Adoption vs. IVF – a second look and Friday Legal Updates

I hate to beat up on a tired and worn horse, but I want to reiterate what I hear clients telling me all of the time – it should be their own personal decision on whether to pursue adoption in the first place or as a last resort. My clients are tired of being judged and criticized when “there are so many children out there to be adopted.” Whether that is true or not, we cannot decide what is the best family building choice for anyone else. And, we should not be judgmental. Just be supportive.

There are so many things to look at when making these decisions, such as cost (all of the options are actually about the same), timelines (how long do you have to wait), home study requirements, court procedures, age limitations, marital status requirements, and can the surrogate/birth mother change her mind in a surrogacy or adoption? Each person has their own level of risk that they are willing to take. What are your thoughts on this? I would love to hear.

Listen to Creating a Family: Talk About Infertility and Adoption

Now, onto legal updates:

New England – Rhode Island seems to be the only hold out in the area of gay marriage. We now have Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine and likely New Hampshire. Fox News has their spin on RI’s hold out. What are your thoughts on this?

US – HR 697 Support the Family Building Act of 2009? – any thoughts on this particular piece of legislation?

Subscribe to my blog at:

2 thoughts on “Adoption vs. IVF – a second look and Friday Legal Updates

  • May 9, 2009 at 4:21 am

    IVF is a very important option.

  • May 9, 2009 at 4:24 pm

    I see this topic from a very different perspective and have a very viable answer for anyone who feels pressured to ‘save” a child via adoption.

    Wanting to parent is a very natural desire. Failure to be able to reach that goal can be devastating. That is the purpose of the medical field of reproductive technology.

    Adoption, however, is not a reproductive technology, not a medical treatment or “fix” for one’s physical impairment, and not a “right” – as parenting one’s own child is.

    Seeing it lumped together like this, as if it is simply an alternative fertility treatment demeans every adopted person and the families who suffered a grave lifelong loss.

    The children available for adoption are not the ones being adopted. In The U.S. there are 129,000 children in foster care who could be adopted and in orphanages worldwide the same categories of children – older,disabled, sibling groups – are ignored and left behind while those who seek INFANTS to replace their phantom child and pretend it is “the same as if” they birthed it are in hot pursuit. The demand for infants has created a $6 billion dollar global child trafficking market in which children are stolen and kidnapped, papers forged, mothers coerced.

    Anyone who tells you how many babies are in need of adoption is not aware that 88.7% of children in orphanages worldwide are not eligible for adoption because they have at least one living parent, as was the case with the boy Madonna adopted and the girl she tried to.

    Adoption is rapidly changing. Nations such as Vietnam and Guatemala are closing the door to corruption and baby selling. The old mantra of thousands of “unwanted” babies is simply not true today.

    Those considering this option or wanting to be aware of the current facts in oder to respond to well-meaning but hurtful comments are very much encouraged to read the resources listed at:

    Mirah Riben, The Stork Market: America’s Multi-Billion Dollar Unregulated Adoption industry

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.