iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Dina McQueen

GET UPDATES FROM Dina McQueen
 

Overpopulation, The Environment and Adoption: An Urgent Call to Action

Posted: 09/01/11 06:27 PM ET

"I respect the secrets and magic of nature. That's why it makes me so angry when I see these things that are happening, you know, that every second, I hear, the size of a football field is torn down in the Amazon. I mean, that kind of stuff really bothers me. ... I love the planet. ... I love it. ... People are always saying, 'Oh, they'll take care of it. The government'll... Don't worry, they'll...' 'They' who? It starts with us. It's us, or else it'll never be done."
--Michael Jackson, "This Is It"

Michael Jackson's film "This Is It" astonished me. I had no idea that he was such an environmentalist, or how his creative life was fueled by his passion for Planet Earth. His posthumous film touched a place in me that instigated a call to action. Thus this short piece on how to heed M.J.'s warning: do something before it's too late.

With the advent of vaccines, technology and industrialized ways of living, life span has increased since our grandparents were kids. By 2050, it is estimated that the planet will house more than 9 billion people. Though birth control is available to those who know about it and choose to use it, it is my belief that educating our youth about creating a family must now include the topics of overpopulation, the environment and adoption. It is no longer OK to only discuss safe sex with our hormone-driven, adolescent population. We now must, if our planet is to survive, show our children how poverty, environmental disasters and garbage are a direct result of too many people living on Planet Earth, consuming -- at least in the Western world -- far more than our share of resources.

My 4-year-old, Ethiopian-born daughter lives as a privileged American, with all the perks that come with this. She uses the computer to play "Curious George" and "Mickey Mouse Clubhouse" games. She eats macaroni-and-cheese for dinner, and if she swallows the broccoli on her plate, she is rewarded with an ice cream sandwich for desert -- all organic. Her best friend at preschool, the 4-year-old son of a surgeon and a scientist, got an iPad for his last birthday. His grandmother gave it to him, under the guise that she wanted to be able to Skype with him often. And, as hypocritical as this may make me sound, I thought this was really cool.

This one 4-year-old will eventually trade in his iPad for the next new thing. My daughter will, no doubt, eventually get hers, as well. The old equipment, if not disposed of consciously (and this takes some homework; ask your local Best Buy for help), will end up in a landfill. We are two families among billions who may think about where our used items end up being dumped, but may not always take the time to do the right thing. This thought alone has been enough to kick my rant about choosing adoption first into the highest gear possible.

I'm frightened about our future. And I want every child to be scared, too. Because sometimes fear is the only motivator that clicks the mind over and presents new ideas that may, generations down the road, make a difference.

Included in my book, "Finding Aster: Our Ethiopian Adoption Story" (February 2011, Inkwater Press), are three appendices, one that focuses on the topic of overpopulation. Researching for this section, I came upon a "belief" that is the basis for a movement called the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, or VHEMT. Rather than viewing human life as something to be destroyed, they actually consider their movement as "the humanitarian alternative to human disasters."

In an article published in the San Francisco Chronicle, Les Knight, the spokesperson for VHEMT, discusses his passion for Planet Earth. Reading the author's thoughts as he interviews Knight, I was struck with how similar Knight's feelings about Earth are to Michael Jackson's. But unlike Jackson, who used music and film to illustrate his point, Knight employs words. And though there is something quite powerful about seeing an image and feeling emotive music to get a message into one's consciousness, there is also strength in reading a clear and direct message. I have found a "like mind" in Knight, and know that this ideology about voluntarily deciding to stop breeding is controversial. However, it can also be a seed-planter.

Several years after this article was published, Knight provided a statement for my book, "Finding Aster." In part, it reads:

Adopting existing children avoids adding another wildlife habitat usurper to the excessive billions of us, provides parenting opportunities for couples who feel qualified, and gives life-saving care to children who would be languishing in miserable conditions. Until we eliminate the inhumane conditions which create orphans, an urgent, unfilled need for compassionate parents continues unabated. Adoption isn't a complete solution, it's simply the best we can do with a deplorable situations.

Though I did not start out on the path of adoption, or writing a book about the experience, to promote adoption as a way to help heal the planet, as Oprah often has said (quoting Maya Angelou), "When you know better, you do better." It is my greatest hope that presenting the idea of choosing adoption as a first choice rather than a last option will plant knowing seeds in fertile minds and encourage people who inhabit this planet to make choices that perhaps they might not have made.

Maybe if a woman deeply feels the desire to give birth, she will do it one time, then decide that adopting to grow her family is the most conscious choice to make. Maybe if a couple finds that they cannot sustain a pregnancy, rather than go find a fertility doctor to prescribe drugs that possibly will make her pregnant, these people will decide that adoption is the better option.

The time has come to see that choosing adoption as a first choice, not a last option, for growing your family is the right thing to do -- for the planet, for a woman's body, and for the parentless children who ache for family.

 
 
 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 67
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
06:47 PM on 09/06/2011
Dina, although I understand the sentiments behind your argument, the environmental basis of what you're saying just doesn't hold water. First, 'overpopulation' as you call it, has long since been debunked as an environmental myth. The production, consumption and circulation practices found in industrialized nations are the leading cause of most of our environmental problems- from deforestation to desertification, toxic pollution of the land, air and oceans, dying coral reefs, and particularly climate change. And it's not even individual consumers that are most to blame; corporations and militaries are. Militaries are the leading global environmental polluter in every corner of the earth; the U.S. military alone is the world's leading consumer of oil and producer of greenhouse gas emissions. But it is true that American consumer practices are a significant part of the problem too- so why on earth do you think you've done something good for the environment by bringing a child (who likely already had a family) from a low resource consuming country, to a high consuming country? That child's carbon footprint will now be at least 20 times what it would have been in Ethiopia. Not to mention the fact that the international adoption market (yes, it is a market) does nothing to alleviate poverty, strengthen families, or support women's and families' ability to effectively parent their children. Again, although I can understand that you mean well, this article COMPLETELY misses the mark.
11:45 PM on 09/06/2011
Have you seen the BBC doc series "How many people can live on planet earth"? Unless you can answer in the affirmative, your comments betray your ignorance. I am not not trying to communicate in a cruel or condescending manner. But I really do think that you, my friend, have missed the mark.

Please do not assume to know the conditions that surrounded my daughter being given up for adoption. Please do not assume that you know what it is like for many of the Ethiopian children who have been brought to a life where medical care, food, and shelter are not a luxury, if available at all. Please do not assume that I am not teaching my child to respect the planet and teach others to do the same. Please do not assume that my husband and I are not strong earth advocates, or politically for anything but that which best, to the best of our abilities, serves our planet.

Have you been to Ethiopia? Have you been involved in Hague investigations of corruption? How many birth children do you have? Do you produce garbage? Do you vote? Your comment, though perhaps well-intentioned, assumes that I am worldly ignorant and emotionally bankrupt. Until you take the time to read all that I have written on my blog, until you have read my book and personally contacted me at info@findingaster.com to discuss your "issues" with my work, I cannot take you seriously.
12:57 PM on 09/07/2011
Hi Dina,
No, I don't need to watch a BBC documentary to learn more about the earth's resources, and whether and how they can sustain human life. I have a college degree in environmental science. If you get your education through television specials, you have bigger issues than can be addressed in this conversation.

I make no claims to knowing the circumstances surrounding your child's birth, adoption, living conditions in Ethiopia, etc. My point was to complexify an issue that you are reducing to a frightening level of simplicity. And by the way, I have been to Ethiopia, and I've witnessed grinding poverty, but suggesting that food, medical care and shelter are not available at all is quite a stretch.

I have no children, I produce trash, most of which I recycle, I vote, and i have no intentions of reading your book or contacting you to engage further in this ridiculous conversation. Thanks for the insults; they weren't enlightening.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Just4theHalibut
09:02 PM on 10/30/2011
Funny how none of the multitudes of scientists and environmentalists I've worked with professionally as a natural resources manager for the last 4 decades have "debunked overpopulation as an environmen­tal myth". I do know there are a lot of new soft-science "environmental science" degrees and programs out there that are making that ideological claim. They sort of remind me of the climate-change deniers.
11:30 PM on 10/30/2011
Thank you for this comment. My presentation became an argument that I did not know held enough controversy to argue.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gaye Tannenbaum
Apprentice adoptee activist
01:35 PM on 09/04/2011
IbnZayd said: "The problem in the world is not lack of resources, or lack of space; it is the unequal distribution thereof."

Exactly.

How does removing an existing child from subsistence conditions and placing him in a resource devouring culture help the environment? Not only will the child grow up in that culture, he will presumably have (or adopt) children of his own and they will have (or adopt) children... This is progress?

Better to reduce the amount of resources you (and your family) are using. If you adopt an existing child, you are (temporarily) reducing the amount of resources needed in the child's modest homeland while doing nothing about the amount of resources being depleted to support yet another First World citizen.

At first glance, adopting rather than breeding your own would appear to impact absolute population numbers - but a much greater impact would result from universal access to birth control.
03:58 PM on 09/04/2011
Gaye Wrote: "At first glance, adopting rather than breeding your own would appear to impact absolute population numbers - but a much greater impact would result from universal access to birth control."

Agreed. And thank you for pointing this out.

Please remember, also, my main point is to EDUCATE our YOUTH, not dissuade the adult population from growing their families. Education must begin early early early on. From recycling, reusing, growing our own foods, buying locally, passing on, not throwing out, and avoiding products purchased outside of one's community and/or country, to considering not procreating, or adopting existing children to create a family.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gaye Tannenbaum
Apprentice adoptee activist
08:17 PM on 09/04/2011
I agree except for the "adopting existing children" point. I fail to see how that has a greater, or even equal, impact compared to just NOT raising children (their own or pre-owned) in a First World culture.
09:05 AM on 09/04/2011
The "paradigm shift" that is required is for those of the First World to realize that it is their very consumption-based lifestyle that causes the political, economical, cultural, and social destruction seen in the Third World. To then come to the "aid" of those so afflicted is unfortunately metaphorical to a pyromaniac firefighter expecting praise for their act of altruism. Those who survive the devastation turn back and see the gasoline can and box of matches in the firefighter's hand and don't buy it. I've left the core of Capital and have returned to the periphery, from where I was adopted a half century ago. I can report back that there is a revolution going on, yes; but it is certainly not coming from the oppressors, but from the oppressed. Their message is simple: you don't get to speak for them. And you will hear their Voice soon enough, loud and clear.
04:42 AM on 09/04/2011
Dina, as a fellow adoptive parent, I agree that society could use a paradigm shift regarding how we define family. I share your frustration that some people see adoptive families as 'less than' those that have been created by biology.

However, I fundamentally disagree that adoption is any way to address the issues that face our planet. The problem is not just the number of people, but the people multiplied by how much we all consume. When you (and I) adopted, we did not create new life, but we DID create new little first-world consumers. The rainforest doesn't care whether the iPad is being used by your bio kid or an Ethiopian kid, surely? It just. makes. no. difference.

I also disagree with Knight's statement that adoption "gives life-saving care to children who would be languishing in miserable conditions." The wait for adoption for a healthy infant from Ethiopia is more than a year - from China, more like five. There are many, many more parents waiting for these infants (and toddlers) than there are infants waiting for parents. And those of us who DID adopt infanst don't get to use the stats about US teens in foster care as if they are anything to do with OUR adoptions.

I am NOT anti adoption, or anti international adoption (since that's what I did!) but I think when we do it, we need to be really clear that it saves neither the planet nor a child.
11:15 AM on 09/04/2011
Adopting a child, rather than procreating over and over again, or buying and using drugs to make one pregnant, is a start. One foot in front of the other. One CONSCIOUS choice DOES make a difference. And, if we teach our adopted or biological child right, to respect the earth, in a thousand ways that manifests, that one child will go into the world with more awareness of how delicate our eco- systems are, and how focused we must be in, and our seriously we must take our role as Guardian.

Thank you for your comment.
12:24 PM on 09/04/2011
The analogy here is "Yes, I'm driving a bulldozer, whose sole purpose is to destroy everything in its path. But if I go slow, and maneuver around obstacles, then everything will be fine." The problem is not your choice of action or non-action; it is the system you find yourself in and which you obviously revel in, given the list of consumer products you mention. The problem in the world is not lack of resources, or lack of space; it is the unequal distribution thereof. For those who take advantage of this to their benefit, it is imperative on them to stand down from their class position. That they might lecture others about "what to do" is truly the definition of hubris.
05:01 PM on 09/04/2011
With respect, I still think you're conflating two issues here. I don't think anybody would disagree that we need to teach our children (however they join our family) to respect the earth. But that is an issue of consumption, and has nothing to do with adoption.

I agree that we need to be responsible guardians of our incredible planet, but that doesn't address either of my original points!
08:51 PM on 09/03/2011
OK, I'm sorry but the first thing that struck me about your commentary is your use of Michael Jackson as some sort of role model - the man had 3 children with surrogates and then died of a drug overdose and left them with his mother and abusive father. He was hardly an example of a stellar human being.
The second thing is the entitlement and privilege that drips from your words. Adopting a child from a developing country is not what we need to do to change the world. Most of the children in these orphanages have living parents and family who are living in such terrible poverty that they simply cannot feed the children. The money that you spend on your adopted child's mac & cheese and iPad's could help an entire community, more importantly, could help a family stay together. By adopting from developing countries, the West is maintaining the status quo and supporting a corrupt industry that is rife with kidnapping and child trafficking.
Third, you quote Oprah quoting Maya Angelou. Perhaps you should mention that Oprah herself did not adopt a child, she built a school to help many children - this type of charitable act is what we need to encourage.
And to the commenter who said we need to adopt children for no other reason than we really, really want one - no, we really, really don't. It is not meant to be about providing children for people who really want one.
11:22 PM on 09/03/2011
I am truly sorry that you did not "get" the motivation of the article. If you were able to read it with a clearer vision, you would understand that I am seeking to shift the way that society defines "family." The article is not a promo piece for international adoption. I support adoption as a way to avoid financing the fertility business, and as ONE small way to help keep the planet from destroying itself. What about the 30,000 teens who aged out of the US foster system in 2010? What about the millions of children bouncing from foster home to foster home in our own country? Parenting is not about ego. Conscious parenting embarked upon by choice and intention is hard work, and takes the kind of lifelong commitment that need not be judged by others. No matter how it is created.
01:03 AM on 09/04/2011
So Dina, are you planning to adopt some of those teens? It seems that everyone wants the newborn babies and infants. Very few of the people who talk about using adoption to reduce the population ever seem to want to adopt those children in foster care.

Also if you adopt a newborn baby, there is a good chance the first mother will still want to raise a child and will have another child in later years so in effect, the population isn't necessarily being reduced overall because if she had raised her first child, she might not have felt that same need to have another.
07:07 PM on 09/04/2011
My vision is perfectly clear, I just disagree with your premise. If this article is not a promo piece for international adoption, if it is meant to be about teaching our children to be environmentally aware, then that message is buried so deep that it is lost. Since the main topic discussed is adoption, I think you have gotten away from the point that you claim you were trying to make. I do not see how your assertion about foster children needing homes is in any way relevant to my comments but it does beg the question, why didn't you adopt from foster care in your own country rather than displacing a child from their country? I agree that the fertility industry needs to be reined in but perhaps that could be achieved by infertile couples accepting their infertility and finding an outlet for their energy in say, fostering older children or building a well for a community in a developing country.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BigWillyG
12:38 AM on 09/03/2011
Wasn't Malthus debunked before the First World War?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lambdin1
What's this?
06:55 PM on 09/02/2011
I'm an adopted child. I learned of my adoption when I was in pre-school. It really didn't take hold until I was in elementary school. I've felt special all my life! Someone out their really wanted me! Now at 64 I urge all those who can to adopt a child. Not just a small child or infant but those much older that really need someone in there lives. If you can give of yourself and help a child, do so. Excuse me while I cry a little.....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
babeltek
04:36 PM on 09/02/2011
Dina, I am confused by your last sentence--would you mind clarifying for me? What do you mean by adoption being the right thing to do "for a women's body?". Thank you.
07:32 PM on 09/02/2011
There are studies out there (Israel & France, I believe at least) that have linked fertility drugs to breast and other reproductive cancers. Slate.com a few years back discussed Elizabeth Edwards as one of these women who suffered cancer from fertility drugs. There is a NY attorney as we speak who believes her breast cancer was caused this way, and she is in the beginnings of making a doc film about it, as well as a possible lawsuit against the pharmaceutical companies who make these drugs. I do not know those details. See Appendix Two of my book, Finding Aster--our Ethiopian adoption story, for more information.
12:27 PM on 09/04/2011
As an adoptee returned to his land of birth, I have to ask: Do you at all consider the rights, needs, desires, wishes, or worries of the women who are supplying these children to you? Their families, communities, countries? How is this exploitation any different than the purchase of an iPad and the trashing of an old computer resulting in the poisonous recycling centers where women work all day in a sea of heavy metal toiling to recover ounces of silver?
04:17 PM on 09/02/2011
Thank you for this article. I've chosen not to have biological children. Right now I'm helping my sister (a single mom) care for her adopted 2 year old from Ethiopia. This child is such a joy as I'm sure your child is too.
And just as the paradigm of planning a family has to change, so too does our ways of "consuming".
I am concerned though that many Americans (not you) blame climate change solely on overpopulation in the "poorer" countries of the world. I read recent comments on a Huff Po article on the Famine in Somalia and many wrote the starving deserved to die because they were having too many children. Really cruel comments. And thoughtless because much of climate change has been caused by the over-consumptive Western lifestyle. One American child presently consumes as much resources as approximately 12 Brazilian children!

So please, for her sake, don't raise your daughter like a "typical" American. My sister feeds her daughter almost exclusively organic whole foods, diapers her in cloth diapers and then hang dries the diapers, gets her books at the library and really cute clothes and toys at the Goodwill, composts everything, entertains her by taking her for walks around the neighborhood - not perfect but conscientious. Adoption is definitely worthwhile - giving a child a loving home ... but it just isn't fair to the rest of the world (or our children) for American parents to continue over-consumptive (cancerous) patterns. Thanks again.
11:23 PM on 09/02/2011
Congrats on being part of a super conscious parenting experience. Your sister is doing it right, in my opinion, and I applaud her efforts. Your comment has inspired me to "do better." Tomorrow my family is selling off our "stuff" (wedding gifts like Waterford, and Nambe, my husbands artwork, books/cds, etc.) as a benefit to support AHOPE for Children, an organization that aids HIV+ children in Ethiopia. My Ethiopian born daughter feels sad to sell some of the artwork that she has grown attached to, but is also able to speak these words: "We're having a sale to help sick children in Ethiopia." This example is the start of something I hope will grow in our family as a way to show, not just tell, that material wealth is meaningless without health, love, and compassion. Thank you again for taking the time to share a bit of your story.
12:30 PM on 09/04/2011
At last count, Lebanon has 7,000 NGOs like AHOPE for Children; that's one for every 500 people here. They are, if anything, the scourge of this place; the face of neo-colonialism, as described in the works of Jean Bricmont's Humanitarian Imperialism. How do you justify this? When my parents adopted in the early '60s, it might be possible to forgive their naive colonialism and salvationist missionary zeal. Today? The rest of the world demands an apology, not more handouts.
03:56 PM on 09/02/2011
Lovey story, hated the unrelated reference to Michael Jackson, took away from my enjoyment of the reading.

Adoption doesn't have to be from China or Ethiopia..plenty here as well!

Personally I think we should just ban sex.
11:26 PM on 09/02/2011
I appreciate this feedback. However, have you seen the film? The part that I quoted was deeply moving, inspiring, and motivated me in a direction to take action. I studied film at SFSU and my early years as a writer were spent studying and writing scripts. I love the use of multi-media to tell and show an important story. This is why I referenced MJ's film and philosophy about our planet.
11:26 AM on 09/03/2011
Wow, I sure didn't expect a response from the author. Thank you for keeping it real.

I never cared for Michael's music. Some of the J-5 I liked but his solo career did little for me and my tastes. In my opinion his collaborations (sp?) were best (McCartney for example). He only became more eccentric as time went on. I feel for him but didn't care for him.

As far as your philosophy, I found your story moving and your desire adopt such a child as wonderfully fresh. Your intentions are noble. I have no problem with those looking to "reduce or not add" to the planet's population, or at least to slow its growth.

Thank you for your response. Likely, I will not view the film, but I may take a look at your book.
03:09 PM on 09/02/2011
Where the hell do you think all those adopted kids come from? I promise you, they are not brought by the stork or found under a cabbage leaf. Someone still had to give birth to those kids. ADOPTION DOES NOT SOLVE OVERPOPULATION. IT IS CHILD TRAFFICKING. Don't participate in this insane system.

Seriously. I can hardly stand to read the comments here; they are dripping with privilege. I thought we were supposed to be the good guys. What gives you the right to talk about buying children like you are purchasing a pet? They're not your kids. You have no right to them. Get a dog.
11:28 PM on 09/02/2011
Please check out lambdin1's comment above and rethink this post.
11:44 AM on 09/02/2011
It's all good. It would even be better if adoption agencies would allow, especially since you have pointed out that our life expectancy as a race has greatly increased, adoption beyond the age of 40 years of age. Stop making excuses! Women have given birth in recent years into their sixties! We tried adopting for almost 15 years, and finally gave up after agency after agency said we were "too old" ... that was in the early 1990's. If we were allowed to adopt infants, they would be entering college by now, and there's be no end to our happiness.
02:32 PM on 09/02/2011
I was 45 when we adopted our, then, about 14-month old daughter, Aster. She was born in Ethiopia. Different countries have different policies. But, I do agree with you ... with our lifespan in the United States quite a bit more than it was 20 years ago, age requirements for adoption must be revisited. Good point. However, the lifespan in third world countries is much less, which may contribute to a policy from their governments that do not match our own ideologies. And, I am quite sad to hear that your attempts at becoming adoptive parents did not come to fruition. I appreciate your comment.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
shamgar50
10:27 AM on 09/02/2011
Unfortunately most people can’t grasp seven billion. They hear the figure, and just shrug there shoulders. I found a good way to illustrate the vastness of seven billion. If you greeted ever person on earth at the rate of one a second, it would take you over 220 years to greet everyone on the planet. That’s a lot of people.
05:44 PM on 09/02/2011
Wow, and 1242 barrels of hand sanitizer!
10:25 AM on 09/02/2011
Hi Dina,

I appreciate your points, and too am concerned about what our planet and environment. We have a series underway on RH Reality Check that speaks to these issues. You can view the series here: http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/tag/seven-billion-people

However, I have to take issue with two things in your article. You say "Though birth control is available to those who know about it and choose to use it..." Not true. There are 215 million women worldwide who want to limit or space births and have no access to birth control. Women's ability to use contraception also is hindered in many circumstances by gender-based violence and coercion. Part of the problem of lack of access is our own government, which in kowtowing to the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, as well as evangelical fundamentalists, has so politicized family planning that our international support for this critical public health intervention is stagnant.

The second thing that concerned me was your somewhat flippant treatment of consumption. A four year old with an iPad? Seriously? Your daughter will inevitably go the same route? Those are your choices. My kids are 12 and 15 and do not have their own iPads. They share a family computer and are no worse for the situation. This is a big part of our problem; people who not only consume huge amounts but think also somehow equate good parenting with giving their kids far too much.

Best, Jodi Jacobson
12:06 PM on 09/02/2011
Jodi, thank you for your comment, as I did indeed fail to include the masses of women across the globe who do not have access to birth control, either physically, ideologically, or spiritually. I am so glad that you took the time to include the information about our government, a government who is not doing enough to help women world-wide become free and independent citizens of the planet.

I also admire your strength in denying your kids what has become a seemingly "natural" part of growing up. When friends text and they are shocked we don't I feel good about that. I also should feel good about attempting to keep my daughter from owning an iPad until she is old enough to work and pay for one herself. Thanks so much for your insights and wisdom.

Best to you!
Dina