What comes to mind when you hear *anti-adoption*?

Question

When you hear someone use the phrase Anti-adoption do you see it as negative or a positive phrase?

I think many times when it is used, it is meant to be an insult but, I see it as a group that does not like current adoption practices.

If being anti-adoption means you are against pre-birth matching, closed adoptions and sealed birth certificates then I guess I am anti-adoption.

What does Anti-Adoption mean to you?

PS: for the record, I am an Adoptive Parent.

Answer 1

Dear Heather,



Since coming to this board I have actually become rather fond of the term. LOL! It has become a sort of badge of honor for me even though it is a misnomer and not truly what I (or many of the other people here) believe.



Most literate people are able to grasp the differences between "anti-adoption" and "pro adoption reform". (I am not at all bothered by people who are new to the ideas being confused.) The ones who continually make derogatory comments and use misuse the term just to get a rise out of people make me shake my head and smile. I actually feel sorry for some of them.



Semantics are so blurred and misused in adopto-land, most of the time when people use the term "anti-adoption" on this forum, it is flung as an ignorant attempt at a put down towards those of us who speak for reform; I figure being lumped in with other reformists and collectively given the misnomer of an "anti-adoption" at this point it kind of seems like "my team" (so glad you're on it!!!) is getting yelled at by the opposition on the ball field - it shows they're all talk, no skill. The kind of tactics used by bullies when they know they're wrong, losing the game or trying to start a fight.



I guess I would even say there are occasions when I am proud to be an "anti-adoptionist" - even if it isn't the right classification. I am quite happy to be associated with the majority of the other people who are misclassified with me - I have a great deal of respect and admiration for them.



Being called "anti-adoption" at this point gives me the same feeling getting a TD from the thumb stalker who lurks in the shadows of the adoption board...I get a little giggle. I kind of tickles me that I have an "anti-fan" - it means I've made them uncomfortable/afraid/upset enough (not because I've been rude or directly insulted them - I don't purposefully do that, but because of my experiences and opinions) they feel the need to try to hurt my feelings. I made them THINK and they didn't like it! I made my point and they can't think of anything better to "argue" with. Mission accomplished.

Answer 2

As someone who is anti adoption it means I am against a system that has failed miserably, caused untold anguish, pain and heartbreak, bases its whole existence on the loss of the baby and mother, falsifies legal documents, is manipulative and deceitful. I don't think it has a place in today's society. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have something else in place for th children who sadly need to live with families other than their Natural parents, I just don't believe it should b adoption.



Adoption now is about wants and desires. I don't see love, compassion or kindness playing any role in adoption. I am not saying that all adoptive parents are nasty, child stealing people because I know the ones here (regulars) who are not as well as a few others but in general, compassion does not play a huge role.



Anyway, the term anti-adoption means someone who is against adoption and what it stands for. It is often used as an insult here where we are labelled 'extremists', 'flying monkeys' or in a 'cult' which is a fairly shallow way of looking at a much deeper issue.



Thanks for the question by the way :)

Answer 3

I see it as neither a positive or negative per se, but a factual statement about a person's beliefs. Just like saying that I'm a political liberal and support foster care adoption is not a compliment OR an insult to me... just an objective statement of my position on some issues.



Personally I would define being "anti-adoption" meaning that the person believes that in all cases, adoption is a negative outcome. That adoption is categorically wrong, and they are against it regardless of the specifics of the situation. Thus the "anti-" label.



If someone did not take a position that extreme, I would consider them "pro-reform" or "pro-family preservation" rather than "anti-adoption."

Answer 4

I personally feel the motivation is vaild--noble and appropriate! I just believe the realities of the agenda would be better recieved if there were a different term used... As the mother of children with an adopted father I worked hard for open-record reforms in Oregon. It mattered to me too... As an adoptive mother I want my children to have their rights and support reforms.... I just can't jump in and call myself "anti-adoption" under the circumstances.... really.

Answer 5

I think the term anti-adoption in its broad sense means being against all types of adoption, including those that are necessary.



What most people who are labeled "anti-adoption" really are is "pro-reform" (against pre-birth matching, closed adoption and sealed records) Big difference.

Answer 6

Its stressful to declare. professional skill "for", such as you're all "for" something. interior the example of "existence", i'm worried approximately it. residing is remarkable. i assume that would make me "professional-existence"? no longer interior the slightest. There are "strikes" that take a term and supply it a political which skill. i'd reluctantly say i'm "Anti-adoption" in maximum circumstances, yet that does no longer mean that i think of adoption desires to end and not in any respect take place. i'd desire to declare i'm "anti-adoption" interior the case of x, y, and z... yet then it might take numerous explaining to enable somebody understand the circumstances the place i discover that's a constructive subject, and likewise the place i discover it to be destructive. simply by fact of all the variables, i decide directly to no longer associate myself with any circulate like this. purely like i'd desire to in no way say i'm a Democrat or a Republican. I accept as true with some from column 'a' and a few from column 'b', and loathe factors of each. once I hear words like "professional-relatives" and "anti-adoption" all i'm able to think of is that i'd extra effective metallic myself up for somebody else's schedule to be pressed.

Answer 7

It is very much a propaganda word. If you don't agree with adoption as it is currently practiced, you are then labelled anti-adoption.



Just as an adoptive parent I am to be I guess "pro" adoption. Neither is really true, I am a meld of both.



It reminds me of pro-life people, who basically by their propagandic words, make anyone not "pro-life" into then pro-death. I am pro-choice, and I use the word anti-choice for people who identify themselves as pro life.



If it is a term used to describe someone who stands for something you do not, more often then not it is a propaganda filled word aiming to put someone in a box into an all or nothing scenario.

Answer 8

It depends on what context it's used - I have friends who are anti adoption period, others who are anti bad practises in adoption such as coercion and the reasons you don't like about adoption. I don't like certain practises in adoption either.

Answer 9

The term itself seems to be a label for anyone who opposes adoption or supports adoption reform and is usually used primarily in a derogatory fashion. Adoption is nothing more than a legal process born of a political agenda. Turning any political agenda into a sacred cow is always dangerous business. Adoption is certainly no exception.



The only reason 'adoption' is ever necessary is because our current political structure is prohibitive against other forms of child custody modifications. Adoption allows people to ignore reality and legalize fantasies. I personally see nothing healthy about that agenda.



The adoption process begins with child abandonment. There's nothing at all noble or romantic about that. It is not Constitutionally protected behavior. If child abandonment is to continue to be legal, it should not be promoted and should be highly regulated.



The term is simply aimed at avoiding the ugly reality behind adoption and easing the conscience of those who participate in the process.

Answer 10

I am an adoptive parent. I wouldn't give up my kids for anything in the world. With that being said, the practice of adoption is a joke. It is simply legal baby selling. There are actually women out there that get pregnant regularly to make extra money. Disgusting!



I thought that I was doing the socially conscious thing by adopting from foster care. Wrong. It was just as corrupt, if not more then private adoption. The county case workers have done things to my children's birth parents that sicken me.



I am a happy adoptive parent but I am anti-adoption on terms of ethics. If my child was unexpectedly pregnant I would give her every resource I had in order for her to keep her child.

Answer 11

I guess I'm anti-adoption as you describe it. I am only in favor of adoption as a last resort - for children who have been abused or are orphaned and have no other biological family available to give them a home.



I am totally opposed to adoption practices such as closed records for adoptees and first parents and the use of coercive tactics to encourage mothers to give their child up.

Adoption has become a huge glorified industry and it is appalling to me that children are being sold by agencies and attorneys who claim that they have the best interest of the child in mind.



I am also in favor of family preservation first and if that's not possible -legalized guardianship which allows a child to remain connected to their family of origin.

Answer 12

Depends who it's coming from. If it's from someone who IS anti-adoption, I think of it as pro-family, pro-child, someone who cares about what children unnecessarily separated from their families have to go through, someone who wants to prevent that pointless pain in future generations.



If it's coming from someone who is not anti-adoption, what usually comes to mind is a bitter person who can't handle emotions and needs to throw out useless labels to make themselves feel superior. It's usually coupled with an accusation of childishness, which strikes me as ironic.

Answer 13

When I hear "anti-adoption", what comes to my mind is...Sly's avatar. Yes, that came to my mind before I even clicked on the question and read the details.



I think that those who are branded "anti-adoption" are usually those who focus on speaking out against adoption practices that pretty much everyone is against if aware of the practices. They seem to be more aware of these practices and believe they occur more often than those not tagged "anti-adoption". Also, most "anti-adoption" folks seem to be pessimistic about adoption based on personal experiences.



The word seems to have a negative vibe, but I don't think it's a bad thing to be if the goal is simply to inform. I suspect that deceit, exaggeration, and unrealistic extrapolation are sometimes involved, but I cannot judge whether this is intentional or due to strong emotion.

Answer 14

I interpret it as a positive thing.

I imagine an anti-adoption person being an individual who does not condone the current practices of the adoption system where they live, and find it too flawed to surrender a child to.

Answer 15

to me...when I first see that phrase I think that is a person that believes adoption should never happen





Then I just sigh and know its someone trying to stir up trouble



Just as people say that if you are pro-choice, you aren't pro-life...one has nothing to do with another

Answer 16

Natural family preservation first, legal guardianship after that.



If adoption has to happen,(parents are gone missing, in prison, dead, no relatives to adopt the child) then there should still be a point in the future for families, if there are any relatives, younger ones for example, at least to be able to reconcile at some point.



No fake birth certificates. Birth records should not be falsified.



Child placement should serve the child, not be a service for "needy" adults.

Answer 17

Positive - I picture a person who believes in preserving the natural family.



ETA: After reading a lot of today's questions, another picture I have is of exploding heads....say ONE WORD critical of adoption and watch people freak out! It's actually kinda fun :)

Answer 18

I'm anti-adoption. I don't know (nor will I guess at) how some mean it when they use it to describe others. (I assume they mean it as an insult. I am not insulted.)



This is not a position I've arrived at quickly or rashly. A few years ago, I was more ambivalent about adoption. I've become increasingly of the opinion that adoption is wrong, always, and that we continue it simply indicates a lack of creative thinking in our society. I do not believe children should stay in abusive or neglectful situation. Nor do I think children don't deserve love and affection. I just think the institution of adoption has become hopelessly messed up. It screws with children. And I think we need to think of better alternatives.



That said... I am not opposed to people who adopt. I am not opposed to people who support adoption (in some ethical forms). I am not opposed to first mothers who relinquish their children.



My opposition is reserved for the institution of adoption, and for society as a whole (and certain members of it) who refuse to see the dark side of adoption. I am opposed to some of the attitudes out there (whether among adoptees, APs, or FPs) and would like to see them changed. That doesn't mean I want everyone to agree with everything I've said. But I cannot accept the conclusion that adoption is simple and good.



(I recently wrote most of the above in another forum, and thought I would repeat it here for this question.)





ETA: Just to be clear (and I'm serious, this isn't directed at anyone, I just want to be sure that I'm clear on this point): I'm not pro-reform. I respect those who are. But I do not see any adoption as necessary. I think we need to find better ways to help children than the mess that is adoption.



I understand that this will get me even more thumbs down. But that's okay. I'd rather get thumbs down for what I believe than thumbs up for a misunderstanding.



And again, I understand not everyone will agree with me. And I'm okay with that.

Answer 19

When I see it, it seems to be a lame attempt at insulting people who criticize current adoption practices

Answer 20

My view may be a little different, and possibly because of where I live.

(Los Angeles)



Adoption is such a need here, I can't count how many times a year I see local news stories about "first" mothers who dump their babies in trash cans or burry them alive. Good friends of mine are foster parents, and in one year alone, they've taken care of multiple babies given up by their drug addict mothers, who didn't care enough to stop doing drugs while they were pregnant.



"Closed" adoptions are also done at the request of the birth parents. Some don't want a child to come knockin' 20 years later, a child they obviously didn't want. If a mother gives a child to a stranger, instead of her own family, maybe she doesn't trust her family enough to give them the child.



The whole "family preservation" theory is off. Family is more than just blood. To imply that family loves you simply because you share DNA is delusional.



Is the "system" broken? Yes, of course it is. Show me a system that isn't broken. Are there shadey adoptions that happen? Yes, there is. Nothing is going to work 100%, 100% of the time. To be against adoption in any case is just ignorant.



I'd like someone who is 100% against adoption 100% of the time, to tell me what they propose we do about the multitude of orphaned baby girls in China, the babies that no one there wants because they are girls. Is it better to let them grow up in an orphange than to let willing parents love and care for them? Or the kids in the orphange I visit in Mexico, most of which were taken from their parents due to sexual abuse. Maybe we should give those kids back to the families that abused them.

Answer 21

I agree with Heather. It is used as a way to insult those of us who are pro-reform. Quite frankly I'll take the anti tag over walking around farting rainbows all over the subject.

Answer 22

Right off i think thats dumb. it doesnt make any sense to be anti-adoption, i mean, is it better for children to sit in treatment centers and orphanages until they r 18? is it better to raise a bunch of cold-hearted adults that never had the chance to experience love in orphanages? Whether anyone likes it or not, adoption is a neccesity. I, (bring on the thumbs down) on the other hand am a Huge supporter of abortion. I think it should be used more often just to prevent the whole adoption mess.

Answer 23

Hmmm... anyone who isn't willing to "buy" (ha ha, no pun intended) into the status quo.

Answer 24

(Tongue firmly planted in cheek)



Bad, bitter, and negative people who hate puppies, rainbows, and families who are destined to be together through the miracle that is adoption.

Answer 25

Personally if I was giving up for an adoption I would want to pick the parents before having the child. That way they wouldn't have to deal with foster care, etc.

If I was adopting it wouldn't matter either way, but I would prefer to have the child right when it's born.

Answer 26

the same thing as:



reformist

black liberationists

abolitionist

feminist

---------------------------



it's someone who is usually loathed by the establishment for attempting to call bullsh*t on the status quo.

Answer 27

never heard it before

Answer 28

never heard it before