It is easy to see why a Caucasian adoptive parent of an African-American daughter and a bi-racial son might find this argument (which the episode seemed to support) a little troublesome. But I think the arguments posed by this lawyer should bother all of us.

Racial identity, as a subset of cultural identity, is a good thing. It adds the color of distinctiveness to our lives and it gives us identity with a special group of people. However, race and culture should never let us forget that we are all brothers and sisters.

Racial politics wants to deify racial identity in a way that forever separates us from one another – so that racial identity trumps love and individual identity.

I want to raise my daughter and my son to be who God created them to be. This does not mean raising them as Caucasians. It does not mean raising them as African-Americans. It means raising them as individuals, as children of God, and as members of our family. It bothers me that for some people race is more important than an of this. It is just racism, accepted because it comes from those who used to be discriminated against. Adoption and the love that it engenders erases the racial barrier. I would think that would be embraced by everyone.

[ad#seasonal]

Related Links:

• Do you know of good links related to this post? Let me know by leaving a comment!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

As an adoptive family, I am fully aware of how important foster families are in the lives of the children they serve and of the foster mothers who entrust these little lives to foster care. Children who are given up for adoption face the challenge of starting life in an atmosphere of insecurity. They are seeking to bond to someone who can offer them love. Foster families can offer these children more than physical care, but also the spiritual and psychological foundation that they need. Even though these bonds are pulled apart when the child leaves the foster family (Edith talks about crying each time a baby left her care), they give the children a good start that adoptive families can then continue.

I have heard pro-abortion doctors, politicians and actors claim that they would rather offer a single, pregnant woman abortion than making them face the pain of giving their children up for adoption. These people don’t understand the healing that takes place in the lives of birth mothers when they know that their child is being loved and cared for. A good foster family can help this healing begin. Foster families like the Georges enhance the culture of life through the love they give to foster children and the hope they can give to the children’s biological parents.

Related Links:

• Do you know of good links related to this post? Let me know by leaving a comment!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Regulating women (Ellen Goodman ~ Boston… – Care2 News Network

Abortion is inherently harmful to women, their argument goes, because it violates a woman’s true “nature,” her role as a mother. This would be familiar stuff to Justice Bradley, but Justice Kennedy also wrote about “the bond of love the mother has for her child,” suggesting that any true woman would suffer.

I don’t deny that some women feel regret as well as relief after an abortion. More than 30 million American women have had abortions since Roe v. Wade. Each unwanted pregnancy comes with its own story of a failed contraceptive or failed relationship, of an economic or a health crisis.

Some women do indeed feel coerced by men or by parents. Surely thousands have suffered from the crisis they faced and the decision they had to make.

But to this range of individual dilemmas, the pro life argument offers only one solution: Criminalize abortion. To this range of life stories, it offers only one kind of “help”: Take the decision out of her hands. Now their argument has been folded into a Supreme Court decision. As Yale Law School’s Reva Siegel said, “The opinion imagines that the state knows better than women what they really want and need in matters of motherhood.”

I want to first focus on the last argument here. Ms. Goodman’s argument reminds me of a debate I had with my aunt about the Church’s teaching on contraception. She was arguing that contraception must be made legitimate because a woman has the right to protect herself against an abusive husband or boyfriend who pushes sex on her. She argued that in such cases there is no way that Natural Family Planning could work.

My aunt made a very similar argument to Ms. Goodman’s, “the only solution the Church offers a woman in such a condition is to get pregnant.” The same is true of Ms. Goodman’s claim. Is criminalizing abortion really the only solution offered by pro-life groups? Most pro-life groups that I am aware of support a total respect of reproduction, including the promotion of abstinence education (another thing that Ms. Goodman ridicules). Efforts include pregnancy crisis centers, houses for single pregnant mothers, and promotion of adoption. These and other solutions preserve the dignity of motherhood. Far from taking the choice out of women’s hands, pro-life groups attempt to empower women to make the best choices, before they choose to have sex and after the natural consequence and purpose of sex occurs in their bodies. It is Ellen Goodman who is removing choice – by narrowing the decision to two options: kill your baby or suffer with an “unwanted baby.”

This is exactly the point where Ms. Goodman’s modernist philosophy comes to bear. I think I would find my self disagreeing with Justice Bradley’s ruling that women should not work outside the home. However, my reason for disagreeing would be very different from Ms. Goodman’s. For me, Justice Bradley’s argument is a misapplication of a true principle. Women and men are different, and therefore play different roles in society. It does not necessarily follow that they should not be part of the workforce, or that they should not follow careers. In fact, women should be in the workforce precisely because they are different from men. While men approach their careers from the male perspective and in the role of fathers, women approach their careers from a female perspective and in their role as mothers. Motherhood and fatherhood are roles not limited to the upraising of children.

Modernists see Justice Bradley’s ruling in a completely different light. Modernists don’t believe that there is such a thing as motherhood, or womanhood, or fatherhood, or manhood. For a modernist, his ruling is an imposition of a subjective label (motherhood, fatherhood, male, female) on a culture. Modernists also see his ruling as a power struggle between men and women, in which men try to impose a subservient role onto women in order to keep them under their thumb. They see attempts to interfere with “abortion rights” in the same way.

This viewpoint also feeds into the liberal view of government. For modernists, the purpose of government is to ensure individual liberty, defined as the right to do whatever you want – ultimately, to make up whatever reality you choose to live. If modernists believed in such things, they would have a tough time coming up with any proof that America was founded on this view of government. Contrarily, our country was formed on a much more Catholic view of government. The purpose of government is primarily to protect the common good. The common good includes some fundamental freedoms and rights, but throughout history a society that allowed its citizens to do whatever they wanted whenever they wanted was doomed to failure.

Are gender roles important to the common good? If we examine our culture it doesn’t take too much thought to see that our culture is suffering due to the failure of families, higher divorce rates, and lower marriage rates. This is what Justice Bradley was trying to prevent. Keeping women out of the workforce was probably not the way to do it, but a way must be found to bring back parenthood as a value in society and to truly respect gender differences. Government has a stake in this question because how we treat family and gender roles affects all of society.

So what about partial birth abortion? Does government have a stake in the question about whether or not abortion is good for women? Does government have a stake in the question about whether or not a medical procedure should be legal? Clearly, if you consider the purpose of government the protection of the common good, the answer to both of these questions has to be yes. Finally, can somebody please tell me how killing an unborn baby is good for women’s health? Let’s face it – no matter what your view of gender roles and government, killing babies in order to preserve personal freedom is depraved.

The abortion-hurts-women argument had its first incarnation in repeatedly debunked attempts to link abortion to breast cancer. Now anti abortionists have fabricated an entire mental illness they name post-abortion syndrome, which has been debunked by study after study.

It is my understanding that Ellen Goodman is simply wrong in calling these findings debunked. Notice that she didn’t provide any reference for the studies, which isn’t absolutely necessary, but it would be nice if she did. A 1995 study by pro-choice researcher Janet Daling identified specific high-risk groups: women under 18 or over 29 had a twofold increase in risk; women with a family history of breast cancer, an 80% increased risk; and teenagers with a family history who had abortions before they were 18 had an “incalculably higher risk.” All 12 of the women in this last category of the study contracted breast cancer by age 45. See also the ABC Link home page

I am less familiar with studies on post-abortion syndrome. It seems to me that PAS is simply an application of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, identified more in clinical settings than by studies. Certainly the outcomes of such projects as Project Rachel give credence to claims of PAS. However, it is also possible that pro-lifers are overstating their case by giving feelings of guilt and remorse a label as if it were a legitimate psychological disorder. I think pro-life groups do themselves a disservice if this is the case. We don’t need to use deception or exaggeration to win our case, and to do so actually hurts our credibility. If anyone is aware of objective studies that show whether or not PAS is real, please leave a comment with the info!

Related Links:

• Do you know of good links related to this post? Let me know by leaving a comment!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

The obvious answer to the above question is yes. Certainly someone who adopts a child with the intention of molesting or selling him or her would be committing an evil act in adopting. However, what about the everyday family who adopts out of a desire to have another child? I may not go so far as calling such an adoption evil. However, shallow or selfish intentions can certainly creep into a decision to adopt a child that can tarnish this awesome act of love.

In the January/February 2007 issue of Adoptive Families Theresa Reid, Ph.D. discusses the difficult decision whether or not to adopt a second time in her article “Adopts Again?” She explains,

Like biological parents considering a second child, adopters need to weigh many considerations – whether we’ll be able to love another child as much as we love our first, our ages, the expense – all the questions biological parents weigh, and then some. But what pushes most second-time adopters past all uncertainty is the desire to raise another child.” I so was determined to do it again as soon as I could,” says Emily Breeden, of Oregon. Susan Olson, of Colorado, and her husband agree. Despite qualms about their ages – Susan is 44 and her husband is 57 – they’re planning a second adoption. “For us, the overriding reason is the joy we get from parenting” (31).

Much of this statement is very legitimate. Couples thinking of expanding their families do have a lot to think about. Ages of the parents and the expense of adoption and of raising a child may be morally legitimate reasons for choosing not to adopt another child. However, they can also be selfish intentions not to adopt. If the expense is a road block because you want to use your financial blessings for self-pampering, using your money to adopt another child would certainly be better use of it. If your consideration of age is that you are not healthy enough to chase after another child, it can be a morally legitimate reason for considering your family large enough. However, if your consideration of age is because you want enough retirement years to take your cruise around the world, perhaps using your time would be better used raising another child. What’s the big deal? Why shouldn’t a couple decide to use their time and money to enjoy themselves? Because we are called to love, we will only find our fulfillment in giving ourselves to others as a gift. What better way to offer yourself as a gift of love than to invest yourself in the life and eternal destiny of another human being as a mother or father? In the long run, what will make our lives more fulfilled? Buying a new car? Taking a long cruise? Or will you find your fulfillment in the investment of life and love into the life of a child?

What do you make of statements like, “I don’t know if I’ll be able to love another child like I love my first”? I find such statements perplexing. There seems to be a bit of confusion about what exactly love is. My guess is that most people, if they really though about it, would define love as an emotional state of bonding or closeness. Dr. Reid confirms my suspicion as she explains, “They worry that it won’t be as easy to bond with a second child, or that the relationship they have with their first might be upset by a new addition to the family” (31). What is love, though? Love has many levels or dimensions to it. Emotional love, as is being described here, is the emotional recognition of something good. This kind of love is not sufficient to constitute familial love, or even true human love. First of all, emotional love (also called “erotic love” – not necessarily sexual) is selfish. It looks toward how the good can benefit me. I think this is the main problem I have with basing a family planning decision on this kind of love. Is parenthood really about feeling good as a parent? Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy the warm fuzzy feeling I get when my 10 month old daughter cuddles into my shoulder. But is such a feeling really a good reason to have children? Ask yourself, “Can a selfish parent be a good parent?” The second reason emotional love is insufficient is because it is temporary. Like all emotions, love waxes and wanes with our circumstances, energy levels, and attitudes. If I adopt a child in the hopes of gaining warm fuzzy loving feelings, what happens when parenting two children becomes more stressful than enjoyable? Do I stop loving my children? Finally, emotional love can be deceiving. It is possible not to feel emotional about something that is objectively good. It is also possible to feel emotional love for something that is objectively bad. I may feel like I could love another child despite the fact that my circumstances would make it impossible. I may not feel like I could love another child, even though having another child would be very good. We cannot rely on our emotions. A much better understanding of love is “To will the good of another.” This is the kind of love families are founded on. We become parents, not for our benefit, but because we want to share the goodness that has grown in our marriage and in our home. We want another life to benefit from the goodness that we have gained. The best understanding of love is the definition of love that Christ gave us. “No greater love is there than this: to lay down one’s life for a friend.” To give ourselves to others as a total gift is what Christian love is all about. We are called by Christ to be completely selfless, to give away our very lives. This kind of love is not altruism. We are able to give ourselves away completely because we know that the reward for doing so will be great. Love has great rewards, the greatest of which is participation in God’s divine life. Pope John Paul II, borrowing from the Second Vatican Council, says, “Man comes to fully know himself only by making a gift of himself to others.”

Dr. Reid handled the issues she brought up with a great deal of grace. I was impressed with most of her answers, and placid about the rest. She was not writing from a Christian point-of-view in her article. Adoptive Families is not a Christian publication. So, while her answers reflected my thoughts in this blog entry pretty closely, she seemed to accept that the fear of not being able to love another child as much as the first child as a legitimate concern. To me, it is a sign of a culture that needs to learn what true love really is.

Rampage time: the most odious statement in this article came from the author’s mother-in-law. Dr. Reid used this quotation to open her article:

“Oh, you guys,’ my mother-in-law fretted when she learned that my husband, Marc, and I had started out to adopt a second child. ‘Look what you have! You’ll never get another child as wonderful as Natalie! Why not just be happy?”

Yikes! What exactly is this woman saying! I can’t even begin to understand where such a statement comes from. It just screams “It’s all about me!” You see, the nature of love is to expand. If we are really loving like families should, our love should grow to encompass as many people as it can. It’s not about getting wonderful children. It’s about participating in the life and eternal destiny of a human person. It’s not about enjoying parenthood (not saying that you can’t or shouldn’t enjoy parenthood, just don’t make that your reason for doing it), it’s about making yourself a gift of love!

Related Links:

• Do you know of good links related to this post? Let me know by leaving a comment!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

First Joyful Mystery: The Annunciation “The Angel of the Lord declared unto Mary . . .”

Jodi received the phone call at about 8:30 on a Friday morning. It was our adoption agent asking permission to share our name and information with another agency that had an emergency situation and needed to place a baby right away. Of course, we said yes. At 11:00 she received a call from that adoption agency telling us that we had been chosen by the birth mother. That evening, Jodi and I called the agent back and we talked about the details regarding how to proceed: paperwork, traveling, working with the interstate agencies, and the steps toward finalizing the adoption. Now, Jodi and I have not really been waiting long for a child, compared to some couples who have struggled with infertility. We have only been trying for about three years, and we have only been in the adoption “pool” for only three months. So, our journey toward parenthood was rather quick. However, in those three years the longing in our hearts has grown tremendously. We so much ached for this expansion of our marital love, for the fulfillment of our vocation. As the good news sank in, I thought about all the times in the Bible that God had brought life out of barrenness. Abraham’s wife, Sarah, bore Isaac. Manoah’s wife was infertile until she bore Sampson. Elizabeth bore John the Baptist “in her old age.” And Mary, who as far as we know was not infertile but who was a virgin who did “not know a man,” conceived Jesus. They too knew the longing that our hearts experienced. Ironically, Mary knew it best, even though as an unmarried woman (and possibly a consecrated virgin) she had no reason to expect pregnancy. Her longing was the longing of all of Israel waiting for their messiah. I don’t believe that she felt the desire explicitly all her life, but I can easily imagine the dammed-up desire of the entire Hebrew people (indeed of all of humanity) throughout history suddenly rushing into her heart at the Angel’s words. How painful and joyful that news must have been – the satisfaction of the desire of her heart that she had not even been fully aware of until just then. We knew it well on the day we received our own annunciation.

Second Joyful Mystery: The Visitation “Immediately Mary went to visit her cousin Elizabeth…”

At the close of our phone conversation with the adoption agent, he said, “So when can you be here? If you can be here on Monday …” Monday! That gave us only the weekend to get plane tickets and to get ourselves together for a journey. The preparation that weekend was frantic but joyful. We had the opportunity to celebrate our good news at a family birthday party on Saturday night. Mass that Sunday was especially filled with feelings of gratitude. Monday was a long day of flying and layovers, though the journey went smoothly. We arrived at our destination late Monday night and got to the hotel room too tired to do anything but sleep, but almost too excited to sleep. What must have Mary’s trip to Elizabeth been like? She was not traveling to receive her promised child. Instead, she was traveling to complete an act of love, to care for her cousin in her pregnancy. I have always admired this about Mary. However, now I know what kind of act it really was. Mary’s heart must have been bursting with joy, with the Good News that she had received from the Angel and with the sense of the new life inside her womb. She must have been aching to share that news with somebody. Yet, she suppressed her desire to make the journey to care for Elizabeth first. I can clearly picture her packing for her journey. I can feel the almost painful excitement, bordering on impatience, as she worked, and then as she waited for the long journey to be complete. Did Mary have anyone to celebrate with before she met Elizabeth? How many prayers of Thanksgiving and Praise must she have uttered as she traveled? Then, when she meets Elizabeth, Elizabeth greets her with, “Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And how is it that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, as soon as the sound of your greeting met my ears the child in my womb leapt for joy. And blessed are you that believed, because those things shall be accomplished that were spoken to you by the Lord.” The dam in Mary’s heart bursts and she pours forth the words of praise and wonder that have been forming in her heart during the entire journey:

My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord.
My spirit rejoices in God my savior,
For He has looked with favor on his lowly servant.
From this day all generations will call me blessed.
The almighty God has done great things for me.
His mercy endures form age to age,
And holy is His name…

Oh how this same song was streaming from our hearts as we tried fruitlessly to sleep that night, realizing all of God’s goodness.

Third Joyful Mystery: The Nativity of Our Lord “…Mary kept all these words, pondering them in her heart.”

Our new baby was born before we even knew about her. We experienced her nativity when we picked her up from the foster home and held her in our arms for the first time. While we had nothing to do with giving her life, we knew at that moment that we were being called to be her parents, to nurture her and to love her. We experience this overwhelming epiphany again and again whenever we look into her beautiful face. Our hearts overflow with love. What must it have been like for Mary? Her baby too was born before she knew about Him. He was the eternal Word before He took on human nature. While Mary gave birth to His human nature, His Divine Person existed before all time. Yet, she accepted the overwhelming responsibility of being the Mother of God. She nurtured Jesus’ human nature and she loved Him. What must if have been like for Mary? We don’t know if she experienced pain in child birth. Popular Catholic tradition is that she did not, and that would make sense since pain in childbirth is a consequence of Original Sin. Would Christ, who conquered the effect of Original Sin throughout his earthly ministry and in His Passion, Death, and Resurrection, not come into this world already conquering sickness, suffering and death? Yet, if she did feel pain in child birth, Mary’s love would have made that pain meaningful, beautiful. Our love for our new baby daughter certainly transformed all of the pain we experienced facing our own infertility. All of that suffering was for her. It suddenly did not feel so much like suffering as we gazed into the peaceful face of our new baby daughter. What must it have been like for Mary? If our hearts overflow with love as we gaze at our baby, what must it have been like for Mary to gaze into the face of Love Himself? If our love for our daughter is almost painful at times, how unbearable must her love have been as she looked into the face of God? I am caught up in reverie as I watch our family accept our new baby daughter into their lives and hearts, as I see her fitting herself into our household and family. I have a new appreciation for Mary as she pondered the mystery of love in her own heart.

Fourth Joyful Mystery: The Presentation of the Baby Jesus in the Temple ”And after the days of her purification, according to the law of Moses, were accomplished, they carried him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord.”

The adoption of our daughter will not be complete until this summer. We await that day with a little apprehension, and wit
h eager anticipation. Most of all, we look forward to the day when we can present her to the Lord in Baptism. On that day we will allow Jesus’ grace to wash away original sin so that our adopted daughter may be adopted by God as His own child. When Mary and Joseph presented Jesus at the temple, Simeon and Anna gave them a glimpse into who their baby boy really was, and what kind of person he would be like: “Behold this child is set for the fall and for the resurrection of many in Israel and for a sign which shall be contradicted.” What will our baby daughter become as she grows up? Looking into her beautiful eyes I sometimes think I catch a glimpse of who she is, but it is elusive. It is only enough to make me wonder. When Mary said, “behold, the handmaid of the Lord. Let it be done to me according to your word,” she did not fully know what she was saying yes to. She was saying yes to whatever God planned for her. Her yes was an act of faith, of loving trust. I made my own “fiat” when I said “I do” at the altar. When I married my wife, I was saying yes to whatever God had planned for us. As we adopt our daughter, we continue to say yes. We say yes to whomever she is, whomever she becomes. We say yes in loving trust to the mystery.

Fifth Joyful Mystery: The Finding of the Child Jesus in the Temple ”…and not finding him, they returned into Jerusalem, seeking him.”

Well, we haven’t actually lost our daughter yet, or left her anyplace. However, perhaps this mystery is the most relevant of all. Even though she was full if grace, Mary was still a human parent. She still struggled to grasp the mystery of parenthood, as well as the mystery of her Son. This is the challenge and the joy of parenthood. It is a mystery. It is cooperation in the very love of God. This was especially true for Mary, who was the parent of Love Himself. But it is also true for us. Marriage is a sacrament, a reflection of a divine reality. As we love each other, and as we love our daughter, we are sharing God’s love. This is an awesome reality. It is also an awesome responsibility. Are mere human beings capable of it? Only by the grace of God.

Conclusion
Isn’t God amazing? By coming to earth and taking on human nature, the Second Person of the Trinity has intimately tied Himself to human experience. In a very loose paraphrase of Pope John Paul II, Christ draws close to human experience. Now, as we go through the natural occurrences of human life, we are able to reflect on the Divine Life of God. Our human experience is given Divine meaning, Moreover, we are able to daily participate in God’s divine life. As we exercise love for each other, even (especially) in the family, we are also exercising our love for God, and experiencing His love for us. I hope the Holy Spirit continues to bring these truths to my mind. As we experience everything that people warned us about – stinky diapers, sleepless nights, changed schedules, changed lives – these meditations have turned potential suffering to great joy. God is great!

Who would have thought that such a little baby could give rise to such deep ponderings? It’s amazing what comes to mind during these 5:00 AM feedings…

In the love of Christ,

Jeff
(No pen name – this was a personal experience of the true author!)

Related Links:

• Do you know of good links related to this post? Let me know by leaving a comment!

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.