In one thread on one of the blogs, I received this response:
"Separation of a child from her mother is not and should not be a solution to teen pregnancy, a punishment or corrective for sexually active teens or women and should not be promoted as anything of the sort by the church!"
This is my response:
We agree regarding punishment. I don't understand where you're coming from with your first statement, unless you are against adoption entirely?
Separation of a child from her mother *IS* a solution to teen pregnancy. It is an improper solutioin when it is forced or coerced, for certain, but adoption is most certainly a worthy solution in my view.
And, I don't believe I am oversimplifying. What we are talking about are unethical adoptions... coerced adoptions... and the most likely victims are children (e.g., teenagers) who are dependent upon others for their own livelihoods and, thus, are the most susceptible to decision making being done by others (which we both agree is wrong).
Teenage pregnancy is, indeed, down. But, I read a statistic somewhere that said that 1,000,000 teens in the U.S. will get pregnant this year.
Half of those are 17 or younger.
Reduce this number... and reduce the likelihood of unethical adoption practices.
The church should be leading the way in this regard. If legislation is necessary to force them to use efforts to maintain the family first, then so be it.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Monday, April 14, 2008
Religion in Adoption
There has been recent discussion in the adoption blogosphere regarding the interplay between religion and adoption (See Third Mom and Mia's Saving Grace and their comment sections) .
The ultimate issue that is not being addressed here is the issue of basic morality that falls outside of the religious plain. That issue is: Do we want our babies having their own babies? Do we want laws that will require parents of teen children to raise their grandchildren?
Are we so focused on adoption reform that we can't see the proverbial forest (teen pregnancy is NOT a good thing) from the trees (preservation of the family)?
Certainly, the underlying problem here in adoption is NOT religion. It is teen pregnancy. And, if religion is one of the few bastions that refuses to tolerate teen pregnancy or implicitly support teen pregnancy by staying silent, then I say Thank God!
Does this mean that I support coercion on the part of churches and other religious groups to force young women to relinquish their children?
Certainly not.
But, religion's condemnation of teen pregnancy and the problems that it poses REQUIRE, in my view, that religion also provide family planning solutions that should not be solely limited to abortion ala Planned Parenthood.
Common ground? I believe that religious-based adoption organizations should have it first on their minds to counsel with the default thinking that the child should stay with his/her mother. And, I believe it is very correct that such organizations (as a whole) do not do this right now, and this should be changed (and mandated, perhaps, by law for ALL agencies, religious and secular).
In the end, I believe that religion and adoption mix quite well, and those opposing a mix between the two have emotional blinders on.
The ultimate issue that is not being addressed here is the issue of basic morality that falls outside of the religious plain. That issue is: Do we want our babies having their own babies? Do we want laws that will require parents of teen children to raise their grandchildren?
Are we so focused on adoption reform that we can't see the proverbial forest (teen pregnancy is NOT a good thing) from the trees (preservation of the family)?
Certainly, the underlying problem here in adoption is NOT religion. It is teen pregnancy. And, if religion is one of the few bastions that refuses to tolerate teen pregnancy or implicitly support teen pregnancy by staying silent, then I say Thank God!
Does this mean that I support coercion on the part of churches and other religious groups to force young women to relinquish their children?
Certainly not.
But, religion's condemnation of teen pregnancy and the problems that it poses REQUIRE, in my view, that religion also provide family planning solutions that should not be solely limited to abortion ala Planned Parenthood.
Common ground? I believe that religious-based adoption organizations should have it first on their minds to counsel with the default thinking that the child should stay with his/her mother. And, I believe it is very correct that such organizations (as a whole) do not do this right now, and this should be changed (and mandated, perhaps, by law for ALL agencies, religious and secular).
In the end, I believe that religion and adoption mix quite well, and those opposing a mix between the two have emotional blinders on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)