snopes.com Post new topic  New Poll  Post a reply
search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hello snopes.com » SLC Central » Soapbox Derby » Too fat or deformed to adopt?? (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Too fat or deformed to adopt??
erinker74
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for erinker74   Author's Homepage     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
BEIJING -- China is tightening rules on foreign adoptions, barring parents who are unmarried, over 50 or obese, but said it will try to increase the number of children available to those who qualify, according to U.S. adoption agencies. Article here.

--------------------
"I bet a funny thing about driving a car off a cliff is, while you're in midair,
you still hit those brakes. Hey, better try the emergency brake." -Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey

Posts: 245 | From: Gladstone, MO | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mr. Fed
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mr. Fed   Author's Homepage   E-mail Mr. Fed   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
This is very controversial and unpopular in adoption circles.

We are in the adoption process with China now. Fortunately we get grandfathered in, as I take medication for depression and would therefore no longer be qualified under the new rules. (I'm not quite BMI 40, but I'm too damned close.)

Despite this, I don't condemn China. A country should exercise great care in choosing which people may adopt its children. A sovereign nation gets to choose its own factors. Though I disagree with some of China's factors (the facial deformity one, for instance), it's their choice to make. And from a pure mote-in-the-eye standpoint, lots of the factors are less repugnant than the ones frequently urged and widely supported here.

--------------------
With occasional, half-hearted, semi-literate blogging comes great responsibility.

Posts: 1621 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Buckleupp
Away in a Manager


Icon 501 posted      Profile for Buckleupp   E-mail Buckleupp   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Fed:
A sovereign nation gets to choose its own factors. Though I disagree with some of China's factors (the facial deformity one, for instance), it's their choice to make.

Bull. Lots of sovereign nations make choices for their children that are completely repugnant and morally reprehensible. It's sickening that potential adoptive parents may now choose to forego needed treatment for moderate depression in fear they'll be turned down, turning a minor problem into a severe one, and endangering the child further than one who got appropriate treatment in the first place. And the idea that a child is better off growing up in an orphanage than living with one who has a facial deformity is unforgiveable.

Don't give them the benefit of the doubt. That government's misguided policies have caused the deaths of thousands of newborns, and this new policy is nothing short of Nazi-esque perfect society genetic engineering.

--------------------
HA! That's so funny I forgot to laugh...excluding that first Ha. -Stewie Griffin

Posts: 112 | From: Albuquerque, NM | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
infoseeker822
I'm Dreaming of a White Sale


Icon 1 posted      Profile for infoseeker822   E-mail infoseeker822   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
i can't beleive the marrage rule they have put in place.

just because your single you're unqualified to be a parent?

i just recently decided not to ever get married, mostly because that seems to be the only reason to do so is to have children.

i may be alone in this view, but i find that it's true.

Posts: 39 | From: California | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mr. Fed
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mr. Fed   Author's Homepage   E-mail Mr. Fed   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Godwinized in the third post!

The notion that this is some sort of "perfect society genetic engineering" makes no sense. These are rules of eligibility for foreign parents adopting Chinese infants and taking them back to their foreign countries, after which the Chinese government will no longer have any influence whatsoever over how they are raised, who their other family members are, who they marry, etc. Are you really suggesting that China is trying to socially engineer OTHER countries?

China is setting criteria for what people it will allow to come and take its children under its care to another country. A number of the criteria (for instance, the age restrictions) are LESS restrictive than those used by other countries. China's decision to change policy and permit only couples, not singles, to adopt brings it in line with many other countries.

As for the BMI, 40 is over the line into "morbidly obese." At 6' I'd have to be 300 pounds to get there. Now, obese and morbidly obese parents can be loving parents with perfectly good parenting skills, like anyone else. But they face severe health risks. I'm obese, but I'm not going to second-guess a country that wants to try to place kids with healthy parents who aren't at a much higher risk of not being there for the kid. (Of course, using just the BMI and not other health indicators is a sloppy mechanism.)

The facial deformity thing is troubling. I don't like it. I don't support it. But I can tell you where I suspect it may come from. Many Asian cultures have adoption taboos. That's why even first-world countries like South Korea have struggled to normalize adoption to the point that they don't need to place children with foreign parents. Some adoption advocates in Asian countries have a mindset that kids placed with foreign families will face shame, as they would in many Asian countries. They therefore advocate minimizing factors which, in their judgment, would result in further "shame" to the child. I think it is irrational as applied to facial "deformities," but I suspect that is the genesis of the rule, not some free-floating hostility towards people with facial "deformities."

As I said, even as someone who takes meds for depression and would be disqualified were I not grandfathered in, the no-meds issue does not outrage me. (Technically, I understand the new rules will not only limit taking meds for major depression, but people with major depression as well. So, the hypothetical person in your example would need to both avoid meds and perjure themselves.) China is concerned about what type of people adopt its kids, whether they will be there for the kids, and how capable they are of parenting. The rule about certain mental illnesses and meds reflect China's cultural attitudes towards such things, which are several decades "behind" ours. Again, they are a sovereign nation. It's their choice, not ours.

Once again, criticism of China's policies should be tempered with a realization that we can't keep our own house in order. Our history of dealing with cross-racial issues in adoption is troubled . Some places don't allow adoption by gay couples -- a proposition that many politicians and a regrettable percentage of the public supports. Let's get the mote out of our own eye first.

And let's place this in perspective. Under China's old more permissive rules, fewer than 10,000 Chinese kids (about 8,000, as I recall) were adopted by Americans every year. That doesn't come anywhere close to touching the number of kids who could be adopted. So it's not like Americans were taking all the kids and now they won't be.

There's another issue looming over this -- the racial one. International adoption by Americans is plagued by the "noble white people saving the black/brown/yellow people from poverty" meme. There's an attitude that Americans have a RIGHT to come into other countries and take kids because in our view they aren't cared for well enough. Some agencies have marketed China adoption in a way suggesting "even if NO ONE ELSE will let you adopt, you can at least get one of THESE kids." China's stricter rules may well be a reaction, in part, to that.

Nothing sets my teeth on edge more than people telling me how LUCKY my kids are. No, I'm the lucky one -- lucky that another country granted me the amazing boon of raising these kids. Envisioning international adoption as an American entitlement thwarted by unreasonable restrictions set by backwards foreigners is the very worst sort of American hubris.

--------------------
With occasional, half-hearted, semi-literate blogging comes great responsibility.

Posts: 1621 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mr. Fed
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mr. Fed   Author's Homepage   E-mail Mr. Fed   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by infoseeker822:
i can't beleive the marrage rule they have put in place.

just because your single you're unqualified to be a parent?

i just recently decided not to ever get married, mostly because that seems to be the only reason to do so is to have children.

i may be alone in this view, but i find that it's true.

To put it in perspective:

Many, if not most, foreign countries permitting Americans to adopt their kids limit adoption to couples.

Though adoption by singles is legal across the U.S. IIRC (except, in some states, gay singles), for a substantial part of the last century social workers and adoption agencies raised significant barriers to adoption by singles. It remains the case that many private agencies only assist couples.

--------------------
With occasional, half-hearted, semi-literate blogging comes great responsibility.

Posts: 1621 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
magpie
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for magpie   E-mail magpie   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I didn't realize adoption standards from foreign countries was a new thing. My brother and his wife have to wait until they are married for 3 years before they can adopt a child from the Phillipines.

If people don't meet the standards set by other countries they can always adopt the unwanted children in the US. Sure the cute healthy babies have 5 year long waits, but there are children who are drifting from foster home to foster home that will never be adopted, and maybe this will give them just a little bit better chance of finding a family.

Posts: 439 | From: Redondo Beach, CA | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
erinker74
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for erinker74   Author's Homepage     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by magpie:
I didn't realize adoption standards from foreign countries was a new thing. My brother and his wife have to wait until they are married for 3 years before they can adopt a child from the Phillipines.

If people don't meet the standards set by other countries they can always adopt the unwanted children in the US. Sure the cute healthy babies have 5 year long waits, but there are children who are drifting from foster home to foster home that will never be adopted, and maybe this will give them just a little bit better chance of finding a family.

I agree with this completely. If I am being completely logical, I suppose I don't have too many objections to their guidelines; I would rather a country have too many guidelines than too little. I do wonder, however, what their non-physical requirements are. But my heart says that it is a shame that children from any country go to bed without a loving home , especially when so many people who could be capable, loving parents - fat people, gay people, medicated people, single people, people with deformities - are excluded.

I am infertile. I am also single and likely to remain so. Oh, and I'm fat. I am not on medications...yet. I do plan to eventually adopt a small baby so that I can have that experience, but I will also adopt older children from the US. The thought of a 14 year-old getting ready to go out into the world with no one is almost unbearable to me. Although I certainly understand the desire for a newborn (I struggle with the same desire), I do find it a bit heartbreaking that people go through so many extreme measures - IVF, fertility treatments, strenuous and long adoption processes - to get a newborn when there are so many older kids ready for homes right now.

--------------------
"I bet a funny thing about driving a car off a cliff is, while you're in midair,
you still hit those brakes. Hey, better try the emergency brake." -Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey

Posts: 245 | From: Gladstone, MO | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Ophiuchus
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ophiuchus   E-mail Ophiuchus   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
To play China's advocate for a moment, some of these are not too unusual of rules.

First, the thing about being treated for psychiatric conditions, if you consider this, is quite reasonable. Sure, it would be more fair to say presence of psychiatric conditions. But treatment is pretty strong evidence of presence of conditions. Now, applicants with severe conditions are almost certain to understate those conditions on an application. So, do you really want to take the chance sending a child to someone with psychiatric conditions from a country where such mothers have killed their children in the name of god or locked them in a car and driven it into a lake? This isn't to say that every person with psychiatric conditions is going to do something (yes, it is a rare, rare instance), but the alternative would be to set up a system the Chinese could trust to try to determine how severe the conditions are. Would you be any happier with that?

Also, try to realize that the world does not revolve around Americans. China is right for putting the safety and well-being of its children above your convienence. Hell, there is no shortage of countries with children that need adopted, one has to wonder if having a Chinese child is being seen more as a fad fashion accessory. Sort of like getting the most popular breed of puppy. If this is the case, then by all means they should be unreasonably picky.

Now, as for the weight and marriage requirements
1) Morbidly obese parents raise morbidly obese children. Not even a geneological link here, but the kind of lifestyle that gets you to a BMI of 40 is passed onto the kiddies.
2) Children who grow up with a single parent tend on average to have more problems than a child with two parents. Go to any website that is designed to try to encourage men to stick around and be fathers to their kids for the information. The typical dropping out, doing drugs, teenage pregnancy, crime rate speil.

Furthermore, on the marriage thing, try to put yourself in their shoes for a moment here. China is a country where many people still have their spouses choosen for them. Just stick two people together and say 'you are married' and they make this relationship last with relative contentment for the rest of their lives.
And you tell them that you chose your husband/wife and you are excited that you made it last a whole 4 years (current mean average length of a marriage in America). That just reaks of an inability to maintain a relationship in the face of adversity. You really want to put the responsibility of a kid into those kind of hands?

Now, I know everyone wants to say 'But I am one of the good ones!', but that's the same as a merchant telling you that they are honest. Everyone says it, especially those who aren't.

Finally, and by far more importantly, if you know what the 1-child per family law did to China's gender ratio and you notice that most of those being sent to America are girls, you'd realize that it is in China's best interest (and probably every country near China) not to let any of the girls it has be shipped off to America. Not unless they are somehow adopting twice as many girls from even more poverty stricken countries.

Posts: 411 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Buckleupp
Away in a Manager


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Buckleupp   E-mail Buckleupp   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
This kind of attitude is terrifying. Soon there will be advocacy for not allowing fat, gay, single, or other "undesirables" to even parent their OWN children. After all, the arguments you just raised are just as true for one's own biological children as for adopted kids. So why don't we just sterilize those the government deems not acceptable?

--------------------
HA! That's so funny I forgot to laugh...excluding that first Ha. -Stewie Griffin

Posts: 112 | From: Albuquerque, NM | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mr. Fed
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mr. Fed   Author's Homepage   E-mail Mr. Fed   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
You forgot Hitler.

--------------------
With occasional, half-hearted, semi-literate blogging comes great responsibility.

Posts: 1621 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Elkhound
It Came Upon a Midnight Clearance


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Elkhound         Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Buckleupp:
So why don't we just sterilize those the government deems not acceptable?

It has been tried. Not only in Germany, but also in the United States.

--------------------
"The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch

Posts: 3307 | From: Charleston, WV | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Artemis
The First USA Noel


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Artemis   E-mail Artemis   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
But where do you draw the line? There are arguments against singletons and obese people, and facial deformities...who's fit, then? I just feel like at least everyone has something wrong with them. Probably everyone at some point will get teased for having "weird" or imperfect parents. And every kid thinks their parents are embarrassing. I'm just having trouble thinking of a "good" parent under China's policies.

--------------------
"You can't play Electro-magnetic Golf according to the rules of Centrifugal Bumble Puppy."
-Mustapha Mond, "Brave New World"

Posts: 679 | From: New York | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Spooky Cactus
I'll Be Home for After Christmas Sales


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Spooky Cactus   E-mail Spooky Cactus   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ophiuchus:
2) Children who grow up with a single parent tend on average to have more problems than a child with two parents. Go to any website that is designed to try to encourage men to stick around and be fathers to their kids for the information. The typical dropping out, doing drugs, teenage pregnancy, crime rate speil.

And are those problems more or less prevalent in people who grew up with no parents at all?

It's not to do with America, imperialism or anything else. It's the simple fact that some of these are not acceptable limits to place on adoption FULL STOP and *will* result in children who would otherwise have had one or more fat or deformed parent, or one with a mental condition, will be stuck in the orphanage.

--------------------
'When the world is dead and gone, we will still be Rocking On!' (J.P.McCartney)

Posts: 154 | From: Yorkshire, England | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Buckleupp
Away in a Manager


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Buckleupp   E-mail Buckleupp   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I think the decisions should be based on actions and not on characteristics. In other words they should consider things like criminal background and past incidences of abuse, neglect, or violence. This is the only fair way to judge or predict someone's parenting without discriminating against a group of people.

(And to clarify when I suggested sterilization I was being sarcastic.)

--------------------
HA! That's so funny I forgot to laugh...excluding that first Ha. -Stewie Griffin

Posts: 112 | From: Albuquerque, NM | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Lainie
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Lainie   E-mail Lainie   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ophiuchus:
Furthermore, on the marriage thing, try to put yourself in their shoes for a moment here. China is a country where many people still have their spouses choosen for them.

Do you have actual evidence that most marriages in modern China are arranged, or are you just guessing? IOW, cite, please?

--------------------
How homophobic do you have to be to have penguin gaydar? - Lewis Black

Posts: 8322 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mr. Fed
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mr. Fed   Author's Homepage   E-mail Mr. Fed   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Spooky Cactus:
quote:
Originally posted by Ophiuchus:
2) Children who grow up with a single parent tend on average to have more problems than a child with two parents. Go to any website that is designed to try to encourage men to stick around and be fathers to their kids for the information. The typical dropping out, doing drugs, teenage pregnancy, crime rate speil.

And are those problems more or less prevalent in people who grew up with no parents at all?

It's not to do with America, imperialism or anything else. It's the simple fact that some of these are not acceptable limits to place on adoption FULL STOP and *will* result in children who would otherwise have had one or more fat or deformed parent, or one with a mental condition, will be stuck in the orphanage.

It is exactly to do with America and imperialism when you take the attitude that Westerners know better than Chinese the circumstances under which the Chinese should relinquish their own children to people from other countries.

--------------------
With occasional, half-hearted, semi-literate blogging comes great responsibility.

Posts: 1621 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mistletoey Chloe
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mistletoey Chloe     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
China already refuses to allow gay couples to adopt, so lesbians have had to represent themselves as single women (which, technically, they are) in order to do so. This can't happen under the new rules, so my colleague wouldn't have been able to adopt her smart and beautiful little girl. Children of single parents may well have more problems, statistically (although controlling for poverty would do much to rectify this); children of same sex couples have no such problems. There's no justification for it, as far as I can see.

--------------------
~~Ai am in mai prrrrrraime!~~

Posts: 10111 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Buckleupp
Away in a Manager


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Buckleupp   E-mail Buckleupp   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
It is exactly to do with America and imperialism when you take the attitude that Westerners know better than Chinese the circumstances under which the Chinese should relinquish their own children to people from other countries.
No, this is a universal human rights issue. What makes a child grow up healthy and well adjusted is, in my opinion, universal. I don't mean to suggest that all children must be exposed to American TV and Barbies or even public schools, but I believe it is a universal truth that children of any culture will grow up to be better (emotionally and physically healthy, capable of making good decisions, etc.) if they have a parent or two devoted to their well being, rather than growing up in a group home, orphanage, or similar condition. Many of the girls who grow up in these orphanages leave in their early teens and turn to prostitution to support themselves. I don't think it's such a horrible thing that people want to "rescue" these children - not from their culture but from pain and death.

--------------------
HA! That's so funny I forgot to laugh...excluding that first Ha. -Stewie Griffin

Posts: 112 | From: Albuquerque, NM | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Rhiandmoi
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Rhiandmoi   E-mail Rhiandmoi   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Arranged is not the same thing it used to be. Probably most of the arranged marriages nowadays the people getting married have as much say in as if they went out into the world and found a partner on their own. IME it usually involves consulting a horoscope chart of the two people and a facilitated introduction. It is as arranged as any mother telling her son that she knows a nice woman from church that would be perfect for him and she is going to be at the house on Friday so wear a nice shirt.

--------------------
I think that hyperbole is the single greatest factor contributing to the decline of society. - My friend Pat.

What is .02 worth?

Posts: 8745 | From: California | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Little Pink Pill
Little Sales Drummer Boy


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Little Pink Pill     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
With reports like this that detail the horrifying statistics of China's orphanage system (like an up to 72% mortality rate for newborns in the first year), I have a hard time not feeling like these types of rules "protecting" orphans from foreign adoptions are not something of a sham, considering the government's treatment of them at home.

But I am, admittedly, biased. I live too close to Romania and have too many friends who are either adoptive parents or aid workers there. It is very difficult for me to not see the foreign adotion system of countries like these as little more than institutionalized baby selling. To now have them add rules making it even more difficult to save children out of a lonely, wretched, and often cruel system is nothing short of disgusting to me.

Edited to fix statistic

--------------------
The technical term is narcissism. You can't believe everything is your fault unless you also believe you're all powerful.--House

Posts: 2684 | From: Budapest | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
TurquoiseGirl
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for TurquoiseGirl   Author's Homepage     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Fed:
It is exactly to do with America and imperialism when you take the attitude that Westerners know better than Chinese the circumstances under which the Chinese should relinquish their own children to people from other countries.

Are children a natural or manufactured resource that the Chinese government can consider rightful owners of? Or are they humans who need care and nuturing? If the Chinese government were providing adequate care and nuturing, I would say you had a point. But they are not.

--------------------
There are people who drive really nice cars who feel that [those] cars won't be as special if other people drive them too. Where I come from, we call those people "selfish self-satisfied gits." -Chloe

Posts: 6995 | From: New Mexico | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Rhiandmoi
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Rhiandmoi   E-mail Rhiandmoi   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Should the Chinese, or any adoption agency for that matter, have standards for the prospective parents? If yes, what kinds of things would be acceptable?

--------------------
I think that hyperbole is the single greatest factor contributing to the decline of society. - My friend Pat.

What is .02 worth?

Posts: 8745 | From: California | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Aud
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Aud   E-mail Aud   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I think part of the problem is that people want to adopt a child free and clear of any specific connections. One reason I've heard many people look international is so that don't have to deal with birthparents. Now they don't want China, an uber birth parent if you will, to have a say in what happens to its children. These connections don't just disappear when the legalese is done.

(I'm not trying to say this was Mr. Fed's motivation to adopt internationally. Discussion of a tendency doesn't necessarily apply to individual decisions.)

Even people who haven't adopted seem to have a inordinate amount of interest in the birthparents. The motivations for giving up a child are questioned and because the BF could consider such a thing all other choices are suspect. Is this why the story is getting so much traction among those who have no intention of adopting from China?

The facial deformity thing is interesting. One friend adopted a girl with a cleft lip and palate from China. She was told that the baby was probably abandoned because of the cleft lip and had zero chance of finding any place in socity because of it. I suppose that there is a deep seated prejustice against facial deformity that we don't really grok here.

Posts: 1168 | From: Missouri | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mr. Fed
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mr. Fed   Author's Homepage   E-mail Mr. Fed   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Children are not owned by the government. But if there is a human rights obligation to provide adequate care for them, does that imply an obligation to let (comparatively) rich Westerners come and get them, on whatever terms the rich Westerners deem acceptable? The question of whether China treats its orphaned children in an acceptable manner, and the question of whether it must export them, are two separate questions.

And is America really the country to be throwing the first stone about adequate care for children? The infant mortality rate here for poor children is nothing to be proud of. Nor, for that matter, is the overall infant mortality rate -- which is roughly 10th (the second worst in the developed world), despite the fact that we are so comparatively rich. And if you are born black, welcome to an infant mortality rate more than twice that of whites.

--------------------
With occasional, half-hearted, semi-literate blogging comes great responsibility.

Posts: 1621 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mr. Fed
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mr. Fed   Author's Homepage   E-mail Mr. Fed   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Aud:
[QB] I think part of the problem is that people want to adopt a child free and clear of any specific connections. One reason I've heard many people look international is so that don't have to deal with birthparents. Now they don't want China, an uber birth parent if you will, to have a say in what happens to its children. These connections don't just disappear when the legalese is done.

(I'm not trying to say this was Mr. Fed's motivation to adopt internationally. Discussion of a tendency doesn't necessarily apply to individual decisions.)

No offense taken, but it skips over a number of other frequent reasons. The process tends to be shorter, and is more predictable (usually) than domestic private or public adoption. Also, you don't have to rely on the United States' social worker network -- a network which, until recently, was heavily influenced by a group that claimed that cross-racial adoption was "cultural genocide."

quote:



The facial deformity thing is interesting. One friend adopted a girl with a cleft lip and palate from China. She was told that the baby was probably abandoned because of the cleft lip and had zero chance of finding any place in socity because of it. I suppose that there is a deep seated prejustice against facial deformity that we don't really grok here.

This is an important point -- we don't know or understand all of the cultural signifiers.

Most people we talk to are amazed to learn that many more boys than girls are put up for international adoption from South Korea. There's a cultural reason (having to do with the stigma on adoption and the cultural importance of a man being able to trace his lineage) that most people aren't familiar with.

--------------------
With occasional, half-hearted, semi-literate blogging comes great responsibility.

Posts: 1621 | From: Los Angeles | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Buckleupp
Away in a Manager


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Buckleupp   E-mail Buckleupp   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
My friend who is in the process of adopting (hence my emotional and committed responses here) has her motivation in trying to rescue a girl from potential sex slavery or prostitution. I don't think there was any specific reason for her to eschew domestic adoption of a black child or an older foster child other than, her words, she felt "called" to adopt from China. She is certainly not one to fall for "fads" nor a desire to avoid birth parents. It was just her choice.

Mr. Fed I certainly agree with you wholeheartedly that we are doing a crappy job here in America of taking care of our orphans. I'd love to adopt or foster an older child but would never be approved by the government (pick a reason - obese, treated for depression, single, they don't love those things here in America either).

All I can hope is that China hurries to approve her dossier before May 1st, because despite China's "evidence" to the contrary, I know my friend will make the best parent you could imagine. I wish you the best in your process as well.

Going home now to avoid the snow.

--------------------
HA! That's so funny I forgot to laugh...excluding that first Ha. -Stewie Griffin

Posts: 112 | From: Albuquerque, NM | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Aud
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Aud   E-mail Aud   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I'd like to emphasize that I said "one reason" in my comment about reasons for adopting internationally. I know all too well that there are a host of reasons for intiating any family building. [Smile]

Buckleup - don't discount yourself. My weight and previous treatment for depression were mentioned but not really an issue in my daughter's adoption. Some agencies specialize in single parent adoption. There is lots of stuff people think they know about adoption that turns out not to be true.

Posts: 1168 | From: Missouri | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Elkhound
It Came Upon a Midnight Clearance


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Elkhound         Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseGirl:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Fed:
It is exactly to do with America and imperialism when you take the attitude that Westerners know better than Chinese the circumstances under which the Chinese should relinquish their own children to people from other countries.

Are children a natural or manufactured resource that the Chinese government can consider rightful owners of?
Every heard of "Parens Patriae"?

--------------------
"The bicycle is the most civilized conveyance known to man. Other forms of transport grow daily more nightmarish. Only the bicycle remains pure in heart."--Iris Murdoch

Posts: 3307 | From: Charleston, WV | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
LolaRennt
The First USA Noel


Icon 1 posted      Profile for LolaRennt   E-mail LolaRennt   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Buckleupp:
I think the decisions should be based on actions and not on characteristics. In other words they should consider things like criminal background and past incidences of abuse, neglect, or violence. This is the only fair way to judge or predict someone's parenting without discriminating against a group of people.

(And to clarify when I suggested sterilization I was being sarcastic.)

And what do you do when the potential adoptive parents have never had kids before? How do you prove that they would be fit parents based on your criteria? There are probably abusive parents out there who probably would have looked good on paper before having kids on their own.

LR

Posts: 780 | From: Dallas, TX | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
GenYus
Away in a Manager's Special


Icon 1 posted      Profile for GenYus   E-mail GenYus   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Buckleupp:
My friend who is in the process of adopting (hence my emotional and committed responses here) has her motivation in trying to rescue a girl from potential sex slavery or prostitution. I don't think there was any specific reason for her to eschew domestic adoption of a black child or an older foster child other than, her words, she felt "called" to adopt from China.[emphasis mine]

That might be the exact attitude that causes resentment from the other countries. I don't know about the Chinese, but if someone had the attitude of adopting a child from the US in order to save her from sinfully showing her ankles and looking men in the face, I'd be pretty cheesed off.

--------------------
IIRC, it wasn't the shoe bomber's loud prayers that sparked the takedown by the other passengers; it was that he was trying to light his shoe on fire. Very, very different. Canuckistan

Posts: 3694 | From: Arizona | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Aud
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Aud   E-mail Aud   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
There are some cases of black children in the US being adopted abroad. I'm not sure if their adoptive parents thought in terms of rescue but birth mothers in both articles cite less prejustice in other contries in their reasons for choosing the adoptive parents' location.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/11/60minutes/main673597.shtml
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1027/p11s01-lifp.html

Posts: 1168 | From: Missouri | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
erinker74
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for erinker74   Author's Homepage     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
This discussion reminds me of the little "experiment" my Sociology 101 professor visited upon us in college, and I am sure many of you are aware of it. We were put in groups of four people and told that it was 200 years in the future. The population had gotten so out of control that you now had to have a license to get pregnant. We (the group of four) were given the task of assigning only four "babies" to six potential couples. We were given no names; only stats. Which two couples would we deny a baby? Three of them were exemplary couples, two were below average, and one was just horrible. Across the board, everyone denied a baby to the "horrible" couple, and the other denied couple was spread evenly among the two "below average" couples. Now here come the punchline: The "horrible" couple that was unilaterally denied was Abraham and Mary Lincoln (what a nut case they were!) I believe Mozart and Ben Franklin were the patriarchs of the "below-average" couple. Hitler and Eva Braun were one of the "exemplary" couples.

I am not sure how that applies other than to illustrate the sometimes impossible task of identifying greatness or decent parenting by statistics alone.

--------------------
"I bet a funny thing about driving a car off a cliff is, while you're in midair,
you still hit those brakes. Hey, better try the emergency brake." -Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey

Posts: 245 | From: Gladstone, MO | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Ophiuchus
Deck the Malls


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ophiuchus   E-mail Ophiuchus   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by erinker74:
Now here come the punchline: The "horrible" couple that was unilaterally denied was Abraham and Mary Lincoln (what a nut case they were!) I believe Mozart and Ben Franklin were the patriarchs of the "below-average" couple. Hitler and Eva Braun were one of the "exemplary" couples.

Just because Lincoln did some good things doesn't necessarilly mean he was a good parent. Mozart, if I recall correctly, was borderline insane. Franklin had a dozen of mistresses at any given time.
On the other hand, I don't see how one could classify Hitler and Eva Braun as good parents. The former was hateful, physically and mentally abusive and likely stricken with at least one terminal disease. The later was obsessive, irresponsible and prone to suicidal depression. Someone really dropped the ball on that one.

Just because one is skilled, determined or ambitious enough to make them historically signifigant does not mean that they would make good parents. In fact, the families of the most famous politicians and artists have always been some of the most neglected (check out what little is known about Shakespear's family).

Anyhow, I will admit that in my defining why the rules China made might not be so bad, I did neglect to compare it to the conditions of an orphanage. It is important to look at it in the context of those parents or nothing and that does significantly change things.

But, at the same time there are plenty of children who need adopted in the U.S. and dozens of other countries in the world (many of whom are worse off than China) and I cannot help but feel that those who are going after the Chinese children may have less than impure motives. Whether it be because it is the fad thing to do or they want to "Save" some heathens/infidels or what... A really vague reason like they were "called" to do so would make me highly suspicious and I think the person needs to do some real soul searching and consider whether they are doing this for the good of a child or themselves. Especially when it comes at the price of abandoning another child who could have used a parent.

And how serious is the person really taking it? Are they choosing to become fluent in Chinese and are they willing to celebrate the various Chinese festivals? Are they prepared to make some trips to China later in life so that the child can get in touch with the land their ancestors came from? Or do they expect the child to be delivered to them ready to speak English and be Americanized and never think or see China or the Chinese as an evil communist empire again?

If you don't like China's rules, adopt elsewhere.

Posts: 411 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mad Jay
Let There Be PCs on Earth


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mad Jay     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by erinker74:
This discussion reminds me of the little "experiment" my Sociology 101 professor visited upon us in college, and I am sure many of you are aware of it. We were put in groups of four people and told that it was 200 years in the future. The population had gotten so out of control that you now had to have a license to get pregnant. We (the group of four) were given the task of assigning only four "babies" to six potential couples. We were given no names; only stats. Which two couples would we deny a baby? Three of them were exemplary couples, two were below average, and one was just horrible. Across the board, everyone denied a baby to the "horrible" couple, and the other denied couple was spread evenly among the two "below average" couples. Now here come the punchline: The "horrible" couple that was unilaterally denied was Abraham and Mary Lincoln (what a nut case they were!) I believe Mozart and Ben Franklin were the patriarchs of the "below-average" couple. Hitler and Eva Braun were one of the "exemplary" couples.

I am not sure how that applies other than to illustrate the sometimes impossible task of identifying greatness or decent parenting by statistics alone.

Do all Sociology professors steal experiments from chain emails?

--------------------
Nico Sasha
In between my father's fields;And the citadels of the rule; Lies a no-man's land which I must cross; To find my stolen jewel.

Posts: 4912 | From: VA | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post new topic  New Poll  Post a reply Close topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Urban Legends Reference Pages

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2