August 12, 2011
-
Buying Babies…A Frank Discussion of Modern Adoption
There was an article this morning over at Huff Post about a baby buying racket out of LA.
It talks about how agencies “bumped” the cost of adoptions…in some cases to 100K. But reading the article made me have one thought…an idea that had been bumping around in my brain for nearly 20 years. Adoption in modern America is almost ALWAYS “baby selling”. The mother may not see the money, but the adoption brokers and lawyers do. And if you think I am wrong, try to adopt a baby if you make less than 50K a year. Couples who take ads seeking infants always talk about “financial security”. The women they are writing these ads for are never people of means themselves. They are women to whom raising a child is an economic disaster. In effect, the poor are having babies for the affluent…and that bothers me.
Part of my discomfort is that babies when sold become a commodity. And once you establish a “going price”, they stop being children, and become products. The adoptive parents become consumers—and whenever money is an issue, people think “top quality”. We are hearing of surrogate situations where a woman is contracted to have a baby—and the infant is refused for not being “perfect”. The people seeking babies don’t want “someone Else’s problem”. There is an underlying, unspoken tone here…it suggests that parents who adopt can pick and choose. According to the March Of Dimes, one in thirteen child are born with some form of birth defect, small or large. For the Adoptive Consumer, (at least many of them) this child is off the list.
I’ve often heard of people smugly saying “Don’t abort…put the baby up for adoption.”.That sounds reasonable. Only there are only about 120,000 adoptions a year. Most states are overflowing with children who need homes…but most of them are not babies. And the babies they do have don’t meet the “criteria” of people who claim they are “desperate” for a child. Sorry…but that pisses me off. I spent months wondering if I could have a baby at all. I understand the longing. A close friend conceived when I was in the thick of it, and I cried the first time I held her baby.
But back then IVF was not covered by insurance. And when I looked into adoption, I hit the Money Wall. Back then it was 35K to adopt…when our annual income was barely 40K. If you didn’t have it, you could forget about even applying. Back then, Gays were not adopting yet. A few helpful souls suggested maybe I could try for a “non-traditional adoption”. What was that? “Oh…the children who no one else wants.”
DOUBLE WHAT? Older kids. Orphans. and of course…the handicapped. My mind was utterly blown by the notion of “kids nobody wants”. And then something worse occurred to me. They were SELLING babies to the highest bidder. At the time, everyone wanted white, healthy blue eyed males. My thought was that adoption should be a lottery system. You can apply…but only to adopt. No preferences…no “criteria”. If you’re not “able” to handle a handicapped kid, what will you do if some day your nice healthy one has a horrible accident…and ends up that way? Return them?
This struck me as good way to test the mettle of people. Part of my objection to giving the affluence such deference is the assumption that because they have means, they will provide “a good home”. So if you have bucks, you’ll be a great parent…but if you’re poor, you’ll be crap? How does that work, exactly? I’ve been reading a lot about Adults who were adopted, and the huge issues they face as a result. There is a portion of that population who remain angry, bitter, or simply hurt all their lives over being “given up”. And the fact that someone adopted them doesn’t make them feel any better. I never considered how arrogant that was before…”What? Why you were CHOSEN.” To which the reply too often is “Sure…after my mom threw me away.”
I’m not saying that the rich are essentially evil. I’m just wondering why an institution like adopt so frequently makes the assumption that they are BETTER for a baby…and go out of their way to convince women of that. If all a child needed was well to do parents, there would be no unhappy families over a certain income level. And we all know that’s crap. I know at least one family with assets over a million dollars. They go to family therapy together, and are ALL on anti-depressants. So, no happy in that house, despite the healthy bank balance.
I guess what I am really asking here is why we pretend that we don’t sell babies…when honestly…we do?
Post a Comment
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
