More Desireable Parent?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-22-2003
More Desireable Parent?
10
Fri, 06-06-2003 - 10:58am
Reading the paper the other day, I noticed that the majority of the adoption ads say something to the effect of "Professional Father and Stay-At-home Mother await your baby with open arms." I have seen very few ads that list the mother as working. This got me to thinking...

Do pregnant BMs who have chosen adoption prefer to have their baby go to a family with a SAHM? Why?

What are those women (The potential adoptive mothers) doing prior to the adoption - are they at home? Do they have jobs, careers?

Is it more likely that a woman who SAH will be able to adopt an infant than a woman who WOH?

Avatar for biancamami
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Fri, 06-06-2003 - 12:29pm
I think for many people the professional father-sahm model is the "ideal" version of parenthood. Every time I pick up a parenting magazine I can almost COUNT on there being at least one article that says something like "Saving Strategies to make SAH possible" I always feel like this society is very accepting of working mothers AS LONG as they secretly wish and hope that they could SAH...know what I mean? Like if I admit I rather work than SAH that would put into question my love for my child...but if I do it because I "have" to, then that's ok!

What else would this say to a birthmother? That the mother is FULLY committed to caring for the child as her SOLE responsibility, that the father is affluent enough to support the household on one income, and that the couple is already eagerly awaiting this new addition and there won't be any shuffling of work schedules or frantic arranging of daycare provision. It says "We are 100% ready to care for this child"

Could this be said of a working couple? Of course, but people tend to want to view things in a generalized and stereotypical way. I'm sure some birthmothers envision giving up a baby to a working mother only to have him "tossed into a nasty daycare where no one loves him" or some other horrible scenario.

Ana
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 06-06-2003 - 12:33pm
I have had 3 friends that have adopted. One was a SAHM with a 6 year old. She had lost one baby and had a really difficult pregnancy with her 6 year old. They decided to adopt and adopted from South Korea. The second couple had no children. They added Kai to their family last year. They both still work since the adoption was so expensive. The third couple is in the process of adopting. They are going to the Republic of GA this summer. She is a teacher and he is a stock-broker. She plans to take a year off work then return the next school year.

When I have read those ads, I have always assumed that the mother either has another child or plans to stay home. Of course, assumptions are not always correct. I would think work status would only be a small part of the adoption process.

Kristi

"I do not want to be a princess! I want to be myself"

Mallory (age 3)

      &nbs

Avatar for cyndiluwho
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Fri, 06-06-2003 - 12:40pm
I agree. I think it's more likely for an adopting couple to have moms working held against them than her not working. While there are those who realize that moms working status makes no difference, there are those who think it does in spite of years of research that has failed to find any real differences. Hence, you can increase your odds by painting the picture of the WD and SAHM. There are far more people out there who would judge a WM inadequate than would judge a SAHM inadequate. It's just playing the odds.


Edited 6/6/2003 4:55:45 PM ET by cyndiluwho
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 06-06-2003 - 1:57pm
I really don't know the answer to any of the questions but I will speculate on one of the issues.

It could be some BM's way of giving their child something that they couild not otherwise. For many people from poor working class surroundings a family that can actually afford to have a SAHP must be "well-to-do" and if the main reason to give up a child is so it can have a better life then it would otherwise then the you would choose what in your mind would seem the most ideal situation.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-13-2003
Fri, 06-06-2003 - 3:37pm
I think there are so many eager adoptive parents that the BM's (Ugh, I hate that acronym), can be very picky, so why not choose the most ideal possible scenerio? They interview the prospective parents, so they know who will be caring for their child, if both parents go to work, then they don't know who will be caring for their child all day. Given the choice, they will probably go with someone they know, and who they FEEL will be more fully committed. I have a friend who's adopted 2 children. She is a SAHM who's husband can provide the children with the kind of lifestyle most people only dream about. The children have the best of everything. She went out of state and adopted children who's parents looked just like her and her husband, that's the kind of options you have when you can pay for private adoptions I guess.

I don't think all adoptive moms were staying home before they adopted, I'm sure they promise to stay home when the child comes and let the BM know that during the interview process. Apparently it's fairly competitive.


Edited 6/6/2003 3:40:05 PM ET by trip59

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 06-06-2003 - 9:03pm
If I were giving up a child for adoption I would most likley go with the "professional father" sahm....only because I would most likely be giving up the child because I couldn't afford to raise or didn't have the time(in school, college etc) I would want my child to have a sahm, not be in daycare....

of course this is just me and I know that there are plenty of dual working families that could provide an equally good home. I'm just biased.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 06-06-2003 - 9:04pm
i have a cousin who adopted two children(at two seperate times) and was *required* by the adoption agency to sah with them for a year after the adoptions. bonding was the reason, but i have issues with this. i dont think they should dictate how you run your family after the adoption has taken place.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-22-2003
Fri, 06-06-2003 - 9:09pm
Wow. Really? Required? Oh my.

If they didn't did they have to give the child back?

What if their financial position changed and both needed to work? Do only rich people get to be parents?

I have lots of issues with that. I mean how did the agency determined who SAH? Was it automatically the mother or could it be either? What about the other parent - did their "bonding" not matter?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-17-2003
Fri, 06-06-2003 - 9:20pm
I don't really know what the repercussions of noncompliance would have been, but when my aunt adopted my cousin, she "had" to sah for a year. Of course, that was almost 40 yrs ago. She went through an agency. My mom adopted me through a private adoption and there were no such stipulations.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 06-06-2003 - 10:14pm
actually, i think the adoption was not "finalized" until the end of the first year. the agency determined the mother should sah. i know i was very surprised to hear it too, and remember thinking, well, i guess im lucky i can have children, because we would be childless if that were the case. i have a hard time being told what to do, especially within my own family.

my brother adopted two children as well, and they(db and sil) decided my sil needed to sah, because the first child was from paraguay and not in great condition when they *finally* got him. he *needed* her around the clock. the second one, although came from a wonderful foster home environment in korea, was about 15 months old, and *needed* to be with her as well, because they truly had to bond, as he had already bonded with his foster family. i am happy to say, they are 10 and almost 9 and extremely well adjusted all american kids, who i might add are as cute and sweet and ours as they can be. i personally would not trade any of my little nephews for anything in the world....ftr, i have no nieces on my side of the family.