[dymk]

Referring to children as "inventory" is implies all sorts of negative things. Adoption isn't the same as a transaction where you peruse the "inventory" for a new hot tub or something.

Those interested in adoption should be _so_ interested, that they're willing to go meet in-person with an agency who can introduce them to the children.

[ipaddr]

The biggest problem agencies have is getting parents to come down. By advertising with pictures people will emotionally bond with a specific child which will prompt them to go through the long, expensive agency adoption process.

Charities use images of children to sell the charity.

[dymk]

Yeah, that still strikes me as gross and undignified, and I don't buy the premise that you need to show specific images of specific children that are available for adoption _right now_ to increase the rate at which parents come down.

> Charities use images of children to sell the charity.

Note that they're not selling the children.

[brabel]

> Those interested in adoption should be _so_ interested

That's what everyone would like... except that even if they are sloppy (not saying that they are) there's still a lot of children that are never going to be adopted. Do you believe that's better? Spoiler: it's not, because you're making sure most children will have a disfunctional adult life (growing up without a family is extremely hard) instead of allowing more children to live a normal life, but with the increased probability of a few living with bad parents (the number of cases where that's worse than no family at all is probably very small).