Crowdfunding to Build Your Family
November 3, 2014 9:40 AM Subscribe
Should we crowdfund families? The cost of some adoptions or fertility treatments have people turning to Crowdfunding. Growing your family has never been more public.
Adoption and fertility treatments can be very expensive. Crowdfunding medical bills are very common and now even fertility treatments are on the table. International adoption can cost from $15,000 to $30,000. So why are people reaching out to the public when there are so many children available domestically where the costs are lower and assistance is available?
Adoption and fertility treatments can be very expensive. Crowdfunding medical bills are very common and now even fertility treatments are on the table. International adoption can cost from $15,000 to $30,000. So why are people reaching out to the public when there are so many children available domestically where the costs are lower and assistance is available?
It takes a village!!
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 9:55 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 9:55 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
From the "medical bills" link:
According to a 2011 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research, half of American adults say they wouldn’t be able to easily produce $2,000 in the event of a medical emergency. Nearly 75 percent of those surveyed said that, to come up with the money, they would have to dip into savings, ask friends and family for help or rely on credit cards or a home equity line of credit.
I went to the actual publication and found that 52.4% of all respondents selected "draw from savings" as a method for coming up with $2,000 (pg. 20). I did this because "dipping into savings" seemed like a weird thing to be alarmed about when it comes to dealing with an unexpected expense. I mean, where would you rather they get it from?
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 9:59 AM on November 3, 2014 [15 favorites]
According to a 2011 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research, half of American adults say they wouldn’t be able to easily produce $2,000 in the event of a medical emergency. Nearly 75 percent of those surveyed said that, to come up with the money, they would have to dip into savings, ask friends and family for help or rely on credit cards or a home equity line of credit.
I went to the actual publication and found that 52.4% of all respondents selected "draw from savings" as a method for coming up with $2,000 (pg. 20). I did this because "dipping into savings" seemed like a weird thing to be alarmed about when it comes to dealing with an unexpected expense. I mean, where would you rather they get it from?
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 9:59 AM on November 3, 2014 [15 favorites]
I think that's fine for truly orphaned children who don't have a safe loving family, but shouldn't we also crowd fund families who are too poor to keep their children to begin with?
I know. We could take a little bit from the people who have more than enough and give it to the people who don't have enough. We could also ensure that people who have a job can earn enough in a reasonable amount of time per week for food, decent shelter and some recreation.
We could call it "taxation" and "civilized society" respectively. It'd be a nice change from the "fuck you I've got mine" we live in.
posted by Talez at 10:12 AM on November 3, 2014 [41 favorites]
I know. We could take a little bit from the people who have more than enough and give it to the people who don't have enough. We could also ensure that people who have a job can earn enough in a reasonable amount of time per week for food, decent shelter and some recreation.
We could call it "taxation" and "civilized society" respectively. It'd be a nice change from the "fuck you I've got mine" we live in.
posted by Talez at 10:12 AM on November 3, 2014 [41 favorites]
I mean, where would you rather they get it from?
In an ideal world, your checking account and cutting back on some luxuries. The fact that people have to dip into months of saving to cover what should be a reasonably sized unexpected expense (car repairs, home repairs, medical emergency, funeral) shows that a lot of people could be wrecked by a number of unexpected expenses in succession.
posted by Talez at 10:14 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]
In an ideal world, your checking account and cutting back on some luxuries. The fact that people have to dip into months of saving to cover what should be a reasonably sized unexpected expense (car repairs, home repairs, medical emergency, funeral) shows that a lot of people could be wrecked by a number of unexpected expenses in succession.
posted by Talez at 10:14 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]
Also, since I think adoption should be something we do as communities for the welfare of children in need of families, and not to supply often already financially secure people with the children of the very poor, I am in favor of treating infertility as the medical condition it is, and ensure people of all economic situations have access to that medical care. Living children are not a cure for infertility.
I personally have always found all the gushing loving support of adoptive families in need of funds to adopt horrific having been in need of funds to SAVE me from having to place my child and finding a never ending stream of moralizing from conservatives and liberals alike about my lack of worthiness of my own child due to my poverty and singleness and need of assistance.
Knowing my own mother was told she literally couldn't keep me because she had stayed in an exploitative maternity home that supplied with housing, encouraged her to not work or create a plan or support her with means to keep me, and then after the birth did what they did to all those moms, remind her as she sobs and howls and screams (and they listen to these sounds all the time, they know what removals do to these mothers, though once discarded they don't have to watch the lifelong effects), remind her she can't even afford a car seat, or a place to stay. She would owe them thousands of dollars for staying there, but if she sells her child she will be free of the debt and her child doesn't have to live on the streets with her. Remind that she's not good enough, and she can't possibly give a good home to her child because she doesn't have enough resources. So she has to give the baby to people with more resources- if she really loves her child. Or she can be a bad selfish unloving mother who destroys her childs life by keeping them. It's totally up to her.
It literally shocks me, that people bend over backwards with sweet love, encouragement, support, and even funds for potential adoptive parents while we throw the original mothers in the garbage.
posted by xarnop at 10:20 AM on November 3, 2014 [30 favorites]
I personally have always found all the gushing loving support of adoptive families in need of funds to adopt horrific having been in need of funds to SAVE me from having to place my child and finding a never ending stream of moralizing from conservatives and liberals alike about my lack of worthiness of my own child due to my poverty and singleness and need of assistance.
Knowing my own mother was told she literally couldn't keep me because she had stayed in an exploitative maternity home that supplied with housing, encouraged her to not work or create a plan or support her with means to keep me, and then after the birth did what they did to all those moms, remind her as she sobs and howls and screams (and they listen to these sounds all the time, they know what removals do to these mothers, though once discarded they don't have to watch the lifelong effects), remind her she can't even afford a car seat, or a place to stay. She would owe them thousands of dollars for staying there, but if she sells her child she will be free of the debt and her child doesn't have to live on the streets with her. Remind that she's not good enough, and she can't possibly give a good home to her child because she doesn't have enough resources. So she has to give the baby to people with more resources- if she really loves her child. Or she can be a bad selfish unloving mother who destroys her childs life by keeping them. It's totally up to her.
It literally shocks me, that people bend over backwards with sweet love, encouragement, support, and even funds for potential adoptive parents while we throw the original mothers in the garbage.
posted by xarnop at 10:20 AM on November 3, 2014 [30 favorites]
There was a recent article about how most people are forced to draw on their 401k retirement accounts (with substantial penalties and bad implications for solvency later) to solve these kinds of problems. Savings doesn't mean discretionary savings in this context, I suspect.
posted by Dip Flash at 10:23 AM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]
posted by Dip Flash at 10:23 AM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]
316 million points of darkness.
posted by ennui.bz at 10:23 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
posted by ennui.bz at 10:23 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
In an ideal world, your checking account and cutting back on some luxuries.
But these weren't even options on the survey! "Draw from savings" was the most conservative option given.
posted by mr_roboto at 10:26 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]
But these weren't even options on the survey! "Draw from savings" was the most conservative option given.
posted by mr_roboto at 10:26 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]
In an ideal world, your checking account and cutting back on some luxuries.
I think you vastly underestimate how many families with good, healthy homes live paycheck to paycheck.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:32 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]
I think you vastly underestimate how many families with good, healthy homes live paycheck to paycheck.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:32 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]
I do find the popularity of international adoption vs. foster care adoption very puzzling. What's the reasoning there? (I assume it's something awful and racist/colonialist but I'm hoping I'm wrong!)
posted by chaiminda at 10:34 AM on November 3, 2014
posted by chaiminda at 10:34 AM on November 3, 2014
28% of respondents said they "certainly" would not be able to put together the $2,000 in 30 days, while 22% said they "probably" would be unable to do so. These respondents were in households making between $100,000 and $150,000 annually.
Paycheck to paycheck living is pretty widespread.
posted by echo target at 10:40 AM on November 3, 2014 [6 favorites]
Paycheck to paycheck living is pretty widespread.
posted by echo target at 10:40 AM on November 3, 2014 [6 favorites]
I mean, where would you rather they get it from?
In an ideal world, your checking account and cutting back on some luxuries.
I don't think that's realistic for many people. $2K is somewhere over 50% of median monthly take-home pay here in the US.
Most recent number I could find for median household income was $51,939 -- obviously things like your number of dependents, state taxes, health insurance, etc. will affect takehome pay significantly but as a very rough calculation it looks like that generally translates -- optimistically -- to around $1500/two week pay period, or $3K/month most months.
If your checkbook and your monthly luxury budget can cover an unexpected $2K without dipping into savings you either keep a lot more money in checking than I do, or you have a lot of luxuries to cut back on. Or it's Three Paycheck Month.
posted by pie ninja at 10:41 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]
In an ideal world, your checking account and cutting back on some luxuries.
I don't think that's realistic for many people. $2K is somewhere over 50% of median monthly take-home pay here in the US.
Most recent number I could find for median household income was $51,939 -- obviously things like your number of dependents, state taxes, health insurance, etc. will affect takehome pay significantly but as a very rough calculation it looks like that generally translates -- optimistically -- to around $1500/two week pay period, or $3K/month most months.
If your checkbook and your monthly luxury budget can cover an unexpected $2K without dipping into savings you either keep a lot more money in checking than I do, or you have a lot of luxuries to cut back on. Or it's Three Paycheck Month.
posted by pie ninja at 10:41 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]
I actually talked to someone the other day who had no idea what Three Paycheck Month was.
I was torn between envy that they were that well-off it didn't matter to them and smugness that they'd been missing out all their lives on it.
posted by winna at 10:51 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
I was torn between envy that they were that well-off it didn't matter to them and smugness that they'd been missing out all their lives on it.
posted by winna at 10:51 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
Or they could get paid monthly! Some people are. (I know someone whose company is switching from monthly to biweekly pay and people are apparently PSYCHED for TPM.)
posted by pie ninja at 10:56 AM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]
posted by pie ninja at 10:56 AM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]
The definition of "savings" is important. I have a big chunk of my paycheck deposited into my savings account, but, for me, it's not really any different from a checking account. I can draw money from savings right at the ATM, and it serves as my checking's overdraft protection. I "draw from savings" whenever my credit card bill is a little large or I need a new couch--it's not breaking open my 401k or liquidating assets or anything like that.
posted by MrMoonPie at 10:56 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by MrMoonPie at 10:56 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
So she has to give the baby to people with more resources- if she really loves her child. Or she can be a bad selfish unloving mother who destroys her childs life by keeping them. It's totally up to her.
I too am a product of the Baby Scoop Era, when unmarried pregnant women were coerced into giving up their children. It happens for different reasons now, mostly poverty. But it still happens.
Molly McGrath Tierney used to run social services here in Baltimore. She tried to change the agency's focus from ransacking poor families of their children--for things as fixable as not being able to pay for heat to keep the kid warm during winter--to doing what's necessary to help keep children in the families they were born into. If, she said, we paid for the heat to stay on, we wouldn't be producing children to feed the foster care system and adoption industry.
To put it another way: When did adoption become about finding a child for a couple who "needs" one? Adoption should be about finding a family for a child who needs one.
posted by ImproviseOrDie at 10:59 AM on November 3, 2014 [16 favorites]
I too am a product of the Baby Scoop Era, when unmarried pregnant women were coerced into giving up their children. It happens for different reasons now, mostly poverty. But it still happens.
Molly McGrath Tierney used to run social services here in Baltimore. She tried to change the agency's focus from ransacking poor families of their children--for things as fixable as not being able to pay for heat to keep the kid warm during winter--to doing what's necessary to help keep children in the families they were born into. If, she said, we paid for the heat to stay on, we wouldn't be producing children to feed the foster care system and adoption industry.
To put it another way: When did adoption become about finding a child for a couple who "needs" one? Adoption should be about finding a family for a child who needs one.
posted by ImproviseOrDie at 10:59 AM on November 3, 2014 [16 favorites]
You should be able to crowdfund things like this by paying taxes.
posted by srboisvert at 11:08 AM on November 3, 2014 [14 favorites]
posted by srboisvert at 11:08 AM on November 3, 2014 [14 favorites]
Related: "Canadians should not be denied having children for the sin of being socio-economically disadvantaged," Dr. Nisker said. "Almost all other developed countries have funded fertility treatments. It's embarrassing."
posted by blue_beetle at 11:14 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
posted by blue_beetle at 11:14 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
I do find the popularity of international adoption vs. foster care adoption very puzzling. What's the reasoning there? (I assume it's something awful and racist/colonialist but I'm hoping I'm wrong!)
The process of becoming foster care parents is extremely invasive and allows a lot of mandated home visits - and I don't believe you get to choose which child you get. The process of international adoption often involves demonstrating you're financially and relationship-stable, and picking a kid.
posted by corb at 11:17 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]
The process of becoming foster care parents is extremely invasive and allows a lot of mandated home visits - and I don't believe you get to choose which child you get. The process of international adoption often involves demonstrating you're financially and relationship-stable, and picking a kid.
posted by corb at 11:17 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]
I do find the popularity of international adoption vs. foster care adoption very puzzling. What's the reasoning there? (I assume it's something awful and racist/colonialist but I'm hoping I'm wrong!)
My sister and her husband have gone through the process of getting approved for ministry adoption in their province which is essentially adoption from foster care. One of the things talked about was this difference. Primarily it's age and the situation the kids come from. If you want a baby or very young child then your chances are very, very small through the foster care system. If you want a child with no 'issues' whether physical or some sort of emotional problems or just generally with history because of their situation growing up that's rare within that system. My sister went through some pretty extensive education in order to prepare themselves for what the ministry calls children with special needs. This is to help as well as make sure that they as parents want and are prepared for it.
To be blunt I guess if you would like a 'new' kid, as in baby or young then private or overseas adoption is where you're going to find one a lot easier.
posted by Jalliah at 11:22 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
My sister and her husband have gone through the process of getting approved for ministry adoption in their province which is essentially adoption from foster care. One of the things talked about was this difference. Primarily it's age and the situation the kids come from. If you want a baby or very young child then your chances are very, very small through the foster care system. If you want a child with no 'issues' whether physical or some sort of emotional problems or just generally with history because of their situation growing up that's rare within that system. My sister went through some pretty extensive education in order to prepare themselves for what the ministry calls children with special needs. This is to help as well as make sure that they as parents want and are prepared for it.
To be blunt I guess if you would like a 'new' kid, as in baby or young then private or overseas adoption is where you're going to find one a lot easier.
posted by Jalliah at 11:22 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
For a while it seemed like every month I'd see a plea for some moderately famous person who found themselves in the hospital and needed help paying the bills. Not famous enough that I'd heard of the person, but enough that I'd heard of something they did (usually a musician or a comics artist, just because of the sorts of feeds I follow).
It mostly made me feel sad for the people who don't have the connections to have these pleas sent out for them, and angry for the sort of medical system that has these ever-growing cracks for people to fall into.
posted by ckape at 11:30 AM on November 3, 2014
It mostly made me feel sad for the people who don't have the connections to have these pleas sent out for them, and angry for the sort of medical system that has these ever-growing cracks for people to fall into.
posted by ckape at 11:30 AM on November 3, 2014
Yes and as Corb stated adoption through a government system is pretty intense process. My sister had many home visits and mandated education. They also look fairly extensively at your extended support system. It's not just to make sure your good people but to also make sure that whatever child is adopted is the right fit for the family and home environment. At least in my sisters case they do have some choice, though now that they've been approved it's a matter of waiting until there is a potential match. This match comes out of both reccomendations from the ministry study and my sisters wishes. They for instance can say that they would like a certain age or are not okay or okay with certain disabilities. Once there is a potential match they can say yes or no.
I don't know their particular wishes with the exception that they would be willing to take siblings. I'm big sister proud of her for that as that would be a big instant life change and I know that apparently siblings can find it more difficult to find adoptive homes.
posted by Jalliah at 11:31 AM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]
We could take a little bit from the people who have more than enough and give it to the people who don't have enough.
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
Yeah, this has been tried. Didn't turn out so hot.
I do find the popularity of international adoption vs. foster care adoption very puzzling. What's the reasoning there? (I assume it's something awful and racist/colonialist but I'm hoping I'm wrong!)
"I hate foreigners so much that I want to pay for the privilege of raising their unwanted children"?
I fail to understand your assumption.
posted by IndigoJones at 11:34 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
Yeah, this has been tried. Didn't turn out so hot.
I do find the popularity of international adoption vs. foster care adoption very puzzling. What's the reasoning there? (I assume it's something awful and racist/colonialist but I'm hoping I'm wrong!)
"I hate foreigners so much that I want to pay for the privilege of raising their unwanted children"?
I fail to understand your assumption.
posted by IndigoJones at 11:34 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
I'm starting an IndieGoGo to fund a Kickstarter pledge to help.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 11:34 AM on November 3, 2014
posted by DirtyOldTown at 11:34 AM on November 3, 2014
One bad thing about crowdfunding charity (in general) is that people are naturally going to help those they instinctively like. It's going to select heavily for photogenic, charismatic people and heavily against everyone else. I'd also guess there will be a huge element of racism and ageism and possibly even classism, with people being more willing to help fallen middle-class people than those who started poor (who will also have less computer experience and therefore ability to ask for it).
posted by Mitrovarr at 11:36 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]
posted by Mitrovarr at 11:36 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]
The process of becoming foster care parents is extremely invasive and allows a lot of mandated home visits - and I don't believe you get to choose which child you get. The process of international adoption often involves demonstrating you're financially and relationship-stable, and picking a kid.
yeah it completely depends on what you consider invasive and appropriate for checks and balances- it also heavily depends on the state that you are adopting in. And you actually have a lot of choice in which child you adopt. In New York it goes as far as listing available children online.
The reason why all of those invasive questions are asked are to try to make sure children get put into homes where there is a high chance of success. I feel like a lot of people are personally offended by this, but they need to be sure they aren't putting vulnerable children into homes that aren't equipped to deal with them.
There is also a misconception that you'll get a better "quality" child from overseas. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There aren't just mountains of healthy, pretty babies up for adoption for no reason.
posted by Blisterlips at 11:39 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
yeah it completely depends on what you consider invasive and appropriate for checks and balances- it also heavily depends on the state that you are adopting in. And you actually have a lot of choice in which child you adopt. In New York it goes as far as listing available children online.
The reason why all of those invasive questions are asked are to try to make sure children get put into homes where there is a high chance of success. I feel like a lot of people are personally offended by this, but they need to be sure they aren't putting vulnerable children into homes that aren't equipped to deal with them.
There is also a misconception that you'll get a better "quality" child from overseas. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There aren't just mountains of healthy, pretty babies up for adoption for no reason.
posted by Blisterlips at 11:39 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
As friends of ours noted, when you adopt a baby from China, you don't have to worry about a birth parent ever trying to take the kid back.
posted by Mary Ellen Carter at 11:39 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
posted by Mary Ellen Carter at 11:39 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
I do find the popularity of international adoption vs. foster care adoption very puzzling. What's the reasoning there? (I assume it's something awful and racist/colonialist but I'm hoping I'm wrong!)
"I hate foreigners so much that I want to pay for the privilege of raising their unwanted children"?
I fail to understand your assumption.
You might want to read up on the history behind the Indian Child Welfare Act for a parallel example.
The sentiment is more "You're all heathens, and I need to save your children from you".
posted by damayanti at 11:41 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]
"I hate foreigners so much that I want to pay for the privilege of raising their unwanted children"?
I fail to understand your assumption.
You might want to read up on the history behind the Indian Child Welfare Act for a parallel example.
The sentiment is more "You're all heathens, and I need to save your children from you".
posted by damayanti at 11:41 AM on November 3, 2014 [8 favorites]
I actually talked to someone the other day who had no idea what Three Paycheck Month was.
At my current job, we are paid on the 1st and 16th of every month; I've never had a "Three Paycheck Month" in the 23 years I've been here.
posted by xedrik at 11:42 AM on November 3, 2014
At my current job, we are paid on the 1st and 16th of every month; I've never had a "Three Paycheck Month" in the 23 years I've been here.
posted by xedrik at 11:42 AM on November 3, 2014
"I hate foreigners so much that I want to pay for the privilege of raising their unwanted children"?
also- "i'd rather have that pretty baby from sad china then this complicated brown toddler from the projects"
posted by Blisterlips at 11:43 AM on November 3, 2014 [6 favorites]
also- "i'd rather have that pretty baby from sad china then this complicated brown toddler from the projects"
posted by Blisterlips at 11:43 AM on November 3, 2014 [6 favorites]
Yeah, international adoptions are "easier" because there are less ethical restrictions in place (or at least those restrictions are de facto unenforceable), so there is a larger pool of kids to draw from. Intact families are often coerced by outside forces or poverty to sell their kids to be adopted by white people.
posted by Ragini at 11:45 AM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]
posted by Ragini at 11:45 AM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]
I have a big chunk of my paycheck deposited into my savings account, but, for me, it's not really any different from a checking account. I can draw money from savings right at the ATM, and it serves as my checking's overdraft protection. I "draw from savings" whenever my credit card bill is a little large or I need a new couch
Be aware that most banks watch that sort of activity closely and, if you draw from savings a bit more often than they like, will convert your savings account to a checking account. Chase, for instance, sets their limit at five draws from savings in a month.
posted by Thorzdad at 11:52 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
Be aware that most banks watch that sort of activity closely and, if you draw from savings a bit more often than they like, will convert your savings account to a checking account. Chase, for instance, sets their limit at five draws from savings in a month.
posted by Thorzdad at 11:52 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
I don't think that's realistic for many people. $2K is somewhere over 50% of median monthly take-home pay here in the US.
I know it's not realistic for anything but maybe the top 5% of wage earners. Wouldn't it be great if we all could live knowing we're not one disaster away from being fucked up by an unexpected expense?
posted by Talez at 11:53 AM on November 3, 2014
I know it's not realistic for anything but maybe the top 5% of wage earners. Wouldn't it be great if we all could live knowing we're not one disaster away from being fucked up by an unexpected expense?
posted by Talez at 11:53 AM on November 3, 2014
Yeah, international adoptions are "easier" because there are less ethical restrictions in place (or at least those restrictions are de facto unenforceable), so there is a larger pool of kids to draw from. Intact families are often coerced by outside forces or poverty to sell their kids to be adopted by white people.
There are two other things, I think. One is that the perception is that a much smaller percentage of the international children are special needs, compared to children in the US foster system -- that may not be based on truth at all, but I hear people saying it confidently whenever the topic comes up. The other is (again a widely-held perception) that international adoptions are less likely to be reversed or challenged, so they are "safer."
posted by Dip Flash at 11:54 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
There are two other things, I think. One is that the perception is that a much smaller percentage of the international children are special needs, compared to children in the US foster system -- that may not be based on truth at all, but I hear people saying it confidently whenever the topic comes up. The other is (again a widely-held perception) that international adoptions are less likely to be reversed or challenged, so they are "safer."
posted by Dip Flash at 11:54 AM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
Yeah, this has been tried. Didn't turn out so hot.
Getting all reductio ad absurdum up in this thread. Scandanavia shows us a nice happy middle compared to the dog eat dog world of life in these United States.
posted by Talez at 11:54 AM on November 3, 2014 [7 favorites]
Yeah, this has been tried. Didn't turn out so hot.
Getting all reductio ad absurdum up in this thread. Scandanavia shows us a nice happy middle compared to the dog eat dog world of life in these United States.
posted by Talez at 11:54 AM on November 3, 2014 [7 favorites]
I do find the popularity of international adoption vs. foster care adoption very puzzling.
Sadly, foster children are often considered "damaged goods" by a lot of couples. There's also the point of most couples wanting a newborn, whereas kids in the foster system tend to be much older.
Oddly, there's also the belief that an international adoption will happen much quicker than a domestic agency adoption. While that used to be true, especially in nations like China, the Hague Convention really put the brakes on most international adoption. Some nations have shut-down completely to adoption. Today, you could probably adopt a newborn domestically much quicker than going international.
posted by Thorzdad at 11:58 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
Sadly, foster children are often considered "damaged goods" by a lot of couples. There's also the point of most couples wanting a newborn, whereas kids in the foster system tend to be much older.
Oddly, there's also the belief that an international adoption will happen much quicker than a domestic agency adoption. While that used to be true, especially in nations like China, the Hague Convention really put the brakes on most international adoption. Some nations have shut-down completely to adoption. Today, you could probably adopt a newborn domestically much quicker than going international.
posted by Thorzdad at 11:58 AM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
In an ideal world, your checking account and cutting back on some luxuries. The fact that people have to dip into months of saving to cover what should be a reasonably sized unexpected expense (car repairs, home repairs, medical emergency, funeral) shows that a lot of people could be wrecked by a number of unexpected expenses in succession.
Do they define "savings" in that PDF? I glanced at it, but it's large and I didn't find anything concrete. To my mind, money in my checking account is "savings," if it's not earmarked for definite expenses. It's money I have not spent. I have saved it.
We could take a little bit from the people who have more than enough and give it to the people who don't have enough.
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
Yeah, this has been tried. Didn't turn out so hot.
This is one of the most absurd things I have ever seen on this site, and that's saying something. Yes, taxation with an eye toward smoothing out economic hardships is Marxism. You've certainly got that one figured out. Intellectual giant, you.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 12:09 PM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]
Do they define "savings" in that PDF? I glanced at it, but it's large and I didn't find anything concrete. To my mind, money in my checking account is "savings," if it's not earmarked for definite expenses. It's money I have not spent. I have saved it.
We could take a little bit from the people who have more than enough and give it to the people who don't have enough.
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
Yeah, this has been tried. Didn't turn out so hot.
This is one of the most absurd things I have ever seen on this site, and that's saying something. Yes, taxation with an eye toward smoothing out economic hardships is Marxism. You've certainly got that one figured out. Intellectual giant, you.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 12:09 PM on November 3, 2014 [5 favorites]
Why not just, you know... not have kids?
This just seems absurd. Kinda like crowdfunding a breast enlargement or a new tattoo...
Also I had to google "three paycheck month". I had no idea, but I've always been paid monthly not fortnightly.
posted by mary8nne at 12:44 PM on November 3, 2014 [7 favorites]
This just seems absurd. Kinda like crowdfunding a breast enlargement or a new tattoo...
Also I had to google "three paycheck month". I had no idea, but I've always been paid monthly not fortnightly.
posted by mary8nne at 12:44 PM on November 3, 2014 [7 favorites]
Yeah, international adoptions are "easier" because there are less ethical restrictions in place (or at least those restrictions are de facto unenforceable), so there is a larger pool of kids to draw from. Intact families are often coerced by outside forces or poverty to sell their kids to be adopted by white people.
Not so. For international adoptions, you have three separate authorities that need to be satisfied. First, there's the local or state government agencies that perform and certify your home study (consisting of several visits). Then, the foreign government has to approve everything on their end (involving more studies, more certifications, etc). Finally, the US federal government has to certify that everything from the first two studies is legit and has to perform its own background checks before it will issue an immigration visa for the adopted child. I grew quite tired of the constant fingerprinting and the endless trips to the notary public. And as alluded to earlier, everything became more complex with the Hague Convention on Adoption (actually a good thing, as it standardized the whole process).
Quite a few families get stuck somewhere in the process. Especially difficult is the case where the first two agencies have signed off, but the federal government refuses to issue an immigration visa due to some (real or imagined) irregularities. Some families have had to rent an apartment in Moscow or in Guatemala City or in Kinshasa for a year or more to wait out the process, because the local government says it's your child but your own government won't let you take the child home.
That's not to say that there are or are not less ethical restrictions; that's a topic for another post. But I can say that international adoptions are not easier.
posted by math at 12:57 PM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
Not so. For international adoptions, you have three separate authorities that need to be satisfied. First, there's the local or state government agencies that perform and certify your home study (consisting of several visits). Then, the foreign government has to approve everything on their end (involving more studies, more certifications, etc). Finally, the US federal government has to certify that everything from the first two studies is legit and has to perform its own background checks before it will issue an immigration visa for the adopted child. I grew quite tired of the constant fingerprinting and the endless trips to the notary public. And as alluded to earlier, everything became more complex with the Hague Convention on Adoption (actually a good thing, as it standardized the whole process).
Quite a few families get stuck somewhere in the process. Especially difficult is the case where the first two agencies have signed off, but the federal government refuses to issue an immigration visa due to some (real or imagined) irregularities. Some families have had to rent an apartment in Moscow or in Guatemala City or in Kinshasa for a year or more to wait out the process, because the local government says it's your child but your own government won't let you take the child home.
That's not to say that there are or are not less ethical restrictions; that's a topic for another post. But I can say that international adoptions are not easier.
posted by math at 12:57 PM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
Why not just, you know... not have kids?
My wife works for an adoption agency. If you want to see just how strong the desire to have children is, have a chat with an adoptive couple. It's amazingly strong and really does drive their lives. Most of them also seem to be fairly religious, and that definitely informs their desire.
posted by Thorzdad at 1:01 PM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
My wife works for an adoption agency. If you want to see just how strong the desire to have children is, have a chat with an adoptive couple. It's amazingly strong and really does drive their lives. Most of them also seem to be fairly religious, and that definitely informs their desire.
posted by Thorzdad at 1:01 PM on November 3, 2014 [3 favorites]
How about not having kids? You know what, I used to feel that way about international adoption and IVF. To me, it seemed really unethical because there are so many kids who need a home here, and spending all those resources seemed foolish.
Then I decided to deal with my mental health issues that related to the function of my body and I got it: for people who want kids, that's a major part of their emotional and physical needs that they can't meet any other way. For people who really want to be pregnant or who just know they need to be parents as part of their life, telling them to just give up on that is like asking you or I to give up on a life goal like, I don't know, fixing a debilitating back issue or becoming a doctor. It's a huge thing to ask someone to give up something like that just because you personally don't want it or respect it.
Once again, we as a society need to put the priority on fixing the society so that the worst thing that can happen to a child-- losing their birth family-- is rare, and making it so the people who do or don't want kids have a clear and ethical path to that goal. It's not my business to tell an individual what to want or work for, but it is my business to work together to make it work for everyone involved.
posted by blnkfrnk at 1:29 PM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]
Then I decided to deal with my mental health issues that related to the function of my body and I got it: for people who want kids, that's a major part of their emotional and physical needs that they can't meet any other way. For people who really want to be pregnant or who just know they need to be parents as part of their life, telling them to just give up on that is like asking you or I to give up on a life goal like, I don't know, fixing a debilitating back issue or becoming a doctor. It's a huge thing to ask someone to give up something like that just because you personally don't want it or respect it.
Once again, we as a society need to put the priority on fixing the society so that the worst thing that can happen to a child-- losing their birth family-- is rare, and making it so the people who do or don't want kids have a clear and ethical path to that goal. It's not my business to tell an individual what to want or work for, but it is my business to work together to make it work for everyone involved.
posted by blnkfrnk at 1:29 PM on November 3, 2014 [4 favorites]
"It mostly made me feel sad for the people who don't have the connections to have these pleas sent out for them, and angry for the sort of medical system that has these ever-growing cracks for people to fall into."
I'm in the middle of doing a GoFundMe for $2800 to cover two pieces of medical equipment (a mobility scooter so I can keep working and a flexitouch pump to treat my severe lymphedema from having cancer.) I'm at the halfway point in funds raised and this has been due to 18 days of really pushing the issue.
I set it up a month ago and talked to multiple people before linking it anywhere. It was a hard decision to make. I live in a small town, write for the local paper, and I'm well known due to that.
Having to beg to cover equipment that our insurance won't cover sucks. I hate doing it, but what can you do? I either ask for help or do without, lose my job, and end up in worst shape from the lymphedema.
All of this is following me having a horrible accident in August which caused an avulsion fracture of my heel and an Achilles' tendon rupture which led to major surgery, two weeks in the hospital, then six weeks in a nursing home.
I'm looking at a year of therapy and possibly never walking normally again due to how severe the damage was, yet, my insurance doesn't want to cover two of the smaller things to help me out.
posted by SuzySmith at 3:14 PM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
I'm in the middle of doing a GoFundMe for $2800 to cover two pieces of medical equipment (a mobility scooter so I can keep working and a flexitouch pump to treat my severe lymphedema from having cancer.) I'm at the halfway point in funds raised and this has been due to 18 days of really pushing the issue.
I set it up a month ago and talked to multiple people before linking it anywhere. It was a hard decision to make. I live in a small town, write for the local paper, and I'm well known due to that.
Having to beg to cover equipment that our insurance won't cover sucks. I hate doing it, but what can you do? I either ask for help or do without, lose my job, and end up in worst shape from the lymphedema.
All of this is following me having a horrible accident in August which caused an avulsion fracture of my heel and an Achilles' tendon rupture which led to major surgery, two weeks in the hospital, then six weeks in a nursing home.
I'm looking at a year of therapy and possibly never walking normally again due to how severe the damage was, yet, my insurance doesn't want to cover two of the smaller things to help me out.
posted by SuzySmith at 3:14 PM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
That's not to say that there are or are not less ethical restrictions; that's a topic for another post. But I can say that international adoptions are not easier.
Fair enough, and I appreciate the thoughtful response.
posted by Ragini at 5:07 PM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
Fair enough, and I appreciate the thoughtful response.
posted by Ragini at 5:07 PM on November 3, 2014 [1 favorite]
I'm struggling now with fertility issues, and adoption-foster discussions again, and I believe adoptive parents have 90% of the power and the pain of infertility is far less than the pain of unethical adoptions. Fundraising for adoption is just so much fuel to a broken system. I absolutely believe adoptions can take place ethically, but only with major curbs on the position of adoptive parents who have far too much control and influence. If you're coming from infertility where you've become effectively disabled in your body, deliberately giving up control in adoption can feel like another catastrophe, but I have so little sympathy these days for adoptive parents who complain about delays and costs as they affect them, and then tag on at the end a quick "it's for the orphans really". Be super sad about being infertile and having to adopt! That's fine, but don't put your healthy and absolutely fine desire to parent above an entire childhood and family of someone who has zero voice.
Argh.
posted by viggorlijah at 9:30 PM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]
Argh.
posted by viggorlijah at 9:30 PM on November 3, 2014 [2 favorites]
People who have no experience with infertility have no basis on which to judge those who have.
Anyone who thinks it is easy to just "not have kids" either hasn't been infertile or never wanted kids in the first place.
Studies suggest that women who suffer from infertility have similar levels of stress to those who have just had a heart attack or just been diagnosed with cancer. Try to have empathy for others whose shoes you have not walked in.
posted by treehorn+bunny at 12:17 PM on November 4, 2014 [10 favorites]
Anyone who thinks it is easy to just "not have kids" either hasn't been infertile or never wanted kids in the first place.
Studies suggest that women who suffer from infertility have similar levels of stress to those who have just had a heart attack or just been diagnosed with cancer. Try to have empathy for others whose shoes you have not walked in.
posted by treehorn+bunny at 12:17 PM on November 4, 2014 [10 favorites]
Tree horn, I have had both trouble conceiving and multiple early miscarriages and am in the midst of deciding whether to try again with health issues or stop and go onto our foster plan. I also have adopted children. Infertility is incredibly painful but it's something adults deal with. Adoption involves children who have very little power and even when they grow up, have part of their identity defined as a child in the power structure of the adoption industry. It's not a comparison of subjective pain, but of control and power, and infertility is not an excuse for the slippery side of adoption, which it gets often turned into.
I edited out an earlier comment which is that infertility should IMO be treated as much a serious health issue as diabetes or heart attacks by a health system. It isn't something that should have to rely on fundraising unless as it seems to be in the US, your health system relies on fundraising in general. I was pregnant in my one live birth and met a grandmother who was very very poor and her big question to me was how she could get advice for her daughter who had a similar history of early losses. They were devastated by the miscarriages and longed for a baby, even though they were struggling to make ends meet. It's not irrational or foolish or a luxury to want a child or to want to parent, but I feel like a line often gets crossed ethically with expensive adoptions because they don't need to be expensive. IVF etc costs money in clinics and salaries, but with adoption, it feels like the money is going away from the families and children to cushion a broken system.
posted by viggorlijah at 6:08 PM on November 4, 2014 [1 favorite]
I edited out an earlier comment which is that infertility should IMO be treated as much a serious health issue as diabetes or heart attacks by a health system. It isn't something that should have to rely on fundraising unless as it seems to be in the US, your health system relies on fundraising in general. I was pregnant in my one live birth and met a grandmother who was very very poor and her big question to me was how she could get advice for her daughter who had a similar history of early losses. They were devastated by the miscarriages and longed for a baby, even though they were struggling to make ends meet. It's not irrational or foolish or a luxury to want a child or to want to parent, but I feel like a line often gets crossed ethically with expensive adoptions because they don't need to be expensive. IVF etc costs money in clinics and salaries, but with adoption, it feels like the money is going away from the families and children to cushion a broken system.
posted by viggorlijah at 6:08 PM on November 4, 2014 [1 favorite]
« Older Howdy, young feller! Come set a spell by th’ far … | YouTube finally pays off Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 9:47 AM on November 3, 2014 [14 favorites]