Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I avoided children for many years, because of my pain of losing one. I quit my job, teaching, I was so depressed about everything in my life. Because that was all I focused on for many years, what I did not have...I am glad you have your cats.
If you are really depressed, maybe you need medication.
Not sure exactly which part of my post you are addressing, but taxpayers aren't paying for it. My workplace is a top notch hospital with private operations, and financially they can absorb the extra cost as a favor to their own (since we are seeing their staff and they have their own labs etc). They pay a hefty premium for insurance which partly comes out of my paycheck. Plus, menstrual irregularlty / endometriosis / pelvic pain is a perfectly good reason to work somebody up because there can be many underlying and treatable causes, whether you are single or married.
Personally I don't think married people should receive any extra benefits. God knows how many people get divorced so what does it matter.
It is called insurance fraud and abuse and the Dr who did it for you could recieve some pretty serious sanctions.
Insurance costs go up because Dr's do favors and committ fraud like this. It is crap and a pretty rotten thing to do.
Me personally, no. My mother couldn't have children either, so she adopted my brother and I.
When my best friend was in her early 30s she still hadn't found Mr Right and was considering getting inseminated and going it alone. I did my best to convince her not to do it and she decided to wait a while. She met Mr Right and it turned out she had infertility problems anyway.
I held her hand and gave her my shoulder for 3 solid years through treatment after treatment and heartache after heartache until she finally got pregnant. She has since thanked me for convincing her to wait and not do it alone because she is now sure she never could have done it without her husband.
I am not minimizing the heartache of not having a child. I am asking why an alternative such as fostering or adopting a child who is already born and needs some love is such a bad option?
My computer server was down until now so my apologies for not getting to this sooner. And I haven't read any further at this point than this post, so perhaps my point has been brought up.
Firrst of all I never said adopting was a bad option. I would simply like to know why it is that fertile women don't choose to forgo bearing their own biological child in favour of adoption or fostering if it is such a good option and there are so many children in need of good homes?
No new mother showing off her biological baby is asked "Why didn't you adopt instead?"
I suggest that in most people who want children, there is an urge to bear one's biological children. I am not saying this is rational, but there is no rational reason for anyone to have a biological child as long as there are children in the foster system is there?
Are infertile women supposed to be 'bigger people' than all the 'normal' fertile women who choose to have children?
Adoption is always put forward as an option for infertile women by women who have never tried to adopt. It is very difficult to adopt here.
I won't presume to know how the system works in the US, but adoption in Canada is difficult. We did go through the process and there was a ten-year waiting list for younger (I'm not talking babies) children. There was also an age limit for the would-be parents, under which my much older husband would never qualify. I asked that we be put on the list anyway, and we never recieved a call about any child.
There are open adoptions, which scare many people, including me. There is also the possiblility of adopting children with issues that are not immediately apparent, such as drug use by the bio mom. Some people could be perfectly good parents to a normal child but still know enough about themelves to know they would not be capable of giving a special needs child the attention the child deserves.
One could alsways deliberately choose to adopt special needs children - but it takes a very special person. It is one thing to give birth to a biological child and find out there are health issues, and quite another to consciously put one's self on the line in that way.
And then there are also the spouses of infertile women, who may not be opposed to having their own biological child but would absolutely not want to take an entirely unrelated set of genes into their lives. My husband is one of those. However much I want a child, I could not adopt a child fearing that every time he or she did something remotely wrong, my husband would blame it on unknown genes.
But first and foremost, my question to those who have biological children would be why they didn't choose to adopt. Whatever answer they give is likely to be the same answer any infertile woman dreaming of a child with grandma's smile and grandpa's nose would give.
I have never seen a study on this, but as being a former teacher and counselor, I found it interesting that many of the children with severe behavioral problems were usually adopted children. Giving the adopted parents lots of grief. I don't know if it is genetics, or some sort of reaction-attachment disorder, but to always just casually throw out adoption as an answer to being childless is not thinking all the ramifications of that thru, people just see the objective, a child. Unless you are emotionally ready to take on what could be a child with whatever issues he or she may have, it is better to be child free.
Firrst of all I never said adopting was a bad option. I would simply like to know why it is that fertile women don't choose to forgo bearing their own biological child in favour of adoption or fostering if it is such a good option and there are so many children in need of good homes?
No new mother showing off her biological baby is asked "Why didn't you adopt instead?"
But first and foremost, my question to those who have biological children would be why they didn't choose to adopt. Whatever answer they give is likely to be the same answer any infertile woman dreaming of a child with grandma's smile and grandpa's nose would give.
Thank you for saying tis. I have always wondered why too. If an infertile woman chooses not to adopt, she seems to get looked down upon and I have been told I am selfish for not wanting to choose adoption. Yet, fertile women are never even questioned about why they didn't choose to adopt instead.
I was actually told by my OWN MOTHER, that since I wanted children and dont choose adoption, that I don't love children enough to deserve being a mother.
Yes, my own mother told me that. So I asked her why SHE didn't adopt instead having her own kids. Her answer? "Well, I didn't have to think about it since I was able to get pregnant".
That makes no difference in my book. If someone WANTS to have children, they can certainly choose adoption over having their own.
Then again, my mother never wanted kids, so that really means nothing as far as her choosing. Bad example.
My computer server was down until now so my apologies for not getting to this sooner. And I haven't read any further at this point than this post, so perhaps my point has been brought up.
Firrst of all I never said adopting was a bad option. I would simply like to know why it is that fertile women don't choose to forgo bearing their own biological child in favour of adoption or fostering if it is such a good option and there are so many children in need of good homes?
No new mother showing off her biological baby is asked "Why didn't you adopt instead?"
I suggest that in most people who want children, there is an urge to bear one's biological children. I am not saying this is rational, but there is no rational reason for anyone to have a biological child as long as there are children in the foster system is there?
Are infertile women supposed to be 'bigger people' than all the 'normal' fertile women who choose to have children?
Adoption is always put forward as an option for infertile women by women who have never tried to adopt. It is very difficult to adopt here.
I won't presume to know how the system works in the US, but adoption in Canada is difficult. We did go through the process and there was a ten-year waiting list for younger (I'm not talking babies) children. There was also an age limit for the would-be parents, under which my much older husband would never qualify. I asked that we be put on the list anyway, and we never recieved a call about any child.
There are open adoptions, which scare many people, including me. There is also the possiblility of adopting children with issues that are not immediately apparent, such as drug use by the bio mom. Some people could be perfectly good parents to a normal child but still know enough about themelves to know they would not be capable of giving a special needs child the attention the child deserves.
One could alsways deliberately choose to adopt special needs children - but it takes a very special person. It is one thing to give birth to a biological child and find out there are health issues, and quite another to consciously put one's self on the line in that way.
And then there are also the spouses of infertile women, who may not be opposed to having their own biological child but would absolutely not want to take an entirely unrelated set of genes into their lives. My husband is one of those. However much I want a child, I could not adopt a child fearing that every time he or she did something remotely wrong, my husband would blame it on unknown genes.
But first and foremost, my question to those who have biological children would be why they didn't choose to adopt. Whatever answer they give is likely to be the same answer any infertile woman dreaming of a child with grandma's smile and grandpa's nose would give.
I can't speak for anyone else but I had 2 very unplanned pregnancies but I would have had zero problems adopting. Quite frankly, if you could not accept an adopted child as your own, you have zero business adopting one.
I'm an adopted child. My parents and I always got a good laugh when some ignorant moron would look upon me with some kind of pity because I *gasp* was adopted. I will tell you what I have told each and every one of these imbeciles throughout my life. My parents loved me more than yours..they waited 3 years for me and I was the absolute light of their life. They wanted a child so badly that they woud not have cared if I had 2 heads and 1 leg. They loved me unconditionally and without reservation and my life was a million times better because they were what they should have been. Parents. Not simply someone concerned with whether or not I carried someones smile.
You said your husband is advanced in age, are you? Because your chances of a special needs child increase tenfold. Given your post about your husbands attitude I have to think that he would not handle it well if you had a child who was not perfect and didn't carry Grandpas smile. I will do you a favor and solve the mystery for you...your husband is not cut out for being a Dad. Him being a compassionate human is questionable.
Every day I wish my mother was still alive but after reading your post, I really wish she was today. My parents and my brother all had dark hair and eyes. My mother was 5'2" and round as could be. I am 5'9", thin, have blonde hair and blue eyes. How on earth could she possibly have loved me so much for looking so odd.
I have never seen a study on this, but as being a former teacher and counselor, I found it interesting that many of the children with severe behavioral problems were usually adopted children. Giving the adopted parents lots of grief. I don't know if it is genetics, or some sort of reaction-attachment disorder, but to always just casually throw out adoption as an answer to being childless is not thinking all the ramifications of that thru, people just see the objective, a child. Unless you are emotionally ready to take on what could be a child with whatever issues he or she may have, it is better to be child free.
Pure and utter crap. I'd love to see some statistics on that.
As far as adoption goes, I don't know how it works for adopting from the U.S., but I have a friend and her husband who have been on waiting list for YEARS (going on 7 years) for adoption from (Eastern) Europe (I can't remember if it's Poland or where, but somewhere in that vicinity). I beleive it's easier to adopt internationally. I don't know the EXACT reasoning, but I recall hearing it's hard to adopt from the U.S.
Anyhow, they don't have "special requirements" - like only girls, only boys or one of each, or a baby, or blond hair/blue eyes, etc. For lack of better wording I will say "they will take any kind of child" and are open to one child only, but prefer 2. Seems pretty easy huh?
Nope, for years they have been promised a child(ren) only to have that change instantly, mostly because someone from that country decides to adopt so they get picked first even though my friend got the call saying "we have a child for you" and has been on the list for years.
Imagine the heartbreak of going through that over and over.
My aunt and uncle adopted and while not as bad as my friend, they had a couple incidents where there was a child for them, only to lose that child. They finally were able to get my cousin after 6 years.
Adoption is NOT an easy process to go through. And before anyone says anything, I'm NOT saying that children should be just handed over to anyone. I'm talking of course, about people who have been thoroughly checked out (however that process works).
As far as adoption goes, I don't know how it works for adopting from the U.S., but I have a friend and her husband who have been on waiting list for YEARS (going on 7 years) for adoption from (Eastern) Europe (I can't remember if it's Poland or where, but somewhere in that vicinity). I beleive it's easier to adopt internationally. I don't know the EXACT reasoning, but I recall hearing it's hard to adopt from the U.S.
Earlier in the thread, you said adoption is not an option for you because you can't afford it. Now you've admitted that you don't know anything about adoption. How can you know for certain that you can't afford it if you haven't bothered to do your own research?
Don't tell me the other reason is because you don't want to wait years. You're already waiting years and trying to conceive your own child might not even work if you ever do get infertility treatments. The torture of "waiting" to adopt is an illogical argument because you are waiting anyway and your odds of getting a child through adoption are higher than your odds of having a child with infertility treatments.
Granted, your odds could be lower for adopting if you have some background that would hinder being approved for adoption. But if you qualify for adoption, adoption is an eventual guarantee. Everything else you are trying to pursue isn't a guarantee.
And don't tell me adoption is too expensive. I know people who adopted children through the foster care system. It didn't cost them a penny except for court costs for the actual adoption, which is a very minimal expense. Furthermore, the state continues to provide funding to help the adopted family to raise the children (health care, college education funding, etc.) And their children are lovely. They don't have behavioral problems.
Clearly, you ruled out adoption without doing any research.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTGirlNoMore
Anyhow, they don't have "special requirements" - like only girls, only boys or one of each, or a baby, or blond hair/blue eyes, etc. For lack of better wording I will say "they will take any kind of child" and are open to one child only, but prefer 2. Seems pretty easy huh?
That's not true. They won't take any kind of child.
Since they are trying to adopt from Eastern Europe, Poland or somewhere near Poland, they do have a special requirement---they only want a white child.
I suspect you already knew that and chose to say "for lack of better wording."
btw, my friends adopted white children through the foster care system. I thought I'd clarify that if you also prefer a whilte baby and think that's impossilble in the US.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTGirlNoMore
Adoption is NOT an easy process to go through.
True. But trying to conceive when infertile is not an easy process to go through either.
Earlier in the thread, you said adoption is not an option for you because you can't afford it. Now you've admitted that you don't know anything about adoption. How can you know for certain that you can't afford it if you haven't bothered to do your own research?
Don't tell me the other reason is because you don't want to wait years. You're already waiting years and trying to conceive your own child might not even work if you ever do get infertility treatments. The torture of "waiting" to adopt is an illogical argument because you are waiting anyway and your odds of getting a child through adoption are higher than your odds of having a child with infertility treatments.
Granted, your odds could be lower for adopting if you have some background that would hinder being approved for adoption. But if you qualify for adoption, adoption is an eventual guarantee. Everything else you are trying to pursue isn't a guarantee.
And don't tell me adoption is too expensive. I know people who adopted children through the foster care system. It didn't cost them a penny except for court costs for the actual adoption, which is a very minimal expense. Furthermore, the state continues to provide funding to help the adopted family to raise the children (health care, college education funding, etc.) And their children are lovely. They don't have behavioral problems.
Clearly, you ruled out adoption without doing any research.
That's not true. They won't take any kind of child.
Since they are trying to adopt from Eastern Europe, Poland or somewhere near Poland, they do have a special requirement---they only want a white child.
Regarding my friend - oh please, just stop. You will take anything and twist it around. IF that is their choice then so be it. My point is they are not saying they want girls only or blond hair only.
Regarding adoption, I have not looked at the cost in recent years, but I know people who have adopted 10 years ago and said it was $15,000. Another couple who adopted internationally put out $45,000.
And I never said adoption was out because I can't afford it - I just said it was not an option.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
