MY LETTER TO YOU:

Ms. Louison — I just finished reading your article online and I felt compelled to write to you. I got the link to your article from a listerve to which I belong. The listserve is made up of people associated with Guatemala adoptions, so I warn you that you may start getting reactions from people on the list. I personally wanted to write to you to let you know that I was disappointed with the negative slant of your article. I would like to know how you gathered your information and how are you personally affected by adoption — specifically international adoption? It seemed that there were many figures and comments that were simply not true. Please allow me to address those: First of all, children are NOT exports. Insinuating that they are is what is truly troubling. I quote you as saying, “Americans do not go overseas because of a lack of children…” Please let me correct you. My husband and I DID choose to go to Guatemala because we were unable to adopt a HEALTHY infant in the U.S. without feeling that we had to “win over” a birthmother in hopes she would pick us. Not to mention the fear that the child could be taken from us if the birthmother (1) has a change of heart within a specific amount of time; (2) decides to marry the boy/man who got her pregnant; (3) the courts decide that she has cleaned up her act and “deserves” her child back. We wanted a healthy infant that we could parent, not co-parent with a birthmother. We felt that was the healthiest situation for a child and would not be as confusing. Third — we did not spend $40,000 for our adoption like you stated. I think it would be difficult for you to find many people who actually did spend that much. I think that $20,000-25,000 would be more like it. People spend that much (and WAY more!) on a car — isn’t it worth the money to give a child a family? You also said, “here were approximately 542,000 children in the foster care system in the United States as of September 30, 2001.” Do you know if all of these children were available for adoption or just stuck in our failing foster care system? Our country MUST reform the foster care system to allow adoptive parents to adopt these children without ongoing problems and fears. Sadly, it is easier to adopt a child internationally than in the U.S. because of the finality of the adoption itself. I don’t want a child ripped out of my home and my heart because of a loophole in a U.S. law. Adoption should be forever and some states’ adoption laws don’t seem to view it that way. You said: “Middle class parents send them an undeniable message by chosing to predominantly adopt from abroad: you are less desirable than a child whose skin color is closer to our own.” That was not part of our criteria when we decided to pursue adoption. We wanted a healthy infant who would be in our family forever. Sadly, we just couldn’t find a baby to match those criteria in the U.S. Birthmothers in the U.S have different opportunities than birthmothers in other countries. We are a rich country compared to other countries, such as Guatemala. Birthmothers here have birth control readily available, Medicaid, welfare to help them get back on their feet, and programs to assist unwed mothers. These things are not available in many other countries, so their option is adoption. Many times, the children born in other countries are born without birth defects caused from drug use because drugs just aren’t available to them. We felt that we had the best chance for a healthy baby if we looked at adopting from outside the U.S. Birthmothers in other countries just want what all mothers want — a safe, healthy home for their child. Does an American child deserve a home more than a Guatemalan-born child? Perhaps instead of taking the time to bash those of us who have adopted internationally, you could better use your time to investigate the problems with adopting within the U.S. Thank you for your time.

— Cindy, adoptive parent to one son born in Guatemala

YOUR RESPONSE:

Dear Ms. ____:

I appreciate your response to the ITF PULSE posting. I am not an expert on adoption, but felt it was important to highlight some of the interesting and disappointing implications of The Christian Science Monitor article. While I understand this is a personal issue for you, I in no way meant to disparage international adoption, but instead merely sought to contrast it with adoption of African American children by citizens of other countries. I hope you will keep reading In The Fray, and I encourage you to respond to the post if you would like a more public forum for your comments.

— Laura Louison

MY RESPONSE:

I am disappointed that your article made it seem like you WERE an expert — quoting figures and statements as if they were truth and that International adoption was fueled by racist Caucasians. How can you twist those statisitics into “racism?”

We had love to give and our child was desparately in need of a home. How could we say no, just to sit in line for an American child? Sorry — that seems a little prejudiced to me — that an American child should be adopted before a child from another country.
PLEASE investigate your statements thoroughly before you publish them. I wonder how many readers may now have a negative view and think that, because I adopted from Guatemala, I must be racist. That just seems absurd…

—Cindy

In The Fray Contributor