A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » General (moderated)
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Am I crazy?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old January 27th 05, 12:20 AM
A Mighty Fun Time
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In regards to your question...

"that single-parent families are OK for adopted or foster kids, but not
for biological children. Is that what you meant to imply?"

The answer is no. I never said anything was not OK. I simply asked if
you looked at this by taking yourself out of the picture and thinking
what is best for your child.

It is easy to split hairs on this issue and I am sorry if I have not
offended you but the way I look at it is there are thousands of
children out there in unloving environments who could use a loving
mother, I used to be one of them. I was adopted and thank God everyday
for the life and second chance I was given being supported by a loving
mother "who wanted me" instead of one who did not.

I think it is better then having them in home that does not want them
or in a orphanage.

To say which one is ok and not ok is unanswerable...I think the better
question is which one is better for the involved children. Maybe I am
biased because I was adopted and I realize I have no idea what it is
like to be in the shoes of the lady questioning this...but I do know
what it is like to be a child that is not wanted and then finally
adopted and given a second chance in a loving environment.

Again I deeply apologize if my previous comments were offending to
anyone...

Jason
Visit today to WIN $250 in FREE Children's Software!
http://www.funpreschooleractivities.com

  #12  
Old January 27th 05, 05:01 AM
Banty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article . com, A Mighty Fun
Time says...

In regards to your question...

"that single-parent families are OK for adopted or foster kids, but not
for biological children. Is that what you meant to imply?"

The answer is no. I never said anything was not OK. I simply asked if
you looked at this by taking yourself out of the picture and thinking
what is best for your child.


::snip::

To say which one is ok and not ok is unanswerable...I think the better
question is which one is better for the involved children. Maybe I am
biased because I was adopted and I realize I have no idea what it is
like to be in the shoes of the lady questioning this...but I do know
what it is like to be a child that is not wanted and then finally
adopted and given a second chance in a loving environment.


Which is wonderful. But presumably, if you really think this is a sub-par
situation for children, you would not be encouraging single people to adopt -
right? If it is really true that married couples make better situations for
children, you'd prefer that married couples adopt the children who need homes.
But no - somehow this has come up (and so often comes up, it's certainly not
just you) in the context of a prospective single parent by choice.

As a single parent by choice myself (by my son being born to me, and I strongly
considered adopting a second), I'm very familliar with this kind of opinion. As
if, as long as I'm bound and determined to make a second-class family, I could
at least help society out in the meantime by creating it from those second-class
kids over there. While married heterosexual couples are presumed to want to be
have biological children; people mention adoption to them only if they have
fertility problems. Lifetime-committed gay couples face the same kind of
expectation, BTW, and there is a situation where there will be two parents.

Banty

  #13  
Old January 28th 05, 03:52 AM
A Mighty Fun Time
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"I could at least help society out in the meantime by creating it from
those second-class kids over there."

These are strong words and it concerns me that anyone would call any
child second class. No where in any remarks of mine did anything come
close to that and in fact as I said above, I was adopted so in essence
that would of put me in that catagory.

Perhaps I did not explain myself well enough yet again. Let me explain
using your words -
Adoption is giving a First Class Child a Second Chance at a Happy Life!

As for this comment...

"While married heterosexual couples are presumed to want to be
have biological children; people mention adoption to them only if they
have
fertility problems."

Does that surprise you - like it or not biological children come from
the elements of a man and women therefore it is much more presumable
to expect a biological child to come from a married heterosexual couple
then from life committed gay couples.

My question to you however is why do you state them to be second class
kids?

  #14  
Old January 28th 05, 07:11 PM
Banty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article .com, A Mighty Fun
Time says...

"I could at least help society out in the meantime by creating it from
those second-class kids over there."

These are strong words and it concerns me that anyone would call any
child second class. No where in any remarks of mine did anything come
close to that and in fact as I said above, I was adopted so in essence
that would of put me in that catagory.


I'm not saying adopted children are second class. I'm pointing out that saying
a family situation is less than optimal, THEN recommending adoption to those in
such a family situation (e.g. single parent), is in effect saying adopted
children are second class, who would appropriately be raised by those in less
than optimal family situations. As in, adopted children deserve LESS.


Perhaps I did not explain myself well enough yet again. Let me explain
using your words -
Adoption is giving a First Class Child a Second Chance at a Happy Life!

As for this comment...

"While married heterosexual couples are presumed to want to be
have biological children; people mention adoption to them only if they
have
fertility problems."

Does that surprise you - like it or not biological children come from
the elements of a man and women therefore it is much more presumable
to expect a biological child to come from a married heterosexual couple
then from life committed gay couples.


It does surprise me. It puts adoption in a sort of Plan B backup plan. Again,
the inferrence is that adopting children is a *second* choice. I don't know how
that can be believed in without believing adopted kids are the lesser option,
the better being biological chidlren.

Married, fertile couples can and do adopt, and I think the case for adoption is
much stronger when the appeal is made to all who want to parent, and not only
those who are either in some difficulty or a non-standard situation. I'm
puzzled why you, as a very pro-adoption adopted person, would acquiesce to this
idea that the greatest group of prospective parents, the very ones *you* say are
better situated to parent, would not adopt unless they're having fertility
problems.


My question to you however is why do you state them to be second class
kids?


I don't state is a fact. I'm pointing out that it's implied in the attitudes
toward adoption - that it's the backup plan for married couples, that it's for
those 'other' people, who are less sanctioned by society to be parents, who
want to form families - single parents, gay parents.

In my opinion, you've internalized some (rather prevelant) attitudes which put
adopted kids in second place, along with the (rather prevelant, but becoming
less so) attitudes toward single parent families as being inadequate.

Think about it.

Banty

  #15  
Old January 29th 05, 12:42 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dumb question, but if you are strong and mature enough to deal with
raising a child on your own, how come you aren't strong and mature
enough to be up front about who you are to your nearest and dearest
(i.e.out of the closet?).


Mary G.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Going Crazy! Nikki Pregnancy 29 September 26th 04 05:43 AM
Dr. Horkel's vagina stretcher (the EPI-NO) Todd Gastaldo Pregnancy 2 April 28th 04 12:36 AM
Gastaldo finally admits he's crazy! (but only if...) Todd Gastaldo Pregnancy 6 February 15th 04 04:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.