happening is ethical". Our adoption was ethical. When some one talks about adoption and says what is currently happening isn't ethical without specifying the adoption situations they find unethical, their generalization hurts the children that need families. They insult the families built through completely ethical adoptions. There are many differing adoption experiences, many different reasons a child might find themselves in the position to be adopted. Ethical adoptions do happen and they happen more frequently than not. Do certain areas of the adoption world need reform? I think so. But it doesn't negate the parts that are working fine, just like the drunk woman who rolled on her baby and suffocated it doesn't negate co-sleeping being a perfecting acceptable and safe way to night-time parent. The term "Anti-Adoption" does not differentiate and there are distinctions to be made.

Sarah
Okay. Point taken.

I think there is much corruption within the adoption industry and that it compromises the ethics of adoption generally to a certain extent. I also think it is hard to have free choice in a culture where there is a huge lack of social services, and where the bio-mama/baby bond is not adequately respected. And I think over-respect for money and higher socio-economic status, and guilting mothers on that basis, complicates it further.

So in that way I tend to see adoption in general as being ethically compromised. Kwim?

That said, of course I don't know your individual situation, and I can think of adoptions that IMO were extremely ethical, as ethical as can possibly be given the context in which we are all operating.

If I were an adoptive mama, (and I may someday be), it would be very important to me to know exactly what went on with my child's adoption. What were the issues, why was the child relinquished or taken, who is profiting from this adoption, what level of contact is desired by the birthmama and available to my child. I would also make sure to fulfill any promises I make to the birthmother, and to support a reconnection when my child and the birthmama are ready.
thismama is offline  
#144 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 10:37 PM
Banned
 
MillingNome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: hunting in Gilead
Posts: 6,414
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
Okay. Point taken.

I think there is much corruption within the adoption industry and that it compromises the ethics of adoption generally to a certain extent. I also think it is hard to have free choice in a culture where there is a huge lack of social services, and where the bio-mama/baby bond is not adequately respected. And I think over-respect for money and higher socio-economic status, and guilting mothers on that basis, complicates it further.

There may be some pressure by some people to place the baby with adoptive parents but please show me the numbers. How many place their baby v. how many parent? Like I said before, most the young mothers I work with experience just the opposite. That is why there are over 40 waiting parents for every 1 (white, healthy of course ) baby.

If there is a lack of social services in our society (I think there is), it could be argued we are all at the same disadvatage. I'm sorry this girl was not able to use what was avaliabe to her. If I was her and I was a young mom but not 13 and I wanted to do right by my baby, I would have taken advantage of every possible resource I could find. She seemed to have no problem finding time to party. Maybe she should have used some time and energy to do some research on good parenting. If she is not capable of that, how then is she capable of advocating for her baby's needs?


ETA: there were over 138,000 adoptions in America in 1999. The adoption "industry is about 1.4 billion dollars. Figured out over those 138,000 adoptions, that is on average about $10,100 per an adoption. That is really not so much money that average people can not adopt.
MillingNome is offline  
#145 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 11:05 PM
 
sugarmoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by choli View Post
I'm sure that was painful - almost as painful as it was for the baby's Mom to hand it to you in the first place. But, why do you say that she will be at best a mediocre mother to him? You have no way of knowing that - isn't that why she is in a residential program for teen moms, to learn how to be a good parent? On what are you basing the idea that she will be mediocre?

I don't think there are any perfect solutions in these cases, and there is no sure fire predictor of who will be a good parent, and who won't. There are many mediocre parents out there, should the children be removed from all of them and reallocated to "approved" parents?
I'm basing my assessment that the best I can hope for is for her to become a mediocre mother on the "care" she gave her older dd for the 2 years that she "parented" her. Her most basic needs, food, shelter, human contact, adult supervision were not met. The mom had many many supportive people around her, offering physical help and financial help, connecting her with great resources in the community. She was working with an intensive parent educating program (not live-in though) that time around too. I'm also basing my assesment on the relationship I have developed with her over the last year of having her dd in my home as my foster daughter. I like this mom well enough as a person. But seeing how she acts and reacts to her kids leaves me very little hope that she will ever be more than just good enough. I hope I'm wrong, I really do.

And, just to be clear, when I agreed to foster the baby I *knew* it would likely be very short term, as they were trying to get her into this program and I *knew* I would likely get my heart broken. I also knew that it would be best for the mom, and her family, if her 2 kids could be in foster care together, if she only had to deal w/ one foster mom etc. So I did it. That's my point -- not how painful it is for me, but that I do want this mom to have a chance, so I got involved.
sugarmoon is offline  
#146 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 11:16 PM
 
blessed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by moonbeem View Post
An infant is capable of bonding only with his mother. After that attachment is secure trusting others will be the next progression. Some are better able to bond to substitutes than others, but it is a loss when mother/baby separation occuars. No matter how good the substitutes are, it is not the same.
Imagine that infant's psychological deconstruction when the person she is trying to bond with is emotionally unavailable, handles her with detachment or roughly, with angry, impatient hands. Imagine when her cries are unanswered, when she lies in her own filth until her skin breaks down. When she learns - forever - that there is no use in trusting or loving or reaching out or having needs. These children become the shattered adults who tragically mishandle their own lives and go on to procreate with no capacity to understand or implement parenting.

Then imagine that same infant cuddled, and cooed over, and snuggled. Fed immediately and fully. Clean and warm and loved. Consistently. Forever.

Infants bond completely with their caregivers, be they father, mother, distant aunt or anyone loving and attentive.

Sorry moonbeem. You're just wrong.
blessed is offline  
#147 of 147 Old 06-28-2007, 11:22 PM
 
BelovedK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: wandering around.... with an aim.
Posts: 16,877
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This has been an interesting thread. It has been closed but left on the boards in case anyone wants to read. This thread will be under review and may be removed depending on the number of UA violations. Thank you.

                                Whatever will be, already is...
 
BelovedK is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off