Then there are man-made disasters that are called foreclosures.
This is the stuff that makes a family go homeless because for whatever reason, the parent/s can no longer afford to pay their monthly bills and mortgage payments to the bank.
Oddly enough, banking companies, like The Freddie Mac Foundation supports adoption, perhaps as a reinvestment initiative for the future. I would like to think rebuilding a community, while keeping families together, would be the focused, ultimate goal, (like they show on Extreme Makeover), but I'm not exactly sure what a banking-firm's interest would be in terms of the adoption industry. Would anyone care to guess what's really going on in the minds of people "helping build new futures?"
Half a century of adoption history in the Netherlands
On 1 November 1956, half a century ago to the day, the Dutch adoption law came into force. Since then, 60 thousand children have been adopted in the Netherlands. Approximately two-thirds of them came from other countries.
From foster status to legal status
In the first half of the twentieth century, more and more children were placed with foster parents. The legal position of foster parents and foster children was not very solid, because the biological parents could always reclaim the child. The foster parents were not legally obliged to provide for the child. This changed, when the adoption law was introduced in 1956, which made it possible for a foster family to adopt a foster child as their legitimate child.
Such non-stepparent adoptions do not involve (one of) the biological parents. Since 1979, the law also allows for stepparents to adopt a child: the (new) partner of one of the biological parents adopts his or her stepchild.
Rapid increase adoptions in the 1970s
Until the late 1960s, a few hundred children were adopted in the Netherlands each year. Nearly all of them were Dutch children relinquished for adoption by unwed mothers.
On the website of the Councel on Accreditation, responsible for the accreditation of adoption agencies, I found the following snippet.
PURPOSE: Adoption Services establish a permanent family for children and youth awaiting adoption, and increase the well-being and functioning of birth parents, adoptive families, and adopted individuals.
I was wondering which child is really awaiting adoption? Isn't the COA mistaken and shouldn't it read "prospective parents awaiting adoption"?
Not without any reason do certain governments discourage parents from adopting overseas babies, since this is a driving force behind child abandonment in many third world countries: Romania, India, Guatemala, to name only a few.
The adoption lobby to keep children coming to the western world is already too powerful, we don't need another supporter of adoption, especially not one who wants to speed up procedures in the best interest of...
If we want to do something for children in poor countries and I believe we should, we can support programs that support local care, programs that support family preservation. Do we have to be so greedy we need a child in return of our "humanitarian" actions.
By Ellen Connolly
August 12, 2007 12:00am
ACTRESS Deborra-lee Furness will form an adoption action group to lobby governments to change the law to make it easier to adopt.
Furness said she had received overwhelming public support accusing federal and state governments of discouraging parents from adopting overseas babies.
In an article in The Sunday Telegraph last week, Furness told of how she and her husband, Hugh Jackman, were forced to return to the US to adopt Oscar, 7, and Ava, 2, because of red tape and bureaucracy.
"We'll continue to push until we get some changes made because this is an injustice to Australian families,'' Furness said.
Children being viewed as a commodity, that can be bought to fit the parents needs; it is expressedly voiced, by so-called superstar Ricky Martin. Wanting a child from each continent reads to me like words from a collector not from a parent to be.
Call me stupid, but I always thought nature had an answer to the question where babies come from. This piece of consumer information from the Chicago Sunday Times tells how lucky some adoptive parents have been in the purchase of a child.
Not a single word about the children!!! Who's best interest is served here?
Countries with children available for U.S. parents can change dramatically
There are medical issues that go with each child's family history, and not all family members may be forthcoming and honest when telling case-workers their stories in an adoption agency. People can be funny that way.
To get a sense of how genetic diagnosing affects parents, consider the following from:
GENETIC SCREENING AND ETHICS AN OVERVIEW By: David Devore
1992 Woodrow Wilson Biology Institute
When a child is adopted, I believe many (poorly prepared) APs will (wrongly) assume the variety of unwanted behaviors exhibited by the adopted child will only indicate and prove just how neglected that child was by previous care-takers. I'm not sure how many APS recognize even good change - like change to a new bed or room, or country - is a very real stress, and that stress can be seen and experienced as tremendous loss and trauma for a very young child. In other words, not all signs of delayed development are the direct result of parental
By Gayle White / The Atlanta Journal and Constitution
January 28, 2003
For 18 years, Sandra Cano lived with two identities.
She was Sandra, a struggling mother of four children --- two given up for adoption, two mostly in foster care --- trying to make a go of life despite a string of marriages, illnesses and financial difficulties.
And she was Mary Doe, the unnamed plaintiff in Doe v. Bolton, a Georgia abortion case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on the same day as the better-known Roe v. Wade, which led to the legalization of abortion in 1973.
By GAIL ROSENBLUM
Star Tribune (Minneapolis)
Monday, July 16, 2007 12:34 AM EDT
MINNEAPOLIS * In the tense final moments of waiting for her daughter to come around the corner of Catholic Charities in St. Cloud, Minn., Sandy Sperrazza could not take her eyes off the floor. It was not an act of submission or fear. Sperrazza was looking for her baby.
“For all those years, I was mourning the loss of the baby, ” Sperrazza said. “I always wanted the baby back. ”
July 26, 2007 -- The parolee charged in the brutal Connecticut home invasion and arson that killed a doctor's wife and two daughters was adopted as an infant by a wealthy family and remained "distant" throughout his childhood and into his troubled teen years, The Post has learned.
Joshua Komisarjevsky, 26, was born to teenage parents who gave him up at birth, and ended up in the arms of Ben and Jude Komisarjevsky, born-again Christians whose lineage includes a prominent theater director and dancer and a CEO of p.r. giant Burson-Marsteller, said a source close to the family.
"Everybody in the family tried as hard as they could to make him feel welcomed, but he was very distant," the source said.
"They had many sleepless nights and tried very hard to figure out what was going wrong."
Joshua began his criminal career with burglary at the age of 14, and his parents stood by him. But these heinous accusations have left them stunned, the source said.
Komisarjevsky, 26, and Steven Hayes, 44, were slapped with a string of charges including kidnapping, sexual assault and arson. Prosecutors are still undecided whether to charge them with murder or capital murder.
Officials said that Janet Hawke-Petit, 48, was strangled in her Cheshire home. Her daughters, Hayley, 17, and Michaela, 11, died of smoke inhalation.
Their father, Dr. William A. Petit was severely beaten, but survived. He remains in serious condition.
The family had been held hostage for hours after the thieves broke in Monday and forced the mother to withdraw money from a local bank, where she was able to tip off a teller to call police.
Komisarjevsky and Hayes were arrested after trying to flee the burning house.