Buy a baby! ONLY $30,000 USD each.

I'd like you to consider a "social issue" a friend of mine is facing:

They're good people, couple under 40, nice home, two cars, two decent jobs, respectable citizens, but no kids.

They're sterile.

that's no fun... well its kinda cool but...

Anyway they're serious about wanting kids and they're ready to adopt a baby.

Isn't that a wonderful thing? Adopting a baby... its so noble.

$2500=========="licensed" home study $800+ / year for a few years
$22,000==========lawyer and legal fees
$3,000=============medical expenses for the mother
$2500============travel multiple, sometimes for nothing
$150============advertising expense
$2000===========agency fees

How is it a young couple is supposed to come up with a lump sum of $20-40,000 and then afford to best provide for a newborn?

Doesn't it seem a little odd to you that 50% of all adoptions cost more than a new Dodge 1500 pickup?

The mother gets only medical expenses paid but the lawyer gets to pay the lease on his beach house? Why is it illegal to sell children, yet lawful for lawyers to profit from their exchange?

check out this chart:

www.adoptivefamilies.com...

and these statistics:

ffpa.org...



Are you seeing the same issue I see with the $30,000 legal baby exchange paradigm we're in?

Sri Oracle

My wife's aunt peddles children and she makes stupid good money. This is a new racket we need to get into. I say we just form a business right here, right now and start selling kids. There is money to be made and we will be changing lives.

I agree!

This is just a continuation of run-amok capitalism. Some people make money on cars/trucks. Some make money on twinkies and others make money on legalized human trafficking!

We are supposed to forget the fact that adoption is the best option to some people who would otherwise abort the child, but it takes someone with some wealth to follow through on the adoption.

It's quite obvious that the money to be made is more important than the fate of the child. I know quite a few people who would adopt....if they could afford it.

I do agree that that a ridiculous amount(pales in comparison to raising them glad i dont plan to have one) Especialy when the majority of the amount goes to lawyers.It does bring with it some type of care to the baby making sure they've gone to a good family. Why exactly do the lawyer take such a huge cut?
EDIT: Opps i misread your post.

that is for newborns I suppose.
It's a lot simpler and cheaper
to just drop by an orphanage
and adopt one like the Windsor
family does when they need a
new slav .... errrr I mean child
I hear some times they take home
a half dozen at the time. Never to
be heard from again.

Originally posted by Sri Oracle


$2500=========="licensed" home study $800+ / year for a few years
$22,000==========lawyer and legal fees
$3,000=============medical expenses for the mother
$2500============travel multiple, sometimes for nothing
$150============advertising expense
$2000===========agency fees

How is it a young couple is supposed to come up with a lump sum of $20-40,000 and then afford best provide for a newborn?

edit on 11-7-2011 by Sri Oracle because: (no reason given)

Uh no. It costs a LOT to have a baby. The medical expenses alone are ridiculously expensive. If they wish to adopt a baby, they should take on the costs as if they are having the baby themselves. The extra costs are for an agency to find the "perfect" baby for them = that costs money! The legal fees? Well it is a legal matter. Of course that will cost money. The home visits? Well, the agency needs to pay someone to visit to make sure the couple adopting is fit to adopt a baby. I'm sure the birth mother does not want to give her baby up to just anyone out there.

Seems like a reasonable business agreement to me since having a baby is super expensive. Adopting one is equally as expensive. Why should the birth mother encure all costs if she is giving up her baby to them?

Originally posted by etombo
My wife's aunt peddles children and she makes stupid good money. This is a new racket we need to get into. I say we just form a business right here, right now and start selling kids. There is money to be made and we will be changing lives.

Well if that wasn't a call for "imminent lawless action" I don't know what is. Good luck to you. I'm going to stick with the mighty pen on this issue. I don't think I want to get involved in the baby trafficking market at the moment. Perhaps not for profit?



Sri Oracle

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
Uh no. It costs a LOT to have a baby. The medical expenses alone are ridiculously expensive.

See those small dark brown shoes in the avatar?

I caught them on the way out myself, clamped the cord twice when it quit pulsing and clipped in between.

Happy healthy, FREE. Homeborn. Breast fed. $75 in cloth diapers till potty trained.

Sri Oracle

reply to post by Sri Oracle


I am a mother. It is not cheap.
That is great you could give birth all on your own all for $75. Hardly any are that lucky. Especially when one has to have an emergency c-section or are a high risk pregnancy.

Your experience is not indicative of others or probably the majority.

Originally posted by Bixxi3
Maybe the lawyers should take a smaller role.

Or perhaps just a smaller cut???

Sri Oracle

this is abominable to do this!

- spoken by an adoptee

more to the subject, when we say we will donate our organs, because we want to save a life when we pass on, the money grab on the recipient is also extortion - if they cant pay they dont get my organ(s)

- not what I signed up for........

reply to post by Sri Oracle


Nice if it happens that way but not all births do; babies are expensive to have and raise. Yes, I'm a mother as well. GEL is right.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo

Originally posted by Sri Oracle


$2500=========="licensed" home study $800+ / year for a few years
$22,000==========lawyer and legal fees
$3,000=============medical expenses for the mother
$2500============travel multiple, sometimes for nothing
$150============advertising expense
$2000===========agency fees

How is it a young couple is supposed to come up with a lump sum of $20-40,000 and then afford best provide for a newborn?

edit on 11-7-2011 by Sri Oracle because: (no reason given)

Uh no. It costs a LOT to have a baby. The medical expenses alone are ridiculously expensive. If they wish to adopt a baby, they should take on the costs as if they are having the baby themselves.

I have to disagree with you on that. If a women decides to keep the baby and not go for an abortion or a condom. How much does the mother get for handing over her baby does she make any profit? If she is incapable or unwilling to except her responsibility as a parent then she shouldnt be getting pregnant in the first place!off course i know that isn't always the case but she shouldn't just sell it on .

2 hundred years ago,

a native Indian could give birth
in a teepee and have a mid-wife
assist for about a Deer Pelt.
If the mother died or gave the
child up to another mother
in the tribe, it cost absolutely
nothing.

Basically the same thing happens
within the Amish colonies.

You are NOT paying for the baby,
you paying for the Capitalism.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
Your experience is not indicative of others or probably the majority.

100 years ago (and in many places to date) nearly all babies were homebirths, breast fed, and cloth diapered for under $75. I guess it depends upon your perception of normal and "majority".

Originally posted by boondock-saint
2 hundred years ago,

a native Indian could give birth
in a teepee and have a mid-wife
assist for about a Deer Pelt.
If the mother died or gave the
child up to another mother
in the tribe, it cost absolutely
nothing.

Basically the same thing happens
within the Amish colonies.

You are NOT paying for the baby,
you paying for the Capitalism.

ah yes...let us just force women to birth at home and if they are high risk and they die, who gives a crap...at least they were not giving into capitalisim

Originally posted by Bixxi3
I have to disagree with you on that. If a women decides to keep the baby and not go for an abortion or a condom. How much does the mother get for handing over her baby does she make any profit? If she is incapable or unwilling to except her responsibility as a parent then she shouldnt be getting pregnant in the first place!off course i know that isn't always the case but she shouldn't just sell it on .

edit on 11-7-2011 by Bixxi3 because: (no reason given)

Legally, the mother gets nothing. She is not selling her baby. The costs to have the baby and the legal fees, etc are where the money is going. She does not pocket it then go on some island getaway after giving birth.

Originally posted by Sri Oracle

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
Your experience is not indicative of others or probably the majority.

100 years ago (and in many places to date) nearly all babies were homebirths, breast fed, and cloth diapered for under $75. I guess it depends upon your perception of normal and "majority".

100 years ago, the chance of high risk pregnancy resulting in a healthy baby born alive and the mother living was MUCH less than now.

We live in a modern world. Not 100 years ago. We live in a world where mothers who are high risk can survive and babies that may have died 100 years ago, survive.

But hey, to each their own. If one wants to birth at home for next to nothing, they can. But do not criticize those who chose to live with modern conveniences.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
She does not pocket it then go on some island getaway after giving birth.

Right... the lawyer gets to do that.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
ah yes...let us just force women to birth at home and if they are high risk and they die, who gives a crap...at least they were not giving into capitalisim

you give absolutely no credit to the
skills of mid-wives.

Over half of the C-Sections today
could be avoided by a mid-wife
turning the head of the baby or by
a manual adjustment of the babies
body. And no scars !!!

Native Indian tribes flourished
in America for centuries with no
hospitals and no doctors.

It may be a lil harsher than going in
and getting a nice hotel room with
a hospital bed and lots of high priced
pain medication that the Indians made
from leaves and roots for free.

And the white man thinks he improved
on that free system ???

He just got rich off of it.