"Only one to two percent of children born out of wedlock are placed for adoption. Without presuming to judge any individual decision, it seems to be in the best interests of children and their birthparents for significantly more of these children to be placed for adoption. Social science has directly correlated the rise in children languishing in foster care to the number of single-parent households. The number of single-parent households is
directly correlated to the decrease in infant adoptions. Here are some of NCFA's policy priorities to help create healthier attitudes towards infant
adoption and make it easier for birthparents to choose adoption." http://www.adoptioncouncil.org/about/pol_law_first.html
The statement begins with the word "only" bemoaning the "decrease in infant adoptions" followed by the pejorative, outdated label "born out of wedlock" - a phrase offensive to single mothers and their children, adopted or not.
Reports of decreases in teen pregnancies, coupled with more mothers having the resources, support, and ability to care for their children would be an indication of a healthy society is something to warrant rejoicing, not concern. This is especially true in light of the fact that there is no evidence whatsoever that it is "in the best interests of children" or their parents "for significantly more of these [bastard] children to be placed for adoption."
The fact is quite the opposite. The largest study to look at the effects of foster care provides "the first viable, empirical evidence" of the benefits of keeping kids with their families, says Gary Stangler, executive director of the Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative, a foundation for foster teens. Stangler says it looked at kids over a longer period of time than had other studies. "It confirms what experience and observation tell us: Kids who can remain in their homes do better than in foster care," says Stangler. He says some kids, for their own safety, need to be removed from their families, but in marginal cases of abuse, more should be done to keep them together.1 Additionally, programs that work to keep families intact, providing drug rehabilitation and other resources have proven to be more cost effective and have better results.
Who/what is the NCFA and why are the promoting increased family separations? The NCFA lobbies on behalf of adoption businesses who profit from the redistribution of children. The paid clients of these agencies are willing to pay $10-$20,000 per child. It is, thus, a simple matter of dollar and cents to encourage and promote the relinquishment of children for adoption in order to add to the coffers of those whose livelihood depends on such family disruptions.
The NCFA is notorious for intentionally fallacious statements and invented "facts" such as alleging that mothers who relinquish children for adoption are promised protection of their privacy form their own children. That lie is perpetrated in order for the NCFA o campaign against the rights of adopted citizens to their own records because the agencies they represent operate with more ease under the cloak of secrecy, making it clear that they have no concern for the best interest of adopted persons, or their mothers. They in fact act contrary to all organizations that represent mothers and adoptees.
It is, thus, not wonder that the above claim is based on "correlation" and vague "social science" - typical of NCFA's spurious arguments. A "correlation" can imply a possible causal relationship, but cannot indicate what the causal relationship, if any, might be. The causes underlying the correlation, if any - in this case a "rise in children languishing in foster care" and "the number of single-parent households" - may be indirect and unknown. Establishing a correlation between two variables is not sufficient condition to establish a causal relationship (in either direction). If, in fact more children in foster care are from single-parent households, that indicates merely that single parents need more support such as adequate day care, than they are receiving. It in no way indicates that more children would be better off permanently severed from their families.
The NCFA's solution - referred to in typical sugar-coated newspeak as "healthier attitudes" - is the promotion of what are called "quick-trigger adoptions" and have been criticized all over the country. 2
The solution for marriages in trouble is not quicker divorces. The same is true of families in crisis. Tearing children from their parents, siblings, grandparents and other extended family causes far more harm than working to keep such families together.
Permanent care for children in temporary foster homes who have no family to return to is preferable and there is a need to promote suitable families to come forward and provide homes for the tens of thousands of orphans who might benefit. But the public, and lawmakers are duped when the NCFA encourages legislation using foster care as a foot in the door. There is a failure (deliberate on the part of he NCFA) to distinguish the adoption of such children who have no families, and infant adoption which is a vast, unregulated money-making industry involving coercion and exploitation and needs to be discouraged not aided.
The NCFA gets away with mendacious claims because the public wants to believe that adoption is a warm-fuzzy, win-win. We cling to a vision of adoption in which love can cure all and that adoption is "the same as if" a child was born to you. We are fond of accepting the illusion of adoption as "rescuing" kids and bringing happiness to those suffering the heartache of infertility. We embrace these myths and fairy tales so much, that fundamental Christians and our government - not just the NCFA - promote and encourage adoption.
The promotion of adoption is counter to the promotion of a healthy society. Being adopted creates feelings of rejection, abandonment and identity crisis that results in a disproportionate high umber of adoptees in all mental health and criminal facilities, and a disproportionate number of serial killers were adopted. This is in addition to the lifelong post-traumatic stress suffered by mothers who have lost children to adoption.
Adoption is a permanent, irrevocable solution for temporary problems. The purpose of adoption is to find homes for orphans children and the thousands of children already in foster care who cannot be reunited with families, not creating more separations.
1. Wendy Koch, "Study: Troubled homes better than foster care" USA Today July 2, 2007. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-07-02-foster-study_N.htm?csp=34&POE=click-refer
2. Valerie Honycutt Spears.Panel works on law to slow quick-trigger adoptions. Lexington Herald-Leader. November, 2006. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_km4469/is_200611/ai_n17023181
Published by Mirah Riben
Author of "shedding light on...The Dark Side of Adoption" (1988) and "The Stork Market: America's Multi-Billion Dollar Adoption Industry" (2007) www.AdvocatePublications.com View profile
- Living in Foster Care: Advice from Teens Who Have Been ThereLiving in foster care is difficult. Teens who lived in foster care give advice to others in the same situation.
- Louisville and Kentucky Foster Care Services The Kentucky Foster Care and Adoption Program is state program and is responsible for finding foster homes for children in Louisville, Kentucky.
- Senators Hillary Clinton and John Rockefeller Sponsor a Bill to Boost Foster Care... If this bill becomes law, it will establish a trial project for the purpose of helping people who want to adopt children who are in foster care maintain their interest and not drop out.
FCAA: Foster Care Alumni of AmericaFoster Care Alumni of America is a 501c-3, non-profit organization that brings together the knowledge, experience, and strength of alumni of foster care in the U.S. in order to...- Minorities in Foster CareA Texas study shows that black children have longer stays in foster care, are less likely to be reunited with their families, and wait longer for adoption than white or Hispanic children.
- Parenting and Foster Care, to Raise a Child
- Foster Care System
- Facts on the Foster Care System and its Children
- Teen in Foster Care Dies of Complications from Asthma
- Tips on Adopting Children Out of Foster Care
- Foster Care Pros and Cons: Is it As Bad As You Think?
- Foster Care System Then and Now




3 Comments
Post a CommentThank you for this excellent article. I completely agree with you. I was appalled to read the Republican Party's 2009 campaign platform, in which they boast about the increased number of adoptions during the Bush administration. One can only wonder about the wisdom and logic - and "family values" - of people who believe that tearing apart natural families to supply babies and children to the adoption industry is a noble humanitarian goal. It's bizarre that most Americans don't question how all of these children were obtained for adoption, much less know or care what happens to them afterwards. It's very disturbing that millions of citizens who consider themselves intelligent and well-informed have been brainwashed about adoption by groups such as the NCFA. It shows the power of propaganda.
Thank you, Sweetrose, for sharing your personal thoughts.
I am very happy for you. And sorry that anything about adoption makes you feel odd. Genealogy is not considered and odd pursuit, nor are non-adopted persons considered odd if they don;t, so I agree that it is sad that you are judged differently for whichever choice you might make in that regard.
Your contentment and lack of curiosity does not mean that redistributing children needs to be promoted. Adoption needs to remain a last resort and helping families stay together the first option.
You were happy and well raised and that is good. But adoption doe not guarantee that will happen. Nor does it mean you would not have been safe, well cared for and perfectly happy and content raised by those you are genetically connected to, had your mother had received some temporary assistance.
You'll never know...
That is a fine choice for you. Others deserve to make a free choice and not be hampered by sealed record laws.
I was adopted, and my parents actually loved me and I loved them. I have never wanted to "seek" my birth parents nor have I ever felt rejected. And I turned out to be a productive member of society. Now, that I am a parent, I know the type of love my parents felt for me, and to be honest, I don't love my children because I gave birth to them but because I am raising them with the same type of love that my parents had for me. The only time I feel different is when people who are not adopted think I am some sort of oddity for not wanting to find my "real" parents after they have found out I was adopted.