Fertile people adopting?

[LuvinLucifer]

Where does it they do have special needs?

It doesn't address that! That's the point. You've been saying there are thousands of healthy infants waiting to be adopted in foster care. It's illogical that there would be thousands of healthy infants waiting in foster care because there are far more people waiting to adopt. Safe Haven babies are immediately adopted because everyone wants healthy infants. The only thing that would be keeping these babies from being adopted is special needs.

I suggest you actually read some real life accounts on the realities of adopting through foster care. You'll see it's not as easy choosing from a bunch of infants:

Years ago, my colleague adopted a baby from foster care, so I knew it was possible. I called our local foster care office, but I could not get even basic questions answered. I was transferred to several agencies and each person ratcheted up the age of the youngest child I could hope to be matched with. I was first told I might get a seven-year-old; then I was told, no, an eight-year-old was probably the youngest. The last woman I spoke with said no way would I get a child that young. Ten years old is about the youngest we see, she said. She explained that the goal was to reunite kids in foster care with their mothers or other relatives, and children were only available for adoption after every attempt at reunification failed.

Via http://www.divinecaroline.com/34/37590-adopting-foster-care-harder#ixzz2KwbkcbU0

 

[JessB320]

No where does it state that these children don't have special needs. On every adoption site virtually all the kids under the age of one have severe special needs. Again, there literally thousands of people waiting to adopt healthy infants.

First you post that there are NO babies available in foster care, then you say there are only 8 children under 2 years available, after being shown you are incorrect you are now saying they must all be special needs. You keep jumping from one wrong assumption to another. It seems like instead of wanted to really know the facts you want to cling to your own misconceptions about children in the fostercare system.

 

[JessB320]

It doesn't address that! That's the point. You've been saying there are thousands of healthy infants waiting to be adopted in foster care. It's illogical that there would be thousands of healthy infants waiting in foster care because there are far more people waiting to adopt. Safe Haven babies are immediately adopted because everyone wants healthy infants. The only thing that would be keeping these babies from being adopted is special needs.

I suggest you actually read some real life accounts on the realities of adopting through foster care. You'll see it's not as easy choosing from a bunch of infants:

Um, actually I have personal contact and experience with dozens of foster family's and their foster children. I currently provide respite care for several homes, there is a total of about 20-25 infants (children under 12 months) in these homes. Only 3 of those children are Special needs. I don't feel the need to read "real life " accounts when I experience it in real life.

 

[LuvinLucifer]

First you post that there are NO babies available in foster care, then you say there are only 8 children under 2 years available, after being shown you are incorrect you are now saying they must all be special needs. You keep jumping from one wrong assumption to another. It seems like instead of wanted to really know the facts you want to cling to your own misconceptions about children in the fostercare system.

I have stated all along that there are no HEALTHY INFANTS waiting for adoption. I even went to AdoptUSKids where there were only children under 2 with special needs. You've yet to post any sources to support that there are 3,000 infants without special needs available. Considering it makes no sense that there would(since there are far more people than that waiting to adopt such infants) you really don't have anything to stand on. Where are all these children? They seem to be pretty hidden considering even people such as Sandra Bullock and Nia Vardalos(who were desperate to adopt from anywhere) couldn't find them.

 

[LuvinLucifer]

Um, actually I have personal contact and experience with dozens of foster family's and their foster children. I currently provide respite care for several homes, there is a total of about 20-25 infants (children under 12 months) in these homes. Only 3 of those children are Special needs. I don't feel the need to read "real life " accounts when I experience it in real life.

Your personal anecdote contradicts just about every foster care site, adoption agency, and personal adoption story in the media. If there are all these healthy infants waiting why can't you find a single source to contradict all of mine? There are thousands of profiles online for people who want adopt a healthy baby. Why isn't there any evidence of all these waiting infants when there are plenty for older children and babies with special needs?

 

[JessB320]

I have stated all along that there are no HEALTHY INFANTS waiting for adoption. I even went to AdoptUSKids where there were only children under 2 with special needs. You've yet to post any sources to support that there are 3,000 infants without special needs available. Considering it makes no sense that there would(since there are far more people than that waiting to adopt such infants) you really don't have anything to stand on. Where are all these children? They seem to be pretty hidden considering even people such as Sandra Bullock and Nia Vardalos(who were desperate to adopt from anywhere) couldn't find them.

Well 20 of them I see personally on at least a monthly basis.

You need to reread your previous posts then.

There are healthy infants, believe whatever you want but keeping your head in the sand doesn't help these kids get homes. Education and spreading awareness is what gets these kids homes.

If people believe the old myths and don't think to contact social services, then they call private adoption agencies instead. A private agency doesn't gain anything and loses business if they point someone to the foster care system.

Are you really saying that all of 13,000 children under 2 available all are special needs? Where are your sources? Not some vague article, actual statical information from a state or government agency.

 

[LuvinLucifer]

Are you really saying that all of 13,000 children under 2 available all are special needs? Where are your sources? Not some vague article, actual statical information from a state or government agency.

My sources are every adoption and foster care site in the country! Any that display available children only have children with special needs for infants. Every site says to adopt a healthy infant one must foster to adopt in the hope that parental rights are revoked. If you go to any adoption agency there are already profiles of people willing and ready to adopt an infant ASAP. If you are going to defy logic and state that there are really all these healthy infants show me where they are. Seriously, I really would like to know because several people I know have been told by social workers that if they want an infant they must foster first with hopes the parental rights will be terminated or adopt one with special needs.

 

[JessB320]

Your personal anecdote contradicts just about every foster care site, adoption agency, and personal adoption story in the media. If there are all these healthy infants waiting why can't you find a single source to contradict all of mine? There are thousands of profiles online for people who want adopt a healthy baby. Why isn't there any evidence of all these waiting infants when there are plenty for older children and babies with special needs?

You have not shown a single source that shows numbers of an kind. You have not provided one single source that uses any kind of statical evidence to back up your theories. A sob story from a celebrity and a couple yahoo articles do not equal factual information.

 

[LuvinLucifer]

This is from one of your sources:

Be aware that if you say you are only interested in adoption, you will likely be told there are only older children with special needs available for adoption. Tell them you are aware of that but you would like to foster younger children and would be open to adoption should the children become available. We were approved for up to 3 children ages 0 to 10. We told them we were willing to consider sibling groups also.

http://voices.yahoo.com/ten-tips-adopting-infant-foster-care-8626281.html?cat=25

The rest of the article talks about all the difficult steps in getting the chance at adopting an infant. They include fostering older children and being prepared for those with special needs. Hardly the adopting from one of many healthy infants without foster first you describe.

 

[JessB320]

My sources are every adoption and foster care site in the country! Any that display available children only have children with special needs for infants. Every site says to adopt a healthy infant one must foster to adopt in the hope that parental rights are revoked. If you go to any adoption agency there are already profiles of people willing and ready to adopt an infant ASAP. If you are going to defy logic and state that there are really all these healthy infants show me where they are. Seriously, I really would like to know because several people I know have been told by social workers that if they want an infant they must foster first with hopes the parental rights will be terminated or adopt one with special needs.

What foster care sites? Foster care.com and adoptive family magazine are private for profit companies, not government run foster care systems.

Again shown me the numbers that support what you say, you have no numbers from any source much less a reliable one that backs up what you say

 

[JessB320]

This is from one of your sources:

http://voices.yahoo.com/ten-tips-adopting-infant-foster-care-8626281.html?cat=25

The rest of the article talks about all the difficult steps in getting the chance at adopting an infant. They include fostering older children and being prepared for those with special needs. Hardly the adopting from one of many healthy infants without foster first you describe.

That article starts

Many people believe there are no infants available for adoption in the United States, or that you have to be willing to spend up to $40,000 to adopt one, but this is not true.


I actually used that article to say that yahoo was not a reliable source for anything as it contradicts itself, one day with an article saying one thing,and the next day with an article that says the opposite.

 

[LuvinLucifer]

What foster care sites? Foster care.com and adoptive family magazine are private for profit companies, not government run foster care systems.

Again shown me the numbers that support what you say, you have no numbers from any source much less a reliable one that backs up what you say

You are one stating there are all these healthy infants available. If they are exist why can't you support that assertion? They aren't here:

http://www.adoptuskids.org/

http://www.adoptawaitingchild.com/waiting_children.html

There are no healthy infants. What you say makes no sense, and you are the one who has posted nothing to support your ridiculous assertion that there are these 3,000 healthy babies waiting to be adopted when there are thousands waiting to adopt such infants already. Where are they?

 

[LuvinLucifer]

That article starts

Many people believe there are no infants available for adoption in the United States, or that you have to be willing to spend up to $40,000 to adopt one, but this is not true.


.

That doesn't mean there are thousands of healthy infants available for adoption! The article clearly states that you have to foster first and be open to children with special needs. If there were thousands of healthy infants just waiting there wouldn't be thousands of people waiting to be chosen by a birth mother.

 

[JessB320]

That doesn't mean there are thousands of healthy infants available for adoption! The article clearly states that you have to foster first and be open to children with special needs. If there were thousands of healthy infants just waiting there wouldn't be thousands of people waiting to be chosen by a birth mother.

That wasn't my point at all!!! My point was yahoo is a crappy resource for anything!

I have over and over asked to see the numbers to support your views. You can't provide any. That leaves simply your opinion based on myth and misconception.

 

[JessB320]

You are one stating there are all these healthy infants available. If they are exist why can't you support that assertion? They aren't here:

http://www.adoptuskids.org/

http://www.adoptawaitingchild.com/waiting_children.html

There are no healthy infants. What you say makes no sense, and you are the one who has posted nothing to support your ridiculous assertion that there are these 3,000 healthy babies waiting to be adopted when there are thousands waiting to adopt such infants already. Where are they?

I did show you numbers, from more than one reliable government agency and reports.


Children from these foster care systems are not listed on adoptkids.org

Or adoptawaitingchild.com as those are not foster care systems, they are privately run websites.


If you read through this thread there are multiple people who adopted infants from foster care.

You have no numbers, you have nothing to support your views.

 

[LuvinLucifer]

That wasn't my point at all!!! My point was yahoo is a crappy resource for anything!

I have over and over asked to see the numbers to support your views. You can't provide any. That leaves simply your opinion based on myth and misconception.

I can not provide numbers for something that doesn't exist! There are no 3,000 healthy infants anywhere to be found. You can't provide it! No one can. You can only bash reputible resources that state the facts on infant adoption. Would you like me to provide profiles of couples waiting to adopt who would love to have access to you elusive healthy infants waiting for homes?

 

[LuvinLucifer]

I did show you numbers, from more than one reliable government agency and reports.


Children from these foster care systems are not listed on adoptkids.org

Or adoptawaitingchild.com as those are not foster care systems, they are privately run websites.

You showed me that there a 3,000 children under one in foster care for adoption. That hardly means there are 3,000 healthy babies available without foster to adopt!

Where exactly are these elusive healthy infants that so many people would gladly adopt if you would only shine a light this?

 

[JessB320]

I can not provide numbers for something that doesn't exist! There are no 3,000 healthy infants anywhere to be found. You can't provide it! No one can. You can only bash reputible resources that state the facts on infant adoption. Would you like me to provide profiles of couples waiting to adopt who would love to have access to you elusive healthy infants waiting for homes?

Exactly, you can not provide numbers showing how all the infants in foster care are special needs , so by your own admission that must not exist!

 

[LuvinLucifer]

Here are profiles of people who just want a healthy baby who are obviously in the dark about your secret infants waiting for homes:

http://www.parentprofiles.com/

 

[LuvinLucifer]

Exactly, you can not provide numbers showing how all the infants in foster care are special needs , so by your own admission that must not exist!

I said healthy infants waiting to be adopted don't exist! Since there is a demand for healthy infants it makes no sense that there would be healthy infants waiting to be adopted unless there were ridiculous hoops to jump.