ETA: I just received a comment from a reader, informing me that more changes are taking place on the blog in question. Therefore if you click the links to that blog, you may not be reading the same things I read when I wrote this post.
Did you ever know someone who was happy enough to be a mother/father, but didn't actually want to parent their child?
I have. Several, in fact. My biological dad. My ex-husband. And even, at times, certain family members (who shall remain nameless so as not to hurt their feelings.)
And then there was this family that my family knew well. 20 years ago, my momma babysat for them. She started sitting for them when the girl was small, and the mom was single. Mom got into a relationship, was pregnant, and had a son. Mom and dad lived together and took care of the kids together.
Mom and dad lived a lifestyle that made it really difficult for me to respect their choices... especially now that I am a parent myself. When she was pregnant, mom smoked, drank to excess, and used drugs. The baby had many health issues when he was born (FAS among them) and continues to have other long-term health issues, even as an adult. Even when the baby came home from a stay in the NICU, they did things like put beer in his bottle so that he would go to sleep.
Now, don't get me wrong. The kids had a home, food, clothes, etc. Their immediate physical needs were met. When they were older, they went to school. My mom babysat for them a lot, and when I got old enough, I babysat for them, sometimes at their house. I don't think the kids were ever neglected according to the legal definition. But the parents lived a lifestyle that, as an adult, I believe shows that while they wanted their kids, they didn't want to parent them. Drugs, alcohol, and I believe (although I never saw it happen) physical abuse would be how I summed up these kids' childhood.
When the little boy was about 18 months old, DCFS (Dept. of Children and Family Services) showed up at my parent's door on a Saturday morning. My parents were shocked, and immediately began questioning what they could have done wrong to warrant this attention. As it turned out, DCFS was there to interview my parents about this family, and to ask if they would take temporary custody of the kids. My folks spoke with the DCFS worker, and the kids came to our house for the weekend.
DCFS became involved after a neighbor had called the police on Saturday morning when they saw the little boy jumping all over while locked inside the dad's car. Upon inspection, the neighbor found the dad, apparently dead, laying across the front seat. (Turns out he was just totally passed out... drunk, and possibly with more substances in his blood- my parents didn't tell me.) Long story short, eventually the little boy ended up in the custody of DCFS... and then my parents.
I don't know what happened to this on the legal side of things- if any charges were filed against the dad, or if there was an investigation by DCFS. I do know that the boy was returned to his parents within a day or two, and he continued to live with them. My parents and family (including me and my sister) continued to babysit. We continued to see signs of an unhealthy family, potential abuse, and parents who wanted their kids, but didn't want to parent. Eventually, the kids were old enough that they didn't need sitters, and the family moved away. I don't know how their older childhood and teen years were spent.
These kids are now adults. As far as I know (based primarily on posts to social media where we are friends/connections), they do not have much of a relationship with either the mom or the dad. Both have experienced permanent and ongoing health problems related to their prenatal exposures and the care they received (or rather, didn't receive) as children. This is exactly the situation where I wonder if the kids would have been better of in an alternative living situation- perhaps with the grandma (who lived next door) or an aunt and uncle (who lived 4 houses down from them). Although, these family members were not oblivious to what was happening, and I don't know that they ever tried to stop/help/change the parents or protect the kids, so who knows if different would have been better. I just wish they had something better, because they certainly deserved it.
As an adult, my mom admitted to me that she was so unsure what she should say to the man from DCFS. In truth, what my parents heard, witnessed, and suspected could probably have been enough to keep the kids out of their parents care for quite some time. But she chose not to divulge everything she knew, because she loved these kids.
I can understand her reasons. At least when the kids were living with their parents, they did spend a good amount of time with people like my family--- people who loved them, took care of them, and most importantly, parented them. My family had no aspirations of adoption, fostering, or having these children live with us in any way (nor would we likely have been approved to foster/adopt based on house size, income, and other qualifying factors), but we were attached to them and wanted to see them happy, healthy, and successful. If the kids continued living with family, at least they could come play in our backyard and go on family trips with us, learn how to follow rules, do their homework, and make good decisions. As long as they were with their family, my family could continue to be a positive influence... and hopefully protect them and teach them as much as possible. If the kids were taken away from their parents, who knows what kind of situation they would end up in. Especially given the foster care fiasco in Cook County at that time.
I think what my mom did was in a very gray area... ethically, she might have been right (or not). Legally, by not lying but not divulging everything, I'm not sure sure where that puts her. But I will say that I can completely understand the choice that she made, and if placed in the same situation, I may have done the same. I will also say that my step-dad, who does not often go into a legal or ethical gray area, did agree with her choice.
Over at Scooping It Up, the discussion about ethical adoption practices (which I also touched upon here), has continued with the acknowledgement that sometimes there are gray areas in adoption. Because sometimes, protecting kids and providing for them right now in their moment of need can take you to that place where ethical and legal seem secondary to the immediate need (and adoption is not the only place where this happens- we see it all.the.time in health care, but I digress.)
I don't know if there is a hard and fast rule about when it's okay to go into that gray area... when it's okay to cross lines and when it's not. That's the nature of gray- it's a spectrum color. What I will say is this: if you personally stand to gain from going into that gray area, you should abstain from going there. Don't abandon a child in need, but seek out someone honest and trustworthy who does not have a vested interest in the child, and ask them to champion that child's cause. Their ability to discern when "crossing the line" is right or wrong will be significantly more accurate than yours because their mind will not be struggling against their heart.
I think my mom did the right thing at that point in time, under those circumstances, with the knowledge available to her. Would I do the same thing? I don't know. It's hard to say, since I have the benefit of seeing the bigger/future picture. But I think she acted to the best of her ability in the kids' best interest. And I know that she wasn't looking to (and did not) personally gain from the situation.
Unfortunately, after reading a few posts over at the blog in question, I can't agree that it was okay, in the situation described on the blog, to proceed into a gray area. The bloggers posted about how they met this child here and here. Based on what they wrote, this child was in a safe place. Pictures show a child that is clearly healthy, well-fed, and has a room of her own/space of her own. She is in some sort of orphanage, but based on the pictures, it's nicer than any of the orphanages that I saw in Ethiopia! It seems obvious to me that there was no immediate threat of harm or danger to the child. In fact, the bloggers never convey that there is any chance of harm to the child- instead, they simply write about how they "fell in love" with her and decided she should join their family. And they told her so, going so far as to have her start calling them mommy and daddy.
Then they inquired about her orphan status. Yes, you read that right- first they fell in love, decided they wanted her, and promised to adopt her... then they checked to see if she was an orphan, and were surprised when the biological family were opposed to the adoption. They were upset that the living grandmother, uncle, and mother all opposed the adoption... and when a relative offered to have the girl come live with them, it was recounted this way: "Another relative has threatened to take her to live in the slums with them."
All of these things seem to be taking place in ethically gray areas. They identified a child they wanted to adopt without regard for her orphan status, then proceeded to pursue despite biological family objections and even bio family offers of a home. In my mind, that would have been crossing a line, but I will give them the benefit of the doubt that they were still in the gray. But it didn't end there.
The post telling what happened from there has been taken down. That post had the most disturbing information in terms of that descent into the darkest of gray... the place where gray potentially becomes black. A place where I personally feel ethical lines were crossed. A place where I am fairly certain legal lines might have been crossed.
Now, let me be clear: I do not believe that children should live in facilities or orphanages. Children belong in families. I am not in any way opposed to having this child live in a family. However, I am opposed to a family pursing an international adoption for a child who has an option (maybe 2?) for reunification, and is living in a country where a domestic placement is also a viable option.
I can understand that the American family now suspects all sorts of corruption and evil motivations from the biological family, and potentially from the government. But, the sad reality is that if they had not stepped foot into that gray area.... if they had not decided to adopt a child who was not legally available for adoption... if they had used ethical and legal methods of inquiring about her orphan status and respected the law regarding it, or even if they had requested the social worker or orphanage director to make inquiries into the possibility of adoption without revealing their American (read: wealthy) status, the whole outcome might have been different. Maybe not in their favor, but hopefully in the best interest of the child. I know for sure if they had never promised to adopt a child who is not legally available for adoption, that child would have been better protected.
Their descent into this gray area (because falling in love with a child is not a bad thing... it's everything they did after that) was entirely motivated by their desire to adopt this child- by their own selfish wants, not by the needs of this child. If they had not wanted to adopt her, they would have left her like they left the other children she lives with: relatively happy, physically cared for, and safe. There was no danger to the child--- no immediate, pressing, urgent needs that caused them to cross into that gray area. It was 100% their desire to adopt that motivated them (I am not commenting on whether that desire to adopt was "Godly" or not.) All of this is according to what they have posted and provided pictures of on their blog, in their own words.
Does adoption and orphan care have gray areas? Yes. But I think those gray areas should not be entered into unless necessary. I think those gray areas are best handled by someone who does not have a personal stake in the matter. And I think those gray areas often can wait for the legal and ethical processes to occur, because rarely do they involve true emergencies.
Slow down. Step out of it as the PAP/sometimes-crazily-emotional-woman (I speak from experience, knowing that the process of loving a child who is not and may not legally be yours can be difficult.) Let the system of checks and balances work so that you can say at the end of the day "I know I have done nothing legally or ethically wrong." Pray hard. Cross your fingers and toes and legs and arms. Dream big dreams.
Don't go charging into the gray, championing a cause that is so dear to your heart that your eyes are blinded by un-shed tears. Don't allow your love to blind your logic and reason. Because when you stumble and fall in those gray areas... especially those areas of the deepest grays... that's when you will feel as though you have fallen into the dark. That's when you will be the hardest to find again.
![]() |
| Not the child in question Source |
I have. Several, in fact. My biological dad. My ex-husband. And even, at times, certain family members (who shall remain nameless so as not to hurt their feelings.)
And then there was this family that my family knew well. 20 years ago, my momma babysat for them. She started sitting for them when the girl was small, and the mom was single. Mom got into a relationship, was pregnant, and had a son. Mom and dad lived together and took care of the kids together.
Mom and dad lived a lifestyle that made it really difficult for me to respect their choices... especially now that I am a parent myself. When she was pregnant, mom smoked, drank to excess, and used drugs. The baby had many health issues when he was born (FAS among them) and continues to have other long-term health issues, even as an adult. Even when the baby came home from a stay in the NICU, they did things like put beer in his bottle so that he would go to sleep.
Now, don't get me wrong. The kids had a home, food, clothes, etc. Their immediate physical needs were met. When they were older, they went to school. My mom babysat for them a lot, and when I got old enough, I babysat for them, sometimes at their house. I don't think the kids were ever neglected according to the legal definition. But the parents lived a lifestyle that, as an adult, I believe shows that while they wanted their kids, they didn't want to parent them. Drugs, alcohol, and I believe (although I never saw it happen) physical abuse would be how I summed up these kids' childhood.
When the little boy was about 18 months old, DCFS (Dept. of Children and Family Services) showed up at my parent's door on a Saturday morning. My parents were shocked, and immediately began questioning what they could have done wrong to warrant this attention. As it turned out, DCFS was there to interview my parents about this family, and to ask if they would take temporary custody of the kids. My folks spoke with the DCFS worker, and the kids came to our house for the weekend.
DCFS became involved after a neighbor had called the police on Saturday morning when they saw the little boy jumping all over while locked inside the dad's car. Upon inspection, the neighbor found the dad, apparently dead, laying across the front seat. (Turns out he was just totally passed out... drunk, and possibly with more substances in his blood- my parents didn't tell me.) Long story short, eventually the little boy ended up in the custody of DCFS... and then my parents.
I don't know what happened to this on the legal side of things- if any charges were filed against the dad, or if there was an investigation by DCFS. I do know that the boy was returned to his parents within a day or two, and he continued to live with them. My parents and family (including me and my sister) continued to babysit. We continued to see signs of an unhealthy family, potential abuse, and parents who wanted their kids, but didn't want to parent. Eventually, the kids were old enough that they didn't need sitters, and the family moved away. I don't know how their older childhood and teen years were spent.
These kids are now adults. As far as I know (based primarily on posts to social media where we are friends/connections), they do not have much of a relationship with either the mom or the dad. Both have experienced permanent and ongoing health problems related to their prenatal exposures and the care they received (or rather, didn't receive) as children. This is exactly the situation where I wonder if the kids would have been better of in an alternative living situation- perhaps with the grandma (who lived next door) or an aunt and uncle (who lived 4 houses down from them). Although, these family members were not oblivious to what was happening, and I don't know that they ever tried to stop/help/change the parents or protect the kids, so who knows if different would have been better. I just wish they had something better, because they certainly deserved it.
As an adult, my mom admitted to me that she was so unsure what she should say to the man from DCFS. In truth, what my parents heard, witnessed, and suspected could probably have been enough to keep the kids out of their parents care for quite some time. But she chose not to divulge everything she knew, because she loved these kids.
I can understand her reasons. At least when the kids were living with their parents, they did spend a good amount of time with people like my family--- people who loved them, took care of them, and most importantly, parented them. My family had no aspirations of adoption, fostering, or having these children live with us in any way (nor would we likely have been approved to foster/adopt based on house size, income, and other qualifying factors), but we were attached to them and wanted to see them happy, healthy, and successful. If the kids continued living with family, at least they could come play in our backyard and go on family trips with us, learn how to follow rules, do their homework, and make good decisions. As long as they were with their family, my family could continue to be a positive influence... and hopefully protect them and teach them as much as possible. If the kids were taken away from their parents, who knows what kind of situation they would end up in. Especially given the foster care fiasco in Cook County at that time.
I think what my mom did was in a very gray area... ethically, she might have been right (or not). Legally, by not lying but not divulging everything, I'm not sure sure where that puts her. But I will say that I can completely understand the choice that she made, and if placed in the same situation, I may have done the same. I will also say that my step-dad, who does not often go into a legal or ethical gray area, did agree with her choice.
![]() |
| Not the child in question Copyright Espen Faugstad Source |
I don't know if there is a hard and fast rule about when it's okay to go into that gray area... when it's okay to cross lines and when it's not. That's the nature of gray- it's a spectrum color. What I will say is this: if you personally stand to gain from going into that gray area, you should abstain from going there. Don't abandon a child in need, but seek out someone honest and trustworthy who does not have a vested interest in the child, and ask them to champion that child's cause. Their ability to discern when "crossing the line" is right or wrong will be significantly more accurate than yours because their mind will not be struggling against their heart.
I think my mom did the right thing at that point in time, under those circumstances, with the knowledge available to her. Would I do the same thing? I don't know. It's hard to say, since I have the benefit of seeing the bigger/future picture. But I think she acted to the best of her ability in the kids' best interest. And I know that she wasn't looking to (and did not) personally gain from the situation.
Unfortunately, after reading a few posts over at the blog in question, I can't agree that it was okay, in the situation described on the blog, to proceed into a gray area. The bloggers posted about how they met this child here and here. Based on what they wrote, this child was in a safe place. Pictures show a child that is clearly healthy, well-fed, and has a room of her own/space of her own. She is in some sort of orphanage, but based on the pictures, it's nicer than any of the orphanages that I saw in Ethiopia! It seems obvious to me that there was no immediate threat of harm or danger to the child. In fact, the bloggers never convey that there is any chance of harm to the child- instead, they simply write about how they "fell in love" with her and decided she should join their family. And they told her so, going so far as to have her start calling them mommy and daddy.
Then they inquired about her orphan status. Yes, you read that right- first they fell in love, decided they wanted her, and promised to adopt her... then they checked to see if she was an orphan, and were surprised when the biological family were opposed to the adoption. They were upset that the living grandmother, uncle, and mother all opposed the adoption... and when a relative offered to have the girl come live with them, it was recounted this way: "Another relative has threatened to take her to live in the slums with them."
All of these things seem to be taking place in ethically gray areas. They identified a child they wanted to adopt without regard for her orphan status, then proceeded to pursue despite biological family objections and even bio family offers of a home. In my mind, that would have been crossing a line, but I will give them the benefit of the doubt that they were still in the gray. But it didn't end there.
![]() |
| Copyright 2006 Colorsimulator.com Source |
Now, let me be clear: I do not believe that children should live in facilities or orphanages. Children belong in families. I am not in any way opposed to having this child live in a family. However, I am opposed to a family pursing an international adoption for a child who has an option (maybe 2?) for reunification, and is living in a country where a domestic placement is also a viable option.
I can understand that the American family now suspects all sorts of corruption and evil motivations from the biological family, and potentially from the government. But, the sad reality is that if they had not stepped foot into that gray area.... if they had not decided to adopt a child who was not legally available for adoption... if they had used ethical and legal methods of inquiring about her orphan status and respected the law regarding it, or even if they had requested the social worker or orphanage director to make inquiries into the possibility of adoption without revealing their American (read: wealthy) status, the whole outcome might have been different. Maybe not in their favor, but hopefully in the best interest of the child. I know for sure if they had never promised to adopt a child who is not legally available for adoption, that child would have been better protected.
Their descent into this gray area (because falling in love with a child is not a bad thing... it's everything they did after that) was entirely motivated by their desire to adopt this child- by their own selfish wants, not by the needs of this child. If they had not wanted to adopt her, they would have left her like they left the other children she lives with: relatively happy, physically cared for, and safe. There was no danger to the child--- no immediate, pressing, urgent needs that caused them to cross into that gray area. It was 100% their desire to adopt that motivated them (I am not commenting on whether that desire to adopt was "Godly" or not.) All of this is according to what they have posted and provided pictures of on their blog, in their own words.
Does adoption and orphan care have gray areas? Yes. But I think those gray areas should not be entered into unless necessary. I think those gray areas are best handled by someone who does not have a personal stake in the matter. And I think those gray areas often can wait for the legal and ethical processes to occur, because rarely do they involve true emergencies.
Slow down. Step out of it as the PAP/sometimes-crazily-emotional-woman (I speak from experience, knowing that the process of loving a child who is not and may not legally be yours can be difficult.) Let the system of checks and balances work so that you can say at the end of the day "I know I have done nothing legally or ethically wrong." Pray hard. Cross your fingers and toes and legs and arms. Dream big dreams.
Don't go charging into the gray, championing a cause that is so dear to your heart that your eyes are blinded by un-shed tears. Don't allow your love to blind your logic and reason. Because when you stumble and fall in those gray areas... especially those areas of the deepest grays... that's when you will feel as though you have fallen into the dark. That's when you will be the hardest to find again.























