Quote:
Originally Posted by Munchkin03
I'm not quite sure what the hullabaloo is either, unless people are just piling on someone.
|
And which people are those?
This is not one of those topics where piling on someone is fun. Sure, the tone of some of these posts could have been better (including a couple of carnation's posts) but that does not mean the point of discussion is unfounded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munchkin03
With adoption, you have to be completely honest. Some people are not equipped (financially, emotionally, tempermentally, what-have-you) to have anything other than a drug-free infant of their same race. For some people, having an older child or one of a different race is a loud indicator to the rest of the world that they're unable to have a child.
|
Adoption is not the only place in life where complete honesty is important. Adoption is also not the only place in life where people respond to commonly used terminology in a negative manner. For example, "special needs" is used in the adoption world and outside of the adoption world for a range of conditions. (
http://encyclopedia.adoption.com/ent...eds/339/1.html)
Depending on where you are and who you are talking to, some people (including adopted parents, social workers, and community leaders) have an issue with categorizing some of these children in that manner. That doesn't mean people do not understand why that categorization and terminology is used. It means that people are challenging the implications and what is embedded in such use. People are also bringing attention to potential outcomes, including the process of labeling children as having "special needs" or "having certain conditions."