NationStates Jolt Archive

My husband and I have been talking about adopting children for years. We have two of our own, but it was always our wish to adopt a child, or two children from his native country, Chile. Yet it is a long, expensive process, and international adoptions are tricky in that they are all treated as 'special adoptions'. That means, you can't really know if the children you are getting have any special medical or developmental needs. I feel terrible admitting it, but I don't think our family could handle children with severe developmental or medical problems. If we were going to have just one or two children, that might be different, as we could spend the necessary time to deal with these needs, but we want a large family, and we also both want to continue working.

Anyway, have you adopted? Have you considered it?

A yes...I would also want a to adopt as young as possible, because I think it would help for them to grow up in our family, rather than come in partially grown:). I think I would take a child up to about 4 years old. I would take two children maximum (siblings).

I hate this...it sounds like I'm buying horses or something...can I check your teeth, kids? It's kind of a strange process. You can't really pick your own kids...their gender, their health and so on...yet you sort of can with adoption.

I've never really asked myself the question... I really want to pass my genes on, and I'm not sure if I could treat kids I wouldn't be related to the same way that I would treat kids that would have the same eyes or smile or hair as me.

If I couldn't have kids with my wife we would both consider it and give it long hard thought but right now it's too early to think about it.

Shortly after having our third healthy child a year and a half ago, my wife started talking about adoption. (She had a tubal ligation after the last was born)
Her heart was specifically going out to the orphans of the tsunami. Right now, I dont have the room, cash or patience for another child. We have discussed it several times. If we had no children of our own, or only one, I would adopt a child. I agree with her , but it isnt reasonable.
At this point, I would rather put our efforts and resources into the children we already have.

I think if I won mega million lottery, I would seriously see what I could do to help a large number of children, both here around the world.
I dont need a lot to be happy and I could spend a lot of time lifting people out of hopeless situations.

Well, sometimes I feel like I could use a personal slave, but I don't feel like changing diapers. So, that's where adoption comes in.

But I think your motives may be different.

I picked all the contradictory options. :)

I wouldn't adopt.

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

In principle I would, but I think that realistically I want my own genetic child and I want to have a pregnancy. However, I haven't even had sex yet, so there is no telling.

I definitely would consider it if me or my life partner was infertile, my partner was a transsexual, or my partner was a woman. If my partner were a woman, however, I would probably think about each of us getting artificially inseminated first, that way we could both feel like we "contributed" but we'd have at least half a genetic connection.

I used to wonder if I could really love a child not my own...but I've realised that of course I would! Even when your own children are born, it takes a while to get to know them, and to really love them. That doesn't mean you don't love them when they're born...but you love them MORE the more you get to know them. I think there would be that transition period with an adopted child as well, but in the end, they would be YOUR child too.

The only thing I do worry about is this...with your own children, you are fairly aware of family medical issues that might arise. My first daughter, for example, has a condition that causes her to not digest properly sometimes, and she'll vomit up her food hours later in the same condition it went down. This would have really freaked me out if I hadn't known my husband had the same thing until he was three. Many doctors wanted to operate on her, but I was confident it would pass. She's three now, and it happens less and less, and not doctor has been able to tell me why.

With an adopted child, where you don't know the parents, you won't have that kind of information. You won't necessarily know what to look out for. I don't think it's a major issue, but I have considered it.

Your poll lacks a no I would not . . .

I would not adopt for the same reason I do not intend to have a child by natural means, I do not wish to be responsible for another human being. I like kids but strongly prefer the ones I can give back.

my wife's family took in foster children on a regular basis when my wife was a child. It agony to care for a child for a few years and then give them up to the adoptive family. My wife's parent werent allowed to adopt permanently at the time because they were able to have children of their own.
They stopped taking in foster children when my wife asked her mother when she was going to have to go away. Thats heartbreaking.

I would certainly adopt, but I would like to experience a pregnancy first. Now, if it happens that I can't conceive naturally, then I would adopt without hesitation. I am single at the moment but I have no qualms about being a single parent, although I would not have more than one child on my own.

Like everyone, I would want a health child, especially if I am a single parent. But I also realize that perhaps their only chance at a quality of life would be for me to adopt them... If I was already a parent, I might consider a child with health issues, depending on the issue.

As for the sex of the child, I don't really care. If I were pregnant I wouldn"t want to know the sex of the child, and it's much the same thing here.

Your poll lacks a no I would not . . .
Space does not permit. If you wouldn't, the poll would not make sense for you to complete. I originally had a "not applicable/don't want children" option, but I had to fit something else in. I figured the ones who wouldn't could just discuss why not...as you succintly have:).

My wife's parent werent allowed to adopt permanently at the time because they were able to have children of their own.

That's a ridiculous restriction. Is that still the case where you live?

I would (and probably will adopt).

I've always wanted kids, but refuse to have children until the situation is right, at least financially. But I will not have children of my own after the age of 35. The risk of birth defects becomes unacceptably (to me) high at that point, plus I've watched my mom deal with two children born after she turned 45, and frankly, I wouldn't want to be 65 before I finally shooed all my kids out the door. Running after small children in my 50's is definitely out for me.

As I am now 34 and still not ready to have children in my life (well, other than relatives! ;) ), chances are very good that when I decide it's time, it will be adoption. Thus I've worked out a formula for the child's age:

+1 for every year I am past 35.

Yes, adopting older children means that you have to deal with more baggage, but face it, those are the kids who need homes the most but have the most trouble finding one. Agencies rarely have trouble placing new-borns, even non-blond, blue-eyed ones, at least here in Canada, anyway. (Not to go off-topic, but many Canadian couples who want new-borns get black babies from the States rather than go on a Canadian waitlist for a new-born.)

But this is still all theoretical for me since until I'm in a more conventional relationship (or at least a commited one) AND I feel financially secure, it's not going to happen.

Part of my desire to adopt also has to do with age. I don't want to be having kids in my thirties...and I'm 27 now. Even if I got pregnant THIS SECOND, that would mean I'd be 28 before the child was born. If I waited about a year and a half to have the next one after that, it would still be too far into my "NO MORE BABIES COMING OUT OF HERE" zone. Adoption saves me that time frame squeeze.

My other weirdish restriction is that if I adopt older kids, they can't be older than my first daughter. As a first born...I think it's important to keep your place...so these kids should be younger than her. It's not rational, I know.

I adopted 4 children, 3 boys and a girl. Early on I decided that it wasn't logical for me to have children when there were so many who needed a good, loving home. Later I found out I couldn't have children, so it was a done deal at that point. 2 of my boys are legally blind, the youngest is dyslexic, and my daughter was epileptic. I can't imagine loving a child more than I love them just because they were from my genes. My kids are my heart. One of my sons and his wife legally adopted 2 children they had been fostering (little boy and girl, natural siblings) on the day they got married. One trip to the court house and they had an instant family!! My youngest recently remarried and is preparing to adopt his wife's 4 children, one of which has Downs Syndrome. Once the adoption is completed I will have 13 grandkids. Life is good.

Where's the "Only if it were a cat" option?

I'll be adopting. Sure, I'd love to have children of my own, and maybe one day with science, but it's a vain hope when there are practical solutions that would do a lot of good. So yes, I will. Aside from that, I haven't really thought into it. I'd just love to be a mother, regardless of all the stress.

(ok, I'd like a girl and a boy, that's all I've thought about it.)

My other weirdish restriction is that if I adopt older kids, they can't be older than my first daughter. As a first born...I think it's important to keep your place...so these kids should be younger than her. It's not rational, I know.

Doesn't sound weird to me.

Doesn't sound weird to me.
Okay. I'll just stick with the 'it's not rational' comment though:). Most people give me weird looks when I mention this caveat.

Okay. I'll just stick with the 'it's not rational' comment though:). Most people give me weird looks when I mention this caveat.

It's the most rational thing I've heard. As the oldest child, I did like being the oldest. If someone new was introduced older than me, it'd be like I was usurped. If you're meaning that's irrational, maybe so. But I say not. it's just very human.

It's the most rational thing I've heard. As the oldest child, I did like being the oldest. If someone new was introduced older than me, it'd be like I was usurped. If you're meaning that's irrational, maybe so. But I say not. it's just very human.
And yet, I'm not worried about the other daughter being usurped, because she's already (potentially) a middle child...is that mean?

Okay. I'll just stick with the 'it's not rational' comment though:). Most people give me weird looks when I mention this caveat.

I think it's good because it (to a limited extent) mimics natural addition to the family that way.

My other weirdish restriction is that if I adopt older kids, they can't be older than my first daughter. As a first born...I think it's important to keep your place...so these kids should be younger than her. It's not rational, I know.

Sounds reasonable to me. As an oldest child, I'm pretty sure I would have been in a hell of a snit if an older kid got adopted. However, it probably would have passed -- it really isn't any different to adjusting to not being the 'baby of the family' anymore.

Why did nobody else choose "but only a special needs child"?

I would certainly adopt any suffering German, Polish, Irish, or Croatian child later on in life. ;)

And yet, I'm not worried about the other daughter being usurped, because she's already (potentially) a middle child...is that mean?

No.... typically being the oldest is the position of power, being the youngest is the baby. So whilst you'd be taking the oldest down a peg, you'd be raising the youngest upwards... there'd be someone lower than her, that -conscious or not, I think she'd pick up on. Always seems to be a heirarchy in youth. I was the oldest of my first group of friends, and so I seemed to be an automatic core. When I was the youngest, I was someone who sat on the outside looking in.

This is just my experience though, and is likely to be a little exagerrated over time, and of course, not applicable to everyone.

EDIT: back on topic, I have no idea whether I'd adopt a special needs child... I mean I might, but a part of me is thinking I'd only do so out of guilt, and that's a very poor foundation to adopt on. I wish I wasn't so shallow about it, and who can tell what I'll do in the end, but that's the way I am now, at least.

The problem is that at least in the UK it is almost impossible to adopt a baby, and call it selfish but I don't think I would be able to deal with a partly developed child which has probably come from a hard background and may have social or psycological problems as a result of it. If I couldn't deal with it - what then? Abandon them and probably damage them even more? Live in misery? No, it would be better for all concerned if I didn't adopt I believe.

I have adopted children already, but only a healthy child with special needs. Not that I would base my choice on the child's health, just not a child over a certain age. Boy, girls, children of either sex. As long as it's one child, or more than one child

:p