I always feel really weird when white people adopt several kids from a specific race, like, these two only adopted black kids. Why is that? And someone might be thinking "well, why not?", and that is absolutely valid too. There is NOTHING wrong about only adopting black children. I'm not saying that, since they are white, they should exclusively adopt white children. I'm not saying that black children are unwhorthy of being adopted. What I'm saying is that I always feel weird when white people go above and beyond just to adopt black kids, or hispanic kids, or asian kids, and so on. It doesn't feel right to me, it always seems like they're making it about them and about the image of themselves that they want to be perceived by everyone else. And I'm aware that white people are not the only ones that do this. I'm sorry if this is confusing or if this doesn't seem relevant to this case.
To my knowledge (correct me if I'm wrong please) there are more prospective foster and adoptive parents who are white than black, and for children it's the other way around, and then add in mixed race kids).
I agree with you that I don't see anything wrong with adopting children of a different skin color, I just want them to have good families and good parenting.
And these kids were adopted in sibling groups, much harder to place, and apparently coming from backgrounds with abuse and that had led to the children displaying problems, so again they're going to be harder to place in adoptive families.
If someone/a couple are simply looking beyond color to adopt children who need a good home, I don't have anything negative to say about that.
But I do have a bit question mark for these women on how these things, and especially taking in two sibling groups with all six being fairly close in age to each other, how it might have had a large part in their desire to appear super-altruistic, maybe wanting to create a narrative that the whole world is racist *except for us!*
The kids have been in this family for a long time, is it 9 years and 14 years? But there seems to be a mixed narrative of how the kids came from terrible backgrounds that had given the kids issues (no fault of the children) and then these two parents have erased all the damage. Then on the other hand it feels like constant reminders of where the children have come from and that some of it is being used to say that the children, who on the one hand are 'cured' and 'perfectly behaved' are still displaying damage from the early childhood stage. I feel like there's a disparity in how the kids are two things at once and all the negative is attributed to their pre-adoption lives, while all the positive is attributed to their post-adoption lives.
The story about the encounter in the store, combined with neighbors saying they didn't see the kids out in the garden playing games, people saying there's a lack of child stuff like balls and things in the garden. Was it really the six kids who didn't want to play sporty games or ball games or was it the parents telling the kids they didn't want to do those sorts of activities? You don't have to want to grow up to be a sports star to kick or throw a ball around the garden and spend time outdoors playing games? feel like these women have sucked the life out of these children and tried to imprint the children with their own image? None of this has anything to do with race, it has to do with children...and out of six kids, sure there might be a bookworm or two in there, but even bookworm kids can go out and run around and play ball games and work off excess physical energy? And surely that's especially true in a household without TV where video games and electronics are discouraged?
I'm not keen on when parents want children to be image that their parents want them to be instead of growing up to be themselves with their own interests. But these two are apparently combining this with extreme abuse. How much are they using abuse to get the desired outcome and to drain these kids of their own individual development in six different ways?
