Someone recently raised the question of what happens to the mother who truly does not wish to raise a child. Should she be required to keep the baby in order to prevent adoptee issues from harming the child? I have to recognize the fact that there are those women who have no maternal feelings and who do not wish to raise children. I do not judge them. I respect those who are honest about it and I understand that it's still a world of individuals..different strokes for different folks is a truism.
My question, in return, would be, what would such a woman be doing risking pregnancy, then? In most places, unmarried women from the teen years on up, have access to something we didn't have in my era...safe, effective birth control. My niece (unmarried) recently had that new IUD inserted and is very happy with it. She is a single mom, raising two daughters and doesn't want any more. There is also the option of sterilization which can be done on an outpatient basis. I had my tubal ligation after the birth of my fourth child and it worked like a charm. Even at that time, they would not do the same thing for an unmarried woman in my state. Now, my husband's cousin, age 30 and with no children, who is immersed in her burgeoning career, has opted for a childless life and has had a tubal ligation. More power to her.
If, perish the thought, the birth control method failed, then there is the option, again, of a safe, medical, legal termination of the pregnancy. It is still the law of the land that a woman has this choice. My personal feeling is that I would rather see an embryo aborted than to see a child surrendered and told that his/her mother didn't want the responsibility of a child.
OK, so then we have the women who are, for religious or other reasons, opposed to abortion. Well, then I think someone had better either check with Daddy-kins or their own family members about raising this child in their families of origin or, bite the bullet and give the kid a chance to grow on you. You'd be surprised how those little critters can bore into your heart and lift your spirits.
I'm sorry, but I don't find the lack of maternal instinct a valid reason for surrender of a child for adoption. Women have more autonomy and more information than we BSE moms had. Many of us were not even knowledgeable about things such as birth control or the mechanics of pregnancy and childbirth. And we all know that condoms can fail, even for the young men who were thoughtful enough to use protection.
I know too damn many of these horny Lotharios who really didn't give a rat's ass because they knew that the onus would fall on the girl and all they would get would be a wink and a nudge and a good reason to avoid said girl's male relatives. In my day, as was pointed out by a friend on a support list, men grew up with the Playboy Philosophy and women were airbrushed sex objects, period. They weren't all like that, but I went through enough wrestling matches with dates to know this specious mindset was prevalent.
So, to the women who do not want the responsibility of raising a child...you have your options and you can even have your relationships because you have access to what we didn't. If you know that is how you feel, then be proactive and do something before you enjoy your new boyfriend's favors. So many people decry using abortion as birth control...well, I find it to be damaging to a child and a mother to use adoption for the same reason. This, for the Senior Mother, was society's and our parent's form of birth control and all it has done is create broken hearts and confused adoptees.
If money is a problem, get thee hence to the nearest county Health Department. They will be thrilled to fix you up with whatever you need to stay in a non-fecund state.
Either that, or get thee to a nunnery. Abstinence works, but it sure isn't any fun, especially if you are over 21 and paying your own way. We have seen how well the "Abstinence-only" programs are doing. Human nature just seems to overrule that particular idea.