There are more black children in the system for three reasons: first, more wind up in the system (this isn’t the place to discuss that), second, fewer black families formally adopt children. There is often an informal process amongst blacks, but when that breaks down, and it has, you wind up with all these kids who have nowhere to go. And thirdly, some time ago black social workers got up in arms about white folks adopting children of color, because they felt it was a sort of “genocide,” and, as a part of that, white parents couldn’t possibly appropriately bring up a black child. Their “black” identity would be extinguished. These are 3 very real reasons why there are more black kids in the system than any other at this time.

There are incentives for all adoptive parents of hard to place kids, regardless of the child’s color or ethnicity. Not foreign born kids, but kids born right here in the U.S.A., and there are millions of them that need homes.

The fact is, the author probably wanted an infant – a new born. The wait in the U.S. for white children and even bi-racial children can be long, even with an expensive adoption service. Frankly, it has gotten so even black infants are becoming a premium – it’s not until after the bio mom has either decided she can’t take care of the child, or has had it taken away, that they enter the system. And, often, by that time, many are no longer considered infants – which for the purposes of adoption, usually means school age.

Why tell her as a child, she had less value because she was black or mixed? When she gets older and her self image is set, and she knows the way of the world, then go ahead – no reason to hide it. But, by that time, it probably won’t matter to her that she was a blue-light special.

I know what I’m talking about – I have 7 adopted children, 5 of which are bi-racial. And ALL of whom were special needs kids. Hard to place kids. And, all from the U.S. There are plenty of them here, or hadn’t you noticed?

So, keep your outrage and use it to not only teach her to be a person first, not someone who is bi-racial, but also a self-reliant young woman, and to be proud of who she is, regardless of color.

“In all probability, they discount the fees for adoption of black children to encourage adoption of them.”

Absolutely. No racism here, just common sense economics. “Racism”–whatever that means–would be to refuse to take any black kids in for adoption at all, although even in that case the motives might be other than “racism.”
What’s increasingly clear to me is that, while the “racism” of Jim Crow is fast disappearing, the PC, multiculturalist left insists on finding it everywhere, under every stone, and re-creating it by making “race” the alpha and omega of civilization.
Whatever you do, whatever your intentions, you can’t hide from accusations of “racism.” It has taken the place of the original sin.
In communist dictatorships, political sin had a variety of names: “bourgeois,” “imperialism lover,” “cosmopolitan” (because you read, say, Baudelaire or Goethe or Whitman, or, worse, you had once said, foolishly, when you thought you were among friends, that American science was better than Soviet Science), “Zionist,” “saboteur,”
“enemy of the proletariat/working people,” each of which accusation would have sent you to a labor camp, to the salt or lead mines, or to rot in a dungeon with your feet permanently in cold water.

This is where the accusation of “racism” is taking us.

A reasonable case can be made that the fee structure is not a reflection of racism. It is not racist for white parents to prefer to adopt white children. Why shouldn’t they want to adopt children who look more like them? It is not racist for adoption agencies, faced with more minority children who are harder to place (Do more minority parents put their children up for adoption? Do fewer minority parents adopt?), encourage their adoption by adjusting the fee structure. It is not racist for people who desperately want to love a child to also consider the economic costs associated with bringing that child into the family.

Perhaps I am wrong. Just too simplistic. Not perceptive enough to see the racism. Perhaps both of our views are reasonable. That is something we could debate long into the night.

But what does it say about you, Ms. Friedman, that you would choose to tell your beloved daughter the version that might damage her self-worth? If you believe that your daughter already faces an uphill battle in a racist world, why would you pile on?

THEN you can tell her how much she cost.

Sheesh, lady, ever heard of preserving the child’s self-image? Be sure to tell your daughter she’s fat, too. That’ll help her just as much as the adoption fees and how guilty you feel about OTHER people’s latent racism that YOU have discovered.

Taking tongue out of cheek: I very much doubt that your child will every inquire about this aspect of the adoption. The agency charges what the traffic will bear, more or less. In all probability, they discount the fees for adoption of black children to encourage adoption of them. To see this as a Bad Thing is looking for trouble when none exists.