Adopted Pets/Adopted Kids?
I had the WEIRDEST question asked of me this morning, so I'll pass it on, because it's THAT strange.
Do you muse that the concept of "adopting" pets belittles those involved in adoption (of children), particularly the adoptees?
Do you think the lingo associated beside animal "adoption" should be changed, and a different word used?
Let yer freak flag fly, people. Let's hear it.
I think it would be inappropriately draconian to try to eliminate the word "adoption" from its multiple uses-- it is used within MANY other contexts, and has been for generations-- in rather of one single use that has arbitrarily been decided to be the "correct" one. "Adoption" have NEVER meant only one thing, and to trilby things off, its use for child adoption is actually a more modern construction than some of the others.
Legislatures adopt resolutions. Businesses adopt policies. People adopt political stances, etc. The word has never signified JUST the adoption of children, and it would strike me as abnormal if someone suddenly expected it to be seen that way in this social group, when it never was before.
In terms of the pet entity specifically:
Adopting a pet very much mirrors how human adoption SHOULD be... the pet is homeless and in a shelter or rescue organization, or is a stray. You may own to pay money to adopt a pet, but it is to cover the actual operating costs of the shelter/rescue organization, if that, and they often hold to do additional fundraising. (I paid $50 to bring home my kitten and donated some supplies, but later figure out that I had still come out about $40 ahead of the shelter because of the vet care they have given him, which cost almost double the money they asked from me.)
If a pet is instead bred to be sold or purchased at a pet store, that is a bought pet, not an adopted one. Adopting a pet doesn't mean lately getting one; only animals who NEED homes are appropriately said to be adopted, and if you use the word "adopted" for a pet you bought, animal people will fuss at you or flame you. Only animals minus homes can be called adopted, and other pets are bought.
While I can get why this quiz would come up, you can't narrow the term "adoption" to mean only just what you want it to mean-- including eliminating older meanings of the term-- when it's used contained by many other contexts too.
("You" meaning general you, not the asker within particular.)
I think the problem lies partly in how pets are see as disposable. I've read stories of dogs, who do to age or the fact that they are mutts will almost certainly be euthansied, are taken to a pound because a child didn't clean their room or do their homework. A pet should be a commitment for that pets entire energy, you shouldn't just adopt one and send it back.
When you adopt a pet you are taking within a new family member who for doesn`t matter what reason could not be with their first owners(I'm understanding adopt a pet here to mean from a shelter, rescue, or pound, and buying a pet to be from a pet store(ick) or breeder). While I do not question that children have a better place then dogs the ideal motives(pet or child has no place to say aloud and adopters want a pet or child) and results(pet of child has a new permanent family) for adoption are alike. I think there is more of a problem with adopt-a-highway, adopt-a-monkey, adopted-a-endangered-plant programs, where on earth the commitment is solely finical(as opposed to the time and emotional commitment needed for a child or pet), and temporary.
I've mulled this over and I can't decide how I feel about it. Even though I volunteer near an animal rescue group, I have a hard time saying "adopt a pet" I don't own a problem if someone else uses it, but it's just not something I say. I found myself changing the verbage when we started researching the adoption process and become more educated about it.
However, I do think that the "Adopt a (fill-in-the-blank)" could be curtailed in recent times a bit. Adopt a highway, adopt a park bench, etc.
It is adoption, just the same way we'll call upon a puppy a baby dog sometimes.
I think rather than shifting every aspect of every word used in the adoption forum, and perhaps raising the children who are adopt with a little more resilience, and a little more confidence might be better served.
As an adoptive parent, I've be called a lot of stuff by people on forums here. The truth is, within real life, people don't know the correct language (I was told in foster parenting classes to not use the term First Mom-and I be told to use Birth Mom).
Sticks and Stones..
I don't particularly similar to it but as long as it refers to something that has a pulse I guess its acceptable. I hate ADOPT A HIGHWAY.
I agree with MonkeyKitty...I think the word has multiple uses, and you can't basically eliminate it from our vocabularies. I also think that pets are supposed to be a lifelong part of the family, and it might confuse kids a bit if families are not committed to the pets they adopted. But, good dialogue next to the kids should really eliminate confusion.
Kinda cool, though, that people were discussing it. It's considerate of them to even meditate of it. Source(s): soon to be adoptive parent.
To adopt is to make a contribution a home to something/someone who otherwise is homeless or unwanted. The word adopt is used in many aspects of business. They adopt new policies, etc. Adopt a highway.
When you adopt a pet you are taking an animal who doesn't enjoy a home and providing one.
I don't find it wrong at all. I was adopted and simply so happened my dad was the humane officer for our county, and they also kept foster kids for the county. So I saw the abuse both suffered. From what I saw both deserved a loving home to dance to.
I think it is more insulting to use the word adopt when referring to business policies and highways. At least an animal is a living breathing, loving anyone that needs care and love, There not an inanimate object (highway), or something that can't be see (company policy).
There is a huge difference between pets and people--pets have more rights.
Pets (esp. purebred animals) have documented lineage that's celebrated. They hold open records.
Adoptees are more like indentured servants who's residence never ends, at least in the eyes of most American states.
Answers: LOL Gemma! I have actually asked this cross-question here before! I have been told (by race here that I respect) that I'm just being too sensitive, but I HATE it when people right to be heard they adopted their pet. (I hate adopting a highway, a Cabbage Patch Kid, or anything else that isn't human-related, too.) If adoptees don't have a feeling diminished by it, then great! I just don't like it. I BOUGHT my dog at the pound. I did not buy my son and his adoption is binding. If the dog turned out to be dangerous or whatever, I'd have no problem at adjectives taking her back to the pound. My kid? Nope. I'm in it for life next to him. Source(s): ;)
Thank you for asking this question. As an full-grown adoptee, it gives me the quivers to hear pet adoptions, like human adoption. It hits close to home and leaves me feeling squeemish. I also dislike adopt a highway. Yuck.
well technically ur not adopting a parent, as u buy them after their birth parents have given birth to them anyway...
in that should be a different term for it as its not technically the same thing as adopt children.
I rescued one of my dogs from the pound and purchased two of them from breeders - I adopted my child out of foster care! Source(s): Wording is separated here!
No, the simplest definition of adoption is to "[v] take into one's family" or "to take on as your own" Pets are considered clan too.
It doesn't bother me. What else would you call for it? It IS adoption.
There's one term used within both that bothers me. forever family. I see the pet bios with the whole "I'm looking for my forever family" item, and it bothers me when I hear it in reference to human adoptees.
Interestingly enough, the word for pets before adopting would be rescuing. Now that would not be well-mannered for adoption, to "rescue" the child.
I have a dog from the Shelter, and he is part of my family, I love him to bits.
I adopt three children from foster care.
It is not the same thing.
What is like peas in a pod is when adoptive parents make promised to Dog Shelters or owners and do not follow through, much like those promising to keep adopt open but not following through.
Bring on the thumbs down. Source(s): Became a dog owner when "adopting" my dog.
Became a mom when adopting my children.
Became a birch when adopting innovatory point of views.
I have seen a variety of articles related to this exact subject. One of the sentiments I own seen in the argument against the "adoption" of pets is that it isn't always irremediable or doesn't carry the same level of dedication. How do you explain to an adopt child that even though you adopted this pet you are now returning him (as this happens too repeatedly in my opinion). Does the child come away from the experience feeling they could be returned?
To me adopting a pet is severe. You are making the same life-long commitment to the animal as you make to a child when you adopt. I have address this recently with my daughter because of the movie Bolt. She loves the movie but has be quite distressed by Mitten's (the cat) story of being abandoned by her kinfolk. My daughter and I have one cat, and every time we see this scene my daughter emphatically insists that we would never do this to Spaz. I generally just agree beside her that we would never do this, that it is not a nice thing to do...that Spaz is part of our family forever and we don't do something resembling that to family members.
I have wondered how much my daughter's observable distress to this idea of the cat being abandoned is related to her adoptive status. This have brought home to me why some object to the "adoption" of pets; as too many people find rid of pets when they become inconvienent.
I do notice it and avoid the word when referring to rehoming dogs. Perhaps it's not the word for animals we should change but the word for ethnic group. Perhaps people need to be rehomed rather than adopt. rehomed sounds better because it immediately acknowledges the fact that they be in a home before hand.
But it doesn't bother me so much that it offend me or anything. As a child I think i related to animals much better than people. We get a kitten when I was 2 1/2 years old. The owner told me not to take her because she be the runt and very ugly. So I said I wanted her. I call her Raisin and she was my best friend as a kid. (I did have people friends too lol). She lived until she be 17. I was devistated when she died because she was that one thing I loved that never changed, never forsaken me.
It doesn't bother me although I am not an adoptee so, my answer doesn't really count.
Why is everyone involved with adoption so uptight about vocabulary?
Related Questions:
My adoption is enlarge.. if i close it will the birthfather still hold contact?
What is the difference between coercion and making a fruitless informed outcome?
Foster kindly? UK just?
Do you muse that the concept of "adopting" pets belittles those involved in adoption (of children), particularly the adoptees?
Do you think the lingo associated beside animal "adoption" should be changed, and a different word used?
Let yer freak flag fly, people. Let's hear it.
I think it would be inappropriately draconian to try to eliminate the word "adoption" from its multiple uses-- it is used within MANY other contexts, and has been for generations-- in rather of one single use that has arbitrarily been decided to be the "correct" one. "Adoption" have NEVER meant only one thing, and to trilby things off, its use for child adoption is actually a more modern construction than some of the others.
Legislatures adopt resolutions. Businesses adopt policies. People adopt political stances, etc. The word has never signified JUST the adoption of children, and it would strike me as abnormal if someone suddenly expected it to be seen that way in this social group, when it never was before.
In terms of the pet entity specifically:
Adopting a pet very much mirrors how human adoption SHOULD be... the pet is homeless and in a shelter or rescue organization, or is a stray. You may own to pay money to adopt a pet, but it is to cover the actual operating costs of the shelter/rescue organization, if that, and they often hold to do additional fundraising. (I paid $50 to bring home my kitten and donated some supplies, but later figure out that I had still come out about $40 ahead of the shelter because of the vet care they have given him, which cost almost double the money they asked from me.)
If a pet is instead bred to be sold or purchased at a pet store, that is a bought pet, not an adopted one. Adopting a pet doesn't mean lately getting one; only animals who NEED homes are appropriately said to be adopted, and if you use the word "adopted" for a pet you bought, animal people will fuss at you or flame you. Only animals minus homes can be called adopted, and other pets are bought.
While I can get why this quiz would come up, you can't narrow the term "adoption" to mean only just what you want it to mean-- including eliminating older meanings of the term-- when it's used contained by many other contexts too.
("You" meaning general you, not the asker within particular.)
I think the problem lies partly in how pets are see as disposable. I've read stories of dogs, who do to age or the fact that they are mutts will almost certainly be euthansied, are taken to a pound because a child didn't clean their room or do their homework. A pet should be a commitment for that pets entire energy, you shouldn't just adopt one and send it back.
When you adopt a pet you are taking within a new family member who for doesn`t matter what reason could not be with their first owners(I'm understanding adopt a pet here to mean from a shelter, rescue, or pound, and buying a pet to be from a pet store(ick) or breeder). While I do not question that children have a better place then dogs the ideal motives(pet or child has no place to say aloud and adopters want a pet or child) and results(pet of child has a new permanent family) for adoption are alike. I think there is more of a problem with adopt-a-highway, adopt-a-monkey, adopted-a-endangered-plant programs, where on earth the commitment is solely finical(as opposed to the time and emotional commitment needed for a child or pet), and temporary.
I've mulled this over and I can't decide how I feel about it. Even though I volunteer near an animal rescue group, I have a hard time saying "adopt a pet" I don't own a problem if someone else uses it, but it's just not something I say. I found myself changing the verbage when we started researching the adoption process and become more educated about it.
However, I do think that the "Adopt a (fill-in-the-blank)" could be curtailed in recent times a bit. Adopt a highway, adopt a park bench, etc.
It is adoption, just the same way we'll call upon a puppy a baby dog sometimes.
I think rather than shifting every aspect of every word used in the adoption forum, and perhaps raising the children who are adopt with a little more resilience, and a little more confidence might be better served.
As an adoptive parent, I've be called a lot of stuff by people on forums here. The truth is, within real life, people don't know the correct language (I was told in foster parenting classes to not use the term First Mom-and I be told to use Birth Mom).
Sticks and Stones..
I don't particularly similar to it but as long as it refers to something that has a pulse I guess its acceptable. I hate ADOPT A HIGHWAY.
I agree with MonkeyKitty...I think the word has multiple uses, and you can't basically eliminate it from our vocabularies. I also think that pets are supposed to be a lifelong part of the family, and it might confuse kids a bit if families are not committed to the pets they adopted. But, good dialogue next to the kids should really eliminate confusion.
Kinda cool, though, that people were discussing it. It's considerate of them to even meditate of it. Source(s): soon to be adoptive parent.
To adopt is to make a contribution a home to something/someone who otherwise is homeless or unwanted. The word adopt is used in many aspects of business. They adopt new policies, etc. Adopt a highway.
When you adopt a pet you are taking an animal who doesn't enjoy a home and providing one.
I don't find it wrong at all. I was adopted and simply so happened my dad was the humane officer for our county, and they also kept foster kids for the county. So I saw the abuse both suffered. From what I saw both deserved a loving home to dance to.
I think it is more insulting to use the word adopt when referring to business policies and highways. At least an animal is a living breathing, loving anyone that needs care and love, There not an inanimate object (highway), or something that can't be see (company policy).
There is a huge difference between pets and people--pets have more rights.
Pets (esp. purebred animals) have documented lineage that's celebrated. They hold open records.
Adoptees are more like indentured servants who's residence never ends, at least in the eyes of most American states.
Answers: LOL Gemma! I have actually asked this cross-question here before! I have been told (by race here that I respect) that I'm just being too sensitive, but I HATE it when people right to be heard they adopted their pet. (I hate adopting a highway, a Cabbage Patch Kid, or anything else that isn't human-related, too.) If adoptees don't have a feeling diminished by it, then great! I just don't like it. I BOUGHT my dog at the pound. I did not buy my son and his adoption is binding. If the dog turned out to be dangerous or whatever, I'd have no problem at adjectives taking her back to the pound. My kid? Nope. I'm in it for life next to him. Source(s): ;)
Thank you for asking this question. As an full-grown adoptee, it gives me the quivers to hear pet adoptions, like human adoption. It hits close to home and leaves me feeling squeemish. I also dislike adopt a highway. Yuck.
well technically ur not adopting a parent, as u buy them after their birth parents have given birth to them anyway...
in that should be a different term for it as its not technically the same thing as adopt children.
I rescued one of my dogs from the pound and purchased two of them from breeders - I adopted my child out of foster care! Source(s): Wording is separated here!
No, the simplest definition of adoption is to "[v] take into one's family" or "to take on as your own" Pets are considered clan too.
It doesn't bother me. What else would you call for it? It IS adoption.
There's one term used within both that bothers me. forever family. I see the pet bios with the whole "I'm looking for my forever family" item, and it bothers me when I hear it in reference to human adoptees.
Interestingly enough, the word for pets before adopting would be rescuing. Now that would not be well-mannered for adoption, to "rescue" the child.
I have a dog from the Shelter, and he is part of my family, I love him to bits.
I adopt three children from foster care.
It is not the same thing.
What is like peas in a pod is when adoptive parents make promised to Dog Shelters or owners and do not follow through, much like those promising to keep adopt open but not following through.
Bring on the thumbs down. Source(s): Became a dog owner when "adopting" my dog.
Became a mom when adopting my children.
Became a birch when adopting innovatory point of views.
I have seen a variety of articles related to this exact subject. One of the sentiments I own seen in the argument against the "adoption" of pets is that it isn't always irremediable or doesn't carry the same level of dedication. How do you explain to an adopt child that even though you adopted this pet you are now returning him (as this happens too repeatedly in my opinion). Does the child come away from the experience feeling they could be returned?
To me adopting a pet is severe. You are making the same life-long commitment to the animal as you make to a child when you adopt. I have address this recently with my daughter because of the movie Bolt. She loves the movie but has be quite distressed by Mitten's (the cat) story of being abandoned by her kinfolk. My daughter and I have one cat, and every time we see this scene my daughter emphatically insists that we would never do this to Spaz. I generally just agree beside her that we would never do this, that it is not a nice thing to do...that Spaz is part of our family forever and we don't do something resembling that to family members.
I have wondered how much my daughter's observable distress to this idea of the cat being abandoned is related to her adoptive status. This have brought home to me why some object to the "adoption" of pets; as too many people find rid of pets when they become inconvienent.
I do notice it and avoid the word when referring to rehoming dogs. Perhaps it's not the word for animals we should change but the word for ethnic group. Perhaps people need to be rehomed rather than adopt. rehomed sounds better because it immediately acknowledges the fact that they be in a home before hand.
But it doesn't bother me so much that it offend me or anything. As a child I think i related to animals much better than people. We get a kitten when I was 2 1/2 years old. The owner told me not to take her because she be the runt and very ugly. So I said I wanted her. I call her Raisin and she was my best friend as a kid. (I did have people friends too lol). She lived until she be 17. I was devistated when she died because she was that one thing I loved that never changed, never forsaken me.
It doesn't bother me although I am not an adoptee so, my answer doesn't really count.
Why is everyone involved with adoption so uptight about vocabulary?
Related Questions: