Should cult members be allowed to adopt or be foster parents?

by Mad Sweeney 44 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Mad Sweeney

  Because of blood issue alone,,I think most agencies will not accept JWs as good candidates for this.

  That's what I would think but I know JDubs who have adopted successfully and others who are foster parents. Band on the Run shared an example of lazy JWs who could work but would rather take in our tax money for sheltering and attempting to indoctrinate the youth of our society.

  Raising a child in a cult is emotional and psychological abuse.

  Letting them die rather than get a blood transfusion is murder, IMO.

  I love ProdigalSon's comment. They shouldn't be allowed to breed their own kids. It would be comical if not so sad and true.
• 

  Married to the Mob

  Straight off NO!

  A lot of dubs will call themselves christains when they adopt to avoid questions.

  Its only if the adoption agent digs further into the religious aspects that it might come out.

  From experience we were told to say christain rather than list my wife as JW. Especially as we were looking at adopting from Russia.

  In Ontario you also have to do a PRIDE program. Whilst the program was not massivily taxing, it is a form of assesment and I am not sure how many dubs could get through it and pass without ending up with some severe questions of their faith.
• 

  still thinking

  I am not sure, but I don't think that JW foster parents would have the authority to decide against blood transfusion...I'm sure the state would step in.

  They shouldn't be allowed to breed their own kids

  Thats kind of a funny comment don't you think Mad Sweeney. I could say the same about alcoholics, drug users, etc etc....

  What sort of world would we be living in if we literally didn't ALLOW people to breed? I'm not sure I want to live in a controlled world like that. In fact, I wouldn't even exist and neither would many on JWN. Who would be making this decision about other peoples live? Is that a better option?...I dunno?
• 

  Scully

  Hello Shelby:

  for the most part, these children would be adults by the time such a thing occurred.

  Of course, that part is true. It's damaging enough for those of us who are rejected by our flesh-and-blood family because of WTS dogma, whether we are children or adults. I mean, I'm looking at my 40s in the rear-view mirror, if you know what I mean, and to know that my JW parents would sooner associate with creepy JW people with inappropriate tendencies toward teenaged kids, and non-JW relatives who drink to excess, fornicate, commit adultery, smoke, etc. rather than me - for the simple reason that I cannot, after careful consideration, believe the way they do - is extremely painful.

  When you take the case of an adopted child, whose biological parents couldn't keep them or didn't want to keep them, being made to feel special by their adoptive parents "We chose YOU!!" knowing that their bio parents chose otherwise, I would think the feelings of rejection would be magnified exponentially if they were to be shunned by the adoptive family as well. I can only imagine the mental gymnastics involved when an adopted child, who is raised in the JW religion, figures out that it's not The Truth™, and knows the ramifications if they ever want to leave the JWs. They truly may not have a single blood relative that they know of to turn to - their feelings of isolation / captivity must be extremely poignant.
• 

  talesin

  @ Scully

  precisely

  t
• 

  GLTirebiter

  Unfit parents should not be allowed to adopt. That does mean investigating prospective adopting parents to determine if they will offer a safe, supportive family life. I realize no parent is perfect. But I also agree that JW families are more likely to have problems than the national average, and the more closely they follow the dictates of the GB the more likely it is that there will be problems.

  But religion in and of itself isn't the criteria. The character and abilities of the parents are. Bad parents come in every every religious persuasion.
• 

  jwfacts

  One of the most emotionally damaged people I know was adopted by a JW family. Back when jwfacts.com was annoymous and I had stopped attending meetings in an attempt to fade, he was the one that sent a letter to the elders that got me disfellowshipped. His huge insecurities have just led to his wife leaving him.

  I have in my will that in the case of my death, my child is not to be placed with anyone that is in a high control group, as defined and listed on rickross.com.
• 

  talesin

  But religion in and of itself isn't the criteria.

  So, members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints should be considered as potential adoptive parents?

  How about the Children of God?

  The Unification Church?

  Church of Scientology?

  t
• 

  2pink

  we have adopted twice, and were JWs the first time around. we adopted internationally though and we knew better than to tell the homestudy agency that we were JWs. we called ourselves "christian". (sidenote: the country we adopted from banned JWs so we were going to be missing meetings for 8 weeks when we traveled to pick up our daughter...the elders and our families freaked out saying not to do it. apparently the life of a child was less important than 8 weeks of cult meetings hearing the same sh*t everytime...idiots!). (oh, another sidenote: my parents repeatedly mailed us JW literature while we were in the country, even though they knew we could be arrested for that. again, idiots). after we adopted, two other families in our cong adopted domestically. the first couple had a hard time at first bcs they said they were JWs. then they wised up and just listed themselves as christians.

  i dont think any child should be raised in a cult, BUT i do think that, especially in the cases of internationally adopted children, being raised a JW is far, far more ideal than being raised in an orphanage...which is nothing more than hell on earth. many of the children in orphanages die before age 5. of those who make it to adolescence, 10% commit suicide before age 18. of the rest, 60% of the girls turn to prostitution and 70% of the boys to a life of crime. and this is not to mention any of the atrocities they endure while living in the walls of the orphanage...abuse of every kind, starvation, neglect, etc. so for children facing those prospects, i think they would jump at the chance to be raised anywhere else...even in a cult.
• 

  GLTirebiter

  So, members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints should be considered as potential adoptive parents?

  How about the Children of God?

  The Unification Church?

  Church of Scientology?

  Where is the line declaring some groups are unpopular but OK, while others are dangerous cults? We agree there is such a boundary, but probably not on exactly where it is.

  What about Hassidic Jews? Seventh Day Adventists? Mainstream Mormons? Opus Dei? Masons? Sunnis? Shiites? Snake handlers? Hare Krishnas? Voodoo practicioners? Rastafarians? Pastafarians? Pagans? Vegans who belong to PETA? Deer hunters who belong to NRA? Born-again Republicans? Agnostic Democrats? Unitarian Libertarians? No matter what the group is, somebody thinks it's naught but a mob of fools and miscreants.

  My point was that group labeling is an inaccurate way to predict who will and won't be a good adoptive parent. Judge the parents on their own merits, not by the group they belong to. A child rapist is a horrid excuse for a human being whether or not they're in one of the polygamist LDS splinter groups. Physical and emotional abusers respect no group boundaries. Drunks and drug addicts are found in every walk of life.

  It's also a matter of prejudice: would you reach the same conclusion after replacing the phrase "cult membesr" with "Blacks" or Latinos"?