Oversea adoption

I'm not entirely sure about what laws there are, but here's my view. I think that oversea adoption is great. It's a great way to help those children. However, I think we should bring our main adoption back to the U.S.A. People remain ignorant of the number of children who do not go to homes in our country (I confess, I don't know facts, but I know generalizations). The sad part is that many of those children aren't adopted because they are mixed race. I admit, raising a mixed race child is hard. Being from two separate worlds, whether it be by genetics or language or immigration or class etc., is always hard because you never really belong to either side. I'm speaking from personal experience here. It is a challenge to raise such children and to see them try to find themselves and deal with all the pressures that come at them. I admire anyone who is willing to bear this responsibility.

Anyways, I think that more people should adopt kids from the U.S. before trying to save other countries. After all, if you can't solve your own problems, how do you expect to solve anyone elses for very long?

Yeah... There's a lot of children who doesn't have parents both in U.S. and overseas. Poor kids :(. Well, for the amount of children whose parents abandoned them... I know that some countries don't like girls because the girls can't carry on the family name, which is pretty mean. Besides, women are needed for families... (at least there are more women than men *cough* *cough* :D). I don't like how some parents ditch their children because they can't take care of them. But these parents are very irresponsible. Why have kids when you don't even have the money to care for them? I don't think married couples should have kids if they aren't financially stable; if they weren't, the children would suffer and the adults would suffer...

AP_Work_R wrote:I don't like how some parents ditch their children because they can't take care of them. But these parents are very irresponsible. Why have kids when you don't even have the money to care for them? I don't think married couples should have kids if they aren't financially stable; if they weren't, the children would suffer and the adults would suffer...

It is not always the parent's fault. First of all, accidents happen, we all know this. Products that prevent conception are not 100% reliable and sometimes conception does occur. Some people feel morally obligated to have the child because they or their families believe that abortion is wrong. And let's face it, abstinence is becoming a less common practice everyday.

Second, situations can change. Families that could afford the child at the time of conception could have had a serious accident in the family that cost them the money that they were saving for the child. Or one of them could have died or they could have gotten divorced. Or perhaps they were forced to move because of one of their jobs and the new situation was not good for the child. There are many circumstances that are beyond the parents' control that could influence whether they keep the child or not.

pianogirl2422 wrote:It is not always the parent's fault. First of all, accidents happen, we all know this. Products that prevent conception are not 100% reliable and sometimes conception does occur. Some people feel morally obligated to have the child because they or their families believe that abortion is wrong. And let's face it, abstinence is becoming a less common practice everyday.
You think parents having kids, even though they aren't financially stable, shouldn't be found fault? How is that so? The parents knew that they couldn't afford having a child, so why make an irresponsible decision to have one? As for trying to prevent having a baby - that's their fault too. They knew that even with protection, there would be a small chance that they would have a child. But some cases are acceptable, such as rape. But other than that, if a parents don't have the ability to afford a child, don't have one :rolleyes:! Simple! The child wouldn't have to suffer!

There are exceptions. Like some of situations you listed. But, as for divorce, those parents are one of the most irresponsible people. Divorce is a circumstance that can be controlled. Simple, don't divorce! Seek help from counselor. Besides, divorce is expensive, and children suffer a lot from divorces more than their parents. Don't make the situation even worse by separating (lose money) and destroy their own child's emotions.

One thing I really don't like about the world is the divorce rates. Over 80% of marriages in America fail... My question is, why marry when you can't stand the person for years? What happened to "til death do us apart" (er something like)? Even if the two can't stand each other, why not then consult help? (The only time it's reasonable, I think, is when one of them cheats the other. Even if that happened, they should still consult help)

AP_Work_R wrote:You think parents having kids, even though they aren't financially stable, shouldn't be found fault?

I'm sorry, I realize that it sounded like I was saying that. I'm tired and overworked and really stressed, so I'm not as articulate as I'd like to be. I do think that they should be at fault, but I wanted to point out that there are several cases in which it isn't the parents fault.

And as to the "Till death do us part", I believe it was King Henry the VIII who messed that one up...

Maybe I'm being pessimistic, but I think you regard the general American public more highly than I do. Well, I know what I mean, but I can't figure out how to word it right now.