Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
People go out of the country because they want infants. There are plenty of older children and children with disabilities who need foster care and parents. If there are childen out of the country who need homes why ruin their chances by forcing homegrown baby production?What a way to get someone to birth a child for you!!
Do childless couples have trouble adopting now? Have we run out of orphans?
Yes, we have. Why do you think so many people go out of the country?
Adoption Statistics: Placing Children* Less than 3% of white unmarried women and less than 2% of Black unmarried women. (Mosher and Bachrach, 1996)
* Of Black women with premarital births,
From 1952 to 1972, 1.5% placed their children for adoption.
From 1973 to 1981, this percentage fell to .2%
From 1982 to 1988, it rose to 1.1%.
* Of White women with premarital births,
From 1952 to 1972, 19.3% placed their children for adoption.
From 1973 to 1981, this percentage fell to 7.6%.
From 1982 to 1988, it fell further to 3.2%. (Bachrach, Stolley, London, 1992)
Yes, the adoption industry is a money maker for the brokers. Selling babies can get you a comfortable income. Even when you sell your own.This is nothing but a supply and demand issue.
Follow the money. If there is money to be made in it, it will be done.
Abortion shouldn't be the only choice for unwanted children.
Abortion shouldn't be the only choice for unwanted children.
Has it ever been?
Adoption within the US is not very cheap either. Unless you are willing to take a less than perfect child, then it's a bit more affordable.
You call it a silver lining that more restrictions on abortion may increase the up for adoption baby pool. I hope you do not think of it as a selling point. I'm sure many do.
Following the current zeitgeist, most American women bearing children they can't afford will do their utmost to hold onto them. Who could blame them? The maternal instinct is a very strong one. Welfare will continue to support them and even if that were cut it will mean many costly and emotional battles by Family Services to wrest children from their parent's arms. In most cases then you will still end up with older children with issues to be dealt with.
I think that women who must give up their children to someone else through no fault of her own but that they were denied abortion and now can't afford to feed their kids, must be among the most unfortunate and most cruely wronged women in the world. I don't see any silver lining in situations like this.
No, I don't find that strange at all. In fact, if every fetus were to turn into a human being that lived an average life span and procreated the environment, and thus the future of our species, would be in grave danger. Get back to to when there is a shortage of fetuses and then I will be concerned about them.What people are these?
Well, your typical liberal environmentalists. Not ALL of them, of course, because I try not to make absolute statements like that. But I'm sure there are many...enough to make pointing out the irony worthwhile.
You don't find it strange that a person would argue against something for environmental reasons because living things are potentially killed in the process, and simultaneously support killing a fetus simply because it's an inconvenience?
I'm only speaking about the matter of convenience in this case, not a rape, or something else that might provide a more justified reason for an abortion.
As long as those children came to their parents by honest means and there was no forced birth due to abortion being denied then forced release for adoption. Women are not breeding stock.Children being raised by parents who want and love them is never a bad thing.
But I doubt that's the goal of the protestors. I just mentioned it as a possible unintended consequence. Personally I'd prefer if people who dont want kids got a fricken shot. But that would make too much sense.
You said it yourself, 99% of the time.Are you serious? I meant Depro Provera! To be perfectly honest, if I had a teen daughter, I'd prob give her the shot in the ass as she slept just as a precaution.
There are ways to prevent pregnancy. 99 percent of the time.
That's how things work in the natural word, Paulie. Excess children used to be disposed of by leaving them out in the elements or selling them off as slaves. We aren't like some species like kangaroos which can reabsorb fetuses when environmental conditions change. Now we can slow down the birthrate and children can come into existence at a rate which alows us to give thm th very best life has to offer. We can can also afford to give women the right to live for something other than existing as breeding stock and servants to men.No, I don't find that strange at all. In fact, if every fetus were to turn into a human being that lived an average life span and procreated the environment, and thus the future of our species, would be in grave danger. Get back to to when there is a shortage of fetuses and then I will be concerned about them.Well, your typical liberal environmentalists. Not ALL of them, of course, because I try not to make absolute statements like that. But I'm sure there are many...enough to make pointing out the irony worthwhile.
You don't find it strange that a person would argue against something for environmental reasons because living things are potentially killed in the process, and simultaneously support killing a fetus simply because it's an inconvenience?
I'm only speaking about the matter of convenience in this case, not a rape, or something else that might provide a more justified reason for an abortion.
Ouch Ang.
So the value of living things correlates directly to the amount of each in existence?
Abortion shouldn't be the only choice for unwanted children.
Has it ever been?
Adoption within the US is not very cheap either. Unless you are willing to take a less than perfect child, then it's a bit more affordable.
You call it a silver lining that more restrictions on abortion may increase the up for adoption baby pool. I hope you do not think of it as a selling point. I'm sure many do.
Following the current zeitgeist, most American women bearing children they can't afford will do their utmost to hold onto them. Who could blame them? The maternal instinct is a very strong one. Welfare will continue to support them and even if that were cut it will mean many costly and emotional battles by Family Services to wrest children from their parent's arms. In most cases then you will still end up with older children with issues to be dealt with.
I think that women who must give up their children to someone else through no fault of her own but that they were denied abortion and now can't afford to feed their kids, must be among the most unfortunate and most cruely wronged women in the world. I don't see any silver lining in situations like this.
I see your point... keep someone shielded from a possibly tough life by killing them.
Nice plan.
Am I the only person in this thread to feel compassion for women forced by lack of access to birth control and abortion to give birth and then have to give their babies away to strangers?
All of us came from a mother. Regardless of our relationships with our mothers later on, in the beginning we wanted nothing more than to be with them. I find it astounding how callous people can be about a mother's desire to be with her baby.Am I the only person in this thread to feel compassion for women forced by lack of access to birth control and abortion to give birth and then have to give their babies away to strangers?
You expect compassion on this topic? Good luck with that.
I would hazard to guess that the majority expect that if a female gets pregnant then that is too damn bad, time to step up to the plate and do what you gotta do. Excuses are not accepted.
True about access to all kinds of medical care. Though in the case of abortion there is the factor of additional pressure brought on by the protesters.I am not thinking that the beef is with the sex but the consequences of the decision to have sex. "If you can't do the time don't do the crime". Back to the OP access is down to quality medical for everything in the past few years unless you have the money so it is not a surprise really.
Are you surprised to hear this sort of thing is happening in the Liberal North East?
Will abortion eventually become inaccessible anywhere in the US due to pressure from anti-abortion groups and locals who fear them?
Abortion shouldn't be the only choice for unwanted children.
Has it ever been?
Adoption within the US is not very cheap either. Unless you are willing to take a less than perfect child, then it's a bit more affordable.
You call it a silver lining that more restrictions on abortion may increase the up for adoption baby pool. I hope you do not think of it as a selling point. I'm sure many do.
Following the current zeitgeist, most American women bearing children they can't afford will do their utmost to hold onto them. Who could blame them? The maternal instinct is a very strong one. Welfare will continue to support them and even if that were cut it will mean many costly and emotional battles by Family Services to wrest children from their parent's arms. In most cases then you will still end up with older children with issues to be dealt with.
I think that women who must give up their children to someone else through no fault of her own but that they were denied abortion and now can't afford to feed their kids, must be among the most unfortunate and most cruely wronged women in the world. I don't see any silver lining in situations like this.
Did you read the article? Not only are protesters trying to shut this clinic down, the neighbors are too. They are petitioning the town because they don't want the protesters to have an adverse effect on their businesses nearby. They don't want their kids to be frightened by these people on the way to day care.Are you surprised to hear this sort of thing is happening in the Liberal North East?
Will abortion eventually become inaccessible anywhere in the US due to pressure from anti-abortion groups and locals who fear them?
This simply about the economy. There is no threat to access for abortions due to anti-Choice crowds and rent in Chestnut hill is really high. It is the typical over priced over policed white suburbia.
