textualdeviance (
textualdeviance) wrote2011-10-22 12:01 am
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
Yes, but ...
This rant about abortion rights is well worth a read.
I do have to quibble a bit about the adoption thing in it, however.
Most adoptive parents are pretty much exactly like us (on the surface): Infertile, childless, middle class or more, and yes, white. The race issue is a separate thing (and largely connected to issues of class and secondhand teaching of cultural identity) but I think the rest of it is key to understanding why healthy infants are the most wanted by adoptive parents. Simply put: Most of us are rookies, and we have no damned idea how to handle a kid with special needs. Giving one to people who are that clueless isn't just cruel to the parents, but to the child as well.
I have no doubt that some adoptive families want perfect designer babies. But most of us just want a kid who isn't going to die in five years, need constant care, torture the cat or never be able to leave home. Parenting is never easy in the best of circumstances, and throwing people in the deep end of Advanced Parenting just as a matter of principle strikes me as, frankly, pretty stupid. If the goal is for the child to be in a safe, healthy home, giving her to people who don't know how to handle her needs is probably the absolute worst thing you can do.
Do I know how to handle a baby born with drug addiction? No. Do I know how to handle a baby with brain damage? No. Do I know how to handle a four-year-old whose father raped her? No. Do I know how to handle a kid who's autistic, can't move or feed herself or will never learn how to spell her own name? No.
Could I learn these things? Possibly. Should I learn them on the job when doing that job well is so critical? Fuck, no. There are a ton of things that I could and likely will pick up as I go, including handling some mild special needs. Hearing impairment? Dwarfism? Club foot? Needs daily meds of some sort? Bring it on. I can handle that. Fetal alcohol syndrome? Severe attachment disorder? Not so much.
As I've mentioned before, I have a great deal of respect for those experienced folks who are not just willing but able to care for kids who have these needs. I ain't one of them. And neither are a heck of a lot of other adoptive parents. That doesn't mean they're selfish or vain. It means they're realistic. I'm not against taking on a child like that because I'm lazy or afraid she won't go with the drapes, but because I'm not so damned full of myself as to think I can take on anything and do a good job of it. I'm going to screw up enough as it is with a relatively healthy and resilient kid. Screwing up when the kid is already fragile to begin with would be disastrous. Not gonna go there.
Two other notes:
-This is one of the reasons I'm in favor of abortion rights. It's so much kinder to put some of those really fucked up babies out of their misery before they have to suffer one day out here. We euthanise irreparably broken and suffering animals. Why are we so squeamish about doing that with our own species?
-I really dislike the tone of some of the pressure I've heard on this. It comes off as if pushing infertile couples to take on special needs kids is sort of a punishment. Like since we sinned by being barren, we ought to be paying penance by raising a more difficult child. Considering how much of the adoption world is dominated by anti-abortion people who believe the pain of pregnancy and/or childrearing is an appropriate punishment for fornication, I shouldn't be surprised by this. But it's still grating, not the least because they're not considering the needs of the child at all. (And of course, a lot of these same people also believe that a child's suffering is appropriate punishment for their parents' crime of being poor. Bleh.)
I do have to quibble a bit about the adoption thing in it, however.
Most adoptive parents are pretty much exactly like us (on the surface): Infertile, childless, middle class or more, and yes, white. The race issue is a separate thing (and largely connected to issues of class and secondhand teaching of cultural identity) but I think the rest of it is key to understanding why healthy infants are the most wanted by adoptive parents. Simply put: Most of us are rookies, and we have no damned idea how to handle a kid with special needs. Giving one to people who are that clueless isn't just cruel to the parents, but to the child as well.
I have no doubt that some adoptive families want perfect designer babies. But most of us just want a kid who isn't going to die in five years, need constant care, torture the cat or never be able to leave home. Parenting is never easy in the best of circumstances, and throwing people in the deep end of Advanced Parenting just as a matter of principle strikes me as, frankly, pretty stupid. If the goal is for the child to be in a safe, healthy home, giving her to people who don't know how to handle her needs is probably the absolute worst thing you can do.
Do I know how to handle a baby born with drug addiction? No. Do I know how to handle a baby with brain damage? No. Do I know how to handle a four-year-old whose father raped her? No. Do I know how to handle a kid who's autistic, can't move or feed herself or will never learn how to spell her own name? No.
Could I learn these things? Possibly. Should I learn them on the job when doing that job well is so critical? Fuck, no. There are a ton of things that I could and likely will pick up as I go, including handling some mild special needs. Hearing impairment? Dwarfism? Club foot? Needs daily meds of some sort? Bring it on. I can handle that. Fetal alcohol syndrome? Severe attachment disorder? Not so much.
As I've mentioned before, I have a great deal of respect for those experienced folks who are not just willing but able to care for kids who have these needs. I ain't one of them. And neither are a heck of a lot of other adoptive parents. That doesn't mean they're selfish or vain. It means they're realistic. I'm not against taking on a child like that because I'm lazy or afraid she won't go with the drapes, but because I'm not so damned full of myself as to think I can take on anything and do a good job of it. I'm going to screw up enough as it is with a relatively healthy and resilient kid. Screwing up when the kid is already fragile to begin with would be disastrous. Not gonna go there.
Two other notes:
-This is one of the reasons I'm in favor of abortion rights. It's so much kinder to put some of those really fucked up babies out of their misery before they have to suffer one day out here. We euthanise irreparably broken and suffering animals. Why are we so squeamish about doing that with our own species?
-I really dislike the tone of some of the pressure I've heard on this. It comes off as if pushing infertile couples to take on special needs kids is sort of a punishment. Like since we sinned by being barren, we ought to be paying penance by raising a more difficult child. Considering how much of the adoption world is dominated by anti-abortion people who believe the pain of pregnancy and/or childrearing is an appropriate punishment for fornication, I shouldn't be surprised by this. But it's still grating, not the least because they're not considering the needs of the child at all. (And of course, a lot of these same people also believe that a child's suffering is appropriate punishment for their parents' crime of being poor. Bleh.)