I’m not an adoptee but I am the child of two addicts so I thought I’d chime in! The OP wasn’t implying that children be kept in dangerous homes at all - not all addicts are abusers or dangerous and while it’s likely that media gave you that implication, it’s still an implication that harms addicts and addicts’ families far more than helping their children. The OP is advocating for systems that actually address the societal problems that cause an addict - problems that will likely plague that addict’s child as well - rather than taking a kid away from their parents and putting them in a system that’s seen as a bandaid for bad parenting instead of as the oftentimes pervasively harmful system it truly is.
I can only speak for myself but I have one abusive parent and one who is non-abusive. If I was taken away when my non-abusive parent was addicted to pain meds, I would have lost my best friend, confidante, and role model. Furthermore, being put up for adoption when my abusive alcoholic parent was at his worst wouldn’t have fixed my problems at all. Adoptees are not given adequate therapy and, if I had been adopted, the insurance of my adoptive parents likely would’ve been worse than the insurance of my abusive parent, meaning I’d be living with two strangers that I have no emotional connection to, forced to contend with my PTSD and other disorders by myself or at a higher price than staying at home.
No, abused kids shouldn’t have to stay with abusive parents, but adoption is also not a perfect fix and can lead to more harm than good, as OP was trying to say.
wait in confused by ur dni. the pro adoption thing...What Do You Mean By That...
hi! thanks for asking! i really need to like have a tag or a link or something but my adoption tag only has one thing in it rn so Oof............
i'll try and keep this fairly short and concise!
so, i'm adopted and i can say it's a racist, colonialist, multi-billion dollar industry, very popular with evangelicals (always a good sign), and propagated almost entirely on inflicting trauma on marginalized families and vulnerable woman. the industry also has little to no oversight.
all adoption starts with trauma for the child, like a baby being separated from their mother at birth cannot be explained to or consent to that happening and actually affects the brain structure of the child as any trauma will. adoptees have 4x the rate of suicide as the general population.
in addition, there is this popular fantasy of adoption being "saving a child" from being an orphan, having some Nasty Abusive CrackWhore (TM) as a parent, or giving them a Better Life.
addressing those in order, almost no adoptees are true orphans, almost all of them have a living parent, and even more have a living relative, and this narrative actually creates more "orphans" for orphan tourism. Secondly, just because someone is an addict or even an "incompetent" parent doesn't mean they should have their children taken away, they deserve the supportive services they need to let them and their child thrive. thirdly, adoption does NOT guarantee a child a better life, only a different one. incidents like these are not unusual and neither are the social media "stars" who send their children back after the traumatized child doesn't meet their starry-eyed expectations.
additionally, many relinquishments are coerced, and as i believe i mentioned earlier?, there is little to no oversight in this multi-billion dollar a year industry and much of it is done behind closed doors. so there's not nearly as much information as there needs to be out there.
finally, adoptees are subject to literal human rights violations beyond just the trauma, such as having no access to their medical records and family medical history and literally not having citizenship.
i think that covers the basics? if you have any more questions feel free to ask! :>