Posted on 04/02/2014 6:17:50 PM PDT by Morgana
FULL TITLE: Abandoned: Heartbreaking pictures of parents leaving their children in China’s notorious 'baby hatches'
They are truly heartbreaking scenes. The moments of despair as parents cling to their children for one last time before abandoning them in China's so-called baby hatches.
A father kisses his child, her face hidden in a blanket. A mother holds her hooded baby as their shadows are cast upon the last door they will pass through together. Another collapses to the ground, reaching out to touch her son for the last time.
They are the final moments of lives torn apart, often by poverty or an inability to cope with disease or disability.
“My baby cannot take care of itself when it grows up,” one woman cries, explaining that her infant has Down’s syndrome. ‘I just want my baby to survive,” she tells the Information Times newspaper based in Guangzhou. She and an accompanying female friend leave, both in tears.
(Excerpt) Read more at scmp.com ...
Any evidence these kids aren’t being used as organ donors and disposed by the state?
That’s my question also
Government forces abortions in China, literally have armed officers drag the women to get them
Government forces abortions in China, literally have armed officers drag the women to get them.
And in America doctors are paid to murder babies by stabbing them in their heads and sucking their brains out and our government supports them with tax payers money.
Yea we are so much better that’s why we can be so critical of others doing the same thing but in a different way.,
Wow just wow.
I can’t be critical of both?
If your intent was to critical of both they I apologize.
Have a great day.
Our daughter will be 13 this year...we adopted her in 2002. Our son is 11 and he was adopted in 2006.
Just curious, why do people not adopt directly from this country (USA)?
I got physically ill. I had to grab my waste basket thinking I was going to throw up.
They do.
If you are wealthy it is easier in this country.
I know of one couple that went through three heart breaking foster parenting experiences before they were given complete custody of
a little boy.
Each time they had intention of adopting an abused or neglected child
and each time the parents got the child back.
So, in answer to your question, it is more difficult and or, it is more expensive.
Twice the blessings.
Cool, we may have been there at the same time in 2002.
We were there in May 2002 our daughter will actually be 13 in June.
Do you watch NCIS?
There is a character in it that he and his wife want to adopt a child. They found a birth mother, probably paid for her medical expenses and then, after the baby was born, she decided to back out.
They have no recourse.
If they try to go through the foster system they will be going through the same thing possibly several times.
And even once the adoption is over you can not rest easy because the birth mother or birth father may decide to contest the adoption for whatever reason.
People get tired of being jerked around by the system. Once you start looking at it you realize, especially if you are an older couple that you will be much better off going overseas. Less heartbreak. Less time. And less money in the end.
baby hatch opened on January 28. It was forced to shut its doors after less than two months as staff were overwhelmed with 262 abandoned youngsters............All were ill or disabled.
50% had cerebral palsy,.... 15% Down’s syndrome.... and 12% per cent were suffering congenital heart disease....... Almost one in 10 died.
Clearly this is not just people who do not have the means to care for these children. Rather those who will not as well.
I read another article some time ago about these “hatches”......many babies left were mothers who found themselves pregnant and already with children, therefore used these to simply forgo their responsibilities.
The culture there is very different then ours to be sure, and this is just the way they have chosen to solve it.
50% with cerebral palsy speaks volumes IMO. In the USA they would be aborted.....but there is no way we know what happens to these children once they are dropped off.
Bottom line, regardless of the economic conditions of the parents etc...it is still abandoning your child.
It’s better than abortion.
The Left has been very effective at telling this lie. Sadly, many conservatives have fallen for it. All the stories we were taught in government school pointed to the need for government because the urbanization and industrialization of America where so dehumanizing and inhumane.
Then come the necessary evidences of long hours in the factory, urban living densities, children working and low pay. What the unobservant or historically ignorant don’t know is that all these people came to live and work in cities and their factories of their own free will and choice. What the ignoramuses don’t know is that farm life is 24/7, low return, high risk work.
Lose a body part in the urban jungle and you can be at a hospital in minutes. Lose one in the field and you’ll likely bleed out and die. Rural poverty is broadly dispersed versus its concentration in cities. Worse, our idealized nostalgia over the bucolic history of the United States warps our view of cities.
The people of the prairie were working for a better life. That was to be had in free land and hard work. As soon as cities sprung up, they willingly left the forests and fields and moved into cities. Nobody collected them by force. Why would people willingly move to cities and work in factories? Because it improved their lives. They know it. We’ve forgotten it.
We've absolutely forgotten it, which is why we see some incredibly absurd things written on this thread. My father grew up on a farm during the depression and he tells stories about every one of his siblings dreaming of leaving the farm for the city to work in a factory....or anywhere. The agrarian lifestyle that brain dead liberals wax nostalgic about was a hard and miserable life.
Each and every one of them (9 children in all) were successful and found a way to climb up from the factory floor and provide an exceptional living for their families.
I'm a fan of Ayn Rand, and it's in discussions like this that I recall one of many favorite quotes:
Compared to the centuries of precapitalist starvation, the living conditions of the poor in the early years of capitalism were the first chance the poor had ever had to survive. As proof – the enormous growth of the European population during the nineteenth century, a growth of over 300 percent, as compared to the previous growth of something like 3 percent per century.
Great quote and true. Despite its improvement and being taught more broadly, people just don't get economics. If there were one fact I wish people would understand it is this: scarcity is the normal and steady state of human existence.
That is once your preferences have changed and you've moved "up" economically, scarcity exists again. What has changed is your preferences. Even FReepers believe that trade only happens in a surplus. That's a Marxist perspective.
It is preferences, not surpluses that drive exchange. Out at dinner with another couple, each tastes their ordered meal and doesn't like it. They then trade plates, each now satisfied enjoys the meal. Trade existed without there being a fifth surplus meal. The idea that preferences drives trade is the most critical one to understand in economics.
The farm hand trades a less preferred life on the farm for a more preferred urban life at the factory. As long as you can choose you can use your preferences.
The other critical fact to understand about scarcity is that shortages are abnormal states. Shortages are everywhere and always a government phenomenon. What a shortage means is that natural trades and the underlying preferences are not being satisfied. There is some intervention in the market by force yielding this outcome.
Scarcity is normal, shortages are created via force and preferences drive trade. If people understood those and applied them so many bad policies would end.
Things like poverty occur only in the context of government. It is literally a shortage of wealth. In a free market poverty is a preference. It would end as people's preferences change. We're being lied to about the cause of poverty. Government is the cause.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.