Friday, February 01, 2008


After having spoken with many adoptees, adoptive parents, and natural parents, I don't dig LDS Social Services and their umbrella of adoption agencies. There is just something that terrifies me about Mitt Romney. He drug his feet with the Massachusetts bill. Sadly that state still settled for something less.

After being in the United States Army for several years, I learned early on. Leave no man behind. Some notes about Mitt Romney have been floating around the internet. I do apologize to who ever wrote them. I want to give you credit but there is no name attached. Even though John McCain is an adoptive parent, I would rather him as the Republican candidate.


Regardless of your political leanings, I feel it is important to submit the following material to you regarding one of the major candidates for the Presidency, Mitt Romney. It would not be fair to postpone releasing this until party nominations have been made; Republicans still have Super Tuesday to make their choice for their party's nominee.1. Whatever your position is on abortion, you should know that Romney's efforts to prevent abortions designate only adoption as the “other alternative.” No mention is made in his platform plank of helping women with problem pregnancies remove the barriers they feel are preventing them from parenting their own children.

See Romney's plan to promotion adoption – (11-7-07)“I think it's a good idea for moms to be able to see the development of their child," Romney said."I think it will tend to encourage adoption where they were considering abortion as the other alternative.”

Romney supports adoption as a money-making enterprise. Read this: For-profits to compete in child placement,-- (9-17-06) describing how Romney helped to sneak in a provision in Massachusetts legislation, without discussion or a vote, that gives business enterprises like Massachusetts Mentor, a for-profit enterprise, access to child care contracts through the state.

Another piece worth reading – reaction to the previous item, plus mention of how Romney let NCFA influence his response to the Massachusetts access-to-OBC bill: Romney adoption stance questioned . (11-17-07)3 Without discussing Mormon religion in general, we need to be keenly aware that its agency, LDSFS, promotes three adoption-related policies that are totally contrary to those of the general adoption community:

a. Putative father registries, rather than notification of birth fathers of the pregnancy/birth involving their children, as painfully illustrated by the current attempt by Idaho birthfather Matt Tenneson to gain custody of his child, placed by LDSFS.

b. Pressuring unmarried pregnant women, at least in their own community, to surrender their children to adoption:• "Under President Gordon B. Hinckley, the First Presidency recently affirmed PresidentKimball's words, saying that if establishing a successful marriage is not possible, placing an infant for adoption through your bishop and LDS Family Services is "best for the child and enhances the prospect for the blessings of the gospel in the lives of all concerned. For the young woman who chooses this option, blessings include a better chance for full repentance, a more successful economic and social life, and a better chance of marrying in the temple.”

"A child needs both a mother and father who provide love, support, and all the blessings of the gospel. Every effort should be made in helping those who conceive out of wedlock to establish an eternal family relationship. When the unwed parents are unable or unwilling to marry, they should be encouraged to place the child for adoption, preferably through LDS Social Services. Placing the infant for adoption through LDS Social Services helps ensure that the baby will be reared in a faithful Latter-day Saint family and will receive the blessings of the sacred sealing covenant.

(See Temple Sealings) "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.

(See Self-Sufficiency) In many instances, an unwed parent is not able to provide the stable, nurturing environment so essential for the baby's wellbeing.When deciding to place the baby for adoption, the best interests of the child should bethe paramount consideration. Such a decision enables the unwed parent to do what is best for the child and enhances the prospect for the blessings of the gospel in the lives of all concerned."(Signed by Ezra Taft Benson, Gordon B. Hinckley, Thomas S. Monson) Participation in/complicity with NCFA in fighting legislation that would give adoptees access totheir own birth certificates


Anonymous said...

Amy, ALL of the super religious candidates — those who want undo the separation of church and state, abolish abortion, and prevent gay marriage — are dangerous to family preservation and open records.

Anonymous said...

Yuk! This is seriously sick. Thank you for drawing attention to this "religious view".

Anonymous said...

As a resident of Massachusetts, I can attest to what a complete idiot Mitt Romney is. He has done absolutely nothing for this state and will change his views depending on the political winds. He doesn't mention that he disappeared from the state half way through his term to go test the presidential waters.

I am no fan of Ronald Regan but listening to Mitt compare himself makes me want to puke.

Amyadoptee said...

I think Mitt Romney scares me the most because of the mothers and fathers that have been hurt by his religion.

Huckabee scares my husband even more so as well. I have still not decided which candidate to support. Hillary is so wishwashy as is Mccain. I am seriously interested in Barack just because he is into change but I worry that he being the first black/muslim man in office, that he just might be shot in office. I want a president who will do what is right for his country and his people.