Media Misses the Boat on Adoption Coverage

This is an equal opportunity adoption blog -- I cover what liberals, conservatives and everyone in between is saying about adoption. Today at townhall.com, conservative columnist Marvin Olasky bemoaned the fact that the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune and USA Today have given ZERO coverage to National Adoption Month so far this month. Shame on them!

While I'm encouraged to see the abundance of stories touting National Adoption Month in smaller, regional publications, I'd like to encourage the media to cover adoption more consistently throughout the year, not just during its month and day (November 20) of official recognition.

Olasky brings up some thought-provoking issues in his column. I'd love to hear people's comments about what Olasky calls "four troublesome trends in adoption."

Troublesome Trend #1: While Americans are adopting increasing numbers of children from Russia, China and Guatemala, we are "exporting" black children for adoption in other countries. Olasky says, "Charity begins at home." He believes that we need to publicize the needs of African-American babies so that more of them will be adopted domestically.

Laura's thoughts: My question to those of you who choose to adopt internationally is: What motivated your choice? Of course you knew that there are plenty of African-American children waiting for families here in the U.S. And yet you chose to adopt internationally. Why? I'm not asking this to criticize your choice...I'm just curious.

Troublesome Trend #2: The push for total openness in adoption redefines the family to include a variety of "caregivers" rather than two parents. Olasky defines fully open adoptions as "long-term foster care in which a child has adoptive parents but also a fully involved birthmother." He believes that until a child is age 18, "the confusion that results from having two moms can cut into the sense of security and belonging that children need."

Laura's thoughts: As the mother of two children involved in a fully open adoption, I can report with complete confidence that my children (both under age 18), are not the least bit confused about who their parents are. Their first (birth) parents nurtured them in the womb, carefully chose adoptive parents for them, gave birth to them, lovingly cared for them during their first few days of life, and then placed them into our arms. The boys live with us. Permanently. We are Mom and Dad. Our boys call their birth parents by their first names, and they know they are their birth parents. We all love the boys unconditionally, which I believe increases the sense of security and belonging our boys feel.

Troublesome Trend #3: Gay adoption lobbyists claim that two fathers or two mothers are just as good as having both a father and a mother. Since many birthmoms will be reluctant to place their children for adoption if they think placement will be with homosexuals, fewer adoptions will result. Olasky advocates that birth mothers should have the right to "discriminate by stipulating that children they place for adoption will not be put into a homosexual home."

Laura's thoughts: Birth mothers are generally reluctant to place their children for adoption, whether it be with single parents, married parents, or gay parents. Adoption is an extraordinarily difficult choice, even under the best of circumstances, and I believe that birth parents should be allowed to choose the parent(s) they feel are best equipped to raise their child. I think the best-case scenario is for a child to have two heterosexual parents. Adopted kids have a lot of built-in issues to deal with. Is it fair to them to further complicate their lives by having gay parents?

Troublesome Trend #4: The role of Christian and pro-life groups in adoption has received little coverage. Olasky says that Christian nonprofit agencies such as Bethany Christian Services (the largest adoption nonprofit in the country) have been "so under-covered in the press that some people think adoption is carried on only by government agencies and for-profit businesses."

Laura's thoughts: Are people really so ignorant that they believe government agencies and for-profit businesses are the only ones that process adoptions? Perhaps, namely because the stories the media often covers are the sensational "bad news" angles about scams and adoptions gone wrong. But as a journalist who has spent the last 12 years researching adoption, I've noticed that when the media covers positive adoption stories, they do a credible job of mentioning both Christian non-profits and government agencies. If those of us who choose to do business with Christian organizations become more bold about sharing our experiences, the media will cover it more.

Comments

[Lorraine]

Hi Laura,

Commenting on Item #1:

Often I have wondered at Americans' willingness to help children of other countries and wonder why they wouldn't choose to do so for a fellow American in need.

I have decided it is perhaps because those children living in other countries do not have the same opportunity for a quality life as is possible for our own through various agencies and help programs in the U.S.

However, I would urge people to look at "home" first. In my opinion, a better life for Americans means a stronger America.

[Monica]

Correct me if I'm wrong but in regards to troublesome thought number 1 - is it not actually the "system" that is stopping African American children from being placed as they would rather wait for a family that has some African American background then place them with a family that doesn't. I'm from Canada but my understanding of the issue is that it is a top priority to place with an AA parent to the point of holding off too long before a child gets adopted.

As for the non-traditional family - I am a single adoptive parent and I feel strongly that a birth family that sets up an adoption plan for their child should have the right to choose what kind of family they want their child in. They are not randomly putting a child out there but rather making a very tough decision and I think they have to the right to say they want their child raised in a certain type of family or in a certain religion or whatever.

Just a couple of my thoughts.

Monica

[KymberlyL3]

We chose to adopt internationally because laws in America favor the "birthmother". Rightfully so... But as a parent who had already dealt with tremendous loss, I felt it "safer" to adopt internationally where the risk of a family "changing their mind" was less.

I truly believe that we were 'led' to our children. They just happened to be on the other side of the world.

[rob]

I think that the most prevalent reason why folks adopt internationally is because there is less a chance of any kind of birth family contact.

[Tamra]

**I think that the most prevalent reason why folks adopt internationally is because there is less a chance of any kind of birth family contact.**

I don't know how prevalent it is, but I do know that this is not true in my case. It breaks my heart that we have no information at all on my daughter's birth family. She had a wonderful caregiver in her orphanage who loves her and misses her terribly. She writes to me and sends gifts for my daughter and I write to her and send her pictures. I am so grateful for this relationship as it is the closest thing to a birthmother relationship that we can have.

**My question to those of you who choose to adopt internationally is: What motivated your choice? Of course you knew that there are plenty of African-American children waiting for families here in the U.S. And yet you chose to adopt internationally. Why? I'm not asking this to criticize your choice...I'm just curious.**

Hmmm honestly I'm not too sure. The first exposure I ever had to adoption was when a good friend of mine adopted an AA baby girl. I started at that time thinking more about adoption. I truly believe that I was led by God to my daughter as there were so many things that influenced us. We never really made a "decision" per se we just knew that was where our daughter was. We are hoping to adopt internationally again next year but domestic AA adoption may well be in our future. I'm not limited or think a certain way is best, I'm just looking for my child.

[dawn]

I'm speaking to the so-called troublesome trend about promoting gay adoptions. It reminds me a bit of the discussions about transracial adoption not being ok because it may create "issues" for an already over-burdened child. Lousy parent and loving parent are equal opportunity situations. They both cross color lines, socio-economic boundaries, show up in various religions and can appear in families with single parents, gay parents and hetereosexual parents. I think it's dangerous to make generalizations about families based on characteristics that will not necessarily impact parenting. So yes, I'd say it's fair to an adopted child to have gay parents as long as those parents are good parents and there's just no predicting that based on sexual orientation.

[achromic]

Of trend #3, I fail to understand the point. Either the birthmother cares enough about the child she is placeing up for adoption that she is going thru' an agency where she will get to choose the parents or she doesn't. If she is useing some excuse like "the agency might place my child with a gay couple" then perhaps she isn't really ready to give her child up for adoption. If she is choosing the parents of the child then she can use whatever dicrimanting factors she wants to, how would we stop her? She can deicide that money matters, or age, or if they have a dog. As for being gay being some sort of hardship on a child....personally I think being poor is a much bigger one and I don't see Xtians saying people shouldn't adopt/or have children because of their income level.
Of trend #4, Yes people are really that ignorant. Expecially if they havn't had anything to do with adoption before. So many people now a days even see that the word christian or prolife is link to something and they don't want anything to do with it. Xtians and prolifers have a nasty rep. with a lot of people if you want to change their idea of what you are about then you will have to out shout your fantical leaders.
And one last note, I have never adopted but one of my fears about a domestic adoption would be that I've heard of more then one case where a bio dad or mom decided they wanted the child back, in some cases the dad hadn't signed the paper work other times the mom said she was to incapastated to understand what she was signing and they won, and the child was ripped out of the only home that child knew. That sure would scare the piss outta me.