Is it a good idea for two people not romantically involved to adopt a child together?

Posted by: Gustav_Adolf_II

Siblings or friends for a couple of examples.

Poll will close on 1/11/2222 at 11:11AM.
Vote
14 Total Votes
1

No

8 votes
3 comments
2

Yes

6 votes
3 comments
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Stefy says2015-06-14T19:33:51.1905339-05:00
Forethelulz: Why would they eventually have to live apart. Im pretty sure if they were seriously considering adopting together they would also plan to stay together.
Diqiucun_Cunmin says2015-06-14T22:12:42.2277420-05:00
Is this a commentary on gay adoption?
OpinionPersom121 says2015-06-15T01:07:34.9234801-05:00
I think it kind of depends
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-06-15T12:59:14.1760619-05:00
"If the home is stable." It's precisely that, unstable. What does a stable home with two roomates wanting to adopt look like? How is it stable if either parent could be forced from the relationship without the kids being a factor?
TBR says2015-06-15T13:53:28.5546449-05:00
@FreedomBeforeEquality - I don't see how it is inherently more unstable. The same legal responsibilities would exist for the protection of the child (child support etc.).
Gustav_Adolf_II says2015-06-15T14:00:25.2698585-05:00
@Diqiucun_Cunmin No, that's why I said "not romantically involved", so a gay couple (I assume most gay couples are romantically involved) would be disqualified from this category. What I was thinking of was more like a couple of close friends (They could be gals or guys or one of each) both want to be parents but don't want to have a romantic relationship to do so. So they both apply to be the parents of an orphan. I was asking if something like this would be a good idea or not. Would the lack of romantic love between the parents have a bad effect on the child's own romantic skills and perhaps some other issues of development arising from this?
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-06-15T14:47:28.9362815-05:00
There is more incentive to do things in the childs best interest with two guardians who also have a responsibility to each other as well. Two bonds are better than one. It is more stable in that sense. Its hard to say there could be more financial responsibility and stability among two parties who are not already financially responsible towards eachother. I know some people keep it separate anyways ... But part of the reason big possessions are jointly owned in marriages (house for example) is for that stability. You don't have that with two separate people. You could ... With enough legal paperwork to follow ... But its of course easier to do all those things at once with a marriage license.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-06-15T14:48:19.5177788-05:00
"Would the lack of romantic love between the parents have a bad effect on the child's own romantic skills and perhaps some other issues of development arising from this?" Also this, Yes.
TBR says2015-06-15T14:58:41.6711561-05:00
"There is more incentive to do things in the childs best interest with two guardians who also have a responsibility to each other as well." - Don't see this lacking inherently in the relationship described. || "Two bonds are better than one. It is more stable in that sense." - What bond is lacking? Love? || "Its hard to say there could be more financial responsibility and stability among two parties who are not already financially responsible towards eachother. I know some people keep it separate anyways ... But part of the reason big possessions are jointly owned in marriages (house for example) is for that stability." - Again, the relationship could have a shared house etc. I just don't see this as a valid argument. || "You don't have that with two separate people. You could ... With enough legal paperwork to follow ... But its of course easier to do all those things at once with a marriage license." - So paperwork. That's the best we have? As best I know any adoption will have legal responsibility for ALL parties involved in the adoption. The marriage is not necessary for financial liability.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-06-15T15:07:52.9234948-05:00
So if the agency required that that level of stability be proven and legally bound before an adoption took place ... Then sure. The only argument aside from that is that the love in the relationship is an important part of the childs development. We dont teach that kind of bond in schools. I'm not sure it's a thing you can even teach at all, except through experience. That part would be lacking. Its not something we want to be without even among the married/divorced couples the way things are now.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-06-15T15:08:57.5401391-05:00
So no ... Marriage per se is not required ... But every aspect contained within a marriage ought to be applied to show stability.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-06-15T15:09:29.9507844-05:00
So why not keep it simple and leave it at marriage ... ?
TBR says2015-06-15T15:11:19.8928766-05:00
Right, agreed. Its not that a marriage insures any real type of "love" and that friends could NOT show children what a loving relationship is, but that is infarct a important component.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-06-15T15:11:29.9922632-05:00
I mean ... I suppose it shouldnt even matter anymore ... Marriage has been so bastardized it doesnt mean the same thing anymore. Might as well keep the progressive/degenerative ball rolling.
TBR says2015-06-15T15:13:57.5558479-05:00
I don't think the vision of marriage has ever been some think it was. Ozzie and Harriet existed on the tee-vee.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-06-15T15:15:21.4940007-05:00
"and that friends could NOT show children what a loving relationship is" They can't show them what a loving relationship is, no. Not without exposing them to a loving couple. They don't need just the child-parent loving relationship ... They need to see it as a third party also. Teaching only one way (between them and a parent) doesnt provide the entire picture of how they should grow up to be like.
TBR says2015-06-15T15:41:23.0052527-05:00
What I am getting it is love (of friends) is undeniably different, but it could exist while there is NO guarantee love of ANY type in a marriage.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-06-16T15:22:12.2187941-05:00
Is there really a guarantee amongst friends? Friendships are certainly more fleeting than marriages. I wouldnt stick around in a friendship that put me through half of what my marriage has.
FreedomBeforeEquality says2015-06-16T15:26:01.0344973-05:00
Friendship vs. Family bonds aren't really even comparable. There are a scant few friendships out there that can claim to contain "unconditional love". Kids are alot of stress to put on a marriage. I'm fairly certain your average friendship couldn't hold up to something like that.
TBR says2015-06-19T20:05:10.8875025-05:00
I don't disagree with that FreedomBeforeEquality.

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.