|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 28, 2020 13:28:38 GMT -5
Adding prevention as the #1 priority would be a practical and easily accepted stance. Mandatory or highly encouraged are not technically the same, but execution of that theory can go poorly, fast. I'm with you that adootion is a lovely thing, but if the democrats put "encourage young pregnant girls to give their babies up for adoption" will absolutely, 100% be used against the democrats. It will backfire. I am sure there is a way to successfully incorporate increasing acceptance of adoption into the execution, but maybe that concept isn't a written pillar of the core beliefs of the party. It is a live wire. Edited to add: Was adoption ever mandatory? I think it was just strongly encouraged? Was there ever a law? I don't know, but if you are from a family that has absolutely no resources and has said that they will not help you, it really isn't a choice. If you add that until just recently, unwed women were outcasts from society, who couldn't even get employment, there are few options. So while it may not have been a law, you were forced into it.
|
|
oped
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 20, 2018 20:49:12 GMT -5
Posts: 4,676
|
Post by oped on Sept 28, 2020 13:32:17 GMT -5
Lots of girls had their babies forcibly taken from them.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Sept 28, 2020 14:14:41 GMT -5
Adoption in the US is essentially legalized human trafficking.
That's not to say ALL adoption is bad, but the fact that it's become this thing where you can only get an infant if you have $40k to spare and that more often than not the birth mother probably doesn't even make that a year -- it all becomes this mess and honestly a little icky.
There's truly women out there who get pregnant, don't want to abort, so they freely choose adoption. But there's also women out there who couldn't afford/didn't have access to birth control or who are lower income that adopt out not because they want to but because they felt they had no other choice.
It's kind of hard to champion adoption while there's still so many other things in our society that have women giving up their children not completely freely.
ETA Was watching Ever After yesterday and it makes me thing of the quote (which is actually from Utopia) "For if you suffer your people to be ill-educated, and their manners to be corrupted from their infancy, and then punish them for those crimes to which their first education disposed them, what else is to be concluded from this, but that you first make thieves and then punish them."
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,155
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 28, 2020 14:24:25 GMT -5
the Handmaid's Tale
|
|
oped
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 20, 2018 20:49:12 GMT -5
Posts: 4,676
|
Post by oped on Sept 28, 2020 14:26:56 GMT -5
Was just thinking the path is actually pretty clear.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Sept 28, 2020 15:42:57 GMT -5
It is this weird conundrum. The adoptive parents don't give the birth mom the $40k because then that's buying the baby which society has said bad (with prob a dash of why should stupid women get paid money for being stupid) - but we're ok with adoption agencies making money off of this?
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,415
|
Post by thyme4change on Sept 28, 2020 16:14:48 GMT -5
Well - this thread confirms my belief that adoption is a controversial topic from a policy/macro level. The discussion can devolve quickly from the positive aspects of adoption to the dirty roots and problems that still plague the practice.
Prevention still has a eugenics background, so that could be problematic, too. I think the answers are a little easier there - but maybe not.
|
|