Adopted children

[Jazzy]

Do you believe that adopted children should have access to information about their biological parents? (Why/Why Not)

 

[tango]

That's a thorny one. These days I believe most adoptions are open, but I can see that if the biological parents don't want their information known they should have some rights as well.

If people want to present giving a child up for adoption as a preferable alternative to abortion it doesn't really help the cause if the parents know that in 10, 20, 30 years they might suddenly have someone showing up on their door claiming to be their child.

I think that children should have rights to certain information - known genetic issues being an obvious example - but the question of where one's rights end and another's rights begin isn't an easy thing to resolve.

 

[Jazzy]

I think the adopted child should have access to biological family and medical history.

As far as meeting biological parents, the rights of the parents also need to be weighed up. Part of giving a child up for adoption is because the biological parents didn't want to have a child, weren't ready to be a parent etc. and it was a way of giving others who wanted a child but perhaps couldn't have their own a chance to be parents and in this way, biological parents could move on with their lives. The biological parents may not want to know the child they gave. They may want privacy.

 

[tango]

I think the adopted child should have access to biological family and medical history.

As far as meeting biological parents, the rights of the parents also need to be weighed up. Part of giving a child up for adoption is because the biological parents didn't want to have a child, weren't ready to be a parent etc. and it was a way of giving others who wanted a child but perhaps couldn't have their own a chance to be parents and in this way, biological parents could move on with their lives. The biological parents may not want to know the child they gave. They may want privacy.

The key thing is that the parents should have the right to accept or decline a meeting with the child.

It may be they gave the child up because they didn't want it, or because they weren't able to look after it, or because there were some other social factors at play. It wasn't that long ago that giving birth outside of marriage was considered shameful. It may be that they dearly wanted to keep the child but simply weren't in a position to be able to do so - maybe someone who lost their home when pregnant. It may be they gave the child up and spent the next years regretting their decision but couldn't turn back the clock.

I don't suppose it would do much for the self esteem of someone who spent untold weeks or months tracing their biological parents only to have a door shut in their face, whether metaphorically or literally, because their biological parents want nothing to do with them. I'd also wonder how many biological fathers wouldn't even know that a child exists and how they would react to the news. At least a biological mother would know she had a child and know that she gave it up.

 

[Messy3]

The key thing is that the parents should have the right to accept or decline a meeting with the child.

It may be they gave the child up because they didn't want it, or because they weren't able to look after it, or because there were some other social factors at play. It wasn't that long ago that giving birth outside of marriage was considered shameful. It may be that they dearly wanted to keep the child but simply weren't in a position to be able to do so - maybe someone who lost their home when pregnant. It may be they gave the child up and spent the next years regretting their decision but couldn't turn back the clock.

I don't suppose it would do much for the self esteem of someone who spent untold weeks or months tracing their biological parents only to have a door shut in their face, whether metaphorically or literally, because their biological parents want nothing to do with them. I'd also wonder how many biological fathers wouldn't even know that a child exists and how they would react to the news. At least a biological mother would know she had a child and know that she gave it up.

I don't think they should have that right, but yes what use is it for the kid to know they hate em.

 

[tango]

I don't think they should have that right, but yes what use is it for the kid to know they hate em.

If adoption is to be presented as a viable alternative to abortion I think parents must have the right to say they don't want their children to be given more than very basic medical details.

If you're saying that parents shouldn't have the right to decline meeting the child they gave up 10, 20, 50 years ago it makes adoption look like a far less attractive option. It's not about the kid knowing they are hated - how can you hate someone you never knew? - but about the biological parents not wanting anything to do with the child.

For good measure it potentially complicates things if a child long since given away for adoption traces their biological parents and tries to make a claim to their estate after they have died.

 

[Messy3]

If adoption is to be presented as a viable alternative to abortion I think parents must have the right to say they don't want their children to be given more than very basic medical details.

If you're saying that parents shouldn't have the right to decline meeting the child they gave up 10, 20, 50 years ago it makes adoption look like a far less attractive option. It's not about the kid knowing they are hated - how can you hate someone you never knew? - but about the biological parents not wanting anything to do with the child.

For good measure it potentially complicates things if a child long since given away for adoption traces their biological parents and tries to make a claim to their estate after they have died.

Not hate but indifference. Maybe even worse. I often watched a tv program where they searched for their biological parents and some just wanted nothing to do with them, which was really sad. It used to be that seed donors could be anonymous, but they changed that here in 2004, because kids come first. But yes if it prevents an abortion then let them. Who wants to meet someone like that anyway?

 

[Forgiven1]

There are adoptees in our families. They have all found there biological parents. One has no interest in meeting her son. One has had a good relationship with hers. Two (full blooded siblings) have had contact with their biological mother. Not sure if that has been good for them. The last one, both her biological parents are deceased so she was an orphan.

I think adoptees should be able to know their biological medical history at least. Other than that, it depends on the people involved about any further relationships.

 

[tango]

Not hate but indifference. Maybe even worse. I often watched a tv program where they searched for their biological parents and some just wanted nothing to do with them, which was really sad. It used to be that seed donors could be anonymous, but they changed that here in 2004, because kids come first. But yes if it prevents an abortion then let them. Who wants to meet someone like that anyway?

It's sad but if parents are given the right to say they want nothing to do with their biological offspring it saves the children from conducting a long search only for it to end with a door shut in their face. Whether that door is literal or metaphorical, if they knew in advance that the parents didn't want to know them they would at least have advance warning before they started the process. It would also potentially mean the entire process could be simplified if it went through some central agency, although then there would be the potential for personal information to leak. Entities with large amounts of personal data don't seem to be as good at keeping it secure as they should be.

 

[Messy3]

It's sad but if parents are given the right to say they want nothing to do with their biological offspring it saves the children from conducting a long search only for it to end with a door shut in their face. Whether that door is literal or metaphorical, if they knew in advance that the parents didn't want to know them they would at least have advance warning before they started the process. It would also potentially mean the entire process could be simplified if it went through some central agency, although then there would be the potential for personal information to leak. Entities with large amounts of personal data don't seem to be as good at keeping it secure as they should be.

Yes but now with DNA they can find out anyway and sometimes find out they have 200 or more half siblings from the same doctor.

 

[tango]

Yes but now with DNA they can find out anyway and sometimes find out they have 200 or more half siblings from the same doctor.

They can find out a certain amount but not necessarily the location of their parents.

DNA testing for the masses seems like it has the potential to wreak all sorts of havoc.