textualdeviance (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
textualdeviance) wrote2011-09-22 01:10 pm
textualdeviance) wrote2011-09-22 01:10 pm
Entry tags:
One more adoption-related rant
Really quite sick of the whole beggars-can't-be-choosers attitude.
Also quite sick of the implication that we're morally bankrupt if we're not open to a special-needs child.
1. The fact that we're not physically able to make our own biological child from scratch does not mean we're less deserving of a relatively healthy infant that will be solely our child.
2. I think pretending we could properly care for a special-needs child when we actually can't would be a far greater moral failing.
Yes, of course nature occasionally randomly delivers a special-needs baby to his or her bio parents. But that's a lot more rare than you might think. Assuming a healthy, first-world pregnancy with no genetic weirdness or teratogens, the chances of having a kid who can't eventually be turned into a self-sufficient adult are infinitessimally small. In our case, since we were genetically cleared and I don't drink/smoke, etc., the biggest risk we'd have had would've been Down Syndrome, and that's still less than a quarter percent of all births.
So, yes, if I'd been able to carry to term, chances are excellent that we would've had a perfectly healthy baby. So why shouldn't we have one now that we're adopting?
Again, I am way happy for people who want to take on those challenges and are able to do so. But I don't, and I'm not. If my otherwise-healthy kid had some horrible accident and needed care, of course I'd deal with that. But I'm not going to go voluntarily taking on that kind of misery if I don't have to. This doesn't mean I'm spoiled or selfish. It means I'm realistic.
I'm already dealing with a ton of social bullshit implying that I'm less of a person because I can't make my own kid. Dealing with even more of it when I'm trying to buy someone else's? Is pissing me off.
Also quite sick of the implication that we're morally bankrupt if we're not open to a special-needs child.
1. The fact that we're not physically able to make our own biological child from scratch does not mean we're less deserving of a relatively healthy infant that will be solely our child.
2. I think pretending we could properly care for a special-needs child when we actually can't would be a far greater moral failing.
Yes, of course nature occasionally randomly delivers a special-needs baby to his or her bio parents. But that's a lot more rare than you might think. Assuming a healthy, first-world pregnancy with no genetic weirdness or teratogens, the chances of having a kid who can't eventually be turned into a self-sufficient adult are infinitessimally small. In our case, since we were genetically cleared and I don't drink/smoke, etc., the biggest risk we'd have had would've been Down Syndrome, and that's still less than a quarter percent of all births.
So, yes, if I'd been able to carry to term, chances are excellent that we would've had a perfectly healthy baby. So why shouldn't we have one now that we're adopting?
Again, I am way happy for people who want to take on those challenges and are able to do so. But I don't, and I'm not. If my otherwise-healthy kid had some horrible accident and needed care, of course I'd deal with that. But I'm not going to go voluntarily taking on that kind of misery if I don't have to. This doesn't mean I'm spoiled or selfish. It means I'm realistic.
I'm already dealing with a ton of social bullshit implying that I'm less of a person because I can't make my own kid. Dealing with even more of it when I'm trying to buy someone else's? Is pissing me off.