In the adoption of children, should active promotion of the traditional nuclear family be avoided?

  • Everybody Has a chance

    Well do "perfect families" even exist nowadays? Everyone should have a chance no matter if you are gay/lesbian, multiracial, or even a single parent. Isn't the child's happiness worth it? Not every home that has a parent with both genders is content with his/her life. We need to start thinking 21st century people! Stop being haters boo!

  • The traditional nuclear family is no longer necessarily the norm for society.

    While the traditional nuclear family may be considered by many to be the model family structure, in reality it is no longer the norm for society. Between single-parents, re-marriages and homosexual relationships, the nuclear family is no longer the standard family unit of society. Even the modern two-parent family structure doesn't necessarily match the traditional nuclear family model. Promoting it for child adoptions is not needed, since the alternatives to it are now considered just as normal or safe for child raising.

    Posted by: KnownEvan
  • All families, nuclear or not, should have the right to offer a home to a child who doesn't have one.

    The most important goal of adoption should be to have as many children as possible matched with loving families. These families need not be nuclear families. I believe that gay couples can be amazing parents, and that single men or women should also not be barred or discouraged from welcoming children into their homes.

    Posted by: FancyNicholas92
  • I oppose active promotion of a traditional nuclear family for adoption because there are many wonderful parents who do not fit this description.

    I have many friends who are looking into the adoption process. They all have great jobs, are amazing people, and would provide a home for a child who might otherwise linger in the foster system. However, many of them do not fit the traditional 'nuclear family' image. There are so many kids in the system that need loving homes, not just a traditional family.

    Posted by: LongShawn93
  • I believe any family that is providing a loving home can adopt children.

    In this day and age, we should be more tolerant of what the word "family" means. A nuclear family is still a family in today's sense, but so are same-sex partnership families, and even single-parent households. We should not promote a certain type of family for adoption. We should promote a loving, caring, financially stable atmosphere for a child to be raised.

    Posted by: AbusiveHilario39
  • Yes, I believe that the traditional nuclear family should not be promoted in adoptions, because the best family for the child should be chosen, regardless of their makeup.

    Single parents can provide as good a home for a child as traditional families. Often they have the financial means and the dedication to be good parents as equal to two-parent homes. A loving home with parents who truly want the child should be promoted, regardless of how the family is formed.

    Posted by: 54kiRud
  • I believe that the most positive family model for any child is typically that of a traditional nuclear family.

    While I believe that gays and lesbians or even single individuals should have the right to be eligible for adopting children, I strongly believe that the best option for most children is a more traditional family. For children aware of being adopted, they may already have feelings that are confusing and difficult to cope with as a young child, which would likely be intensified by possible exclusion from groups of peers based on the unique quality of their household, in the cases of gay and lesbian adoptive parents. Even without awareness of having been adopted, the lack of acceptance from peers alone does great amounts of damage in a long-term sense. In order to identify with others their own age (which I think is incredibly important), they must have a background that is at least similar in some fundamental ways. It would be somewhat unfair to equally encourage placing adopted children with alternative types of families, and I think the reasons for this are rather obvious.

    Posted by: taffydelite
  • Promoting the traditional nuclear family in adoption cases will result in fewer children being adopted.

    There is nothing special about the traditional nuclear family - it's simply the model that has been the most prevalent in most countries for most families. If we choose to promote that model in the adoption setting, we're limiting the number of children who can be adopted. The only quality in an adoptive parent or set of parents that should matter is the ability to care for a child. Beyond that, even the most atypical family who loves their adopted child is better than that child growing up in foster care, being passed from home to home like a fruitcake that keeps getting re-gifted at Christmas.

    Posted by: A Bass
  • A family that is traditional is not as important as a family that loves each other and functions well.

    I still love the idea of the traditional family, but that is not the case for everyone. In an age where there are so many different kinds of family, and so many incidences of adoption, it seems unreasonable to only accept that a family is a mother, father and 2.5 children. I filly believe that single parents or same sex couples can provide just as nurturing of an environment as a man and a woman. We need to redefine our definition of family in the modern world.

    Posted by: lachercheuse
  • Promotion of the traditional nuclear family should be avoided because the extended family is just as important as the nuclear family.

    The nuclear family is important because it is crucial to the foundation of the family. This does not mean however that extended family should be forgotten. The extended family is important to the children in the nuclear family. It is important to know their families history and to know how to relate with people that are related to them. They say that if you can get along with your family then you will be able to get along with anyone. Also extended family has older people who are wiser than the typical nuclear family. It is important to pass this wisdom on. The nuclear family is important, but should be promoted in conjunction with the extended family as well.

    Posted by: T Richmond
  • I disagree that adopted children should miss out on the traditional family unit, because that unit is important to the adopted child's emotional well-being.

    Adopted children deserve to be treated every bit as a part of the family. You can't treat them as if they're something different from your other children. That's not to say that they cannot explore their own personal history and heritage, but they need to feel as if they are included fully within the family unit they become a part of. Their brothers and sisters, while not blood, are still family in the end.

    Posted by: ClutteredHai44
  • I do not believe that the promotion of the traditional nuclear family should be avoided in the adoption of children, because that would be the preferred destination for any adopted child.

    I do not believe the promotion of the traditional nuclear family should be avoided in the adoption of children. I feel it would be nice if all unwanted children in need of adoption could be adopted by your typical family unit. I also feel there is nothing wrong with a homosexual couple or single parent being allowed to adopt a child, as long as that child will be going to a loving and good home environment.

    Posted by: TickoCa22
  • No, the active promotion of the traditional nuclear family should not be avoid, because it is the more natural and normal family setting for a child to be brought up in.

    When a child is to be adopted, everything in the prospective life is screened to a higher degree than any normal family would have to endure. They have to make a certain amount of money, have the right temperament, references, and be home a certain amount of hours. Adoption agents seem to look for the most perfect people in the world to adopt children, and having the right kind of family structure is no different. They avoid single-parent adoptions, fearing that the child would be neglected from the adult having to work and raise a child at the same time. As long as there are more people looking to adopt a child than there are available children within the young age group every one seems to want, the adoption agents have every right to be as selective as possible.

    Posted by: H_Baird
  • I do not believe that the traditional nuclear family should be avoided in the adoption of children because children thrive much better in a traditional home with both a mother and a father.

    I believe that the traditional nuclear family is the best environment to place a child for adoption if at all possible. Children fare much better in a traditional family with both a mother and a father present and active in their lives. Studies have proved that children who were raised in a traditional nuclear family usually do better in life than those who are raised in other situations. This type of family gives them a good foundation for their own lives.

    Posted by: R0d0Ferdy
  • I do not believe that the active promotion of the traditional nuclear family be avoided in the case of adoption.

    I do not believe that in the adoption of children the promotion of the tradition nuclear family be avoided. In my opinion the traditional family should be promoted as I believe it provides the most stable environment for children. There are many different people adopting children these days, but do we have any idea of how these children are turning out as they turn to adults?

    Posted by: SlayrKalle
  • There is no such thing as the traditional nuclear family when it comes to adoption.

    Nowadays, our society is not about 2.4 children. Households are made up of gay couples, single people, single parents and children with older parents because people are waiting longer to have children.

    So, no, the traditional nuclear family should not be promoted when it comes to adoption because it presents a false picture of how families are nowadays. Also, if this was promoted, children from, for example, single parent families or with gay parents might feel lesser in our society because the traditional nuclear family would be upheld as an ideal, and they would feel like they are not matching up to that.

    Posted by: MentM4j3r3
  • Why do away with tradition?

    There is nothing wrong with the nuclear family and we shouldn't dismiss it. We should embrace all kinds of family structures. Family is meaningful, whether in the traditional sense or not. It's the word "family" that carries all the meaning. It doesn't make a difference if it's an extended family, a family with two dads or grandparents raising grandchildren. It's all about the family unit. And, the nuclear family is the model upon which all others are based.

    Posted by: MohaI0v35

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.