Why is there such a negative stigma on adoption but not on teen pregnancy?
In almost every question on here, anybody who is for adoption seems to get tons of thumbs down, yet abortion and even teen pregnancy don't. Abortion is seen as a woman's right to her body and teen pregnancy is seen as the same, and also an accident. But adoption seems to be a big no-no. I just don't understand why there is a negative stigma on adoption. When will people realize that it's a loving sacrifice to ensure that a baby you can't take proper care of has parents who can take care of him/her?
2013-06-13T10:04:50Z
Contrary to what you seem to think, I know my fair share of adopted people as well as having several close friends who placed babies for adoption after getting pregnant as teenagers. For them, yes, it was a loving sacrifice. They say they wouldn't do it differently if it happened again because they know their child is better off. And the friends of mine who've been adopted have wondered about their biological parents, but have also recognized the love that it took for their biological mother to make the choice she did. Your answers reflect exactly what I was saying--you think that adoption is a negative thing instead of a positive thing.
2013-06-13T10:08:01Z
@frockney--if a woman can't handle raising a child, she shouldn't be having sex. THAT is control over her own body. That is why abortion should not be lauded as a woman's right to choose. She made her choice when she had sex.
2013-06-14T14:07:09Z
Just so we're clear, if you read my question, you'll see I'm not talking about "forced adoption". I'm also not talking about shaming teenage girls into it. I'm talking about the fact that many people seem to be against it no matter what, and think that in every situation, the best for the baby is to be raised by his/her biological mother. And wondering why so many people are so down on adoption because all of the experiences I've had with friends and family members going through it have been positive.
Pegatha2013-06-13T11:52:33Z
Favorite Answer
Back when teen pregnancy was considered a gross violation of the norm, there were actually fewer teen pregnancies, and fewer young women in the unenviable position of having to decide between giving up their children and raising them alone. As a society and as individuals, we lost a lot when we abandoned the concept of sexual morality.
Once the pregnancy exists, there are no pain-free solutions. Having sex before you're ready to deal with the natural consequences is wrong. But coercing mothers to give up babies against their will isn't right, either, and neither is a situation where adult adoptees and their natural parents who want to be reunited have to jump through hoops to find each other.
The sanest solution is to save sex for marriage, or at least until both sexual partners are able to support a child financially without excessive struggle. Too bad that's seen as a reactionary and outdated approach. It actually works, when it's used.
There is a stigma attached to teen pregnancy and that stigma has been around for so long that most of us probably see it as beneath mention. Do you realize that the additives (and other environmental assailants) being put into food which most Americans consume contain hormones which increase the rate at which children develop sexually now a days? And that young people's brains are not fully developed until around age 25?
Hence, younger people will naturally tend to engage in riskier behavior without thoroughly weighing the consequences. When people here try and encourage against adoption, I think it's because they want to steer a young person (who is already pregnant) away from making yet another poor choice with life-long adverse consequences for mom AND baby.
Well then why don't you take some time to read the answers?
I'm guessing you are one of the people that overlooks all the negative? All you want is rainbows and butterflies... It's NOT positive for all.
You think adoption is so great then whenever you fall on hard times financially even if it's just temporary! Just give your children up for adoption because it's such a "loving sacrifice" that is what you are telling people to do! Because material objects are the most important thing in the world.
I know plenty of adoptees who are not happy they were relinquished and put up for adoption..
By the way did you know staying in your biological family (unless you are abused/ neglected) is best.
EDIT: You're Mormon? Your additional information makes sense now..
Your description says you see the world "Right and wrong" clearly not.
EDIT: Sammy gabby, could you link the pages where people have said that please? Thank you.
Melissa, it wasn't a "crack" sweetheart.. A lot of this post makes sense to me now I know she is a member of the LDS.
P.S. I'm educated. I know all about your religion and many other religions in fact..
I would think that had you actually taken the time to read our posts, you would know exactly why we feel how we do. However, in case it's still unclear, we lived it; you didn't. Knowing adoptees and first mothers is not the same thing as living it.
I'd like to focus on one thing you said, that adoption "ensures" parents who can take care of the baby. Tell me: how do you "ensure" this? I'll await your answer.
The fact is, there is zero way to guarantee that adoption provides a better life. Adoptive parents can divorce, die, go bankrupt, abuse their children, etc. It is an irresponsible and reprehensible claim to say that adoption "ensures" anything.
As for my mother's "choice", well, she wanted to keep me. She wouldn't sign the papers for four months. But it was the Baby Scoop Era and there was no support for single mothers. I know her. She never had another child. It'll be interesting to hear your spin on how this was a "positive thing".
This is your opinion, rather than an actual question.
Personally I missed and grieved for my mother and adoption was a HUGE loss for both of us. It often is.
As for it being a 'loving sacrifice' - it's more often than not outside influences & stigmas that put the mother in a position of choicelessness in the first place.
My own mother made no such 'loving sacrifice', signed no paperwork and was informed I was deceased at 3 days old. Many, many mothers suffered the same fate due to the exact same 'stigmas' you defend (teen pregnancy, unmarried pregnancy . . . . )
ETA: You have no right to tell adoptees or mothers how they 'should' think or feel. GROWING IN THE DARK NOT KNOWING ANYTHING ABOUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF YOUR OWN BIRTH, WHO YOU ARE OR WHERE YOU COME FROM IS NOT POSITIVE. SECRETS AND LIES SUCK.
Positive/negative = adoption is far more complex that the black/white picture you try to paint. Conflicting feelings abound and arguing with people who have LIVED the experience with anecdotes of hearsay is just incredibly pompous.
ETA DENA dear, I think you'll find that most mothers considering adoption are NOT TEENAGERS. What utter, utter tripe you spew. What 'vested interest' pray tell. I care about the kids is all, there's nothing in it for me - no ulterior motives, no 'vested interest. You? ppfffttt
Royalbird: will you be handing your brood over more wealthy strangers to raise if you ever fall on hard times - y'know - as it's such a loving thing to do. After all, in another of your answers you state that: ""It is a great act of love to realize that you don't have the means to raise a child and to let someone else who does do it."" So, if your hubby lost his job and your income was struggling, you'd give your kids up, yes?