$500 incentive to choose adoption over abortion

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[impressive]

Wow. A whole $500?

 

[Guest]

. . . .

 

[wehstar]

Now that's just a crazy mad idea.

You'd end up with some people selling babies as a sideline business to drawing their regular state benefits.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Use your own money, Representative. Go away.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Now that's just a crazy mad idea.

You'd end up with some people selling babies as a sideline business to drawing their regular state benefits.

Oh, I so agree! $500.00 is good return for nine months of pregnancy...

that's what- an extra $55.00 per month or thereabouts, although she'd have to wait out the term to get it, presumably. Give her, say a month to recover, and she's all ready to get knocked up again!
I'm sure the hormonal ups and downs won't be any trouble, it's just another job, right?

(Just to make sure you don't think I'm serious- Imagine my voice sounding even MORE sarcastic that Jack Nicholson)

 

[scriptordelecto]

Oh, I so agree! $500.00 is good return for nine months of pregnancy...

that's what- an extra $55.00 per month or thereabouts, although she'd have to wait out the term to get it, presumably. Give her, say a month to recover, and she's all ready to get knocked up again!
I'm sure the hormonal ups and downs won't be any trouble, it's just another job, right?

(Just to make sure you don't think I'm serious- Imagine my voice sounding even MORE sarcastic that Jack Nicholson)

I LOVE you Stella!

 

[Pure]

it becoming clear that the 'abortion' ruckus is really about adoption:

where can you get healthy white babies for the middle class?

that's why the bonus is for putting the baby to adoption.

a sensible plan, for someone sincerely 'pro life,' would be to offer the mom, say $500/mo for 5 years if she keeps the baby.

 

[S-Des]

it becoming clear that the 'abortion' ruckus is really about adoption:

where can you get healthy white babies for the middle class?

that's why the bonus is for putting the baby to adoption.

a sensible plan, for someone sincerely 'pro life,' would be to offer the mom, say $500/mo for 5 years if she keeps the baby.

Why would you introduce race? The numbers clearly show that a greater percentage of african americans are having abortions. Sometimes you honestly puzzle me.

 

[3113]

where can you get healthy white babies for the middle class?

that's why the bonus is for putting the baby to adoption.

S-Des has a point. If the money was taken, then most such babies up for adoption would not be white.

But there is another problem here. Adoption laws in the U.S. are so strict that people who want to adopt are more likely to adopt from other countries than try to adopt here in the U.S. There are just too many strings attatched. Easier to adopt a kid from China or Russia. Cheaper even.

I suspect, however, that the real aim here is NOT adoption. What the real aim here is to have the mom give birth, and fall in love with the baby and so keep it. Which is fine...except that if the mom is poor (and we'll assume she is if $500 can tempt her), then she might have to rely on welfare...and too many of those who want to give a woman money not to have an abortion, don't want to give her money to feed, clothe and house that child once it's born.

I honestly have no problem with people being against abortion and urging women to keep babies. What I have a problem with is people who urge this but who are NOT willing to put money either into birth control and family planning (so women DON'T get preggers and so don't have to have an abortion), or into supporting children once they're born. They put all their money into protecting fetuses

 

[Pure]

s-des,

i have no idea what your claim is. mine is this:

1)there is, relative to the demand from the white middle class, a great shortage in the supply [available #] of healthy white babies.

2) those who want to legislate against abortion--typically white evangelicals; occasionally catholics-- are essentially (and primarily) trying to beef up this 'supply.' [secondarily they are trying to 'consequence' {punish} the pregnant single mom.]

the initial article posted, supports my points, because it focuses on trying to persuade a pregant teen to put baby for adoption. i presume that white teens are the main target.

---

note to 3113:
If the money was taken, then most such babies up for adoption would not be white.

i don't agree with this prediction (not sure if s des is making it).

for one thing, there is no shortage of black babies for adoption by black families or white families. there is no reason [for a legislator] to [attempt to] increase the supply.

---
i do agree that sincerity of support for 'life' would be shown in willingness to provide prenatal and onging post natal care, esp. by the birth mom.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Why would you introduce race? The numbers clearly show that a greater percentage of african americans are having abortions. Sometimes you honestly puzzle me.

Yeah, but we wanna beef up the trailer trash numbers... so we thought that $500 incentive might do it...

 

[starrkers]

it becoming clear that the 'abortion' ruckus is really about adoption:

where can you get healthy white babies for the middle class?

that's why the bonus is for putting the baby to adoption.

a sensible plan, for someone sincerely 'pro life,' would be to offer the mom, say $500/mo for 5 years if she keeps the baby.

In the past couple of years, the Australian Government has introduced a payment for new mothers (generally known as the "baby bonus") It's $3000.

 

[ChristopherMaxwell]

Holy smokes!

I've known quite a few women who would not only refuse this offer, but slap a chap for even suggesting it. My ex, for instance. She commented on this recently to me. Maybe she has on here as well. I do not know. Anyway, she made a point of saying that, "My reproductive rights are not for sale." She has a point. It's rather like you Yanks saying, "Millions for defence, but not one cent for tribute," during the commotion with the XYZ Affair. Can't say that I blame you or her on either account. Some things, matters of principles, are more precious to some of us than money.

Mind you, she can sometimes forget her principles over passions, but we humans are a queer race in that way (I meant "queer" in the old sense, of course, nothing about gays or lesbians).

 

[S-Des]

I suspect, however, that the real aim here is NOT adoption. What the real aim here is to have the mom give birth, and fall in love with the baby and so keep it. Which is fine...except that if the mom is poor (and we'll assume she is if $500 can tempt her), then she might have to rely on welfare...and too many of those who want to give a woman money not to have an abortion, don't want to give her money to feed, clothe and house that child once it's born.

I honestly have no problem with people being against abortion and urging women to keep babies. What I have a problem with is people who urge this but who are NOT willing to put money either into birth control and family planning (so women DON'T get preggers and so don't have to have an abortion), or into supporting children once they're born. They put all their money into protecting fetuses

I strongly agree. I'm not exactly "tight" with the religious right, but the ones I know sincerely want to help. The problem is that they only want to help so much, then want it to be someone else's problem. It's not a fault unique to them, but it makes their position difficult to defend. I suppose they do hope for adoption, but you're probably right, they're hoping the mother won't be able to give up the kid afterwards (and gee, with that whopping $500 in her pocket...she shouldn't any problems ).

We have Jane Doe laws here where a mother can walk away from her responsibilities with no strings attached. It was enacted because of a number of babies turning up in the trash or dropped on doorsteps, evidently because the mothers didn't want them or had lied about being pregnant and were afraid. I think offering money is a fine idea because it doesn't force a choice on anyone, but what would be better (as several have pointed out) would be free doctor's care and social services to help the mother make whatever decision she wants. Somehow I'm guessing that if this bill passed, there would be some attachment about how she lives or which doctor she sees (certainly none of those evil Planned Parenthood ones *rolleyes x 100* ). They just don't seem to be able to look at giving people choices as the best outcome, it always has to be about it not being enough until everyone agrees with them. You'd think after 35 years, they'd have figured out that isn't going to happen.

 

[Svenskaflicka]

You know, if they'd make that $500/ born child instead of just per finished pregnancy, we'd see a boost in sell of fertility drugs, and teenage girls who have dropped out og high school would sell octoplets (sp?) to adoption agencies.

Heck, a few years of constant pregnancies, and these girls would be able to save up for college!

 

[ChristopherMaxwell]

You know, if they'd make that $500/ born child instead of just per finished pregnancy, we'd see a boost in sell of fertility drugs, and teenage girls who have dropped out og high school would sell octoplets (sp?) to adoption agencies.

Heck, a few years of constant pregnancies, and these girls would be able to save up for college!

Fucking hilarious! Of course, never mind the health risks to the poor lasses in the meantime, eh? It's just business, nothing personal. Very funny, tongue-in-cheek suggestion. But I can just see it now, "Don't worry, dear, the cash dividends will cover the hospital expences!"

Mind you, some chaps would end up pimping out their ladyfriends as wombs and some ladies would convince beaus with more greed than sense that they are only fooling around with other men for the pregnancy stipend. Prostitution by any other name is still prostitution, however.

Not that I'm a prude, mind you. But this is prostitution, plain and simple. And it undercuts the very priggish morality that they claim to uphold. But it is the logical next step in the process.

I have nothing against polyamory (in fact, I'm leaning toward myself of late). But if you overlook a usual preference for monogamy on your part out of greed, then you're selling out your principles to the highest bidder. Going against your nature for the sake of cold, hard cash would cost more than it pays out in the long term.

However, I can take this as the satire that it was clearly intended to be. Good one, love.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pure
it becoming clear that the 'abortion' ruckus is really about adoption:

where can you get healthy white babies for the middle class?

that's why the bonus is for putting the baby to adoption.

a sensible plan, for someone sincerely 'pro life,' would be to offer the mom, say $500/mo for 5 years if she keeps the baby.

Why would you introduce race? The numbers clearly show that a greater percentage of african americans are having abortions. Sometimes you honestly puzzle me.

I don't very often agree with Pure, but I do here. Most white people who want to adopt a baby would prefer to adopt a white baby, but there are few available for diverse reasons. There are plenty of black babies available, and some white couples adopt interracially.

Personally, I think it will have little or no effect. If a woman or girl has decided on an abortion, for whatever reason, such a trivial amount will not be a consideration in getting her to change her mind. However, those who have decided to have the baby and put it up for adoption will take the money, considering it like finding money in the street, and do what they already planned on doing.

 

[S-Des]

I don't very often agree with Pure, but I do here. Most white people who want to adopt a baby would prefer to adopt a white baby, but there are few available for diverse reasons. There are plenty of black babies available, and some white couples adopt interracially.

Of course, you're just guessing (as is Pure). Since I know dozens of "white people" (after all, what is really white any more?) who have adopted asian, hispanic, and african american children, you really have no idea how many adoptive parents would be happy with any healthy baby. That said, it's irrelevant. Pure was also assuming that he knew the motivations of this individual lawmaker (so I guess we can add fortune teller to his list of accomplishments). It's funny...if a Republican assigns illicit motives to a Liberal, it's called sliming. When a Democrat does it, it's called...the truth. Gee, no hypocracy there.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

It's so satisfying to see that the Anti-Abortion nut jobs have finally place a value on the life of an unborn child. $500 eh? That's somewhat more than the cost of the componants needed to bomb an abortion clinic... Oh... I wasn't supposed to remember that. Sorry.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
I don't very often agree with Pure, but I do here. Most white people who want to adopt a baby would prefer to adopt a white baby, but there are few available for diverse reasons. There are plenty of black babies available, and some white couples adopt interracially.

Of course, you're just guessing (as is Pure). Since I know dozens of "white people" (after all, what is really white any more?) who have adopted asian, hispanic, and african american children, you really have no idea how many adoptive parents would be happy with any healthy baby. That said, it's irrelevant. Pure was also assuming that he knew the motivations of this individual lawmaker (so I guess we can add fortune teller to his list of accomplishments). It's funny...if a Republican assigns illicit motives to a Liberal, it's called sliming. When a Democrat does it, it's called...the truth. Gee, no hypocracy there.

Of course. As I said, many couples who are commonly described as being "white" or "Caucasian" adopt interacially. I don't know what the percentages would be, but I think it is safe to say that most of those would have preferred to adopt a white baby or babies. I also agree that most parents would be happy with any healthy baby and would love and cherish that baby with all their hearts. I don't know the motivation of the lawmaker, except to reduce the numbers of abortions.

 

[Avagadro]

Freakonomics

The book Freakonomics has a chapter on abortion.
It reveals some surprising facts which one would not otherwise think of.