Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Could you adopt a Chardonnay?
http://www.dailymail....ystal-Chardonnay.html
Was reading this earlier, and I'd like to say that if ever I was serious about adopting a child, I wouldn't let a simple thing like their name prevent me from thinking about it. But after reading the horrific examples of Gemma-Mai, Courtney-Mai, Alexia-Mai, Lily-Mai, Shania-Rae further down the page, the snob in me came rushing to the fore and thought, "no no NO, I couldn't have a child of mine called that". It really is a social stigma isn't it being landed with a name so bad?
What's the solution? Going back to the days where the birth parents had no say in the upbringing of their child, therefore no say in their names?" Getting over our inbred snobbery for such names and thinking " a child, is a child, is a child" no matter what name they've been dumped with?
Was reading this earlier, and I'd like to say that if ever I was serious about adopting a child, I wouldn't let a simple thing like their name prevent me from thinking about it. But after reading the horrific examples of Gemma-Mai, Courtney-Mai, Alexia-Mai, Lily-Mai, Shania-Rae further down the page, the snob in me came rushing to the fore and thought, "no no NO, I couldn't have a child of mine called that". It really is a social stigma isn't it being landed with a name so bad?
What's the solution? Going back to the days where the birth parents had no say in the upbringing of their child, therefore no say in their names?" Getting over our inbred snobbery for such names and thinking " a child, is a child, is a child" no matter what name they've been dumped with?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by B00. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I don't speak from personal experience, so im only quoting...
[i]n previous generations, even as recently as the late 1980s, children were adopted and a shutter came down on their past. Background details were sparse and they had to wait until they were 18 to apply for their birth certificate. But since then, the system has changed — and not necessarily for the benefit of the child or the adoptive parents [i]
Any answers to the problem rojash? or just here to pick holes in my post? ;-)
[i]n previous generations, even as recently as the late 1980s, children were adopted and a shutter came down on their past. Background details were sparse and they had to wait until they were 18 to apply for their birth certificate. But since then, the system has changed — and not necessarily for the benefit of the child or the adoptive parents [i]
Any answers to the problem rojash? or just here to pick holes in my post? ;-)
I personally think that it's a back handed good thing- because a kid has had a narrow escape of an unsuitable set of parents for the second time if they are so bl00dy worried about a name. I mean how shallow exactly can people get? It's ridiculous and disgusting and in my opinion people who refuse a child on that basis should be removed from the register of people approved to adopt. I have pretty much zero tolerence for such callous stupidity and it makes me really angry:(
I dunno Noxxy, i'm thinking that a child given such a dreadful name, and lets be honest, the examples are awful, is going to stick out like a sore thumb in a "normal" school, filed with Henry's, Jack, Charlotte etc aren't they?
Why are we giving so much right's to the birth parents and their families? Surely by giving up on the child or having them removed they should forfeit any say in their upbringing ? If one of those rights is giving up on the name that could hold your child back in life- shouldn't it be looked into?
Why are we giving so much right's to the birth parents and their families? Surely by giving up on the child or having them removed they should forfeit any say in their upbringing ? If one of those rights is giving up on the name that could hold your child back in life- shouldn't it be looked into?
I think if you are adopting a baby who can't speak or understand speech then changing their name is not a huge problem. Once the child is a little older and knows their own name then I would absolutely not change it. I dont think that the examples that you have chosen are so bad although I haven't read the link.
Me neither Tilly, as ive said im only quoting from the article, which admittedly could be dodgy (From the Mail, lol)
But this would worry me...
"One couple I came across were on the verge of adopting a six-month-old boy when they discovered that he would have to meet his birth family every year ‘to continue the link with his identity’.
This birth family included crack addicts and criminals, essentially the very people whose behaviour had put him into the care system in the first place."
But this would worry me...
"One couple I came across were on the verge of adopting a six-month-old boy when they discovered that he would have to meet his birth family every year ‘to continue the link with his identity’.
This birth family included crack addicts and criminals, essentially the very people whose behaviour had put him into the care system in the first place."
With the utmost respect that's a really unpleasant attitude regarding a child's name. In my opinion a kid's name is it's very identity and one of the few things that most parents take a long time choosing. You have no way of knowing why a child has been taken into care ( it's not always abuse) and to be honest I would never seriously consider that any name would hold you back. My daughters have unusual names and you might consider those to be chavvy I dunno ( one of em posts on here and is called Sha'ori- and to my knowledge it's never held her back). I can;t imagine that a well brought up likttle Lily- Mai ( which I actually thought was quite a pretty name) is going to even remotely disadvantaged, and a lot of people's kids who aren't from a ' social underclass' are called unusual things (India, Apple, Chelsea, Shiloh, Mili, Corinth etc).
I really don't understand why you or the author think it's such a problem? It's only a problem if you make it one (Wendy was once held in the same distain in the early 1900's) and I do think it's a terrible thing to be honest, it's nothing to do with the birth parent's rights, it's to do with the child's rights to be who they really are- they're not barbie dolls to be altered and played with, they are living thinking human beings who I would imagine would be mortified later on if they thought their new parent's didn't think their name was high class enough- I mean what does it seriously say about these people?
I really don't understand why you or the author think it's such a problem? It's only a problem if you make it one (Wendy was once held in the same distain in the early 1900's) and I do think it's a terrible thing to be honest, it's nothing to do with the birth parent's rights, it's to do with the child's rights to be who they really are- they're not barbie dolls to be altered and played with, they are living thinking human beings who I would imagine would be mortified later on if they thought their new parent's didn't think their name was high class enough- I mean what does it seriously say about these people?
-- answer removed --
Similar to Eddie51, I thought maybe if the name was 'Emmarald' as stated in the DM, then use 'Emma' or 'Chardonnay' to 'Charlotte' or 'Charlie', 'Chrystal' to 'Chris'... There are ways around it, but I do believe that if the child is young enough then it should be the choice of the adoptive parents. What's more I don't understand why the birth parents have a right to choose, particularly in some of the cases that happen. They should have absolutely no rights, and then it should be up to the child after 16/18 if they want contact.
I don't really have THAT much of a problem with it noxxy. I'm not adopting or thinking about it, and truth be told I highly doubt i'd even be considered even if I was.
All I was doing was opening up a debate about this news story. You've made your point, thanks for that, but don't look too deeply into the reason why I posted it :-)
All I was doing was opening up a debate about this news story. You've made your point, thanks for that, but don't look too deeply into the reason why I posted it :-)
I'd also like to say, no matter how hard you try to escape stereotypes, it's highly unlikely that you will. You might not care what others think, but think about the children when they go to school, or introduce themselves to future employers, etc.
Alot of those names would look out of place in an £11,000 a year school. Particularly with the Harrys, Tarquins, Darcys and Gwyneths.
Alot of those names would look out of place in an £11,000 a year school. Particularly with the Harrys, Tarquins, Darcys and Gwyneths.
okay, now I have read the link. Surely Courtney, Alexia, Lily, Gemma and Shania are all quite reasonable names? Chardonnay, might be a bit much but even then a baby is a baby surely and i am with Nox on this one, anybody who will refuse a child on the basis of its name obviously doesn't want to adopt that much and should be removed from the register.
I do agree about the keeping contact bit but that promise might have been the only way to get the child surrendered for adoption voluntarily rather than getting legal permission to remove the child for adoption.
I do agree about the keeping contact bit but that promise might have been the only way to get the child surrendered for adoption voluntarily rather than getting legal permission to remove the child for adoption.
Quote 'the snob in me came rushing to the fore and thought, "no no NO, I couldn't have a child of mine called that". It really is a social stigma isn't it being landed with a name so bad?'
I don't care why you posted it, you asked for opinions and you got one, no-one was having a go at you personally Boo. This sort of thing makes me genuinely enraged so I'll leave you to your thread.
I don't care why you posted it, you asked for opinions and you got one, no-one was having a go at you personally Boo. This sort of thing makes me genuinely enraged so I'll leave you to your thread.
I can't imagine that giving a promise to the birth parents then going back on it would go down too well woofy to be honest. They'd be screaming human rights before you could blink of that was the case.
From reading the article it does seem that the the birth parents and their family have an awful lot of rights, and the child in question and the adoptive parents- not so much.
Chocolate Chip, along with me can see, what an awful disadvantage having such a name would be to the child, if they are sent to a middle class school. Can we all honestly say, hand on heart, that having such a name as Chardonnay and Chrystal, would not make that child stand out and possibly not in a good way?
From reading the article it does seem that the the birth parents and their family have an awful lot of rights, and the child in question and the adoptive parents- not so much.
Chocolate Chip, along with me can see, what an awful disadvantage having such a name would be to the child, if they are sent to a middle class school. Can we all honestly say, hand on heart, that having such a name as Chardonnay and Chrystal, would not make that child stand out and possibly not in a good way?
point taken Noxxy, guess I did get a tad defensive in my reply, possibly because I AM slightly snobby and a part of me would think twice about taking on a child with such a name.
Yes it's probably not a nice side to me, but as ive said, i'd probably never be considered as a adoptive parent anyway.
Don't leave the thread- just stop attacking me :P ;-)
Yes it's probably not a nice side to me, but as ive said, i'd probably never be considered as a adoptive parent anyway.
Don't leave the thread- just stop attacking me :P ;-)
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.