I Really Tried To Ignore Douthat’s Column
You’re probably destined to write a post about something you go to bed thinking about. Here’s what kept me up last night:
In every era, there’s been a tragic contrast between the burden of unwanted pregnancies and the burden of infertility. But this gap used to be bridged by adoption far more frequently than it is today. Prior to 1973, 20 percent of births to white, unmarried women (and 9 percent of unwed births over all) led to an adoption. Today, just 1 percent of babies born to unwed mothers are adopted, and would-be adoptive parents face a waiting list that has lengthened beyond reason.
My first thought was… is he pining for the days when young girls and women were forced sent to “visit relatives” for nine months?
My second thought was… is he lamenting the fact that there just aren’t enough white babies to adopt? If that’s not the case then why did he write: Prior to 1973, 20 percent of births to white, unmarried women (and 9 percent of unwed births over all) led to an adoption.
My third thought was… does he really view giving up a child for adoption as a commodity rather than a gut-wrenching decision? He seems to be saying: Hey, there’s market demand here! “Mid-life, upper-middle class” infertile couples need more product!
Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I’ve had friends who have had abortions and friends who have given their babies up for adoption. Both are heartbreakingly difficult decisions; both can leave emotional scars. What bothers me most is how cavalier Douthat’s approach is when it comes to giving up a child for adoption. It is not the easy choice, simply because there is no easy choice in these situations.
Tags: Abortion
” Hey, there’s market demand here! “Mid-life, upper-middle class” infertile couples need more product!”. There isn’t a problem that the free market can’t fix.
You make me smile. 🙂
Douthat writes a pretty dumb column but this one takes the cake. It’s also pretty weird that Douthat is treating babies like a consumer good since he’s part of the group insisting that embryos are people.
I always shake my head at the “get government off my back” types who want to control women’s fertility.
But the women who would be giving up these babies are poor, and Douthat deems to be of a mind that poor women should accept their lot in providing babies to rich people. Which was the way it worked back in the day. At least for white babies.
I rolled my eyes at this at his writing of infertility being a side effect of the pill. Endometriosis is one of the leading causes of infertility among women and thr pill is one of the ways it can be treated (or managed, more like).