like i said before, nobody (but me) is honest about what a terrible person they are. i know it is murder and i dont care.
Ahh caring, the issue that people make it out to be….. You see, you bring up a good point. Is it that people think its ok and the law is fine, or do they really just not give a chit and can’t admit it to themselves?
clearly nobody gives a **** and doesn't admit it. everyone knows that life isnt sacred and they cant be bothered to care about anyone but themselves. if they cared about humans they wouldnt let them be aborted by the zillions.
actually, govt is not overly involved in adoption. and it is private adoption that costs 30k or more. adopting a child through a govt agency is heavily subsidized as there are too many children that are difficult to get adopted in govt custody. my husband and i pursued adoption in a very limited way. partially limited by his wishes as there were only certain avenues he was comfortable with, and i respected those feelings. the other limitation was his age. he is a lot older than me and at the time was over 40, and some private agencies will not even take applications from anyone over 40. with govt adoption, the waiting list for a healthy newborn is more than long. most healthy newborns are through private adoption, as the responsible biological mother knows she can get better care for herself and the unborn child that will be paid for by the adoptive parents. most children up for adoption through state welfare agencies are children with special needs, and mainly older children with special needs that have been abandoned. there are very few newborns, and even fewer healthy ones. the govt seems to (unfortunately) be nothing more than a custodian for children of birth parents that damaged (for lack of a better word) their children through irresponsible behavior. on the other hand, private agencies can charge an arm and a leg, and have restrictions out the wazoo that the govt does not have in terms of who can adopt children. while most birth mothers just want to do the right thing, many are also using the process to get a few bennies for themselves as they know at this point, most adoptive parents are desperate. much of it has turned into nothing more than a money making venture for both the agency and the birth mother. or they have (what i consider to be) restrictions that are outdated. the last avenue (without going abroad), is private adoption not done through an agency. because of the limitations we had or were self enforced, this was the long shot avenue we pursued. my ob-gyn is one of those good people still in the business partly because he believes it is his mission to bring families together. birth mothers that want to put their baby up for adoption, without using the child as a money making prop, go through him. the adoptive parents pay for the attorney/court fees, and the home study that the govt requires for all adoptions. the birth mother does not get paid (she only wants a good adoptive family for the child) and he waives ALL his fees. (that is part of his belief of his mission). this was the avenue we pursued. we knew it was a long shot. however, we did get selected by a birth mother. unfortunately, the baby died in utero. for international adoption, he cost is as high when travel and attorney fees are calculated in. the only benefit is the chance of getting a healthy newborn. especially a baby girl in china. that is your lesson on adoption, and my novel of a post for the day.
i tried to edit the following in, but cannot edit a post today. it just goes to a blank white screen and i have to then go to my navigation bar or hit the back arrow to get back to the forum. another goddamned bug. imagine that! :rolleye33: anyway, here is more about costs... for domestic adoption, the "govt fees" of home studies by a social worker, and followup (which does not go on for years, but does happen for a short period of time after adoption), court fees, and any attorney fees needed are not much. a few thousand at most. the high fees of 30k or more are from private agencies turning adoption into a money making racket. yes, many religious institutions such as catholic charities, or the church of latter day saints, run their own "not for profit" agencies, but they are still high, for whatever their reasons. and many of those have the restriction of the adoptive parents have to be of the same religion.
Here's a little something I'd like to insert into this debate if you don't mind. If we legally accept that a child has rights at conception that need to be protected, to what extent should they be protected. Should the gov't start regulating everything that happens to the mother at that point (what she eats, how much she eats, exercise, etc). Also what about medical decisions involving how to birth the child? Should we demand all births happen in a hospital? Should we require c-sections since natural birth may be too risky? Many states are considering proposals to outlaw home births and you could have your child taken away from you if you have a home birth. Many doctors and hospitals are overzealous in protecting the unborn child at the expense of medical decisions that should be made by the mother. Case in point, my wife recently told me the story of a woman who, rather petite, tends to deliver large children. She has birthed 3 such children naturally with no complications whatsoever. For her fourth pregnancy, her OB insisted that she have a c-section even though her past medical history indicates she can birth large children just fine. This woman decided to change OBs and successfully delivered her fourth child naturally. Only later did she find out that the OB she fired went to hospital where they practice and where this woman would have given birth and had the hospital attorneys obtain a court order to basically force her to have a c-section if she came there for the birth. All in the name of protecting the unborn child (supposedly). There are many other cases like this. How far does this go?
My wife was induced both times but she is a nurse practitioner and was okay with it because her blood pressure would spike at the end of the pregnancy. Neither one resulted in a section and both kids were healthy. However, we had a friend whose doctor pushed for induction because the baby was getting big and the baby came out and was just under 6 lbs. The thing most people don't realize is that there is a two week range of when the baby was conceived. Sometimes doc will say, "the baby's at 39 weeks when in reality it's at 37", you can never know for sure. My wife talked to her friend in OBGYN at Johns Hopkins and she said the rarely if ever induce.
winner winner winner! She did change doctors and hospitals and had a safe natural delivery. At some point after the birth did she find out about all this legal crap. And once you have a section, it is very difficult to find an OB/hospital willing to let you have another baby vaginally even if there are no other risk factors present besides having a section. This reminds me of another story that did end in a forced c-section. A woman who had her first child by c-section wanted to have her next child naturally. Knowing that she wouldn't be able to find an OB/hospital willing to let her do this, she chose to have a home birth with a midwife attending. During her labor at home, she got very dehydrated and her midwife recommended that she go to the hospital to get IV fluids. So she did. While there, the OB oncall got the hospital attorneys to convince a judge to issue an order forcing this woman to have a c-section. A sympathetic nurse saw what was happening and helped the woman leave the hospital through a side entrance. By that time, it was too late. The cops were called and went to her house and arrested her while in the throes of labor. They escorted her back to the hospital, handcuffed her to a gurney and she was subjected to a forced c-section. All for the sake of concern for the unborn child. While I would be interested in having a discussion about the state of child birth in this country, my original intent of bringing this up is to add another angle to the abortion issue. Performing forced c-sections upon unconsenting women in labor is being justified in the name of protecting the unborn child who only has a very narrow legal status. If we extend this status, then there could be no end to what overzealous doctors, hospitals, and government could do to regulate the activities and choices of pregnant women. I think abortion is an awful thing and it is rotten that some women have to consider that as an option. But if outlawing abortion means you are taking away the health choices of informed pregnant women, then I think it should remain legal.
