Adoption rules are strict for many reasons, reasons which prioritize the child's safety and general well being. And every child deserves safety and proper well being, I support the long requirement given to the prospective parent and I believe the requirements needed for adoption are what any responsible adult should be able to achieve without complaints or much stress.
I understand the financial requirements could be like another way to exploit intended parents and that's the aspect I feel should be regulated. The welfare of the child should be prioritized over the huge amount needed for their adoption. What's more important is giving the child a home and not trading the child for money.
We can all agree that kids can't give themselves the protection they deserve, and it's expected that whosoever intends to adopt a child should be able to offer protection, care, a conducive environment and safety.
If the adoption process seems so strict, unattainable and difficult for intended parents, then they should consider other options and, as humans, we tend to chase what we cherish and are passionate about with much determination. That determination should also be applied by a person who really wants to adopt a child. If they can meet the requirements, regardless of the stress and strictness, then they truly deserve an opportunity to adopt the child.
The rules aren't the problem to me, but rather unrealistic financial expectations by those who approve adoption, the corruption in the system, and unclear procedures for more financial benefits.
These unrealistic financial expectations can discourage genuine love and responsible people from adopting and not the rules of adoption. The strictness isn't the direct reason children stay longer than necessary in orphanages, there are other reasons.
The strictness of adoption is for the benefit of the child. If adoption is made to be less strict, it's going to give everyone a chance to adopt, regardless of what they do for a living, give kids less care, endanger kids by keeping them in unsafe environments, adopt kids without a good source of income or financial plan and many more disadvantages that could cause harm to kids.
The essence of adoption is to give those kids parental love, give them a safe and healthy future and that should be prioritized before an adoption, not the financial gain at the orphanage.
The part of adoption that needs to be amended is the financial expectation and exploitation that makes the process seem like a trade.
Instead of financial gain, they should look into child welfare and the intended parent's lifestyle. The source of income of the intended parents, protecting the child against abuse and harm, should be more considered, amongst other red flags.
The amount that should be demanded during adoption shouldn't be the priority, it's not a trade.
If the rules are reduced or removed, children could end up in dangerous homes, subjected to child labour, child exploitation and abuse, which could lead to trama. The rules are very necessary, reducing standards could cause more harm to these kids than expected.
After an application to adopt a child, with the required credentials, factors like the adoptee's eligibility, like age, marital status, health status, family background, home assessment, counseling and interviews with the adoptee, court proceedings and other necessary requirements.
These requirements should be placed above financial benefits to be made by the orphanage home to ensure that the child will be safe and healthy with the intended parents.
I believe the act of adoption is not only about providing a child with shelter, but also ensuring that there's love, longterm stability, care, protection, and emotional support.
First and Second Pictures are generated through ChatGPT.
