So tired

of this attitude......

" If someone chooses to parent when they aren't emotionally or financially stable can create an unstable enviroment for the child, the length of which is undetermined and often the Birthmom gives up on their persuit of their own dreams. To chose adoption I would imagine there is always a since of loss even with the best open adoption situation. So both optons have lifelong downsides."


I copied this from a comment on a facebook page. Oh yes, I guess according to this person all circumstances should be perfect before having a baby. All the planets should be perfectly aligned before giving birth and keeping your baby. If they're not then you should consider giving your baby to someone who has it much more together than you do. 


I can say that after living without my daughter for literally decades that no career is worth losing your child. No dream is bigger than the dream of being with your baby. No financial reward is worth the loss that mothers face when losing a child to adoption - open or otherwise. NOTHING can replace a child. I don't understand what's so hard to understand about that. The only reason anyone would have that attitude is if they want someone's child for themselves.


I lost my daughter in 1980 and it was only a year later that I married. Just a year after that my son was born. At the time he was born my husband and I were living in a small rundown duplex. We didn't have 2 nickels to our name but we had each other and our son. Were we financially stable at that time and really ready to have children? No. Was I emotionally ready to have a child after what I had been through just a couple of years earlier? No. Did I learn and manage? Yes. I did what I had to do. I became a mother and a damn good one too from what my children tell me. Three years after having my son I had a little girl. Both of them grew up to be happy, healthy, successful adults. There was no reason in this world that I couldn't have done the same with my first child. My daughter could have also been raised by me. We could have been together all those years. All of my children could have been raised together, known each other, played together. 


If financial stability is such a huge factor in whether or not a woman should keep and raise her child then what of all the people suffering financial setbacks right now in this economy? Does that mean all the people facing foreclosure on their homes should consider giving their children to others to raise?


There are no guarantees in life. Giving a baby to someone who has more money does NOT guarantee that the child will grow up happy. Giving a baby to a married couple does NOT guarantee that the couple will remain married. Giving a baby to a couple that seems emotionally stable (according to their advertising brochure aka bmother letter) does NOT guarantee that the child won't be abused.


Once I became a mother, a mother who was allowed to keep her baby, the dream I pursued was the dream that my children would grow up living happy, healthy lives. Yes, I also worked at becoming an artist. It was always a dream of mine to paint. I pursued that dream AND raised my children. The biggest dream I had though was the dream of seeing all 3 of my children in one room. It took 22 years to fulfill that dream.


"To chose adoption I would imagine there is always a since of loss even with the best open adoption situation. So both optons have lifelong downsides."      


This line in particular tells me that this person really doesn't have a clue. I can't think of a single downside to raising my other 2 children. Yes, we had some financial difficulties. So what! So do millions of other people. We got by and we were together, we were there loving each other. What was the downside of adoption? It was more than a "sense of loss" I can tell you. It was decades of unresolved grieving that ripped me to the core of my being.


I can show you many, many, many mothers who regret "choosing" adoption but so far I haven't come across any that regret keeping their children.