A
female
age
41-50,
anonymous
writes:I grew up in a household that was very strict and very religious. When my school taught sex-ed, they separated the boys from the girls in grades 6-12. Now, that makes sense because when you're young, puberty is scary and embarrassing and you're more likely to ask certain qusetions. Or, certain information simply doesn't pertain to you anyway. We had boxes we could drop questions into and we simply checkmarked "boy" or "girl". The teacher answered these questions but was allowed to use discernment and not answer some (some were stupid such as "what if I have sex with a bird?" and others were too easy to identify the asker). When we hit on topics in the later years such as abortion, we were told "it's wrong. period" When we came up to birth control, we knew that if we wanted more information, we could call the Health Department and find out. We had to have permission from our parents to hear about all the different types and the other places (very few) in town who offered them without telling the child's parents. Roughly half the parents said, "Nope. My child is going to abstain, they don't need to know that". The probelm is that they said (in school) that if you got pregnant by accident, adoption was the way to go if you did not want to or could not take care of a child. They said to approach one of the teachers, the nurse, or one of the nuns for counseling on adoption agencies. However. There were two girls who got pregnant before we graduated (we had a class of 75 and I know MANY of them who did get pregnant had either switched schools or dropped out because out school had a HUGE stigma against it). Both girls were strongly encouraged to continue their classes at HOME where we wouldn't have to see that. Both girls stayed and got a LOT of crap from other parents about how appalled they were. (I went to school there from 1983-1997, so it wasn't the dark ages) Both girls wanted to put the child up for adoption. Both girls were talked out of it. Why? Well, one boy had "rights" but oh ... he had a basketball scholarship coming up and needed to leave for college but his parents paid the medical biills (no health department or women's center for her, not with their grand child). They also paid her parents a HUGE amount of money so he could "put this behind him". She never got to put it behind her. The second girl, the guy wanted nothing to do with her but her parents told her that there was too much help and too many resources and too many family membesr who could oversee her parenting until she got on her feet. She got the cold shoulder from nearly everyone because she was being "selfish" and putting the child up for adoption. This happened to me when I got pregnant, and to many other women I know. Some kept the child because "it was the right thing" or because they were in their 20's and there was too much help out there. Adoption, we were told, was just selfish and irresponsible and abandonment. In my case, my ex boyfriend became VERY angry at the suggestion but he wasn't fit to be a full time parent. His mother wanted TEMPORARY custody but that meant that he was going to pawn our child off on whomever and I didn't like his lifestyle. I had been doing inappropriate/illegal things up until that point and I'd wanted COMPLETELY out. I wanted our CHILD out of that too. I was afraid to give my child to strangers and my family was furious that I'd gotten pregnant in the first place and that it was good that I'd gotten pregnant because it would force me to grow up. My child is just fine and while I haven't seen his dad until eight months ago (facebook), we get along well enough and he's paying back child support. I think I did the best job I could but the "I can't believe you were going to give him up" comments have NOT stopped. I know too many women who lost their kids to the state (I volunteer for several groups) because of addiction or because of how the father/a boyfriend treated their child. These women come from all backgrounds: quiet suburbs, deeply religiious (and overly sheltering) families, or a poor, urban, drug-infested family. They range from street-smart to very naive. Quite a few of them (who say they would never admit it to anyone but me) say they wanted to put the child/children up for adoption from day one. But where they came from, you didn't even bring that up. All those backgrounds and it is NOT considered OK. I've had many tell me that they were told that adoption is for the "desperate" or those who have no support or abilities. Or, if the state MAKES you give them up. I find this incredibly heartbreaking and have been told more than once "I didn't want to have an abortion, but if people know I was pregnant, adoption wouldn't fly" "I wanted to cut off all ties to the guy and I wasn't ready for a kid, but the way my family is, I wouldn't be ABLE to cut off ties. So I had an abortion" I'm not getting into any abortion arguments, but I believe that part of the reason the rate is as high as it is is because peole do not respect adoption. Has anyone spoken to anyone on this topic or had experiences where people act horrified at the very idea of it? Why do you think this is so?
View related questions:
abortion, money, my ex, period Reply to this Question
Share |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
female
reader, Behavioural Analysis  +, writes (19 August 2014):
 My answer is going to be short. In a way, I agree with Cerberus; it's frustrates me that so many women (not the majority, but a lot of women) use abortion and adoption as birth control. I am going to adopt, so I do see the benefit in the option, BUT I know it's not that simple and children can (and some do) fall through the cracks. I also believe it's each individual's right to choose abortion or not choose it, but it annoys me when they use it like "oh, I'll just get an abortion" when they should be saying "oh, I'll use contraception". I think some people really do just throw up their children for adoption because it means they have "their life back", but I can empathise if it was a rape or they really have no money at all because the (particularly if the man left them with nothing, and hasn't stuck around) and they feel truly unable to raise a baby properly (if they have no family support either, like to let them move back in so they can get a job and earn money for the baby, etc.) as it's expensive and sometimes, if you really don't have any money, even as much support from around you isn't enough and can still result in children's services taking your child.Ultimately, I think it's complicated and I'd try not to judge someone for it, especially if I didn't know their reason for it. However, if I did know their reason and it was something like "I wouldn't have been able to go clubbing still or see my friends and have lots of me time", then I'd be annoyed, but I probably wouldn't say anything.
A
reader, anonymous, writes (19 August 2014): My personal point of view is if you can't raise a kid don't create one, if you make a mistake and create one then it's a parent's duty to take care of that kid because that's how I would have done it.
I don't have anything against people who want to adopt or give away their kids, not everyone is me and people have that option. I'm also neither pro nor anti abortion it's a woman's choice not mine, I'm a man so I can't have one so I don't have an opinion on it as it's not relevant, just like my opinion on menstruation isn't.
OP I'm a teacher, the way you do sex-ed and how your school sounds is archaic, I'm surprised they don't still burn witches it sounds so puritanical.
Sex-ed in my school is done with both genders present so that they can also understand how each others bodies work and the boys especially can understand that women are more than just something to stick it in.
I can understand why people are against adoption, children are our greatest commodities, our future leaders and innovators, they're not just something you can pop out when you feel like and then throwaway because it doesn't suit you to raise them yourself. This "better life" thing is a fallacy as adoptive parents can be emotionally, physically and sexually abusive or they too can discard that child to be raised by the state, which if you ask anyone who has been through that is a nasty fate.
It pisses a lot of people off that children are discarded that way, especially when most people give up their lives, their freedom or change whatever it is they're doing just to do their best by their kids. If you can't be a parent, don't pop out a kid. It's really not hard to make sure you don't get pregnant and children shouldn't have to pay the price for a person's "mistake".
To me people making adoption sound like a noble act to give their child a better life is bullshit because they can't guarantee that will happen, they're throwing that kid away, discarding it like trash because they don't have the strength, courage or conviction to step up to their responsibilities. A drug addict can quit, a woman with no support can support herself, but they just don't want to, it's easier to just discard it. "A better life" doesn't always happen, lots have been adopted into families where they were tortured, raped and killed, and at the end of the day that's all down to the original parent not stepping up.
OP I've seen first hand what happens children who are discarded that way, I've seen the worst case scenarios, I've seen kids who are emotionally disturbed after treatment by foster families, adoptive parents and the state. There is no way I'd risk any child I created going through that no matter how dire my own situation. I'd give up everything and change everything about my life to do well by that child.
So my point of view is one way people think. Others have other reasons such as slut shaming a girl for getting pregnant in the first place, or parents that just can't imagine anyone that would abandon their child as being in any way a moral person. Others look at it from the point of view of all they had to sacrifice once they had kids and see others just throwing them away to have an easy life. others then can't have kids yet would love their own and be amazing to them see others mothers just pop them like out they're a mistake, then treat them with contempt by throwing them away and lying to themselves that it's for the best when no one can guarantee that it is and often it's actually worse.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (19 August 2014): Personally I think it's selfish to purposely bring a child into the world only so that some unknown person will take care of them.I know that families are vetted thoroughly before being allowed to adopt but there are enough orphans in the world who need love. We could adopt those children who are already in the world who desperately need homes rather than populating it with even more children.I say 'purposely bring a child into the world' because given the opportunity to abort, carrying the baby to term is a CHOICE to create a responsibility for other people.I feel that if you decide to create a life, you should do your duty by that child. If you decide that you cannot be a parent then abortion is an option.In exceptional cases I see the arguments for adoption. But in most cases, I think carrying a baby to term only to leave their fate to luck is incredibly irresponsible and selfish. That is having your cake and eating it too. For me, it is a way for people to avoid the guilt of aborting AND the responsibility for the child.
...............................
|
