What if you couldn't choose?

You're forgetting something here.

On that list of what APs will and will not accept are things like FAS/FAE, and in-utero drug exposure.

These things are not part of a roulette wheel. They happen as a deliberate choice by the pregnant women. If a pregnant woman does not use drugs/alcohol during pregnancy there is a 0% chance that these disorders will spontaneously occur.

Since adoption is a choice for the APs, after what should be a long process of self examination and an honest inventory of their financial and personal resources, I see nothing wrong with APs being forthcoming with regards to what special needs they can cope with.

After all, on this forum, APs are constantly held to a higher standard than non-APs. There have been numerous situations where a biological parent's behavior would have been excused or rationalized, where an APs behavior would not be.

Can't have it both ways here.

Even though we chose the age, gender and special need of our daughters we still are spinning the roulette wheel some. We don't know any of the medical or pregnancy related information. We just had to pray that their birth mothers didn't drink alcohol, do drugs or smoke when they were pregnant. These are activities I didn't do when I was pregnant due to the risks and I would not like my adopted children's birth mothers to do either. Did they though? We'll never know for sure.

So it the aspect of prenatal care, conditions that can be controlled I think that AP are within their rights to have certain restrictions. Many people luckily want the children that have been exposed in utero. My hats go off to them, they are better people than I ever will be. I wish I had the patience to deal with some of the problems that they choose to have.

All this being said if any of my children adopted or bio were to develop a severe mental, physical disease I would buck up and do what I have to do. I would never turn my back on them.

Even through an international adoption, I basically played roulette...

The only information I received for my son, was his date of birth, height, weight at 3 days old (my son was not born in a hospital), and his birth-given name... and I received information that his natural mother did not have HIV. But, that was it. I accepted his referral and about 7 months later, flew to Guatemala to meet him for the first time and take physical custody of him. The adoption was completed with me never meeting him... which is why he came to the USA on an IR-4 visa, which meant I needed to readopt him in my state when I got home. He was mine- no matter what.

And, yes, I'd do it all again, if I could afford parenting a second child.

In the beginning I did specify that I wanted to adopt a girl because I am single and I lived with my sister at the time... but things happened and I felt it was meant to be that I tell my agency that I was not adamant about adopting a girl. I told them just to notify me if there was any baby from Guatemala, boy or girl, that needed a home. And when I got *the* call, it was regarding my prescious son. I could not imagaine life without him or life with a daughter... he is just too awesome! And he does have some tiny minor health issues-- but who doesn't?

------------

If anyone wanted to adopt a child... and there was no choosing sex, age, abilities, race, etc., YES, I'd do it the first time.

The second time, however, I'd give it more thought. As I am doing now... I'd love to adopt again, but I can't afford being a parent to two children... this time, it's not just me, I think of how it would affect my son, first.

It's really not quite true that having biological children is entirely left up to chance. People choose a partner with traits they can live with. There are prenatal screenings for many genetic and physical defects. Biological parents can make the decisions about prenatal health, including nutrition, vitamins, medical care, doctor visits, and avoiding alcohol and drugs. Those of us who know our genetic histories can choose whether or not to reproduce based on our medical risks.

It's also not true that biological parents are always able to raise the children they conceive and bear. They can't always just "adapt." Some special needs children simply exceed their parents' capacity to provide care. Sometimes the state will only provide resources after custody is surrendered. These children are sometimes relinquished into the care of others because the parents just can't cope. (I have a friend going through this right now-- she has a child with severe special needs who requires 24/7 specialist care, but the child can't be placed in a residential facility in their state if her parents keep custody-- and it's heartbreaking to watch them have to choose between the child's need for family and need for professional intervention.) Biological parents cannot just automatically handle whatever is flung at them.

When it comes to adoption... why set the parents up for failure? Why leave it up to chance, when the futures of children are at stake? Is it REALLY in the best interests of a severely handicapped child to be placed with parents who couldn't handle her needs, and she ends up in foster care again a few years later? Is it REALLY best for any child in the home if a child who sexually offends against other children gets placed in a home with vulnerable little ones? Is it REALLY in the best interests of a fourteen year old boy to be placed in the home of a twenty five year old single mom without parenting experience?

I am an ardent supporter of adoption from foster care. I strongly, strongly encourage anyone who has a place in their hearts to consider opening their home to a child in need. I strongly support the adoption of older children, minority children, children with special needs, and sibling groups.

But I am NOT in favour of placing children with unprepared adoptive parents, or in favour of placing already vulnerable and traumatized children in homes where they will not receive care suited to their needs. I don't think that helps anyone. I think the best adoptive placement is a permanent and secure one, and that doesn't just happen by accident. I see no logic in placing children by "roulette," because it's ultimately going to be the CHILDREN who suffer.

I see this not as something I can decide if I would or would not do personally, but as something that would be harmful to children in general.

This is an excellent question and one I never really thought about till now. Yes, we did set some guidelines as to which children we would like to foster - but it wasn't set in stone. We did want to foster only boys (my husbands choice) and we didn't state what race (although this isn't part of this discussion), but we did also state that we could only handle mild to moderate special needs. Meaning that we couldn't / weren't able to foster / parent a child with severe medical needs who needed 24/7 care. We weren't opposed to down syndrome...etc.

But I can see where you are coming from when asking this. And I guess my answer would have still been yes. There are people that we have met through classes and such who only foster / adopt extreme special needs children....and they choose to only foster / adopt these children.

If we wouldn't have adopted our son, we never would have persued adoption. We were open to foster care (and we still are, maybe way in the future). It wouldn't care the sex, race or anything like that. If we foster I don't think I would be partial..

Now, when it comes to special needs, there should be a list of people who PREFER a special needs child. I think those people have it in their heart to look beyond a disability. I would worry that another migt just put the child back into the system, much like how they got there.

Both times we adopted we told the agency: any age, any gender, medical needs ok, siblings ok. Really, truly, adoption is always a spin of the roulette wheel. We didn't feel we were ready to adopt until we were ready to accept anything that came with it.

With our first son all we got for information was an email that said "Young boy with heart defect - can't diagnose here. Respiratory and immune problems. Severe Allergies. Need to know asap if you accept." We accepted immediately. But for our next adoption we did limit the medical needs we would accept. My husband and I both work, although different schedules so someone can be with the children. We didn't feel that we could handle two children who were always in the hospital, who we have to tote around their medical equipment everywhere we go. For the last eight or so years, I haven't slept more than three hours in a row at night. It wouldn't be fair to the children to play the saint and ask for more than we could handle. We were referred a pair of older siblings, one of whom has a birth defect that a few more surgeries should correct.

Yes it is true we couldn't choose if we could get pregnant. We could choose not to do drugs, smoke, drink, etc. We could choose to eat healthly take our vitamins, get prenatal care for better outcomes. That is the difference. Also people can choose as horrible as it may be to terminate a special needs child if found early enough. I did adopt a child that had some problems don't regret it sometimes wish his life was a little easier and he wasn't so "special"

It depends on the choice.

I feel it would be selfish of me to deliberately bring a child into a situation that I know I couldn't cope with.

I couldn't cope with a child with severe mental difficulties.

I used to volunteer and be a play buddy for children at a local special needs school, and I know that I couldn't do what those people do without it breaking up my family and sending me mad.

I have great admiration for families that can cope. I may be selfish, but I am being honest. Our family could not cope.

What I can cope with and what I want however I think is a different matter.

Physical disabilities are not a great problem for us. My MIL is a nurse, my FIL a doctor. We both know people with all kinds of physical disabilities, and we could and will, cope with those if needs be.

Race, gender, and age to a great extent are really not a great concern, sibling groups will be considered, as long as they're all younger than our daughter when we do, as i believe that is the best way.

I think there's a difference between wanting and coping.

Everyone deals with some disappointment when they have a child. Some part of everyone wants a boy, some part wants a girl. Either way, a part of you will be disappointed.

A part of us feels everything. The important thing is to love your children, and love them regardless, finding the parts that make you overjoyed with love.

Rdit - I think it does. Because the disabilities thing

I would also have to choose whether to continue with the pregnancy. Which, in the cases above, I don;t think I could.

That is a part of the choice.

If I couldn't choose at all, I don't think I would. Because it wouldn't be fair on the child to go to a family unable to care for them.

We are about to get our foster care license and my cousin has asked us to take her baby since the state won't allow her to care for him. My lil brother is also her son and has autism and ADHD along with many other learning disabilities. We knew we eventually wanted to adopt if we couldnt have our own kids but we didnt get to choose, we were asked to take this child knowing he could possibly have many mental and learning disabilities. As we come along getting our foster care license I don't want to choose! I couldnt find it in my heart to turn away a child because of certain criteria. I will never say no to anyone who needs my love and a stable home envirornment. I couldnt even think about being choosy.