Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Looking for Juno

HAYLEY MICK

FromTuesday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 1:35 PM EDT 24/03/08

Canadian couples desperate to adopt are going directly to the source, setting up websites to sell themselves to pregnant women ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. J W from Canada writes: I really hope these couples are careful. You hear stories from the U.S. about well-intending would-be adopters getting scammed by heartless people on the internet. I would try to arrange a face to face meeting as soon as possible to ensure I wasn't being taken for a ride. That being said, adoption can be a great option for people who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant and for those who want to raise a family but can't conceive.
  2. CD W from Canada writes: The alternative for the child is not great, usually death by abortion, but that is another topic. Folks who want to adopt a child, good luck and we thank you in advance for your life affirming choice.
  3. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: Couples like this do not get my sympathy. For starters, no one gets a guarantee that they will be able to conceive healthy babies at any time, let alone according to the schedule of life goals the couple may have set for themselves. More importantly, there are plenty of children right in their own communities that need good homes. No, they're not Gerber-baby perfect infants, and they have issues, but parenting is always a gamble. And if these would-be adoptive parents are such good, generous, ready-to-love people, why are they not considering this option?
  4. Woman of Reason from London, UK, Canada writes: Melissa, you seem to feel you have the right to judge other people's choices. So, I'm curious how many special needs children have you adopted?
  5. Jennifer R from Ottawa, Canada writes: Melissa nowhere in the article do the people say they want perfect children or that they held off having kids for some reason or that kids in their own area are not good enough. Maybe some of them only met their spouses late in life, have tried & failed to conceive, suffered miscarriages or been told that for medical reasons they can't have kids, or have tried adopting in their own city but are on a long waiting list. Do not judge why they are adopting unless you know the full story. For all you know they would be happy with less than gerber baby perfect.
  6. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: Why, Woman, so you can judge my choices? Hey, I'm not spending thousands to advertise my parental suitability on the internet in the hopes of attracting some random pregnant woman somewhere on the planet when there are kids who need homes right in my own neighbourhood. Judge that!
  7. Chris H from Canada writes: I think that maybe what Melissa is trying to get at (and it's what makes me a wee bit queasy) is the apparent commodification of parenting. The ability of prospective parents and birth mothers to "shop" for families is one aspect of this version of family-making that makes me a bit uneasy.

    It must seem so dehumanizing for a couple to have to advertise and market themselves in order to achieve that very basic human need to love another person. And Melissa is right: how many children in need of that love are being overlooked because they don't have the right 'shelf-appeal'? The onus is on fertile couples to look at that question too, not just the ones forced into adoption.
  8. Rob Smith from Toronto, Canada writes: JW, warns adoptive parents to be careful because in the States people are scammed. I am a birthfather. Canada and the States are very different. In Canada, you don't hear the "scamminig" stories as no money is exchanged, that would be illegal.

    Being a birthfather, I am aware of the websites that profiles are posted on. The two mentioned here, don't charge thousands of dollars to advertise like one poster says they do.
  9. stand up mimi from Canada writes: I find it depressing that couples have to outshine each other on websites just to be deemed worthy by a random stranger to adopt her child. It's not enough now to be sensible, loving people in a reasonable financial position. Now you also have to be better looking than anyone else, have a better website, a bigger yard and more education. At least, it seems so if you're going this route. I feel bad for these couples.
  10. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: Thanks Chris H :) I knew my comments would be unpopular but I feel it's an important one to make, and I've thought so for a long time. The issue of infertility and adoption (including overseas adoption) gets WAY more attention than the issue of not-so-perfect kids in foster homes. I understand that it's heartbreaking not to be able to conceive, but these are adults and part of being an adult is coping with not always getting what you want. To me, it would be far more heartbreaking to be a child with health issues of one kind or another, and being shuttled around between foster homes, and having no real connection to your biological family (who maybe hurt you in some way). And lots of kids go through that - it's heartbreaking just to think about and these kids ACTUALLY LIVE IT. And these internet-advertising would-be parents with all this love to give are CHOOSING to PASS on these types of kids. And I'm supposed to feel sorry for them? Er, no. Since I'm sure someone's wondering, no, I don't have kids. I'm not even ready to get a dog. I doubt I am parenting material. But if I did conceive the desire to be a parent, I would hope that I have the open-mindnesses, patience and generosity of spirit to love ANY child in my care, come what may.
  11. Eric the Red from Uzbekistan writes: Chris H: you make salient, salient points about interesting potential ramifications of this type of scenario.

    Biology, Marketing, Advertising, Ethics, Bioethics, Law and a host of other issues wrapped up in a package that's fertile ground for business.

    I found this article pitiably lacking in background detail regarding the couple desperate for a child. I have to ask: how long have they known that conception and fertility were issues? If adoption really takes up to three years, it begs the question that they should have been on this sooner than later. As well, once they end up getting a child, can they really handle one in their mid forties? Are they able to provide in all respects to a baby not even a decade shy from their fifties?

    There is something sinister I find about the commodification of adoption.
  12. Eric the Red from Uzbekistan writes: Arguably, could more money and wealthier clients get greater exposure and thus heighten their attractiveness, marketability and overall success in becoming adoptive parents?

    Does then having more money have the final says in becoming an adoptive parent?

    Sorry - this issue strikes me as a Pandora's box of sorts...
  13. Colin C from Calgary, Canada writes: Melissa - it's not quite as simple as saying if you want to adopt, you should be willing to adopt any child. The adoption of a special needs child takes special abilitied parents, and not all parents have the gifting to do that. In addition, there are at times circumstances that make the adoption of special needs children inadvisable. I know - I am an adoptive parent of two children. In our first attempt at adopting, we were offered twins who had been crack exposed in their early development and might therefore be high needs children. We were absolutely willing to proceed, but the adoptive mother eventually chose to parent. We then adopted a very special little 13 month old girl who is an absolute joy to us. One of the crucial issues in a healthy adoptive parent child relationship is the bonding that is developed between parents and child. Without bonding, a child can grow up with *severe* sociological issues. In our second adoption, we were again asked to consider twins that were significantly exposed to crack early on and we chose not to this time. Having to deal with two potentially high needs children with another toddler also needing continued attention would probably have stretched our emotional resources beyond their limit and risked serious adverse consequences on our first child. We instead adopted a second child who, just like special needs children, desperately needed a good home also. I agree that it would be great if more people would adopt special needs children, and these children also need good homes. But not everybody is cut out to be able to give these children what they need. No one is asking you to feel sorry for these parents, but to criticise them because they haven't gone the special needs route is not particularly helpful to your cause of drawing attention to special needs children.
  14. Colin C from Calgary, Canada writes: Melissa - it's not quite as simple as saying if you want to adopt, you should be willing to adopt any child. The adoption of a special needs child takes special abilitied parents, and not all parents have the gifting to do that. In addition, there are at times circumstances that make the adoption of special needs children inadvisable. I know - I am an adoptive parent of two children. In our first attempt at adopting, we were offered twins who had been crack exposed in their early development and might therefore be high needs children. We were absolutely willing to proceed, but the adoptive mother eventually chose to parent. We then adopted a very special little 13 month old girl who is an absolute joy to us. One of the crucial issues in a healthy adoptive parent child relationship is the bonding that is developed between parents and child. Without bonding, a child can grow up with *severe* sociological issues. In our second adoption, we were again asked to consider twins that were significantly exposed to crack early on and we chose not to this time. Having to deal with two potentially high needs children with another toddler also needing continued attention would probably have stretched our emotional resources beyond their limit and risked serious adverse consequences on our first child. We instead adopted a second child who, just like special needs children, desperately needed a good home also. I agree that it would be great if more people would adopt special needs children, and these children also need good homes. But not everybody is cut out to be able to give these children what they need. No one is asking you to feel sorry for these parents, but to criticise them because they haven't gone the special needs route is not particularly helpful to your cause of drawing attention to special needs children.
  15. Colin C from Calgary, Canada writes: Oops - don't know how that got posted twice - my apologies.
  16. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: Colin, I see your point. But here's the rub: Parenting is a risk. For every parent. These adoptive parents might just as easily have conceived children naturally who turned out to have special needs. What would they have done then? Presumably they would have risen to the challenge and given their children the necessary care. So why not do so for an adopted child? To put it bluntly, I think some of these would-be parents are "cherry-picking" from the pool of available children. What they're really shopping for is a certain idealized experience of parenting.
  17. whatevah D from Canada writes: Melissa Pauline: I think if people want to adopt from overseas or not, they are helping a child who is unwanted and giving them a loving home. I know lots of people who wouldn't adopt AT ALL- but they would conceive. Is that better? I can understand wanting to adopt a baby (although some of these overseas babies are not exactly newborns when they come over) because I think it is easier for a baby to become integrated into a family unit then an older child. For instance, my cousin was adopted as a baby; never questioned who his parents were. On the other hand, a good friend from high school was adopted at 11; she knew who her parents were... the drunks who would be passed out on the floor when she came home from work. I applaud her parents for adopting her and her brother, but it ain't easy and takes a lot of effort.
  18. stand up mimi from Canada writes: Melissa - I disagree that these hopeful parents are "cherry-picking". It's one thing to rise to a challenge that is placed on you; it's quite another thing to go seeking a challenge. These couples may be brilliant, loving parents and still not feel they are up to caring for a special needs child. Who says they have to be all things? Why should adoptive parents be held to such ridiculously high standards just because they can't give birth to their own children?
  19. whatevah D from Canada writes: PS: I'm not saying any children don't take a lot of effort; I just think an older child who has been through the foster system, abused, neglected, etc, might not be the right choice for some parents. It is very tragic for sure, but I could see coming to the realization that I might not be that parent.
  20. Colin C from Calgary, Canada writes: Melissa - I assume you realize that when any adoption occurs, there is risk? In our circle of adoptive parent relationships, there are all sorts of issues that have been discovered since adoption. We ourselves have had to deal with issues with our first that no birth parent has. And our second is young enough that we don't know if there are issues existing that we are unaware of, but we are his dad and mum now and we'll deal with it just as we would with a birth child. However, you appear to be advocating that one should be willing to accept an almost certainty of special needs rather than a chance at it. Adopting any older child, let alone a special needs child, is a path fraught with risk. You can't just blithely state that all should be willing for it - it's not that simple. There are adopted children who have not bonded with their adoptive parents (for no fault of their parents doing the best they know how) and therefore have not developed a normal sense of sociological responsibility. Some (who themselves have been abused) turn out to be pathological abusers of other children in the family or really serious disruptors of what most of us would consider normal family life. When a prospective adoptive parent goes through training, as all must do in Canada, any competent adoption agency will stess this and seek to prepare parents for it. You have stressed that you are not a parent, nor ready to do such, yet criticize others who would like to parent. Please, advocate for special needs children, but be careful about making judgement on those that don't feel able to meets the needs of special needs children.
  21. whatevah D from Canada writes: Thanks Colin C. I find your posts insightful. And congratulations on your adoptions. You sound like great parents.
  22. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: mimi - "These couples may be brilliant, loving parents and still not feel they are up to caring for a special needs child. " Well, then, perhaps they should consider themselves lucky, because if they had conceived naturally, a special needs child might have been exactly what they got. To all those who think I am judgemental, remember, I'm not the one claiming to want desperately to be a parent while ignoring the needy kids right in my own community. I think it would be more honest for these would-be parents to say something like "We really only feel up to caring about 1) our own biological children, however they turn out or 2) other people's kids as long as they meet our criteria. Accordingly, we have adjusted our expectations to include the possibility that we may not get a kid."
  23. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: whatevah - "I think if people want to adopt from overseas or not, they are helping a child who is unwanted and giving them a loving home" These kids aren't necessarily unwanted. It may be that their parents simply cannot afford to keep them, and did not have good access to birth control so that they could avoid a situation in which they had to give away their child. I think (don't actually have the information) that in overseas adoptions the parents have literally no idea what happens to their child after the adoption. I'm sorry, but that's got to be harder than never having had a child at all.
  24. Colin C from Calgary, Canada writes: Thanks whatevah D - Adoption is an absolutely wonderful way to build a family - there's nothing like the arms of a little gal around one's neck, or hearing "Daddy" when she wakes up in the morning. But adoption is also a whole lot more stressful and expensive than birthing - both in Canada and overseas. In the States (where we adopted our second) it's big business, and one does need to hold one's nose when dealing the agencies down there. We have know parents who have lost tens of thousands of dollars through agencies that demand payment up front, then if the birth mom changes her mind (which she has every right to do) they lose big time. For us, we didn't go to the extent of the couple mentioned in this article (and I don't think we would), but it did feel like a competition where the adoptive parents were simply there to fund all those making dollars from it. In Canada, it's not as bad, but it is still very much like a competition. Having said that, many of us wouldn't really sweat over the price of a new car when we felt we need one, and the joy a child brings to our lives is worth far more than a piece of steel. In fairness to Melissa, however, there is a lack of public awareness of all the older children that would also love a home, and while there are horror stories, there are also wonderful success stories.
  25. whatevah D from Canada writes: Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: mimi - "These couples may be brilliant, loving parents and still not feel they are up to caring for a special needs child. " Well, then, perhaps they should consider themselves lucky, because if they had conceived naturally, a special needs child might have been exactly what they got. To all those who think I am judgemental, remember, I'm not the one claiming to want desperately to be a parent while ignoring the needy kids right in my own community. I think it would be more honest for these would-be parents to say something like "We really only feel up to caring about 1) our own biological children, however they turn out or 2) other people's kids as long as they meet our criteria. Accordingly, we have adjusted our expectations to include the possibility that we may not get a kid."

    that's your choice. I still think taking in an unwanted child (from wherever on the planet) is ultimately a good thing. You're saying you aren't willing to adopt at all; that you'd rather conceive for whatever reason... These people are doing a good thing; instead of adding to the world's population biologically they plan to raise an unwanted child.
  26. whatevah D from Canada writes: Colin C from Calgary, Canada writes: Thanks whatevah D - Adoption is an absolutely wonderful way to build a family - there's nothing like the arms of a little gal around one's neck, or hearing "Daddy" when she wakes up in the morning. But adoption is also a whole lot more stressful and expensive than birthing - both in Canada and overseas.

    I hear what you're saying about the successful stories of older adoptees; my friend who was adopted at 11 had all-in-all a great experience with her adoptive parents.

    I always planned to adopt a second child (I have one biological child), but I know that agencies do not approve of anyone who has suffered anxiety and depression and I had both in the post-partum period. It was quite severe and I don't think I could stomach going through that kind of intense scrutiny. It definitely is easier to get pregnant and give birth for some of us.

    All the best.
  27. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: whatevah - "You're saying you aren't willing to adopt at all; that you'd rather conceive for whatever reason"

    ------

    Actually, I never said that. I said "if I conceived the desire to be a parent", which includes either possibility.

    --

    Not all adopted kids are "unwanted". Huge difference between not wanting a child and not being able to care for it. Or too poor to care for it.
  28. Colin C from Calgary, Canada writes: Whatevah D - it is tough to go through the scrutiny of the home study - what birth parent has to prove that they can be a reasonable birth parent before they have children? However, it is a necessary evil that must be endured. Having said that, the agencies that do the studies are also people who are imperfect and understand that certain life experiences do not necessarily disqualify one for being a good parent overall. If it has been some time since your "episode" :-) and overall your parenting experience has been positive, by all means at least explore that possibility. My wife and I are by no means perfect and we didn't know if we'd qualify, but we did. It's the best thing we ever did.
  29. stand up mimi from Canada writes: whatevah D from Canada writes: "It definitely is easier to get pregnant and give birth for some of us."

    It seems so. Not only do adoptive parents have to undergo intense scrutiny from the agencies, it seems they must also be subject to judgemental comments from strangers who believe they should all be willing to take a special needs child on instead of an ordinary baby (which has its own challenges). Again, I will say that the expectations some people (including agencies) have of adoptive parents is ridiculous. They are not superheroes. Does the "desperate" label mean that they should seek out a challenge they are not comfortable they can handle well? How does that help the child?

    whatevah D - you make a good point. Even those who have proven to be good parents (as I believe you must be, having read a lot of your posts) are often subjected to intense, possibly unfair scrutiny if they want to adopt. I realize it's necessary to do thorough checks, of course. It just seems to me that adoptive parents have to withstand a lot of judging that even birth parents of questionable capabilities never have to worry about.
  30. Peter The Not Quite Great from Edmonton, Canada writes: Melissa - Adoptive parent s don't "cherry pick" from the available children. In Alberta ( and everywhere else in Canada that I'm aware of) the birth parent chooses the family the child will be placed with.

    The adoptive couple can specify the sort of child they are willing to consider adopting - gender, ethnicity, medical history, age, etc. Deciding on those things does feel like drawing up a "shopping list" but it forces you to think very realistically about your parenting ability and your sense of what you can cope with (as best as you can tell).

    Not everyone feels capable of certain things, and yes it's true that if you have a biological child with special needs you deal with it. But it's quite another thing to deliberately choose that. So please keep advocating for special needs children but don't criticize those who don't adopt special needs children. Adoption isn't social work, you're not "doing a child a favour" or "setting an example" you're forming a family. And when you need to form that family in such a deliberate way it means making some very difficult choices.
  31. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: Peter - "The adoptive couple can specify the sort of child they are willing to consider adopting - gender, ethnicity, medical history, age, etc. " -- That's cherry-picking. Heck, that's more cherry-picking than you get to do when you conceive naturally. -- mimi - Perhaps you were not referring to me when you commented about "strangers who believe they should all be willing to take a special needs child ", but anyway, I never said that. -- To clarify: 1) I have no sympathy for would-be adoptive parents who won't consider a special needs kid but will spend money on internet ads and other forms of brokering to get a specific type of baby (a type of baby they may not have gotten naturally). It's my right to decide who I will have sympathy for. 2) Too much attention is paid the "suffering" of these would-be parents who are, after all, making a choice about what child to parent. It's a bit like the person who complains about being out of work for sooooo long, but who won't take the jobs they are offered because they don't feel the jobs suit them just right. 3) Too little attention is paid to the kids toughing it out in the foster care system. These kids are WAY worse off than those would-be parents on the websites. -- So, if you're looking to adopt but won't consider a special needs kid, fine. But don't whine about it. No one promised you the baby of your dreams.
  32. Chris H from Canada writes: There is, I think, a fundamental difference between the couple that says, "We want a baby," and the couple that says, "We would be good, loving parents."

    I fear that too many families are made/found based on the first approach.
  33. Michelle M from Toronto, Canada writes: Why would people be disappointed that there aren't babies available for adoption? Adoiption as a practice that finds babies for families is wrong. If there are less mothers surrendering children for adoption - this is good. Many mothers-to-be seek out adoption because they need support, are unsure about what will happen after their baby is born. Many do not follow through with an adoption plan once they have given birth. Many need support and guidance - not to meet and develop a relationship with people who want her child. That's coercive and some mothers end up feeling pressured by adoption agency staff, lawyers and the prospective adopters to surrender her child. How fair is this to her child and to her? Adoption is separating a child from its family and identity for life. This what is important and should be the primary concern and focus of all potential adoptions; not those who want to build a family. The (potential) losses for the mothers and the children outwiegh the the needs of those wanting another woman's child. Adoption means a child is losing its mother, father, family and identity. A mother, father and family are losing a child. The idea is to help mothers keep their babies, if this isn't possible then adoption can be considered as an option. No one should be soliciting expectant mothers with hope of meeting her, only to separate her from child and her child from her.
  34. stand up mimi from Canada writes: Melissa - 1) These adoptive parents are not looking for your sympathy, as near as I can tell; 2) Wanting a child is nothing like looking for work - the comparison is ludicrous; 3) Feel free to bring attention to kids in foster care.

    I wonder if you think it's a picnic for couples who have chosen to try and adopt because they have been unable to conceive. Lots of times it has been a long, hard road for them, filled with disappointment and pain. Your flippant comment that they shouldn't "whine" is pretty revealing.
  35. Colin C from Calgary, Canada writes: Melissa - you state "That's cherry-picking. Heck, that's more cherry-picking than you get to do when you conceive naturally." Are your really that out of touch? When you conceive naturally, what are you picking? - almost absolutely everything except the gender of the child. Even the health of the child is often screened by many birth parents today. You know your child's parents, its ethnicity, its medical history, its siblings, its grandparents, the place it was born, the circumstances of its conception, absolutely everything. An adoptive parent gets very little choice in any of this - by necessity, we state the parameters we are willing to accept as part of our family, and frankly, most of us put very few restrictions on them at all. You are holding those that want to adopt to a far higher standard than any birth parent. If you are advocating for caring people to care for children in the foster system, I would suggest a little more compassionate approach.
  36. Chris H from Canada writes: Michelle, with the prevalence of open (domestic) adoptions, where the mother still has access to the child, and there are no secrets about parentage, many of your fears are somewhat exaggerated.

    I suspect, too, that the trend toward there being fewer babies for adoption has less to do with young single women spontaneously deciding to become mommies, and more to do with improved access to therapeutic abortions. So don't get too excited about it.

    And as far as a child losing a mother/father/family/etc -- true, adoption for many families has been a painful and wrenching experience (hence the increasing prevalence of the open adoption). But conversely, if mama's a crack whore, the baby is better off with that nice, desperate couple who put an ad on the web. No absolutes here.
  37. melissa nelson from Toronto, Canada writes: I am an adoptive mom. These websites are for people who wish to adopt a child through a private domestic adoption (meaning in Canada, not through the child welfare system). I adopted my child this way. Like myself, many adoptive parents try the public route and they wait forever. I was on the public waiting lists for years. Like the couple in this article, I didn't want to just "sit and wait". So I decided to try the private route and I am thankful I did as that is how I became a parent. Couples who go the private route are not "cherry-picking". There is no gaurentee that we will be chosen or that the birth parents who chose us will give birth to healthy babies. These children can be special needs children as well. We have an open adoption with our child's birthmom and I can tell you that my child was not an "unwanted child" as someone here posted. Most often parent don't chose adoption because they didn't want their child! My daughter's birthmom loves her and wanted her. However her circumstances lead her to decide that adoption was a good option for her child. Adoptees are not unwanted children, infact they are often loved by two families. As for the arguement that adoption separates a parent and child, isn't that the birth parents choice? There will always be women who chose adoption. As long as that is the case, it's a good thing, there will always be adoptive parents. Although my daughter's birthmom wanted to parent her, she didn't feel she could provide her with the kind of home that she wanted to at the time of her birth. She chose adoption. Having said that, what's wrong with couples wanting to reach as many people as possible? I think this is a great option as their profiles will be viewed by more people and women considering adoption can more easily find the family for whom they are searching. Had I known of such an option, when I was waitng to adopt, I may well have used it.
  38. Peter The Not Quite Great from Edmonton, Canada writes: Michelle M - Adoption has changed a great deal and most are now open. Which means that the child will grow up knowing their birthparents, history, ethnicity, birth culture, etc. So I don't think it's fair to say that adoption permanently separates a child from all that. It certainly used to but shouldn't now.

    Of course that depends on the adoptive parents and the birth parents. All of them have to be committed to keeping this relationship alive.

    Adoption is almost always second choice for everyone but that doesn't mean that it has to be second best.

    For all of you who feel free to comment on adoptive families, how would you like to have your family and choices discussed in a public forum like this? The comments today have been sensitive and reasonable but I must admit it feels a little weird to be the subject of this type of discussion.
  39. Dani O from Canada writes: It's amazing...as a prospective adoptive mom you hear stories from others about people making judgements and/or ignorant comments about adoption but to see it in black and white is simply "amazing".

    Until you've suffered through years & years of infertility treatments...until you've been put through police checks, RCMP checks, Interpol checks, financial checks, references, gone through a homestudy...had your entire life more or less since birth put under a microscope to determine your "ability to parent" then you are in no way shape or form capable of making an informed comment. Adoptive parents aren't "cherry picking". That's an ignorant thing to think...and an even more ignorant thing to say outloud.
  40. H M from Canada writes: I have an aunt and her husband who have been tryuing to adopt for over 10 years, and I don't think that their choices to not adopt any children over 5 or who have severe drug-exposure disabilities is 'cherry picking'. I guarantee you that if they had conceived naturally, they would not have borne a 6 year old. They might have borne a child with disabilities, but it wouldn't have been due to drug exposure.

    And I think there is a very large difference between choosing and accepting some situations. I would (hopefully) rise to the challenge if I happened to give birth to a child with any disabilities, but I can almost guarantee I would not go ahead and choose that. And I would do my very best to try to avoid any child of mine developing in utero disabilities.
  41. C P from Canada writes: I'm shocked, amazed, and unbearably pleased at the conversation here today. I disagree with Melissa's point of view and side with those who encourage her to bring the issue of special needs kids to light in a different manner, but it was sure nice to read arguments that were reasonably thought out and articulate. the comments section often reads like something a child would write.

    thanks also to Colin C, whatevah D, and all of the rest who have shed some light on the adoption process in Canada. I'm a 30 year old recently divorced woman with no kids and I would absolutely love to have a child in my life. I mull over my options every day. I know I have plenty of time to naturally conceive, but the clock sure feels like it's ticking....

    anyway, good conversation. shall we continue this over dinner at my place?
  42. Colin C from Calgary, Canada writes: Hey C P - thanks for your kind words (and I agree about the normal banality of the comments section). There are options for single women to adopt, though they are becoming less available (China recently restricted their availability to single folks). One big question on the horizon is what the Hague convention will do to adoption from the States. The US has been one of the few places Canadians (and single women) can adopt from and receive a newborn, and quite quickly if you are willing to adopt a child of African American descent or part thereof (but it can be expensive). After April 1st, the US has signed on to the Hague convention which advocates that all efforts be made to adopt children within their national / cultural origin. There are differing opions on how this will affect Canadian adoptions. Only time will tell. Some Hague certified agencies are saying it won't have much affect - if the birth mother chooses a Canadian couple, that can somehow influence the decision. The similarity between Canadian culture and American may make it more acceptable under the Hague. But others are very concerned about this limiting access to adoption. The sad thing is that AA children and children of mixed race are often not wanted enough in their home country, the US, and that this might inadvertently just restrict the availability of good homes to children there. It might also just increase the expense of adoptions of those children that can't be adopted out in the States in that the adoptive parents will also have to bear the cost of foster care for the child while the Hague processes are followed - possibly up to 6 months. We don't really know - only time will tell.
  43. Michelle M from Toronto, Canada writes: Chris H from Canada writes: Michelle, with the prevalence of open (domestic) adoptions, where the mother still has access to the child, and there are no secrets about parentage, many of your fears are somewhat exaggerated. "I suspect, too, that the trend toward there being fewer babies for adoption has less to do with young single women spontaneously deciding to become mommies, and more to do with improved access to therapeutic abortions. So don't get too excited about it. And as far as a child losing a mother/father/family/etc -- true, adoption for many families has been a painful and wrenching experience (hence the increasing prevalence of the open adoption). But conversely, if mama's a crack whore, the baby is better off with that nice, desperate couple who put an ad on the web. No absolutes here." Yes, Chris H - yes, the crack-whore-mother often comes up when discussing adoption. Have you researched adoptees that were abused or murdered by their adopters? Not all people who are parents, adoptive or not, make good parents. Infertility does not automatically qualify anyone as a good parent. Again, my point is that we shouldn't be soliciting mothers for the purpose of surrendering their children for an open or closed adoption - it is isn't about finding babies for those wanting to build a family. Abortion is legal in Canada. Abortion is a decision made in the first two months of pregnancy. Adoption can be decided before and after a mother has given birth (hopefully at least three months after - never 24 hours) and is completely sure that she is not able to parent her child, that the father is not able to parent his child, and that no extended family members are able to parent. We don't make babies to sell to prosepctive adopters. There are no legal contracts (yet) for open adoptions. The adopted person can be cut off from their family at any time. Sadly, this happens often.
  44. melissa nelson from Toronto, Canada writes: Writtein by Michelle: "Again, my point is that we shouldn't be soliciting mothers for the purpose of surrendering their children for an open or closed adoption - it is isn't about finding babies for those wanting to build a family." Couples on these websites aren't soliciting mothers. They are making their desire to adopt and their information available for any mother or fathers who are looking for it. Soliciting means going to the mother and father and asking. The websites allow women considering adoption to go to the couple, not the other way around. My daughter's birthmother has told me that she has heard your arguement repeatedly. It bothers her because she chose adoption and as her child's mother, she had the right to make that choice. She chose myself and my husband from profiles presented to her by a liscensee, in an office, much like the women mentioned in this article. In order for women who wish to place a child for adoption to do so, there need to be adoptive parents. It's a good thing that birth parents can now pick the adoptive parnents themself. My daughter's birthmom said she may have aborted if she wasn't able to chose her daughter's parents herself...she didn't want this important decision left up to someone else. The websites are allowing more women the option of reading these profiles and contacting the potential adoptive parents themselves. Noone is going to contact a pregnant woman and ask for her baby, that's not the information that is being provided on websites. More choices or more easily accessible choicces (more couples to view) is a good thing for women considering adoption. You are right, adoption is not about finding babies for the prospective adoptive families. It's about finding families for the babies that mothers and fathers are choosing to place for adoption. That is exactly what these websites provide. By the way, abortions are not only done in the first two months of a pregnancy in Canada.
  45. whatevah D from Canada writes: Chris H from Canada writes: Michelle, with the prevalence of open (domestic) adoptions, where the mother still has access to the child, and there are no secrets about parentage, many of your fears are somewhat exaggerated.

    I suspect, too, that the trend toward there being fewer babies for adoption has less to do with young single women spontaneously deciding to become mommies, and more to do with improved access to therapeutic abortions. So don't get too excited about it.

    And as far as a child losing a mother/father/family/etc -- true, adoption for many families has been a painful and wrenching experience (hence the increasing prevalence of the open adoption). But conversely, if mama's a crack whore, the baby is better off with that nice, desperate couple who put an ad on the web. No absolutes here.

    Great post Chris H.

    Just a comment I made about "'unwanted" children. I realize some birth parents can't take care of their children; I commend them for making this very difficult decision to choose adoption. I sincerely didn't mean to offend. However, some kids who are put up for adoption are neglected, abused, etc I'm sure, and I was just pointing out that in those cases, as well as in cases where parents can't care for the children, it is great that people like this couple are willing to step up to the plate and provide a family environment.
  46. Chris H from Canada writes: Oh yeah! No kidding a woman shouldn't be pressured to give up her child! I can see that happening in some countries, but I doubt very much that there is institutionalized solicitation of Canadian women to give up their kids. Am I totally wrong in assuming this? Apart from being informed of all her options, I can't see many women here being brow-beaten into giving up their wanted babies. And I'm pretty sure it's illegal to pay for babies here. It's not perfect, and like anything involving human beings, sometimes it's downright vicious, but I still think (know, actually) that adoptions can be a positive thing. It is a good option for women to have.

    And to the person who is so pissed that we blissfully fertile people are even discussing this topic, simmer down. Tough stuff happens to all of us. Yes, your horrible ordeal is awful. But this is, for the most part, a group of concerned, compassionate people who have a stake in how the next generation finds their families. We ARE qualified.
  47. Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: "Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: Thanks Chris H :) I knew my comments would be unpopular but I feel it's an important one to make, and I've thought so for a long time."

    You sound like a very honourable and kind person, Melissa, and I applaud you for those chacteristics. HOWEVER, each set of adopting parents know their special talents, limitations and strengths and it is for THEM to decide what would be best for them and FOR THE CHILD they wish to adopt in order to give each the best results of such adoption.
  48. Rae Vandenberg from Canada writes: I'm very much pro-choice, because I recognize abortion as a necessary evil. Having said that, I wish more women would consider putting an unwanted child up for adoption. Adoption is a beautiful, selfless act and birth mothers who look out for the health of their unborn child and place their babies in loving homes should be honoured and supported financially and emotionally.
  49. Michelle M from Toronto, Canada writes: "Adoption is a beautiful, selfless act and birth mothers who look out for the health of their unborn child and place their babies in loving homes should be honoured and supported financially and emotionally."

    How about honouring, supporting financially and emotionally a mother before she has to decide the fate of her uborn child to that of adoption. Lots of adopted persons wish their mothers had been supported before they were sent for adoption. Seaparting mother and child is never a beautiful act.
  50. whatevah D from Canada writes: Michelle M from Toronto, Canada writes: "Adoption is a beautiful, selfless act and birth mothers who look out for the health of their unborn child and place their babies in loving homes should be honoured and supported financially and emotionally."

    How about honouring, supporting financially and emotionally a mother before she has to decide the fate of her uborn child to that of adoption. Lots of adopted persons wish their mothers had been supported before they were sent for adoption. Seaparting mother and child is never a beautiful act.

    I completely disagree. I don't think the "birth mother" is necessarily the person who should raise the child if a perfectly loving adoptive mother who has the financial means and desire to raise that child is waiting in the wings. I suspect you have had a personal experience; I'm sure all experiences are unique. From my perspective having had a close family member adopted at three months I know for a fact that he doesn't feel this way at all. Having said that, if a birth mother wants to keep the child, then yes I agree she needs more support.
  51. Rae Vandenberg from Canada writes: Michelle,

    I don't think all women who are pregnant should raise their children. Some women are not mature enough, emotionally stable enough, physically well enough, or financially stable enough to raise children. Kudos to those women who put the needs of their children above any selfish desire they might have to raise children in an unstable or unhealthy environment.

    Frankly, I also don't think it's fair for any teenage girl to be expected to give up on her adolescence and young adulthood to raise a child. Parenting should be something one wants to do and is capable of doing.
  52. Rae Vandenberg from Canada writes: BTW, I want to correct myself. In an earlier post I said, "Having said that, I wish more women would consider putting an unwanted child up for adoption." What I meant to say is an unexpected child. I realize that birth mothers also have hopes and dreams for their birth child and that the child is not "unwanted."
  53. Michelle M from Toronto, Canada writes: Rae wrote: "I completely disagree. I don't think the "birth mother" is necessarily the person who should raise the child if a perfectly loving adoptive mother who has the financial means and desire to raise that child is waiting in the wings.
    Kudos to those women who put the needs of their children above any selfish desire they might have to raise children in an unstable or unhealthy environment."

    A selfish desire to keep her child? How so you know what environment the child would have lived in or how their life would turn out? An unselfish person would be the one who puts her selfish desires to parent aside to help a mother keep her child - who realizes that she is taking a child away from its mother, father, culture and people and helps a woman to begin her life a mother. BTW, every woman who gives birth is a birth mother. A woman who adopts is an adoptive mother.

    And separating children from their families is tragic in any situation including adoption. How can losing one's parents and family been seen as beautiful?
  54. Tom W from Vancouver, Taiwan writes: Honestly, as an adoptee, I too find the financial commodification of adoptions - esp. in the US a little much. Mind you, as Juno showed, it's the medical costs that probably forms the central need for it to be a "tranaction" of the most intimate kinds.

    That said, I'd agree with Melissa in the sense that this article failed to reporting on - even in passing - about the numbers of unwanted children in Foster Care in this country.

    In fact, I wouldn't think it would hurt to "encourage" prospective adoptive parents to accept a Foster Child into their lives.
  55. John Deriso from Edmonton, Canada writes: If you can't wait three years to adopt a child, and must have a baby NOW, then you are not qualified to be a parent. At all.

    They're human beings, not handbags.
  56. Tom W from Vancouver, Taiwan writes: Michelle, I resent your characterization of adoptions as tragic acts: I have two-loving parents, and thank every member of the trinity that the two young Catholic university students who spawned me had the very good sense and bravery to give me up to a wonderful, loving and very capable family. These two people who created me aren't my parents, I've never had a relationship with them.

    Having (and keeping) a child in a world of 6.7 billion is an intrinsically selfish act. A natural, genetically mandated form of selfishness, but selfish nonetheless. Giving a child up is perhaps the most generous, self-less act a women can possibly make.
  57. whatevah D from Canada writes: Tom W from Vancouver, Taiwan writes: Michelle, I resent your characterization of adoptions as tragic acts: I have two-loving parents, and thank every member of the trinity that the two young Catholic university students who spawned me had the very good sense and bravery to give me up to a wonderful, loving and very capable family. These two people who created me aren't my parents, I've never had a relationship with them.

    Exactly my thoughts and glad it worked out for you. To say that a woman will be the best mother for a child because she can biologically conceive that child is ignorant, in my opinion. My aunt who could not conceive and adopted my cousin is a great mother, and he's turned out to be a wonderful father himself.
  58. Amy H. from Canada writes: My reading of Michelle M.'s post is not that she's demonizing adoption. I also read this article and thought: they're missing the fact that fewer adoptions means fewer women going through unwanted pregnancies. Whether that's through more use of protection, Plan B or termination doesn't really matter - more women have been able to take control of their own reproductive systems. At 35 weeks pregnant, swollen, and stiff, but thrilled to be having a baby soon, I can't imagine doing this without wanting the baby in the end.

    I do feel sorry for those who want and cannot have children, but there have been a lot of things I wanted in life and could not have. Are these people still hung up on the fact that they didn't grow up to be astronauts? These websites seem to be stringing these poor couples along with false hope.
  59. whatevah D from Canada writes: Amy H. from Canada writes: My reading of Michelle M.'s post is not that she's demonizing adoption. I also read this article and thought: they're missing the fact that fewer adoptions means fewer women going through unwanted pregnancies. Whether that's through more use of protection, Plan B or termination doesn't really matter - more women have been able to take control of their own reproductive systems. At 35 weeks pregnant, swollen, and stiff, but thrilled to be having a baby soon, I can't imagine doing this without wanting the baby in the end. I do feel sorry for those who want and cannot have children, but there have been a lot of things I wanted in life and could not have. Are these people still hung up on the fact that they didn't grow up to be astronauts? These websites seem to be stringing these poor couples along with false hope. Coming from someone who is pregnant. This is not about not getting the house you want or job you want; this is about sharing the joy of having a child. What is so wrong with adoption ? What is so wrong with loving parents providing a safe and nurturing environment for a child who needs it? As a biological mom who loves her son very much, I would fully adopt a second child to give them a better life. Imagine that; someone who can conceive considering adoption!
  60. Tony Mareschealle from mississauga, Canada writes: At the risk of being a cynic, I guess that children are now just a commodity to be bought and sold to the highest bidder.

    In time as the "Brave New World" evolves we will dispose of the human excess in much the same way - a commodity that has that outlived its usefulness or if 'defective" to be "recalled" and removed from society as being unproductive.
  61. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: stand up mimi - 1) These adoptive parents are not looking for your sympathy, as near as I can tell; 2) Wanting a child is nothing like looking for work - the comparison is ludicrous; 3) Feel free to bring attention to kids in foster care. I wonder if you think it's a picnic for couples who have chosen to try and adopt because they have been unable to conceive. Lots of times it has been a long, hard road for them, filled with disappointment and pain. Your flippant comment that they shouldn't "whine" is pretty revealing. It’s only a long, hard road if you think you are entitled to have the baby you want in the first place. And, again, I must point out, it’s a choice. All of these infertile couples have the option to NOT to try to adopt, and simply play the cards they’ve been dealt. Colin C - When you conceive naturally, what are you picking? - almost absolutely everything except the gender of the child. Even the health of the child is often screened by many birth parents today. You know your child's parents, its ethnicity, its medical history, its siblings, its grandparents, the place it was born, the circumstances of its conception, absolutely everything. An adoptive parent gets very little choice in any of this - by necessity, we state the parameters we are willing to accept as part of our family, and frankly, most of us put very few restrictions on them at all. Ah, you KNOW these background things with a biological child but you don’t CHOOSE them. There’s a difference. (None of us get to choose our ethnicity, for example.) And the moment a prospective adoptive parent “states the parameters” of what they are “willing to accept” in their family, they are, by definition, cherry-picking.
  62. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: Peter - how would you like to have your family and choices discussed in a public forum like this?

    We’re not talking about a particular family, this is a general discussion. And as a matter of fact, we childfree people have others negatively commenting on our choices ALL THE TIME. So unless we&8217;re going to agree as a society to live and let live, there will be no cherry-picking of who gets picked on.

    Dani O -- Until you've suffered through years & years of infertility treatments...until you've been put through police checks, RCMP checks, Interpol checks, financial checks, references, gone through a homestudy...had your entire life more or less since birth put under a microscope to determine your "ability to parent" then you are in no way shape or form capable of making an informed comment.

    But it is a CHOICE to go through all that. These people CHOOSE to suffer those experiences.

    Amy - I do feel sorry for those who want and cannot have children, but there have been a lot of things I wanted in life and could not have.

    Spot on!
  63. whatevah D from Canada writes: Melissa Pauline from Canada writes:

    Amy - I do feel sorry for those who want and cannot have children, but there have been a lot of things I wanted in life and could not have.

    Spot on!

    So you'd rather have them stay in foster care, orphanages in China, etc, all because you feel people shouldn't adopt. Strange outlook.
  64. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: whatevah - So you'd rather have them stay in foster care, orphanages in China, etc, all because you feel people shouldn't adopt. Strange outlook. --- I definitely NEVER said people shouldn't adopt. I said people shouldn't whinge about how tough it is to be childless when there are lots of children available to adopt. It's the whingeing I object to. I NEVER said I'd rather see children rot away in foster care, etc. Heck, I was the first and one of the few in these posts to even mention those kids. I'm the one who has been advocating for more attention for those kids and less for the would-be parents and their "parameters". C'mon, I know you and other posters want to make me out to be evil because I don't feel sorry for a bunch of adults who didn't get their fantasy family on order, but it won't wash. It's not evil not to feel sorry for people who don't have it that bad (if they've got money to spend on website ads, they've got money to spend on therapy to learn how to deal with life's many disappointments). It's not evil to point out that childless couples get articles written about them in major media, but foster kids rarely do (that would be an interesting study). Neither do the parents in poor countries that export their kids for adoption only because they can't afford to keep them. Imagine what that must be like - to give away your child to strangers in another country. THAT's heartbreak. If I were Queen, there would be hardly any adoptions, only because every child would be wanted and every parent would be capable of raising their children (or would get lots of good help).
  65. whatevah D from Canada writes: Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: whatevah - So you'd rather have them stay in foster care, orphanages in China, etc, all because you feel people shouldn't adopt. Strange outlook. --- I definitely NEVER said people shouldn't adopt. I said people shouldn't whinge about how tough it is to be childless when there are lots of children available to adopt. It's the whingeing I object to. I NEVER said I'd rather see children rot away in foster care, etc.

    I'm not trying to make you look evil Melissa... just trying to get your point. In any case, I think it's really hard for people to adopt... again, the scrutiny they go under, the costs etc. Yes, they choose it as you point out, but I have no problem with people speaking of the difficulties.

    I agree that kids in foster care, experiences of international kids should get more press. And yes, I can imagine that having to give up your children to have a better life is a terrible choice to make and that those people need more support. I'm not that vacuous. I just don't understand why you are attacking adoptive parents. If anything you should be attacking the system for not making it easier for parents to adopt children in Canada.
  66. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: I'm not attacking adoptive parents. I'm saying enough with the whingeing already - we all have to play the cards we're dealt. Since you brought it up, however, I wouldn't advocate for easier adoption in Canada. More adoption means more biological parents giving away their kids - I see this as a last resort. As for the scrutiny that prospective adoptive parents go under - I'm sure it's not pleasant but they don't have to do it. They're trying to get someone else's baby, it's a huge responsibility so of course they need to be checked out thoroughly. If they were in the biological parents' shoes, they'd want to know their child was going to safe, sane home.

    ---

    Even in these more recent posts, I see a certain favouritism towards would-be adoptive parents: They are the ones who suffer, who have to jump through hoops and wait a long time and live with the uncertainty, when really they are just trying to do a good thing. Few of these posts have commented on the suffering of the child or the biological parents (and they suffer too, it's not "over" once the baby changes hands).
  67. Peter The Not Quite Great from Edmonton, Canada writes: The discussion here has been great but it does seem to be getting a little edgy. I suppose that's natural given the deeply personal issues here.

    For those of you who wonder about coercion, I think this is unlikely (but not impossible) in Canada. In Alberta birth mother has 10 days after consenting to an adoption to revoke her consent and have her child returned to her. In BC and Saskatchewan she has 30 days. I'm not sure what the time is in the rest of th Canada. The adoption is finalized by the courts abut 6 months after the child is placed with the adoptive parents. If a birth mother can show the court that she was coerced or deceived then the adoption is overturned and the child is returned to her. So she has legal rights that are there to explicitly prevent coercion.

    Adoption isn't the "happily ever after" story that TV and movies so often present. There is incredible pain for the birth mother who places her child and adoptive couples become very aware of that. Things have changed for the better in this respect.

    As for "choosing" it is true that parents who can conceive do get to choose whether or not to smoke, drink, do drugs, take pre-natal vitamins, eat right, etc. Prospective adoptive parents only get to say what birth mother behaviour (and its attendant risks) they are willing to consider. Would you consider minimal, moderate or heavy alcohol use during pregnancy is one of many such questions you have to answer. So again, I don't think of it as choosing or cherry picking. It is more a matter of having to critically look at yourself and assessing what you believe you are capable of. And the more things you say no to the longer you will wait. If you narrow it down enough you will probably never be chosen.
  68. whatevah D from Canada writes: Melissa: sometimes the child suffers when they stay with the biological parents too. I don't believe biological parents are the best parents in every certain situation. Sorry, but I guess we won't see eye to eye on this. I would have loved to adopt a child, but I refuse to put myself through the scrutiny of someone going into my life as i had postpartum depression. Therefore, I think if I have another child, it will have to be the biological way. It's easier.
  69. Peter The Not Quite Great from Edmonton, Canada writes: I ran out of room and have to continue my comment here.

    As for adopting kids in foster care that isn't a fast or easy process either. Melissa it's great that you advocate for them but it isn't as easy as you seem to think. Social services is also very picky about who they will place a child with. As they should be, they are responsible for the kids and must be sure they are being placed in a safe and nurturing environment. Social services is often looking for experienced parents so those of us who have not been able to have children naturally can't even be considered as parents for these kids.

    And the government goes to great lengths to help birth families and keep them together. Again that is a good thing. But the result for many kids is that they spend years in and out of foster care before the government is able to say that adoption is the best option for them. So we're not talking about babies here. We're talking about kids who have (at the least) trouble trusting and forming lasting attachments. This type of adoption takes some very strong and special people. A lot of prospective adoptive parents consider this but decide that we are wiser to adopt an infant first and a child in foster care later.

    I guess I want people to understand that adoption is a painful and imperfect thing. But beautiful things can come out of an open adoption. Like U2 sings, Grace makes beauty out of ugly things.
  70. stand up mimi from Canada writes: Just a note about the comment that poor mothers "export their children for adoption" because they can't afford them. In some cases, it's true that countries allowed to adopt kids out to Canadians do have children in orphanages because of the family's poverty. However, this often has less to do with poverty per se than with drug problems - same as here. And the majority of international adoptions come from China, where the one-child system itself is largely to blame for its abandoned girls. In Korea, where many other adopted children originate, society is again largely to blame, as it places a huge stigma on unwed mothers. It is up to these governments to protect and nurture their own children, and they are beginning to do so. In the meantime, it's better for children to grow up with a family, even a family of a different culture, than to grow up in an institution. The fact that there are so many willing adoptive parents to take them may make this look like shopping for "someone else's baby" but most of the kids really don't mind that they were given loving parents. "Grace makes beauty out of ugly things." Well said, Peter. No, adopting a child is not something to be taken lightly, particularly if it's a child from a very different culture. But the notion that these parents just want to fulfill a silly "fantasy" about having children shows no understanding of a basic human need for family. Not everyone has that - certainly Melissa currently doesn't - but for others it goes very deep, and should not be trivialized.
  71. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: "certainly Melissa currently doesn't"

    ---

    "Currently" - hahaha! Because of course I will come around eventually and realize how normal it is to have a basic need for (a certain type of) family. So now my non-interest in parenting means I don't understand basic human needs?