Letters to the Editor
-
Angelina
Laurel1962, your comment is so wrongheaded to me:
especially single or older women - wanting to adopt exotic children rather than (boring) locally available children, and rather than undergo the miseries of pregnancy...
Say what??? Are you the Wizard of Oz? On the flipside, like you, I have wondered about those Christian people who adopt many children. But we can't be sure. I'll not judge.
Even though I don't like Angelina's movies, her acting so much or her too-skinny arms, my sense is that she cares a lot about the world. She has been an impressive activist and I applaud her for that. She seems like the real deal to me. Hers have never seemed like vanity adoptions. There is a context to her adoptions that I haven't seen in others but people who birth and/or adopt children are as varied as snowflakes: their motivations, desires, childrearing practices etc.
I believe that people go where they need to go when they choose to adopt. It's a gut feeling, a calling perhaps to go with one country or one situation over another one.
It's deeply personal and no one should judge.
With that being said I hope that Angelina does not over-adopt. I think 2 parents, even with a gaggle of nannies in tow, can only do so much, but I don't have kids so that's my guess.
-
Self-knowledge is not a character flaw
It takes a certain type of person to adopt a special-needs child, and not everyone is cut out for it. That's why the adoption agencies ask about this up front.
At one point in the adoption process, the author was asked if she would take a special-needs child, and she declined. There's no shame in that. In fact, she is to be commended for knowing herself so well.
However, preference aside, once she commits to a child (via birth or adoption), the author should be prepared to accept any special needs or challenges that emerge without flinching.
-
Throwing the Baby Out With the Corrupt Bathwater
Anonymous "journalist who lived in Guatemala" writes: "For this reason, UNICEF, the UN, and human rights organizations are all wary of international adoptions. The demographic explosion of US couples seeking international adoptions is having unforeseen effects, not all of them positive."
The Facts...
Guatemala is mired in poverty, and it is likely that it will continue to be so during our lifetimes.
A poor child in many regions of Guatemala has about a 2 in 5 chance of not making it to his or her fifth birthday, due to malnutrition or disease.
There are limited to no social services for the poor in Guatemala -- including medical care and food aid. And with a series of corrupt, ineept, and actively racist governments that discriminate against the poor, who are most often Mayan indigenous people, this is not likely to improve for decades.
While some mothers may be giving birth and putting children up for adoption to generate income, the vast majority are extremely indigent women with no means to care for their babies who are not deliberately conceived for profit. With a monthly income of $100, and the women need to work full-time to earn that $100, these mothers can't even breastfeed, and baby formula (which costs well over $100 a month) is beyond their reach. These infants end up being fed watered down milk, and sometimes even coffee. Unless Unicef and the UN have some sort of secret, hidden and unshared plan to provide medical care and food to every one of these women who would have otherwise put a child up for adoption, exactly what will become of these babies?
You had babies in a system of private foster care, with the vast majority of foster families providing a loving start for these infants. Now, the government's aim is to institutionalize them in goverment-run institutions, with a typical adoption taking at least 2 years, according to Guatemalan government officials.
Coincidentally, researchers have just put out a study that demonstrates, definitively, that growing up in an institution like an orphanage stunts children’s mental development, as compared to foster care.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/21/us/21foster.html?ref=us
So could someone please explain where Unicef and the UN's concerns are for the welfare of the children of Guatemala?
When the malnutrition and death rate of children goes up, and the children who are institutionalized suffer, and develop attachment disorders, who will be worrying about and caring for the children then?
EVERY SYSTEM IS FLAWED. Yes, there are some corrupt lawyers in Guatemala, and some women are being encouraged to birth babies for economic reasons.
But the Guatemalans don't want to care for their poor children, and they don't want to adopt them either. And they don't want to fix their system, because they are just shifting the economic benefits...Now, Unicef will hand over bucks to the government to help subsidize some of these institutions.
And let's just see how much of it actually translates to food, medical care, or loving care for these children. My guess -- little to none. It's going to end up in the pockets of the corrupt Guatemalan bureaucrats, as usual.
They are throwing out an entire system, and condemning thousands of children to the hell of inept institutionalized care -- and this so-called care is coming from a corrupt, racist and uncaring government that is doing it primarily to skim the international aid designated for their huge population of poor children.
It's a complete travesty, and no one seems to care...
What will happen to the thousands of poor children from Guatemala who have no where to go, no one to feed them, no one to care for them, no one to provide medical care, no one to educate them, and no one to love them?
-
Couple of thoughts
Just a couple of thoughts - for those who are angry and disappointed with Gross for not adopting this girl, and wonder what will become of her, I suggest you contact the author and she can put you in touch with the adoption agency. Then you can go to India and adopt her if she is still available. Anybody?
And for those who think being interested in a country or culture is a stupid way to choose where to adopt from, do you consider a rational way to choose? Any way you look at it, you're choosing a human being and not choosing other human beings. How is choosing a country to adopt from not going to be arbitrary in the end? And if you do have specific criteria about the child you want, it seems that makes you a bad person (shallow, narcissistic, racist, celebrity-trend-following, perfectionist, or at the very least, bad parenting material.)