tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post5641854134609061149..comments2024-03-27T20:48:39.389-04:00Comments on [Birth Mother] First Mother Forum: Newsday and the backlash.......'More Adoption Information may not be good'Lorraine Duskyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18285341379272250245noreply@blogger.comBlogger74125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-16699088912813480952011-06-09T12:49:39.015-04:002011-06-09T12:49:39.015-04:00COMMENTS TO THE POST ARE CLOSED.
Sounds to me as ...COMMENTS TO THE POST ARE CLOSED.<br /><br />Sounds to me as if the writer of the letter to NEWSDAY (or one of her compatriots) objecting to the idea that love of adoptive parents cannnot quell genetic curiosity found our blog. <br /><br /><b>COMMENTS TO THE POST ARE CLOSED.</b>Lorraine Duskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18285341379272250245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-4230032977644511552011-06-09T06:24:45.894-04:002011-06-09T06:24:45.894-04:00@ anonymous 9:18 PM
"Do you think that &quo...@ anonymous 9:18 PM<br /><br />"Do you think that "love and blood" should always triumph, even in cases where a child has been with their legitimately acquired alternative family for many (two, three, five, whatever number of) years"<br /><br />DUH. Your the one who sounds twisted.<br /><br />"it means children who do not have parents or extended family willing or able to care for them"<br /><br />You mean orphans in foster care with NO family? I have no problem with that either, not at all. What about the children who's mothers were able to care for them or who did have other family such as grandparents, aunts, uncles; many members of their blood clan? Why aren't they considered a viable option, as opposed to a child being legally separated from his biological family forever, to genetic strangers? A great many women who lose their children to adoption today do so needlessly, as they are perfectly capable of caring for their own flesh and blood. How many of those adoptive families include a natural mother or her family into the life of their lost family member? Not many from what I read. A woman is punished for the rest of her life because she dared get pregnant outside of marriage. Her punishment is being banished from her own child. Sounds pretty TWISTED to me. <br /><br />Adoption is big business and women are coerced and manipulated into relinguishing their infants without being fully informed of the repercussions to them or to their children. Once a child is lost to adoption, it is irrevocable. There is no turning back.<br /><br />Your reasoning is so black and white. Do you know the complete circumstances of all adoptions that take place where you believe that natural families should just be cut out of the picture after a few years because they made a mistake by going through with adoption? <br /><br />People such as yourself seem to think you are experts on adoption. When you have lost your own child, please feel free to elaborate a little more. <br /> <br />"I also don't think that paps should use the "only family he/she has ever known" argument to keep children away from parents who have been duped into relinquishing them." <br /><br />But you do think natural parents should take a hike after their children are "legitimately acquired in alternative family for many (two, three, five, whatever number of) years."<br /><br />Which is it, Anonymous? <br /><br />Your just full of contradictions, aren't you and you have all the answers about what is best for everyone (including people you don't even know) don't you? No you don't.<br /><br />DUH.<br /><br />I stand by the fact that natural families are the only one who lose while adopters gain. There is nothing twisted about that. That is a fact.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-68010033109089617012011-06-08T21:18:58.380-04:002011-06-08T21:18:58.380-04:00@ anon 11:51
In response to your question "...@ anon 11:51 <br /><br />In response to your question "What does "legitimately acquired" signify?", it means children who do not have parents or extended family willing or able to care for them and who consequently gain another 'legal' family through adoption. <br />To make it quite clear, I do NOT mean children who have been "needlessly" separated from their parents. <br /> <br />Such children do not deserve to grow up as mere wards of state. They deserve to have a legal family to raise them. Equally importantly, they do *not* deserve to have their original identity and history obscured by that same state. <br /><br />I also believe that, ideally, such children also deserve to be able to maintain contact with their original family and to grow up knowing them. And no, I am not starry-eyed about open adoption. I think of it as something that has to be chock-full of ambiguities.<br /><br />I should add that your assumption that I support "buying children through baby brokers" or that I think it's right to use "promises of open adoption" to inveigle parents into surrender is totally off the wall.<br />I can only assume that one of the reasons you have come to your twisted conclusion is because I said that I don't think that biological parents should be able to take whatever time suits them to keep their children in storage until they decide to claim them. I stand by that.<br /><br />I also don't think that paps should use the "only family he/she has ever known" argument to keep children away from parents who have been duped into relinquishing them. <br />Duh.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-28003104990566367172011-06-08T16:36:42.237-04:002011-06-08T16:36:42.237-04:00Maryanne, if I should not call your untruths lies,...Maryanne, if I should not call your untruths lies, OK, sorry for that. But the intention of your words was clear to me, fully clear, it was just not the right question. <br /><br />Can we stop this bickering, please?Theodorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14634057445114838262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-8520759638475725172011-06-08T11:51:52.532-04:002011-06-08T11:51:52.532-04:00@ Anonymous 9:18
"Do you think that "lov...@ Anonymous 9:18<br />"Do you think that "love and blood" should always triumph, even in cases where a child has been with their legitimately acquired alternative family for many (two, three, five, whatever number of) years." <br /><br />You sure don't with your adoption agenda, do you? I,for one am coming from a POV of children and their mothers not being seperated needlessly. <br /><br />What does "legitimately acquired" signify? Being "legitimately" bought from a baby broker? Being procured via a promised "open adoption" that closes? <br /><br />Yeah, real "legitimate"...That is not so "legitimate" to those of us who did not have to lose our children to adoption.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-85550377219143167422011-06-08T09:18:06.992-04:002011-06-08T09:18:06.992-04:00"Well anonymous, my position is not half that..."Well anonymous, my position is not half that extreme,"<br /><br />Excuse me for finding your answer rather evasive.<br /> I'll try again, using a more specific example.<br />Do you think that "love and blood" should always triumph, even in cases where a child has been with their legitimately acquired alternative family for many (two, three, five, whatever number of) years. <br />Particularly as disruption itself is known to be harmful, and the child has already been disrupted once. <br /><br />Personally I do not think any mother can expect an indefinite amount of time to get her life in order. Putting a plant in the greenhouse over winter and then planting it outside in the spring is not comparable to raising a child in a second home for a protracted period and then returning that child to its original family years later.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-74998334347534278312011-06-08T09:15:39.432-04:002011-06-08T09:15:39.432-04:00Theodore:
As a Dutch American, I am very interest...Theodore:<br /><br />As a Dutch American, I am very interested in hearing about the differences between US Domestic Infant Adoption and that of the Netherlands, my ancestral homeland. I am sure there are many. Feel free to email me anytime.PhoenixRisinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07655924058370540037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-67664349250127139522011-06-08T08:21:29.049-04:002011-06-08T08:21:29.049-04:00I think we have a language problem, Theodore, and ...I think we have a language problem, Theodore, and I do not appreciate being accused of "telling lies". I asked:"Theodore, are you an adoptee from the Netherlands? Sorry if you have already told us but I must have missed it. What is your situation?"<br /><br />You left out a sentence. "What is your situation?" means if you are not an adoptee, what connection to adoption do you have? So where have I lied about what I asked?<br /><br />Here is your only, ambiguous reply to that question:"Maryanne, I am basically a child of one. I do not mind telling details in private e-mails."<br /><br />The only thing your name here links to is a bunch of poems, evidently about the Holocaust, no private email, no other blog. But as I said I do not care to have a private conversation with you, was just curious what your adoption connection is, since you purport to be an expert on adoption in the Netherlands, but if you prefer not to tell, ok. But don't be calling me or anyone else a liar based on your misunderstanding of what was said.maryannenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-22768092864458242992011-06-08T00:24:12.858-04:002011-06-08T00:24:12.858-04:00Maryanne, please, stop telling lies about what you...Maryanne, please, stop telling lies about what you asked: You asked whether I was an adoptee from the Netherlands, not what was my connection to adoption. <br /><br />Well anonymous, my position is not half that extreme, but I do think that in principle a child has a right to his or her original mother, and that that right should trump, for instance, a mother's right to relinquish and any right to the child of replacement parents, of course the child's right to a degree of safety trumps the child's right to the original/real mother, just to give an example, but blood and love in combination should be able to beat ink and former weakness .Theodorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14634057445114838262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-54845881477713874142011-06-07T20:16:24.038-04:002011-06-07T20:16:24.038-04:00Please correct me if I am wrong, Theodore, but bas...Please correct me if I am wrong, Theodore, but based on everything you've said, it seems that you believe children who need to be cared for by people other than their original family should be returned at any time the bio-parents are in a position to receive them - no matter how long they may have been with the substitute family, or the circumstances of the original separation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-3076509929543192742011-06-07T17:56:38.095-04:002011-06-07T17:56:38.095-04:00Anon, I have no idea what is "best for everyo...Anon, I have no idea what is "best for everyone", unlike a lot of people who comment here about family preservation being the BEST for all, no matter what, and adoption always being the worst. I think every situation is different and needs to be weighed on its own merits. My own surrender should never have happened, nor should those of many women I know. But that does not mean there should never be surrender or adoption. My opinion is just my opinion, like yours and everyone else who comments here. <br /><br />I asked what Theodore's connection to adoption was just as countless others have asked whether certain commenters were adopters, from the tone of their writing, or just assumed that they were. I am not the only person to have asked that someone specify their interest or connection to adoption. If he chooses not to say, ok. I was just curious, since he seems to have an unusual point of view.<br /><br />Of course you have every right to remain anonymous, but that is something people get called on here too, especially if they are not going along with the prevailing point of view.maryannenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-2981726360330941932011-06-07T17:34:06.311-04:002011-06-07T17:34:06.311-04:00Well, that Coram baby thing seems mostly bussiness...Well, that Coram baby thing seems mostly bussiness as usual,though using a tough kind of PAP, but Coram seems rather adoption-happy.Theodorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14634057445114838262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-13877901145914943242011-06-07T16:02:29.556-04:002011-06-07T16:02:29.556-04:00**Open adoption is NOT about eventually giving the...**Open adoption is NOT about eventually giving the child back to the biological parents, it is about permanency for the child with contact with their blood relatives, but the adoptive parents are the ones legally responsible for the child.** <br /><br />Yes, with other words, the bio-family has no rights, but can just beg for some scraps the adopters may give them. Old show. I did not say that getting kids back out of foster care is always easy, but there is always the possibility, and it leaves the bio/parents much stronger compared to the replacements than adoption. (Look, I know it is not popular, but it is an alternative.)<br /><br /> <br />**I have no desire to know your real name, Theodore, or to know or embarrass any of your relatives, or to start a private email conversation. I asked a simple question, are you an adoptee?**<br /><br />No, you asked something else and your question was answered. If you wanted to know why I am interested in the adoption topic, you should have asked that, as that question was not asked and not answered. If you were interested in me, my background or something like that, you could have sent me an e-mail. You did not, so you are not interested in the things you ask and you misrepresent the questions you asked before. <br /><br />OK, anybody here wants to read more about Dutch adoptions?Theodorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14634057445114838262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-77528506548783517692011-06-07T10:53:48.493-04:002011-06-07T10:53:48.493-04:00It is not so easy to get a child out of foster car...It is not so easy to get a child out of foster care in the USA once the child has been put there, even voluntarily. The mother has to prove a whole lot of things she would never have had to prove if she had just taken her child home from the hospital with her. Once a child is in foster care the state has stepped in and that complicates things. It should be avoided at all costs unless the child is in danger. Mothers who want to raise their children and are able to with a little help should get that help, and the child should be with relatives if the Mom is temporarily disabled. <br /><br />Temporary foster care is a last resort, and in some cases would work, but again, what do you define as "temporary"? 6 months, a year, 5 years, 8 years? Is a child just a possession of either the biological or adoptive family, or a person who eventually has feelings of his own? <br /><br />Open adoption is NOT about eventually giving the child back to the biological parents, it is about permanency for the child with contact with their blood relatives, but the adoptive parents are the ones legally responsible for the child. <br /><br />I have no desire to know your real name, Theodore, or to know or embarrass any of your relatives, or to start a private email conversation. I asked a simple question, are you an adoptee? Evidently not, question answered as much as you are willing.maryannenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-67205999497230000942011-06-07T08:49:16.278-04:002011-06-07T08:49:16.278-04:00Theodore said "I do agree that if a long term...Theodore said "I do agree that if a long term or permanent placement of a baby is/seems/may very well be necessary, it is best to place the child directly from the bio-family into the replacement family."<br />Under Coram's concurrent planning model, if the bio-mother was unable to get her life in order (with professional help) sufficiently to be able to take care of her child independently within the allotted time frame (a year, I think), that replacement family would become the child's permanent legal adoptive family. <br />This seems like a humane and reasonable approach to me. What do you think?<br /><br />Another thing. Adoptees who are 18 and over who have been adopted in England, Wales or Northern Ireland can apply for a copy of their original birth certificate (although if they were adopted before 1975, they have to see an experienced counsellor first).<br />Adult adoptees can also obtain a copy of the adoption certificate issued after the adoption order was granted.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-5009301443794997752011-06-07T08:45:24.317-04:002011-06-07T08:45:24.317-04:00“Theodore,one of your parents was an adoptee? It d...“Theodore,one of your parents was an adoptee? It does not seem too much to ask what your connection is to adoption and to get a brief public answer. I gave you mine, most people are upfront about what their interest in adoption is.”<br /><br />Maryanne, I am curious to know where you get off demanding people identify themselves and their own personal stories and/ or situations. Are the blog identity gustapo, or am I missing something here? <br /><br />Theodore, Maryanne seems to think she is an expert on adoption and what is best for everyone and likes to hijack blogs to denounce others experiences and feelings. Maryanne seems to think that a lot of other women’s children, whom she does not know from Adam, are better off raised with adopters (whom by the way, also have alcohol/ drug problems, are emotionally abusive, and the like.) I might be more inclined to agree with Maryanne and her constant denouncing of others experiences and feelings if she personally knew all the adoptees and mothers in this world whom she claims were so much “better off” without each other.<br /><br />Moreover, it is a slap in the face to the thousands of women who have lost children to fraudulent open adoptions for you (and others who seem to know so much about it) and to promote it as if it is such a “better option”. When did you become such an expert on that, or let me guess, you personally know mothers and adoptees that have been affected so “wonderfully” by bogus open adoptions? <br /><br />Theodore said:<br />"Open adoption?" If it works, great idea, but is often used as marketing trick, to trick women into giving up babies they could have easily kept, after which the adopters close it. It is not enforceable. Good thing that Open Adoption is prohibited in the Netherlands. Opening up closed adoptions is allowed and a lot more fun. <br /><br />Show me ONE adopter in an open adoption who has relinquished the child so the biological mother could be just the mother again.”<br /><br />Open adoption is a con here in America, a trick used to lure and sway a woman into a revocable decision that will have lasting negative repercussions on a mother (and her child for the rest of their lives). Where is the outrage for people who deliberately close them, after they get what they want from her? Only in America, where capitalism reigns, is there no outrage. Only in America, do you have people coming to a first mother blog promoting it, as if it is such a "good option". Sickening. <br /><br />And yes, Maryanne, I am chosing to be "anonymous" in my post. That is my right and quite frankly, none of your business....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-35623092162820063642011-06-07T06:46:56.313-04:002011-06-07T06:46:56.313-04:00Oh, I am too rather upfront about it, but I am not...Oh, I am too rather upfront about it, but I am not the last of my family, and to the Dutch cultural mind (and the Tamils of southern India, who knows what other cultures more), relinquishing a child means rejecting a child, relinquishing mothers are not seen as heroines or brave girls, but as bad mothers and evil persons, and that tends to have rather a disastrous effect on one's social life.<br /><br />I have hardly screened my identity, Theodore IS my name, (OK, official spelling is slightly different), one can deduce easily from my blog where my closesrt blood relatives are living and if you have my e-mail addy you have my family name. Googling the combination of my first name and my family name tends to find only one person: ME. <br /><br />I just try to protect the dignity and privacy of my relatives.Theodorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14634057445114838262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-42342741182335956052011-06-06T21:57:07.821-04:002011-06-06T21:57:07.821-04:00Well, my privacy I do not care about, but I would ...Well, my privacy I do not care about, but I would be revealing stuff about the relatives of other people too, including a very little girl, so I am reluctant to do it in a public forum. As I said, you want to know more about the mess, e-mail me.<br /><br />Well, I guess that having the first 18 years of your life one set of fosterparents, who do not claim that they are your real parents, who do not beed to have their names on your birth certificate, who cannot change your official name is fairly stable and permanent. <br /><br />"Open adoption?" If it works, great idea, but is often used as marketing trick, to trick women into giving up babies they could have easily kept, after which the adopters close it. It is not enforceable. Good thing that Open Adoption is prohibited in the Netherlands. Opening up closed adoptions is allowed and a lot more fun. <br /><br />Show me ONE adopter in an open adoption who has relinquished the child so the biological mother could be just the mother again. <br /><br />"In situations where the biological parents just need some temporary help to raise their child, they should get that help and the child should remain with them, never go into foster care in the first place."<br /><br />This statement does not start to make sense, foster care is meant to take care of children whose parents cannot take care of them, but that inability may very well be temporary. Say single mother with a really bad postnatal depression or a traffic accident, <br />something like that. Do you really think that ANY child would prefer to have been adopted over being in fostercare until mom is better again? And if mom doesn't get better, after all, upgrading the foster family all the way to an adoptive one is still a possibility.Theodorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14634057445114838262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-81468760388290069282011-06-06T21:51:10.582-04:002011-06-06T21:51:10.582-04:00Maryanne wrote:" but the child has permanent ...Maryanne wrote:" but the child has permanent legal parents who are responsible for him."<br /><br />It is not just having "legal" parents but that the child feel 100% that s/he is a member of the family. This is why open adoption from the child's perspective could make him feel like s/he is neither fish nor fowl. That s/he is not fully a member of the a-family and is certainly no longer fully a member of his bio-family since s/he isn't being raised by them. I see open adoption as being kind of like a divorce type situation for the child from the get go. With the bio-family having visitation the same way a non-custodial parent does. Though I certainly think the child should know who his bio-parents are, I think the most important thing is that the child has the strongest possible sense of being rooted in a family even if in some unfortunate cases this has to be an adoptive family rather than his original family.Robinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-53579997723776818482011-06-06T18:56:28.626-04:002011-06-06T18:56:28.626-04:00Theodore,one of your parents was an adoptee? It do...Theodore,one of your parents was an adoptee? It does not seem too much to ask what your connection is to adoption and to get a brief public answer. I gave you mine, most people are upfront about what their interest in adoption is. <br /><br />I cannot recommend foster care as it works (or does not) in this country as an alternative to adoption, especially not if it goes on for years. Children need some kind of permanence and stability for their whole childhood, not a scheme where they get shuttled around or back and forth at the convenience of the adults involved. In some cases, especially children placed with relatives, a form of guardianship can also guarantee permanency, but anything that leaves it open to shift the child around is not really a good thing. <br /><br />Kids in foster care here have no permanence at all, and those who stay in the system are often moved from one home to another many times. When there are severe problems in the birth family like long-term recurrent drug or alcohol addiction, child abuse or serious mental illness, children's lives cannot be put on hold until the biological parents get it together.<br /><br />This is where open adoption is a better choice, some contact is maintained with the biological family, if that is safe, but the child has permanent legal parents who are responsible for him.<br /><br />Yes, there are bad and abusive adoptive parents just as there are bad and abusive biological parents. Nobody is denying that. In situations where the biological parents just need some temporary help to raise their child, they should get that help and the child should remain with them, never go into foster care in the first place. This was and is the case for many surrendering mothers, adoptions that should not have happened.<br /><br />But on those situations where the problems in the original family are so great they really can't care for the child, foster care is the worst outcome for the child. Again, ask anyone who grew up in and aged out of foster care in the USA. I have heard varying opinions on growing up adopted, but have never heard a person who was left in foster care who felt it was a good thing or a happy childhood.maryannenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-87696873098388943002011-06-06T18:12:24.312-04:002011-06-06T18:12:24.312-04:00"it is rather like putting a plant from a gar..."it is rather like putting a plant from a garden in a greenhouse for the winter."<br />"Theodore, what do you think of the Coram Foundation (London, U.K) model of "concurrent planning" ?<br /><br />"Coram's instant adoption plan helps to keep babies out of care system":"<br /><br />Well, the underlying premises are somewhat alien to me, but I do agree that if a long term or permanent placement of a baby is/seems/may very well be necessary, it is best to place the child directly from the bio-family into the replacement family.Theodorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14634057445114838262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-29777641239833299622011-06-06T14:23:12.880-04:002011-06-06T14:23:12.880-04:00"it is rather like putting a plant from a gar..."it is rather like putting a plant from a garden in a greenhouse for the winter."<br />Theodore, what do you think of the Coram Foundation (London, U.K) model of "concurrent planning" ?<br /><br />"Coram's instant adoption plan helps to keep babies out of care system":<br /><br />http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/<br />life_and_style/women/families/article6898675.ece<br />and:<br />http://www.coram.org.uk/section/adoption/Babies-under-twoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-26853931422779950662011-06-06T05:47:39.047-04:002011-06-06T05:47:39.047-04:00@ Anonymous 8:05
I know what you said and I will ...@ Anonymous 8:05<br /><br />I know what you said and I will say again that Adoption is no easy out. When you have been faced with an unplanned pregnancy and losing your own child to adoption, come back here and tell us all how what an "easy out" it is. I don't care who you are talking to. You are on a forum where many mothers come to write from the POV of the pain of losing a child to adoption. I for one don't appreciate your suggestion any of it has been "easy".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-38736816565294551972011-06-06T03:21:29.869-04:002011-06-06T03:21:29.869-04:00Maryanne, I am basically a child of one. I do not ...Maryanne, I am basically a child of one. I do not mind telling details in private e-mails.<br /><br />Anonymous, foster care is the closest thing there is to reversible adoption, it is not intended to layaway a child, but used as an adoption alternative, it is rather like putting a plant from a garden in a greenhouse for the winter. Placing into fostering is not an easy-out, it is rather the hard- back-in to parenting, giving the mother the time to kick that drugs habit or something like that.<br /><br />And yes, adoption pushing families are part of the problem, but keeping pushing families exist too.Theodorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14634057445114838262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-574300303008890516.post-6166028729669979312011-06-05T20:05:41.902-04:002011-06-05T20:05:41.902-04:00"There is no “easy out of parenthood” when yo..."There is no “easy out of parenthood” when you bring a child into the world."<br /><br />Anon 1:03:<br /><br />I was addressing Theodore in regards to his suggestion of keeping a child in foster care. As I said before, there's no "easy out" when it comes to parenthood. You can't put a child on the shelf until one gets its.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com