I hate overly simplistic views of complex issues. Presidential campaigns bring out the best of them, don't they? With abortion remaining a hot button issue, we're bound to be subjected to some real bang-up statements regarding abortion, adoption and how easy it all would be if the world just magically acted in one way or another.

For example, Presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani has decided that if you decrease the number of abortions, the number of adoptions will increase. Anyone else having a hard time making the mental leap between the two? Yes, me as well. In fact, my Husband just got an earful. Poor guy. He was just trying to watch television.

But seriously, let's look at the issue without debating the rights and wrongs of abortion itself. (Read: keep the controversial pro-life and/or pro-choice comments to a minimum. This post will in no way discuss Roe v. Wade. Read on.)

When a mother finds herself unexpectedly pregnant, she first has to make a decision whether or not to carry the pregnancy to term. This is the first decision. It is the abortion versus eventual baby decision. For some, myself included, adoption may not even be a part of this initial decision. In fact, for some mothers, abortion simply isn't an option because the pregnancy is found out about too late in gestation. Other factors come into play why mothers may decide to continue to carry a pregnancy to term: they want to parent their child, they feel a sense of responsibility, they are legitimately pro-life or any other number of healthy or unhealthy lines of logic. When it comes down to it, some mothers are going to choose to continue the pregnancy.

And then? Then comes the decision between parenting and placing for adoption. No longer a decision solely about pregnancy, it is a parenting decision made in the best interest of the child. Pros and cons are weighed as to which choice is the right one for the current situation. For some mothers, like myself, increased hardship (for example, my health concerns) push mothers who were planning on parenting at the time of the initial decision down the road of adoption. Never my intention, I placed my daughter after making many grueling parenting decisions. Out of mothers I have known via school and friendships (in real life) who were faced with an unplanned pregnancy (and, at the juncture in my life, we're talking darn near 20 at this point), the majority parented their children. In fact, the only one who placed? Was me. (As a note, two had abortions.)

And so, to say, that decreasing abortions will magically raise the number of adoptions is far-fetched, at best. As you can see, for some, simply choosing to continue the pregnancy may (or may not) lead to an adoption. However, if he really wants to "protect the quality of life for our children," he (and other candidates) should take a deeper look at the current practices of today's adoption system. If he (or someone else) said that they wanted more ethical adoptions, oh, you can bet that they'd have a different breed of supporters! Instead of concentrating on a somewhat connected but not really correlated issue (abortion), perhaps candidates should be concentrating on opening adoption records, regulating agencies and doing something about scam artists (whether they be fake expectant mothers, lying and conniving adoptive families or blood-sucking agencies/attorneys). Imagine the controversy there! (And would it be all bad? Controversy brings you greater coverage, after all. I think candidates are missing the boat by continuing to ignore the reform community.)

In short: the answer is too simplistic. Decreasing abortion doesn't necessarily equal an increase in adoptions. In fact, if agencies keep acting like they do at the present time with technology becoming more and more available (and thus, the truth at the fingertips of those able to do the research), I would predict less and less adoptions in the coming years. If you want to decrease adoptions and still protect the quality of life for our children, perhaps candidates should consider looking at the current resources available to families as well as the problems that are bogging down adoption as a whole.

Since I placed my daughter for adoption, political figures have treated me, as a birth mother, as nothing more than an incubator. We're continually left out of the President's speeches concerning National Adoption Awareness Month (next month). While initially created in hopes of getting word out about the many available children in foster care, ignoring those of us who allowed our children to be adopted (without neglect or abuse) seems to perpetuate the mindset of "out of sight, out of mind." It's disheartening to hear the actual plight of a birth mother ignored, year after year, without giving credit where credit is due.

All the same, I hope that someday, somehow, some candidate will get the fact that something within the system is inherently flawed and that changes are desperately needed. That candidate? Will have my vote. Until then, it's finding the lesser of all evils.

//
For more, read:

1. Avoid Murder! Place Your Baby for Adoption!

2. Start Reform from the Ground Up.

3. Open Letter to the Presidential Candidates.

//
Photo Credit.