Am I wrong to find it selfish of Ben & Jessa...?

[twinmama]

It isn't the job of the infertile to seek IVF either. What's your point? People do it and it happens.

My point is when a couple has trouble conceiving people tend to ask why they don't "just adopt." It's super painful to someone who is going through fertility treatments to hear that. And they are under no more obligation to adopt rather than try for a biological child than any person without fertility troubles.

I wanted to be pregnant, I wanted a newborn, I wanted a biological child with my husband if it was possible. IVF was MUCH MUCH cheaper than adoption of a newborn would have been. Also much faster.

My point is also, it is perfectly fine for a couple who can easily have a biological child to adopt a child. Having any child is selfish, no one goes into it for any reason other than "I want a child."

[Firiel]

In no way did I mean, or do I believe only infertile couples should be able to adopt.

My belief may be the minority but I do feel as though people whether they are infertile, same sex (whole different debate I dont want to start) or for whatever reason cannot experience a child from the newborn stage themselves have that opportunity if it is something they truly desire. All I am saying is to adopt domestically from the newborn stage is a lengthy and expensive process, and there are waitlists in most areas.

I am all for adopting, and am a major advocate of it, I guess what I am saying is IMO, those who can have there own children should foremost consider adopting the older children, even if that means a 1 year old (I am also by no means saying that infertile couples shouldnt adopt older children either).

I am having trouble verbalizing my beliefs. I just really feel empathy for the couples who cannot have children, and want them and are stuck spending insane amounts of money, and enduring long waits to experience the joys of raising a baby.

I think I get what you are saying here, but correct me if I'm wrong.

I think I agree with your basic premise. To me, it seems like if someone can have children of their own but chooses to adopt, there is usually at least a nominally altruistic element to it.* Like, an element of wanting another child but wanting to give a home to a child who wouldn't have one or knowing you have the resources to help a special needs child or an older child or something like that. If you adopt a white newborn with no medical issues, it's not really altruistic at all because white newborns with no medical issues are generally in high demand by gay couples/couples struggling with infertility/whatever. All this to say, anyone can do anything they want, but I would be confused by someone saying that God was calling them to adopt in addition to having their own biological children and then adopting a "high-demand" baby. Like, what are you really accomplishing? Do you really think YOUR parenting skills and the opportunities a child would have in YOUR household are that much better than what any number of stable, middle-class homes could offer?

*I know not always. And I purposefully included "nominally" because I think often the altruism is actually just a disguised desire to increase street cred within certain communities.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Let's talk about the differences between The Little Couple and Ben and Jessa Seewald, shall we?

Binessa

19 and 21 years old

Have known each other for a year

Got pregnant 3 months after the wedding

Both unemployed (ooops, they're "reality TV personalities")

Have no financial stability

Have no financial assets. Do not own their home.

Have no training for a future career

Ben and Jessa allegedly have GED's. Ben has "some" college.

Belong to a religious cult that believes it's acceptable to swat an infant that crawls off a blanket, for starters

Bill Klein and Jen Arnold

Bill and Jen are in their 40's. I believe they have been married for seven years.

Bill owns at least two successful businesses.

Jen earned her MD and is a neonatologist.

They are financially stable.

The Arnold Kleins own their home.

After many attempts to conceive their own children, they researched and went through the process of adopting two special needs children. They financed their children's adoptions themselves.

"The Little Couple" is not their sole financial support.

They have a strong support network of family and a nanny.

There's no comparison. Bill Klein and Jen Arnold knew what they were getting into and have the family and financial support to raise their kids. Binessa probably think that adopting a child is like checking a book out of the library.

Let me add to that with some stuff that's not so focused on finances.

Bill and Jen didn't just adopt children with special needs. They adopted children with the same special needs (similar form of dwarfism) that they have, and they have both the financial means and the personal experience and the medical background to deal with those needs in the best way possible. While the kids are not from the same ethnic culture, they have parents who share a key characteristic and can understand exactly what it means to live life as a little person.

They are child-focused. They seem to have a real understanding of child development, and do not have unreasonable expectations. They understood, for example, that Zoe was upset when she was taken from the orphanage and that she'd need time to adjust. They look for the good in their children, and don't focus on a negative.

[Feberin]

Haven't you heard? Moms with one child are selfish for not giving their child a sibling. Also, her kid will be selfish and spoiled and lonely. Moms with two kids aren't real mothers. :/ (Just some stereotypes I've heard, not at all a representation of my actual thought process.)

Yeah I'm currently expecting my third and have been told that there is no way I will be able to give three children enough attention. I also got asked outright if this one was an accident and before I got pregnant was told lots of times since I had a boy and a girl my family was perfect and complete. And if you just have one child people tell you all sorts of things about depriving your child of a sibling or that they'll be spoiled. And if you have two of the same sex then you should have a third to try for opposite sex. I feel like there is always criticism from somebody about your family size.

[eh02]

If Jessa and Ben DO adopt within the next 5ish years, for the child's sake, I hope it is a baby, and that it does not happen until they at least already have 2 or 3 kids.

Jessa had to work hard raising kids her whole life, but she was always doing it as a member of a "team." I don't think she probably knows exactly how hard her life is going to be if she has one kid after another PLUS adopted kids. The oldest kid won't be much help to her for a solid 10 years. The idea of them having a baby a year AND adopting on top if it is just absurd. Jessa could have 8-10 biological kids by the time Ben turns 30, plus adopted kids? And all this when Benjermen's career goals are so vague and wishy washy (ministry? political science degree? what does he do again?). They'll end up riding the TLC gravy train for a few more years and then grifting like every other fundie family.

The sad thing is, a 19 year old not having a career figured out is not weird. But most 19 year olds aren't talking about how they will have dozens of babies. Ben better figure it out. They're delusional if they think TLC checks will be rolling in forever.

I think people are misunderstanding my comments about older or special needs children up for adoption. I was not suggesting that having a child with any sort of special needs is somehow lesser than a healthy newborn. But healthy, young children are in "higher demand" - that's just how it goes. And it is definitely true that nobody should take in a child who has likely been through trauma or faced neglect without really seriously considering whether they can provide for their needs.

And of course you have no guarantee that your biological children will be healthy, either. But I think the difference is that many people who do have children with more demanding special needs DON'T HAVE 20 CHILDREN. Because it is IMPOSSIBLE to give even 20 HEALTHY children everything they need, much less when one or more of them require a lot of extra care.

[silverspoons]

How many adoptions do not use home studies? Obviously private adoptions, which are either expensive or very situational. Any others? Don't most religious organizations overseas still require a home study?

My husband and I wanted to adopt and were very open to age, race, and most disabilities. We have the income, we have 3 extra bedrooms, we had guardianship of 4 kids for over 3 years due to a family terminal illness so we had some many letters saying how we stepped in and loved kids, everything was going fine until I disclosed a health issue I have (The reason I wanted to adopt over having another child) and it basically made us not eligible for almost every country and many US situations.

I doubt that Jessa or Ben have a hidden genetic condition, but they certainly could not meet the requirements of the home study. They only have a 2 bedroom home and with one child of their own, it would disqualify some options, once they have 2 kids of there own, virtually no home study will pass you for adopting child #3 with two bedrooms. I wonder how they would consider income? Does TLC guarantee some many episodes or seasons?

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

Cause nothing says "selfish" like giving a child a home and providing for said child despite having no family ties to said child.

Also, we don't even know what kind of adoption they're pursuing. Are they going in looking for a baby or are they looking to adopt an older child? If it's the latter, there's literally no way you'd ever convince me that was anything less than selfless.

I think that people here want nothing more than to hate the Duggars for their very existence, so they look for every opportunity to attack them. This thread is a perfect example of that. If anyone else adopted, it would be "great" and "selfless" and they'd be praised. But a Duggar wants to and suddenly it's selfish because they can get pregnant, and they're only doing it to get white babies, and they are unfit parents, and they should be made infertile, etc.

I find these types of threads and accusations to not only be disturbing but to be counterproductive. If you want people to understand the Duggars have terrible beliefs, you shouldn't focus on fabrication of caricatures, you should be focused on what is known about them and their beliefs. If you try too hard to make someone look like a monster, people stop taking you seriously because the majority of the people in this world understand that people aren't "good or evil." These caricatures paint them as pure evil, which is so unbelievable. Even Voldemort has a tragic backstory that helps make him more human.

[KelseyAnn]

I find it selfLESS. Do you know how many babies there are needing homes?

And who cares if it's a healthy baby they want, there is a suprlus of them too.

[eh02]

Cause nothing says "selfish" like giving a child a home and providing for said child despite having no family ties to said child.

Also, we don't even know what kind of adoption they're pursuing. Are they going in looking for a baby or are they looking to adopt an older child? If it's the latter, there's literally no way you'd ever convince me that was anything less than selfless.

I think that people here want nothing more than to hate the Duggars for their very existence, so they look for every opportunity to attack them. This thread is a perfect example of that. If anyone else adopted, it would be "great" and "selfless" and they'd be praised. But a Duggar wants to and suddenly it's selfish because they can get pregnant, and they're only doing it to get white babies, and they are unfit parents, and they should be made infertile, etc.

I find these types of threads and accusations to not only be disturbing but to be counterproductive. If you want people to understand the Duggars have terrible beliefs, you shouldn't focus on fabrication of caricatures, you should be focused on what is known about them and their beliefs. If you try too hard to make someone look like a monster, people stop taking you seriously because the majority of the people in this world understand that people aren't "good or evil." These caricatures paint them as pure evil, which is so unbelievable. Even Voldemort has a tragic backstory that helps make him more human.

I don't think what they are trying to do is selfish. Just naive. I think they mean well and honestly, I respect Jessa and Ben for (IMO) indirectly calling out Jessa's parents on their hypocrisy about adoption. I do not think anything less of them for wanting to adopt. There are a lot of things about them I dislike, but I think it's admirable that they're showing interest in "walking the walk" more than Boob and Jchelle ever did. But they're also young and likely overly optimistic because they're in love and have their first taste of independence. They think they are grownups with big-kid wisdom who have it all figured out.

But I loathe the idea that they will keep having biological children at an uncontrolled rate ON TOP OF adopting several(?) kids. Having 20 children is wrong. Nobody will convince me otherwise. You cannot care for 20 children on your own, whether they're all biological, all adopted, a mix of the two, whatever. Would an agency even want to give a baby to a couple who already has their own older kids raising their younger kids? Considering how many other things are dealbreakers (young or old age, unmarried, newly married, income too low, health issues etc.) I would not be surprised if they looked at an application of someone whose family looked like the Duggars and said HELL NO.

[Selena]

Unfortunately, a lot of the time, Quiverfull couples will adopt older children internationally and then, when the kids misbehave, treat them like they'd treat their own "trained" children of they misbehaved the same way: punish them. The kids then act out more, the punishments get worse, etc.

[Rainytown]

They are child-focused. They seem to have a real understanding of child development, and do not have unreasonable expectations. They understood, for example, that Zoe was upset when she was taken from the orphanage and that she'd need time to adjust. They look for the good in their children, and don't focus on a negative.

One of the things I have appreciated most about Jen Arnold and Bill Klein's allowing the show to document their quest to adopt Will and Zoey is the fact they brought in a child psychologist to help Zoey with a tough adjustment and the cameras were shut off during that period. It hasn't always been perfect, but as you mention, they are child-focused and willing to do whatever they can to make sure Will and Zoey get any help they need now and in the future.

Let's face it. I love seeing their kids, but I will be relieved when they decide to shut off the cameras once and for all. Their family deserves privacy as the kids grow up.

I wish I could say the same for the Duggars. They've sold their children's privacy and futures to the highest bidder.

[DGayle]

Uhm, in my state, there are thousands of children in the foster care system that are adoption eligible. So the 'wait for adoption' thing is a myth.

The waitlist for a healthy newborn, especially white, is very long. There is no wait for medically-fragile and older kids. I think some states even pay you to take those kids.

[DGayle]

There are millions of children that need homes I don't see how in any way that it is selfish for them to adopt instead of adding to this already overpopulated world.

It's selfish of them because they won't use birth control and would toss a kid into a home where the kid wouldn't be likely to get the one-on-one needed. They wouldn't be adopting a child to love. They'd adopt to add more arrows. Any kids adopted by them would be given a heavy burden and saddled with obligation.

[DGayle]

Not to sound like a leghumper, but really? Since '14 Children and Pregnant Again', people have been bitching and moaning about how they should adopt and they're sooo selfish for having more when there are starving kids in need of homes, and the world is overpopulated, and blah blah blah... Now they're selfish for adopting because they have no fertility issues?

Also, I think it's stupid how so many people think of adoption as a last resort for infertile couples.

It's more like, stop pumping the babies our and adopt INSTEAD OF breeding more. Jessa and Ben would adopt on top of breeding. Kids who are adopted come with the special need of extra time and patience to adapt and bond. Any kids they take in won't get that. If they started using birth control and adopted instead so that adopted kids could have that time, and got the hell off TV so a child wouldn't have the world staring, great. But that isn't what they're doing.

I also hate how adoption is often seen as the responsibility of infertile people and a last resort.

[DGayle]

I think the biological parents of all those unwanted children in the world are the selfish ones.

You do know that not all children put up for adoption are unwanted, right? On the first page of this thread, a woman gave up a daughter when she was 17 and knew she couldn't provide. A lot of babies given up are very wanted, but the parents know they can't provide, and hope for a better life for their babies. Carrying a baby, and then giving the baby up, is UNselfish. We don't call women who abort babies they just plain don't want selfish, do we? No. We praise them for knowing their limits, and not raising a child who isn't wanted. So why bash on parents who have babies they know they can't provide for, and then call them selfish for doing 1 of the most emotionally difficult things parents could do?

[Rainytown]

But a Duggar wants to and suddenly it's selfish because they can get pregnant, and they're only doing it to get white babies, and they are unfit parents, and they should be made infertile, etc.

They don't "want to". They think it sounds really cool and the Duggars' publicist is probably encouraging this to the hilt. To be blunt, they're ineligible due to age and most other factors. They can't apply for the vast majority of state or private adoptions for a minimum of 18 months and they will not be leapfrogging to the front of the list at that time. Bin will be almost 22 at that point. I don't own an adoption agency, but I don't believe Bin would be eligible to adopt an older child due to age. It's also entirely possible Jessa will have had two children and a third on the way by that point. They can't prove financial stability or steady employment. Any social worker doing home visits for state adoption could do a 30 second Google search and get some interesting information about what the Duggar family views as "acceptable" child discipline/child rearing methods, as well as the Duggar family's adherence to Gothard's principals, one of which is that adoption is verboten due to the "sins of the father" being visited on any adopted child.

I'd love to say I'm just a haterrrr, but we have personal experience with the above. Our aunt has been placing foster children for 30 years for both the state and for a private organization. (The Casey Family; feel free to look them up.) I'm very familiar with Gothard and his principals; I attended Basic Youth Conflicts for several years in my teens and twenties.

If they're so interested in aiding children that don't have a home, maybe they need to put their money where their mouths are and sign up to be a guardian ad litem for a foster child, or even pursue being foster parents. I believe the age limit for being a guardian ad litem is 21. If Arkansas has the program, they're always looking for volunteers.

[Lucy H]

I find it selfLESS. Do you know how many babies there are needing homes?

And who cares if it's a healthy baby they want, there is a suprlus of them too.

This is completely untrue. While there are millions of babies in the world who are born into poverty and what we would consider less than optimal living conditions, these babies are not availble for US couples to adopt. Healthy newborns availble to be adopted by citizens of the USA are in very short supply.

[Lucy H]

You do know that not all children put up for adoption are unwanted, right? On the first page of this thread, a woman gave up a daughter when she was 17 and knew she couldn't provide. A lot of babies given up are very wanted, but the parents know they can't provide, and hope for a better life for their babies. Carrying a baby, and then giving the baby up, is UNselfish. We don't call women who abort babies they just plain don't want selfish, do we? No. We praise them for knowing their limits, and not raising a child who isn't wanted. So why bash on parents who have babies they know they can't provide for, and then call them selfish for doing 1 of the most emotionally difficult things parents could do?

I agree with your post with the exception of women who choose abortion. They are often called selfish along with worse things like murderers.

[Lucy H]

Cause nothing says "selfish" like giving a child a home and providing for said child despite having no family ties to said child.

Also, we don't even know what kind of adoption they're pursuing. Are they going in looking for a baby or are they looking to adopt an older child? If it's the latter, there's literally no way you'd ever convince me that was anything less than selfless.

I think that people here want nothing more than to hate the Duggars for their very existence, so they look for every opportunity to attack them. This thread is a perfect example of that. If anyone else adopted, it would be "great" and "selfless" and they'd be praised. But a Duggar wants to and suddenly it's selfish because they can get pregnant, and they're only doing it to get white babies, and they are unfit parents, and they should be made infertile, etc.

I find these types of threads and accusations to not only be disturbing but to be counterproductive. If you want people to understand the Duggars have terrible beliefs, you shouldn't focus on fabrication of caricatures, you should be focused on what is known about them and their beliefs. If you try too hard to make someone look like a monster, people stop taking you seriously because the majority of the people in this world understand that people aren't "good or evil." These caricatures paint them as pure evil, which is so unbelievable. Even Voldemort has a tragic backstory that helps make him more human.

I'm a parent by adoption and no, I don't see choosing adoption as way to build a family as selfless at all, at least not any more selfless than building a family by giving birth to children.

Is raising children selfless? Sure it is in that it takes away time and money that could be used for other things. It is also selfish because it brings most parents great joy and happiness. Most people who create a family through childbirth aren't doing it to provide a home for a fertilized egg, they do it because they want a child. Adoptive families had the same motivation.

My husband I adopted a child because we wanted a family and nature wasn't cooperating and then gave birth to a child because nature changed its mind. Our motivation in each case was the same, we wanted these babies in our lives.

I can maybe see an argument that adopting an older child with emotional or health issues is selfless, but only in the way that raising a child born to you is selfless. While parents that adopt these children know that raising them will be difficult, they do it because it will enrich their lives as well as providing a home to a child who needs one.

This argument is important because one of the most damaging thing you can do to a child who joins your family through adoption is to expect that child to be grateful to you. A child who is told that his parents did him a favor by being him into their family is a child who will be angry and resentful.

This is where I wonder at the motivation behind the Ben and Jessa adoption talk. Why exactly do they want to add children their family through adoption? What will a child who joins their family in that way bring that another child born to them won't?

Perhaps they want a large family but Jessa doesn't want to be PG over and over, that's legitimate. Perhaps they want diversity and cultural enrichment by adopting internationally, legitimate. Perhaps,they want the challenge and reward of adopting a older child or one with special challenges, legitimate. I'd like to hear some motivation for it because right now they just sound clueless and attention seeking.

[Toothfairy]

Adoption is for every one, it is not like the orphanages are empty. There sure are plenty of children waiting to be adopted.

I disagree. Adoption isn't for everyone. It take a very special(sorry can't think of another word) person or couple to go through with adoption.

[Toothfairy]

I agree with the second and third paragraph.

Regarding the first paragraph: Giving up a child is really difficult to do. Unless you lost your child to the foster care system for good reason and make their life hell by petitioning to get your child back, how are you selfish? Pro-lifers feel that giving up a child for adoption is the better alternative to abortion. Are abortions less selfish? How do you decide?

Pro abortion people are dumb as fuck. I hate how kids who are given up for adoption are used in font abortion adopt campaign. Makes my blood boil. Then the kids who are adopted should be grateful that they had a chance at life and someone adopted them. :angry-banghead: I can totally see Benessa doing this.

[eri]

My point is when a couple has trouble conceiving people tend to ask why they don't "just adopt." It's super painful to someone who is going through fertility treatments to hear that. And they are under no more obligation to adopt rather than try for a biological child than any person without fertility troubles.

I wanted to be pregnant, I wanted a newborn, I wanted a biological child with my husband if it was possible. IVF was MUCH MUCH cheaper than adoption of a newborn would have been. Also much faster.

My point is also, it is perfectly fine for a couple who can easily have a biological child to adopt a child. Having any child is selfish, no one goes into it for any reason other than "I want a child."

IVF is definitely selfish compared to adoption. But who cares? Everyone is selfish to a degree.

[Toothfairy]

I kind of feel like there's a bit of "damned if you do, damned if you don't" directed Jessa and Ben's way here, in somewhat the same way women in particular are judged for having 1, 2, 3, 19 kids.

Let's face it, if they only had biological kids, there would people judging them for not adopting (overpopulation!). Now that they're still talking about adopting, they're selfish for adopting, or they should only adopt a certain type of child in order to not be selfish--even though everyone here seems to agree that they should not be adopting a special needs child, or a child from a different culture.

If the Seewalds look around in a year and a half and decide adoption isn't for them, more power to them. If they decide to go full steam ahead, well, as long as they have more/better skills than they do now (and/or a solid financial plan to provide for the kid), again, more power to them. If they decide a young healthy baby of their same background is best for them, good for them. If they decide a gay teenager from a different background that is also emotionally stunted, has learning disabilities, and only one leg is the perfect addition to their family, good for them. I admit I would be more than a little terrified for the latter, but hey, people surprise me sometimes. Maybe that kid would be the one that changed Ben and Jessa's attitudes.

I have a feeling that if Jessa (in particular) is really as cold and non-maternal as people (myself included) seem to think she is, it's going to be "one and done" anyway.

The only reason they want a bunch of kids is because of God's army aka gothard. The only reason they would adopt is because of God's army or as a pr move to gain more attention. If they adopted a gay teen they would probably do conversion therapy or Ben would try to save him/her from their sins. Benessa are two kids uneducated playing house. I hope they never adopt as long as they're associated with JB and Gothard then get a job and be stable

[eri]

I disagree. Adoption isn't for everyone. It take a very special(sorry can't think of another word) person or couple to go through with adoption.

In that same vein, not everybody should be a parent. Some people have no patience at all. Unfortunately everyone is taught to believe that they are going to become a parent one day so most people do.

[PracticeMakesProgress]

I have worked with many children from foster backgrounds. And I get all the of arguments about Bin and Jessa's age, naivete, lack of "real" job, etc., etc. All legitimate. But compared to what many of these children have been exposed to, are currently exposed to, and how bleak their future prospects are? Adoption by even the Duggar clan would be a major step up. I actually had a great aunt (permanent adoptive mom) of a foster girl lament to me, "I know ____ is a meth baby. She's dumb like a meth baby is. She don't mind me at all. And I just don't care. She's gonna grow up worthless, just like her mother." :pink-shock:

As questionable as the Duggars can be, I can't imagine them ever having such an attitude. Many foster/adoptive parents ARE heroes, but the terrible truth is many children do wind up in damaging and ill-equipped homes, simply out of lack of options. They have not improved their stations, if anything, they may have fared better with the original birth parents.

Every time I see children in this situation, I am very thankful for the good people out there willing to take on the daunting challenge of adoption. I do believe J&B--*IF* they ever actually do adopt-would not sit and wait for the perfect private baby. I believe they would foster, or go international, because it's clear they view adoption as a "ministry." And it takes a couple who's pleasantly optimistic and convinced that with unconditional love and Jesus they can overcome the inherent obstacles...