Is it common to ask for money to adopt?

[Meadowlark]

This, exactly.

I feel the need to clarify...this is not what I described for what it's worth. It's all being done via Facebook (links to fundraising page, blog links with donation requests). But boy, I totally agree with you. I'd be in a REAL tizzy if I was singled out...um, they'd hear about it straight from my mouth for sure.

[Haiku]

Maybe I'm wrong, but I've always thought that the products were available so that the person needing money could work for their money instead of asking for a donation.  There is a certain amount of work that goes into the design, purchase, sales & distribution of products. Some people would rather do that than ask for a donation and I can respect that. 

 

Again ... do you want to donate $7 because the person "worked for their money" or $20 because you find their cause worthy? I, personally, avoid these types of fundraisers because I don't want some business receiving the bulk of the money that I am supposedly "donating."

[katilac]

Again ... do you want to donate $7 because the person "worked for their money" or $20 because you find their cause worthy? I, personally, avoid these types of fundraisers because I don't want some business receiving the bulk of the money that I am supposedly "donating."

 

I think this may hit at the heart of the issue. For some people, the idea of an adopted child as a 'worthy cause' is a difficult one. 

[LizzyBee]

So, where I live, 3 couples that I know have adopted in the past few years. Another of my FB friends just posted a fundraising page today. All of these couples have been raising money, having fund raisers...benefits, etc to bring their children home. All are internationally adopted.

 

This is driving my parents and husband crazy, and me too a bit if I'm being honest. The constant asking for money part. Don't get me wrong, we all think adoption is AMAZINGLY wonderful, and I've even thought about it myself. But, the constant asking for money part is really beginning to....seem strange to us. My husband says "when we had our 5 kids, did we ask anyone to pay the hospital bill? No, because we CHOSE to have these children, and so the responsibility lies with us".

 

Im not wishing to ruffle any feathers or start a debate, but just curious if this sort of thing is common in other parts of the country. Again, adoption is beautiful and despite our feelings of weirdness, we will most likely support these people because it's in the best interest of these precious kids.

 

Yes!  A lot of people are doing that around here.  Sometimes they have a yard sale or something and earmark the funds for adoption, which is fine, but other people just ask for donations straight up.  I think the logic is that they are "rescuing" these children and so it's honorable for people who can't adopt to help those who can. I find it irritating. But I would never tell the person doing it that I find it irritating; I just ignore.

[SKL]

I think this may hit at the heart of the issue. For some people, the idea of an adopted child as a 'worthy cause' is a difficult one. 

 

Once a family accepts a referral of a specific child, right or wrong, that family is going to consider that child a part of their family.  So they probably view the "worthy cause" as "our son is stranded in a third world orphanage; help him get home where he belongs."  Does that make sense?

 

I could see some viewing it the way people view a plea to help a non-adopted child get needed medical or educational or legal assistance that is not covered by insurance.

 

Personally I would not go into an adoption knowing that I could not afford to complete it.  Not judging one way or the other, but that is how I would feel.  But if, as is not unusual, there was a turn of events that caused the adoption to become unaffordable mid-stream, then that is completely different in my opinion, and it would affect my willingness to donate.

 

[unsinkable]

I'd rather be asked directly for money, in most any situation, including adoption, than asked to purchase something or participate in something.

 

People DO give money, straight up, when asked. When my son was little, their hockey team would do "shake the can" outside of sporting goods stores. They'd wear their jerseys and had signs that said, "support the ------s." They had pencils that read "Thank You" they'd give for a donation.

 

They would make hundreds of dollars in a matter of hours. No other "fundraiser" was easier or more profitable. Maybe 40% of the people who exited the store donated. Hardly anyone wanted a pencil, :lol:.

[Haiku]

Once a family accepts a referral of a specific child, right or wrong, that family is going to consider that child a part of their family.  So they probably view the "worthy cause" as "our son is stranded in a third world orphanage; help him get home where he belongs."  Does that make sense?

 

Exactly. If your child were stuck in another country and you didn't have the money to get him or her out, wouldn't you ask for help? Whether non-adoptive families can understand it or not, adoptive families feel the same way about the children they are adopting, even if they haven't met them yet. It killed me that my son (whom I didn't meet until we went to bring him home) was stuck in an orphanage. It killed me that my daughter (whom we met when we went to get our son and had to wait 18 months to bring home) was stuck in an orphanage.

 

I have been to 10 orphanages in several different countries. I have seen what it is like to be raised in an orphanage. I have seen the neglect. I have seen the lack of food. I have seen the lack of medical care. I have seen the lack of anything that even remotely resembles what children need to be raised healthy and happy. I spent a month last year volunteering in two orphanages for disabled kids. I have seen kids who rarely, if ever, leave their beds. So yes, I do see it as rescuing kids. I don't care if that's not a PC thought. It's very easy for people sitting in their comfortable American homes to pontificate about how it's better to do this, that, or the other to help orphans in foreign countries. But what it comes down to is, we were able to open our home to children who were without families right now. Children for him money donated to some organization to help them stay with birth families would never have helped them (for a variety of reasons). Children who every day were being further damaged by growing up crushingly neglected. Children who had good chances of becoming prostitutes or beggars if not adopted. So yes, we saved them. That's not the reason we adopted, but it is part of why we adopted overseas. I'm not even remotely embarrassed by that. My kids have better lives than they would have. That's a fact. I was not part of the reason they were separated from their birth families, but I am part of the solution for these particular kids to have a better life.

 

That said, if you don't want to donate to people's adoptions, don't. There are many thing I don't care to or can't afford to donate to. But please, please don't cast aspersions at those who are trying to do the best thing they can for their children, which is get them home quickly.

[stripe]

But, the constant asking for money part is really beginning to....seem strange to us. 

My husband and I have had no end of people wanting us (either together or individually) to feel sorry for their money woes. Most, if not all of these people have several of the following:

* brand new mac-mansion

* brand new car

* iPhone

 

A few guys have asked my husband for a donation so they could buy their wives jewelry or take them on vacation. 

 

I don't have a problem contributing to something someone is saving up for, as a matter of principle, but I dislike the "poor me" way that many people have phrased this in the past when discussing their lives to me. I tend to be less than thrilled by open soliciting for donations. The sense that everyone else is just sitting back, relaxing, while only that one couple has any problems is generally not the case. People generally assume I am fabulously wealthy because I don't complain and moan to other people -- I consider that tacky.

 

I guess it's all about how it's phrased or how the person acts otherwise.

[Guest]

My husband and I have had no end of people wanting us (either together or individually) to feel sorry for their money woes. Most, if not all of these people have several of the following:

* brand new mac-mansion

* brand new car

* iPhone

 

A few guys have asked my husband for a donation so they could buy their wives jewelry or take them on vacation.

 

I don't have a problem contributing to something someone is saving up for, as a matter of principle, but I dislike the "poor me" way that many people have phrased this in the past when discussing their lives to me. I tend to be less than thrilled by open soliciting for donations. The sense that everyone else is just sitting back, relaxing, while only that one couple has any problems is generally not the case. People generally assume I am fabulously wealthy because I don't complain and moan to other people -- I consider that tacky.

 

I guess it's all about how it's phrased or how the person acts otherwise.

A donation for gifts and luxuries? Color me flabbergasted.

 

As an aside, there was a family in the area who, for years, put together a golf fundraiser for the community sports league. That was fine, right? Yes, it was, until their son aged out of the program. Then - for real - they put on a golf fundraiser to finance the athletic goals of JUST THEIR OWN SON! Their flyers said something like, "6th Annual Buckingham Palace Golf Fund Drive... To benefit Joe Blow's bid for State Champion!" Folks were dumbstruck. Not to mention nearly all the participants from prior years do, of course, have their OWN athletic children to finance!

[Plink]

I have no idea if anyone is still reading this thread, but it has caused me to do a lot of soul searching and I thought I'd throw in my newest thoughts.

 

I'm realizing that what I object to is the mass marketing of adoption.

 

Anyone who comes to me personally saying "Hi, I know you've spent time working in orphanages and I thought you'd be excited to know that we are adopting soon. He is a fantastic 6year old named ABC blah, blah, blah" will get my attention, admiration, and probably a large unsolicited donation. If they let me know that they are selling cookies, I will probably tell my friends to buy from them.

 

On the other hand, a blanket plea saying "Save ABC! Donate here" makes my skin crawl. It puts poor ABC in the position of being a faceless cause by giving me no information about him. It dininishes my relationship with the adoptive parents by not being personal, and it causes them to look self righteous by focusing on the "saving" rather than ABC. It just makes the whole process feel like lazy begging rather than a conversation between friends who may live differently, but want the best for each other.

 

Does that make any sense?

 

These kids deserve great homes. I don't pretend to speak for anyone other than myself, but I hate to see any prospective adoptive parents thwart their own efforts by coming across wrong. Most people believe in adoption. We just don't want to be subjected to one more source of well intentioned mass-emails or guilt trips. Save the trees, save the rhinos, save the oceans, save the arctic, save the whales, save the rainforest, save the tigers... Do you see how we can loose Children in the noise?

[mommaduck]

I have an online acquaintance that is fundraising for a multiple international adoption. I'll admit that it bothers me. I'm supportive in that I believe their intent is good...but good intentions aside, there is just so much that bothers me. I'm huge on Adoption Reform and Adoptee Rights. International adoptions have so many issues attached to them: not really checking out the families children are going to, people unprepared for RAD and other issues, and the fact that some of these children are taken from their families to SELL to Americans (without the Americans knowing, but believing these children have NO family...reports have come out recently about these cases). Even within the US, children are treated as a commodity to sell and buy (Veronica Brown and many others). There are those that manipulate parents in difficult straits (adoption agencies, lawyers, etc), laws that aren't build to protect the rights of BOTH parents, and those that really do think of children as a "purchase" rather than as a human with rights (hello, Capobiancos!). There are those that adopt here and internationally as a way of "evangelizing the world", but those children are never treated as part of the family (I've seen this with various anabaptist groups...they will adopt or foster children of different ethnicities, but once grown, those children have no place in the community and are left to flounder on their own with no sense of family). There is so much that is wrong with the adoption INDUSTRY...and that is what it is.

 

 

btw, much of the fundraising and sales done in Veronica's name was simply disgusting. So it turns me off entirely to the idea of fundraising for adoption.

[Melissa in Australia]

I have an online acquaintance that is fundraising for a multiple international adoption. I'll admit that it bothers me. I'm supportive in that I believe their intent is good...but good intentions aside, there is just so much that bothers me. I'm huge on Adoption Reform and Adoptee Rights. International adoptions have so many issues attached to them: not really checking out the families children are going to, people unprepared for RAD and other issues, and the fact that some of these children are taken from their families to SELL to Americans (without the Americans knowing, but believing these children have NO family...reports have come out recently about these cases). Even within the US, children are treated as a commodity to sell and buy (Veronica Brown and many others). There are those that manipulate parents in difficult straits (adoption agencies, lawyers, etc), laws that aren't build to protect the rights of BOTH parents, and those that really do think of children as a "purchase" rather than as a human with rights (hello, Capobiancos!). There are those that adopt here and internationally as a way of "evangelizing the world", but those children are never treated as part of the family (I've seen this with various anabaptist groups...they will adopt or foster children of different ethnicities, but once grown, those children have no place in the community and are left to flounder on their own with no sense of family). There is so much that is wrong with the adoption INDUSTRY...and that is what it is.

 

 

btw, much of the fundraising and sales done in Veronica's name was simply disgusting. So it turns me off entirely to the idea of fundraising for adoption.

 

:iagree: :iagree: :iagree:

 

[clementine]

Once a family accepts a referral of a specific child, right or wrong, that family is going to consider that child a part of their family.  So they probably view the "worthy cause" as "our son is stranded in a third world orphanage; help him get home where he belongs."  Does that make sense?

 

I could see some viewing it the way people view a plea to help a non-adopted child get needed medical or educational or legal assistance that is not covered by insurance.

 

Personally I would not go into an adoption knowing that I could not afford to complete it.  Not judging one way or the other, but that is how I would feel.  But if, as is not unusual, there was a turn of events that caused the adoption to become unaffordable mid-stream, then that is completely different in my opinion, and it would affect my willingness to donate.

 

 

An acquaintance has started a fundraising page for an international adoption, so I had to search to see if there was a previous thread about this.  Her circle is relatively small, so we are seeing pleas often.  I feel for them, but have a hard time constantly hearing that they are trying to rescue an orphan, so please give generously.  

[StephanieZ]

I think it's ridiculous. 

 

Kids are expensive. 

 

If a family has an unexpected desperate medical or other need, then, personally, I am all-in on doing anything -- begging, borrowing, pleading, humiliating, etc, -- that you need to do to help your kid. I would spare no shame to get my kid the help s/he needed. In fact, it makes me smile donating to the occasional GoFundMe for an accident/illness victim that I know in any round about way. Life's hard. Unexpected expenses suck. I'm happy to spend my occasional pizza money on a GoFundMe instead to smooth a bumpy patch for a family. Sure. 

 

BUT, as adults, functional enough to raise children and choose to raise MORE, then I think it's really bad form to go begging for money to pay for that kid. Get a second or third job for a year. Sell your second car. Sell your jewelry. Skip vacations. Cancel cable. Whatever. If you have no spare room in your budget to trim expense to raise the funds to adopt that kid . . . then you should NOT be getting another kid (on purpose) by any means, IMHO. If you have no spare room in your budget, and are not resourceful and self-reliant enough to fund your own adoption . . . then you should NOT be taking on responsibility for a child. What happens when that child has expensive medical or educational or psychological problems? How will the new parents pay for the kid's needs?

 

I NEVER donate to the "Mission Trip", "Adoption" or similar funding requests. To me, those are things that folks should fund themselves and asking others to pay for discretionary expenses is bad form. (Feel free to ask at your church if you are going on a church mission, but don't ask outside of YOUR church, IMHO.) I don't ask you to pay for my kid's music lessons and I paid for my own birth expenses . . . even when I was poor and had a home birth that insurance didn't cover . . . don't ask me to fund your babies or trips or whatever. I see few of these request, since my friend circle doesn't typically do that. However, I nearly ALWAYS cheerfully buy from/etc kids who are working on their own to raise funds for trips, goals, teams, etc. Sell me your overpriced wreaths, come rake my yard at overpriced rates, etc. Show me someone who is working to self-fund some reasonable goal and I'm all in. (This totally excludes the idiotic school fund raisers. I don't do those . . .) 

[purplejackmama]

I know 10 families who have adopted, 8 of them asked for money. The requests came in various forms of garage sales, bake sales, fundraising, etc.

[StephanieZ]

I think it's tacky and I hope my kids didn't offend people when they adopted our grandson.  They did have a garage sale and accepted donated goods to sell. No pressure at all and most people who donated were people like us who just drop things off at Goodwill instead of trying to sell them at a garage sale. So they did make almost $1000 but it seemed better than some of the folks I know who just outright asked for cash to adopt. 

 

See, I think this is AWESOME. IMHO, it's very different from asking for cash. 

[Spryte]

I find it distasteful.

 

We have adopted twice. We would never set out to adopt, or start the process, without knowing that we had the funds available.

[StephanieZ]

I'm very ignorant about this so I could be totally wrong, but I think the adoption credit only covers about $1,000 and we are very not wealthy people. I will look into it further, but I think we're a year or two down the road from looking into it. His company will cover $2,000, but when they've been contacted in the past about coughing up $50,000 or so they've done it for the sake of a child, and I have no shame in asking them for that.

 

https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc607.html

 

I believe the tax credit is up to $13,190 per child. It appears to be "non refundable", which means you have to be paying federal taxes to benefit. It phases out around a household income of 200k, so, essentially, to benefit, your family needs to fall in the middle income bracket that is paying some federal taxes but not earning over 200k. I think. (I'm not a lawyer or CPA and have not adopted. I just pay a lot of taxes, lol.)

 

If you are planning on adopting multiple children, it seems to me it'd be smart to do just one per tax year to maximize tax benefits. :) It looks like you can spread expenses over two tax years in some circumstances. 

[clementine]

I know 10 families who have adopted, 8 of them asked for money. The requests came in various forms of garage sales, bake sales, fundraising, etc.

 

I am completely fine with someone 'raising money' by hosting a garage sale and WORKING it, or by having a bake sale and WORKING it.  I actually admire that more than a go-fund me page.  The family that we know is not doing any additional types of fundraising, just asking for donations.

[DawnM]

https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc607.html

 

I believe the tax credit is up to $13,190 per child. It appears to be "non refundable", which means you have to be paying federal taxes to benefit. It phases out around a household income of 200k, so, essentially, to benefit, your family needs to fall in the middle income bracket that is paying some federal taxes but not earning over 200k. I think. (I'm not a lawyer or CPA and have not adopted. I just pay a lot of taxes, lol.)

 

If you are planning on adopting multiple children, it seems to me it'd be smart to do just one per tax year to maximize tax benefits. :) It looks like you can spread expenses over two tax years in some circumstances. 

 

 

I read a while ago that it is all going away in 2016?  

 

Anyone know?

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

I have two internationally adopted special-need kids. We did not fundraise to adopt them. 

 

I am dismayed by the attitudes I see in this thread. We're talking about kids in orphanages, kids growing up with no mommy to kiss them and dry their tears, no daddy to tuck them in at night, no one to love them the way they were made to be loved. Many of these kids are literally starving to death. Many are literally dying of neglect and lack of medical care. And people are annoyed that others are asking for help? People think that these kids should only get families if a family can afford to come up with tens of thousands of dollars up front? Are you willing to be the one who tells a kid, "Sorry, anonymous kid in another country that I don't know and therefore don't really have to care about, I know you want a family, and there is a family that wants you, but some of us think it's tacky that they can't afford to adopt you on their own so we're not helping, but don't worry, just sit tight in your orphanage and grow up a little more every day without a family, eventually they'll get there." Think about it from a kid's perspective.

 

You may think it's tacky that someone is asking you for help, but I doubt anyone is asking you to take food out of your own kids' mouths to give them money. Most people are hoping you can spare $5 or $10 or $20. Little amounts add up. Every little bit helps. And it changes the world for the child who gets a family to love them. Stop thinking of it as helping a family do something they "can't afford" and start thinking of it as helping a child. Because it is. We adopted kids because we wanted to expand our family, but I am never going to pretend that we didn't help our kids by doing so. Read the statistics on kids who grow up in orphanages and then say, with a straight face, that wanting more kids is the only reason to adopt. We wanted kids and so we chose to add to our family in a way that is mutually beneficial to us and the kids we adopted.

 

 

I'm assuming you haven't adopted, because this comment (and all the similar ones) betrays a real lack of understanding of what goes into an international adoption. The entire process is defined by effort and investments of time and energy (as well as emotion and money). Months and months of my life were consumed by little more than the work it took to adopt my kids.

 

I am not a rugged individualist. I don't buy into the idea that we are all solely responsible for ourselves. I believe the world only works in a positive way when we all work together. I am proud to be part of the village that helps adoptive families and adopted kids come together.

 

I think this post bears repeating. I really can't quite believe the attitude that it's better to avoid appearing tacky than it is to explore every avenue possible to find a way to get a child in need into a safe, loving home. This isn't a mission trip or an Odyssey of the Mind competition we're talking about here. It's children's lives. 

[StephanieZ]

I read a while ago that it is all going away in 2016?  

 

Anyone know?

 

This is not an IRS site, but it looks reputable. http://adoptiontaxcredit.org/faqs/

 

According to this site, the credit is now a "permanent" part of the tax code with no "sunset date". (Those sunset dates are what generally get us in trouble with various credits or rules expiring and requiring new passage every few years or even every single year.)

 

Of course, several presidential candidates are running on platforms to eliminate nearly all or even all deductions. If one of those plans actually goes through, all this could change. 

[mamiof5]

Haven't seen it around here, but I am not sure I'm OK with it. Maybe I should start fundraising since my girls really want to do private gymnastics? I didn't read all the responses, but did read the one about the garage sale. I think that's OK, they worked hard (I can't stand doing garage sales), they chose to use the money for the adoption, that's great!

[Bluegoat]

I find these things a little odd.  I guess I am not totally crazy about international adoptions anyway - sometimes they make sense, but in most cases what would be really the best thing would be to fix the systemic issues.  So for me to fund a couple bringing back one child, I would be thinking - what can that money do about the more basic problems that those children are facing?

 

I also feel different about extended family and others.  In a fairly close knit family, arguably people are working together, they have a connection and will be interdependant with new family member.  That is not so much the case with people from outside the family.

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

Maybe I should start fundraising since my girls really want to do private gymnastics?

 

Yes, that's a very accurate comparison. 

[StephanieZ]

I think this post bears repeating. I really can't quite believe the attitude that it's better to avoid appearing tacky than it is to explore every avenue possible to find a way to get a child in need into a safe, loving home. This isn't a mission trip or an Odyssey of the Mind competition we're talking about here. It's children's lives. 

 

I think the difference is you are looking at adoption as a mission/service to the children. I look at children as a wonderful, fulfilling, incredible, blessing to the parents who have/adopt/raise them. I know (infertile) families who never had or adopted children because of the expense. One such couple has been married 20+ years and both parents are competent, lovely, loving, educated, solidly upper-middle class, and happen to be serious church-goers who heavily support various charities. 

 

There are plenty of ways to support needy children. The 20-50+k in adoption expenses would likely save many more children around the world if those funds were donated to a tax-deductible charity doing medical/educational/social work in needy places. If someone is determined to save children, there are many other ways to do it . . .

 

I think children deserve parents who profoundly desire to be parents of that child. I wouldn't support anyone's desire to adopt if they are just looking to do good for that child. If that's the case, there are better ways to expend your (and other people's) charitable energies/monies. 

[KrissiK]

I think the difference is you are looking at adoption as a mission/service to the children. I look at children as a wonderful, fulfilling, incredible, blessing to the parents who have/adopt/raise them. I know (infertile) families who never had or adopted children because of the expense. One such couple has been married 20+ years and both parents are competent, lovely, loving, educated, solidly upper-middle class, and happen to be serious church-goers who heavily support various charities.

 

There are plenty of ways to support needy children. The 20-50+k in adoption expenses would likely save many more children around the world if those funds were donated to a tax-deductible charity doing medical/educational/social work in needy places. If someone is determined to save children, there are many other ways to do it . . .

 

I think children deserve parents who profoundly desire to be parents of that child. I wouldn't support anyone's desire to adopt if they are just looking to do good for that child. If that's the case, there are better ways to expend your (and other people's) charitable energies/monies.

I completely agree. We are adoptive parents of 5 kids. They are our only children and nothing makes me want to scream more than when people tell us how wonderful we are for giving these children a good home. We didn't adopt because we wanted to "give back to the community" or do something good for mankind. It was for purely selfish reasons - we desperately wanted children. I like to think that our adopting was mutually beneficial, both for dh and me and the kids. But we are their parents not their benefactors.

[Plink]

.

[Katy]

Zombie thread!

[clementine]

I completely agree. We are adoptive parents of 5 kids. They are our only children and nothing makes me want to scream more than when people tell us how wonderful we are for giving these children a good home. We didn't adopt because we wanted to "give back to the community" or do something good for mankind. It was for purely selfish reasons - we desperately wanted children. I like to think that our adopting was mutually beneficial, both for dh and me and the kids. But we are their parents not their benefactors.

 

This is what I was thinking exactly.  I don't like the whole 'we're rescuing a child' spin.  I'd rather just hear 'we wanted another baby and aren't able to afford all of the adoption fees.'   I feel like that is more honest & less manipulative.  

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

I think the difference is you are looking at adoption as a mission/service to the children. I look at children as a wonderful, fulfilling, incredible, blessing to the parents who have/adopt/raise them. I know (infertile) families who never had or adopted children because of the expense. One such couple has been married 20+ years and both parents are competent, lovely, loving, educated, solidly upper-middle class, and happen to be serious church-goers who heavily support various charities. 

 

Huh? Because I believe that it's a valuable thing to bring children into loving homes if a family is so inclined, I must not think of them as wonderful, fulfilling blessings? Are those two things mutually exclusive? 

 

I'm not sure what your example of infertile couples who haven't adopted because of the expense is supposed to mean. Are they better people because they decided frugality was a higher priority than not asking for help or looking tacky? Would it suddenly make those same people less honorable if they decided that they desperately wanted one or two of those wonderful, fulfilling blessings, and appearances be damned, they were going to ask for help? 

 

My concern here is not whether or not people should be doing everything they can to "rescue" children. My concern is the ire leveled at people who, ultimately, are doing something good for the global community because they come off as "tacky," of all things. Adopt or don't adopt, donate to charities or refrain, whatever you think is best overall. What I have a problem with is the attitude toward people who, ultimately, are trying to do something out of a deep sense of love and responsibility and who have apparently offended Miss Manners in doing so. I think that's a very sad commentary. 

[StephanieZ]

Huh? Because I believe that it's a valuable thing to bring children into loving homes if a family is so inclined, I must not think of them as wonderful, fulfilling blessings? Are those two things mutually exclusive? 

 

I'm not sure what your example of infertile couples who haven't adopted because of the expense is supposed to mean. Are they better people because they decided frugality was a higher priority than not asking for help or looking tacky? Would it suddenly make those same people less honorable if they decided that they desperately wanted one or two of those wonderful, fulfilling blessings, and appearances be damned, they were going to ask for help? 

 

My concern here is not whether or not people should be doing everything they can to "rescue" children. My concern is the ire leveled at people who, ultimately, are doing something good for the global community because they come off as "tacky," of all things. Adopt or don't adopt, donate to charities or refrain, whatever you think is best overall. What I have a problem with is the attitude toward people who, ultimately, are trying to do something out of a deep sense of love and responsibility and who have apparently offended Miss Manners in doing so. I think that's a very sad commentary. 

 

Obviously, we disagree about the appropriateness of people asking others to fund their personal family choices. I think it's inappropriate. You think differently. Keep believing whatever you want. That's cool. I just disagree. 

 

The alternative view of adoption as a service to the children . . . offends me . . . but it is maybe fine if someone wants to spend their personal funds on it (assuming they are otherwise great people and will be great parents when that kid actually joins their family, since they are good human beings, they are soon cured of their odd view of the adoptive child / adoptive parent relationship) . . . but IMHO, it is not appropriate to ask others to fund such an incredibly inefficient charitable effort (and one that is questionably moral, IMHO, as it is not right, IMHO, to bring children into a home where they are viewed as beneficiaries of their new parents' largess instead of as simply children). My example of my childless friends is intended to highlight that people can choose to do good for children in the world without adopting them. And, frankly, that such efforts are most likely much more effective in actually helping children, dollar for dollar. It supports my belief that the "mission" approach is simply wrong on many levels. 

[albeto.]

What I have a problem with is the attitude toward people who, ultimately, are trying to do something out of a deep sense of love and responsibility and who have apparently offended Miss Manners in doing so. I think that's a very sad commentary. 

 

That's one way to look at it. It's a bit emotionally manipulative as well, just in the other direction. For example, reading this post, it is assumed I should consider raising money for adoption to be a behavior indicative of love and responsibility, and my objection to this scenario means I'm basically the control-freakish lady whose frustration revolves around people not crossing their "t"s and dotting their "i"s correctly. How shallow that [ideally] makes me seem. 

 

In reality, people have all kinds of articulate, rational, compassionate reasons that are inspired by a deep sense of love and responsibility. This thread is full of them.

 

Now I know why people warn these threads to be resurrected zombies. This has been said before. Upthread. ETA: I don't mean to brush you (or anyone) off, but to suggest that by reading (or rereading) the thread, one might find what they're looking for. Then one might consider quoting the pertinent comment and go from there. 

[beaners]

I missed this thread the first time because I was taking a board break while we were adopting. We fundraised. I know people thought it was tacky. I hated to need to...but my kids are home and alive now. One of my kids wore the same size diapers at 11 as my then one year old. And his size was not even close to a remarkable level. I see kids come home every day in ten times worse condition. He was in "good" shape for a kid with special needs in a laying down room. One of other kids was aging out and due to be sent to an unspeakable place. I could say things for shock value all night, but for people who are familiar with the type of places my kids were adopted from will know that they are very common.

 

We did adopt to grow and enrich our family. I love my kids with all of my heart. We adopted because we wanted more kids. But our kids were in places where no child deserves to be sent, and I can't pretend otherwise.

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

The alternative view of adoption as a service to the children . . . offends me . . . to bring children into a home where they are viewed as beneficiaries of their new parents' largess instead of as simply children).

 

Do many people jump through the zillions of hoops and mountains of paperwork and years of emotional turmoil to adopt children out of some sense of noblesse oblige? I have never encountered an adoptive family or fundraising page that implied that the entire reason for adopting was a sense of obligation and mission. The adoption stories I've heard (that didn't involve infertility) have always been what beaners has described about her own situation: A family that wants more children and opts to adopt instead of giving birth to more babies. Obviously we're in a "never the twain shall meet" kind of discussion here, but I simply cannot see what's offensive about having more love to give and recognizing that there are already kids in the world who need that love. Why else does anyone spend a that much money and go through the time and emotional effort to adopt children if not to love them and expand the family? Are there lots of Miss Hannigans out there that I don't know about, spending $20K-$50K per adoption to amass a team of little ego boosters?

 

Maybe I'm just that naive, but I don't see it. What I see are families who want more children to give their love to and are hoping to help ease a child's suffering in the process. I will never see how that's a bad thing. 

 

No one has to respond. I'm done. Zombie or not, this thread has actually been on my mind frequently in the years since it was first posted. I was surprised to see it pop back up again today and felt that Tara's sentiments were valuable enough to be shared again. 

[Haiku]

nm 

 

[Meadowlark]

I think it's ridiculous. 

 

Kids are expensive. 

 

If a family has an unexpected desperate medical or other need, then, personally, I am all-in on doing anything -- begging, borrowing, pleading, humiliating, etc, -- that you need to do to help your kid. I would spare no shame to get my kid the help s/he needed. In fact, it makes me smile donating to the occasional GoFundMe for an accident/illness victim that I know in any round about way. Life's hard. Unexpected expenses suck. I'm happy to spend my occasional pizza money on a GoFundMe instead to smooth a bumpy patch for a family. Sure. 

 

BUT, as adults, functional enough to raise children and choose to raise MORE, then I think it's really bad form to go begging for money to pay for that kid. Get a second or third job for a year. Sell your second car. Sell your jewelry. Skip vacations. Cancel cable. Whatever. If you have no spare room in your budget to trim expense to raise the funds to adopt that kid . . . then you should NOT be getting another kid (on purpose) by any means, IMHO. If you have no spare room in your budget, and are not resourceful and self-reliant enough to fund your own adoption . . . then you should NOT be taking on responsibility for a child. What happens when that child has expensive medical or educational or psychological problems? How will the new parents pay for the kid's needs?

 

I NEVER donate to the "Mission Trip", "Adoption" or similar funding requests. To me, those are things that folks should fund themselves and asking others to pay for discretionary expenses is bad form. (Feel free to ask at your church if you are going on a church mission, but don't ask outside of YOUR church, IMHO.) I don't ask you to pay for my kid's music lessons and I paid for my own birth expenses . . . even when I was poor and had a home birth that insurance didn't cover . . . don't ask me to fund your babies or trips or whatever. I see few of these request, since my friend circle doesn't typically do that. However, I nearly ALWAYS cheerfully buy from/etc kids who are working on their own to raise funds for trips, goals, teams, etc. Sell me your overpriced wreaths, come rake my yard at overpriced rates, etc. Show me someone who is working to self-fund some reasonable goal and I'm all in. (This totally excludes the idiotic school fund raisers. I don't do those . . .) 

THIS. Exactly-I couldn't have expressed my views any better. I can't shake the feeling that it's tacky. Maybe because a doctor friend of mine living in a 400,000 house recently adopted and had about 5 fundraisers to do it. Oh, and they just got back from Disney. Hmm....didn't have the money? Doubtful.

[Aelwydd]

Whoa...blast from the past!

 

If anyone is (re)reading this thread, I propose a drinking game for the word tacky, in order to greatly increase your reading pleasure.

[Meadowlark]

I can't stop thinking of Tacky the Penguin. Yes, can't deny I'm a homeschooler :-)

[mommaduck]

The Cappobiancos fought for years for a child that wasn't theirs and had a family that wanted her and could care for her. They had a sense of entitlement. My own adoption happened in this same state. One little lie was all it took to hide it from my father (and, ftr, my mother and father had been married to each other). So, yes, there are people that will spend money and years for attention, entitlement, and "do-gooding".

 

What is sad is when certain things aren't recognised:

 

1) the system is set up to infantilise adoptees for their entire lives and deny them the right to basic information they absolutely should have.

 

2) the thoughts, feelings, and views of adoptees are generally dismissed. Only gratitude is acceptable.

 

3) there are people that adopt for selfish reasons (including mission adopting). At least be honest. I was grateful to see one person here be honest about that. Thank you.

 

4) even in good circumstances, there is a no man's land that many adoptees live in.

 

5) the industry needs to be overhauled. It's become a "kids for cash" venture. This has been proven time and time again, both stateside and internationally.

 

6) society often puts very negative stigmas on adoptees and very positive traits on adoptive parents...without the reality of must people falling in the middle ground of merely being human, like every other kid and parent.

 

Please look up information on Adoptee Rights. Please look up Adoptee groups and conversations. I do know some awesome adoptive parents that have done this. They listen. It will help them as parents and they may have more understanding of their children and the struggles. It will help with some of the things I listed. It may not eliminate them, but it will help. There ARE adoptive parents that support Adoptee Rights; bless them.

 

I still do not like the idea of fundraising to adopt. It does not set well with me on many levels. I don't think those people are evil, but I don't like it. When I see it on Facebook, I unfollow those people and make certain I can't see it again. It's painful and I hold myself back from saying anything, simply because it would be considered as or taken as unkind.

[jpanik]

We have 3 adult daughters who were adopted internationally.  GREAT kids!  I know things have changed, but how in the world do agencies accept families who cannot afford the fees?  I remember having to get all sorts of financial information together for agencies AND the sending programs.  We saved BEFORE we started each adoption. We borrowed from family, we borrowed against the retirement fund. We knew where the money was coming from when we applied, even if we did not have the funds upfront.  I am pretty sure the question was asked by the agencies.

 

It's an unfortunate fact that international adoption is expensive.  I have no problem with helping families raise the extra money needed, especially if they are "working" that second job by offering products or services.   I have a HUGE problem if "saving a child" or "rescuing" is part of the pitch.

 

Sometimes, adoption can be a grindingly long haul with years to save for the final fees, but sometimes they go a lot quicker than expected!  Our last one was so much faster than we had experienced before and expected!  Thank goodness we had a plan in place!

 

I believe the vast majority of families are just like we were.  I don't know any family who feels entitled to their children or entitled to adopt.  Have known of a few who felt they had saved or rescued their kids, but we did not run in the same circles.

[mommaduck]

https://m.facebook.com/StandingOurGroundForVeronicaBrown/

 

https://m.facebook.com/You-Know-Youre-An-Adoptee-When-202291792865/

 

https://m.facebook.com/AdopteeRightsCoalition/

 

https://m.facebook.com/daughterslost/

[MercyA]

This is slightly off-topic, but as someone who was a pro-life activist and is still pro-life without exception, I just wanted to say something. I've talked to women planning to abort and researched all aspects of the issue very thoroughly.

 

Please, please, fellow pro-lifers, stop saying adoption is the solution to abortion. It is not. I know your intentions are good when you buy the bumper sticker that says, "Adoption, Not Abortion," or "Adoption: The Loving Choice." In reality it is *exceedingly* rare for a woman who changes her mind about abortion to then place her child for adoption. Research shows that abortion-minded women often see adoption as the *worst* choice for them and their baby. Telling a woman in a difficult situation that the best thing for her is to go through nine difficult months and then give up her baby is usually not helpful and is (understandably) not perceived well. It's not where our attention should be focused.

 

(Stepping off soapbox.) 

 

 

[mommaduck]

This is slightly off-topic, but as someone who was a pro-life activist and is still pro-life without exception, I just wanted to say something. I've talked to women planning to abort and researched all aspects of the issue very thoroughly.

 

Please, please, fellow pro-lifers, stop saying adoption is the solution to abortion. It is not. I know your intentions are good when you buy the bumper sticker that says, "Adoption, Not Abortion," or "Adoption: The Loving Choice." In reality it is *exceedingly* rare for a woman who changes her mind about abortion to then place her child for adoption. Research shows that abortion-minded women often see adoption as the *worst* choice for them and their baby. Telling a woman in a difficult situation that the best thing for her is to go through nine difficult months and then give up her baby is usually not helpful and is (understandably) not perceived well. It's not where our attention should be focused.

 

(Stepping off soapbox.)

*applauds* THANK YOU! Instead, let's look at working towards helping these women support and care for their child, rather than against, with Adoption being one of the options IF the mother herself brings it up...not the first option, the better option, the option we've shamed her or pressured her to use.