NationStates Jolt Archive

I've got two good friends, a couple, who wanted to have children after they were married. They have been trying for some time unsucessfully, they consulted a doctor. The doctor soon found out that the husband was the infertile one and started heaving all kinds of information on possible ways of treating that infertiliy, having IVF, even information on how to contact surrogate mothers on the couple.

Now, the husband is from India, living in Germany with his German wife. They took all that information home and discussed the options. One of the options the doctor didn't mention (as it wouldn't have put any money in his poket) was adopting a child.
They both felt that as nature/god/fate obviously for some reason hadn't wanted them to have natural children, they should try adoption. As adopting a child is a very difficult and slow process in Germany, the husband contacted his parents in New Dheli who soon enough found them an agency that could help with the legal part.
Half a year later, the couple adopted a beautiful Indian baby girl. She grew up to be an adorable beautiful child, but she seemed a bit slow in her intellectual development. When she was 4 years old, the couple found out that she had severe hearing problems and had to have hearing aids. From then on, she developed normally.
When she was 5 years old, the couple adopted another Indian child, a cute and lively little boy.
Both of them are growing up in a happy, loving family who provides them with everything they need.
The alternative for them would most likely have been to grow up in an orphanage somewhere in New Dheli.

I thought their reaction to the news of the husbands infertility a very normal one. I never really understood why people would go all that length and waste all that money just to have "their own" child, when there are so many unwanted children everywhere on this planet. To me, that seems to be selfish beyond description...

If I were to ever have children, which really is never going to happen as I don't like them, I'd prefer to have one of my own flesh and blood. However, I'm all for adoption, as it would hopefully provide a deterant to people reproducing more, when the world has far too many people in it already, in my opinion. It probably sounds very harsh, I know, but that's my two cents.

I thought their reaction to the news of the husbands infertility a very normal one. I never really understood why people would go all that length and waste all that money just to have "their own" child, when there are so many unwanted children everywhere on this planet. To me, that seems to be selfish beyond description...

It is. Especially since the child would in some cases be certain to inherit the infertility of the parent... placing him in the same position later.

I can only imagine that there is a certain bond with your biological offspring that would not exist with an adopted child, but I am also certain that there is something special about a relationship between an adoptive parent and child that biologicals don't have. I would like to have children of my own someday when I can afford it, and I would try to have my own first, but I would not hesitate to adopt if that proved unlikely.

I thought their reaction to the news of the husbands infertility a very normal one. I never really understood why people would go all that length and waste all that money just to have "their own" child, when there are so many unwanted children everywhere on this planet. To me, that seems to be selfish beyond description...

Hmm, I agree with you Cabra. But I think you already stated the reason why so many people go to extremes to have children and not adopt:

One of the options the doctor didn't mention (as it wouldn't have put any money in his poket) was adopting a child.

Nice job with that analyses. :D
Adoption is a great thing, which you have already expressed quite eloquently. Your friends are to be commended.

There is nothing wrong with adoption.

However, you cannot blame a parent for exhausting every effort in trying to have a baby of their own. There are a lot of social and personally negative implications subconciously put onto parents who cannot have their own children naturally. It is inherent in human nature, as is in all nature to survive... after you cut out all of the emotion and social context put into having children, it is important not to overlook the core issue - to give birth is to survive. We are programmed to think that way - evolutionary function developed over hundreds of thousands of years is hard to simply turn off on the basis of moral or logical resposibility. The reason most parents to be strive to have children of their own genetic model is the basis of human nature... in fact, of all animal nature. It takes a lot to overcome such urges, and to revel in the glory of raising a child as opposed to the miracle of actually 'creating' one. Its animal nature, pure and simple.

Do I wish that more people would adopt? Yes, of course. That said, I think if one really wants to solve these issues, one needs only to adress the reason that there are so many children available for adoption in the first place. If every parent came about as a course of the type of effort parents as youve mentioned put into having children naturally... and none came from reckless behaviour, and lack of education... then there would be far less need for adoption in the first place.

I think adoption is a wonderful thing, esp. because of the home and uprbinging it gives the child that it wouldn't have had otherwise. While there is something amazing about combining as two reproducing humans to create an offspring made from just TWO SINGLE CELLS and watch it grow from the tiniest embryo to a ful human that exihibits characteristics of both parents' genes, adoption, too, has its own enchanting and entrancing qualities, for instance, the way the child blends in perfectly with its own family inside their own home, as if it was their flesh and blood offspring. Everyone has heard stories of people brutally or at least aggressively mistreating their own flesh andblood, but far fewer storied exist of people mistreating adopted children. I believe that the most important part of the family is nothing physical, but rather relational, so therefore I see no real or lasting differences between conception and adoption. More power to adoption!

Hmm, I agree with you Cabra. But I think you already stated the reason why so many people go to extremes to have children and not adopt:



Nice job with that analyses. :D
Adoption is a great thing, which you have already expressed quite eloquently. Your friends are to be commended.

The doctor didn't mention it, that's true. But I would have thought that every adult person knows at least about the concept of adopting a child, if not about the legal process and requirements?
Why does it seem the more obvious solution to try an force your body do something it abviously won't or can't do rather than BE a parent and adopt a child?
Whenever I hear stories of people who spent years in treatment or even had a surrogate mother carry their child, I can't help but thinking that these people maybe shouldn't be parents. They are not doing this for anybody but themselves...

I thought their reaction to the news of the husbands infertility a very normal one. I never really understood why people would go all that length and waste all that money just to have "their own" child, when there are so many unwanted children everywhere on this planet. To me, that seems to be selfish beyond description...
I wouldn't consider it selfish, it's only natural. I believe that deep inside of us, there's the primal instinct that wants to pass on our genes. It's the closest humans can get to immortality. Plus, some people don't feel that they could form a strong enough relationship with an adopted child than with their own, and to be honest, would you really want those people to adopt a child?

I wouldn't consider it selfish, it's only natural. I believe that deep inside of us, there's the primal instinct that wants to pass on our genes. It's the closest humans can get to immortality. Plus, some people don't feel that they could form a strong enough relationship with an adopted child than with their own, and to be honest, would you really want those people to adopt a child?
Sure, granted, but you go visit an orphanage if you're a warm-blooded human and tell me you don't throw that instinct out the window and at least CONSIDER helping at least one of the needy children you see there. People need to open their eyes and see the bigger, more obvious picture, esp. the one that makes much more sense, is what Cabra is saying methinks.

The bigger, obvious picture, is that we are all sponges on some level.

Wanting to help is great - and Im all for adoption... but the basis for becoming a parent has little to do with that. It is, and always has been, in the nature of those who seek to be parents... a way to pass on a little of themselves... and as mentioned, in some ways, become immortal. We all want to pass life on, via natural conception or via adoption. No matter how its dressed up, thats what its all about.

I wouldn't consider it selfish, it's only natural. I believe that deep inside of us, there's the primal instinct that wants to pass on our genes. It's the closest humans can get to immortality. Plus, some people don't feel that they could form a strong enough relationship with an adopted child than with their own, and to be honest, would you really want those people to adopt a child?

I guess what REALLY rubs me the wrong way about this is how society will then congratulate the parents and regard it as good that they brought another child to this planet rather than taking care of one that already is here and might need them. The way that parents are revered for their sacrificing love to their children... I just see that as hypocritical to some extend. Parents have children because THEY want to have them. That's their own, maybe natural but still selfish desicion. I will admire parental love if the parents chose to adopt a child, because that shows that they really care about somebody else, not only their own urges.

Honestly, do you think that people who cannot form a strong relationship with a helpless, small humand being who desperately needs their help would be good parents to their own offspring? I doubt it.

The bigger, obvious picture, is that we are all sponges on some level.

Wanting to help is great - and Im all for adoption... but the basis for becoming a parent has little to do with that. It is, and always has been, in the nature of those who seek to be parents... a way to pass on a little of themselves... and as mentioned, in some ways, become immortal. We all want to pass life on, via natural conception or via adoption. No matter how its dressed up, thats what its all about.
passing life on only involves biological material if you're not enlightened/educated enough to understand that true life needs not biological matter. or how do you explain the soul, and spirits??

I guess what REALLY rubs me the wrong way about this is how society will then congratulate the parents and regard it as good that they brought another child to this planet rather than taking care of one that already is here and might need them. The way that parents are revered for their sacrificing love to their children... I just see that as hypocritical to some extend. Parents have children because THEY want to have them. That's their own, maybe natural but still selfish desicion.
You must remember that in Europe, the population growth rate sux. They're practically wasting away. Therefore, everyone's all gung-ho over actually reproducing, and generating at least 2 children per 2 parents. Adoption literally entails adding no new humans to the world, which is not what Europe wants, but they want to add more humans to their countries. What they aren't seeing, as you have seen, is that what needs to be done is to take the parentless children crowding the overcrowded third-world countries and raise them as citizens of the first-world countries that need an expanding population. As far as the individual countries are concerned, the overcrowded lose population, which is good, and the depleted gains pop., also good. The world needs no more offspring, really, only a relocation of current ones. Then we can worry about reproducing in the areas that are underproducing, like Europe is now. This is an extreme form of global communism, though, for it is highly unfeasible for all the third-world orphans to be raised in Europe, America, etc., and I know this. I'm just ranting. sry

passing life on only involves biological material if you're not enlightened/educated enough to understand that true life needs not biological matter. or how do you explain the soul, and spirits??
What Im saying has little to do with enlightenment or education - no amount of either can overcome, on every level, primal function. Its what keeps any species of animal alive.

Im not disputing that, as you put it, the enlightened and educated among us cannot put our primal functions aside in order to realize that life needs nurture as much as nature. What I said has nothing to do with, and makes no mention of the presence, or lack thereof, concerning souls and spirits.

What Im saying, is that within all of us there exists a hunger to be, and to pass on our own being... it takes a lot to overcome that - hence radical action to support natural conception even when it seems futile. If anything, one should celebrate the tenacity of a human's need to try and survive rather than deny it, or put it off as a rudimentary and archaic function of humankind.

Like I said, sponges.

I never really understood why people would go all that length and waste all that money just to have "their own" child, when there are so many unwanted children everywhere on this planet. To me, that seems to be selfish beyond description...
Continuing ones own gene set is among those things that make us tick. Preservation of self come in different levels, not only eat, drink, sleep and avoid danger but spreading ones DNA as well. That is how we tend to feel more comfortable with family members than with strangers, shared DNA. Its a deep down instinct, that's all, if you find the teachings of sociobiology to hold any value.

You must remember that in Europe, the population growth rate sux. They're practically wasting away. Therefore, everyone's all gung-ho over actually reproducing, and generating at least 2 children per 2 parents. Adoption literally entails adding no new humans to the world, which is not what Europe wants, but they want to add more humans to their countries. What they aren't seeing, as you have seen, is that what needs to be done is to take the parentless children crowding the overcrowded third-world countries and raise them as citizens of the first-world countries that need an expanding population. As far as the individual countries are concerned, the overcrowded lose population, which is good, and the depleted gains pop., also good. The world needs no more offspring, really, only a relocation of current ones. Then we can worry about reproducing in the areas that are underproducing, like Europe is now. This is an extreme form of global communism, though, for it is highly unfeasible for all the third-world orphans to be raised in Europe, America, etc., and I know this. I'm just ranting. sry

No, I think te basic idea is not too bad. But you cannot force people to adopt, and you shouldn't. I don't think that's the right way, either.
But I think it would help to bring adoption to the public mind, to give it some media focus (so far, the media keeps showing reports on IVF and other fertilisation methods, but hardly ever mentiones adoption as an alternative), and I think the governments ought to promote adoption as well.
At the moment, artificial fertilisation and other processes in Germany for example are partly or completely covered by the national health services, and tens of thousands of Euros are spent on sometimes inefficient treatments. If that money was at least partly transfered into bonuses or other incentives to adopt children, I think that would help immensly.

and also, I should add, that although fundamentally it is a moral victory to support adoption in third world countries... its a moral fallacy to overlook the core issues. A lack of education and social control in third world countries is what leads to the mass amounts of orphans in the first place. Though it is only right that we try and help the products of this problem, we must allocate even more resource to the cure... or it will never be overcome. Situational overpopulation is a problem globally - the simple fact is, the world doesnt need more humans at all, not in the UK or anywhere... unless youre only thinking of the global economy and that its current sustainability is based on population growth... once again, a fundamentally flawed ideal.

Continuing ones own gene set is among those things that make us tick. Preservation of self come in different levels, not only eat, drink, sleep and avoid danger but spreading ones DNA as well. That is how we tend to feel more comfortable with family members than with strangers, shared DNA. Its a deep down instinct, that's all, if you find the teachings of sociobiology to hold any value.

Well, I heard that argument a number of times, but I can't verify it.
If I should ever decide to have children (not very likely, as I'll be past that age in another decade) I would adopt them rather than have my own.
And believe me, the last place I feel comfortable is with any of my family members ;)

One comedian put it this way : "Family is nothing but the genetic union of people who otherwise might have turned out to be very good enemies"

Bump

I thought their reaction to the news of the husbands infertility a very normal one. I never really understood why people would go all that length and waste all that money just to have "their own" child, when there are so many unwanted children everywhere on this planet. To me, that seems to be selfish beyond description...
I agree to a certain extent...but I think it's based, in part, on uncertainty. People aren't really sure if they could love a child that isn't their biological child. I'd like people to be more open about adoption, and more familiar with it so they could see real life examples of parents who love their biological children, and parents who love their adopted children. There is also the desire to 'leave something of yourself' behind. It's a deep seated need in many of us, and it's hard to overcome, yet when you attack that desire, intellectually you can understand that even by adopting, you ARE doing that. In the way you raise those children, and love and care for them...in the way you help shape the person they will become...in the way that you gave that child, or those children, a future very different than what they may have had without you.

I would like to see more people comfortable with the idea of adoption. But I would never want someone who wasn't sure about it going ahead with it. Fostering children might be a good way to see if you can handle it, if you can form those emotional bonds.

I plan on adopting, but I am not looking forward to the process. My husband and I are waiting until he takes a contract in Chile for at least a year so we can be there during the whole thing (we'll be adopting from Chile). It's something I've always wanted to do, but I too understand the desire to have a biological child. I have two, but there is no doubt in my mind that I will be able to love adopted children just as deeply as I do my daughters.

Everyone has heard stories of people brutally or at least aggressively mistreating their own flesh andblood, but far fewer storied exist of people mistreating adopted children.
You've brought up a good point. While no one would deny that there exists abuse, even in families that have adopted children, there certainly does seem to be less of it than in families with biological children. Perhaps this is too simplistic, but I believe the difference lies in the fact that adoptive parents have to be READY before they adopt. It's not a decision made lightly, nor one that can happen by accident. It's a long process that tests your dedication (it isn't designed that way, but that's how bureaucracy works:)). Anyone can be a parent, but not everyone has to both WANT, PLAN and PROVE they are capable of it.

I've got two good friends, a couple, who wanted to have children after they were married. They have been trying for some time unsucessfully, they consulted a doctor. The doctor soon found out that the husband was the infertile one and started heaving all kinds of information on possible ways of treating that infertiliy, having IVF, even information on how to contact surrogate mothers on the couple.

Now, the husband is from India, living in Germany with his German wife. They took all that information home and discussed the options. One of the options the doctor didn't mention (as it wouldn't have put any money in his poket) was adopting a child.
They both felt that as nature/god/fate obviously for some reason hadn't wanted them to have natural children, they should try adoption. As adopting a child is a very difficult and slow process in Germany, the husband contacted his parents in New Dheli who soon enough found them an agency that could help with the legal part.
Half a year later, the couple adopted a beautiful Indian baby girl. She grew up to be an adorable beautiful child, but she seemed a bit slow in her intellectual development. When she was 4 years old, the couple found out that she had severe hearing problems and had to have hearing aids. From then on, she developed normally.
When she was 5 years old, the couple adopted another Indian child, a cute and lively little boy.
Both of them are growing up in a happy, loving family who provides them with everything they need.
The alternative for them would most likely have been to grow up in an orphanage somewhere in New Dheli.

I thought their reaction to the news of the husbands infertility a very normal one. I never really understood why people would go all that length and waste all that money just to have "their own" child, when there are so many unwanted children everywhere on this planet. To me, that seems to be selfish beyond description...
While selfish … the biological imperative seems … strong … to spread your genes so I can understand why the drive is there

Personally I would adopt but I can see how the biological drive can be there

But I think it would help to bring adoption to the public mind, to give it some media focus (so far, the media keeps showing reports on IVF and other fertilisation methods, but hardly ever mentiones adoption as an alternative), and I think the governments ought to promote adoption as well.

Yes! Adoption is still a 'strange' thing to us. There is still this feeling of shame surrounding it...for some reason...'don't tell them they were adopted' or 'how are we going to explain why we adopted instead of just having kids'. I think those attitudes are changing. It's no longer as 'shameful' to be put up for adoption. People are learning how to deal with it in a normal way. I knew one kid that was adopted when I went to elementary school, and it was always the thing you weren't supposed to talk about. I'm eight years older than my youngest brother...and he grew up with many friends who were adopted, and schools taught about families other than the traditional, 'nuclear' family, and there was no weirdness about it. Once it becomes a more common practice, people will be able to see for themselves how easy it is to love a child, adopted or biological. More families will be able to point at one of their members and say, "he or she is adopted, but we love that person just the same as our blood relations".

*shrug*

Eventually, I plan to have a child of my own and to adopt. I feel it is likely that, while both are certainly a parent-child relationship, they are very different experiences and maybe slightly different bonds. Plus, I really want to be pregnant at some point (I know this is weird).

While selfish … the biological imperative seems … strong … to spread your genes so I can understand why the drive is there

Personally I would adopt but I can see how the biological drive can be there
Of course that drive is there. So is the drive for men to go out and 'spread your seed' as far and wide as they can:). We are thinking beings as well as feeling ones...surely we can analyse our urges in this matter and come to a rational decision?

I opted to do both. I'm not really sure how rational that is...but it WAS a conscious decision.

*shrug*

Eventually, I plan to have a child of my own and to adopt. I feel it is likely that, while both are certainly a parent-child relationship, they are very different experiences and maybe slightly different bonds. Plus, I really want to be pregnant at some point (I know this is weird).
Not all that weird … it seems a fairly common wish sometimes (never understood it but this is defiantly not the first time I heard of it)

Of course that drive is there. So is the drive for men to go out and 'spread your seed' as far and wide as they can:). We are thinking beings as well as feeling ones...surely we can analyse our urges in this matter and come to a rational decision?

I opted to do both. I'm not really sure how rational that is...but it WAS a conscious decision.
I never said we should not try to overcome our biological imperitives ... I just said I can see why some people would choose that option

Plus, I really want to be pregnant at some point (I know this is weird).
Not really weird...it's a pretty amazing experience. I loved being pregnant!

I never said we should not try to overcome our biological imperitives ... I just said I can see why some people would choose that option
Yeah, I know. I was just thinking out loud.

Not really weird...it's a pretty amazing experience. I loved being pregnant!

Yeah, well you're pretty weird too! (that's why I like you). ;-)

Yeah, well you're pretty weird too!
Good point. But come on...I got to gain 70 pounds, then lose them in two months! What is not totally awesome about that?

Good point. But come on...I got to gain 70 pounds, then lose them in two months! What is not totally awesome about that? Sounds rather unhealthy to me. Need a more balanced diet.

I really, really do NOT ever want to become pregnant… possibly because the only way I could ever become pregnant is "Alien" style.

Um, adoption… yeah, nothing wrong with it. In fact, it's needed more. There's my tuppence.

theres nothing wrong with wanting to make your own children from scratch but surely there are times when a couple who have spent years and many thousands of dollars on fertility treatments wonder why they went through all the effort instead of just adopting.

the husband and i considered adoption before we had our own child but the trouble, expense and uncertainty of it just didnt seem worth it.

you have to be seriously investigated. that alone is too much for me. i dont even like my husband opening my purse on his own; im not gonna let some stranger poke around.

it costs thousands of dollars to adopt. it rubbed me the wrong way to think that in order to rescue a child from a bad situation i was going to have to go into debt. you can get help if you are adopting a 10 year old with disabilities but not for healthy babies. to adopt from another country involves sometimes enormous travel costs plus trusting to the honesty and intergrity of strangers over whom you have little legal recourse (consider the problems with baby selling in cambodia), plus large adoption fees.

then there is the uncertainty. you know and accept your own flaws. you dont know anything about the flaws of the parents of the child you adopt. quite often a child is available because the parents have huge problems that can affect the child. extreme poverty, drug abuse, mental illness, having parental rights terminated by a court. the availabilty of "perfect" babies is severely limited. young women who choose to have a baby instead aborting are much more likely to keep that baby rather than give it up. and then there is the worry that she will change her mind and leave you devastated.

Sounds rather unhealthy to me. Need a more balanced diet.
Unhealthy smealthy.

I ate a balanced diet. Three of them in fact:).

then there is the uncertainty. you know and accept your own flaws. you dont know anything about the flaws of the parents of the child you adopt. quite often a child is available because the parents have huge problems that can affect the child. extreme poverty, drug abuse, mental illness, having parental rights terminated by a court. the availabilty of "perfect" babies is severely limited.
This is my fear...but I think I'm willing to deal with it. Not everyone is, and it's probably good that they admit it and DON'T adopt, rather than end up with a kid with problems they can't deal with.

it costs thousands of dollars to adopt. it rubbed me the wrong way to think that in order to rescue a child from a bad situation i was going to have to go into debt. you can get help if you are adopting a 10 year old with disabilities but not for healthy babies. to adopt from another country involves sometimes enormous travel costs plus trusting to the honesty and intergrity of strangers over whom you have little legal recourse (consider the problems with baby selling in cambodia), plus large adoption fees.

The fetrility treatments aren't any cheaper. The unfair bit here is that the treatment is covered by many health insurances (increasing the fees for all of us, even if we don't want kids in the first place), adoption is not.
And the treatment is often equally time consuming.


then there is the uncertainty. you know and accept your own flaws. you dont know anything about the flaws of the parents of the child you adopt. quite often a child is available because the parents have huge problems that can affect the child. extreme poverty, drug abuse, mental illness, having parental rights terminated by a court. the availabilty of "perfect" babies is severely limited. young women who choose to have a baby instead aborting are much more likely to keep that baby rather than give it up. and then there is the worry that she will change her mind and leave you devastated.

That is one of the reasons I heard a number of times "you never know what you'll get", but it always drives me up the wall.
If you want to be sure what you get, don't have kids. You don't know what you will get with them, either. You children are individuals, they won't ever turn out the way you expect them to, if you're naive enough to have expectations in that way.
My mother once told me if she had known I would turn out that way, she would never have had me, and I'm her natural child (that was when she found out I am bisexual) She told my gay brother more or less the same thing.
You have NO way of knowing who your children are going to be any more than you will know who your adopted children will be.

The fetrility treatments aren't any cheaper. The unfair bit here is that the treatment is covered by many health insurances (increasing the fees for all of us, even if we don't want kids in the first place), adoption is not.
And the treatment is often equally time consuming.

And in addition, many methods to come to a medically assisted pregnancy create multiple embryos, of which in general only "the best" (which aside from genetic defects is not well defined) will be placed inside the females womb. The other potentially viable embryos are frozen in case the attempt fails so it can easily be attempted again, or for when another couple comes along that doesn't mind to have someone elses embryo implanted.
If the pregnancy succeeds however, most of those embryos stay in frozen storage forever, or get flushed.

In other words: anyone who thinks abortion is murder because "the soul enters at conception" or something similar commits massmurder in their own moral system by using these methods.

for most people who choose extreme methods of conception over fertitily i think it really is the feeling that they will love their own child more and that it is somehow life fullfulling to have your own baby.

anyone being handed a newborn when they have wanted a baby for a long time will love that baby as much as if they made it from scratch. you cant help it. babies are babies and it doesnt matter much where they came from as long as they are now YOURS. and you are in much better physical and psychological condtion when you adopt.


pregnancy is hugely overrated. its the misery you have to go through to get a baby not the point of your whole life.

I thought their reaction to the news of the husbands infertility a very normal one. I never really understood why people would go all that length and waste all that money just to have "their own" child, when there are so many unwanted children everywhere on this planet. To me, that seems to be selfish beyond description...

Being adopted myself, I've never understood that either. On the other hand, when I mentioned this to my father, he said if IVF technology had been available way back when they would never had adopted me. I'm sure he wasn't being intentionally hurtful when he said this, just being honest.

I want to adopt myself one day. I'd like to get a child from overseas, maybe China. I kinda see it as returning the favour.

My wife and I fulfilled our biological destiny by having and rearing several children. I would very much like to adopt a child. Both of us really enjoy being parents and very much would like to give someone a better future than they face where they are.

The problem, or at leat that's how I'm seeing it now, is I that am 50. I will be 71 when our adopted child is 21.

Anyone have words of encouragement? Does our age disadvantage the child in the long-term?

Also, why in the world is the adoption process so difficult and expensive? How can this be changed?

My wife and I fulfilled our biological destiny by having and rearing several children. I would very much like to adopt a child. Both of us really enjoy being parents and very much would like to give someone a better future than they face where they are.

The problem, or at leat that's how I'm seeing it now, is I that am 50. I will be 71 when our adopted child is 21.

Anyone have words of encouragement? Does our age disadvantage the child in the long-term?

Also, why in the world is the adoption process so difficult and expensive? How can this be changed?

Do you have to adopt an infant? First of all, there are plenty of children already out there who need good homes, and not all of them are infants. Second, you'll probably have several years before you can adopt an infant, so the age difference will be even greater.

Meanwhile, if you feel healthy and prepared to raise a child, I don't think your age will be a problem. I've had friends with much older parents - and siblings old enough to be their parents - and they've had no major problems.

My wife and I fulfilled our biological destiny by having and rearing several children. I would very much like to adopt a child. Both of us really enjoy being parents and very much would like to give someone a better future than they face where they are.

The problem, or at leat that's how I'm seeing it now, is I that am 50. I will be 71 when our adopted child is 21.

Anyone have words of encouragement? Does our age disadvantage the child in the long-term?

Also, why in the world is the adoption process so difficult and expensive? How can this be changed?

I think you will see that you will go about it differently, you will raise this child differently than you raised the others. Not because it is adopted, but because you've grown older and changed your own attitude, plus you already have a good deal of experience.

I think the child will overall benefit from that, but I wouldsuggest adopting two children rather than one. If you have just one child, it will feel the age difference a lot more and might react negative to it, I've seen a similar situation in the family of a friend with a natural child.

Do you have to adopt an infant?

<snip>

Meanwhile, if you feel healthy and prepared to raise a child, I don't think your age will be a problem. I've had friends with much older parents - and siblings old enough to be their parents - and they've had no major problems.

The child's age is irrelevant to their need, as is race or gender, but by personal preference we'd prefer a younger child. Believe me, it's been discussed a lot and I'm theoretically flexible about age.

My biggest concern is abandoning them too early in their life or not being there for them as we decline into old age. There are no health or financial problems, just thinking ahead to be sure that adoption by us is in the best interests of the child.

I've known people who's parents died young. They seem to carry a strong sense of loss and longing with them, a future that was unfulfilled.

I think you will see that you will go about it differently, you will raise this child differently than you raised the others. Not because it is adopted, but because you've grown older and changed your own attitude, plus you already have a good deal of experience.

I think the child will overall benefit from that, but I wouldsuggest adopting two children rather than one. If you have just one child, it will feel the age difference a lot more and might react negative to it, I've seen a similar situation in the family of a friend with a natural child.

Good point, thanks. Another positive to new children will be that I must regain my German language, rusty from disuse, so that I can raise them bilingually.

However we're a long way from adopting just yet. It's on my mind a lot, though.

I dont really seem the point of adoptions. People need to have their own children to pass down their own genes, because they could be superior to other genes.

I dont really seem the point of adoptions. People need to have their own children to pass down their own genes, because they could be superior to other genes.

Well.. some people cannot have children because they are infertile. Some don't want to risk passing on their genes due to a heredetiary genetic defect/illness that increases the chance of producing a handicapped or sick child. At the same time some people do have children they can not provide for. Why not let the first type of couple take some load of the second ?

I dont really seem the point of adoptions. People need to have their own children to pass down their own genes, because they could be superior to other genes.

1. People don't *need* to have their own children. They might want to, but it's not as if not having your own biological kids makes you explode or something.

2. If their genes could be 'superior', they could equally be 'inferior'.

3. Adoption gives a home to children who need one.

I dont really seem the point of adoptions. People need to have their own children to pass down their own genes, because they could be superior to other genes.

Why should it be one or the other? Have some of your own and make room for an adopted child too.

I dont really seem the point of adoptions. People need to have their own children to pass down their own genes, because they could be superior to other genes.

I don't know about "people", but I do know that I don't need to pass down my genes, heaven forbid.

I've got two good friends, a couple, who wanted to have children after they were married. They have been trying for some time unsucessfully, they consulted a doctor. The doctor soon found out that the husband was the infertile one and started heaving all kinds of information on possible ways of treating that infertiliy, having IVF, even information on how to contact surrogate mothers on the couple.

Now, the husband is from India, living in Germany with his German wife. They took all that information home and discussed the options. One of the options the doctor didn't mention (as it wouldn't have put any money in his poket) was adopting a child.
They both felt that as nature/god/fate obviously for some reason hadn't wanted them to have natural children, they should try adoption. As adopting a child is a very difficult and slow process in Germany, the husband contacted his parents in New Dheli who soon enough found them an agency that could help with the legal part.
Half a year later, the couple adopted a beautiful Indian baby girl. She grew up to be an adorable beautiful child, but she seemed a bit slow in her intellectual development. When she was 4 years old, the couple found out that she had severe hearing problems and had to have hearing aids. From then on, she developed normally.
When she was 5 years old, the couple adopted another Indian child, a cute and lively little boy.
Both of them are growing up in a happy, loving family who provides them with everything they need.
The alternative for them would most likely have been to grow up in an orphanage somewhere in New Dheli.

I thought their reaction to the news of the husbands infertility a very normal one. I never really understood why people would go all that length and waste all that money just to have "their own" child, when there are so many unwanted children everywhere on this planet. To me, that seems to be selfish beyond description...

I'm not really in a position to know what having a child feels like, but I suppose people want to have kids with their partners, its not just about rearing c hildren, but having a pregnancy, and 9 months later being able to say(enter major cheese factor) this is as a result of our love(lord I can't beieive have cheesy Iam. Theres nothing wrong with adoption, but its not for everyone. In most cases nowadays its exceptionally difficult to adopt a new born baby, so most couples get kids a couple of years old. Which can be very difficult for all concerned. These parents have to be willing to accept the fact that the child mightn't adjust to the enormous culture change.

I'm adopted, have never felt shame about it, and have kind of felt proud in being different than many children in that respect. I do have the feeling of being wanted more, whether thats true or not, because my parents went through so much to adopt me. It can be funny and sometimes a little sad in my situation (I'm African-American, my adopted older sister is native Indonesian), when some people do double takes when I show a picture of my family, or if someone asks where my "real" parents are, or when, as it happened once in Germany (kind of ironic), several older women saw my sister and my dad holding hands (my sister was ~13 at the time) and they shook their heads, thinking she was some Asian mail order bride/love slave. I totally understand wanting to have biological children, I'd have to say I don't get putting so many chemicals into your body and ending up with 6 premature babies to take care of, but I do think adoption should be advocated more as something just as good as having a biological child. I dunno, I figure my parents going through all the home visits and stuff and finally getting me is a sign of their love too.I don't think a culture change is something to worry that much about anyway, seeing how the world is getting so the same. And people need to pass on their own genes because they could be superior? First of all, that sounds very close to Nazism, second of all, there are no superior genes unless, if you want to think of it that way, that one person might have a history of and illness that can be passed down genetically. Anyway, my 2 cents. Discuss..

I think adoption is a wonderful thing, esp. because of the home and uprbinging it gives the child that it wouldn't have had otherwise. While there is something amazing about combining as two reproducing humans to create an offspring made from just TWO SINGLE CELLS and watch it grow from the tiniest embryo to a ful human that exihibits characteristics of both parents' genes, adoption, too, has its own enchanting and entrancing qualities, for instance, the way the child blends in perfectly with its own family inside their own home, as if it was their flesh and blood offspring. Everyone has heard stories of people brutally or at least aggressively mistreating their own flesh andblood, but far fewer storied exist of people mistreating adopted children. I believe that the most important part of the family is nothing physical, but rather relational, so therefore I see no real or lasting differences between conception and adoption. More power to adoption!

Just an aside, but the reason you don't hear about many people mistreating adopted children may be because prospective adoptive parents are vetted first by the government or adoption agency to see if they're 'suitable parents'. You have to prove yourself before you can adopt, show that you have the money, sense etc. to raise a child, whereas all you need to have your own children is functioning genitalia.

I thought their reaction to the news of the husbands infertility a very normal one. I never really understood why people would go all that length and waste all that money just to have "their own" child, when there are so many unwanted children everywhere on this planet. To me, that seems to be selfish beyond description...

You are right. I don't understand it either. With the money spent on fertility clinics, many children could be adopted. Unfortunately, some countries make it very difficult to adopt kids in that country. That's why many Americans who decide to adopt do so outside the US. Sad isn't it?:(

I have the interesting perspective of having recently been on both sides of this issue. My wife had to have serious hormone treatments and artificial insemination in order to conceive our daughter, who is now a bouncing 5 month-old. For those interested, our medical insurance only covered half the costs. But the treatments greatly exacerbated an already serious case of endometriosis, and she would not have been able to handle the pain of another round of treatments if the last (of 3) attempts failed. And so, we were forced to talk about adoption.

I was against it, though I realized that being a mother was important enough to her that there was no avoiding it if we failed to produce our own again. Here's why I was against it.

We know the entire genetic history of our daughter. We could safely decide not to store her cord blood because she is not at risk for any of the diseases which can be treated with cord blood stem cells. We know she's at risk for childhood asthma, anemia, endometriosis, and astigmatism. We spotted signs of allergies and lactose intolerance immediately and dealt with them promptly. We can sleep safely knowing she's not at risk for behavioral problems like autism or schizophrenia. We also know that my wife took phenomenal care of herself during the pregnancy, so she wasn't placed at risk for any developmental disorders.

In fact, I credit my wife's diet and exercise during pregnancy for the fact that my daughter never had that helpless be-careful-or-she'll-break stage. She was strong enough that she literally popped her shoulder out of the womb on her own, and was lifting her head the first day. And although at 8lbs 14 ozs she wasn't ridiculously large, she's grown so fast that she's already bigger than almost every baby we've seen over a year old.

With an adopted child, anything goes. You really have no idea what might be in store for you. I have a neighbor couple trying to adopt because they can't have one of their own, and they specified that they wanted a healthy infant. They already had to return one when it became immediately clear it was a crack baby. Social services basically withheld information from them, and they were not happy about it.

Genetics make up a big part of a person's personality, and environment makes up the rest. The longer a child has been in another, potentially hostile environment, the better chance they have of developing lifelong social issues, which is why most people would prefer a newborn. You can't control the genetics, but you want to have as much control over the environment as possible. And as my own daughter's history proves, that environmental input begins in the womb.

Having a child is a scary prospect. It's a bigger commitment than a marriage, because you can't divorce your kids. People want to make sure they have the best child they possibly can. So they select breeding partners they feel will be complimentary (I hope she gets my brain and her looks, my competitiveness and her drive) to try to control the genetics as best you can. Then they micromanage every aspect of the child's life through the key developmental years. When you talk about adopting, you're talking about taking away the little bit of control a couple has on the child-rearing process, and throwing it all to chance. And unless you are adopting from a third world country, chances are that anyone who has to put their child up for adoption has serious issues.

However, on Monday my wife will forever put the question of a genetic sibling to rest, and regardless of my reservations we'll be adopting one in a few years.

I, for example, would probably consider adoption, but the urge to pass on mine and my future husband's genes is very, very strong. Being a nerd, I will marry a nerd, resulting in the liklihood of an extremely bright and talented child, something I would dearly love to see and encourage. Having a child with no similar talents or interests would be a little discouraging, which is what would most likley happen with an adopted child.

There are too many stupid people in the world to let my genes get lost forever. I owe it to the human race.

I can only imagine that there is a certain bond with your biological offspring that would not exist with an adopted child, but I am also certain that there is something special about a relationship between an adoptive parent and child that biologicals don't have.

I'm adopted. As are my 3 other siblings. I assure you the bond is quite the same. In fact stronger in some ways. See, I was chosen, most kids are not. I know both of my own children were not planned, however wanted. But I probably would not of chosen to have children exactly when I did, to do it over again. It wasn't that I was too young or anything, It was just perhaps not the right time. Although I love my children more than life itself, the fact remains the same. I don't regret it by any means.. the only point I'm trying to make is that parents that adopt children want them and want them bad! I know of bio kids who were never treated as well as my brothers and sister and I. So, not a damn thing wrong with being adopted or adopting. If you're adopted, just remember, you were chosen! :)

With an adopted child, anything goes. You really have no idea what might be in store for you. I have a neighbor couple trying to adopt because they can't have one of their own, and they specified that they wanted a healthy infant. They already had to return one when it became immediately clear it was a crack baby. Social services basically withheld information from them, and they were not happy about it.

Genetics make up a big part of a person's personality, and environment makes up the rest. The longer a child has been in another, potentially hostile environment, the better chance they have of developing lifelong social issues, which is why most people would prefer a newborn. You can't control the genetics, but you want to have as much control over the environment as possible. And as my own daughter's history proves, that environmental input begins in the womb.

Having a child is a scary prospect. It's a bigger commitment than a marriage, because you can't divorce your kids. People want to make sure they have the best child they possibly can. So they select breeding partners they feel will be complimentary (I hope she gets my brain and her looks, my competitiveness and her drive) to try to control the genetics as best you can. Then they micromanage every aspect of the child's life through the key developmental years. When you talk about adopting, you're talking about taking away the little bit of control a couple has on the child-rearing process, and throwing it all to chance. And unless you are adopting from a third world country, chances are that anyone who has to put their child up for adoption has serious issues.

However, on Monday my wife will forever put the question of a genetic sibling to rest, and regardless of my reservations we'll be adopting one in a few years.

Hmm...Yeah, that's more or less what my Dad said when he told me that, given the option he'd rather have had his own kids than have adopted my brother and I. I think he is a bit pissed off at the way my brother turned out (he does not get on with the rest of us at all and had a lot of behavioural problems, problems with alcohol etc.), but the way I see it is lots of people are suprised and upset at the way their kids turn out, and genetics and even a good upbringing are no guarantee of anything. My brother might have been just as much of a shit if he was their biological child, there's no way of knowing.

On the other hand, while I'm by no means perfect, I was a healthy baby, and I grew into a healthy adult. It can happen.

Also, the 'serious' issues a woman who wants to give up her baby has can be as simple as not being prepared to raise a child at that point in her life. I don't think that choice means that there's anything inherently wrong with you, or that there is anything wrong with your baby.

I know 2 couples who are adopting kids.
International adoption.
One couple has adopted 2 little girls from China.
One couple is in the process of adopting a little Colombian boy.

The process is awefully long, complicated and costly. You have to go THERE to get the kid. It can take months, even YEARS before you get the OK. Even when you get the OK, things can turn 180 degrees at any point in the process. The costs are prohibitive: more than 15000$. And you fight bureaucracy all the time. From corrupted/inefficient governments.

At one point, after waiting 1 year, my friends received a call from the embassy. Since they were not home at that specific moment, their case was moved to the bottom of the pile. Yep. Another 6 months before the next call. Since this incident, they have bought 2 cellphones & basically never leave home (except for work). It's really hard for their nerves.

I think any solution is less complicated than international adoption. People doing that are very courageous.

We know the entire genetic history of our daughter. We could safely decide not to store her cord blood because she is not at risk for any of the diseases which can be treated with cord blood stem cells. We know she's at risk for childhood asthma, anemia, endometriosis, and astigmatism. We spotted signs of allergies and lactose intolerance immediately and dealt with them promptly. We can sleep safely knowing she's not at risk for behavioral problems like autism or schizophrenia. We also know that my wife took phenomenal care of herself during the pregnancy, so she wasn't placed at risk for any developmental disorders.

This entire paragraph is pretty much loaded with bullshit. First of all, we don't know what diseases may eventually be treated with cord blood, we only know a few that might possibly be helped by it - and the potential is a long way from fully known.

Second of all, none of the diseases or developmental disorders you are talking about are even suggested to be fully hereditary. In fact, the causes of many of them are not well known at all. On top of that, no matter how careful a woman is during her pregnancy, developmental disorders are not completely eradicated. Now, you may know that she is not at increased risk for these things due to hereditary factors, but saying that she is not at risk at all is absolutely ridiculous.

With an adopted child, anything goes. You really have no idea what might be in store for you. I have a neighbor couple trying to adopt because they can't have one of their own, and they specified that they wanted a healthy infant. They already had to return one when it became immediately clear it was a crack baby. Social services basically withheld information from them, and they were not happy about it.

If your friends will only take a perfectly healthy child, they don't deserve to adopt at all. I sincerely hope they don't get a child, as all children eventually have problems, and this couple sounds like one who would punish the child for it.

And as my own daughter's history proves, that environmental input begins in the womb.

Your daugher proves no such thing. Very healthy babies are born all the time. You guys were lucky - that is good, but you can hardly say "My wife was good when she was pregnant. If your baby is weak, it must be because you did something stupid while pregnant."

People want to make sure they have the best child they possibly can. So they select breeding partners they feel will be complimentary (I hope she gets my brain and her looks, my competitiveness and her drive) to try to control the genetics as best you can. Then they micromanage every aspect of the child's life through the key developmental years.

People like that shouldn't have children. They are guarranteed to make that child's life a living hell.

When you talk about adopting, you're talking about taking away the little bit of control a couple has on the child-rearing process, and throwing it all to chance.

Incorrect. They have all of the control over the child-rearing process. All they lose is control over the genetics - control that they never really had. After all, you didn't choose your own genetics, and I certainly hope you didn't choose your wife based on what her genetics might be. "Honey, I'd like to propose, but first I need your entire genetic history..." What a completely screwed up marriage that would be. And, even if two people have no known genetic problems - even in their family history, the child is still at a good risk of having them.

And unless you are adopting from a third world country, chances are that anyone who has to put their child up for adoption has serious issues.

You mean like not being financially able to raise a child? Or being too young to be mature enough?

However, on Monday my wife will forever put the question of a genetic sibling to rest, and regardless of my reservations we'll be adopting one in a few years.

You mean you are going to take care of a genetically inferior child? The horror!