Why?

People sometimes seem surprised that we have continued with our plans to adopt, since we were able to have a second child "of our own" after all.  (For what it's worth, using the term "own" in reference to a couple's biological child/ren, as opposed to a couple's child/ren by adoption, is highly offensive.  Regardless of how a child joins the family, she is every bit her parents' "own", and they are 100 percent hers.  When it's necessary to make a distinction between a child/sibling who was born into the family vs. one who was adopted, then the terms "biological" or "by birth" should be used - not "your own", "their own", "natural" or, God forbid, "real".  Most of the time, it's not at all relevant whether a child was adopted or born into the family.  It just isn't.  So why bother making a distinction?)

Why do couples adopt when they already have biological children?  (It happens a lot, by the way.)  In our case, we began the adoption process when it appeared that we wouldn't be able to conceive a second child.  People seem to "get" this, because most people don't want their kid to be an only child.  But when you go beyond two, either by birth or through adoption, people wonder why.  If you have two boys or two girls, people assume you're trying for the opposite gender.  As if kids are salt and pepper shakers, and you need a matching set, and darn, it didn't happen the 2nd time around so you'd better go for a third.  But if it doesn't work this time, you should probably just call it quits.  Because four is just WAAAAY too many!  *sigh*  Good grief.  What a strange attitude we have toward the gift of a child.  In the case of adoption, people may assume that you're adopting in order to guarantee the gender you desire.  (I have to admit here that it is a bit of a plus that we were able to request a girl when we re-submitted our medical conditions checklist to our agency.  We discussed it a lot, though - so it wasn't a given, and it certainly wasn't our reason for continuing with our plans to adopt.  And on our first checklist, when we just had Patrick, we put "either" for the requested gender - which probably meant we'd be matched with a boy, since most couples want girls.  So we would have ended up with two boys even if we hadn't had Samuel.)

Why does anybody have more kids?  For that matter, why does anybody have kids at all?  I think if your heart's in the right place then the answers to those questions are the same whether you're trying to conceive or adopt, whether you have zero kids or ten.  Children are a gift.  They bring us joy.  They help us to fulfill our purpose.  They are the embodiment of a couple's love and commitment.  Children make us proud and keep us humble.  They somehow manage to turn us gray and help us stay young at the same time.  And as much work as it is adding a child to your family, when you see your kids together - no matter how long it took you to have them or how you went about doing it - you just can't imagine one without the others.  And they can't imagine it either, because siblings are woven into the fabric of each other's lives and their presence to one another is like the air they breathe.  Only more annoying at times.

Why don't we just have another child by birth?  Maybe we could.  But we probably can't.  A startling fact for many people is the relationship between age and fertility.  Sure, we all know of women who've gotten pregnant without any special help well into their 40s.  But those women are the exception, not the rule.  The celebrities you see giving birth in their mid-40s and beyond?  There's an awfully good chance those babies were conceived with someone else's eggs.  In our parents' generation, most couples were "done" having kids by the time they reached their 30s, let alone their 40s.  What our generation is finding out is that there is a precipitous decline in a woman's fertility beginning around age 35 - the age at which I gave birth to our first child.  Beyond age 40 or so, many (perhaps most) women cannot conceive without medical intervention - often very invasive, expensive,  and stressful intervention with a low percentage of success.  Not to mention the moral concerns for those of us who happen to be Catholic.  After trying more than 2 1/2 years for our second child, we were told by a reproductive endocrinologist that our chances of conceiving spontaneously were somewhere between slim and none.  Then along came Samuel.  Perhaps we should have named him "Slim".  Or maybe "Three Percent".  That's the figure we were quoted - those were our chances of having a second child by birth without doing in vitro.  Maybe even with in vitro.  About the same odds as a woman getting pregnant on the birth control pill.  Samuel is living proof that God always gets the last word. 
    
So we're pretty sure our time has passed for having another pregnancy.  And I am totally okay with that, which for me is a sort of foretaste of the "peace that passes all understanding"...  It is *that* powerful.  Because if you've never taken a ride on the hideous roller coaster known as INFERTILITY -  lucky, lucky you.  But we also know that our family is not complete, and I suspect we were placed on the journey of adoption for a reason - just soon enough to become committed to the process before conceiving the miracle that is Samuel, but not far enough along in the adoption that our surprise pregnancy caused any hardship for anyone...  And then three years later along comes this little girl, and we are amazed at how quickly she has become our daughter in our hearts.

That's why.