The Internet Marketing Success Ezine

We hear a lot about how it should alway be about what's best for the child. In general, I agree with that premice. But, how far should that go in what happens to parents' feelings? Let's say there is an illegal adoption and the adoptive parents were complicit. It would be, pretending we could know this for sure, traumatic enough for the child to be removed from the adoptive family that it wouldn't be "what's best" for the child to return to the biological family. Does the injustice of the situation and the biological family's grief trump that?

I think some adoptive parents feel that their feelings NEVER count. I am one that definitely thinks that ap's feelings certainly don't entitle them to a child. That seems obvious, but I've seen adoption agency websites that state they believe everyone has a right to be a parent. But, anyway, I don't think it's right that adoptive parents' feelings seem to never count. For instance, I feel a responsibility to keep up and "network" with people from all groups affected by adoption, and in general I really enjoy it and personally gain from it beyond just the parenting help it gives me. But, I feel like I can never take a break from the high emotions of it or I would be doing a disservice to my daughter. So, should an adoptive parent get to act on those feelings of needing a break from it, even if it would mean missing something that could really help his/her child? Just a small example, but in general, every parents emotions sometimes get in the way of "what's best" for the child, but adoptive parents are made to feel like that isn't ever allowed for them, (and I'm sure biological parents feel that way a lot too) and that may be an impossible standard.