Adoption Is Not An Alternative To Abortion
All about adoption as an abortion alternative (alliteration!)
I can’t tell you how many times anti-choicers scream ADOPTION! As if none of the women who get abortions ever thought of it.
I wonder if the antis ever stop for a minute to really think about adoption. No, I don’t mean considering adopting a child, although that would be the non-hypocritical thing to do. I’m wondering if they really considered how adoption works and how it doesn’t actually solve all the problems that come with an unwanted pregnancy.
Let me preface this all by saying that this is NOT an argument against adoption. I have no problem with people putting children up for adoption if that’s what they feel is the best choice. What I do have a problem with is the idea that adoption is, in all cases a better, alternative to abortion.
In reality, adoption isn’t even an alternative to abortion at all. What it is is an alternative to parenting. It solves the problem of a childrearing, but not the problem of unwanted pregnancy. Women still face nine months of gestation and the pain and sickness that comes with it, will still require very expensive medical care, will miss work or school, will still endure the pain of labor, and will still face all of the risk that come with pregnancy and delivery. To some women, like myself, this is simply unacceptable.
Too often, people accuse women who get abortions of doing so ‘for convenience.’ Because nothing is more convenient than taking time out of your schedule to forge though a mob of screaming antis on your way inside your local clinic to get an uncomfortable and, for some, embarrassing procedure and then withstand cramps and bleeding for a few days, all the while being judged by those around you. And all if this comes after making what could be a very difficult decision, figuring out how to afford it, taking time off work, and finding care for any kids that might already exist. Yeah, right. Real convenient.
The insistence of adoption as the single best solution is made even worse when coming from women who have already had children. They of all people know that pregnancy isn’t a simple inconvenience. Realizing you left the remote on top of the TV on the other side of the room is an inconvenience. Pregnancy is an ordeal and birthing is an enormously painful experience.
The most common effects of pregnancy are mood swings and depression (which, interestingly, are things antis like to threaten women with as affects of abortion, although they’re not,) weight gain, nausea, fatigue, and general inability to function as normal. Forgive me if it doesn’t sound all that fun. However, pregnancy puts women at risk for more serious and sometimes permanent health problems and even the risk of death. I thought about listing as many complications as I could, but after half an hour I still had quite a ways to go to even come close to covering most common. I figured this post was already long enough. Suffice to say, pregnancy is not a passive, un-invasive experience and certainly far more than a mere ‘inconvenience.’
Unless someone can adopt a fetus at any stage in gestation, and take it into their own uterus to later give birth to, or to an artificial uterus then adoption does not solve the problem of pregnancy as abortion does.
Let’s talk about money. When women cite financial concerns as one of their reasons for abortion, antis will none the less insist that those women should have a baby anyway and put it up for adoption as if they think that doing so is free. It’s not. The cost of a vaginal birth without complication ranges between 9 and 17 THOUSAND dollars. If there are complications, or if a C-section is required, the cost is 14 to 25 thousand. Then of course the newborn has its own bill, usually between 1.5 and 4 thousand, and that’s for a healthy baby born at term to say nothing of babies born premature or are otherwise need of additional medical care. Most insurance plans will cover most of this cost but women will still pay from 5 hundred to 3 thousand dollars our of pocket. And this is all just for giving birth at a hospital to say nothing for prenatal care, or any additional care a woman may need as a result of her pregnancy. Not all women even with insurance will be able to afford the cost of pregnancy and birthing.
Women who aren’t covered by health insurance are shit out of luck. By the way 27 million women in the US are without health insurance. That’s 18%, almost 2 out of 10 women without health insurance – and that’s the average for all women! Of course women who don’t have the luxury of being white are far more likely to be uninsured. Whereas only 13% of white women are uninsured, that percentage nearly doubles for blacks, and triples for Native American and Hispanic women. When you factor in that that the rate of united pregnancy for these groups is much significantly higher than for whites and you see that you have a serious problem. How do you expect, uninsured women to pay for their continued pregnancies?
This problem is further exacerbated when you consider that over 28% of single women live below the poverty line which is set at 11 thousand dollars annually if they have no children. That annual income must be higher if they do have children to sit above the adjusted poverty threshold. How do you seriously expect women to pay for the costs of pregnancy and childbirth, with this income with or without insurance especially when you consider what else women must spend money on. Food, clothing, education, basic necessities, utilities, housing, and any children they might already have, puts a lot of women, living paycheck to paycheck as it is.
To make matters worse, pregnancy itself will cause women to miss work and thereby lose income and not all women are covered with paid maternity leave. On top of that, missing work and school has long term financial consequences as well as a result of missed opportunities.
It’s true that some hospitals may offer discounts to uninsured women, and that some women may be able to get financial assistance from the government or other agencies, and some especially lucky women might even get some or all of their costs covered by the prospective adoptive parents, but it’s not enough to cover all the cost for all women.
With all this in mind, it’s just breathtakingly stupid that anti-choicers were among the most opposed to health care reform which could have helped more women afford their hospital bills and maybe more likely to be able to choose to continue their pregnancies.
By contrast, an abortion in the first trimester either by pill or in clinic costs about 300 and 900 dollars without insurance and even less with insurance or if the woman qualifies for financial assistance and even less still if obtained from a non-profit such as Planned Parenthood.
Oh, but being able to afford to feed yourself and your kids and live indoors and receive medical care are just conveniences, right?
‘But there are thousands of childless couples who desperately want yours!‘ the antis mindlessly shout as if the rest of us are supposed to feel obligated to breed for them. Meanwhile, in reality, there are currently thousands of children in America alone already under state care and in need of adoption, yet are not being adopted. Well that’s an awkward fact isn’t it? Where are all those desperate childless families?
Oh, and by the way, it might be interesting to note that non-whites, the groups most likely to live below the poverty line, most likely to be without health insurance, and most at risk for unintended pregnancy are also the least likely to be adopted.
So really, adoption doesn’t solve the problems of pregnancy, physical or financial, and doesn’t really even completely solve the problem parentless children. What does it solve? It solves the problem of responsibility for women who are either unable or unwilling to care for children that they already have. And even then it isn’t a perfect solution. As with any other decision a woman might make regarding her pregnancy, the decision to put a child up for adoption can be a difficult and painful one that some women are simply unable to endure.
When antis shout from the rooftops the stories of a minority of women who regret their abortion, they ignore (or demonize) those who don’t. Similarly, when they exalt women who chose to be parents, then turn around and look down on women who wanted abortions but were unable to get them or realized too late that it could have been a better option for them. So it’s really no surprise that here too they ignore the feeling of women that are not politically expedient for the antis to use to override other women’s feelings. That is to say, they ignore the fact that adoption is as difficult a decision as any other and some women will regret that as well. Who are you to tell women what they should feel?
So before you go about self-righteously declaring adoption to be the end-all, beat-all solution for all women facing unwanted pregnancies, and at all times preferable to abortion, you’d better think again because the reality of it isn’t as rose-tinted as you might think. You don’t know every woman who walks into a clinic, you don’t know her life, her unique situation. So stop pretending you do. Only she can know what is best for her. Keep your judgments to yourself.
Posted on June 14, 2010, in Choice. Bookmark the permalink. 22 Comments.
It seems my response has come a little late. Anyway, this is a subject I tend to avoid comenting on, as the most likely result is a very heated argument, without an actual possibility of getting to an absolute answer. I’d like to give just an opinion, without hurting sensibilities. English isn’t my mother language, so I’d appreciate tolerance with bad grammar and orthography mistakes.
The first thing that should be taken into consideration is the time the abort is carried on. I see little difference in killing a second or third semester fetus and a newborn baby. More than anything, because the organs are already defined and in growing progress, and the major difference between a 8-9 months fetus and a newborn is that the last one is already outside the womb (and thus, doesn’t need the placenta for feeding purposes). If third-semester abortions were allowed, I couldn’t see why newborns murders shouldn’t be, as a safer way to avoid unwanted childs (as the child is already outside the mother). Both are beings capable of sensing, and incapable of abstract thought (wich comes much later). I mean, neither of them will actually be able to think about their life and ending of it.
I can understand more the first-semester abortion arguments, even though the organs are already differentiated by the end of the second month. Another thing I can understand is the debate about the moment the embryo/fetus becomes a person, primarily because there is no consensus on the subject, as there isn’t even a reference (determining a period on which an organism as already a member of a species would be totally based on arbitrary conventions). The one thing I cannot understand is the comparision between a fetus and, let’s say, sperm. Spermatocytes are haploid cells containing half the DNA of a human being, and are that way for sexual reproductive purposes. Zygotes are clunks of cells of the homo sapiens species, and living organisms on their own. Whether they are already human or not is a different (and unresolved) matter.
Human rights are invents made by society, products of culture. From a completely non-abstract point of view, they only exist as artifacts of civilization. Which is a good thing, and are means and ways to achieve the better life we have now. I think most of the pro-choice arguments are based on the idea of defending an extremely important right as freedom. And the pro-life followers want to defend another vital right, the right to live, as they think the fetuses are already living human beings. Insults and ad-hominen arguments such as many of the ones I’ve read before are pretty stupid if both sides have an objective base for their beliefs, as there is no absolute parameter that can define the moment a human being is.
Check out the I’m Not Sorry web site for women and girls who do not regret their abortions:
http://www.imnotsorry.net
Lovlifern, You wrote this: “If we save all the old(er) people and kill all the babies that come into the world, then how will the human race survive? We need babies to continue the population, or else, we will become extinct. Bet you never thought of that before, now did ya?” Um, what world do you live in? Every day babies are being born. And last I checked there are over 7 billion people in the world. Your comment makes me think you are either 13 or living under a rock.
What can we expect? Antis can’t be logical or honest.
“Women still face nine months of gestation and the pain and sickness that comes with it, will still require very expensive medical care, will miss work or school, will still endure the pain of labor, and will still face all of the risk that come with pregnancy and delivery. To some women, like myself, this is simply unacceptable.” How selfish can you get? I have two babies and I would gladly die for them, those few little months of sickness and being uncomfortable have nothing on the years of joy I have spent with them. In case you didn’t know, women were built to carry babies. As long as you take care of yourself during pregnancy as you would when you are not pregnant your body doesn’t have to balloon into a fat tub of lard. You can keep your figure and give your child life, if you don’t want that child then yes ADOPTION is the answer. But in truth if you didn’t want the child to begin with then be responsible and don’t get pregnant. Use condoms or ABSTINENCE (I know to you selfish people out there this is a scary word) these should be the only legal ways to stop an unwanted pregnancy. Take responsibility for your actions, don’t be so dang selfish and for goodness sake stop tearing unborn babies to pieces! (That was not a hyperbole by the way that is literally what is done.)
What is selfish is thinking that other people should suffer, be violated, and DIR just to make YOU feel more comfortable with yourself. Your ego is NOT more important than women’s lives. Get over yourself. No one should have to suffer and die carrying some parasitic lump of tissue just to please you.
Women’s bodies aren’t built for anything. They aren’t built at all. If women’s bodies were built for breeding, it wouldn’t be excruciatingly painful or dangerous. As for purpose, the only purpose a woman has is her own intention.
Adoption is an alternative to parenthood, not to pregnancy or it’s horrors.
And that last bit WAS hyperbole on your part. Most abortion involve no tearing because the non-sentient and insensate mass of parasitic tissue is so tiny, and that description is exactly was an embryo/fetus is – there is no such thing as an unborn baby. Your selfishness, your desperate need to control, and your creepy obsession with other women’s privates, however, DOES literally kill people. 67-67 THOUSAND women die every year because YOU block access to safe abortion care. Their blood is on your hands. So go and explain to the grieving families of your victims how you value life so much that you would condemn actual people to die just to satisfy your obsession with mere fetuses.
First of all, no, women weren’t “built”. My toaster was “built”. My Nintendo DS was “built”. My Franklin Covey purse was “built”. I wasn’t “built” and neither were you… unless you’re a spam bot than yeah, sure – you were “built”.
Secondly, we as women have more purpose than breeding offspring into an overpopulated planet. How dare you devalue every contributor to this blog and yourself by saying that our purpose was to breed… a simple function that a dog can perform.
Thirdly, being fat is not a choice. I’m an obese woman and yet, I run marathons, I diet and the pounds come off… but very freaking slowly. Healthy weight loss is seen as losing two pounds a week, for the person reaching that 300 pound mark, that means that even if they lost that much each and every week, they would not reach a sustainable and healthy weight within a year of hard work.
Fourthly, abstinence isn’t a realistic solution for everyone. Condoms (and other means of birth control other than sterilization) have a risk of failure and are often demonized by religious nutjobs (like the pope).
Finally, to have a child in a world that is rife with overpopulation for the worst possible reasons (like the ones you’ve cited) is selfish. To continue a pregnancy knowing full well that should the pregnancy be carried successfully to term, you will put that baby up for adoption is selfish as well. Why not just end a lifetime of suffering and worry and end a pregnancy that you have no interest in continuing? It’s better for you, it’s better for the “unborn baby” (is that kinda like an undead baby?) and it’s better for the planet.
High five! You’re awesome
Sent from my iPhone
I honestly cannot see why everyone has to get up in arms about abortion. Yes if daddy raped you then you are entitled to a freakin abortion. If you use it like birth control just get birth control, or a more permanent solution, its probably cheaper in the long run. Now, I’ve never had an abortion, but I can tell you right now that the government, religious leaders, or any other bastard who tells me I CAN’T have one period? Nope, sorry, not going to fly. It’s my body and I’ll be damned (sarcasm included) if I’m going to let someone control what I do with it. If you don’t want an abortion dont have one, if you get one suck it up and live with the consequences come what may because regardless of your choice thats what it should be, YOUR CHOICE. I’m not going to demonize either opinions, everyone has one and I’m entitled to think they are all stupid so get over it. The human race will not die because a few hundred women a year decide not to keep their babies. Thats like saying because women miscarry the human race is going to die out. And guess what, it hasn’t. If anything the human race has multiplied ten fold in however many years you care to go back. Point is, stop arguing about it like it matters. I’m not going to forbid anyone from any medical care they feel they need and some of you are never going to think its right to kill a fetus with a heartbeat. (Just curious does it count as murder if its before a heartbeat has developed?) so there is no point in arguing if we just end up yelling ourselves blue in the face and getting no where.
Just an observation…
For people who don’t want to go to Hell for murder, adoption IS an alternative to abortion. And often, if the pregnancy is unwanted, adoption agencies will help with costs.
1. Abortion is not and can not possibly be murder under any circumstances, by the very definition of the word. Get a dictionary and stop lying.
2. Hell is not real. If it were, I would like to think that there would be a special place in it for people who lie as you hav; who reduce women to mere people-factories rather than full people; and who block access to safe medical care, abortion, knowing full well that doing so results in the deaths of tens of thousands of women every year, as such a person is surely anything but “pro-life” as they falsely claim.
1. A fetus has a heartbeat, and when you stop it, it dies. Something cannot die if it is not alive.
2. One day we will find this out for real. I can only hope that you come to your senses before something bad happens to you. And also, have has an “e” on the end, Perhaps you should be the one who gets the Dictionary.
Also, I am a woman, and I work in healthcare, so I believe that would allow me to know a bit more than you do. And with new medical interventions, there are not as many deaths. But if some women would learn to keep their legs closed, then abortions wouldn’t be necessary in the first place. If you know you can’t support a child, then don’t have sex. Easy as pie. Just buy a vibrator and save the whole world some problems.
1. So? What in the hell makes you think a heartbeat matters? Not all living things have one. And just having one doesn’t mean anything (even extracted heart tissue beats.)
Not that anyone said a fetus wasn’t alive anyway. Sperm are alive. Germs are alive. Everything you have ever eaten was once alive. It doesn’t mean anything to the definition of the word “murder.”
Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Abortion is legal in sane parts of the world, only prevents human beings from coming into existence and kills none, and can not qualify as malice aforethought as it’s an act of self-defense.
Lying about the meaning of a word is not on the same level as a simple typo.
2. Hell us not real, and that’s very lucky for you, monster. I hope you come to your senses and stop Hutton and killing people.
Being a woman does not excuse you for being a misogynist, woman-killing piece of shit. And as someone who works in healthcare, you should be ashamed of yourself for having so little concern for providing the healthcare that many patients need- abortion care.
How many people have to die before you’re satisfied?
Also, another little tidbit for you to think about. If we save all the old(er) people and kill all the babies that come into the world, then how will the human race survive? We need babies to continue the population, or else, we will become extinct. Bet you never thought of that before, now did ya?
And also, let me just say this. If your daddy or your uncle raped you when you were 13, and you got pregnant from that, then get an abortion. That’s just sick and wrong on many levels. But to get an abortion just because you wanted to go out with your boyfriend behind the barn and have a little fun? Nope, live with it, it’s called being responsible.
Now, that being said, do you know how bad the females body suffers after an abortion? Because let me tell you, there are a hell of a lot of complications that can arise. And then your medical bills are gonna be sky-high. And also, if you decide 5-10 years down the road that you are finally ready for a baby, good luck, because you are gonna be faced with alot of prblems, and chances are kinda high that you won’t get it.
OR women can do whatever we damned well please with OUR OWN BODIES (seeing as how we’re people and all) and you can mind your own business and keep your ignorant, bigoted mouth shut. Go fuck yourself, bitch.
First of all, bless your heart. You really need an English lesson before you post things, it would be much appreciated. I’m not even going to back and correct your previous errors.
Secondly, I am a woman, I do not hate who I am, and seeing as how I save numerous lives on a daily basis, I am not a woman hater. I will bust my ass and do everything I can to save a persons life no matter what race, religion etc, etc. When did I say that I killed women? That’s right, I didn’t. You’re trying to put words into my mouth (or keyboard) that are false, because you have no argument. Seeing as how your screen name is Julie, I am guessing you are a woman, and I do not hate you. I don’t even know you. In fact, other than knowing your opinion about abortion/adoption, I know little about you other than the face that you are a female.
Thirdly, if you would read what you write, you would realize how stupid you actually sound. The heartbeat is how you define life in the medical world, without it, well basically, you’re dead. Plain and simple. Without a heartbeat you cannot do anything. And I am very confused about you saying “How many people have to die?” Could you clarify that? Because that is the reason for my posting. How many people DO have to die before given the chance to live because their “parents” make stupid life choices and can’t live with the consequences of their own actions.
Also, sperm are not alive. They move, yes, but they do not live. They cannot replicate themselves, they don’t eat, and they don’t breathe. All of these things are necessary for living. Sperm are 1 cell in billions that are necessary to make a living being.
And also, not everything I have ever eaten has been alive. I can name numerous things that I eat that have been artificially produced.
And like I said, eventually, Hell will be proven/dis-proven eventually. I just want to make sure I’m not on the bad end of things when that time comes.
And all the silly immature name calling doesn’t hurt my feelings. In fact, it makes me giggle, and it makes me continue to post. If you can’t handle people posting opinions, then don’t say things on a public internet website.
And one last thing, without beautiful selfless mothers who realize their baby is a life, I wouldn’t have my own 2 children to brighten up my world.
Pingback: Anti-Childfree Clichés: A Challenger Appears Part 1 « Golden Coat Hanger
Pingback: Totally surprising things: Bob McCoskrie and DPF twist poll results to suit own/client’s wishes « Ideologically Impure
Pingback: Adoption Is Not An Alternative To Abortion | Thanks, Abortion!
Pingback: 2010 in review « Golden Coat Hanger
Pingback: Analogy Fail « Golden Coat Hanger