Question by Karlyna: Should it be okay for the states to “market” children via Wednesday’s Child or internet photolistings?

The adults are either making that decision for the children (likely in foster care due to neglect or abuse) or the children are making that decision as children – neglected or abused children, desperate for a family, who may not be thinking in their right young minds. How will they feel when they are older about being on the internet like that?

Best answer:

Answer by rachael
i just love the ones that have ‘discounted’ prices next to the kids pics. how pathetic is that? i hope those kids never ever see those postings.

to answer your question….NO. is should not be ok. not ever

Add your own answer in the comments!

9 thoughts on “Should it be okay for the states to “market” children via Wednesday’s Child or internet photolistings?”

  1. I think so. Many people never consider adoption and those that do almost never consider foster children. Listing them online and through things like Wednesday’s child actually get a few people involved. It actually helps kids find homes. Theses kids need permanent homes and without awareness many of them will age out .
    Children who age out are more likely to be homeless. A matter a fact there are some studies that show that 40-50% are homeless in the first year 60% are homeless at some point in their life. Their legal ties to their family are cut and they have no one to help them. I can’t imagine being 18 19 without help from my parents. I needed them many times. I can’t imagine not having that support but that is what happens to children who age out. They legally have no family and the ones they have abused and or neglected them.

  2. I feel it is exploitative. I don’t think children’s pictures should be used for purposed such as that. They have been through enough, they don’t need to be paraded about cyberspace like the fair’s prize lamb. Plus, you can’t control where those pictures go, and it may encourage other people to try to exploit the child.

  3. You know, this is something that I struggle with, a little.

    On one hand, sometimes a face, name and story might be enough to help someone who would otherwise not have considered adoption, to think about it.

    OTOH, there are safety issues to consider. There are privacy issues to consider. And unless the child is old enough to really comprehend the situation and give consent to having their name and face on the internet, it’s adults deciding to do it.

    I’m not comfortable with it.

  4. This is a Topic that causes me very mixed emotions for a number of reasons.

    My first feelings are that the children Marketed this way are generally considered the Most Difficult Placements–meaning they may never be adopted unless they are made known to as many people as possible.

    My next feeling is that Too Many people make a decision to Adopt a Waiting, Older, Special Needs, or Sibling group Based On Emotion and the vast majority who consider it do not end up completing the Process. And, these kinds of marketing ideas tend to stir-up emotion causing too many people to Seek Out information, and use valuable resources before they conclude they are not right for this dedication.

    The bottom line however is–that Any Child in Foster Care seen on these shows, or listed on the Internet IS a Child that is Legally Free for Adoption and currently sitting in a home or treatment center as a Ward of the State without any legal parent responsible to give a care about them…

    So, as offended as I often may be about the completely UNREAL disclosure of details with the bubbles and delightful interviews of children without Anyone who can or will care enough to take on the responsibility as the Best Advocate for their Needs–I close my eyes and just Pray the children I see find the security every child deserves to grow up with….

    …until there are NO MORE Waiting Children how will Anyone ever hear their Vioce?

  5. The kids that they show on the news are in the foster system and
    are looking for a forever family, but its not an agency its the state so
    they dont cost anything, maybe just the papperwork At least thats
    the info I got from a friend who went to Welfare services, she paid 350 dls for paperwork and background check.
    Agencies are the ones that should be monitored, they do tend to
    advertise or market these children, specially if they are handicapped
    or older children are harder to take out of the system, so if they live
    outside of the country like hondruras, Mexico, they will give discounts
    if they have a disability, its sad but how else can they get these
    infants out of there. Im not against paying for their needs or their
    paperwork, cause nothing in this world is for free, but the excessive
    cost which middle class families cannot aford, like 20-50 k is just
    ridiculous. And if you dont get the child because themother backs out
    you re out that money. Thats where the police or some kind of
    intervention should be made to investigate these agencies.

  6. No. It wouldn’t be okay for any other parent to engage in this behavior. Why should the state be granted special privileges to advertise their children?

    ETA: I do not find Machiavellian arguments pursuasive. The ends do not justify the means.

  7. I concur with Happy Mom.

    Often times listing children in the media/internet/picture trains, etc. is THE WAY a child finds permanency. Though I do not beleive people act merely on emotion, felt at a vulnerable time as they surfed the Web or were watching the news and then a few weeks later they have a child in their home and life. The process is lengthy and when the initial inquiry is based upon emotion, the prospective family backs out or closes their inquiry.

    States are charged with getting kids out of foster care and into permanent homes. When there has been no kin or identified placement found within the state by traditional means….then what is there to do. I do not beleive it is a marketing scheme… is a way to achieve permanency for kids and if one child can find a home through the web or the media, then it is worth it.

    Older kids have a choice and are given the opportunity to speak their voice. If they say no….then no is no. If they are okay with it, they approve the picture and they approve the information given.

    In my state, many kids have found homes through non-traditional means, far better than sitting in foster care.

    I am sure this is a thumb downer…but when you see foster kids day after day who are legally free and they sit and sit and sit…..and then are placed on the internet and within months are placed in a home and are adopted…..makes one a beleiver.

    When there are no more kids who in foster care without identifed placements, then there will be no more need for Media presentations with foster kids.

    How many foster kids you gonna adopt??

  8. Um, no.

    Ick. If you’re infertile get over it already. Desperation is ugly and pathetic.

    These people’s kids are gonna go running SCREAMING back to their REAL bio parents.

  9. I honestly think it’s one step above the kids who were forced into porn, those images of them will be on the internet forever. Can you imagine how you would feel if you or someone close to you was randomly surfing the net and ran across pictures of you in either a porn flick or on a wanted poster? That’s all that is is a wanted poster. I would imagine it would bring back all sorts of feelings that no one would want to deal with or explain.


    and wrong on so many levels.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.