Adoption: Why say Mom and Dad?

[Sarahfeena]

@ZPG_Zealot

If I think you’ve cheated husband, I’m going to elevalute how likely your statements are truthful or how good you are at keeping contracts, etc., with that knowledge in mind.

And I would lay awake at night worrying about that. :rolleyes:

[begbert2]

@ZPG_Zealot

Addressed as follows:

aunts and uncle by marriage = referred to as blood relations’s spouse (i.e., my uncle’s wife, my aunt’s husband).

in-laws = no the connections to one’s in-laws are rarely as strong as to one’s blood relatives. It is expected that your blood relations will be there for you unless you do something extremely heinous (what extremely heinous is varies from family to family). At lot less is expected of in-laws who really shouldn’t be expected to give a damn far you if you do something despicable to their relative (your spouse).

adoption = quite frankly I don’t acknowledge such legal ties to be family ties.

An adoption is exactly, precisely, and identically as much a legal and family tie as a marriage is. If you don’t accept adoptions, you should refuse to accept marriages to exactly the same degree, and if you accept marriages to any degree, then you should extent adoptions the same courtesy. Assuming you prefer not to be logically incoherent, anyway.

ETA: and connections to married partners are consistently as strong or stronger than those to blood relatives, in America and many first world countries. If they weren’t, nobody would ever leave home.

[DianaG]

@ZPG_Zealot

adoption = quite frankly I don’t acknowledge such legal ties to be family ties.

And other people’s family ties require your acknowledgment because… ?

[Sarahfeena]

@begbert2

An adoption is exactly, precisely, and identically as much a legal and family tie as a marriage is. If you don’t accept adoptions, you should refuse to accept marriages to exactly the same degree, and if you accept marriages to any degree, then you should extent adoptions the same courtesy. Assuming you prefer not to be logically incoherent, anyway.

And emotionally, adoption is probably even a stronger tie. As the OP pointed out, people get divorced, but adopted children don’t seem to get disowned too often.

[Mangetout]

@Sarahfeena

And emotionally, adoption is probably even a stronger tie. As the OP pointed out, people get divorced, but adopted children don’t seem to get disowned too often.

Plus adoption is most often a consciously planned and prepared action. Natural pregnancy can happen by accident.

People don’t generally adopt unless they want it to happen, but lots of people get pregnant without wanting to.

[begbert2]

@Mangetout

Plus adoption is most often a consciously planned and prepared action. Natural pregnancy can happen by accident.

People don’t generally adopt unless they want it to happen, but lots of people get pregnant without wanting to.

“Generally”? :dubious:
“Man, what a hangover! What did I do last night - wait, where’d this kid with the sheaf full of adoption papers pinned to his back come from??”

[Freudian_Slit]

@Sarahfeena

And emotionally, adoption is probably even a stronger tie. As the OP pointed out, people get divorced, but adopted children don’t seem to get disowned too often.

Uh, hello? haven’t you read the OP? ONE fortune telling PSYCHO client is about to disown her child! Does that mean nothing?! NOTHING?!

[elbows]

Thing is, if you’re a vegetarian it’s up to you to ascertain whether there is any meat in the food at any event you attend. Same if you’re a Jew/Muslim, it’s on you to ask, “Is there pork in this?”

It’s not the for the host to label it “contains pork, made by the unclean hands of an adulteress, adoptee, etc.”

So, if you or your ilk, feel it’s necessary to know bloodlines and cleanliness of people who may be divorced and remarried, of mixed race, illegitimate, epileptic, then it’s on you to make whatever inquiries are required to satisfy your judgmental selves.

Have at it. Who’s standing in your way? (I would love to be a fly on that wall !)

But if you want this society to label everyone clearly so y’all can stigmatize, judge and disdain, well I’m thinking you’re out of luck there, Gypsy (not so) Wise Woman.

[ZPG_Zealot]

@ZPG_Zealot

I think if you going to socially interact with people you should expect them to want to know some basic details. Knowing that a child is adopted would explain for example a racial difference between the parents and child that otherwise could be embarassing (as in suggests adultery on the part of one of the spouses). As for the pool question, since everyone seems to make a big deal of that issue, if you are going to a private pool owned by a person or group, yes they are entitled to ask you whatever questions they want before letting you into the water. Public pools should not have exclusions, but no one is required to use a public pool either.

And another thing knowing that a child is adopted tells me about their family and the values and tradiations of their value. If nothing else, it’s a signal there are different from mine, and I can more understand behavior that I consider bizarre or rude may simply be a relection of that difference.

[ZPG_Zealot]

@Sarahfeena

And I would lay awake at night worrying about that. :rolleyes:

Well, if you were hoping to sell me something or enter into a business deal you might.

[DianaG]

I think you can safely assume that most peoples’ values are different than yours.

[Mangetout]

@begbert2

“Generally”? :dubious:

I phrased it that way on purpose - because cherry-picking of nasty rare exceptions is kind of a theme in this thread.

I’m sure there are people who adopt out of some sort of obligation (for example if their brother and sister-in-law both die in an accident, leaving young children), and It’s also possible, I suppose, that there are a few nutcases out there who somehow end up managing to adopt for all kinds of weird and inappropriate motives.

Point is - generally*, pregnancy is easy to make happen, adoption is difficult, requiring by default the kind of commitment and deliberation that we might hope to be common, but is not universally required to initiate pregnancy

*(generally - that word again - meaning what it says and acknowledging exceptions. My apologies if that seemed glib to anyone who hasn’t found pregnancy easy to make happen)

[ZPG_Zealot]

@Duckster

So in a nutshell, you do not believe in the entire concept of adoption. Is that correct?

If people want to practice it that’s their business, but I don’t wish to be involved in it.

[ZPG_Zealot]

@Sarahfeena

And emotionally, adoption is probably even a stronger tie. As the OP pointed out, people get divorced, but adopted children don’t seem to get disowned too often.

People get divorced is the reason ties to blood relatives are stronger.

[DianaG]

@ZPGZealot

If people want to practice it that’s their business, but I don’t wish to be involved in it.

If you haven’t adopted anyone, you’re not. See how easy that was?

[Bryan_Ekers]

@ZPG_Zealot

That was a polite way of saying, look at the law. It’s far from arbitrary. Your sister-in-law is not the same as your sister. A woman can divorce and marry her ex-husband’s brother (and vice versa). While in some religious tradiations it might be unacceptable, it is completely legal under U.S. law. However, you cannot marry your brother or sister. Unless of course (sacrasm mode on), your brother or sister was adopted by someone in which case you magically become unrelated (sacrasm mode off)

Hey, that’s great. What does it have to do with calling people “mom” and “dad”, though?

[Mangetout]

@Mangetout

What does this ‘genetic bond’ actually consist of? Are you proposing some kind of mechanism that makes a measurable, real-world difference to the way one person is ‘connected’ to another?

If so, what is it, and how (in detail) does it work?

Or in other words, take 10 assorted people, two of which are close blood relatives, but don’t know they are related - place them all in a room together. Does the ‘genetic bond’ of the two relatives make any difference to the way that any people in the room interact and connect to/with each other?

I’d really like an answer to this earnest question, if you would be so kind, ZPG - because it sounds like maybe you are basing some of your arguments on some kind of entity that maintains and operates a family link or ‘blood tie’ independently of the actions and motives of the individuals involved.

[elbows]

So quit sidestepping the question.

Why would you leave the welcome backwardness of eastern Europe, where these views are indeed widespread, to come to the sunny shores of America, if it means that much to you, that you be able to ascertain who is ‘unclean’?

Please, do tell.

[Duckster]

@ZPG_Zealot

And another thing knowing that a child is adopted tells me about their family and the values and tradiations of their value. If nothing else, it’s a signal there are different from mine, and I can more understand behavior that I consider bizarre or rude may simply be a relection of that difference.

So adoption is bizarre or rude behavior? On whose part? And who is decider here to make that presumption of one person by another?

[The_Hamster_King]

@ZPG_Zealot

Well, if you were hoping to sell me something or enter into a business deal you might.

Some people believe that gypsies are shiftless and untrustworthy. If they knew they were dealing with a gypsy, that might make them feel uncomfortable, particularly if they discovered that the gypsy hadn’t been up front about his status and announced it right from the beginning. Out of respect for the feelings of people who are prejudiced against gypsies, I think it’s really important that gypsies always announce their ethnic heritage whenever they meet someone new:

“Hello, I’m Mrs. Phipps, your daughter’s 4th grade teacher.”

“What a pleasure to meet you. You do know we’re gypsies, don’t you?”

“Um … no … I didn’t know that.”

“I just wanted to be honest with you, in case your traditions require you to treat her differently. I didn’t want you to think I was lying to you about her status.”

“Um … thanks … I guess … .”