TDA - Adoption as a Shopping Experience

Why I Dislike Adoption Advertising

With Courtesy to Amanda who runs the weblog: The Declassified Adoptee

Often in protest of adoption advertising, people will point out the amount of money spent on advertising (this specific reference is for Private Domestic Infant Adoption) for a mother to surrender her child could have gone to help that mother, and many others, keep their children. Or, people will suggest foster care adoption instead. The common response to this I've seen several times now, including to one post I made on this blog is: "Why should Adoptive Parents be told how to spend their money when no one else is?" One comment I read on an article about adoption advertising went so far as to ask fellow commenters, who found adoption advertising unfavorable, if they also chide people for buying over-priced trinkets on vacation. Foremost, I can't imagine how any one could expect an Adult Adoptee not to find any such comparison offensive. But I think there's often a misunderstanding about why people find adoption advertising offensive. Here are my thoughts as to why I personally don't like it.

Adoption's Focus

Adoption's focus: adoption and parenting should be about the needs of children and therefore, someone wanting to help children should want to do so in the best possible way. When people make a suggestion, such as adoption of one of the 120,000 legally adoptable children from foster care, they are trying to direct someone to children who have lost their families. I think it is important to bring loving homes to children who need them, rather than to advertise for more children to be available for adoption and passing by the ones who already need homes. When the focus is on how children can best be helped, it's easier to understand that this isn't about telling people what to do with their money. If adoption is supposed to be about the desire to help a child in need, then wouldn't it make sense to use whatever money designated to help a child in need in the most efficient way possible? Spending thousands of dollars to adopt the baby of an expectant mother to "help a child" doesn't make much sense when that much money could be spent on helping several mothers and children meet their needs, together? The problem is not telling people they have to donate their money. It's the fact that the theme of "helping children" and adoption often do not make sense, depending on the situation. The largest adoption agency in the United States, alone, spends 5% of its 65 million dollar budget on marketing. Considering the amount of entire families that tiny portion of their budget could help; it just doesn't make sense to me.

Comparing Adoption to a Shopping Experience

No, I do not follow people around in the grocery store and suggest to them that spending a little more for healthier foods might in turn lower their health care costs. I also don't march on over to the person driving the gas-hungry SUV at the gas station and talk about global and economic problems caused by waste. I don't chide people for choosing to spend their money on souvenirs when on vacation--Lord knows I've spent my fair share on shiny key chains and whatever else, trying to commemorate the best vacation ever. No, what I dislike about the comparison of adoption to "spending your money how you want" is that, as an adoptee, I dislike being referred to as if my adoption was another shopping experience for my parents to spend money "however they wanted." Talking about ethics in adoption is not about demanding what people should do with their money; it's about entering into discussion about what's best for children.

We Are Not Charity Cases

Often times, people view adoption as a form of charity. Along the same lines of "they can spend their money however they want" is another similar response I've read that adoption is the form of charity someone has chosen, why should it be suggested that they donate elsewhere (e.g. to a family preservation organization) if they don't want to? It's their money. I once read someone point out that advocating for the adoption of truly needy children sounds like people are making these children into a charity case. I understand their point and that's not the intention. I think when someone is adopted, it should be because they actually needed new parents to care for them. Each person should be passionate about whatever cause means the most to them. No one wants to be made to feel badly for donating here and not there. But adoptees are not a "cause." Talking about adoption ethics is not about telling people how to be charitable. I want to be viewed as a daughter; not a charity case.

Lastly

.... While some adoption advertising is used to find parents for children in need, quite a lot is focused on getting the attention of expectant mothers. I think a lot of adoption advertising seems misleading and/or coercive. I won't get into that because I've talked about it before. There's also something about this type of advertising that give me the feeling that a loss is being hoped for when there are already children out there who have lost their parents It just does not sit well with me.