Joan Wheeler tells us how the Adoption Machine works!
On the public forum, Joan Wheeler, as 1adoptee, speaks out…again. Here she is answering two separate quotes by others. I indicate which are quotes and where Joan speaks and then my comments.
« Reply #107 on: December 28, 2011, 01:09:35 PM »
quote I have VERY strong opinions on young women keeping their out-of-wedlock babies and condemming them to a life of poverty that we all pay for. If a young woman can afford the costs and struggles of raising children alone – go for it! Otherwise, use your common sense and give the child a chance at a better life.
quote Why is it common sense to give your child to strangers? Adoption certainly does not guarantee a better life free of poverty. People get jobs and people lose jobs. People encounter hard times. People survive hard times. People fall in love. And people get divorced. People get sick. People die. Even adoptive parents. That child might be forever separated from his or her mother and end up being raised by a poor, single adoptive mother following a divorce or spousal death. Perhaps true common sense would ecompass extending kindness, support and help to a struggling young mother instead of condemning her just for being poor.
Joan…as 1adoptee says…
F’s right. Telling a poor mother that she would be better off giving away her child so she could go on to lead a better life (go to college, get a career, etc) and, therefore, her child would also be better off away from her and poverty, well, this is just buying into what society has been dishing out for decades. That’s the Adoption Machine’s motto — that adoptive parents will provide a better life for the adoptee. Well, adoptive parents certainly do die young sometimes, leaving the adoptee without one or both adoptive parents. An orphan, again. To be adopted again? Maybe. And, adoptive parents certainly do face hard economic times, too. Telling a poor mother to give up her child because she is poor is a cruelty to her and her child. Family preservation means just what Fo said — extending kindness, support, social services, food stamps, Medicaid, education and job training, child care while she does these things to get income, and community support from churches and other social organizations such as the locall YMCA that often have 50% scholarships to low income families so their children can attend camp and year-long Y activities. Socially isolating the mother is not good. She doesn’t live in a vaccuum. She has a family and so the family members can help too. And the unmarried father can be drawn in as well. …. Being cast off because your mother was poor really sends a negative message to the adoptee. That’s one of the reasons why most of us hate being adopted.
Gert’s comments: It amazes me how on one hand, these adoptees and Joan, can see how life works and then on the other hand, they ignore reality and fall back onto their ‘pie in the sky’ viewpoints and their personal self-pities. I’m sorry there is no ‘one-size fits all’ when it comes to families and all the upheavals that can and do occur. The wisest thing a person can do is learn to accept the life they have and find something of worth to discuss, instead of trying to convince the world that they, the world, needs to change according to the whim of adoptees!
That’s the Adoption Machine’s motto — that adoptive parents will provide a better life for the adoptee.
And for a great deal of them, a better life is provided. These adoptees don’t want to acknowledge the vast numbers of children that are products of some of the worst that man-kind does to their own kind. What about children from wars, mass-rape, famine and other natural disasters, refugees of all sorts? Are they products of this ‘machine’ or are they products of the victims within human societies that NEED to be taken care of? And just because a child is placed into adoption doesn’t mean it is a CRIME. Joan’s position is totally anti-adoption.
Telling a poor mother to give up her child because she is poor is a cruelty to her and her child.
How is that a cruelty? Depending on the individual case it might be the best. Joan has a very warped sense of economics.
Family preservation means just what F said — extending kindness, support, social services, food stamps, Medicaid, education and job training, child care while she does these things to get income, and community support from churches and other social organizations such as the locall YMCA that often have 50% scholarships to low income families so their children can attend camp and year-long Y activities.
Such nonsense! Joan obviously only knows the welfare system because she has lived on it for decades. Family is NOT preserved by social services, food stamps, Medicaid, etc…not EVERYONE can get these services! These social services ARE NOT intended to support ANY family for long, it is only a help. Certainly there is abuse but speaking generally, FAMILIES don’t have preservation within the social services agencies.
I myself was on welfare, for 3 years, after my first divorce. I received education/job training and then had a job for 37 years that gave me a pension and health insurance that I pay into. THAT is what the system is for, to get TEMPORARY help so I could MAINTAIN my own FAMILY.
It has been experience that individual communities, via the food-pantries and thrift stores and the church-groups and other organization are ONLY able do so much on their own. If the federal government is NOT giving out dollars to help the poor via the government programs, the local communities get overwhelmed and they have to limit their support. Does Joan NOT know what is going on in the world today? Family preservation IS NOT any governmental or community’s business! It is the business of the individual FAMILY and if the individual family can not then someone has to!
And where was Joan’s kindness and support to HER extended family? She never offered any, all she ever did was destroy her family members.
She has a family and so the family members can help too. And the unmarried father can be drawn in as well.
Again…pie-in-the-sky mindset. Some people don’t have family members! Unmarried or married fathers are not always around! Hey, come on Joan! You, yourself, know that statement is nonsense. Try in todays’s world to get some parents, married or not, to take care of their children. Try, to get mothers to take care of their children. Extended family members are NOT always an answer, for many many reasons.
Being cast off because your mother was poor really sends a negative message to the adoptee. That’s one of the reasons why most of us hate being adopted.
Define poor! Being poor is not a negative message…it is only negative in the mind that sees ‘poor’ as a negative. There are plenty of rich people who are very very ‘poor’. No, this statement is not based on any facts…it only reflects Joan’s mindset.
Joan’s alternative to adoption is family preservation…where the extended family member, in addition to social welfare programs, keep a child out of the Adoption Machine! Sorry! People came with all kinds of families and there is not a one-size-fits-all solution.
Once again…Joan has it all wrong.