I posted a thread some months ago in regards to the way people react with having 5 children and thinking I am mad to consider more.

A few posted maybe I should look into adopting/fostering.

So I did...

1 - As I have 5 children I am overcrowded and have hands full
2 - I have young children so would not be considered able
3 - My partner & I have not been together for long

The list went on and on - I think it unfair but maybe I am biased...

Are these really good enough reasons to make me unsuitable ?

I could always get back in touch when my youngest reaches the age of 10 ! In 10 years time !

#3 is a big consideration. #1 is a matter of economics... will having another make things worse? #2, personally, as the dad of 2 young ones, I think you should wait because it is hard... but if you are in a situation where you can handle it, I don't consider it a factor.

It is not something I would have wanted to do for a few years as I have young children of my own it just interested me enough to enquire.
I just was a little puzzled into why they would think I was unsuitable.
My partner and I have been together 2 years but very happy - where as I was with my ex husband for 10 years and was miserable.
Is it therfore not the quantity but quality argument.
I also understand the children being too young - a lot of children needing a home have a lot of problems and it unfair me not to be able to give as much attention to the needs.
I understand all sides of the arguments just wondered with so many children out there needing loving stable homes I have a home that would offer everything a child would ever need yet am not suitable criteria.
The rules are there for a purpose but I can not help think they are a little too strict.Not everything is black and white.

A few posted maybe I should look into adopting/fostering.

So I did ......

1 - As I have 5 children I am overcrowded and have hands full
2 - I have young children so would not be considered able
3 - My partner & I have not been together for long

The list went on and on - I think it unfair but maybe I am biased ...

Are these really good enough reasons to make me unsuitable ?Hi! mum2five :)
Its not you or your partner. The only reason you are unsuitable is because, the agency is "Looking out" for the best interest's of the children in their charge.
You already have a "large" family, according to "today's standards".

#3 is the one that "upsets" me a little... Here you have an agency that has no idea of your values. So what, "you two haven't been together for long" You've been together for at least five years, unless you had Quints. And you, and your partner are building a cohesive family unit.
All their doin' is CYA an that's the shame, because it's the children that are missing out.


I could always get back in touch when my youngest reaches the age of 10 ! In 10 years time !Sure why not? If you can swing it. I say have more kids.

If one is not a burden to others, who should care, what they do?
KUXJ... (1951 - )

This applies to all government's not just Americans...



I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent
the government from wasting the labors of the people.
Under the pretense of taking care of them.

Thomas Jefferson 3rd president of US (1743 - 1826)


k

My 3 eldest children are from my previous marriage - it was a domestic violence case and that was another cause for concern - I had to have injunction etc against him coming near me or the children. So something else that would go against me. That I once ha da pyscho ex who wanted to kill me ! I also suffered depression on and off during our years together.

My new partner and I have 2 children 13 months and 10 weeks - we have been together 2 years.

It is not something I would have wanted to do for a few years as I have young children of my own it just interested me enough to enquire.
I just was a little puzzled into why they would think I was unsuitable.
My partner and I have been together 2 years but very happy - where as I was with my ex husband for 10 years and was miserable.
Is it therfore not the quantaty but quality argument.
I also understand the children being too young - a lot of children needing a home have a lot of problems and it unfair me not to be able to give as much attention to the needs.
I understand all sides of the arguments just wondered with so many children out there needing loving stable homes I have a home that would offer everything a child would ever need yet am not suitable criteria.
The rules are there for a purpose but I can not help think they are a little too strict.Not everything is black and white.

When it comes to the law, it is concerned with absolutes. Quality cannot be measured. Quantity can.

When it comes to the law, it is concerned with absolutes. Quality cannot be measured. Quantity can.There's the rub... there is no allowance to "Interpret the "Law". Only after you spend Thousands of dollars or more, months, maybe years, does your situation reach a point where the Judicial branch "may be" compassionate enough to display a form of leniency.
If you think otherwise, then start looking at the world without your "rose colored" glasses.

We have only ourselves to blame for "voting in" representatives "that" we "thought" would serve us to the common good.

Human Nature being what it is. Today's Laws are structured to only benefit the people that enact them.

K

Is it fair that you're judged on your financial situation, current number of small children, and length of your relationship for adopting/fostering? Nope.

Is it what EVERY foster/adoptive parent goes through? Absolutely.

Let me just say that as a birthmother, I would have NEVER chosen someone who already not only had kids, but had FIVE kids. No way. You've had MORE than your fair chance to be a mother, as compared to the thousands of infertile couples out there.

On the flip side of that---would you, as a child, want to be just another one of many kids, none of whom get a huge amount of attention?

The state is merely looking at the best interest of the child here--not at being fair to YOU.

Is it fair that you're judged on your financial situation, current number of small children, and length of your relationship for adopting/fostering? Nope.

Is it what EVERY foster/adoptive parent goes through? Absolutely.

Let me just say that as a birthmother, I would have NEVER chosen someone who already not only had kids, but had FIVE kids. No way. You've had MORE than your fair chance to be a mother, as compared to the thousands of infertile couples out there.

On the flip side of that---would you, as a child, want to be just another one of many kids, none of whom get a huge amount of attention?

The state is merely looking at the best interest of the child here--not at being fair to YOU.

Curious: why don't you think its fair that she be judged on those factors? Personally, I wish that all parents be judged on those things before being allowed to reproduce.

But then again, I have been called a fascist. :)

Oh, I think that everyone should have to have a license to have a kid, and be limited as to the number of children they should have---and that you have to pass a certain level IQ to be able to reproduce, but I'm something of a fascist myself.

How it's not fair is that people can biologically reproduce with absolutely NONE of those criteria being thrown in. You can have as many kids biologically as you can take care of---and then you can have some more, but CPS will generally take them away.

So--it's not really "fair" to be judged on those standards to adopt or foster kids---but it's a good place to start.

Let me tell ya---when I was choosing adoptive parents for my child, I was even pickier than those 3 things. I looked at age of parents, I looked at their house, their religion, their thoughts on education, their educational background, and their finances, just to start with.

Can I ask why in your opinion there should be a limit to the number of children a couple may decide to have?

I'm confused about reason #3... I was told that you can be single, married, dating, newly wed... or anything. I was told that they don't evne take that into consideration... or does it vary by state? (im in arizona)

My 3 eldest children are from my previous marriage - it was a domestic violence case and that was another cause for concern - I had to have injunction etc against him coming near me or the children. So something else that would go against me. That I once ha da pyscho ex who wanted to kill me ! I also suffered depression on and off during our years together.

My new partner and I have 2 children 13 months and 10 weeks - we have been together 2 years.


A history of depression would make you unsuitable in NY.

"The system," at least in theory, is looking for a stable home for the children.

Why do you want to adopt or foster when your youngest is only 10 weeks only?

Can I ask why in your opinion there should be a limit to the number of children a couple may decide to have?

Because if every couple had 4 children, the world would quickly become overpopulated and everyone would suffer for it.

1 child per adult is my theory.

im confused about reason #3...i was told that you can be single, married, dating, newly wed...or anything. i was told that they dont evne take that into consideration...or does it vary by state? (im in arizona)

It varies by state (or country)

Can I ask why in your opinion there should be a limit to the number of children a couple may decide to have?

Because the world is overpopulated enough as it is, and I feel that most people have to scramble to find quality time with their kids when they have 2-3... adding more children means that each child gets less quality attention, less focus, and therefore less instruction from parents. Less instruction from parents means that children are growing up lost, confused, and angry. Confused, lost, and angry children lead to crime statistics and teenage pregnancies.

Look, I grew up one of three kids, and felt that I had to work to have time with my parents. My parents each grew up as one of five kids---but they were both the first generation off the farm. My grandparents were farmers, and back then you had a lot of kids to help on the farm. That's not necessary in today's world.

My question back is this: How can you justify having more than 2 or 3 children in today's overpopulated world?

I started this thread as a question after I looked into the possibility after we had talked on an earlier thread. I was more annoyed at the reasons more than not being suitable as I agree with young children I would not be suitable at this present time.

" Why would you want to adopt when I have a 10 week old baby " ? - I do not want to it was something for the future.

As stated it would not be something I would do now but maybe in the furture years when all my children were grown up.

As for having 5 children I can not justify why I love having more than the "normal" number whatever you think this should be, motherhood comes natural to me and I would be happy to have another 5.

As for large families my father is 1 of 14 and my mum 1 of 5 , I am 1 of 4 so you could say we are very family orientated.

For those who can not understand why someone would want a large family well that in my opninion is your loss.

I can assure you my children are very well educated and will be at all costs steered away from a life of crime and having teenage pregnancies.

There is a difference between loving kids and being family oriented (both of which I am) and intentionally contributing to world overpopulation (which includes problems such as pollution, food shortages, overcrowding and a number of other well documented issues).

I understand that you are happy to have 5 and would be happy to have another 5. Your happiness is great. It doesn't make you a responsible citizen of the planet. Why should your happiness outweigh the good of all?

I guess everyone will each have their own opinion on such issues.It is a personal choice.

I guess everyone will each have thier own opinion on such issues.It is a personal choice.

Which I respect. I am not looking down on you. Im having a discussion on views. I mean no malice - I just like discussing things like this. :)

I have started a new thread in regards to " having a large family" as feel the discussion is of interest to others and under the adoption thread it does not fit.

I don't think anyone meant any insult to you - but in these times, particularly in this economy, I don't find "why so many children?" to be an unusual or insulting question. Only you know your financial and emotional abilities to support, educate and nurture your children.

Posing the question now is probably not helpful as laws change almost annually and what is the case now may not be the case then.

I am from a family of three - I got through College by working and having a partial scholarship. I don't know how families with multiple children, particularly in these financial times, as I said, afford it.

A lot of people would have come back screaming. You did not. You don't seem to fly off the handle and that probably is good in your situation.

Please come back and join in other discussions.

I don't know why they are giving you a bunch of reasons you are unsuitable. I also don't understand the reasoning of the world is over crowded after all you are talking adopting kids that are already born and need a home.
I remember seeing lots of things movies, TV shows and real life stories about families adopting special needs kids and they were praised for the work they were doing with kids that otherwise were unwanted... AND the couple had children of their own.

I think the only somewhat legitimate excuse they gave you was that you are single and would have your hands full. I am not sure that they will adopt kids to single parents.

I would ask again when you circumstances change.

I am not single but have only been with my partner for 2 years. That would go against me.

I do not want to adopt as yet it was just I was interested so enquired for furture years.

I hope this is not offensive and I honestly don't want to offend you but I don't understand why unmarried people have children together. Can you explain that to me? And, honestly - no offense meant.

Marriage does make a big difference to the courts in their viewing you as a stable family.

Marriage does make a big difference to the courts in their viewing you as a stable family.


I'm dating a guy with a really great daughter, 2 kids, doesn't believe in marriage - I don't understand it.

She has "unknown" as the father on both Birth Certificates which apparently is fine with her boyfriend because, as he puts it, he's not going anywhere.

?

I was married to my 3 eldest children's father , he was a monster , the abuse got a whole lot worse once we were married as it gave him the knowledge that me leaving proved greater difficult.

Why did I marry him - as we had our first child and though I did not want to be an unmarried mother and others thought it only right.

We went on to have 2 further children in marriage - no different to having 1 child out of marriage except 8 missing teeth later and a whole host of injuries made me leave him.
As we were married he had full rights to decide to take / kidnap my kids if he choose to which he did. To them it was a fun day out to me it was a nightmare after he phoned me and threatened that unless I took him back I would never see my kids again.

Because we were married I had to live with the man 3 months while the court date was given to have him removed from the family home. When it comes to marriage and children being married proved a very bad decision for me.

I met my new partner 2 years ago and we had our 2 youngest together - no we are not married but we share a wonderful an honest, loyal, truthful ,trustful happy stable relationship , the complete opposite to my ex relationship.
Will I marry him? Honestly ? Yes and why because I love this man with all my heart and intend to share the rest of my life with him and because we have children.
I think those that marry for the wrong reasons just as they have children and feel it the right thing to do is getting married for all the wrong reasons.

Perhaps if we thought about marriage before doing it the divorce rate would not be so high.

Does a marriage make a happy child? No - A happy stable relationship does with or without a ring and a bit of paper .

My views on marriage and children x:)

I hope this is not offensive and I honestly don't want to offend you but I don't understand why unmarried people have children together. Can you explain that to me? And, honestly - no offense meant.

Because marriage does not make a family.

Because marriage does not make a family.



True but I wonder about the kids who grow up without a father or worse, father unknown. I just think the kids are at a disadvantage.

True but I wonder about the kids who grow up without a father or worse, father unknown. I just think the kids are at a disadvantage.

Sure, but that's different than the parents being unmarried. I assure you my kids don't know we aren't married and couldn't possibly care less. Heck, most people don't know were not married. Most people don't know that I am not my son's biological father.

Why are we getting married? So I can adopt my son. If it weren't for that, we probably wouldn't bother. Its not going to change anything in OUR lives.