Theodoor W

Unfortunately relatively many adopted girls get pregnant at a young age, and relatively many of those become MOALs too. I am wondering how adoptive parents would tend to react to a teen pregnancy in an adopted daughter.

If you are an adoptive parent, imagine the following situation:

Your adopted daughter tells you she is pregnant, suppose she is 15, or so (in case you only adopted male imagine a girlfriend-without-family of your son, who is the baby daddy): She is a bit confused and asks you what to do:

Do you suggest it is up to her?

Do you suggest abortion?

Do you suggest relinquishment for adoption?

Do you suggest putting the child in fostercare until she can parent?

Do you suggest she keeps the baby, offering full assistance?

Or do you congratulate her, making sure that she feels that she and her baby are welcome in your family? Or are you going to do something else?

I am building a little model of the Tin Woodman from Baum's Oz series. (In case you wonder, the Scarecrow is almost ready and the Cowardly Lion is already in storage). In the finishing of this character I have to consider what color he should be, like an unpainted tin soldier or like a tin can? It seems textual evidence, supports the tin can option. (Tin soldiers don't rust, tin cans do, for instance). What's your opinion?

Just imagine, the state has decided to issue goose hunt licenses to be used in the summer season, all nature preservation foundations and associations agree, the license covers 5 or 6 species, there is of course a reasonable test, you have to show that you can tell, say, a Hawaii goose from a Canada goose and know which ones can be legally bagged. know your gun safety and safe hunting rules. So you have to do the test, but the license fee is very reasonable, and the license allows you to shoot as much as you can find. For the sake of the question we assume that those geese on the license are indeed occuring in such numbers that if you can hit anything smaller than a boar, you can reasonably expect to bag two before the season closes.

What would you do, in such a case?

I just wonder.

I am wondering how long after the removal of the baby from her care should a lady get to start the procedure to get her child back/stop the adoption, according to you? I am not asking how long she gets, but how long she SHOULD get.

I'm currently writing a little about differences between the US and Dutch cultures, somewhat relevant to the understanding of the much lower domestic adoption rates in the Netherlands.

Rather recently the number of options presented to young women with an unwanted/unplanned pregnancy has been increased from three to four. I would like to ask women, (by preference from the US) who have had such a pregnancy, what they would have done if they had been offered the following options:

1) Keeping the baby, some support would be available.

2) Putting the child in a foster family (with a NON-ADOPTABLE - label), to get the child back when you were ready.

3) Relinquishing the child for adoption, with a 15 month period to prevent the adoption, in which the baby will move from a foster to a foster-to-adopt family. No pre-birth contact.

4) FREE abortion, you would have to say you need one and think-it-over for 5 days.

I am trying to make a short list of differences between adoption in the USA and the Netherlands, in the Netherlands adoption by grandparents is totally, completely, fully illegal, it's not in the USA, not in all states at least, but I am wondering whether people could inform me about rules concerning the adoption of children by their grandparents, is it prohibited in some states, or like that it is encouraged in, say, Alabama?

Which gospel(s) do you like best? What is your religious position?

Options: Mark, Matthew, Luke, the synoptics together, John or no preference.

My answer is: Luke, and I am an atheist from a Calvinist background.

I just wonder why people cannot just allow other people to just ask things about Islam and the way Muslims do see things here.

One aspect in which Islamic culture shows itself more humane than Americanized Western culture, is it stance towards adoption, while still promoting that one takes care of orphans, and the children of fellow citizens in difficult circumstances. Nevertheless, life is not perfect, and quite some children of Muslimas have been adopted by Westerners.

One such case was the daughter of an innocent young girl, conceived as the result of rape. She "reunited" with her mother and her family, to a degree. Her husband had known about the rape, not about the pregnancy, but being a kind man, he had no problem with it.

But if things had gone different, could he have married the young mother and taken care of her daughter, while staying a good muslim?

My ideas about the bad sides of adoption, may already be known,and though not anti-choice at all, I'm not a fan of elective abortion, and I'm not rich either. Nevertheless I'm willing to put my money where my heart is at, and try to join an essentially hard-core Pro-Life Association, who are so hard-core pro-life that they try to be as little as possible associated with the name "Pro-Life" (you know, associated with bothering women whose miscarriage is going wrong, promoting adoption, shooting doctors and putting unwanted stuff in people's mail boxes). Sometimes they help with relinquishment, but less than once a year on average. Oh and they are not Christian, not Christian at all, because they are there for babies in the wombs and arms of Agnostic, Atheist, Buddhist, Jewish, Hindu, Mormon, Muslim and other moms too. My choice to support them is based mainly on their mild anti-relinquishment position.* And believe me, they need support, their phones seemed to be messed up, a couple of hours ago.

My question is:Should I pay two, two-and-a half or three times the annual membership fee?

*Mild as in, "Sometimes we fail at preventing it, and it is better than abortion, about, three out of four adoptees seem to agree with that".

I have here a 1976 book based on Winnetou I by the German author Karl May, even though it is claimed that a certain A. Hitler was one of his MILLIONS of fans, at the end of his life Karl May saw intermarriage (miscegenation, if you like) as the way to get better people in the future. His younger, fictional alter ego however rather seems to have had other ideas about active love between people of different races, at least as far as it concerned himself.

This book is however different. Mr. Henry, a widower without LIVING children, is a gunsmith, a very good one, compared to real world gunsmiths, he would have been the best gunsmith in all of America, to start with, Living in St. Louis. So we are talking about a white man with money, serious fire arms and ammo, as well as, probably influential, friends, quite able to move to better place to raise his second family.

The time it occurs is somewhat unclear, but to fit the original books, it should be after the Civil War.

The scene is this: The Hero and Mr. Henry are in Mr. Henry's gunsmith (work) shop in St. Louis discussing the Hero's interracial marriage, prevented by murder of the bride-to-be. The Hero notices Mr. Henry takes a personal interest. Mr. Henry claps in his hands, yells "Della", and a very beautiful, ***** girl, with her breasts uncovered, hardly 18 years old, appears. Mr. Henry tells the hero he is going to marry her, but neither he nor the Hero say anything to Della.Not "My God, Della, cover yourself!", not "Pleased, to meet you", not "Della, you did not have to hurry that much" not "Della, may I introduce you to Charley?", not "How did that ol' Mr. get his hands on YOU?", nothing at all.

Della says nothing at all either.

My question is, could anybody list what's wrong with all this?