"Hey, dude your sister looks Hispanic or something." Many of you, I am sure, have asked me this question. If that is the case for you, you have probably heard my casual response: "Oh, she's adopted from Guatemala." The nonchalance with which I answer that question may surprise some of you, but I wish to address to you the concept that such surprise is unwarranted and, in a century, will possibly be nearly nonexistent. In other words, what I aim to accomplish today is to perhaps change some of your minds with respect to adoption. Adoption is not the easiest subject to persuade about, because there are not as many concrete arguments for adoption as there are for other topics, such as healthcare. And in a way, there is less polarization on this topic than most others. After all, who would oppose adopting impoverished children? I suppose what I must persuade you to believe, then, is that adoption is an entirely acceptable alternative to growing your family naturally. And so I begin.
6,802,944,787. Does that number mean anything to you? If you didn't already guess, that number is an approximation of the current world population, retrieved from the U.S. Census Bureau today, December 12th. I would like you to consider that number. Consider earth's rapidly-decreasing amounts of natural resources, and our dwindling amount of physical space. I don't intend to make this a tirade on what we're doing to the environment, but it's true that it's something we need to consider. With our resources as they are, ought we really to bring more people into the world? Mankind will never stop reproducing, of course, but every step counts. A child is a child is a child, no matter if adopted or begotten, and that is one exceptional reason why you should consider adopting over biologically growing your family.
Consider now, if you will, the number of children living in poverty. I'm sure such a number does not spring readily to mind; as such let me offer some statistics. Norway, currently ranked as the most developed country in the world, has a child poverty level of 8-9%. Australia, which is second, has a level of 14.7%; moving down the list of developed countries, Canada is fourth, with a child poverty level of between 9.5% and 11.9%. Finland, ranked twelfth, has a child poverty level of approximately 8.4%; the United States is currently ranked thirteenth on the list of developed countries. We have a mind-boggling 41% of our nation's youth living in poverty.
I mean, think about some of those statistics. With such high percentages of the most developed countries' youth living in poverty, why bring more children into the world? Why not adopt those already living in extreme poverty and miserable conditions? Do we not owe it to these children to offer them more? For instance, listen to this quote:
"In Canada, only 2300 on average out of an estimated 30 000 to 40 000 children in care who are legally free for adoption find families. According to a British Columbia study, youth in care are 17 times more likely to be hospitalized for mental health issues. By the age of 21, 41 per cent of children and youth in care had been in contact with the justice system, compared with 6.6 per cent in the general population."
Taking this into consideration, coupled with additional studies on the effect of parenting on children's development, it is clear that children that are raised by unstable single parents, as well as children who are available for adoption but are never adopted, run much higher risks (between two and three times more likely) of developing social, maturity, emotional, and mental issues than children who have the benefit of growing up with either one or two stable parents.
That's all I have to offer you in the way of persuasion. I realize that this topic will not have an immediate impact on you. That's understandable. But I want you to consider this. Perhaps one day - it's unlikely, but perhaps - you'll think on these words, and decide to adopt as opposed to - or perhaps even in addition to - growing your family biologically. After all, what's the difference after they're in your family? The only difference is your ethnicity, and if you're able to see past the color of one's skin, you'll understand that such a difference is inconsequential. If you're not able to see past it, maybe you should do us a favor and skip out on having kids altogether.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Melosh, Barbara. Strangers and Kin. 1st ed. Washington D.C.: Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data, 2002. Print.
-Outside Looking In. Dir. Phil Bertelson. Big Mouth Productions, 2001. Videocassette.
-Crossing Chasms. By Jennifer Christine Yang Hee Arndt. Rainbow World Productions, 1998. Videocassette.
-Found in China. By Carolyn Stanek. Dir. Masashi Niwano. Tai-Kai Productions, 2007. DVD.
-"Adoption: Every child deserves a home, researchers urge." Science Daily: News & Articles in Science, Health, Environment & Technology. 23 Nov. 2009. Web. 13 Dec. 2009.
-"Our Work - Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption." Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption. Web. 13 Dec. 2009. .
-Benson, Peter L., Anu R. Sharma, and Eugene C. Roehlkepartain. "Strengths of Adoptive Families | Search Institute." Search Institute-50 Years of Discovering What Kids Need to Succeed! | Search Institute. Web. 13 Dec. 2009. .
-"Adoption Fact Sheet." Start Web Application. Web. 13 Dec. 2009. .
No comments:
Post a Comment