I wrote a guest blog post today over at the Buck Daddy blog. It’s a confessional, painfully honest post. Basically I admit to not being excited about people’s pregnancies because I think they should adopt.
I know, pretty horrible, right?
I know adoption isn’t for everybody. There are people who just aren’t ready for it and there are people who simply shouldn’t adopt. And I get that. But I can’t help hearing about a pregnancy and thinking that they could have adopted. I wish they’d consider it. And maybe they have.
I’m trying to get over it.
I used to be excited when I heard that friends or family were pregnant. A new baby! A new life coming into the world and all the joys and wonders that come with it. High five!
But then we adopted. …
[Now] I’m a pregnancy party pooper.
Update: I’ve added a new post with some clarification and apology.
I read this post over at BuckDaddy.com, and I have to say that, while interesting, it contains some rather fallacious lines of thought.
Firstly, I’m a little curious as to why you state that you know adoption isn’t for everybody, but then in your post seem to assert that your initial reaction to hearing of a pregnancy is to wonder why they didn’t adopt. It seems to me that if you truly ‘get’ that adoption isn’t for everybody, (as you repeatedly attempt to assure us) your stance as a ‘pregnancy party-pooper’ needs to be at least somewhat modified. I can appreciate the ‘confessional’ nature of your post, but given the fact that you go on to outline justification for your line of reasoning, it merely begs the question.
Secondly, it is a somewhat presumptuous statement that biological procreation is ‘cheap’ and ‘easy’ and ‘fun.’ There are multitudes of couples who struggle with infertility, a struggle which can involve a myriad of costs to attempt to treat medically, not to mention the emotional and psychological wounded-ness that infertility can bring to a relationship. The attempt (and, in many cases, struggle) to conceive isn’t always, as you state, ‘fun’- in many cases, it becomes a severe barrier to intimacy and can have damaging consequences for the relationship. Thus, the generalization you employ really becomes an absurdity that makes light (whether intentionally or not) of the heartache that many people will face.
Thirdly, the designation of biological procreation as ‘cheap’, ‘easy’ and ‘fun’ essentially devalues procreation from being a sacred act in which two are united as one and from which life springs forth into a commodity to be quantified. (whether this is your intention or not is somewhat besides the point- in actuality, it does the same thing for adoption.) The fact that one might spend thousands of dollars and months or years to adopt (nevermind the thousands of dollars one may spend at the hospital for pre-natal care, delivery, etc., nor the +/- nine months the woman will spend carrying a child, the significant amount of care required in the first months after birth, etc…) is absolutely irrelevant in respect to the qualitative value of a human life, whether biologically conceived or adopted. The money one must spend for either, while certainly a pragmatic concern, has absolutely no bearing on the legitimacy of one’s decision (in respect to the decision itself) to conceive a child biologically or to adopt. The fact that one might choose to conceive as a ‘first choice’ should not be surprising from a theological (or even biological) point of view, as part of the intent of humankind is to reproduce. As integral aspect of marriage is fruitfulness- love that not only gives to the other and is reciprocated, but that from within that mutual self-gift gives rise to love beyond itself. As we are biological as well as spiritual beings, this manifestation is more often than not evidenced in offspring. (notwithstanding that we as humans certainly fail at the full attainment of this) Adoption, in a similar manner, is an extension of love beyond the mutual gift of self, but in a different way.
Thus, while I can once again appreciate the ‘confessional’ nature of this post, it begs the question as to why your argument in this respect essentially ends up comparing one human life with another by reducing the relative worth of each according to the economic expenditure, mode of convenience and relative amount of pleasure involved for the adopting or procreating parents. (again, whether this is your intent or not is besides the point.) Such an approach (qualifying the ‘standard’ mode of making babies as ‘cheap, easy and fun’) is, in actuality, antithetical to your underlying desire to have everyone consider adoption. Adoption is good because to extend love beyond oneself is good. Procreation is good because to extend love beyond oneself is good. Evaluating the former as a means over against the latter by reducing it as you have according to its economic requirement or mode of convenience or any other reason undermines that entirely.
I certainly sympathize with the desire for people to adopt, and I wholeheartedly support it. Adoption is an amazing option. My wife and I would like to adopt. (and indeed, we may have no choice) It just seems to me that this post could have done with a little more critical thinking in some areas.
Thanks for your comment, deviantmonk. I’m sorry. In my haste to express my feelings and frustrations I think I said some things a little too cavalierly.
You’re very right–having a baby is not always cheap, easy or fun. I know a lot of couples in that situation and I should have been more sensitive.
In general, I was trying to confess some feelings in this post that I know are not entirely good, true or the best. I’m not trying to say that pregnancy sucks or that adoption is a better choice. That’s a horrible comparison, and that’s why I’m confessing it.
These are touchy subjects and I was trying to inject a little honesty and light-heartedness into it (hence the ‘fun’ comment). I probably should have had more sensitivity. But I hope we can still have some open and honest (and hopefully more sensitive) discussion around these issues. That’s the only way we (I) can learn.
Kevin,
You are correct these are touchy subjects that should be handled with care and compassion. God placed four beautiful biological children in my life that I wouldn’t trade for the world. AND, he has just recently placed in my heart the urge to adopt.
Sometimes it all comes down to timing.
I don’t think I would ever wanted to adopt until he had planted the seed in my heart and allowed it to grow in me.
Now, my heart leaps at the thought of the amazing miracle of biological birth as well as the thought of bringing another child into our home who has been orphaned.
I think God’s heart is more about the AND, then it is about the OR. Food for thought.
God Bless bro…
Absolutely, Jefferson. I’ve got one of each, so there’s certainly no talk of one being “better” than the other.
‘And’ vs. ‘or’ is a good way to put it. Too often this discussion is framed with adoption as a second, and therefore inferior choice. Definitely not the case. (and that’s probably what I’m [over]reacting to)
my sister had a hard time getting pregnant because she has this abnormality in her uterus.-`,