http://www.ldschurchnews.com/articles/38871/Unwed-parents-encouraged-to-place-child-for-adoption.html
"
unwed parents should be encouraged to place the child for adoption, preferably through LDS Social Services [now known as LDS Family Services]. Adoption through LDS Social Services helps ensure that the baby will be reared by a mother and father in a faithful Latter-day Saint family.

Unwed parents who do not marry should not be counseled to keep the infant as a condition of repentance or out of an obligation to care for one's own. Generally, unwed parents are not able to provide the stable, nurturing environment so essential for the baby's well-being.

Placing the infant for adoption enables unwed parents to do what is best for the child and enhances the prospect for the blessings of the gospel in the lives of all concerned.
"

best for the child? more like best for the church! i cant believe the church teaches this $hit!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/15/2010 08:08AM by Nick Humphrey.

That is one of the most disgraceful articles I have ever seen.

Oh... That really makes me angry. That is completely sick and nausiating! They are so damned FULL of themselves! So self-righteous, that they truly believe a child is better off being given up for adoption to some TBM couple, rather than being with their real mom and dad, simply because the parents are not married?

I normally never spit on anyone because I think its just the worst insult ever... Really, I would rather get the crap beat out of me than have someone spit on me. But if I could spit on the person that first insisted on this-- I would!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/15/2010 08:13AM by melissa3839.

...you have a faithful, infertile couple, living righteously, fervently praying for an infant to become available for them to adopt. That means they're hoping an unwed couple within the orbit of the church wanders from the paths of righteousness, fornicates without contraception and gets knocked up. Their happiness depends on someone else committing the sin second only to murder. And the church gladly acts as broker.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/15/2010 08:31AM by Nick Humphrey.

Plus, follow the money trail. Perhaps TSCC is afraid that unwed mothers will place burden on the church and certainly they will not be tithe payers.

Ether that or wishing death on the parants. I dont think ether are a good thing.

Yeah, and they don't even believe that fornication is really all that bad, that's what's confusing. I know soooooooo many people who "repented" for fornication in less than a year, and were allowed to go on missions. If they can support that, why can't they support a family staying together?

I'll tell you why-- because unless you are doing what they want you to do, you're not even human in their eyes. Not even worthy of basic human rights.

Makes me sick.

I grew up hearing this.

In fact, my brother got a never-mo pregnant, and my parents refused to acknowledge the child because he wasn't given up for adoption.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/15/2010 10:28AM by Nick Humphrey.

RS was a nightmare. WAlking the hallways was horrid. Teens were everywhere as their huge families split apart.

I am thinking there might be actual cults or hypnotic inductions available in life- separate from what we no longer like of the atmospher or culture of tscc.

These were large groups of friends, not strangers, and they all went to some group together, just like they used to barBQ. And in my mind, someone took advanctage of them as a group. (It included mostly groups of lawyers Oral surgeons, people who could afford all the retreats in one school year or less)

The Baby Emma case is one that highlights them perfectly.

Men have no rights to their children born out of wedlock no matter what state they, the child's mother, and the child lived in unless they report their paternity IN Utah within something like 20 days of the child's birth.

In the Baby Emma case a (apparently) Jack Mormon girl was convinced the day after she gave birth to her daughter to sign adoption papers -- which she apparently did with the full disclosure that the infant's father wanted to raise this child -- in Virginia. The lawyer and the adoptive kidnappers then left the state of Virginia without notifying the father (and yes, that IS kidnapping under the federal custody interference law). The couple ignored a Virginia order to return the child to his father's custody (and the father went through a very thorough investigation as to his ability and fitness to raise his daughter) and got a Utah judge to grant them custody.

I very much hope this case ends up in from of the Supreme Court of the US because it's time Utah was royally slapped down for its interference with families and its disrespect of the laws of other states. They've gotten away with far too much of this sort of kidnapping in my book.

The fact that the Morg makes such sweeping statements that do not even consider the actual people involved shows that the LDS does not want what is best for the people involved.

All studies show that gay parents are able to rear children as well as straight parents.

The church doesn't allow gay marriage.

The church's position is that unwed parents aren't able to raise kids as well as married people.

Therefore: Gays are again marginalized in the church.

No surprises here, at all...

They have to have temple recommends and they end up buying the baby for about $10,000.

It's all about saving a heathen baby and getting it to heaven by putting it in a "saved" temple family.

I was damn cute, though.

You know... I honestly think this is quite the monumental ocasion for me. This one post and that article has made me lose 10 times more respect for the chruch, and turn my back on it far more than anything else I have ever heard or read about it.

The more I think about it, the more it bothers me.

I am sooooooooooooooo GLAD that the only members on either side of my family who are TBM, are just my uncle, his wife and 2 of their 5 boys (the other 3 think the church sucks). And even they aren't TBM enough to forsake any family that leaves, they are still fairly nice people. They're pretty loose, in fact, they cuss a lot and really just don't care, lol.

Everyone else-- my parents, my brothers and sisters-- we all walked away. The rest of my many aunts, uncles and cousins and my grandparents-- they never were Mormon.

I truly feel so sorry for people who have a lot of family in this chruch. I really wouldn't be able to handle that.

In fact, I think I will show this article to all of my family who walked away. I may even show it to my aunt and uncle-- I don't know if they would leave the chruch, but they would agree that its complete B.S.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 11/15/2010 10:01AM by melissa3839.

It is horrible. It is a way to make the woman feel even worse. I know a girl who did this. She is LDS, was a friend of my sister, and came here many times pregnant and not married. Well, my hope was she woud end up marrying the guy. She did two weeks after the baby was born, then two wks. after that said "I can't do this, marriage annulled, baby given to an LDS family in DC. How sad. She wanted to be married in the temple she said. WHAT??? THE D___ temple is more important than your baby. Mormons are messed up.

Well, let's see, I'm not married to my two kids' mom, and the kids are both straight A students, gifted musicians, one's a star athelete--but they shoulda been adopted out to some worthy family...

Some of the worst parents I know are married. And stay married "for the kids."

I don't think people have to be married to make good parents. A marriage license isn't a parenting license.

i was pleasantly surprised to hear that one of my tbm friends is getting a divorce because she DIDNT want to stay married only for the kids sake. i think that is awesome =)

My wifes first child was born out of wedlock.
A more loving family (my wife and her parents) you could not find. According to this he should have been brought up by strangers.
Can you imagine what he would have thought about his natural mother now if she had just had him adopted? He would feel unwanted, have serious mental issues about being discarded, and have no relationship with his natural family.

This advice is not from God.

Adoptees run the gamut of what they think about their birth parents. When I was an unwed mother at the age of 18 my grandmother strongly urged me (and I listened because I love and respect her) to investigate adoption as well as the other possibilities I was looking into regarding my unborn son. Fortunately, she isn't Mormon and her urging was ONLY so that I would make a fully informed decision. When I considered giving my son up for adoption it was the hardest thing I could think of to do. I ONLY considered it because I was 18, unmarried and unemployed. Ultimately, I couldn't bring myself to do it and I'm glad I didn't. I have a tremendous amount of respect for woman and girls who choose (not are coerced, but choose) to give their infant up for adoption because I am confident that they only do so because they believe it will be the best for their child.

Any adoptive parent worth their salt will also make this clear to their child as they grow up. Adoptive children are absolutely not condemned to feel unwanted, have serious mental issues about being discarded and, nowadays, can ususally forge some sort of a relationship with their biological family after they are adults if they want to.

Blanket statements about families aren't helpful. Adoptive children don't necessarily feel discarded, etc.

FYI my adopted son was given up as an infant by his HIV-positive, hopelessly drug addicted, homeless parents, who in their wisdom and unselfishness realized that someday he would have to come to terms with having been "given away," and that was far preferable than the circumstances he was born into.

There's definitely a difference between your son's case, and a case of an able mother giving a child up because she's not married in the temple.

In the latter case, a child would definitely have feelings of abandonment.

Speaking as an adopted person, there is a sense of identity that is lost, even if it is minor.

I was taught this in YW in the mid-90's. This was one of the "straws" for me that set off alarm bells. There was a girl a year or two older than me that had recently gotten pregnant, so her case was implied when they taught that giving up her baby was necessary for her repentance. She didn't give up the baby, and actually is still Mormon, but the thought of being forced to give up a baby I wanted to keep just sounded wrong to me.

When I was President of the YW's a few years ago, I was disciplined for throwing a baby shower for an unwed 18 year old mother. She was abandoned by the father, pregnant with twins and only made enough money to pay for rent and food. Someone HAD to do something, or else she wasn't going to have any clothes or diapers for those babies.

The YW were her friends, she was only barely out of YW when she got pregnant. Instead of being self-righteous and judging her for her pregnancy, those girls went into overdrive trying to help her and get her everything she needed. It was very beautiful, and I couldn't have been more proud of them. However, after we held a shower for her, I was called by the stake YW presidency and chewed out royally for letting the girls hold the shower.

The next week the YW Stake leadership came to our ward on a Sunday, and held a talk with the girls (during MY YW class time no less) about how this 18 year old should be giving up the twins for adoption, and how we should feel "sorry for her, but not encourage her behavior by rewarding her with our help". The YW were instructed to not visit her in the hospital, not offer to babysit, not to purchase her any more gifts.

It was total bullshit, and after the stake goons left, the girls completely ignored their advice. Two of them still in fact babysit those twin girls while the mother is in college classes. We ALL went to visit her in the hospital afterwards. I'm so glad the YW I taught learned to do what is right, no matter what their leaders instruct them to do. Hopefully they don't lose sight of that.

While the article didn't "sicken" me or anything like that, I wondered why the LDS church printed it. Specifically, I'm wondering if fewer unwed Mormons are giving up their infants for adoption through LDS Family Services, and the church is trying to provide support to this sponsored group.

Fortunately, though my brother and his LDS ex-wife were divorced many moons ago (before the birth of my niece), actions were taken that resulted in the girl's not being adopted.

The LDS woman I was attempting to date a few years back told me once that her younger sister did have an out-of-wedlock birth, and the baby was given to LDS Family Services. While the girl went on to the University of Arizona for a teaching degree, I never did hear what happened to the baby after it was adopted.