Iowa, & Other States, Pay White People To Adopt Black People, Because They're Black

I mentioned this in another thread and felt compelled to finally make this statement here.

I know this 1st hand. I won't give any specific details, but I have seen the paperwork proving it. Reason for stipend: Bi-racial... amount approx. $400/month.

For some behavioral children of color, it's $600/mo or more.
They are paying "white people" to "adopt" bi-racial/black children.

Yeah this is happening, in the good ole USA. Why is racism still alive?
Because of mentalities, and policies, like these.

Any questions?

You have caught my attention.
I'm curious to see where this is going...standing by.

reply to post by JibbyJedi


This is disturbing if it is as you say.
What constitutes a "behavioral" child? If it is what I think, then that would seem like a legitimate incentive for potential parents. A little more for taking in kids who have been in lots of trouble.

But giving bonuses based on the race of the kid, I fail to see how anyone would think this is a good idea. I think it is just creating an issue where it doesn't need to be. Now if say the NAACP was providing these bonuses, that would be understandable.

Having it funded by taxpayers is unacceptable.

This hasn't been asked yet but it probably will... how do I know this?

I am/was a parent of adopted children for several years. They were black and I am considered "white" though I am somewhat olive in color, Portuguese and all that.

My life for the past several years has been taking care of these adopted children, both black and white. I don't mean to set the tone for bias against one color, we also received a stipend for the white blond haired child we take care of as well as the 3 black children.

My point being, they pay white people to adopt, not foster, these children.

I didn't even know that was possible until a few years ago, but it's true. And the reason for the stipend for the black children: bi-racial. That is a real thing.

If you are as embarrassed as I am, please state your opinions. I have.

They consider bi-racial as "special needs".... for real.
The fact that they also pay to adopt white special needs kids is surreal, but they pay more for black, and if the behaviors are extreme, they pay more. Someone could never need to work again if they adopted a few black kids in Iowa.

reply to post by watchitburn

This is disturbing if it is as you say. What constitutes a "behavioral" child? If it is what I think, then that would seem like a legitimate incentive for potential parents. A little more for taking in kids who have been in lots of trouble.

I'm going to get in trouble for saying any of this from the old lady..... but yeah, it's all true.

"Behavioral" usually means - throwing TVs out the window, sexual assault when unattended, temper tantrums, physical restraints, lots of psychological appts., more physical assaults on us, etc.... big bucks to accept those kids, black = more $$$

I am guilty of equally accepting this money , but I feel guilty for it now. They are not special needs children as the stipend insists. I think of them as just as normal as any of us given the same circumstances of Hell we are put through.

I feel guilty and ashamed of accepting such benefits for such ridiculous reasons... "bi-racial".
Unbelievable, but true.

We can't afford to be cut off from their stipend, we've become dependent on it for their survival.

All my statements are true. I can't say anymore. These are my opinions, and I'm risking a lot by speaking out. I have paperwork that says : Reason for stipend: Bi-Racial.

If I need to post the paperwork, we could risk our privacy and survival.
I have it, it's real. I can post it if absolutely necessary. I'm hoping I won't need to because this thread will never become a top thread. No one really cares and this won't get that popular.

That's an issue of it's own.

Just a thought, because I don't have any facts at all, but could the stipend for behavioral kids be for added medical expenses and the costs of replacing TVs thrown through windows?

didn't america have a civil war because white people were buying black people.

now they're paying you.

what if you're black and want to adopt a black kid. does that bonus still apply.

they shouldn't pay anyone to adopt kids. it should be out of a desire to help another human being, not profit.

i'm just waiting for the day when cnn reports some white couple from mississippi having a stable of black kids and getting $14,000 a month while the kids sleep in the barn.

reply to post by JibbyJedi


Adopt, vs. foster care? So they are your family, when they turn 18, you are still their parents?

Where and what would happen to these unwanted children, if you didn't "adopt" them?

Foster care in america is a huge scam, lots of black people take in "special needs" kids, so they have a huge income, but don't take care of the kids, and dump them back on society when they become teenagers and are really dangerous.

I live in Wisconsin and know some of the black people who use if for money, for themselves.

If you're good to these abandoned kids, you're doing everyone, besides the kids, a great service.

I also work at the Wi state mental hospital, so I see these kids later in life.

reply to post by JibbyJedi


Jibby I do not care if your kids are black/white/blue/pink or green I think anyone who adopts any child deserves to be payed monies to help that child develop.
Kudos to you for being a decent human being.
If only more people with one child would adopt instead of having another child of their own.
I would adopt but circumstances do not allow me to.

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
Why is racism still alive?

It's the Illuminati's main tool is to divide us: divide and conquer

Tyrants use racism as the primal wedge to force populations apart, in order to divide and conquer all comers. Every other antagonistic ‘ism’ is another version of a single primordial fear – the fear of the other and of the unknown, embodied in racism and justified by religion and patriotism.

nexusilluminati.blogspot.com...

reply to post by randomname


White people do the foster scam also.

It's a very simple matter to take good quality photos of the paperwork and then use practically any photo editing program on the planet to redact out privacy concerning information with xxxx's, black lines, white lines red lines, or any color lines you want, even rainbows.

Thus, with that, seeing such paperwork, appropriately redacted for your own as well as the children's privacy, would certainly help in establishing the validity of your claim.

Thank you.
It's an interesting thing you've brought up if true and begs many questions.

reply to post by Druscilla


The state of wisconsin will pay people to house some adult "psych" patients - up to the tune of $2,000.00 a month. The one person I know, personally, who attempted this, ended up with the adult female brandishing a knife, attempted to stab the "mom", within 3 months time.

They were talking about building an area in a group home with a safety glass enclosure for this patient. It would be a lot cheaper for the taxpayer's than $150,000.00 a year in a state of wisconsin mental hospital.

There is soooooooooo many of these dangerous, dependent adults out there. Unless you work within the system, you have no idea.

In Wisconsin, there are a number of patients that the counties have built houses for, and staffed, because it's cheaper than leaving them in expensive state institutions. If you are so legally incompetent, that you cannot stand in a trial for murder, child rape, battery, arson, you cannot be put into a prison.

reply to post by Happy1


I'm saying that these adults were "special needs" children at one time. All of them came up through the foster care and mental hospital systems.

Well I was wrong...

Black and Biracial Children

Black and biracial infants and children are considered to have special needs even when they are physically normal and of a normal intelligence. Unfortunately, ethnicity alone is often sufficient criteria to categorize these children as having a "special need." Race becomes a double-edged issue in this case because the policies of nearly every state seem to be saying, by virtue of inclusion in this category of "special needs," that being nonwhite makes a child less appealing to prospective adoptive parents, and the equivalent of a child born with severe physical and mental problems. This policy seems to some experts to reflect the worst sort of racism.

But the label "special needs" also carries a benefit that may be the reason for the silence of the minority and multiethnic community: "special needs" adoptions are not only usually free but often parents also receive payments from the ADOPTION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (subsidies), as well as MEDICAID for the child, and other benefits.

For demographic and other reasons, and despite 20 years of active efforts to recruit minority adoptive applicants, there are apparently still not enough black families interested in or aware of the need for families of many black and biracial children. As a result, many remain in foster homes until they "age out" in adulthood. Some social workers have strongly suggested that adoptive recruitment efforts in black communities have been woefully inadequate and hypothesize that greater numbers of black families would be interested in adoption if they had information on the need and the children. Other black social workers say the problem is not recruitment efforts, the race of staff or inappropriate requirements. (See BLACK ADOPTIVE PARENT RECRUITMENT PROGRAMS.)

Many social workers do not wish to place children in transracial adoptions; however, increasing numbers of adoption agencies and even state agencies are beginning to make these types of placements especially in the face of the MULTIETHNIC PLACEMENT ACT.

TRANSRACIAL ADOPTION is a hotly disputed topic in the field of social work today, and some families have sued agencies for violating their civil rights by refusing to allow them to adopt across racial or nationality lines.

Social workers may be more willing to arrange an adoption for a child who is part Asian and part Caucasian or part Latino, part Caucasian in a Caucasian home. Policies vary from agency to agency and from state to state, in part because Congress has failed to set a common definition.

encyclopedia.adoption.com...

Um...ok........

I guess the special need is that white people usually don't want to adopt black babies.

reply to post by ShotGunRum


Um, I see it as that there isn't enough stable black families to adopt enough of these abandoned bi=racial, or black babies.

reply to post by Happy1


And if there aren't enough black families trying to adopt....who's the largest pool of people adopting kids? White people.

Usually people adopt within their own race for practical purposes.

Which goes back to what I said......

I guess the special need is that white people usually don't want to adopt black babies.

reply to post by ShotGunRum


I wonder what the pay rate is adoption vs. foster care for special needs kids?

reply to post by JibbyJedi


Every child adopted out of foster care is considered special needs regardless of color and receives a stipend. This is to help families who otherwise would not be able to take children and also to help with future expenses that may not always be known at the time of adoption. There is a reason these children were removed from their biological parents and often includes prenatal drug exposure or mental health issues that may not arise until the child is older. Also it helps to keep sibling groups together in families like mine who would otherwise not be able to afford to raise so many children. For instance, I had 3 children. I was called to foster 4 children who were known to me since birth. We did it, but that put me with 7 children aged 5 and under. There is no way I could have afforded the diapers, formula, food, clothing and even the added utilities that this put on our household budget on our salaries. After several years we adopted them when it was obvious they would never be returning home. Even though they were out of diapers, there are now school photos, field trips, birthdays, christmas, rising grocery bills and the list goes on and on. Without the stipend we would not have been able to pull it off financially. Even with the stipend there are times when it is really tough and we have to prioritize. Without the stipend my kids would have been separated from each other and the only family they had ever known. BTW did I mention they are all white?

As for the insinuation that people are "getting rich" doing this, I don't see how that is possible. Before we had so many we had no trouble throwing birthday parties for the kids, new name brand clothes, a pile of presents at Christmas and ate serf and turf once every two weeks. Now, we all live in the same 1500 sq ft 3 br home we did before. For birthdays my kids get 1 gift, cupcakes and juice to take to school and they get to choose what the family has for dinner that night. For Christmas they each get 3 gifts. I shop for clothing at thrift stores and department store blowout sales. My husband works 6 days a week at 2 skilled jobs and I still work full time. I shop for groceries at Aldis. I make my own laundry detergent and we raise our own meat, milk and eggs. Utilizing every cost cutting method available to me there are still times when we eat ramen noodles and I worry about the heat bill. Surf and turf is now an annual Christmas treat.

So, if people are profiting from this....I would like to know how.