While researching something entirely different, I ran across this blog post today and I’ve been thinking about it ever since.

When we were first debating adding a fifth child (presumably by birth) and subsequently encountered the idea of international adoption, I spent a good chunk of time wondering whether we should adopt if we were able to have biological children. I worried about the commandment to “multiply and replenish the earth,” and whether I was somehow ducking my responsibility in this area by choosing adoption (though this concern seems pretty silly to me now). Later, even after we had our adoption plans strongly confirmed through prayer, I began to worry that perhaps it wasn’t fair to others for us to adopt. I imagined there were a finite number of adoptable children on the earth, and that we were effectively bumping an infertile couple to the back of the line for one of those children. Since that time, I’ve learned more about the harsh reality that there are, and probably always will be, far more children available than families to adopt them, the “healthy white newborn” excepted.

This blog entry was fascinating to me for many reasons. I found it interesting that this young, newly married couple would consider adoption from the angle they did. The husband’s assertion that it would be more “ethical” to adopt children is something that has honestly never crossed my mind; I certainly don’t see people who birth children as “unethical.” There are those who would argue that it is better to adopt a child than to contribute to the world’s population problem, but particularly when you’re coming from the LDS perspective, the knowledge that “there is enough and to spare” (D&C 104:17), coupled with the command to “be fruitful,” seem to counter that mode of thinking. In any case, it would take a very different worldview to assert that birthing children, as opposed to adopting them, is unethical, or even less ethical.

Another notable point from the blog entry was the fact that this couple seemed to be giving greatest consideration to adopting children that are hardest to place. While I generally dislike the “charity” approach toward adoption, or adoption out of a sense of obligation, it caused me to stop and think about how my perception might have been different if they’d indicated they wanted to adopt a perfect, brand-new little baby, even though they’re capable (presumably) of having a biological child.

Over the years, I’ve heard many adoptive parents (or hopeful adoptive parents) express the sentiment that those of us who can conceive and bear children should do exactly that, but if we must adopt, they say, we should leave the healthy white newborns (and more recently, Chinese infants) to them. I have conflicting feelings on this subject. On the one hand, I think they have something of a point. I treasure the experience of holding a teeny-tiny little person, straight from Heaven, in the palms of my hands, and I would never want to deny another person that same experience. It’s like no other. What I struggle with, however, is the message that is sent, albeit unintentional, that some children are less desirable than others.

“You can have the Black babies.”
“You can have the kids with special needs.”
“You can have the older kids.”

As a mom to kids in all those categories, I must confess it hurts to think of them as the milk, the leavings, once the cream has been removed.

continued