WOW late long comment is late and long.. haha, sorry

But I agree. The whole social services needs to be fired, reworked, redone, and flushed completely of those crazy people who think sending a child who’s parents are loving but can’t to feed it to a foster home where they are abused is the right thing to do.

That said: Why does America so uncritically and unconditionally accept adoption as a social good? If the only kids who were ever adopted were orphans with no extended family, or abuse victims who would die or be permanently damaged if they stayed with their families of origin, it would be one thing. Believe it or not, neither description fits the vast majority of children who are adopted. You’re more likely to languish in foster care your entire childhood if you’re an abuse survivor–virtually no prospective adoptive parents want to be bothered with your “issues.” And most surrendering parents are economically, culturally, or socially coerced into giving up their children. Believe me: there are almost NO baby factories out here who woke up one day and decided to conceive just for some poor widdle infertile rich b***h who put her career first and waited too long to have kids. Our worlds simply do not revolve around such people–we have lives and dreams of our own, thanks.

I’ll tell you why people are more likely to adopt foreign children. It’s easier to fudge the rules, easier to bully the surrendering parents and easier to lie to the kid about where they come from. There are too many laws in the United States protecting surrendering parents and as far as I’m concerned even those don’t go far enough. When I can read an article in a LIBERAL magazine by an adoptive parent asking “Did I steal my child?” that she adopted from Latin America, you know something is wrong. But it’s the elephant in the living room and no one will talk about it. They’d rather badmouth the surrendering parents, particularly the mothers, as being bad people (because otherwise they would have “deserved” to keep their children).

Meanwhile, to accept help from the social safety net is to admit to being a failure and a parasite, and it doesn’t help enough in any case. The Cadillac-driving “welfare queen” is largely myth–those who do drive nice cars are likely dealing, or the Cadillac is old (and therefore a crappy car), or someone felt sorry for the person. TANF doesn’t pay enough to keep body and soul together, and you have to make an indentured servant out of yourself to “earn” it. Medicaid is a joke. The food stamp program is designed to keep you in poverty. We refuse to take care of FAMILIES in this country and then we think it’s “helping” to break those families up. Our priorities are seriously screwed.

I have a lot of philosophical issues with the adoption industry, but if someone is going to have a lot of kids it might as well be a person of means, I guess.

The kids are theirs legally, so there’d be a custody arrangement the same way there is with biological kids. Not that I necessarily think these two would split. I figure it’s about a 50-50 chance at this point…

Cynical? Why, yes. American FAMILIES need help, not just American children. If we didn’t have this pervasive cultural concept that the poor are failures and that seeking help is wrong, I wouldn’t have lost one of my own children and he wouldn’t have to be growing up without his mom. I’m not a drug addict, I’m not a criminal, I just got really unlucky. And I am no less worthy of help than someone under the age of 18.

Please bring me a plastic pony and a rocket.

Just beware of lovely ladies lighting incense.

By Courtney Hazlett
The Scoop
msnbc.com
updated 8:26 a.m. CT, Wed., Oct. 29, 2008

Courtney Hazlett
The Scoop
What does it take to keep the Jolie-Pitt household running smoothly? A fleet of cars and a half-dozen nannies, for starters.

“We’ve provided them with more than 20 Volkswagens while they’re here in Berlin,” Mya Walters, a public-relations manager for the car company, told Life & Style magazine.

The magazine reports that the Pitt-Jolie Berlin digs also have a dinner table that seats 16 — that’s just a couple extra seats when you factor in their own family of eight and the six nannies the couple sometimes requires.

I also take issue with the fact that kids who are moved around a lot are somehow unhappier or at risk compared to children who stay in one place their whole lives. Have you ever heard anybody say this of so-called army brats? The whole point of being pro-family (as so many supposedly pro-family people seem to forget) is that as long as it works for them, who the eff are you to judge?!

I don’t like the fact that they’re adopting them the way some people collect animals. We call THOSE folks hoarders. I don’t see the difference, except that it involves other human beings instead of animals.

Maybe they should invest in some black-market beagles?

when she was eighteen.

They’d be dead in a week.

maybe one of the two is a bit impotent, and try to cover it up this way X3

And wut Ms Valit said — they can afford to take care of them!!!