If abortion were eliminated in the US and almost all pregnancy carried to term, the adoption / foster care system would approximately double. Can it absorb the additional children?

Posted by: TBR

As many as 10 million additional children could be added to the system in the first 18 years. (Discuss)

  • Yes

  • No

29% 4 votes
71% 10 votes
  • Yes, most definitely. It is just a matter of percentages. Also, there would be much more poverty. As more people would need more resources, foster parents will be more difficult to find. The families that ultimately would stick to their babies will have to invest more money in them. The associations that currently take care of wards of the states will need to pour more resources for food, and human capital --i.e. to better understand what it would take, we usually translate it in cash. Averall, more births, means less jobs pro capita, more cahse invested in expendable resources as medicines and food --and no, the number of jobs that may be created will not be enough to support the boom in births.

    Posted by: Ezk
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
reece says2015-04-14T10:45:08.3242893-05:00
@TBR Did they factor in the lack of sex ed in the states that don't teach it? From where you got the info from i mean.
TBR says2015-04-14T10:56:01.6234672-05:00
@reece - This is my current series on the realities of an abortion ban. I am illustrating the social and economic impact of abortion bans, or other methods of near total reduction. The point is not to be overly argumentative about whether abortion should be banned or not, but to look at what it would take.
TBR says2015-04-14T10:58:52.5222323-05:00
Interestingly, significant investment in the programs would reduce the need for abortion even without a ban. So far, I am getting little response from pro-life. Its not a surprise, but I wish they would engage more. These are just realities. If you want to see what happens without addressing these concerns look at Romania during their abortion ban.
reece says2015-04-14T11:03:36.9319111-05:00
@TBR So yes or no? Nvm, can you give me a link? I'm not looking for a debate.
TBR says2015-04-14T11:07:36.6993001-05:00
@reece - I am sorry, the question does not make scene in the context. There are about 1 million children adopted / year with about 50k "excess". There is almost the same number of abortions per year (1.2m) I can get a link regarding sex-ed / state, but it is tangential to the issue. I may be misunderstanding though.
TBR says2015-04-14T11:14:55.2853353-05:00
Actually THIS is a better source than I was using, and blows the numbers UP. It has only ~136,000 completed per year. I was using the foster-care numbers (much more familiar with them) https://www.Childwelfare.Gov/pubPDFs/adopted0708.Pdf
reece says2015-04-14T11:18:36.7538065-05:00
@TBR Maybe i didn't read the poll question correctly. I was mostly trying to point out the high number of teen pregnancies.
TBR says2015-04-14T11:25:01.7076034-05:00
OK Right. Reece, let me try to explain where I am going with these polls, and I hope one or two pro-life people see this. It is NOT some trap. The questions are intended to get conversation rolling about the realities of probation, and start a discussion about how to approach these realities. If pro-live got its wish, the legalization of abortion, how would we deal with the daunting realities of ~1m more children per year.
TBR says2015-04-14T11:27:23.7989407-05:00
Due to family background that some are aware of, my family was involved in the foster care system and adoption as well (see the total siblings poll the other day).
reece says2015-04-14T11:29:46.0611920-05:00
Pro-live doesn't count after your born.
reece says2015-04-14T11:31:15.4920151-05:00
TBR says2015-04-14T11:31:29.5882490-05:00
Well, that is the cliche reece, and very true from where I sit. I am attempting to give pro-life a chance to address real issues.
reece says2015-04-14T11:35:59.0799608-05:00
It's ironic that people that are for pro-life are also for pro-war. Okay i'll stop now.
TBR says2015-04-14T11:45:43.5467547-05:00
@reece - We really only had abortion probation for ~70 years in the US. It sucked. I don't think many pro-life have any clue what it looked like.
TBR says2015-04-14T11:56:22.3469392-05:00
@reece - I don't know what more I can do to have a forthright conversation about these issues. They, the polls, have been mostly ignored.
TBR says2015-04-14T11:57:19.8767302-05:00
Reece - I don't know what else I can do to have a forthright conversation on these issues. Unfortunately the polls have gone mostly ignored.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-04-14T12:44:17.6440863-05:00
Who says they will all be going to adoption facilities? Isnt the point of pro life to ensure the mother and fathers of these children are held accountable? I think the system would have no problem accommodating the extra kids if we tax the bejesus out of the parents to ensure they were paying for them.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-04-14T12:46:00.6397606-05:00
In fact you could even incentivize adoption for responsible folks by forwarding them some money gained by the biological parents. Subsidize adoption with the funds from the parents. Bring it all back full circle.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-04-14T12:48:03.6121957-05:00
Then youre looking at promoting responsibility and promoting the people who actually want good for our nation and its people while at the same time holding the not so responsible ones accountable for their actions.
TBR says2015-04-14T12:49:25.1589734-05:00
@FreedomBeforeEquality - "Who says they will all be going to adoption facilities?" No one. I am attempting to level the numbers a bit for that. Discuss it. "Isnt the point of pro life to ensure the mother and fathers of these children are held accountable?" I have never had anyone frame the discussion like that. Discuss it. "I think the system would have no problem accommodating the extra kids if we tax the bejesus out of the parents to ensure they were paying for them." Taxing 'the bejesus' out of people that have no money does nothing.
TBR says2015-04-14T12:52:13.4730903-05:00
@FreedomBeforeEquality - I should offer you some sort of prize. You have mentioned something in an abortion discussion I seriously have never seen before - " Isnt the point of pro life to ensure the mother and fathers of these children are held accountable? "
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-04-15T14:24:33.6129142-05:00
Yeah well theres my stance on the matter ... That and the putting people to death thing being carried out by one person who is biased and under obvious duress. They shouldnt be making decisions about death for anyone in the role theyre in. Its a conflict of interest.
TBR says2015-04-15T14:26:10.4597209-05:00
@FreedomBeforeEquality - I was going to open a poll on this one point only. I think your idea is unique to pro-life. Unworkable in any real world way, but unique regardless.
TBR says2015-04-15T14:26:36.7795959-05:00
Unique IN pro-life (group)
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-04-15T14:28:29.0978766-05:00
And taxing them does do something. You know as well as i do that back taxes dont go away easily. They will feel the effects of their actions in their everyday circumstance were they not to pay them. I'd think if you didn't have the money for the fine then you wouldnt do the crime. Poor are already asymmetrically inclined to have kids versus stable families. Think of it as a form of reverse progressive taxation. It more accurately targets the problem group.
TBR says2015-04-15T14:32:02.3461460-05:00
Do you know how-many improvised don't ever file taxes? And of those that DO, and you attempt to "ding", they will never be able to pay anyway. Its just making MORE social dysfunction.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.