5 ms·

What’s the alternative? I assume that you’re not suggesting that one signs up for adoption and gets assigned a random child. So the alternative is agents with a

by gene91 5y ago

What’s the alternative? I assume that you’re not suggesting that one signs up for adoption and gets assigned a random child. So the alternative is agents with access to the inventory (children) and clients (potential parents). I don’t understand why that’s better than letting clients browsing inventory by themselves.

dymk 5y ago
Referring to children as "inventory" is implies all sorts of negative things. Adoption isn't the same as a transaction where you peruse the "inventory" for a new hot tub or something. Those interested in adoption should be _so_ interested, that they're willing to go meet in-person with an agency who can introduce them to the children.
- ipaddr 5y ago
  The biggest problem agencies have is getting parents to come down. By advertising with pictures people will emotionally bond with a specific child which will prompt them to go through the long, expensive agency adoption process. Charities use images of children to sell the charity.
  - dymk 5y ago
    Yeah, that still strikes me as gross and undignified, and I don't buy the premise that you need to show specific images of specific children that are available for adoption _right now_ to increase the rate at which parents come down. > Charities use images of children to sell the charity. Note that they're not selling the children.
- brabel 5y ago
  > Those interested in adoption should be _so_ interested That's what everyone would like... except that even if they are sloppy (not saying that they are) there's still a lot of children that are never going to be adopted. Do you believe that's better? Spoiler: it's not, because you're making sure most children will have a disfunctional adult life (growing up without a family is extremely hard) instead of allowing more children to live a normal life, but with the increased probability of a few living with bad parents (the number of cases where that's worse than no family at all is probably very small).
Ekaros 5y ago
I have no issue with clients browsing inventory. But for privacy reasons that inventory should be very well controlled. Preferably in person. So no online access.

by gene91 5y ago

dymk 5y ago

Referring to children as "inventory" is implies all sorts of negative things. Adoption isn't the same as a transaction where you peruse the "inventory" for a new hot tub or something. Those interested in adoption should be _so_ interested, that they're willing to go meet in-person with an agency who can introduce them to the children.

ipaddr 5y ago
The biggest problem agencies have is getting parents to come down. By advertising with pictures people will emotionally bond with a specific child which will prompt them to go through the long, expensive agency adoption process. Charities use images of children to sell the charity.
- dymk 5y ago
  Yeah, that still strikes me as gross and undignified, and I don't buy the premise that you need to show specific images of specific children that are available for adoption _right now_ to increase the rate at which parents come down. > Charities use images of children to sell the charity. Note that they're not selling the children.
brabel 5y ago
> Those interested in adoption should be _so_ interested That's what everyone would like... except that even if they are sloppy (not saying that they are) there's still a lot of children that are never going to be adopted. Do you believe that's better? Spoiler: it's not, because you're making sure most children will have a disfunctional adult life (growing up without a family is extremely hard) instead of allowing more children to live a normal life, but with the increased probability of a few living with bad parents (the number of cases where that's worse than no family at all is probably very small).

Ekaros 5y ago

I have no issue with clients browsing inventory. But for privacy reasons that inventory should be very well controlled. Preferably in person. So no online access.