Adoption, the Better Option
Posted by david on September 7th, 2008
The recent selection of Governor Sarah Palin as the Republican Vice Presidential nominee and the subsequent revelation that her daughter, Bristol, is pregnant shows how deceptive Satan is and how he is trying to destroy the traditional family. Following the principles of Good, Better, and Best taught by Elder Dallin H. Oaks, I would argue that it is good Bristol has decided to keep her baby, marry the father, and raise the child herself, but that it would be better to give the child up for adoption. Of course, the best option would have been to practice abstinence.
In 1995, President Gordon B. Hinckley announced The Family: A Proclamation to the World. He introduced it with this statement, “With so much of sophistry that is passed off as truth, with so much of deception concerning standards and values, with so much of allurement and enticement to take on the slow stain of the world, we have felt to warn and forewarn.â€Â Sophistry is subtle deceptive reasoning.
Satan is an expert in the art of sophistry. With it, he has convinced many good people that keeping a baby conceived by a teenager out of wedlock is the honorable and responsible thing to do. The truth is that while keeping the baby may be a good option, particularly if the mother and father are mature and both committed to marriage and the child, in most cases the better option is to give that child up for adoption to parents who are ready and able to meet the child’s needs.
The Family Proclamation lists three key principles that remind us the focus of parenting should be on the best interests of children, not the desires of the parent:
- “Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.â€
- “By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families.â€
- “Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.â€
Through clever sophistry, Satan has convinced many people that keeping the baby is the honorable and responsible thing to do. Governor Palin was quoted as saying, “We’re proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents.â€Â While it is courageous for a teen mother to keep a child and try to raise it, looking first at the short and long-term needs of the child, the most honorable and responsible choice without question is to give that child up for adoption.
I applaud Bristol Palin’s decision to not have an abortion, and I hope that her marriage is successful and that her baby grows up in a loving, stable home with all the opportunities and support children deserve to have. But unfortunately, most girls who get pregnant will not have the level of familial and financial support that Bristol will have.
Adoption can require even greater courage than keeping the child. That is what makes adoption even more honorable and heroic. That is also why public figures should take every opportunity to support adoption and to remind young mothers, fathers, and their families that their decision should be based solely on what is in the best interest of the child. The Family Proclamation concludes with this challenge, “We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.â€Â I wish Governor Palin had taken this opportunity to promote adoption as a preferred alternative to keeping the child.
Here’s a statement about church’s stance on the issue:
Comment # 1 left by sister blah 2 on September 7th, 2008
The handbook for the past 40+ years has encouraged marriage first and adoption if no marriage.
So, David, when are you going to tell the LDS Church to change their stance from marriage to adoption first?
Comment # 2 left by Steve on September 7th, 2008
I believe the First Presidency’s counsel (and the guidance from the handbook) is consistent with my position which is consistent with the Proclamation. My point (which I apologize for not making clearer) is that given two options–raising the baby alone and giving it up for adoption–the better choice for teenage mothers is normally to give the child up for adoption. I would agree that marriage by the parents is the best option if both parents are committed to each other and to fulfilling their duties as outlined in the Proclamation. Unfortunately, most teenage parents are not in a position emotionally, financially, or in terms of maturity to commit to each other and be able to provide for their child.
My immediate family has experienced all three options: Giving a child up for adoption, teenage parents marrying, and the teenage mother raising the child on her own without the father’s support. By far, the most successful outcome has been for the children adopted by mature parents. Luckily, because of the proximity of extended family (grandparents), the children kept by teenage parents who married are doing OK, but they’re still having a rougher time.
Please remember my primary point here–doing what is in the best interest of the child. I don’t claim to know which option that might be in specific cases. I can only state the principles as I know them and based on what I have seen from personal experience. If I’m wrong, then I’m the first to acknowledge my fault and get back in line with the Lord’s prophet.
I know that in the end, through the Atonement, all things will be made right. Though we may pass through trials in this life, in part because of the choices of others, the Lord will make it possible for all to enjoy the blessings of eternity. However, if I can help make one child’s life easier by helping teenage parents to make their decision based on the best interests of the child, then it’s worth the effort.
Comment # 3 left by david on September 7th, 2008
My wife encouraged me to look at Adoption entry in the True to the Faith gospel reference book. It’s also available on the Church’s website under Gospel Topics. I believe my point is consistent with the counsel which reads as follows:
“Children are entitled to be raised by parents who honor marital vows and who can provide love and support. Adoption can be a great blessing for many children who are born without this opportunity. Adoption can also be a great blessing to couples who are unable to conceive their own children.”
“When a child is conceived out of wedlock, the best option is for the mother and father of the child to marry and work toward establishing an eternal family relationship. If a successful marriage is unlikely, they should place the child for adoption, preferably through LDS Family Services. Placing the infant for adoption through LDS Family Services helps unwed parents do what is best for the child. It ensures that the child will be sealed to a mother and a father in the temple, and it enhances the prospect for the blessings of the gospel in the lives of all concerned. Adoption is an unselfish, loving decision that blesses the birth parents, the child, and the adoptive family.”
Comment # 4 left by david on September 7th, 2008
I have thought about adopting a child. But the process is so expensive and intimidating. Would it make sense for the church to do more to make adoption easier and less expensive for solid, active couples?
Comment # 5 left by Eric Nielson on September 7th, 2008
@Eric Nielson ( foster care is free to adopt from, those are the children who NEED the homes )
@ The original poster of this post. There is so much wrong that I see in your post. I am an adoptee, I do not speak for all adoptees, but I do speak from experience. I have not had a bad life, I was raised by incredible parents, so there is no need to insinuate that when you find that I disagree with you.
I think first its important to clarify that adoption in the bible is nothing like the adoption industry in the United States and around the world today. The two are very separate concepts of adoption. That is important to see when speaking in support of adoption, in relation to Gods word.
Adoption today, in the US, in 44 states doesn’t even give adoptees a right to their heritage. Ancestry and heritage is something that is HUGE in the bible. Tracking of lineage and who and where we come from to define who we are is important. Adoption strips that right from the children today through sealed records and closed adoptions.
Defining the childs best interests as :
1. “Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.â€
2. “By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families.â€
3. “Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.â€
The above is over looking some incredible “needs” and “rights” to the child, one the primal need for a mother. Have you seen what an infant goes through, when they lose a mother? Have you read research studies that prove a stunt and noticeable change in brain development when an infant loses his/her mother?
Are you aware that LDS is the largest organized adoption industry agent? Millions of dollars are made by LDS each year by going through with adoptions.
Where in the bible does it say that a child is better off with two married parents who are not of his blood? Being born to two wed parents would be preferable, but it doesn’t say get rid of the child and give him/her to strangers would be the solution if the above doesn’t happen.
“While it is courageous for a teen mother to keep a child and try to raise it, looking first at the short and long-term needs of the child, the most honorable and responsible choice without question is to give that child up for adoption.”
That is not true in the slightest, and Satan hasn’t put this belief in my head. Do you “know” the child that was given up for adoption in your family? Was it an open adoption and you were able to have ongoing contact with the child…possibly now an adult? Or are you just “hoping” that the surrendered family member of yours is doing “better” than the kept adult? Is there any room for you to say that the kept child and the surrendered child in your family would have had the exact outcome in their lives had both be kept? How can you say that when its only speculation? There is nothing concrete in your argument in favor of adoption other than he said she said.
What is in the child’s best interests?
Well if you want to prevent documented trauma, loss of identity, loss of ancestry, heritage and family then I suppose you would chose adoption.
If you want to promote the LDS’s million dollar business in the Adoption Industry then I guess you’d chose “adoption.” As an adoptee rights activist, I have researched and studied many laws around the world surrounding the rights and treatment to adoptees in the eyes of the law.
One of the most discriminating states is Utah, you know why? LDS runs Utah’s adoption rings. They have some of the most discriminating, insulting bills and laws I have ever come across. They treat adoptees like they should be grateful to have second hand treatment because many of us were born out of wedlock, and THAT is SATAN showing himself right there.
Adoptees deserve to be treated equally. Being born out of wedlock ( and not all of us were ) doesn’t make us “less than” and LDS in Utah do a poor job of showing that.
A bill was introduced last year that would have kept adoptees from being able to apply for non identifying information until they were 35 years old. That isn’t even my age now. Why on EARTH would anyone advocate for adoptees not to know about where they came from until they were almost half way done with their average lifespan? You know who was behind that bill? LDS.
Who is LDS to tell anyone that they don’t have a right to their ancestry? I am not ashamed of being born out of wedlock, and that is not a worthy reason to keep me from my past. Mothers ARE NOT promised confidentiality. Some of the most coerced adoption scandals come from LDS, where children are adopted into families without their parents consent and LDS hides those children from their natural families.
I went into adoption research with an open mind and heart. LDS has changed my entire outlook on religion and adoption being in Gods name due to the reality of what is going on. I ultimately thank them for that, because it woke me up from the fog that appears to still be laying over your eyes. You’re probably one of them though.
Advocating for adoption and separation of mother and child and the participation of the sealing of records and supporting the loss of heritage isn’t Godly.
Imagine if adoption was promoted like this to Mary and what would have happened to her if they found out that Jesus wasn’t Josephs biological son. Imagine if the LDS adoption agents got their hands on her? “We’ll just pressure Joesph to sign off the rights to child” ( oh you probably know that if you’re married in Utah and have a baby by another man, your husband has to surrender the rights to the child, not the biological father of the child ) and you too that way everyone can be protected from this Satan filled situation. No keeping the baby for you, Mary.
I wonder if thats why Moses names his first born son Gershom, exodus 2:22 “And she bore him a son, and he(moses) called his name Gershom, for he said, “I have been a stranger in a foreign land.” But even moses was able to find his heritage? His sister was able to see and know where he went. But did they have birth certificates then? Did they dictate what adoptees ( Moses ) had a right to see or not? No, God led him back to his people, in fact, Moses killed a man from mistreating his people and eventually led them to freedom through the lessons and leadership of the lord.
Babies certainly weren’t a commodity then like they are now either. They weren’t being sold w/ prices according to race and profiting agencies well into 40,000$ for a newborn white infant. What do you think God thinks about that? Due to the LDS’s 990 forms that are public online we know LDS doesn’t think too negatively about it. I guess they’re not too concerned about how God feels in “this” aspect of adoption, it must just be an added bonus for “the best interests of the child” right?
Just read your comments policy, i’m almost positive that this won’t even be posted. But at least you have read it and the message has been received by you.
Comment # 6 left by Gershom Kaligawa on September 8th, 2008
I find your opinions naive and insulting. This opinion has nothing to do with what is in the best interests of the child, but more in shaming the natural parents and providing a baby for couples who can’t have their own.
It is firmly in a child’s best interests to be raised by it’s natural parents, if they marry all well and good, but the important issue is that they are the child’s natural parents. They have the genetic link which enables them to raise the child providing it with nature and nurture, so the child can grow knowing where it came from, why it is the way it is and why it looks the way it is.
This is every child’s natural right and no one has the right to deny this to any child.
I know what I am talking about, I am a product of adoption. I have missed my parents every day of my life and regret that I did not have the opportunity to grow knowing them but have always questioned where I came from and what makes me me. (And no, I have not had an abusive upbringing but had wonderful adoptive parents, they just weren’t MY parents).
If people are really concerned about what is in the best interests of the child they should do what they can to enable natural parents to raise their own children, as this is what is right.
Comment # 7 left by Diane on September 8th, 2008
You are not Adopted David, there fore you have no right to express any opionion on the subject. Especially since you are LDS and you people do NOT act Christian. Bigomy is a form of Adultry that Christ spoke out against, so any man in the Mormom religion who took more than one wife is guilty of Adultry many times over and according to the New Testament will go to hell. (Christ said even lusting for another woman when a man is married IS ADULTRY)Since you people can’t even get the subject of Adultry and Marriage right, and you Mormoms tailor Christianity to your own comfort zone none of you have any right to say what is right for any one else. Not all Adoptive Parents are mature-my Adoptive Mother wasn’t and still isn’t even in her 70’s and she has abused me my whole life. You have NO idea how horrid it is to be told when one is in a closed record Adoption that you can’t even know your own Mother’s name. THAT is NOT God’s will. God’s will IS TO FORGIVE AN ACT OF FORNICATION AND FOR CHRISTIANS TO FORGIVE AN ACTO OF FORNIACTION AND NOT PUNISH IT BY SEPARATING MOTHER AND CHILD. Barren couples that want another woman’s child are THEIVES AND THEY ARE COVETING. BARRENESS IS ALSO A PUNISHMENT FROM GOD, LIKE CHILDBIRTH PAIN IS AND NO MAN HAS A RIGHT TO GO OVER GOD’S PUNISHMENTS, CHRISTIANS ONLY HAVE THE RIGHT TO FORGIVE EACH OTHER FOR SINS THEY HAVE COMMITTED. SO BARREN COUPLES HAVE NO RIGHT TO RAISE A CHILD AND CHRISTIANS HAVE NO RIGHT TO TAKE A CHILD FROM HIS OR HER MOTHER. You Mormoms TOTALLY practice Christianity wrong and hurt SO many people and I am SO sick of it.
Comment # 8 left by The Improper Adoptee on September 8th, 2008
Oh my, what a firestorm we have here. I had no idea this was such a raw nerve for some people.
I can only assume that comments #6,7, & 8 were left by people who are not LDS, and who do not fully understand either our beliefs about the pre-mortal existence of Heavenly Father’s spirit children and the nature of sealing ordinances, or the procedures of adoptions through LDS social services.
Comment # 9 left by RoAnn on September 8th, 2008
Well, you got 1 right, I am NOT LDS, never will be thanks to the damage I have seen on them through the adoption industry.
Yes I understand beliefs of the pre-mortal existence of Heavenly Fathers’ spirit children and the nature of sealing ordinances, I also understand far too well the procedures of adoptions THROUGH LDS social services. Can anybody say organized crime ring?
Comment # 10 left by Gershom Kaligawa on September 8th, 2008
I think most people are aware of what type of agency LDS adoption services run; at least, those educated in the adoption field. I have read and read too many horror stories about the lies and manipulation done. This amom is horrified that you people behave this way, in the name of God!
Comment # 11 left by NONYA on September 8th, 2008
I am sorry I have not jumped into this more, but I don’t know what to say. I have no experience with LDS adoption services, and I do not personally know anyone who has. I can not help but believe that for everyone with bad experiences there are others with good experiences.
Comment # 12 left by Eric Nielson on September 9th, 2008
There was a discussion over at BCC that was a little more civil and had more facts behind things. If you are interested try this link.
Comment # 13 left by Eric Nielson on September 9th, 2008
The real issue for many adoptees–including LDS adoptees, btw–has to do with being denied access to information about our own births and our own genetic heritage. Sealing ordinances do nothing to wipe out genetic predispositions to health conditions that could be avoided or at least anticipated. Nor do sealing ordinances eliminate the natural curiosity about our biological parents, or our desire to at least know who they are. How would you like it if the state told you that you aren’t allowed to know the identity of your parents? It’s more infuriating than you might think. Sadly, the LDS Church continues to support closed records policies, depriving its adopted members of information that should be theirs by right.
Comment # 14 left by Randy on September 9th, 2008
Satan does not work through those who love their children from conception and will give and sacrifice all to give them a good life with their biological family where everyone deserves to be raised.
Satan works in those who promote a profit making industry such as adoption. Those who think it is better to cause harm and loss on children for the benefit of couples who want a baby of their own. For a “self-entitled” piece of mind that no longer is concerned about loving all but instead focuses on taking from others in the most cruel and heartless of ways.
I will never see God or his wonderous ways in opinions such as yours. I see selfish blasting of one who believes they are put here to judge others. One who believes and encourages suffering of others from beliefs that come from your own mind, your own twisted belief, not from the loving, forgiving and wonderful nature of God.
Comment # 15 left by Cassi on September 10th, 2008
For better information on LDS adoption services check out this link.
Comment # 16 left by Eric Nielson on September 11th, 2008
Wow. I would not have expected such a response to this topic.
To those who aren’t LDS, please understand that our beliefs go far beyond the topic of adoption. I understand that without the beliefs we have, that the Church’s position may not be ideal in your mind. But please don’t reduce our beliefs to a money-making endeavor, because that is not why we believe in adoption as a viable and important option to consider.
Comment # 17 left by Michelle on September 15th, 2008
I had the same thoughts as you at first when I heard the young lady was expecting a baby. Then I heard that the couple had planned on getting married BEFORE she was pregnant. That changes much in my mind.
As far as some of the other comments here, they are right that LDS family services is difficult to work with, although I don’t get their extreme hatred. I had to work with several adoptions in my former employement, (I was a neonatal nurse) and by far LDS family services was the most difficult and demanding agency to work with. Many at time, we as the nursing and clerical staff would be frustrated at the hoops we had to go through to for their policies. I decided then that if ever we adopted a baby or a child of our needed to put a baby up for adoption we would go elsewhere for services.
Comment # 18 left by Tigersue on September 18th, 2008
Why does lds family try to coerce women who get pregnant out of wedlock to give their children up for adoption to the church? It is like they penalize them for not being married before/after conception there are numerous cases of unwed couples conceiving and the mother gives up the child for adoption against the wishes of the father are you to tell me that it is okay to steal a child from the father because he is not married to the child’s mother? THE AUDACITY! because it is true fathers are being victimized and lds family services are telling them they dont have rights i have personally met with many others that this has happened to! There is someone in my life who i love dearly that is going through this same thing he wanted to marry his unborn childs mother he loved her very much and even if she didnt want to be with him he still wanted to be in his babies life and wanted full custody of his child. LDS family manipulated both of them telling him he had no rights when indeed he did then telling the mother to deceive him into think she would marry and stick around so that they could have the baby together, instead she quietly behind his back went into labor early without contacting him and letting him know and going through with the adoption and purposely did it on a day when they knew the courts and lawyers offices were closed so the father could not file to appeal anything. NOW are you really going to tell me that it was still ok because that child is in a loving 2 parent home? It has ruined the fathers life and hurt his family but your going to tell me it was for the greater good because they were not married? LDS family services uses these tactics and scams these couples they are evil!
Comment # 19 left by jenny on December 11th, 2008