Let's continue a discussion from
this thread that got zapped for being chatfiltery. It has to do with adoption.
Okay, my response to Not That Girl got deleted. I'm not gonna cry foul, because it didn't exactly answer the OP's original question - though it was an attempt to answer an issue touched-on in the [more inside]. Since I worked pretty hard on it, and I think it's a pretty considered point of view, I'd like to get some mileage out of it. Even tangentially, I hope it's a useful discussion.
The original post:
I'm sorry to derail the thread but - in the interest of fairness - I need to respond to poster not that girl.
1) Many people in the United States do not have insurance at all. Most do not have adequate insurance. Suffice to say that birth expenses leading up to (and on occasion incurred by) IUI are not covered under many/most plans. And yes that's probably illegal, crummy, and blindsighted, but that's how things sit right now is. While adoption /will/ probably be more expensive than IUI, it will does not necessarily need to be massively, prohibitively more expensive. And there's only a fractional chance that adoption will medically complicate the life of the mother in even the way of the most routine births. My point was only that there are trade-offs in any case: financially, medically, experientially.
2) You insinuation, "overall [adoption is] much more morally vexed [than IUI]. At least with my two kids conceived with donor sperm, I don't have to live with knowing there's a broken-hearted birthmother out there somewhere" is strikingly loaded and wholly subjective. As a Quaker (I was raised as one, too, as a matter of fact), it behooves one to credit the awareness, consciousness, and conscientiousness of the birth mother's/guardian's decision to give their baby up for adoption. Not some imaginary charity or nobility: as I'm sure you're aware, on both ends, adoption is a flesh-and-blood proceeding - an investment in an individual child, not a grandiose salvation, kindness, or act of abstract goodliness. To experience or image the birth family's process as tremendously difficult or deeply emotional is fair: but to parent a child with constant awareness of "a broken-hearted birthmother out there somewhere" strikes me as tremendously bizarre. For any of a thousand reasons, a child has been given a wonderful second opportunity because of concrete, rational, and pragmatic decisions of two or more people. Adoption is not in any way about a suffering parent and a saving parent: to see it that way strikes me as a bit condescending, and even - in the case of international adoptions - colonial.
posted by mr. remy to MetaFilter-Related at 9:08 AM (115 comments total)
2 users marked this as a favorite
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:15 AM on February 8, 2010