Since I started researching the ugly underbelly of adoption, I’ve come to an unusual conclusion:
At some point, our culture embraced adoption practices that served the desires of infertile couples, instead of viewing adoption as a child welfare intervention of final resort.
When we did this, we created the foundation for all of the other unethical family-structure practices surrounding children.
Once we accepted that it was OK to chop down a child’s family tree through adoption so that infertile couples could be parents, it was natural and even logical for us to be willing to:
- Split the child’s family tree down the middle (kids of divorce; kids of unmarried parents)
- Chop off one-half of the child’s family tree (kids of third-party reproduction; two moms; two dads; single-parenting-by-choice)
So I’m really happy to link a recent post from HuffPo, talking about the ugly side of adoption:
This runs counter to their normal cheer leading about how great “alternative” families are… in other words, their normal cheer leading about how great it is to chop down or disfigure a child’s family tree. Yea for HuffPo! I’ve been pretty critical of them, so need to give credit where it is due.
Edit: I originally copied and pasted the entire post here, but because of copyright laws I’m not sure that was OK to do. So I just deleted it. Please visit the link instead. Thanks.