Is it selfish to have a child instead of adopting?

Is it selfish?


  • Total voters
    61

Reborn_Cat

A lazy cat pretending to be human
Joined
Aug 26, 2020
Messages
202
Points
133
IMO I think people want to feel more connected to their child, that's why they want their own child rather than adopting as a genetic connection is considered a pretty strong one. Though if you can't have a child due to you or your partner being infertile then adopting is definitely a better option than using a surrogate or a sperm donor
 

MR.DANTE

Active member
Joined
Dec 15, 2020
Messages
68
Points
33
Id say for the simple fact you even ask you shouldn't have a children, not even adopt.

for all the other idiots, there arent enough children anywhere but Africa right now, I understand there are plenty of reasons for not wanting children but for a functioning society everyone should have 2 or 3 by 35yo

while i agree that life is suffering the world is not doomed unless somehow an actual nuclear war happen wich is unlikely in my opinion, climate change while real is not doom, CO2 matter really little and now is colder than it was 2k years ago, the only way to really screw things up is to panic, greed or if someone believe to be smarter than everybody else and come up with a solution that its worst than the problem, the actually dangerous things are how much plastic and antibiotics ars around and entering the life circle
 

Ruriha

Well-known Procrastinator
Joined
Mar 25, 2020
Messages
220
Points
103
I used to think so. Hell, I still do to some extent, but I'm proud to say that I no longer look at people who want to pass on their genes with disdain. I used to panic about the inevitable doom humanity is bringing about against itself with the climate crisis and its inability to meet the physical demands (Not the supply, there's more than enough actual stuff to go around. Screw you zero-sum gamers.) of the people we already have on this Earth.

Hearing someone say, "I want want to have kids of my own." always felt like they meant "I don't care about the planet, or the souls suffering under the horrors of the system." but some long conversations with a number of acquaintances and my mother has revealed a number of reasons why someone would put/bake a cinnabon in the oven rather than picking a perfectly good one out from the store:

They just never considered adoption (the most common reason in my circle)

They see raising their own child as an ultimate expression of love (irrational to me, but feelings are irrational)

They're afraid of the child being wrong/ruined by the system (an idea that I take umbrage with, as the child that you make could also be "ruined" by any number of factors)


None of these point towards disdain for humanity's continued survival or a lack of sympathy for orphans, but a part of me still thinks that despite people's perfectly valid reasons for having their own child, they should be encouraged to rescue one that already exists, if only to reduce the amount of suffering in the world.
No, I don't think that's the case at all. You could argue that people who don't know how to tackle child rearing/unable to commit to stop having a child. That would actually solve the problem.
 

Deeprotsorcerer

Skeletal Eromancer
Joined
Aug 24, 2021
Messages
346
Points
133
for all the other idiots, there arent enough children anywhere but Africa right now, I understand there are plenty of reasons for not wanting children but for a functioning society everyone should have 2 or 3 by 35yo
Sorry, but no. That just ignores the Demographic Transition Model. There's so many children in Africa and other developing parts of the world because infant mortality is very very high and access to quality of life improvements and education is very very low. African countries that have caught up in terms of wealth and tech see similar population statistics as other developed nations. Every person doesn't need to bear two or three kids for a stable society and the population of the West isn't declining into nothing, it's reaching a stable plateau.

Another issue is admittedly, the difficulty in navigating often byzantine adoption laws and the fact that several couples want an infant while many children that need homes are on the older end of the scale. I won't even touch racial issues with a 30 foot pole, but I'm aware of those as well.

No, I don't think that's the case at all. You could argue that people who don't know how to tackle child rearing/unable to commit to stop having a child. That would actually solve the problem.

Irresponsible parenting doesn't account for other reasons children get placed in the system, it would certainly reduce the problem, but it wouldn't solve it.
 
Last edited:

Marunikyu

Most excellent anti-Marxist smut writer
Joined
Mar 19, 2020
Messages
70
Points
58
Tl;dr : there's a "climate crisis" but it has NOTHING to do with humans, our numbers or activities. Said "climate crisis" happens at least every 1500 years, and the worst ones happen less often NATURALLY, always have been. Stop drinking the koolaid propaganda, the billionaires get a laugh and a fat wad of cash at your naivety.
 
D

Deleted member 57675

Guest
Very far connection between ecological and economical. Sometimes connecting two far distant topics sounds...a bit absurd.

Yes and no.

Humans are selfish. We want our own kids because something we can have our own. Our own bloodline to pass on and continue into the next era. In a way showing we existed long after we are no longer living.

However, do you think its purely selfish or is it also part of human nature to reproduce and make their own kin? If humans did not have that desire, would humans continue to exist or decline because we have no desire to have our own kids to continue? Its a way of life. Sometimes people don't do it because they want too, but because of certain outdated traditions they have to follow.

What i think is selfish is bringing a kid to this world for the sake of having kids or "its life," but never taking care of them afterwards and they suffer so much from starvation, disease, poverty, no stable home/life, etc. and you're not there to give them a proper childhood. Or having too many kids just because, and leaving it to your eldest to take care of their younger siblings to the point of exhaustion, even though you are the parent yourself. If you are not capable raising kids, still intend bring more kids into the world, then thats selfish. A child is someone's life on the line in your care. They are not just trophies for you to show off, or a bloodline to remember after neglecting them in every other major way. Its not just a life changing matter for you, but also for them.

If its ecological and economical standpoint, it shouldn't be stop having kids and world will be saved. No, its stop treating the world like a junk landfill and discarding things after only 1 use. You can have less people, but if they are bent on being destructive (always building latest ba-boom weapon and using it) its not gonna make the world better ecologically.

You are better off raising kids (be it your own/adopted/both) so that they have lot of care and love so they don't become broken and suffer. This will probably make the world a better place instead.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mandark

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2020
Messages
49
Points
58
I’d argue that most children are unplanned. Couples know there’s a chance of pregnancy, when the girl forgets taking a her birth control pill or the guy never pulls out in time, but family planning is high in wealthy families, while it’s low in middle income families. It’s almost nonexistent for poor families.

When it comes to the family planning couples. Overpopulation is nowhere near a bad enough problem to it to be a main topic of discussion before having a child. For these families, the main concern is whether the mom can have enough time off work for the birth+a couple weeks afterwards and whether or not they can financially support the child without it impacting their comfort of living.

Adoption has 3 main forces against it. Firstly, most children are unplanned (but I’ve spoke about that so won’t go further). Secondly, the adoption process is a hassle. It ensures that the family will have a state-worker visiting/inspecting their house multiple times a year.

(I think it’s easy to understand WHY adoption agencies want to check on the kids, but for the adult, that’s just a headache.)

Thirdly is that people don’t like being judged, sure your kids may judge you - but what are they going to do? They’re ‘stuck’ with you. Going to interview with a child for adoption is emotionally stressful. What if you don’t like the kid and tell them no? - no one wants to feel like “ah man that kid I just met needs a mom/dad but I said no”.

There are a lot of other reasons, but that’s why I think people don’t even consider adoption unless they were adopted themselves.
 

LABmaiL

Friend of All Hats :)
Joined
Oct 4, 2020
Messages
61
Points
58
I don't mean to come of as rude. but you're displaying a Neo-Malthusian outlook which does not coincide with modern data. The number of children being born has decreased to such a degree that many countries are in the negatives in terms of population growth (look up almost all of Europe's numbers). Most fully developed countries are stage 5 with a few being stage four on their way to stage five with no exceptions to this that I know of. (I'm referring to the demographic transition model with the stages). As LDCs develop, population growth will slow down and stabilize around the 9.5 billion mark and is expected to completely peak at around 11 billion around 2100. You're taking a moral high-ground over people due to an assumption that is almost completely likely to be incorrect. I'd like to restate that I don't mean to insult, but it does serve as a pet peeve of mine that some people are willing to shame others off of data that could be disproved with slight research. If you wish to learn more, here's a great video that may change your outlook:


I'm editing this cuz I wrote it quickly and got some typos
 
Last edited:

longer

Balls
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
532
Points
133
I'm gonna be real with you, I don't think me raw dogging my girlfriend is really going to affect climate change.
 

Deeprotsorcerer

Skeletal Eromancer
Joined
Aug 24, 2021
Messages
346
Points
133
I don't mean to come of as rude. but you're displaying a neo-mendelian outlook which does not coincide with modern data. The number of children being born has decreased to such a degree that many countries are in the negatives in terms of population growth (look up almost all of Europe's numbers). Most fully developed countries are stage 5 with a few being stage four on their way to stage five with no exceptions to this that I know of. (I'm referring to the demographic transition model with the stages). As LDCs develop, population growth will slow down and stablize around the 9.5 billion mark and is expected to completely peak at around 11 billion around 2100. You're taking a moral high-ground over people due to an assumption that is almost completely likely to be incorrect. I'd like to restate that I don't mean to insult, but it does serve as a pet peeve of mine that some people are willing to shame others off of data that could be disproved with slight research. If you wish to learn more, here's a great video that may change your outlook:

Noted this already, and I did bring up the demographic transition model just a few posts above, the idea of a population explosion being anything but a miniscule factor in climate change as opposed to developed countries running the world into the ground is indeed naiive. I backslid a bit into my old beliefs when I composed this post.

I do, however, resent the idea that I'm "taking a moral high ground" over anyone here, I will admit that I used to be that ignorant, I said as much in the original post, I'll never personally condemn anyone for choosing to have a baby.



As CarburetorThompson said: "This is the most retarded thread I've read yet."

I suppose it was my turn.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 57675

Guest
a part of me still thinks that despite people's perfectly valid reasons for having their own child, they should be encouraged to rescue one that already exists, if only to reduce the amount of suffering in the world.
Its alright if they want to care for ones that already exists, that is a very heartwarming individual who will go out of the way for others and take them under their wing.

However, this cannot be for all. In some familes, an adopted kid may not be treated the same as their own kids. And that can hurt and sting people.

Only if they are willing to offer unconditional love to the child, and able to provide them the care they need to grow.
 

CadmarLegend

@Agentt found a key in the skeletons.
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
1,957
Points
153
I used to think so. Hell, I still do to some extent, but I'm proud to say that I no longer look at people who want to pass on their genes with disdain. I used to panic about the inevitable doom humanity is bringing against itself with the climate crisis and its inability to meet the physical demands (Not the supply, there's more than enough actual stuff to go around. Screw you zero-sum gamers.) of the people we already have on this Earth.

Hearing someone say, "I want want to have kids of my own." always felt like they meant "I don't care about the planet, or the souls suffering under the horrors of the system." but some long conversations with a number of acquaintances and my mother has revealed a number of reasons why someone would put/bake a cinnabon in the oven rather than picking a perfectly good one out from the store:

They just never considered adoption (the most common reason in my circle)

They see raising their own child as an ultimate expression of love (irrational to me, but feelings are irrational)

They're afraid of the child being wrong/ruined by the system (an idea that I take umbrage with, as the child that you make could also be "ruined" by any number of factors)


None of these point towards disdain for humanity's continued survival or a lack of sympathy for orphans, but a part of me still thinks that despite people's perfectly valid reasons for having their own child, they should be encouraged to rescue one that already exists, if only to reduce the amount of suffering in the world.
It isn't selfish, IMO. It's more of an instinct and the general norm imposed by society since ancient times. The child that's born between you and someone you love --- it has just become a type of "we need to do this" thing over the years. Adopting a child may seem like, to the other partner, I like you, but not enough to have my offspring be born from you.

Kind of like marriage.

You know, most people will consider marrying the person they love. Why do we do this? No reasons except for the fact that society wants us to, and because we've been exposed to that type of culture since a young age. It probably began like that, then went on to become an almost-forced thing since there are so many laws and stuff regarding marriage. For example, citizenship. If you're a citizen, and you want your gf or bf to be a citizen, it won't work. You need to have official documents to prove you are connected. Most governments only accept marriage certificates (if you have any) to give benefits of your citizenship to a partner.

Biological children haven't been turned into this almost-forced thing yet, but may as well in the distant future. There's always a possibility.

However, I do think that adoption is important and many people should go for it.

For one: you aren't adding an extra human on this already-crowded Earth.
Two: You're giving a family to a person who was abandoned.
Three: Exposing yourself to rooms for growth, both culturally and emotionally
Four: You can actually plan on when you want to have a child, and it's not restricted by age
Five: many more reasons. dot dot dot.

Either way, both options are valid from my perspective. You can have your own child, or you can adopt a child. Heck, you can even not hav e a child. Whatever the person in question's opinion is.

... Ofc there are those who don't deserve to be parents, but ya know.
 

Deeprotsorcerer

Skeletal Eromancer
Joined
Aug 24, 2021
Messages
346
Points
133
Its alright if they want to care for ones that already exists, that is a very heartwarming individual who will go out of the way for others and take them under their wing.

However, this cannot be for all. In some familes, an adopted kid may not be treated the same as their own kids. And that can hurt and sting people.

Only if they are willing to offer unconditional love to the child, and able to provide them the care they need to grow.
This is something that I'll agree with whole-heartedly, it hurts to think that something as simple as the lack of a genetic connection can make a parent treat a child with less care, but there's enough instances of families disowning children for the "crime" of race or even class mixing, so I'm not surprised.
 

Vaxel00

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 10, 2020
Messages
100
Points
83
I would never be able to love or care for a child that isn't mine so adoption is not an option for me.
 
D

Deleted member 57675

Guest
Referring back to someone saying they need have a few kids by certain age...theres quite a number of people who have healthy kids after 35.

You could have young twenties plop out a kid they ain't ready for..Whereas a healthy 36 year and a 37 year old plop a kid they are totally ready to provide everything for..

That being said, age is something to think about as regardless whether you are a m or f, the biological clock will continue ticking eventually and chances of having more medical conditions..and if you are past 45s-50s and still want have a kid, then maybe think carefully if you are capable of providing care for the kid when you are well into the senior age, and that's if you'll still be around.

But...the main thing should be whether the adult is ready and capable to have a child.
I believe no, but either way love your child, adopted or blood-related.
100% most important.
 

Bartun

Friendly Saurian Neighbor
Joined
Dec 9, 2020
Messages
657
Points
133
This one hits hard and it's difficult to reply. I would dare to say NO, it's not selfish to have a child instead of adopting, but what do I know? I've been raising my nephews for 5 years, a pair of twins that aren't my own. I've been doing so because my brother (their father) has been imprisoned during that time for a crime he didn't commit. So yeah, I basically raised someone else's kids and I did my best.

But also, it hits hard because I know what it's like to be told "you are going to be a dad" by the woman of my life only to be told later she's lost our baby before it was even born, due to a natural miscarriage. I'm not going to lie, I was scared, but something deep inside me also wanted that, I wanted to have that baby with the woman I loved, I wanted that life, I was looking forward to it and I wanted it so badly, then it was gone. I know I'm talking from an emotional, non-rational point of view but that's how I was feeling back then. After that, things deteriorated quickly between us, and she even tried to kill herself, in the end, we broke out, and I've never been the same after that.
 
Top