2008 Woodie Awards
The essence of parenting
Katherine Brannon
Issue date: 2/1/02 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
Like many important terms which have been distorted within modern society, the word "parent" has been tagged with a meaning that is trivial in comparison to what it should imply.
Science and technology now dominate our understanding of what a mom and dad are—donors of genetic blueprints. But should we really say that by providing a child with a unique DNA sequence a couple is qualified to receive the title of parent? It seems that an intimate relationship complete with love, anger, caring and nurturing should be the requirement to earn such an honor.
Unfortunately, most people believe quite the opposite. The court system has time and time again ruled in favor of biological parents over adoptive ones. The fact that for years adoptive parents adore, protect and sacrifice for a child is deemed inconsequential in contrast to a chromosomal bond that was formed unconsciously and involved absolutely no effort or attachment between biological parent and child.
There is no denying that hereditary information is essential in determining a person's identity; but it is a natural, automatic process that imparts such data, nothing two individuals can really claim responsibility for. It is those influences after the womb, which parents must carefully exert with consideration, that are to be praised for shaping our being.
A child falling asleep with a blissful smile on his face is most likely not recalling how he received a trait from his father's DNA that made his eyes blue, but rather how he and dad spent all day playing at the park.
The value of seeing parent defined in an emotional rather than biological light is more than just that of a judge's verdict in a custody case. Even as overpopulation threatens to become the biggest challenge our world has faced, adoption is still seen by couples everywhere as a last alternative.
People, when told natural conception is an impossibility, would rather risk the lives and health of their offspring by using dangerous fertility drugs than consider adopting a child who has no home. It appears that this reluctance stems from the idea that a son or a daughter connected to their parents by blood relations is more valid than one with no genetic similarity.
I've often heard people ask one of my good friends, who is adopted, if he knows who his "real" parents are, as if the people who have raised him for eighteen years are some sort of imposters. I know if he were asked he would say his real mom and dad are the people who have given him their love, cared enough to yell, and never given up on him, while any person who tried to claim such a closeness because of biology would be the fraud.
Adoption is an amazing opportunity to enrich the lives of everyone involved. If only more people would realize that being a parent is about providing a home, rather than a genetic blueprint, for a child, adoption might become a first choice rather than last resort.
Science and technology now dominate our understanding of what a mom and dad are—donors of genetic blueprints. But should we really say that by providing a child with a unique DNA sequence a couple is qualified to receive the title of parent? It seems that an intimate relationship complete with love, anger, caring and nurturing should be the requirement to earn such an honor.
Unfortunately, most people believe quite the opposite. The court system has time and time again ruled in favor of biological parents over adoptive ones. The fact that for years adoptive parents adore, protect and sacrifice for a child is deemed inconsequential in contrast to a chromosomal bond that was formed unconsciously and involved absolutely no effort or attachment between biological parent and child.
There is no denying that hereditary information is essential in determining a person's identity; but it is a natural, automatic process that imparts such data, nothing two individuals can really claim responsibility for. It is those influences after the womb, which parents must carefully exert with consideration, that are to be praised for shaping our being.
A child falling asleep with a blissful smile on his face is most likely not recalling how he received a trait from his father's DNA that made his eyes blue, but rather how he and dad spent all day playing at the park.
The value of seeing parent defined in an emotional rather than biological light is more than just that of a judge's verdict in a custody case. Even as overpopulation threatens to become the biggest challenge our world has faced, adoption is still seen by couples everywhere as a last alternative.
People, when told natural conception is an impossibility, would rather risk the lives and health of their offspring by using dangerous fertility drugs than consider adopting a child who has no home. It appears that this reluctance stems from the idea that a son or a daughter connected to their parents by blood relations is more valid than one with no genetic similarity.
I've often heard people ask one of my good friends, who is adopted, if he knows who his "real" parents are, as if the people who have raised him for eighteen years are some sort of imposters. I know if he were asked he would say his real mom and dad are the people who have given him their love, cared enough to yell, and never given up on him, while any person who tried to claim such a closeness because of biology would be the fraud.
Adoption is an amazing opportunity to enrich the lives of everyone involved. If only more people would realize that being a parent is about providing a home, rather than a genetic blueprint, for a child, adoption might become a first choice rather than last resort.
Be the first to comment on this story