Adopting a Snowflake

[carnation]

No, it's not, and I'd like to rip on some birthparents for damaging them. I want to rip on some workers for lying to so many fine families that I know of who were victimized and then blamed because they tried their best but couldn't do it.

Adoption, particularly of an older child, is not for some people. Demand all the paperwork you can get and talk to the former foster parents.

That said, your child can end up with problems, whether he/she is biological, adopted, "snowflake", you name it, and you may or may not be responsible for those.

And--the terminology I used, including "damaged", is frequently used in the adoption world. Not in places where the children can see it, of course, but in literature, research, and in frank talking in the adoption world. It is needed to convey the seriousness of what has happened to certain children, and "flossing it up" helps no one.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by carnation

And--the terminology I used, including "damaged", is frequently used in the adoption world. Not in places where the children can see it, of course, but in literature, research, and in frank talking in the adoption world. It is needed to convey the seriousness of what has happened to certain children, and "flossing it up" helps no one.

Yes and I knew what you meant. Perhaps your explanation for your use of that terminology should be that it is commonly used terminology. Of course that doesn't mean that everyone in the adoption world agrees with that terminology. However, saying "I don't care if some folks don't consider it PC" gives it a particular tone and is almost like saying "I said it, what are you gonna do about it."

I still hate the use of "snowflake" so of course I'm not going to be a fan of some of the commonly used terminology.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by carnation

And--the terminology I used, including "damaged", is frequently used in the adoption world. Not in places where the children can see it, of course, but in literature, research, and in frank talking in the adoption world. It is needed to convey the seriousness of what has happened to certain children, and "flossing it up" helps no one.

agzg nailed it, you said "Who knows what condition those children are in," as if you should have gotten a Carfax report.

And since those children will be able to find all that frank talk by about age 13 or so thanks to the internet, they're the ones who can provide further objection.

There's also a weird dichotomy in talking about people as objects in a thread that talks about embryos as people.