easier way to adopt children from the United States instead of pushing abortion? OK Maybe not just democrats but I knew that would get your attention. Also, if they would make it easier to adopt from the United State people wouldn't have to go to 3rd world countries for their babies. AND I'm not just talking about celeberties!
2006-11-10 02:19:50 · 10 answers · asked by to_sassy4_u 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I'm not against abortion.
2006-11-10 02:23:45 · update #1
The problem is most mothers don't want to give up their babies for adoption. It isn't true that non-white babies are easier to adopt. My wife and I have been waiting 3 years to adopt any baby. The mothers don't want to put any baby up for adoption. We are considering being foster parents but we think it will be hard to be a foster parent not knowing if the real parents will argue for custody. We really don't want to get in that situation.
2006-11-10 02:34:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think your suggestion would reduce the number of fetuses being aborted. Frankly, healthy babies are in such short supply as it is that the pregnant girls know they can put a child up for adoption if they choose. The problem is getting them to choose that option. It means most of a year out of their lives, which can be an opportunity to set themselves on track or a break with all they held dear. But if you really want to promote the idea of having the baby and giving it up for adoption rather than abortion, work with the adoption agencies and the youth shelter people to improve conditions so that girls will be more encouraged to choose this option. Remember that substantial numbers will be abused by their parents if they stay at home. Far more of them have been away from home for awhile already, and have no intention of letting their parents know they are pregnant.
But if the Democrats do it, they will do it by government bureaucracy on tax money, the least efficient and most ineffective way to do anything. If a girl knows she has to be a client of the bureaucratic system to get that kind of help, she is far more likely to say never mind, and have the abortion.
So make it non-profits, which can have a distinctive local style, and be tailored to the needs of various groups of girls. They are far more efficient because they need a minimum of paperwork to help a girl; basically just permission of her parents if she is underage, and the rest to be worked out as they go along.
2006-11-10 10:35:17 · answer #2 · answered by auntb93again 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's really not that hard to adopt, the problem is that everyone wants only perfect babys. between the foster program and the adoption program there is a stagering amount of children that need homes.
stars want good p.r. it sells. the kids they get are than raised by nannies, only to be taken out with the star when they need a boost in the ratings.a career in the movies and the theater are very demanding and time comsuming with very little free-time left.
2006-11-10 10:29:07 · answer #3 · answered by rhonda c 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Much of the time spent on adoption is in background checking and verifying that the child to be adopted CAN be adopted. It is a convoluted process, to be sure, but if not, then how close would we be into 'selling babies' into slave trade?
Many of the 3rd world adoptions are done for financial purposes.
2006-11-10 10:30:26 · answer #4 · answered by words_smith_4u 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Adopting from other countries steals the spotlight and gets one noticed by the public. Everyones wants to have their 15 minuutes of fame, even at the expense of children.
2006-11-10 10:22:25 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
State governments should do this. The federal government should back it up. Too much emphasis is placed on abortion and foster care and not enough on adoption.
2006-11-10 10:42:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It is not that hard to adopt mixed race or special needs children. The problem is that people want a perfect white baby. And if you don't like abortion, don't have one.
2006-11-10 10:21:42 · answer #7 · answered by notyou311 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Good question. But not sure if that would really change the amount of abortions here in the US.
2006-11-10 10:55:15 · answer #8 · answered by kissmybum 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Abortion is a sacred cow for the liberal left extemists and the dems will do nothing to jeopardize it or its supporters who unstintingly support the party. They will soon move to erase any and all progress against the procedures made by the GOP during the last six years.
2006-11-10 10:24:53 · answer #9 · answered by Mad Roy 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
You're right. Insted of commiting infanticide we send them up for adoption. I hope that this idea isn't smothered by the liberals.
Yay! You evil ppl that are pro-abortion rate my answer low!
2006-11-10 10:26:48 · answer #10 · answered by tcreede 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋