Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

The Cost of the Color of Skin.

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
In the U.S., some private adoption facilitators have made it more expensive to adopt a white child than a black child, which is causing controversy because this reminds some people of the day when people were allowed to sell other beings.
One explanation is that this is supposedly a supply and demand thing. There are fewer caucasian babies up for adoption, but they are in high demand, so subsequently the price of the babies is spiked.

Another explanation, and in my mind, a more kosher explanation, is that there is a price disparity because children of other races are more difficult to place.

One more explanation given is that minority mothers are more likely to have financial support paying for the expense of them having their baby while in the case of white mothers, the adoptive parents pick up their expenses.

Which is the true explanation, I don’t know, however it may be according to the situation.

What are your opinions on the topic?

Is this too much like the days of the slave trade to be okay?

For more information, go to http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/adoption_race020312.html .

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Lanni:
    <STRONG>In the U.S., some private adoption facilitators have made it more expensive to adopt a white child than a black child, which is causing controversy because this reminds some people of the day when people were allowed to sell other beings.
    One explanation is that this is supposedly a supply and demand thing. There are fewer caucasian babies up for adoption, but they are in high demand, so subsequently the price of the babies is spiked.

    Another explanation, and in my mind, a more kosher explanation, is that there is a price disparity because children of other races are more difficult to place.

    One more explanation given is that minority mothers are more likely to have financial support paying for the expense of them having their baby while in the case of white mothers, the adoptive parents pick up their expenses.

    Which is the true explanation, I don’t know, however it may be according to the situation.

    What are your opinions on the topic?

    Is this too much like the days of the slave trade to be okay?

    For more information, go to http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/adoption_race020312.html .</STRONG>

    Selling black babies on the cheap..sounds like the slave trade to me.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Buying and selling of babies is disgusting. Anyone who sells their child to another couple is scum, be they black or white..Scum, nothing but.

    As for the race issue, I dont see that there is one really. Certainly not racism. The black birth rate is much larger than the white over in the USA. There are many more black babies being born into poverty which means more being 'sold' <IMG SRC="mad.gif" border="0" ALT="icon"> .

    Even though its not a race issue, it should be banned completely. Makes me angry just thinking about it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I knew the US put down criminals and imprisoned people without charge, but I didn't realise even they were this barbaric.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Vox populi, vox Dei:
    <STRONG>I knew the US put down criminals and imprisoned people without charge, but I didn't realise even they were this barbaric.</STRONG>

    You didn't, so erm...what was the name of that couple who bought twins in the USA???
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I meant its barbaric that its even legal. In the case of the Kilshaws, the children were taken into protective custody by British social services when they were brought back to the UK.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I believe these are private adoption agencies..We have them here as well, its perfectly legal. The Kilshaws were only taken to task because they bought theirs over the internet and there was an issue with the original mother. The couple pays an adoption agency a fee and then that agency sees what babies they have on their books and then organise a deal between the mother and the couple, of course taking their commission in the process.

    White babies are more expensive because there are far less of them for sale. Its not because they are more 'desirable'. There are many more black people in poverty in the US which means many more people willing to sell their black babies.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The whole thing stinks

    As for the race issue I think supply and demand sounds about right to me. They are the two most powerful forces in the world and are present in every sphere of human activity so why not adoption?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Perhaps they SHOULD do the same in this country for Babies and older children as very few people who want to adopt are prepared to adopt any child over the age of 2. Basically people are so selfish - they want babies when there are thousands of older children screaming out to be given a good home, good parents and a future.
    While they are sitting in Foster homes and Care homes several parents are fighting over the very few babies that are available.

    These people don't want to be parents as badly as they claim, they want to adopt something young and cute and pliable.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Not sure I understand you there byny..If people dont want to adopt older kids at the moment then what good will charging them money to do adopt them do? Or am i misreading your point.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by byny:
    <STRONG>Basically people are so selfish - they want babies when there are thousands of older children screaming out to be given a good home, good parents and a future.
    While they are sitting in Foster homes and Care homes several parents are fighting over the very few babies that are available.

    These people don't want to be parents as badly as they claim, they want to adopt something young and cute and pliable.</STRONG>

    Is it any surprise though...? Research shows attachment to parental figures are made within the first 18 months...
    There's a strong link between privation (lack of attachment figure) and behavioural problems in later life.

    This is not a justification, merely a possible explination.
    I think that people should go more for the older kids. They're more likely to need it, but I understand why it doesn't happen as often as it should.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yes, it has been proved that the first three years are the most crucial in development regarding upbringing.
Sign In or Register to comment.