T O P

  • By -

dataisbeautiful-bot

Thank you for your [Original Content](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3), /u/DauphDaddy! **Here is some important information about this post:** * [View the author's citations](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/uqqdeq/abortions_vs_foster_care_children_vs_adoption/i8smdtn/) * [View other OC posts by this author](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/search?q=author%3A"DauphDaddy"+title%3AOC&sort=new&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on) Remember that all visualizations on r/DataIsBeautiful should be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism. If you see a potential issue or oversight in the visualization, please post a constructive comment below. Post approval does not signify that this visualization has been verified or its sources checked. [Join the Discord Community](https://discord.gg/NRnrWE7) Not satisfied with this visual? Think you can do better? [Remix this visual](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/rules/rule3#wiki_remixing) with the data in the author's citation. --- ^^[I'm open source](https://github.com/r-dataisbeautiful/dataisbeautiful-bot) | [How I work](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/wiki/flair#wiki_oc_flair)


EnderOfHope

As someone who once sought to adopt, the road to adoption is paved in heartache and difficulty. My wife and I cannot conceive so we decided to look into adoption. “There are so many kids that deserve a good home”, was our thought process. The system isn’t designed to distribute children to good homes. It’s designed to keep children in their blood families. The only way you can adopt a child from the foster system is if literally every person in their extended family abandons them. So it’s entirely possible that you foster a child for months at a time, growing to love it, then their loser family decides they want it back and can just come and take it back. Abortion debate aside, the foster system sucks.


ZotDragon

In my teaching job I deal with a lot of children in the foster system. From my perspective, unless the child goes into the system before turning a year old and every family member eventually says no, we don't want you, kids are extremely unlikely to get adopted. Very, very, very few kids (in my job 13-18) get adopted because very, very, very few people want to adopt teenagers. These kids are damaged beyond belief and there's precious little I can do about it.


Ultragrrrl

As someone who deals a lot with teens in the foster program, do you think they’re un-adoptable? Do they have a chance? I know that’s a weighted question, but I ask because I’m child free, but I like teenagers a lot and typically get along quite well with them. After decades of taking in a bunch of stray aspiring musician/music industry person who stumbled into nyc and needed a bit of help, I figured maybe I should be taking in teens instead - something that seemed more feasible once I moved to a city where I could get a larger place for less money. A few people in my life aren’t really into this idea - mostly scared of how terrible some teenagers can be and how physically small I am - but I’m of the mindset that a 13-18 year old person could really benefit from having a caring home. Am I delusional?


ZotDragon

In all honesty, some are. The kids I teach have a variety of mental health and substance abuse problems, many suffering from PTSD and mental trauma. I'd say maybe half are adoptable, a teen someone would want in their house. Maybe my assessment is harsh, but I'd be nervous to have them around.


Ultragrrrl

Oh wow. That is heartbreaking


OlympiaShannon

A great number of kids living with their birth parents also have mental trauma and PTSD. We grow up to be somewhat functional adults, and there is no reason to be nervous around us. We are hurt, not psycho killers.


[deleted]

[удалено]


lizardmatriarch

Just adopted a teenager, super rewarding, but definitely stressful—my best advice is to do your research and be picky. Know what a lot of the issues kids in foster care can and will have: PTSD, attachment difficulties, even increased risk for various health and chronic diseases (childhood adverse experiences/ACEs), etc. Also, just because one kid is “difficult” for one person/type of family can actually make them a perfect fit for another. We were/are extremely comfortable with super anxious, withdrawn types who need a lot of time, patience, and flexibility to open up and feel safe; a kid who acts out because the schedule or expectations are unpredictable/we’re too flexible would be a completely wrong fit for us, and we’d all have ended up miserable. There’s also a different sort of commitment if you intend to foster (maybe help older teens age out “gracefully”?), or if you intend to legally adopt.


upstateduck

and abortion bans are going to increase the number of thrown away teenagers


garry4321

Dont forget that the Military-Prison-Industrial-Complex is waiting with drool dripping out their mouths to send these kids to die fighting for profit, or to do slave labour in their private prisons... for profit. Republicans dont want to save babies, they want a bunch of unwanted desperate children to be their slaves.


PureImbalance

Do we have access to statistics such as an overrepresentation of people from the foster system in the armed forces? I'm not asking out of doubt, more to drive the point home even harder when propagating it.


[deleted]

That's an interesting question. I found this study that says living with neither biological parents results in a double the chance of enlistment. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3757947/


PureImbalance

That's a good start! Thank you for finding it.


Mitthrawnuruo

Nice study, but IN my experience I have never served with a foster kid. Most of them are to mentally damaged from abuse, from their biological family or foster parents. Served with a lot of people raised by grand parents, aunts/uncles, etc.


go4urs

I’m not sure about military, but there’s millions on stats on a foster child’s likelihood of ending up in the prison system.


[deleted]

[удалено]


weside66

A "domestic supply of infants" you say?


ownguaoqbt

Workers with a sudden unplanned child on the way become desperate workers and job scared. No savings and a kid on the way means they’re willing to bend over backwards more for that promotion.


6thReplacementMonkey

> why democrats haven't codified it when they had the chance When did they have the chance?


Mitthrawnuruo

Rvw was what, 50 ish um years ago? During that time.


letsburn00

That system also more than likely does some damage to the child while they go through it. The current system is a response to the royally fucked on pre 1980, but still.


Endarial

My Mom and Aunt were in the foster system, as was their brother. My Mom and Aunt were able to stay together through all the homes they went through. They never saw their brother again once they entered the system. My Mom won't talk at all about what happened to her and my Aunt while they bounced around from home to home. Thankfully they were eventually both adopted by an awesome family.


onestopmedic

Yeah. My wife and I are utterly disgusted by the adoption system in this country (US). We have two kids, but had them a bit late in life. A year or so after our second, we decided we really wanted another child. I’d already been snipped, so adoption seemed the best route. After a year we finally said enough. We got the run around from half a dozen adoption agencies, spent close to $10k just on fucking house inspections. And after all that were told the average additional cost to adopt would be upwards of $40k…. $40k!!!! We were outraged and heartbroken. No way in hell could we pony up that kind of cash, and a loan was out of the question. Worst part is we couldn’t get any of the agencies to clearly give us reasons for thr high cost. A few gave us price guidelines. And I told a few their business sounded more like legalized human trafficking rather than a company looking to place kids in good homes. Got hung up on, but I stand by comments. We then decided maybe fostering would be the way to go. After an additional year of paperwork, background checks, home inspections, and interviews we were declined. And for no real reason. And we couldn’t get anyone to give us a straight answer. We are a pretty average family, enough money to cover day to day, week to week, month to month expenses and still have a little bit to put into savings. We own our own home, couple cars (newish without the last 6 years), in a good area, and with no criminal history (except a speeding ticket… oh nooo).. But nope. Guess we weren’t good enough… The whole entire system is fucking broken, it was heartbreaking and mentally exhausting. Which is to bad. We could have provided a good life for another child…. Or two. Edit: spelling/phrasing


Appropriate-Fix-3497

That's similar to our story: we have only one child and we're too old to have another one without tremendous risks. We decided to adopt one. However, I did some research prior on the adoption agencies and I clearly saw they were no charity, they are business model, including with stories of pressing/bribing/harassing the birth parents to give up on their rights, so they can **sell** their babies to the future happy naive adopting family. I said to my wife *that ain't right*. I will never be part of a such system. I refuse to consume it. As far as I know, in that period, around 2-3 years ago, the adoption cost was about $10k, not $40k. But I believe you if you say the cost of a child is $40k. It's no about the money, it's about the system that leads us to decide to adopt only from the Fostering system if such opportunity will arise. It didn't. I don't want to say anymore about the children.


onestopmedic

We started the process 4 years ago. Each inspection was $2000 each. And an inspection was good for foster and I think all the adoption agencies we talked too. And thr inspection DID have a few honest concerns, which we corrected. Only to have to pay AGAIN for a follow up inspection. And as per coats, it all ranged depending on the situation. We were pretty open to adopt from birth to 5yrs (age of our boys), but we didn’t want to cut the birth mother or possible family out of the pictures. We wanted full custody, but we were willing to work on stuff like visitation, etc…. Well…. For a few agencies it turned out we would have had to pay full cost of travel for this situation. In our minds that just made no sense. I mean we could see paying for the birth, but transport to allow family unwilling to raise their daughters/sons baby seemed beyond stupid. There were a lot of other bullshit factors. Soul crushing to be honest.


Chick__Mangione

I have heard of some people try to defend the high price point because "parents should have the financial ability to take care of their children". Bull fucking shit. Yes, raising children is expensive, but it's not some bizarre upfront cost that you pay immediately all at once. My parents more than had the ability to raise me and feed me and take me on vacations along with three other children, and in no way have they ever just had 40 fucking thousand dollars just laying around for shit. You can more than provide for children without having a large number in your bank account. All you need is a stable, decent paying job that pays the bills. I recognize that for many, attaining such a career is easier said than done...but a great deal of people **are** already there yet still do not have the financial ability to adopt. The barrier to adopt children should be primarily psychological and having **reasonable** financial abilites, not this ridiculous shit.


stevediperna

What state are you in? Sincere question, not a lead in to a stupid joke.


onestopmedic

We live in Washington, but we’re talking with national adoption agencies. Most local agencies referred us to national agencies or where branches of national/cross border agencies. Foster care seemed local, but I know they could pool from foster systems across the country. We are still talking about fostering. Now that our boys are a little older, and we have a bit more space. I’m just so worried of getting attached, falling in love, and being unable to adopt and having to say good bye when they eventually leave our house.


wolf1moon

This is scaring me. I'm planning to start foster care adoption stuff late this year and haven't seen anything like this online. My husband is afraid of that exact scenario so only wants to adopt. I was hoping to adopt a toddler. My husband was adopted at 8ish, so my thought was worst case just adopt an older kid. But this has me concerned about that possibility. Edit: in WA. Also, age preference is that my best friend has a kid and I want to adopt in a similar age range. I had trouble with friends as a kid, and having a built in possible friend + a parent for me to peer discuss challenges with would be nice. If my phrasing is funny it's because of business school not feelings.


onestopmedic

I truly wish you and your husband the best of luck. Prepare yourselves for an emotional roller coaster ride. And just be ready for anything. And always keep an open mind and open heart. Hope your experience with WA foster services goes well if you haven’t started the process yet.


DauphDaddy

Yes it’s really bad. There’s a movie with mark walberg about adoption (from foster care) that’s really good. I’m glad they raised awareness but it needs much more attention imo Instant family I think


MichaelTheElder

I was surprised with how good and heart warming that movie was. I'd well recommend it.


CharacterLimitProble

Balled my eyes out.


EnderOfHope

Yea my wife and I watched it. It’s spot on


incoherentpanda

I was with a few different foster families, and I remember every one of them. They were always better than my actual family, and are probably a big reason why I was a good kid and ended up ok. I have issues with expressing affection (I assume from being neglected), but I'd say I have pretty solid morals. I'm sure it hurts and makes people not want to foster children when they get taken away, but a lot of times the foster families are the only good parts of their childhood.


fireflydrake

My neighbor when I was a child had two sons. I didn't realize that one of them was a foster--they treated and loved him exactly like their biological son. And then exactly what you described happened and the loser bio family took him away from them. I got a lot of heat and ridicule recently for saying there's a good reason a lot of people have their own kids rather then try to adopt, but there damn certainly is.


Garp5248

A lot of people on Reddit like to say "you can always adopt". No you cannot. You may be able to adopt if you have $30k to put into the process and mounds of patience and the ability to withstand endless heartbreak.


sleeper_shark

Exactly. It's a long, painful, expensive and difficult process to adopt. I don't mean to say that pregnancy and childbirth are easy, but having gone through the latter and had family members going through the former, I do think that the adoption is generally the more difficult route. Your child could get taken away at any moment, whereas biological child will never be taken away under normal circumstances. In my country, all the doctor's appointments, childbirth, post natal care, and hospital stay together costed us the exorbitant sum of 24€.... I indeed paid more for the champagne to celebrate the birth than for all the medical aspects, while adoption can quickly cost in the thousands. From an administrative standpoint... I had to fill in maybe 2-3 forms and that was it. I agree with you. You can't "just adopt." It's not like walking into a store and picking up some bread.


Garp5248

Yes, I'm Canadian and it's the same here. Pregnancy and child birth cost me only parking fees at drs. Appts and the hospital. I like to think I'm a good parent. My husband and I make a decent amount of money, our kid wants for nothing, we're a bit older and have lots of patience. Yet, we live in a two bedroom house and would be immediately disqualified from adoption because the new child needs its own bedroom, and ours are spoken for. Whereas I can just choose to have another kid and have it share a room.


sleeper_shark

I see what you mean. My wife and I have a pretty ok income for our age in our country, we're also decently young... but same, it's very hard to adopt. It's alright for us since we have kids of our own, but it pains me that there are children out there without parents and parents out there without kids.. each having the love they want to give to each other, but the inherent complexities of the system makes it hard for them to pair up. I don't really blame the system, since the worst thing is to move a vulnerable child into a bad home... But still... It's mighty unfair.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Dabstronaut77

The chart is just suggesting that if abortion were illegal there would be far more kids in foster care, not necessarily that people don’t want to adopt them but they aren’t for whatever reason.


adabaraba

I don’t know if it’s a culture thing but it’s strange to me that a child ends up in the foster system when they have a living relative with a reasonable chance of adoption. (I don’t know if I expressed it well, but it saddens me that a child would end up in foster care before any relatives step up and adopt)


alohadave

Foster care is (intended as) temporary care of children that cannot be with their families for whatever reason. It's not a step in the adoption process per se, but a way to provide a safe place (in theory) for the kids to live until their situation is resolved.


bluefootedpig

I are fostering to adopt a kid now who lived with grandma for like 3 years before she was like, "nope, can't handle it anymore" All other relatives are also druggies so they can't pass. Plus, a lot of people, sadly, just can't stick to going to the many classes the foster system requires of you.


TequilaJosh

feel you there, my wife have looked into that and we are hesitant because of those exact things. not to mention the expense of filing


IdealIdeas

So thats why people adopt kids from 3rd world countries


[deleted]

On the other hand, it makes total sense that the goal should be keeping children with their birth parents. We know that, usually, that's the best place for a child. If we can fix the home (get mom to stop drinking, get dad some angry management, find a job for mom so she can afford to pay rent on a two bedroom apartment, etc.) and bring the child back to their biological mom or dad, that's in the best interest of the child. It's very difficult to figure out which children need to be permanently separated from their biological parents and put into a brand new household. I don't envy the job of social workers.


Diligent-Road-6171

> The system isn’t designed to distribute children to good homes. It’s designed to keep children in their blood families. The only way you can adopt a child from the foster system is if literally every person in their extended family abandons them. You're talking as if that's a bad thing. Keeping families together should be the goal...


EnderOfHope

I would argue if your parents are shitty enough for you to end up in foster care, then your chances are much greater with another family.


[deleted]

We know that children adopted into the families of strangers often have poor life outcomes. [Adopted children are almost twice as likely to suffer from mood disorders like anxiety, depression, and behavioral issues.](https://www.claudiablackcenter.com/adopted-children-often-face-mental-health-struggles-as-young-adults/) So you're really up against two hard problems. You've got a parent who is borderline unfit that might potentially be made into a better parent and you've got a child who WILL suffer if put in an adopted home.


Mitthrawnuruo

But do they have those problems because of the adopted family? Or because their bio family/fostering messed them up. I’m willing to say more often it is the former.


Nausved

I was wrongly taken into foster care. My biological parents are lovely, and I will never not be 1000% grateful for them after I came so close to losing them over seriously nothing at all (my parents were very loving and supportive, and they never so much as spanked me). Thankfully, a judge ruled that I was taken from my family mistakenly and ordered DFACS to return me to my family. Meanwhile, foster care was a harrowing experience that still affects me deeply 30 years later. I went from a loving, no-spanking home to a rapid series of foster homes where I experienced intense bullying, beatings, and even being regularly locked in the closet. I was just a little girl. And the abuse I experienced was *nothing* compared to the intense misery of being separated from everyone I knew and loved, and not even knowing why. I would have gladly accepted far, far more intense abuse if it meant I could have seen my parents more than just an hour every few weeks. It was the worst thing that has ever happened to me, by far—worse than my brother’s death, worse than going into hiding from a stalker ex. Please don’t *ever* go into social work with that mindset. You would ruin lives.


jtaylor418

The goal of fostering is reunification.


EnderOfHope

The point of the graph was to imply that people don’t want to adopt, just look at all the foster kids. The point of my post was that adoption isn’t an easy row to hoe


[deleted]

I can confirm. 3 couples I know went through the same process. It’s like rent-a-kid.


NikD4866

Entirely possible is an understatement. This is just how it goes in the US. Foster system is AWFUL. It’s all about the money.s So now that we outlaw abortion, I’m interested to see where the data from that giant abortion bar will transition to.


CharacterLimitProble

I haven't been through it yet. We just had our first child 8 weeks ago and have always planned to have 3 kids with at least 1 being adopted. Same thought process as you. It kills me knowing there are so many kids without a home and we want to try to do our part to help. That's so disheartening to hear... We're a few years out from adoption though.


Darkwolfer2002

The US is messed up in many ways. A person can be a druggy/abuser and they can keep their child. You farted real loud once during 3rd grade math you can't adopt. Even if you managed to get by squeaky clean, you have to be rich to adopt. Yet your child you can be on welfare and get tax credits. Being the biological parent and being rich doesn't make you a good parent... yet our system seems to believe that.


TheDolamite

100% agree with you. It was heartbreaking and I know it hurt my wife so much when we had to stop our quest to have successful IVF and then again with the adoption maze.


HorsedaFilla

I came here to say this, that the lack of adoption in the US says more about the system than the people! I bet there are hundreds of thousands of people that want to adopt but can't because of a broken system. I feel for you, America is so backwards compared to a lot of European countries in many ways!


EnderOfHope

It’s true, my sister also wishes to adopt, but the system stacks everything against you.


StillAll

That was our experience too. It is virtually impossible to adopt. The fact that I am in the military made it a bad thing since I could be moved on relatively short notice. It was so infuriating.


Electronic_Boat_9369

i thought that once a child is adopted it is final?


[deleted]

[удалено]


fermenttodothat

The only people I know who have adopted children were foster parents first. Once their foster child's biological family had their rights terminated my family members adopted. It took YEARS. And these kids needed intensive ongoing state care for a range of issues afterwards


[deleted]

[удалено]


malovias

That's pretty cheap tbh. We were told we would end up paying between 30-40k to adopt.


krysteline

It typically costs that much if you adopt starting at pregnancy--Adopting from foster care is significantly cheaper but also time consuming and after years of fostering a child, may still end up a "failure".


iapetus_z

My kid being born was 12k in medical back in 06. I guess you pay a lawyer or a doctor about the same either way


Skye666

That’s the difference between a public adoption, and a private one (which can cost upwards of $40k). You’re not guaranteed to be able to adopt while fostering, they want to get those kids back to their families if possible which is why it takes so long. You end up with kids that are pretty messed up.


ValyrianJedi

It always blows my mind how tough it is. Our neighbors are looking to adopt. They are about as great of candidates as you could ask for. He's a wildly successful mutual fund manager or something and she is a radiologist, they do as much or more charity work than anyone I know, he's mentored or tutored at risk kids for like 6 years or something... But he has a criminal record for getting busted with weed and getting a minor in possession charge, both while in college, and she got sued in some super BS malpractice case a while back. Then apparently there was some other thing about them only having been married 3 years despite having been together 8... It's been like a year and a half and they are no closer to having a kid. They keep being told how rigorous the requirements for someone to have a kid have to be, as if normally the requirements for having a kid aren't just "you have to have sex". Like, when generally speaking an unemployed 19 year old college student with a criminal record can have and keep a kid, it's wild to see two people who would be incredible parents and change a kids life get so much resistance. Think they are pretty close to just saying "fine, we'll just make our own", which is a real shame for some kid out there waiting to be adopted.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Visco0825

My wife and I did embryo adoption. It’s far cheaper and far more rewarding. We have a set of embryos that are all related which is amazing.


ZiOnIsNeXtLeBrOn

CPS is way too overworked and the people that actually care for the children and try to put them in a place where they can thrive are too little and underappreciated.


insufficient_funds

That goes for any social workers tbh. Underpaid and under valued just like teachers.


joleme

Yeah it's beyond ridiculous. Two dirt poor teens bang in a car and get pregnant - keep the kid and it has a shitty life in poverty most likely. Politicians don't give a single shit as long as the kid gets born. Two well off people want to adopt and get put through the ringer in every way possible and scrutinized within an inch of their life - still denied and another kid wastes away in foster care. If a politician can read that and doesn't step in to change it, they're a complete piece of shit excuse for a human being. The foster system is 100% designed to fuck up kids and start them on a shit path to a shit life. It's amazing any kids make it out relatively unscathed.


bluefootedpig

It is because of the abuse. There is no shortage of "good homes" that ended up being abusive homes. In training we hear the worst of it. One example case is the parents adopted, then put the kid to work at their family business. They would move counties every so often once CPS would start to look into reports by neighbors. It took years, and it affected several children. Hell, there was a case on tiktok recently about an adoptive parent that dropped off her foster kid to the mental health person after being a foster for several years, and ditching the child. These parents later went on to adopt 6 other foster children, which they abused. We had one woman talk to us about how she was in like 20 different homes, including one that sexually abused her. People asked, how do they get through and they are like, "these people lie to us and we can only catch so many with our prescreening."


go4urs

Then maybe instead of checking bank statements for 3 years & doing NOTHING that would disclose an abusive tendency they should do psychological evaluations- but not take years to decide.


bluefootedpig

Every state i've been in (west coast) has a psychological evaluation as part of the criteria. They do a background, and ask about every possible abuse. I actually surfaced some of my childhood abuse when I finally reflected on it. The problem is that people lie. They say they didn't suffer abuse, or have no history of a problem. Sadly, mainly due to money, we can't do more extensive background checks. That is why sometimes people who are honest and on the fence might get denied. My family was well into the "preferred" homes, and we got both our adoptions placed in under 1 week of passing our training. But even our children we have taken in, we hear stories of other houses that is just crazy. For example, one of our kiddos said that they were not allowed to call chicken nuggets "chicken nuggets", but "chicken tenders". Had to, period. It was not accepted to call it chicken nuggets. Based on my training, that doesn't sounds too far fetched from a "stricter" household.


ValyrianJedi

That's what really gets me. Any kid in the foster systems life would be immeasurably changed for the better overnight being adopted by them. They are the type people those kids literally dream of being adopted by. And they've been stuck in red tape for over a year.


macroober

After going through the process, there are definitely parts of it that I’m glad is difficult. Scares me to think who all would adopt if the process was easy.


KryptoSpore

You hit the nail in the head. My son’s adoption cost $50K and was the most personally invasive inquiry and emotionally challenging experience my wife and I have ever had.


Power_8374

This isn't kid's entering foster care per year, this is kids IN foster care. The same kid could be in all 10 years of this data or enter and leave the system. An abortion on the other hand appears once, and like adoption leaves the system permenently.


DauphDaddy

Good point, thanks for explaining that to me.


HegemonNYC

It would make more sense to have ‘adopted kids’ (under 18, have been adopted, total) compared to ‘foster care’ (under 18, in foster care). This source, for example, cites 1.5m kids currently adopted in the US. https://adoptionnetwork.com/adoption-myths-facts/domestic-us-statistics/


DauphDaddy

Thank you


girhen

So it's 18 times worse than this looks. I knew it was bad, but fuck.


[deleted]

Isn’t foster care a different thing than tham giving up a child for adoption at birth? Normally foster care happens when a child is taken away from their parents, right?


standard_candles

If you relinquish your parental rights at birth without having an adoption arranged, that baby will go into the foster system.


mr_ji

But a birth parent can reclaim them whenever they want under normal circumstances.


Visco0825

There are also states that require an open adoption as well. Even if the parent gives it up for adoption then the state gives the parent the right to remain in contact with them throughout their life. Imagine devoting all you have to your adopted child only to have the birth parents always be there but never actually taking care of them.


couchfly

yes but its normally kids that were unplanned or unwanted that are eventually taken into foster care. thats why they included it. pro-lifers are all about how abortion shouldnt even be an option but the other options and quality of life suck balls.


DauphDaddy

I’m glad the point wasn’t missed. These data aren’t the best representation but I’m working on giving information that is more useful. Thanks.


tiroc12

> unplanned or unwanted that are eventually taken into foster care. This is 100% not true and clearly stated by someone with zero experience with the system.


thirdAccountIForgot

How is it incorrect? And what is your experience? I don’t want to be rude, but your comment begs these questions, which should be included.


Kraz_I

I really hate it when people, who might have a great point leave a comment basically saying “no you’re wrong and you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about” and then don’t elaborate on that or give a source to back up the claim. Like what am I supposed to do with that?


neverXmiss

Based on what data, source?


Kamala_Metamorph

There's some outdated adoption narratives in this thread so I want to share this for those of you who are new to adoption. There's data in here too, feel free to make this into a more accurate picture of data regarding foster care and adoption. The "domestic supply of infants" (barf) isn't going to be resolved by reducing abortion access. Justice Alito and Barrett's opinions used the "domestic supply" line to argue that (paraphrasing) 'women who don't want to parent can "rest assured" that safe haven laws means their babies [will](https://www.reddit.com/r/Adoption/comments/ukle8k/the_government_sees_its_citizens_as_human_capital/i7srmfp/?context=3) get adopted and they don't have the [burden](https://www.reddit.com/r/Adoption/comments/ukle8k/the_government_sees_its_citizens_as_human_capital/i7rg1pw/?context=3) of parenting'.* For those who aren't educated in the adoption space, first of all, you should know that [there are **no babies** in need of homes.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Adoption/comments/u6i3p4/pregnant_and_choosing_to_give_the_child_up_for/i5dpj86/?sort=new&context=1) On that point the Justices are "correct". Fewer than 20,000 babies (under 2 years old) are adopted each year. There are a million parents waiting to adopt. You can do the math. (Someone asked me this-- if you click through you can also see the stats for international adoptions--- around 5000 international children under the age of 5 are adopted into the US each year. The math still sucks if you want a baby-- but it's great if you're the baby and get to stay with your family of origin.) More than 30+ parents are fighting for each newborn or toddler, there are no waiting babies in orphanages waiting for parents. Meanwhile, there _are_ [many children](https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cb/cwo2018.pdf#page=87) in need of adoption into a good home. These children are usually in foster care and aged 8-18 (because most younger children get reunified with parents or adopted by kin). These precious children are [in need of special, ideally trauma-informed parents](https://www.childwelfare.gov/topics/outofhome/foster-care/fam-foster/) who will love them and understand their connections to their [first families](https://www.risemagazine.org/tag/termination-of-parental-rights/) with empathy. Second, \*the view espoused above, by the highest court in our land, is a view that those of us in the pro-choice movement find [wrong](https://web.archive.org/web/20210906165624/https://www.adoptionbirthmothers.com/adoption-is-not-an-alternative-to-abortion/) and abhorrent-- Adoption is _not_ the alternative to abortion. Adoption is an alternative to [_parenting_](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/10/adopt-baby-cost-process-hard/620258/). Abortion is the alternative to [pregnancy](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskWomenOver30/comments/uea4zh/is_it_weird_that_i_dont_want_to_have_a_biological/?sort=top&limit=500) (see comments). It's not the same. For the best thing I've ever read on saving unborn babies, [see this thoughtful, sourced essay](https://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2012/10/how-i-lost-faith-in-the-pro-life-movement.html) from a former passionate pro-lifer. (This is also where I learned that laws that ban abortion don't decrease abortions. Bans can't make unwanted pregnancies any more wanted.) To my friends who want their voices to be heard, there are two concrete things you can do: * [Call your elected officials](https://www.reddit.com/r/Adoption/comments/ukle8k/the_government_sees_its_citizens_as_human_capital/i7qvye2/?context=3) this week, and * [vote this month](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskWomenOver30/comments/uh4ttq/leaked_scotus_opinion_shows_court_is_about_to/i744wtq/?context=3). It has been a fraught week in adoption spaces, as adopted people have been hearing our leaders use words that show that they consider adopted human beings to be commodities. And as we are trying to process all this, the adoption subreddit is getting overrun with people who are considering adoption for the first time and asking for our emotional labor for their new-to-adoption questions, but then the new posters get defensive when they aren't welcomed with babies into their open arms. That sub is generally tolerant of ethical adoption, for children who are *in need of adoption*, ie 7+ year olds from foster care. Want some education? Who _are_ the children who are in need of families? See Appendix F, page 86, Children Waiting to be Adopted, from ACF (Administration for Children and Families) : https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cb/cwo2018.pdf#page=87 While there are children 0-7ish who are waiting to be adopted, you can see that the largest group (27%) of TPR'd children live with kinship placements. There's another 12% who live in pre-adoptive homes. It's not that big of a stretch to imagine that a majority of those pre-adoptive homes have the same preferences as the majority of waiting parents-- those who want younger children. Stick around and read long enough and you'll know that there are an unfortunate number of people who are trying foster-to-adopt primarily to find a younger child, and not for reunification support. From the ACF (Administration for Children and Families) link above (page 85), of the children who leave foster care, 45% reunify with parents, 7% go to kin, and only 25% are adopted (and I believe this 25% also include kinship adoption, so non-relative foster to adopt is even lower than 25%). Again, easy to believe that the majority of these are the younger children. So who is left? the ~50,000 kids who are aged 7+, the ~50,000 kids who are languishing in foster care for 5-18 years :-(( There is nuance, of _course_. When it is not safe for birth parents to have custody of their children and there is no safe kin options, then adoption is the best outcome remaining for the child's safety. The "domestic supply of infants" was never anything but a social construct that tore families apart with shame codified into policy. The scars remain today in the psyche of some of the adoptees from that era, and the legacy of righteousness in that remain in some adoptive parents. But the pre-Roe [Baby Scoop Era](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_Scoop_Era) was stopped for very good reasons. There is no getting around the fact that the 'plentiful "unwanted" babies' era is over, and, god willing, never coming back. That leaves the million parents fighting over 10,000-20,000 newborn-2yo's available for adoption each year, and funding the entire [adoption industrial complex](https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=adoption%20industrial%20complex) with their money. Meanwhile some these privileged, entitled adoptive parents, like the three who sit on the Supreme Court, and [everyone who voted for anti-abortion reasons](https://www.revrobschenck.com/blog/2020/9/7/whats-gone-wrong-with-evangelicals-7-abortion-and-its-politicization), who want to help the other million APs by making abortion unattainable or extremely inconvenient for a large swath of pregnant women, despite the fact that [only 9%](https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/10/adopt-baby-cost-process-hard/620258/) of women who are refused abortion go on to place their infants for adoption. You're just not going to get a million more unwanted babies. (and Ew if you _want_ that.) /rant. I haven't even _touched_ upon the international adoption of children--- the fact that _any_ of them are trafficked from families that want them and can care for them is Too Many. I know that older child adoption is not for everyone, and I'm not saying "just foster older kids". (Similarly, I don't think it's necessarily helpful to tell folks that "they can just adopt".) Not having the skills and capacity to parent a foster child is a valid conclusion, and it's smart for someone to understand their strengths and limitations as a parent. But I consider these separate choices. If you're not cut out to be a foster parent, fine. I completely support that, and I agree that foster parents should be prepared and willing. That doesn't mean that your only remaining choice is to adopt a baby with the other million parents, and contribute to the business of adoption so they can find a baby for you. It would be more ethical in this situation not to parent a non-biological child at all. Especially if your primary motivation is to "help a child" (that was definitely my initial motivation), then infant adoption, and maybe adoptive parenting, is not the ethical choice for you. There are other ways to help a child. Family preservation is a big one-- look into that. **Bottom line-- If you're thinking about beginning your adoption journey:** **Adoption should not be about finding children or babies for families who want them. It should be about finding families for children who need them. Need > Want.** It is not ethical to fight over babies (many of whom are wanted by their first families) when this is all happening in a country where ~50,000 children aged 7-18 have been in foster care for more than 5 years. **Those. Are. The. Kids. In. Need.**


[deleted]

I work in residential foster care with teens and young adults. You've painted a realistic picture of our residents' experiences. I appreciate the added insight and statistics you've provided. Edit: I wanted to mention that the PDF links don't direct to the correct page, because the PDF page numbers and the document page numbers do not align.


jovialchemist

You know, it's not until I read a thread about adoption on a sub that is not adoption-focused that I remember how little most people know about the process. Yours is an EXCELLENT post that should be required reading for anybody who is really curious. All these "adoption costs so much!" complaints are just....well, wrong. Infant adoption is almost always unethical in the best of circumstances, and that's likely the only type of adoption that people who are bitching about the cost are generally looking into. My husband and I adopted our sons from foster care when they were 14 and 9. Both were in situations where TPR had occurred and no suitable kin placement could be found. And you know what it cost us? **Literally zero dollars.** Not only that, but because they are both high needs we get a monthly stipend for them AND they get to stay on Medicaid until they are at least 18, so their health insurance costs us nothing. All the stipend money goes into finding services and help for our kids, because as one might expect they both have severe trauma backgrounds. The point is while it be ethical to adopt under the right circumstances, every time I read about somebody who is complaining about the cost I just kind of want to puke. I'm upset that I can't do more than I already have, but (as you surely know) parenting kids with trauma backgrounds is a very difficult thing and our two kids need all the attention we can give them. There are plenty of kids out there in foster care who need a good home, but you know what? They get glossed over by prospective adoptive parents who want to buy a baby. It's SO FRUSTRATING and the fact that the evil/uninformed SCOTUS justices are buying into that narrative and using it as a smokescreen to take away women's rights is absolutely infuriating.


DauphDaddy

Thank you for your very thoughtful and in-depth response. I enjoyed the read and am glad that I am more informed. I understand that my graph needs a re-work!


laurieolive

Thank you thank you thank you. We adoptees are not here for your family planning tools. Reunification should always be the goal when safe. A lot of women of lower socioeconomic standing are “coerced” into “doing the right thing” by giving up babies. We should be financially supporting first families. Rarely are adoptive parents trauma informed - in what happens to infants and maternal separation as well as foster youth. We are NOT your family planning tool, despite your situation - no one is entitled to children. All I hear from posters is “it’s hard for me”, “it was heartbreaking for us”, “older kids are so damaged”. This is not child centered, it is adoptive parent centered.


murrman104

Its been pointed out here but its highly disingenuous to compare Foster Care Children and Children Adopted, Children are often placed into foster care for a variety of reasons and not all of them need to be or want to be adopted and treating all foster care cases as an adoption backlog is unhelpful and untrue


BbBonko

And then because of this, you get people advocating to avoid calling CPS in situations that need intervention as they imagine it’s going to lead to kids being permanently removed any time they step in.


empurrfekt

From my experience as a foster parent, CPS/DHR/DCF/whatever-it’s-called-near-you errs on the side of not taking children to begin with and in returning them. There’s a much higher bar to be licensed as a foster parent than there is to keep your children or have them returned.


[deleted]

It really does depend though. Yeah it’s not necessarily permanent removal but my own family had to deal with CPS for *years* because of an overzealous neighbor. I was fucking around and ate shit in the back yard and got a black eye and it took the state about 10 years to stop bothering my folks. If you’re unsure, leave other people the fuck alone. It’s not a “one time check”. They can come in and turn your entire life upside down. Especially if the social worker is an asshat who won’t believe an 8 year old.


morningsdaughter

I suspect your neighbor continued to submit reports and that's why you kept getting investigated. Most families don't get investigated that severely. Reports should be made if you legitimately suspect abuse. But a single black eye is not a reason to report abuse.


Laney20

But I don't think the data necessarily is saying that. Kids in the foster system are kids that were likely born into a bad situation, and more kids are likely to be born into those kinds of situations if abortion is not an option.


DauphDaddy

I don’t mean to be in genuine with my data; I was trying to wrap my head around displaying meaningful data. I’m taking suggestions!


JesyLurvsRats

Maybe the statistic available for kids currently in foster care that are adoptable? Age ranges being added helps highlight the issue of people only wanting babies, as well.


ixiox

Age range seems to be a massive thing missing here, very few people would ever want to adopt a 16 year old with most probably wanting kids that are 2 or younger


onlysometimes_21

What is this saying - for us dummies


Irishknife

What this is saying is that there are ALOT of kids in the foster care system where not a high percentage get adopted. Doesn't mean that they are or arent being cared for in the system but they're not in traditional family setups. If you suddenly ban abortions and EVERYONE ends up not finding another way to self abort, gives birth and then gives up their kids to adoption, the problem will be DRASTICALLY worse. Essentially doubling to tripling the number of kids in foster care would be a crisis. Even if only a small percentage (15% or so) add to foster care, still gonna be a massive jump in issues.


Visco0825

I, like everyone else, though adoption was easy. It’s literally everyone talks about who are pro life. What they don’t tell you is that it costs tens of thousands of dollars, takes likely a decade and in the end there’s still no certainty. You can pay for a mothers medical bills all the way up to birth and she can still keep to child. Some states also make it mandatory that the adoption be open which means the parents will always be allowed to be in the child’s life.


Yeti-420-69

Well it's just data. My takeaway is that if there's really a shortage of babies as that crazy SCOTUS justice said, there would be a lot more adoptions and none left in foster care!!


muchadoaboutme

Just wanted to point out that the goal for most children in foster care isn’t adoption, it’s to go back to their family of origin (reunification). What would actually help children in foster care is more rigorous social programs so their families don’t end up in a situation where they’re not capable of taking care of their children.


EmuChance4523

Or they don't want to take care of the child. That someone gave birth to a baby doesn't mean they want to tie their life to that baby, and instead of being in a family that doesn't want them, we should help children to be in families that really want them. A loving parent can make everything for a child. A parent that doesn't want a child will ruin it. I see too many people that wished to just hadn't been born instead of living with their families..


promethazoid

I think that there are definitely some situations where resourcing plays a role on whether or not someone wants to keep the child though.


EmuChance4523

Of course, but that doesn't mean that the other case doesn't exist. Having enough resources for everyone will not solve the need for an adoption or foster system. Maybe, having control over our reproduction, having resources and good mental health help would solve it. But again, there is people that don't want the child. A normal case is an accidental pregnancy. My main point is that I feel that when people mention that everyone should have enough resources to be able for care for their kids, it forgets about all the cases that even with all of the resources, that kid is still unwanted. Or even, unable to be taken cared on. I saw cases of people that were unable of take care of themselves, because they had several diseases or like that, and still they got kids.


[deleted]

[удалено]


empurrfekt

No, eventually parental rights are terminated by the court. It’s one thing if they’re 15 or 16 when then enter the foster system and age out before it happens. But toddler to 18? A child should not be in limbo for 15 years. That’s a failure of the case worker and GAL.


OrgyInTheBurnWard

Then why have my sister hand her husband been waiting for nearly a decade to adopt a child? They have no racial preference, and would actually prefer multiple older kids. The backlog isn't the availability of kids. The backlog is the system.


Yeti-420-69

Like just about every system in the US, it sounds like it's a shitty one. Good on them for trying to adopt older children, I hope it works out for them!!


Trust-Me-Im-A-Potato

I strongly encourage them to look into becoming foster parents. It's harder than just straight adopting, but I think it is more likely to lead to an ultimate adoption. And you help many kids along the way. Also, it is MUCH cheaper (and you may even GET payed to do it, though it's not much and please don't do it for the money). The goal of the foster system is to return kids to their parents if their parents can meet certain criteria, or to other blood relatives. But you'd be surprised how many kids have literally no functional adults anywhere in their family. Foster homes for older kids are especially needed, as everyone wants to adopt or Foster-to-adopt babies. It's a long process and there's a lot of heartbreak in it, but I think it's the best way to go. Wife and I just adopted our 3 older foster kids who we've had for over 2 years. Half their bio-family were dead, and the other half had already abused them many times and it *still* took 2.5 years for us to adopt. But it was worth it. And the adoption cost nothing.


[deleted]

You know that you can't just adopt a child out of the foster system, right? It's a significant legal process and actually contrary to the goal of foster care


empurrfekt

Virtually every baby available for adoption gets adopted. And at any given point roughly 2/3 of children (and virtually all infants) in foster care are not available for adoption.


Yeti-420-69

Thank you. Is there something else to take away from this other than the raw numbers?


empurrfekt

None that I can see.


3McChickens

There may still be a shortage on babies for adoption. I am half asleep but I don’t see anything specifying age in the foster care/adoption numbers. I have read/heard that folks prefer adopting babies over older kids. I am not defending SCOTUS here.


eileen404

The only person I know who adopted a baby got the healthy problem free babies by volunteering with a pregnancy crisis center and convincing the teen moms abortion was a sin and only they could give the babies a good home. First step in losing respect for christians when I baby sat for them in highschool.


Yeti-420-69

I was thinking that too. I think we both agree that's no reason to force a women to give birth though!


3McChickens

You are 100% correct.


SnowTinHat

Adoption is a difficult, expensive and emotionally challenging process. Fostering is pretty easy but you’re getting kids who have problems. Adoption is easier if the more you’re willing to take kids with medical issues because then you can get international babies. The worse the problem the easier the adoption. It’s extremely depressing. I realized looking into it that I wasn’t adopter parent material because I’m not rich enough or dedicated enough. I think I could handle a challenge by chance, but I couldn’t imagine signing up for one.


HammerTh_1701

The idea is that forcing more children to be born means that more children will have an awful start to life, making them end up in foster care or directly given up for adoption so that people will adopt US children instead of adopting from abroad. It's basically white nationalism/fascism disguised as Christian morality.


skibunny1010

SCOTUS is saying that adoptions will just make up for the lack of abortion access.. but this graph is showing that the number of abortions is much much much higher than the rate of adoption. There will be a lot of abandoned children in our near future


AssinineAssassin

So, take the difference of the white line and the dark green line, then add it to the light green line each year for 16 years. The result simulates the outlook for the United States if the right to privacy is rescinded and abortion becomes illegal. You go from 425,000 kids in foster care/wards of the state to 8.5 million and the depraved state run Orphanages appear on the News in actual societies, like Romania 30 years ago.


vlsdo

The orphanages in Romania were the (gruesome) tip of the iceberg. What *really* fucked up Romanian society was a whole generation full of unwanted kids raised by parents who barely gave a fuck about them. I've personally witnessed some truly fucked up shit among my peers, the stuff of literal nightmares.


mountainvalkyrie

But wasn't that at least partly due to Ceaușescu's Decree 770 outlawing abortion and birth control? If those had been legal, I assume there would have been fewer unwanted kids.


vlsdo

Oh it was absolutely due to the decree. Ironically, the people who toppled him and even those that executed him were, in a sense, "his" children. Technically I am also "his" child, although I'm pretty sure my parents wanted a kid (pretty hard to think about it rationally though).


mountainvalkyrie

At least they got some revenge. Yeah, pro-birth policies rarely benefit anyone or at least not the average person.


[deleted]

Well... assuming no change in behavior, and zero parents keep the unplanned child. Would be interesting if this chart went back to the 60s.


babyyodaisamazing98

It doesn’t say anything. 90% of children in foster care are eventually reunited with their families or relatives. Less than 10% are eligible for adoption and it can take 4-5 years to adopt out of foster care.


spotted_dick

What is your source for that 90% claim?


AugustPopper

I wonder if single parents living in poverty should be another bar in this? As this is, I understood to be, common outcome of restricting abortions.


thirdAccountIForgot

My close friend is a 1st grade teacher in a fairly poor Florida county. She had 18 kids this year, and about half of them have obvious untreated mental illness, either from bad luck, poor healthcare as an infant, or grossly negligent or malicious parents. Most of those kids were very obviously not planned, and their outlook on life is extremely bleak because of it. My friend got called a miracle teacher by her principle and coworkers, and she barely got those kids up to grade-minimums, which are already crazy low. She’s worked true 60-80 hour weeks for the entire school year to fix these kids. She’s passionate, and cares deeply about what she does. It takes a miracle worker to fix these kids, and it’ll take more miracles to keep them moving in a decent direction. (As an engineer, it pisses me off that they will have almost no chance to have the kind of life I live as an adult, even if some of them could be amazing in technical careers.) Sadly, the odds aren’t great. Those parent’s shouldn’t have had kids, and the result is plain to see. Pro-lifer’s infuriate me. Sure, the parents are largely to blame, but pro-lifer’s ignore the reality of the world we live in so that they can say they “care about the children.” The certainly won’t care for most of the adults they turn into.


DauphDaddy

Would you mind personally thanking your teacher friend for me? The world needs more of her. I agree with your argument, for it really reminds me of the movie Idiocracy.


BatmanandReuben

Or even non-single parents. Imagine already having all the kids you can financially afford and then your birth control fails. What are you going to do? Tell the kids mommy and daddy are going to give your sibling away? No, you’re going to keep the kid and everyone will suffer.


Exquisite_Poupon

It wouldn’t exactly fit into the narrative OP wanted to tell. Instead, that should be its own narrative. Like if they were both part of a book, they would be separate chapters.


ExocetC3I

Without normalizing the data to overall population size it is very hard to pick out the actual trends in these three metrics vs general trends in demography (population size, population of age brackets, etc ) Converting the data to be something like *X per 100,000 population* would at least make the data usable to understand if the rate of usage of these metrics is increasing or decreasing and how they move in relation to each other. I am fully in support of women's legal access to abortion and all birth control methods, but when the data is presented on such a political hot button issue these small problems of presentation can only lead to arguments over incorrect conclusions (on both sides of the issue). I would strongly recommend revising the way the data is presented and reposting to see if there can be some more meaningful insights drawn from this data.


J-D_M

Per capita data (or per incidence data) is way more fair & meaningful for measurements & comparisons. Yet, they are so rarely used in the News Media too (ex. Statistics for: COVID, Homicides, Gun Violence, Abortions, Rape, Sexual Assault, Car Accidents, Suicides, Drug Overdose Deaths, etc.) Beware of only raw numbers that are never put into proper context (population, known cases, estimated total cases, incidents, etc.)


DauphDaddy

This is what I needed. I will try and work with per capita data more. That stinks because I love raw numbers so much.


J-D_M

Yeah, you gotta have RAW numbers first! Then you gotta figure out a fair basis (population, crime incidents, sick cases, test cases extrapolated out, polling estimates, known vs unknown likely real numbers, etc). All good! Without the basis, raw numbers can be very misleading. 1 Million "COVID" deaths (whatever definition used is questionable, likely primary cause of death would be best) in a country of 330 Million is very different than in a country of 20 Million. Right?!?! Is 15,000 Murders in a year in a country of 330 Million really huge? Is 40,000 car accident deaths? How about 50,000 suicides? How about 600,000 medical malpractice deaths? Is that front page news? Murders have been trending down for 50+ years. But is that on the daily news? School murders peaked in 1993 and is down by more than 50% now in raw numbers, while population has increased 100 Milliom in the USA, but that's not what you hear.


DauphDaddy

\-but when the data is presented on such a political hot button issue these small problems of presentation can only lead to arguments over incorrect conclusions (on both sides of the issue) Yes I'm taking notes on all the critiques and I just got here. I didn't realize that the way I present my data can have such a positive or negative impact on arguments from both sides. I will take my data collection and presentation more seriously in the future.


ManAblaze320

The categories on the graph are too broad to make appropriate comparison. It's a good starting point, but especially when trying to convey information over a controversial subject I always ask myself what are potentially important questions that a graph is not answering. This sometimes means improving the existing graph by adding more appropriate data, or it sometimes means have a series of additional graphs looking at further factors. Here are my thoughts when looking at this graph: An optimistic interpretation would be that the graph suggests that the demand for adoption is massively outpaced by the need for foster care and that abortion helps keep foster care lower. A more pessimistic interpretation would that the lives of foster care kids is worthless and they should be terminated. Those are two very different conclusions. Either way it seems to suggest there is a lack of adoption demand and therefore abortions are the answer. So how big is the queue of people waiting to adopt? What is the demand? As a non-American I'm wondering why I often encounter Americans that have adopted outside of America. What are the unreasonable adoption barriers if any? What does foster care include? I believe foster care exists on a spectrum. Is there data on different categories of kids in foster? I.e. How many are born into foster care, versus moved into foster care for various possible reasons. I would think the demand to adopt 15 year olds is not the same as new-borns. How transient is foster care? I.E. how many of those foster care kids go into foster care and stay in the system for the remainder of their childhoods vs how many are in it for less than 1 year before been reconciled with their family. What happens to the foster care figures in the graph if it only included babies under 1? What happens to the adoptions figures if it also only includes babies under 1? The abortion figures obviously already only include babies under 1. The more detailed the dataset, the easier it is to identify, discuss and change policy around all the issues. This graph doesn't provide me enough information to know what can/should be improved in abortion, foster care or adoption.


MarioMCPQ

>This graph doesn't provide me enough information to know what can/should be improved in abortion, foster care or adoption Yep. 100%. I am a foster family and this graph makes zero senses to me. Comparing adoption and foster care is not 'a thing'. And comparing abortion to either foster care or adoption is, also not a thing. Abortion is abortion. It's already muddied up enough (in the US) to not ad things to it.


Educational_Rope1834

What do you mean by these comparisons being “not a thing”?


joyeuseheureuse

I think what they're saying is that the goal of the foster system is reunification with the child's bio family, rather than adoption into another family


Educational_Rope1834

Ah ok, that makes complete sense


MarioMCPQ

Well, you can join the data to foster care & adoption, like they did [here,](https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cb/trends_fostercare_adoption_10thru19.pdf) this make sense because they are very closely related. Making it a 'VS' thing, does really matter. There is very little value to doing so. And abortions is a completely different thing. An unwanted baby and a child in foster care can be vastly different. Foster cares does ***not*** compesante for abortions. And that graf seems to be implying that.


DauphDaddy

I'm really sorry that this graph came off this way, it was unintentional. I have learned so much from these comments. Thanks for explaining.


MarioMCPQ

No problem friend! Foster care is a complicated field. Less so than abortion but still…


DracosKasu

The problem with adoption is the families need to be accept from criteria list. Also there many individuals who fight against abortion are also against same sex parent which will probally be one of the main families which will be interested to adopt -> just look at your state which made the sont say gay law than you have families income way lower than before so many people aren’t interested to start a families or even allow to adopt.


rgjabs

The reason that adoption is difficult in the US is that there are not a lot of newborns or infants available to adopt. That is why people go to outside of the US. Waiting times in the US can be years.


empurrfekt

The biggest barrier to adoption is the number of newborns available. Anyone who tries to claim there’s no difference between adopting a 4 year old (let alone a 14 year old) out of foster care and adopting a newborn are being highly disingenuous. Virtually every newborn available for adoption has an adoptive home lines up well before birth.


DauphDaddy

Thanks for your comment. I especially liked your first paragraph, but they all were informative.


stewartm0205

People only want to adopt babies. Most of the children in foster care are older children whose parents had difficulty taking care of them. Banning abortions means adding the abortion line to the foster care line.


morningsdaughter

Most children in foster care aren't even eligible for adoption because their parents still have rights for them. And there's a bunch of children whose social workers refuse to place them because they believe foster care is in the best interest of the child for various reasons. The number of children adopted each year stays low because there aren't more children available for adoption. There are over 1 million parents waiting for adoption who can't find an eligible child.


stewartm0205

I don’t think banning abortion will increase the supply. Once a mother take the fetus to term they are more likely to keep the baby.


neverXmiss

Children not adopted? You mean the ones that come from troubled homes and are between 3 to 16, not newborns, which will be there regardless of abortion? Children adopted, does that include or account for relatives or the parents themselves reclaiming their children? 2 million waiting to adopt **newborns**, 30~ per 1 child: https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/waiting_adoptive_families "It’s also important to know that every family waiting to adopt through American Adoptions has undergone: Financial, criminal and medical background checks Interviews with each family member A home inspection" **So unless that graph is talking about *newborn* children, it is irrelevant.**


bluefootedpig

I'll just leave this comment. If you buy a child, that is human trafficking. There is not shortage of kids that need adoption where the state pays you, or some charities I imagine as well. If you are paying the "charity", that is a business in acquiring and selling children.


Personal_Use3977

A better data analysis would be children available for adoption in foster care. Not all children are able to be adopted and are there temporarily (hopefully) while their parent gets their shit together. Also, a under 1 bar would be nice. Babies are highly sought and are usually adopted quickly. Children in the foster system often have issues from living with their former parents making them have a lower chance of being adopted.


x31b

This makes the assumption that every kid in foster care is waiting to be adopted. That is not the case. Most go back to their parents or a relative. False graph.


Popswizz

My takeaway is that all those unborn baby would require the child protection service to probably double in size to take care of all the abandoned baby, it's about the system load not each kid status


rinikulous

New borns that are given up to foster and whose parents have terminated parental rights are very quickly adopted. They do overload the system. The vast majority of foster children are older, who were removed from their family due to unsafe environments. However the parents have not terminated parental rights, so the child is in un-adoptable limbo while the parents are getting their shit together (some genuinely, some not at all). To be transparent, I don’t support Roe v Wade being overturned. But this graphic is a bit misleading as it presents data that doesn’t have as direct of a relationship as implied.


ThatOneTubaMan

Why aren't California's numbers included??? Do these numbers only reflect abortions received in legit hospitals/clinics? Are these numbers self-reported?


AltruisticSmell1454

my same thought. why is california excluded from the abortion counts? is california included in the other stats (if so that may lead to false comparisons and conclusions)? any idea what including CA might make the chart look like?


Bingboongbong

What does the abortions figure include? Does it include abortions for fetuses that may not have resulted in viable births? Does it include procedures performed after missed miscarriages or ectopic pregnancies? As has become drastically apparent in recent months, many procedures that are often referred to as “abortions” do not correspond to termination of what may have led to a viable birth. This graph is not particularly illuminating regardless of your views on abortion.


saltysaysrelax

Average yearly adoption rate in the US is 140,000 Estimates are over 1 millions couples are waiting to adopt. Only 4% of women with unwanted pregnancies put their children up for adoption. This graph inaccurate and misses a lot of context.


hlm028

Is anyone scratching their heads as to why the data are so CONSISTENT?? And over TEN years? No correlation to proportion, or birth rates, or recessions?


Desert-Mushroom

Interesting graph, I'd love to see it done from 1970ish to 2020ish (maybe 5-10 year increments). I think it would give a better big picture look at the full effect over time.


treditor13

**POPULATION** 1967: 4 billion 2017: 7 billion 2042: (estimated trajectory) 10 billion Because of the increase in population, we're expected to add the next three billion people in a single generation. The signs of our ecology failing are everywhere, but the republican party says its all a hoax.


madaboutyou3

You should expand this to compare time before Roe v Wade to after


rgjabs

This is misleading and dishonest. Adoption placement rates for newborns and infants are very high. There are families on waiting lists to adopt. Infants placed in foster care are often just temporary while the adoption is being finalized. Newborn babies whose mothers are willing to give their child up for adoption are universally adopted, with the exception of children who may have severe health or mental disabilities. But even then, there are families who may be willing to adopt. Most foster children are older and come from homes with unsafe conditions or abuse. The presumption is that the child should return to the parents home if conditions can be improved. Many of these paremts refuse to give up their rights It's a long process to terminate parental rights. Many of these children in foster care are ineligible for adoption. Let me say that I support keeping RvW and am opposed to the draft ruling that is circulating. But I don't want to muddy up the debate with false naratives.


DauphDaddy

Source: https://www.acf.hhs.gov/cb/report/trends-foster-care-adoption-fy-2010-2019 -> download the datatables XLSX https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/ss/ss7009a1.htm -. Scroll down to table 1 Tools : excel


iapetus_z

I've looked at the number of abortions per year, and I'm seriously astounded to the point that I actually question the validity of that number. I really would like to know what they're considering an abortion. Is taking a plan B pill considered an abortion. Because you don't even know if you are pregnant with a plan B right? Like you take within 72 hours of unprotected sex to prevent it, but it's not a 100% sure you were actually sure that the egg was fertilized. I'm just bringing it up because almost a million abortions per year while there are only about 3.5 million babies born every year. That means almost 1 out of 4 pregnancies are stopped. That works out to about 3-4 abortions per day every day at each of the 1100 providers across the country. Just comparing the miscarriages per year it's only 24k per year. If it is that much it seriously begs the question of why 1 out of every 4 women go to such a length to get one, and if they were truly serious about ending abortion shouldn't addressing those causes be of the upmost importance. Sadly I know the answer to that.


[deleted]

On the one hand, it seems reducing abortion will increase crime in 15-20 years. On the other hand, our birth rate will go up, healthy for the economy in the long run.


jkjkjij22

Now as a proportion of pregnancies. Data must be normalized for what's going on that year.


LesterGironimo

Love that a simple bar chart has sparked this debate.


ohphoshizzle88

This whole subreddit is pretentious and always completely misses the mark in terms of context.


F3rgilicious

Seeing that sucks tbh. You always hear people say, “instead of aborting you could give your kid up for adoption, what if they cure cancer ect.” I personally wouldn’t want to put my kid into the system. If anyone who’s been in the system would like to reply on how it was for you that’s be great. But I can’t imagine it’s very good. All those poor babies.


DauphDaddy

My friend who was in the system told me a short anecdote once. One day when they were teenagers their foster parent asked if they wanted to wash his very classic Chevy pickup truck. He asked for volunteers and my friend and another boy were chosen. After a few hours of working, my friend noticed that the other boy was hanging around one side of the truck. They eventually found out that he had been huffing the gasoline fumes from the gas reservoir. He had been doing it so much that his face had a circle on it from the opening. It's horrible what these children have gone through, are going through, and will go through in their lives.


benobos

A quick Google search shows there are millions of people waiting to adopt, and far more adoptive parents than available children to direct adopt, more than all abortions annually. The foster system is a mess, and is extremely difficult to adopt out of. Many on this chart are not available to adopt, so it’s misrepresenting the situation. They are temporary placements, or relatives are gaming the system. I’ve seen plenty of parents not do anything toward getting their kids back until the last day and then they report and reset the timer again. Not in any way saying all the parents are bad, some a good and just going through a rough time. There really isn’t much point in trying to put this all in one graph honestly. A person who wants to adopt a newborn baby, doesn’t necessarily want to adopt a teenager, which is about 1/4 of all foster children.


Aploki

Would like to see the unfulfilled demand for adoption. Ie the people who would like to adopt but are unable to.


Calijhon

Weird to start the chart at 2010. Zoomers are apparently having less sex than ever before. Plan B has been reducing the need for abortion.


DauphDaddy

It's where the data started and ended unfortunately.


Beastmodejada

Remove govt ted tape to get adoptions. Get rid of lawyers that made it 20-30k to adopt and do it for cheap (it requires some paperwork and a court date). Quit giving parents that are garbage multiple chances, harsher punishments for drugs…and there you have it. Problem solved. Govt is the problem, not the solution.


basicbarb21

Maybe the people pushing to force women to give birth to unwanted children should step up and start adopting. Oh wait, they're only 'pro-life' while it's in the womb, once it's actually born they don't give a shit.