The Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization majority opinion suggests that “safe-haven” laws enable families to avoid the bad consequences an unwanted pregnancy. However, adoption is not always a good option, and for many—especially poor women—there are no good options. In particular, the history of child protective services in the United States gives Black and Brown women reason to avoid relinquishing their children to the state.
{"title":"The Adoption “Alternative”","authors":"S. Haslanger","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0021","url":null,"abstract":"The Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization majority opinion suggests that “safe-haven” laws enable families to avoid the bad consequences an unwanted pregnancy. However, adoption is not always a good option, and for many—especially poor women—there are no good options. In particular, the history of child protective services in the United States gives Black and Brown women reason to avoid relinquishing their children to the state.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126604390","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
African Americans’ efforts to protect reproductive rights and pursue reproductive justice have taken many forms. This article uses examples from the personal experiences and professional activities of Dr. Dorothy L. Brown—physician, adoptive mother, Tennessee state legislator, and abortion activist—to demonstrate why adoption was never a simple substitute for abortion for African Americans who had to utilize abortion, adoption, foster care, and child welfare institutions to address the needs of vulnerable women and children.
非裔美国人保护生殖权利和追求生殖正义的努力有多种形式。本文以Dorothy L. brown医生的个人经历和专业活动为例，她是一名内科医生、养母、田纳西州立法委员和堕胎活动家，以证明为什么收养从来不是非裔美国人堕胎的简单替代品，他们不得不利用堕胎、收养、寄养和儿童福利机构来解决弱势妇女和儿童的需求。
{"title":"The Debt We Owe","authors":"Kori A. Graves","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0020","url":null,"abstract":"African Americans’ efforts to protect reproductive rights and pursue reproductive justice have taken many forms. This article uses examples from the personal experiences and professional activities of Dr. Dorothy L. Brown—physician, adoptive mother, Tennessee state legislator, and abortion activist—to demonstrate why adoption was never a simple substitute for abortion for African Americans who had to utilize abortion, adoption, foster care, and child welfare institutions to address the needs of vulnerable women and children.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121598218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
: It is not at all clear that making abortion illegal leads to fewer abortions, and still less that it results in more people relinquishing infants for adoption, despite the hopes of anti-abortionists.
{"title":"Making Abortion Illegal Does Not Lead to More Adoptions","authors":"Laura K. Briggs","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0014","url":null,"abstract":": It is not at all clear that making abortion illegal leads to fewer abortions, and still less that it results in more people relinquishing infants for adoption, despite the hopes of anti-abortionists.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124643141","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Rev. of Taking Children: A History of American Terror by Laura Briggs","authors":"John McLeod","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0019","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128424115","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This conversation between artist Lisa Wool-Rim Sjöblom and anthropologist and adoption scholar Eleana J. Kim discusses the US Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in the context of transnational, transracial adoption
艺术家Lisa woolrim Sjöblom与人类学家和收养学者Eleana J. Kim的对话讨论了美国最高法院在跨国、跨种族收养的背景下对Dobbs v. Jackson妇女健康组织的裁决
{"title":"“Would You Rather Have Been Aborted?”: Why Adoption Is Not the Solution to Abortion","authors":"Lisa Sjöblom, Eleana J. Kim","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0017","url":null,"abstract":"This conversation between artist Lisa Wool-Rim Sjöblom and anthropologist and adoption scholar Eleana J. Kim discusses the US Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in the context of transnational, transracial adoption","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"551 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133503122","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
My experience as an adoptive mother who got to know my daughter’s birthmother during her pregnancy demonstrates the inhumanity of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, which turns pregnancy into a fetal delivery system rather than a profoundly transformative experience. This de-humanization undergirds both the Alito/Barrett attitude toward abortion and adoption and the babies who are imagined as refilling diminished stock for the market in babies.
作为一名养母，我在女儿怀孕期间认识了她的生母，我的经历证明了多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织(Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization)一案的裁决是不人道的，它把怀孕变成了一种胎儿分娩系统，而不是一种深刻的变革经历。这种非人性化强化了阿利托/巴雷特对堕胎和收养的态度，也强化了婴儿被想象为填补婴儿市场上减少的库存。
{"title":"We Both Grieved: Adoption, Abortion, and the Callous Indifference of Dobbs","authors":"Susan Bordo","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0013","url":null,"abstract":"My experience as an adoptive mother who got to know my daughter’s birthmother during her pregnancy demonstrates the inhumanity of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, which turns pregnancy into a fetal delivery system rather than a profoundly transformative experience. This de-humanization undergirds both the Alito/Barrett attitude toward abortion and adoption and the babies who are imagined as refilling diminished stock for the market in babies.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125129213","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This essay explores the consequences of the Dobbs decision through the author’s ambivalence about the concept of choice. It weighs conflicting uses of choice to conclude that eschewing rights in favor of choice not only undermined abortion rights, it perpetuated inequities among American families and, finally, sustained simplistic perceptions of adoption that damage the project of adoption studies.
{"title":"Adoption, Abortion, and Ambivalence: Processing the Dobbs Decision","authors":"Cynthia Callahan","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0012","url":null,"abstract":"This essay explores the consequences of the Dobbs decision through the author’s ambivalence about the concept of choice. It weighs conflicting uses of choice to conclude that eschewing rights in favor of choice not only undermined abortion rights, it perpetuated inequities among American families and, finally, sustained simplistic perceptions of adoption that damage the project of adoption studies.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"223 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123030810","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This personal essay speaks to the life-altering impact of adoption, even in the case of a carefully planned and successful open adoption. The essay describes the experience of a birthmother over the course of twenty-two years in an open adoption.
{"title":"The Open Adoption Alternative, A Birthmother’s Perspective","authors":"Amy Seek","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0009","url":null,"abstract":"This personal essay speaks to the life-altering impact of adoption, even in the case of a carefully planned and successful open adoption. The essay describes the experience of a birthmother over the course of twenty-two years in an open adoption.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125518023","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Stories about reproductive choice frame us as competitors in a struggle for access to scarce resources. The repeal of Roe v. Wade is not a gain for prospective adoptive parents. The loss of reproductive freedom for one person is not a win for someone else.
{"title":"You Can Always Adopt","authors":"Janice Schroeder","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0011","url":null,"abstract":"Stories about reproductive choice frame us as competitors in a struggle for access to scarce resources. The repeal of Roe v. Wade is not a gain for prospective adoptive parents. The loss of reproductive freedom for one person is not a win for someone else.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126634375","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, the Court relied on originalism to excise women from the Constitution. Originalism is purposefully backward-looking. With cherry-picked history, the Court created a future that looks to the past: a past where unwed pregnancy is shameful and can be redeemed only by secret adoption. Yet the case has revealed originalism as a flawed method, harmed the legitimacy of the Court, and energized those supporting abortion rights.
{"title":"Originalism: Erasing Women from the Body Politic","authors":"Malinda L. Seymore","doi":"10.1353/ado.0.0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ado.0.0010","url":null,"abstract":"In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, the Court relied on originalism to excise women from the Constitution. Originalism is purposefully backward-looking. With cherry-picked history, the Court created a future that looks to the past: a past where unwed pregnancy is shameful and can be redeemed only by secret adoption. Yet the case has revealed originalism as a flawed method, harmed the legitimacy of the Court, and energized those supporting abortion rights.","PeriodicalId":140707,"journal":{"name":"Adoption & Culture","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133763289","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：