In another thread, I was reading, I saw someone suggest adoption, with the disclaimer that it was not the same as having a baby.
This got me to thinking on a couple of levels. First, I was adopted as a baby (4 months old, iirc) and I can’t think of any way that my childhood was fundamentally different from that of children raised by their birth parents.
Second, I had a child when I was very young, and put her up for adoption. I honestly can’t say I feel any “connection” with her, although every once in a while I wonder how she is doing, and if she will pay a visit when she is old enough.
Finally, I am now at the point in my life where I would like to start a family, but I’m also over 35, so I’m wondering if I might have difficulties. My feeling is I’ll try it the natural route, and if no luck, then we will look into adopting, and I think I will be equally happy either way.
Consider the vast numbers of children that have no home, no parents and that grow up in a shitty country.
I’d adopt, more specifically I’d do my best to adopt some child living in some of the shittier hellholes on Earth. Look around online, Im sure you can find adoption agencies.
Speaking as an adoptee myself, I concur that my childhood was not lacking in any way.
I admire birth mothers that have the courage and strength to “give up” their babies for adoption. Mine gave me the best gift she could have ever given, my parents.
My son was adopted from Korea at 6 months after my husband and I struggled with infertility.
My daughter was a surprise born about seven months later.
Adoption isn’t the same as having a baby. But mother love is infinate…so it isn’t like you love one child more than another. (At least my mother love is infinate).
Not everyone has healthy attitudes towards adoption, and those people shouldn’t “just adopt” as a cure for infertility. Adoption cures childlessness – it doesn’t cure infertility. My sister is currently struggling with infertility - and will do the full nine yards of treatment because her husband feels strongly about a bio child - and if that doesn’t work, they will adopt. My cousin is struggling with infertility - and adoption isn’t even vaguely in the cards. Neither of these paths is wrong (though neither was mine, my husband and I came to adoption quite easily). I think it makes a big difference if you’ve had healthy adoption role models in your life (my Dad is an adoptee, my mother in law a birth mother, making my husband’s bio sister an adoptee. One of my good friends is the bio child in a multi racial family created by adoption - adoption was a natural direction for us to turn).
I also know people who didn’t even try for bio kids. Adoption was their first choice. In some cases, they wanted to give a needy existing child a home. In other cases, they just didn’t feel the overwhelming need to go through pregnancy themselves.
(Leap, try quickly, your options for international adoption, and your chances of a successful domestic placement, start narrowing after 40).
I believe that children born to mothers over the age of 35 start to have a higher risk of having kids some sort of retardation. I work with the mentally retarded. As sweet and precious as these people are (and as much as their parents love them) there is a certain level of pain I see in all their parents.
I’m not trying to suggest that getting pregnant after a certain age is a bad thing, and I’m not saying that giving birth to a special needs child is a bad thing. But you are taking a certain risk when you try to start having kids after a certain age. It is something I don’t personally ever plan to do, that’s all I can tell you. YMMV.
I know several people who are adopted, and they were raised in loving homes and are happy. I can’t think of a nicer thing to do that to adopt.
Favorite line by another adoptive parent:
“Adoption - often second choice but never second best.”
It has been a great way to grow our family.
I must personally disagree with the concept of our (the parents) adopting as some way of doing “good works”; we have been the ones given the gift and the opportunity. I am unashamed to admit that for us, honestly, it is a selfish act.
I had my younges daughter when I was 38. At that time, I was told that the chances of her having Down Syndrome was one in 200. I did not consider these to be unacceptable odds. After all, everything in life that is worthwhile carries risks. Now she’s almost 3, and definitely worth it!!
As for adoption vs. bio, I’d say it probably doesn’t matter. Sperm and eggs (not to be confused with bacon and eggs :)) don’t make you parents, love does.
While “geriatric motherhood” does carry increased risks - you still have a far better chance of a healthy child than an unhealthy one. And some risks can be managed (if you are the type of person willing to abort if you have a chromosome abnormality). If you feel strongly about bio kids and you are 38 years old - you should try to have them. There is a tragedy in an adoptive kid raised by parents who spend a lot of time wondering “what if we’d tried IVF, what if we’d decided we weren’t too old.” Especially when you are looking to adopt a healthy child - even internationally - there is a wait involved and plenty of homes for the children available.
I’ll second DSeid, I was going to post something similar. With the agency we went through, if the social worker thought your PRIMARY motivation was to “save” a child (rather than to raise a child) you failed your homestudy. Far too many bad experiences from “saving” being the motivation over parenting.
norinew hit it on the head. Donating sperm or carrying a fetus does NOT make you a parent. Raising children in an environment filled with love, respect and affection does.
Both my kids are bio, my mom was adopted at birth. She was appalled when someone suggested “finding her parents”- they aren’t lost, they raised her! I think she would see it as insulting them and everything they did to try and find a bio mother. She says she has one mother and one father, and they did a fantastic job.
Dangerosa brings up something I have seen before. Two seperate couples I know struggled for years to concieve (an odious process, to be sure, but they were grimly determined…)
In both instances, after several years, they opted for adoption, and concieved a “bio” (I like that!) some months after.
I’m wondering how common that is, if its not too much of a hijack.
Here’s a question from the peanut gallery. Regarding the issue of bonding between parents and children-- how does that differ for adopted kids and for biological kids? That is, when you give birth, do you feel a connection/parental love right away? And when you adopt, do you feel that connection upon meeting the child, or does it take time? Or does it just depend on both cases? Just wondering, because it always seems like parents just sort of “click” with their kids when they’re biological. I guess because they’ve been there, in utero, for the past 9 months. But with an adopted child, does it take longer for the child to become yours? How long does it take before you feel that parental instinct? Again, I don’t mean to offend anyone, I just think it’s an interesting point.
Zoggie, I can only speak to this secondhand, but I think the anticipation and worry and hoping and waiting sets adoptive parents up for a huge emotional climax when they get their child, one that gives it the same emotional complexity and intensity as having a baby via labor and delivery. My friends went to China to adopt their daughter, and they told me they started crying the minute their adopted daughter was put in their arms, and they were helplessly in love within 10 seconds. The feelings they described sounded very much like what I felt when I saw my newborn son for the first time in the delivery room.
They just went back to get another daughter and I can’t wait to hear about it.
elucidator - According to my infertility doctor, who was also my OB, about as common as people who struggled with infertility for years, decide to remain childless, and have a sudden pregnancy. Stats very, but the generally accepted figure is between 5-8%. I’m on a couple of listserves with several hundred members, and certainly less than 5% of them have bio kids after adopting. But its something that you remember when you hear about it, it sticks in your head. We are close friends with other “mixed sets” - in both cases they had their first and adopted their second when pregnancy wasn’t an option. BTW, please don’t tell people who are adopting “oh, now you’ll get pregnant for sure.” or “I know so many people who adopted and then got pregnant.” An important part of adopting is moving past the need to be pregnant.
Zoggie - I’m not a big fan of the bonding thing. The whole “breastfeeding is great for bonding” drives me insane. I “bonded” with my son four months before we met him when we received his picture and what information we have in an envelope - this is called a referral. Much like a pregnant woman bonds with an ultrasound picture. And sealed that bond when we he gave us his first smile. On the other hand, my pregnancy was less than pleasant, I had post-natal depression, and breastfeeding was problematic - so “bonding” with my daughter was certainly not some magic instantaneous process. I will admit that realizing I (and my husband) “made” my daughter from scratch inspires a certain awe that I don’t feel about my son. But the surprises he brings to the family (he’s a Type A, who’d have thought!) inspire a certain awe I don’t get from my daughter (who’s every talent and feature is traced to some relative or another). I would say that the answer is “it depends” Most adoptive parents feel an immediate bond, just like most bio parents. But some adoptive parents take a while to warm to their children (and some children take a while to warm to their parents). And some bio parents certainly don’t feel an instant bond to their kids either. And, in some cases, with both bio and adoptive kids, there are attachment disorders.
This thread focused on adopting babies, but as a parent of two older adoptees (5 and 3–now 15 and 13, the monsters), this statement is very true. Attachment disorder is a very real problem in many adoptions (even babies) and gets more noticable the older the kids are.
Still, attachment issues and attachment disorders are not the end of loving bonds. Even kids with attachment issues have the need to bond and the love can exist despite the psychological barriers.
I’m one who always wanted a “birth” kid, but we had always intended to adopt, as well. The kids are not substitutes for birth kids, nor do I love them less for being adopted. I do suspect that there are different feelings for adopted and birth kids, but I have “different” feelings for each of my kids, now, based on how I interact with them. They are persons, and, as with all persons, we interact and respond to each differently.
Dangerosa wouldn’t dream of offering parental advice. Managed to raise just the one. Didnt screw it up but not about to press my luck, nor offer nonexistent expertise. Interesting stats on that, though.
I can’t speak to how when the bond appears for biological parents (other than to observe that it may be one of the reasons people who should give their child for adoption don’t). I do know that in our case, the bond was pretty strong already before we’d even seen our son in person. We’d only seen one picture of him and were in Manila getting ready to fly to Davao to meet him when the US agency called to tell us that “he fell at the orphanage, he can’t walk, he’s in the hospital and they don’t know what’s wrong with him yet”.
They offered us a choice of going home or waiting in Manila to see what happened.
We stayed.
When he came home with us, he wasn’t completely recovered yet. He’s now been with us for nearly three years and he’s doing great.
Bonding is a variable entity both ways. Some people bond immediately; some take a while. Bio or adopted. For many of us adoptive parents the process starts when we get a picture to focus on, just like for some bios it starts with the ultrasound or Mom’s feeling movement.
I wonder about “reactive attachment disorder” - I am sure that it exists, but I also know that my bio kids fit the description better than my adopted child does! If someone didn’t know that a child was adopted would they look at the behaviors as closely? Would it get labelled anyway? And if so would it still be called “attachment disorder” or shoehorned into “ADD” or “anxiety disorder” or “conduct disorder” or “oppositional defiant disorder” (you get my drift)? How much is greater incidence over the baseline of similar behaviors/temperments in so-called “normal” bio kids?
