• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Financial Support for Unwanted Children

Who should provide financial support for unwanted children?

  • Total voters
    21
Cephus said:
You missed the obvious answer: the parents. The time to decide you don't want the child is before the child is born. Once the child is born, it is the financial responsibility of the parents, either until there is a legal adoption, or until the child turns 18. It isn't the job of any of the groups listed to take care of children that the parents decide they don't want.
Click to expand...

How are you going to make ****ty parents step up and support the kids they don't have anything to do with?
 
Risky Thicket said:
I was in a hurry when I posted it. Mea culpa.
Click to expand...

yeah, and it's my bad for not reading the thread.

Doncha kinda think that the term "unwanted" children for those being raised by aunts or grandparents, or the like is a bit harsh?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
How are you going to make ****ty parents step up and support the kids they don't have anything to do with?
Click to expand...

The same way we force deadbeat dads to pay child support? We go after their ass and garnish their wages for 18 years whether they like it or not.
 
Phys251 said:
How about making sure all women and girls have access to affordable birth control so this isn't a big problem in the first place? Or must our society punish sluts with unwanted children?
Click to expand...

That's great. We'll Hoover out those little unwanted inconveniences and the whole problem will be solved. Well, except for the ones who become unwanted when their parent discovers that kids are expensive and need regular care that really eats into the party budget. Of course if we don't care about the kids before they're born then why should we care about them after? Maybe we should just fix it so we can get rid of kids up until they're 11 or so.:censored

The LAST thing we need to do is make it easier to "get rid of" an unwanted child. Whether that baby is wanted or not it's YOUR responsibility to make sure he or she is cared for.

I look at this poll and all I can see are 5 options that aren't the parents. That's damned disturbing. Number one on that list should be "Mother and Father".

Look, I know that not everybody is going to be a good parent and some aren't even going to be capable parents. To that end there DOES need to be some kind of fallback position and some combination of all the available options is the way to do that but along with that there also needs to be enforced parental responsibility.
 
cpwill said:
2. Even Milton Friedman said that children, the aged, and the disabled should be taken care of by society. I don't know why your poll does not allow multiple options, however, so I am left unable to vote.
Click to expand...

Why do people keep mentioning Milton Friedman as if he was for small government? Where in the hell is the proof? Is it found in his witholding system? His monetary policy? His support for welfare? Where in the hell is the proof?
 
WCH said:
There are a lot of people looking to adopt. It's very tough here in the States so people look over seas.
Click to expand...

Let me clear something up for everyone because we have adopted twice:

1. Regardless of whether you adopt a child domestically or do a foreign adoption, you still go through the same domestic adoption approval process in regards to the courts, home studies, and so on.

2. There are not actually many people looking to adopt. A lot of people talk about adopting, but not nearly as many take the steps to do so.

3. More people adopt domestically than do foreign adoption. Unless you want to adopt a newborn and thus are willing to pay all of the medical care for the mother and support her throughout her pregnancy, it is cheaper to adopt domestically than a foreign adoption.

So, why do some people choose foreign adoption?

1. They want an older child but cannot adopt several children at once. This was our case. We adopted special needs twice, but we wanted girls that would be closer in age to our biological son so we adopted a 4 year old and a 9 year old (the adoptions were 2 years apart). We looked into domestic adoption extensively, but the problem with finding older kids to adopt is that unfortunately when people are such terrible parents that they get their kids taken away, they typically have several kids and you have to be willing to adopt several kids at once in order to keep the siblings together.

2. They want an infant but are scared of taking the risk of adopting an infant domestically and thus being potentially tens of thousands of dollars into the process only for the maternal mother to decide she wants to keep her child.

Personally I wish many more families would adopt but relatively few choose to do so. I am always amazed when I see couples spend tens of thousands of dollars on fertility treatments when they could just adopt. I think a lot of times people for whatever reason think it will be different to have an adopted child rather than a biological one and think they will be missing out on something by not having a biological child. We have a biological son and 2 adopted daughters. They are all 3 our kids and we don't see them any differently. As incredible of an experience of childbirth is for a mother and a father, I can honestly say this and my wife will tell you the same thing, it has nothing on going through the long adoption process and then meeting your new kid for the first time. There is simply nothing in a person's life that compares to it.
 
Henrin said:
Why do people keep mentioning Milton Friedman as if he was for small government? Where in the hell is the proof? Is it found in his witholding system? His monetary policy? His support for welfare? Where in the hell is the proof?
Click to expand...

There is no proof, it's an appeal to authority.
 
Cephus said:
There is no proof, it's an appeal to authority.
Click to expand...

He's not an authority on anything when it comes to the topic. He was an economist that helped put in place the greatest tools for government growth the world has ever known.
 
Cephus said:
There is no proof, it's an appeal to authority.
Click to expand...

Actually it was simply to dispel a common misconception. There is a strong tendency on the Left to assume that because Conservatives oppose their means, they must oppose their ends (this is why they tend to assume that Conservatives are racist, or narrow-minded, or hate immigrants, or are involved in a war on women, etc). I use Friedman simply to push back on the implicit idea that conservatives are against taking care of those who cannot take care of themselves.
 
Henrin said:
He's not an authority on anything when it comes to the topic. He was an economist that helped put in place the greatest tools for government growth the world has ever known.
Click to expand...

....as a measure to help get us funded through WWII. Which he later said he wanted to repeal because we were in peacetime.
 
cpwill said:
Actually it was simply to dispel a common misconception. There is a strong tendency on the Left to assume that because Conservatives oppose their means, they must oppose their ends (this is why they tend to assume that Conservatives are racist, or narrow-minded, or hate immigrants, or are involved in a war on women, etc). I use Friedman simply to push back on the implicit idea that conservatives are against taking care of those who cannot take care of themselves.
Click to expand...

And most conservatives are fine taking care of those who cannot take care of themselves, but not at the cost of ignoring the real responsible parties. I'm cool with taking care of orphans for whom no one else will take the responsibility. When you have a perfectly good mother and father who simply are too stupid or lazy to do their parental duties though, screw that. It's their job, they should be required to do it, like it or not.
 
Phys251 said:
How about making sure all women and girls have access to affordable birth control so this isn't a big problem in the first place? Or must our society punish sluts with unwanted children?
Click to expand...

You mean free birth control paid for by those who have health insurance.

Society punishes sluts with unwanted children? So its society's fault? :lamo
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1064393052 said:
You mean free birth control paid for by those who have health insurance.

Society punishes sluts with unwanted children? So its society's fault? :lamo
Click to expand...

Why did you respond to that? Not providing someone birth control or even access to it is not the same thing as punishing them. His point was just too stupid to bother with.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1064393052 said:
Society punishes sluts with unwanted children? So its society's fault? :lamo
Click to expand...

 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Let me clear something up for everyone because we have adopted twice:

1. Regardless of whether you adopt a child domestically or do a foreign adoption, you still go through the same domestic adoption approval process in regards to the courts, home studies, and so on.

2. There are not actually many people looking to adopt. A lot of people talk about adopting, but not nearly as many take the steps to do so.

3. More people adopt domestically than do foreign adoption. Unless you want to adopt a newborn and thus are willing to pay all of the medical care for the mother and support her throughout her pregnancy, it is cheaper to adopt domestically than a foreign adoption.

So, why do some people choose foreign adoption?

1. They want an older child but cannot adopt several children at once. This was our case. We adopted special needs twice, but we wanted girls that would be closer in age to our biological son so we adopted a 4 year old and a 9 year old (the adoptions were 2 years apart). We looked into domestic adoption extensively, but the problem with finding older kids to adopt is that unfortunately when people are such terrible parents that they get their kids taken away, they typically have several kids and you have to be willing to adopt several kids at once in order to keep the siblings together.

2. They want an infant but are scared of taking the risk of adopting an infant domestically and thus being potentially tens of thousands of dollars into the process only for the maternal mother to decide she wants to keep her child.

Personally I wish many more families would adopt but relatively few choose to do so. I am always amazed when I see couples spend tens of thousands of dollars on fertility treatments when they could just adopt. I think a lot of times people for whatever reason think it will be different to have an adopted child rather than a biological one and think they will be missing out on something by not having a biological child. We have a biological son and 2 adopted daughters. They are all 3 our kids and we don't see them any differently. As incredible of an experience of childbirth is for a mother and a father, I can honestly say this and my wife will tell you the same thing, it has nothing on going through the long adoption process and then meeting your new kid for the first time. There is simply nothing in a person's life that compares to it.
Click to expand...

You both are heroes in the truest sense.
 
cpwill said:
Strictly anecdotally, there are some public social workers who.... shall we say.... do not wish to dilute the children's "identity" by placing them with parents of an unfortunately lily hue.
Click to expand...

Gotta be careful, huh? ;)
 
WCH said:
There are a lot of people looking to adopt. It's very tough here in the States so people look over seas.
Click to expand...

Part of the problem is that it is basically impossible to get a fully closed adoption in the US. A friend of mine was seriously considering adopting domestically, until she learned that. She has seen the extreme damage this can do, including in my own family, and she is unwilling to take that risk. I don't blame her.

A combination of considering adoptive children to be "lesser" and prohibitive laws that exclude probably thousands of perfectly fit adoptive parents have the situation in the US at basically a stand-still.
 
WCH said:
There are a lot of people looking to adopt. It's very tough here in the States so people look over seas.
Click to expand...

...
There are over 130,000 children ( many of them who are special needs) in the US waiting to be adopted.


From: Adopting smart: How it works and how much it costs
Adopting a Waiting Child

....

Estimates put the number of children in foster care who are eligible for adoption at approximately 131,000.
States and agencies caring for these "waiting children" consider all of them adoptable
...

What it costs: Because the aim of special-needs adoption is to find permanent families for waiting children,
the costs are minimal and incentives are plentiful. Agencies will lower or waive their usual fees,
and the government will reimburse you for your adoption expenses, including travel and legal bills.

Plan on initial out-of-pocket expenses of $1,500 to $3,500, but expect to recoup your costs through a federal reimbursement plan or the adoption tax credit.

In fact, for adoptions of many children from foster care, families will receive a $10,000 tax credit, regardless of their actual adoption expenses.

The federal government mandates that states provide nontaxable adoption subsidies for special-needs children who meet federal and state guidelines. These monthly payments, typically until the child is 18, ensure that a prospective parent is not deterred from adoption because of the expenses of caring for a child with special needs and that the child receives required services.
Coverage includes medical assistance, psychological counseling, daycare and tutoring, for example.
The average monetary subsidy is $250 to $300 monthly, says Joe Kroll of the North American Council on Adoptable Children, an advocacy and parent support organization in St. Paul, Minnesota, but it can reach $1,500 in some rare cases.
Click to expand...

http://www.babycenter.com/0_choosing-adoption-cost-benefits-and-risk-of-the-main-options_1373536.bc
 
joG said:
Yes. so why, I wonder, do they not get the unwanted abandoned children?
Click to expand...

So they'll remain beholden to the government as just another permenant under-class?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Let me clear something up for everyone because we have adopted twice:

1. Regardless of whether you adopt a child domestically or do a foreign adoption, you still go through the same domestic adoption approval process in regards to the courts, home studies, and so on.

2. There are not actually many people looking to adopt. A lot of people talk about adopting, but not nearly as many take the steps to do so.

3. More people adopt domestically than do foreign adoption. Unless you want to adopt a newborn and thus are willing to pay all of the medical care for the mother and support her throughout her pregnancy, it is cheaper to adopt domestically than a foreign adoption.

So, why do some people choose foreign adoption?

1. They want an older child but cannot adopt several children at once. This was our case. We adopted special needs twice, but we wanted girls that would be closer in age to our biological son so we adopted a 4 year old and a 9 year old (the adoptions were 2 years apart). We looked into domestic adoption extensively, but the problem with finding older kids to adopt is that unfortunately when people are such terrible parents that they get their kids taken away, they typically have several kids and you have to be willing to adopt several kids at once in order to keep the siblings together.

2. They want an infant but are scared of taking the risk of adopting an infant domestically and thus being potentially tens of thousands of dollars into the process only for the maternal mother to decide she wants to keep her child.

Personally I wish many more families would adopt but relatively few choose to do so. I am always amazed when I see couples spend tens of thousands of dollars on fertility treatments when they could just adopt. I think a lot of times people for whatever reason think it will be different to have an adopted child rather than a biological one and think they will be missing out on something by not having a biological child. We have a biological son and 2 adopted daughters. They are all 3 our kids and we don't see them any differently. As incredible of an experience of childbirth is for a mother and a father, I can honestly say this and my wife will tell you the same thing, it has nothing on going through the long adoption process and then meeting your new kid for the first time. There is simply nothing in a person's life that compares to it.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the kid feels equally wonderful.
 
WCH said:
There are a lot of people looking to adopt. It's very tough here in the States so people look over seas.
Click to expand...
The reason I bet is because of all that red tape and bureaucracy over here.
 
WCH said:
So they'll remain beholden to the government as just another permenant under-class?
Click to expand...

Why that? There are many middle class, well educated people that want to adopt kids.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom