Friday, February 9, 2007

The Marketing of Adoption

Adoption is 90% marketing and 10% substance

As a marketing professional, I look at life a lot differently than most. An example might be the "American Dream" and how it influences our society. I consider "The American Dream" nothing but a great way for commodity brokers, who control all of the distribution and products to the masses, to get richer. Whether or not anyone planned it out as one great big conspiracy isn't relevant. Think what you want on that one.

In short, The American Dream is a joke for almost everyone that buys into it. It's simply marketing. It's a way to get you to commit the rest of your life's earnings to building something that most likely will end up in the tax accounts of the state and federal governments or insurance companies to pay for your long term health care. It starts with buying and owning a home. It continues with a pretty little picket fence and a dog and cat and 2.2 kids. And then there's the insurance, the upkeep and the improvements. The cleaners, the homecare products, the baby products, the lawncare products, the carcare products and so on and so on. Then there's the property taxes to pay for the (mostly subpar public) school systems, the overpriced police and fire services. Add to this the high cost of utilities. And I haven't even mentioned the big push for sending your kids to the "best" colleges. If one has any fiscal responsibility whatsoever, they step back and gasp at how much it costs to maintain this lifestyle. If you have any accounting aptitude, you know that the only way to get there is dual incomes and lots of credit! Now let's say your parents are fairly wealthy and did a good job and they have a fair amount of wealth and own their home. Do you think you'll ever see anything - NOT! The tax laws (capital gains) keep us from liquidating any of the investments we make in the home until we're 65+. If you're a kid, you'll be 50 years old when your parents move on when and if you ever see anything. You've already raised your family and kids and looking to retire. With the high cost of care once one reaches 65, the chances of any of this going to an inheritance are slim to none as most of it will go to care for your parents in their old age, especially if they have no pension or retirement (of which the majority today do not).

Adoption is much the same way. It's a big one-time sale and then everyone disappears. They don't tell you about the fallout. The social worker moves on (the average life of a social worker in a state system is 6 months). The lawyer retires, there is little to no support from the agency as they have no reason to talk to you any more because they've already got all your money. One home visit after all is consummated and you're on your own as an adoptive parent and the children are on their own. The whole system is about placing children and that's it! Yes there are some service providers such as counselors and therapists who do their best to serve the adoption community, but that's only of recent. No one warns parents of the extra time and effort above and beyond your investment in living the American Dream that adoption requires.

The public is ignorant and the marketers take advantage of it. Adoption is marketed and the naiive are burned. The marketing is all about money but is disguised as "humanitarianism, charity, last chance parenting (infertility usually first), pity, sympathy, etc. Some of the targets are the barren couple, the humanitarian or the wealthy do-gooder that's going to make the life of a "needy" child a dream. The public knows almost nothing about the cause and effect of adoption to our society. One of those is the fact that there are over 500,000 kids in the foster care system all locked up in foster homes and group homes. There are millions of kids who are touched by adoption either by private, state or international means. The number of children adopted who live a "normal" life in my estimation is 0. That's right - ZERO!

Some of the fallout goes like this. Let's say you're an adoptive parent and someone notices that your kids must be adopted. Most people just smile or stare and turn away. But for those who attempt to be friendly, the naivete comes out ugly. The inquiries that come from the public range from the naiive to utterly stupid. The responses of the ignorant with a humanitarian view of adoption go something like this:

"Your kids are so lucky to have you"
"You're so lucky you have such great parents"

The responses of the naiive go something like this:

"What it must be like to be chosen"
"Are those your kids?"

As an adoptive parent, I hear all of the responses. (But don't forget, I was an adoptee.) My twin 4 year olds are not the same ethnicity as my wife and I, and therefore adoption is conspicuous and obvious.

When I took my boys to see my Afather for the first time - he was nearly 80 years old and not in the greatest of shape. But he had his wits. His wife, (not my Amom as my Adad left when I was 10, only 5 years after the adoption) on the other hand is one of the dumbest blondes I have ever known. The first words out of her mouth were "They're darker than I expected". If you have a response to that, please comment, I'd love to hear! I was speechless. This is clearly the case of someone wanting to try and say something applicable and making an absolute ass of themselves.

The "lucky" response is the ignorant thinking that adoption is all about privilege being granted to the "needy".

The "chosen" word is simply a marketing ploy used in the 50s and 60s and sets people up to be ridiculed and separated and isolated by their peers, parents and adoptees. The agencies and the social services proliferate the words without having to pay for the backlash themselves. My parents told me how I was "chosen" and that other parents were simply "stuck" with what they had. Think about the backdraft when a 4 year old repeats these words amongst their peers in kindergarten. Even if they don't know how to respond, the peers take this home and tell their parents and separation sweeps through the Aparents peer groups.

In the Boston area, there's a program referred to as "Wednesday's Child" sponsored by a TV station and an anchor named Jack Williams. I appreciate his intent but his method is abominable. For 25 years, he has paraded "hard-to-place" children on the evening news in an effort to find someone who will adopt them. Parading children, adoption parties and the like simply drives kids to perform to be accepted. The damage is irreparable. The hurt can be irreversible. One never hears about the "placements gone bad" from a program such as Wednesday's Child. But trust me, there are more bad situations than there are good ones in adoption.

Adoption cannot be treated with money as the motive. Adoption needs attention after the placement, far more than the placement itself. You cannot market people. It's a form of slavery. As an adoptee, you know that you're a person and not a commodity. As adoptees, we need to continue to speak up to make known what needs to change. Parents need to be screened by competent counselors and not by social workers who are quitting their jobs tomorrow. Agencies need to be regulated and held at bay as they simply love the unregulated manner in which they can take advantage of rich barren couples who want a family to put on their mantle. As Bill Cosby says "If you know a young woman who wants a baby to love her back - duct tape her to the door and buy her a puppy!". We need to do this with some of the people who are adopting. As for the agencies, especially those who deal in domestic infant adoptions and international infant adoptions, they need a governing body with some teeth. There isn't anything in place and the slimiest of people hide inside these agencies. They are no better than con men. Adoptees need to rally together and teach adoptive parents what it's like to be rejected and then thrown into a completely foreign culture and expected to adapt overnight without any fallout. Adoptees need to become the counselors. When you're the recipient of the abuse, you know the cure. When you're looking in from the outside, you haven't a clue. Adoptees need to band together and go to the legislatures in force and tell their stories. The representatives and senators are there to serve us. I know that seems ludicrous, but trust me, you walk into their face, they have to listen. Walk into their face with a band of adoptees and they'll make change happen. Every state's records should be open. As an adoptee and an adoptive parent having experienced reunion and been adopted by an adoptee who experienced reunion, I don't believe in protecting the birth parent in anonymity. We deserve the right to seek them out and have our piece of the puzzle filled in! If they want to be left alone after that, then that's totally understandable and should be honored.

As adoptees, we have all the harnessed power of a nuclear revolution to bring adoption out of a place of shame and naiivete and into the light where people can see it for the positive thing we can make of it. We harness the power, so let's make things better for those who will follow. Adoption has touched us, now let's touch it back!

There is a charity committed to educating people on the many issues around adoption - the Evan B. Donaldson Institute on Adoption. I am well acquainted with the executive director, Adam Pertman. Adam has devoted his life to simply educating the community on adoption. He's an adoptive parent and a sweet individual. He is a Pulitzer Prize nominee on his writings on adoption. Adam comes from the adoptive parent side and sees the many injustices close up and personal as a father of two adopted children. Adam is an example of people standing up an doing something about adoption!

23 comments:

Lisa said...

I am a former foster child, and current child advocate.

Like you, my early experiences have instilled me with a passion to create positive change in the child welfare system.

My focus is on foster care: http://sunshinegirlonarainyday.blogspot.com/
www.fostercarealumni.org

While yours is on adoption.

Do you know about Amy's blog, "Adoption and Its Triad"?

Here is the URL:
http://amyadoptee.blogspot.com/

Speaking personally, I can tell you that ever since I've been connected with other former foster children through my involvement in FCAA (Foster Care Alumni of America), I have felt much less alone in my efforts to create change.

I hope that you and Amy can be a support to one another.

Best wishes,
Lisa

Ungrateful Little Bastard said...

Fantastic and insightful essay. I remember as a teenager seeing the connection between marketing and adoption. And that was pre-internet days. Now with the web, with ads in print, it sickens and saddens me to no end.

34quinn said...

Yesterday was the anniversary of the death of my birth father..It was a hard day to get through but I did...trying to stay positive

Erika said...

Wow. I love your blog! It is echoing the words of women for generations. My family is now 3 generations adopted as well. I call it three generations of family stumps.

someaussiegirl said...

Well said!
I am an overseas adoptee who looks nothing like my parents. All my life I have dealt with stupid questions/statements and have had to look deep within myself so often to find answers to them. I believe being an adoptee has been a big contributor to my anxiety issues in life. That need to overthink everything. Second guess myself when everyone tries to tell me who I am, what to do and how to view my own life, when in reality they have no idea. It started when I was so young.
I am going to be a counsellor one day and adoptive counselling has interested me a lot. I want to help those who are in similar situations to myself and be able to provide them with long term support.

Third Mom said...

Where have you been? Man, you nailed this! So much to chew on here, I'm going to have to read it again and again. And I'm looking forward to reading your other posts as well.

Thank you for telling it like it is!

Sue said...

I couldn't agree more and it is refreshing to hear these words from another AP. I just found your blog and plan to continue reading. Thanks.

Dad said...

"One never hears about the "placements gone bad" from a program such as Wednesday's Child."

While that may be true for the casual observer who looks no further, I can tell you we were well informed of the "placements gone bad" during our 10 week pre-adoption parenting class. Perhaps our experience was the exception - I don't know. BTW, our daughter had a disrupted placement before she joined our family.

"But trust me, there are more bad situations than there are good ones in adoption."

Ambiguous enough. In this context, what exactly does that mean?

Dad

3rd generation adoption said...

Dad,

Interesting logon - you might want to make your blogger profile public so people can read about your points of view prior to responding to a comment left on their site.

As for the answer to your question, as an adoptive parent, you only have one point of view and that is most often from that of the "positive" side. Adoption is an answer for one to be able to parent a child especially when they are unable to biologically. But the majority of issues come from the adoptee side. You see, you haven't suffered loss, you've gained a child or children. The adoptee and the birth mother have suffered major loss. If you read the rest of my posts and learn a little bit more about me, you'll find out that I come from the adoptee side and the adoptive parent side (father of twin boys). No one can ask you to feel that loss to become equal, you just live on the opposite end of the triad. Read and learn and meet some of the people who are linked off my blog and you'll get to see how much pain adoption inflicts on the two sides of the triad who tend to suffer the most loss.

Dad said...

While I've been posting re- adoption on newsgroups for more than 12 years, blogs are a brand new thing for me. I rather prefer the free and uncensored discourse of a newsgroup, but I'll work on my profile if I hang around much longer. Thanks for the advice.

Granted, all adoption begins with a loss. But I'm not ready to concede that one group universally "suffers" more than another. Did your twin sons suffer from the separation from their natural family? Yes. Did they subsequently suffer from being adopted? I would hope not.

The premise of your argument seems to be that adoption *causes* the separation of natural families, as if natural families would remain intact if adoption was abolished. For some that may have been true, especially with domestic infant adoption of the 60's ilk, but for many it is not.

I get the sense this is not the forum for a lengthy debate, so I'll leave it at that.

Dad (father of two adopted teenagers, advocate of domestic older child adoption, and former scratch golfer ;)

3rd generation adoption said...

While you are an advocate for what you're involved in, you are not familiar nor will you ever be familiar with being an adoptee. Contrary to your comment about this not being a debate model, I disagree. I'm not of the mindset that so many are that adoption is all bad and if you read my history, you will find that out. I'm not anti-adoption and I'm not pro-adoption. Adoption has its goods and its bads and it needs to see reform and regulation. Read the story and see the bad side of your advocacy position

Foster Parent Allegation - States need to do something now!

And will my children suffer from their adoption. Damn right they will. Is it better than what they had - hell yes!

My point in all this is that each member of the triad needs to understand that the stances in their corner of the triads are unique and do not apply to the rest. One cannot generalize a stance for one corner and assume the other corners will see it the same way. It's not about whether we are democrats or republicans. It's not black and white. It's grey, greyer and greying more and more every day.

BTW, I am a golfer too. Love the game and I do appreciate your stance. I'm not against what you are doing at all. Keep doing it. But don't discount what you have yet to learn, know or experience.

Cheers,

Dad said...

"While you are an advocate for what you're involved in, you are not familiar nor will you ever be familiar with being an adoptee."

By continuing same brand of logic, nor will you ever be familiar with being raised to adulthood by your natural parents. How would you know, for instance, what a "normal" childhood is if you've never had one. I could easily argue some of the dysfunction you attribute to adoption is alive and well in many "normal" families.

Besides, what a convenenient premise in which to totally discount an alternate viewpoint. Is an oncologist unqualified to speak on the issue of cancer cells if he's never had cancer?

"And will my children suffer from their adoption. Damn right they will. Is it better than what they had - hell yes!"

Unless you're arguing that separation and adoption are inextricably linked (i.e. the latter causes the former), then I will have to disagree. If the two are separate and distinct events, then one could also argue that your children benefitted from their adoption. What am I missing here? Semantics?

I share your distaste for the domestic infant adoption process in this country and agree that it needs reform, especially in the area of marketing and promotion. We chose not to participate.

I disagree that if you don't want your family ripped apart by some governmental beaurocracy, then your only option is to go overseas. Like you, my wife and I didn't want to fully commit to a child (even for an instant)if there was half a chance that child would be removed from our home.

This is why we chose to consider only those children who were legally free for adoption (read parental rights were already terminated). This is why we chose not to be foster parents, even though we were licensed and asked many times to do so.

There are over 5,000 foster kids in Pennsylvania alone who are legally free for adoption. Of the approx 500,000+ kids in foster care in the this country, about 20% of them will never be returned to their biological caregivers.

These children usually represent the worse cases of abuse and neglect among their foster peers.

Never say never, but I know more people who were struck by lightning than I do parents who lost their adopted children because some court somewhere overturned a TPR.

I want your readers to know that there is a viable alternative, that it's infinitely less expensive, and yes, that many (most?) foster children will not suffer from being adopted.

Thanks for the bandwidth. Blog on!

3rd generation adoption said...

Dad,

Addressing one thing at a time:

"How would you know, for instance, what a "normal" childhood is if you've never had one."

First of all, no one can define "normal". And one does not have to live under their natural parents to understand what that is like. Grow up as an adoptee in a public school system and the picture is quite clear. The majority of children raised by their birth parents have struggles, but not with their foundation and not with belonging. Every adoptee I've ever known does.

"Is an oncologist unqualified to speak on the issue of cancer cells if he's never had cancer?"

Though an oncologist has cancer patients, they cannot relate until they have cancer. They treat, but just like a psychologist, they use theory and science and in some cases just trial and error to come up with a hopeful conclusion. My partner's wife died three years ago of breast cancer she battled for 9 years. Her oncologist did not have one single survivor in that nine years. She watched everyone in her support group die and she happened to be the last in the group to go. An oncologist has a control group from which to pull their data. You have only one set of circumstances and one point of view from the adoptive side. Your view happens to be positive because you personally have had a great experience to date. I express "to date" seriously. You cannot speak to those whose experiences were awful or destructive or tragic. You can only do what you're doing - promote it as though everyone who goes down the same road as you, is going to have a "like" experience. You're sadly mistaken.

"I want your readers to know that there is a viable alternative, that it's infinitely less expensive, and yes, that many (most?) foster children will not suffer from being adopted."

First of all, take off the salesman's hat. You sound like you work for an agency or something. My readers are looking for reform, not looking to adopt children. Foster children suffer more from the system than from being adopted, we all can understand that. The foster system in the United States is the worst system known to man, except for institutionalism which is what the foster system was designed to replace. Someone decided long ago that orphanages had to go and they implemented the foster system. Little did they know that some (poor and desperate and inept)people would opt into the system simply to earn money from the government and don't give a rat's ass about the children. Then they bring in as many as the system will allow because "hey, it's better than leaving the child in a group home". And then the child gets molested by other foster children who don't know any better and the foster child is now scarred for life. Adopting that foster child can possibly ruin the life of an adoptive set of parents. I've seen it happen.

My whole point is to try and get us all to look at each individual case and bring reform where it works. We cannot label everything according to one point of view and assume our view will work for all of the issues. The problem is of terrific proportions and cannot be solved with one action or resolve. Let's all stop defending a single point of view and realize that we have the power to bring reform as a group and address many many issues within each individual's expertise. Knocking your point of view is not my intent. Opening your eyes to other points of view as well as horrific practices that should be revealed for the damage they cause is.

Dad said...

"You can only do what you're doing - promote it as though everyone who goes down the same road as you, is going to have a "like" experience."

With apologies to Marty and Mary, that's precisely what you've done with their story.

"Do you think you would foster older children after reading this story?"

- as if every one who fosters or adopts older children is destined to the same fate.

Another quote - "Most children are abused more in the foster care system than they were prior to being pulled from their homes."

Citations please - especially since you've already conceded that it's not uncommon for foster children to falsely accuse their caregivers (which is true, btw).

I'd love to see any credible study that compares the rates of *founded* neglect and/or abuse in foster care vs. the homes from which they came.

EBD, NAIC, AFSCARS... any of these will do. Where does it say that the *founded* rate of child abuse in foster care is greater than the home from which they came.

If you have statistics which can back up your claim, post them here. I don't think you can.

"You're sadly mistaken."

So you keep saying.

Dad

3rd generation adoption said...

Well, now your true colors come out. You really are just an anonymous lurking person trying to paint the world in colors only you can see. Put up your profile and write like a man, so others can read and comment on the opinions you carry. We all have a right to our own opinions and points of view, but you need to put them up there for all to see and find out I'm not the only one that might disagree with you. It's a lot different when all can see you and your points of view in living color and all can comment instead of the method you use of anonymously replying.

"Do you think you would foster older children after reading this story?"

For one thing, I would never ever foster children! This is not a solution. How do you know that I'm not in favor of institutions or group homes? Foster care is not the answer my friend. You don't and wouldn't foster, so why would you be a proponent of it? I was in a foster home as a child, were you? Ever worked in a group home for messed up adolescents? I have.

Promote something you're not willing to do? And just ignore all of those who write about their horrible life experiences in foster homes. You really do drink the Kool-Aid. If the statistics were avaiable, then there wouldn't be a problem. The children have no voice and the adoptee is just now obtaining one. Statistics are not available because the government runs the programs and compiles the statistics. Although I'm really impressed by those acronyms you throw around (see below).

You need to rethink your poor strategy. Children are not heard in our society. Adoption is not about the children, it's about the parents (of which you are one I might add - and so am I). Only the loud-mouthed adoptive adults with pretty little stories for the media and the publishers and politicians have a voice in this idealistic space (none of you get it). Do you simply deny all of this as though none of it ever existed?

Go cry your foster child story to the media and let them find some unsuspecting do-gooder who wants to save the world. Then watch their pretty little world disintegrate before them when their "perfect" foster child proceeds to wreck their domain. Maybe he's a firestarter or a sexually molested child who flashes himself in public. And I bet you think I'm making all this up. Maybe he's been verbally abused to the point that he'll never ever believe he's worth anything to anyone. Maybe she's just been the keeper of her daddy's drugs and daddy went to jail. Now she's a teen and doing drugs because that's what she knows.

Don't promote something you don't know anything about. You haven't been there and you simply cannot understand until you have. 99% of all foster children are unadoptable and will remain unadoptable by the typical american family. Conna Craig did a study back around 2000 (Conna was a friend of mine and a foster child) in which she simply proved that the foster care system is not about helping people adopt kids.

http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/3564917.html

It's about furthering government initiatives and growing the budgets for job security.
There was no incentive to promote adoption and therefore it is not done. I'm not for continuing the tragedy of the foster care system. I'm for reform and finding an alternative. It's time to address the problem and not simply sit back and say that kids need homes and why don't you adopt?

There are a few special people who get it and are prepared to truly adopt foster kids. They get it because most of their lives they have either been there or have already been touched by hardship or disaster from the foster care system, recovered and want to give back knowing the system may burn them again. But they are not the average. They go in with both eyes open and don't expect anything positive in return. In fact, they brace for the opposite to happen. They truly are saints called to such. They are not going about it for all the reasons most people do when they explore adoption to build a family.

You, are naiive to promote older child adoption or fostering of children. Go spend some time with the unadoptable and unwanted and learn something you do not know.

Here's a start for you "Dad"

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fosterparentallegations/

And for the acroynms you so kindly put forth, believe what you may, I believe what comes from real adoptees an the unbiased who have suffered from the system. For those who read this, NAICS is:

A service of the Children's Bureau, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, we provide access to print and electronic publications, websites, and online databases covering a wide range of topics from prevention to permanency, including child welfare, child abuse and neglect, adoption, search and reunion, and much more.


Not from statistics gathered by government organizations who are accountable to no one as in NAIC.

As for the EBD - Are you stereotyping all foster kids to have emotional behavior disorders or that we're retarded? Ouch! Hey all, this guy things we're all retarded and have emotional behavior disorders if we're adopted. Check out this site:

http://www.pacer.org/about.htm

And AFSCARS? Goodness buddy, you might want to wake up. These are organizations primarily run by state and federal government agencies who cannot even answer to people who were lost in the system (Rilya Wilson). You think I'm going to trust anything they publish. You really do need to stop trusting the idealists who pump you full of this stuff.

So in a nutshell,

we should trust the statistics of the government and simply believe that they are doing a good job.

We should foster children blindly with no support system except what we can conjure up ourselves (little to no help from the government).

And we should believe that all foster/adopted children are emotionally disturbed or special education material.

And we should believe what the government writes about its programs even though they lose living human beings in the system?

I think not?

Dad said...

"Most children are abused more in the foster care system than they were prior to being pulled from their homes."

Just one credible source - one citation - to back up your statement.

"Statistics are not available because the government runs the programs and compiles the statistics."

Translation: I don't have any data or studies to back up my claim, so I'll resort to ad hominem attacks instead.

"Don't promote something you don't know anything about."

You, sir, have no idea what I do or don't know about adopting older children from foster care.

"You haven't been there and you simply cannot understand until you have. 99% of all foster children are unadoptable and will remain unadoptable by the typical american family. Conna Craig did a study back around 2000 (Conna was a friend of mine and a foster child) in which she simply proved that the foster care system is not about helping people adopt kids."

I am familiar with the works of Conna Craig, having quoted her material many times. I think it's completely laughable for you to quote Craig to support your argument that older foster children are not adoptable.

Quote from What I Need Is A Mom by Conna Craig - "There is at least one other mistaken notion that feeds the legal and cultural bias against adoption - the idea that many of the children in foster care are simply not adoptable. My own experience suggests otherwise, as I was an older child when my foster parents adopted me. And my experience with parents in and outside the foster care system tells me that every child is adoptable.

This is not a quote from Craig taken out of context. Here's the URL - read the whole article.

http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/3564917.html

Tell me, once again, how Craig supports your argument that older foster children are unadoptable?

English is my first language. Is it yours?

Dad

Dad said...

"As for the EBD - Are you stereotyping all foster kids to have emotional behavior disorders or that we're retarded?"

Because I referenced EBD as a credible source, that means I think all foster kids have behavior disorders or are retarded?

"Ouch! Hey all, this guy things we're all retarded and have emotional behavior disorders if we're adopted."

Sorry, that's just too stoopid for words.

Dad

3rd generation adoption said...

So do you consider yourself as an EBD statistic because you were a foster child? Why would you quote such an unrelated source?

3rd generation adoption said...

Name a single source for statistics other than the government run ones and you have an argument. You're as invalid as the democrats in a debate. You state your own government having statistics and they are the very one spinning the propoganda and running the systems that abuse the children. Yet you attack me when I tell you there are no unbiased statistics, and then I quote you real sources and you accuse me of what you just did. You're confused.

Dad said...

"Name a single source for statistics other than the government run ones and you have an argument."

Umm, it's your claim - not mine. I just asked you to back it up with a credible citation. I don't care if it's a study from the government or from the private sector. It's clear that you have nothing. Sit and spin time.

"Most children are abused more in the foster care system than they were prior to being pulled from their homes."

"You're as invalid as the democrats in a debate."

I'm republican. You're batting zero.

"You state your own government having statistics and they are the very one spinning the propoganda and running the systems that abuse the children."

I didn't state anything of the sort. I asked you to back up your claim that foster children are at greater risk of abuse than the homes from which they came, simple as that.

"Yet you attack me when I tell you there are no unbiased statistics,"

That didn't stop you from stating this as fact, evidently -

"Most children are abused more in the foster care system than they were prior to being pulled from their homes."

"and then I quote you real sources"

Real sources? I must have missed them.

"and you accuse me of what you just did. You're confused."

Buddy, if you're quoting Conna Craig to support your position that older foster children are unadoptable, I'm not the one that's confused.

Dad

Quote from What I Need Is A Mom by Conna Craig - "There is at least one other mistaken notion that feeds the legal and cultural bias against adoption - the idea that many of the children in foster care are simply not adoptable. My own experience suggests otherwise, as I was an older child when my foster parents adopted me. And my experience with parents in and outside the foster care system tells me that every child is adoptable.

3rd generation adoption said...

It's sad that you cannot see the point that is attempting to be made. You are fighting for foster care placement. My stance is that the system needs to be replaced and/or overhauled. I have nothing against placing kids. My point is that there is litte or no intent to get the children placed. You've really taken a tangent here, probably because you're a previous foster child that was placed. Foster kids need homes, the government is not attempting to place them with any vigilance, plan or competency.

Dad said...

"I have nothing against placing kids."

Good for you. Perhaps you can begin by not demonizing their caregivers with statements that have no basis in truth.

"Most children are abused more in the foster care system than they were prior to being pulled from their homes."

Still waiting for your source on that one.

"My point is that there is little or no intent to get the children placed."

Oh, the intent is quite clear. The ASFA was just warming up when Craig wrote her piece on foster care in 2000. The numbers of adopted older children are growing faster that international or domestic infant adoption.

You really should get out more.

"You've really taken a tangent here, probably because you're a previous foster child that was placed."

Your crystal ball sucks, so does your memory. I'm neither a democrat nor a former foster child. I already told you I was an adoptive parent of two older children. Sheez.

Dad

Lisa said...

I recently found your blog and it is interesting.

I am an adoptee. I was in a foster home for 3 months before being adopted. (1963) I have 3 biological children and we had a failed domestic adoption 5 yrs. ago.

I agree that adoption today is marketing. I agree that foster care is horrible. I agree that it is not about the children at all; they are a commodity to be sold.

I had a happy childhood and I did not feel lost or that something was missing. My parents loved me unconditionally and provided for my every need. Now, there was issues later in my teens, but that was my adoptive mothers mental illness, not with being adopted.

Our failed adoption was horrible and I wish I could scream from the roof tops about the injustice, to us and the child. We were devastated and lost alot of money. We truly just wanted to provide a good home to a child. (this was a private adoption)

Many changes need to be made to an imperfect system that allows the gov't to make money from this and private agencies to make HUGE amounts because they have the children. It is wrong.

There is so much to discuss. I am overwhelmed at the amount.