Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I read the post over on Kristin's blog, as well. No agency involved: it was private, couple to couple with a lawyer/social worker intermediary, it sounds like.
I got that impression too.
It is best to do what is called an "identified adoption" and register the bparents with a reputable agency that provides unbiased counselling.
The best agencies are those that make sure that both parties are fully aware of expectations etc - the agency should not encourage disassociation by the emother during her pregnancy and they should make both parties aware that no real decision can be made until after the birth. They would encourage both parties to be honest with each other. It would be made clear to both parties that the expectant parents are making an important decision re their child's future and that the child is the most important party in the whole deal.
In regards to adoptive parents, I've found that those APs who have adopted through these types of agencies are more able to cope with an adoption going through because their expectations have been kept in check and they have been kept informed.
I suspect that the bparents probably did plan to go through with the adoption but were feeling unsure as the time got closer and when the baby was actually born, they realised they couldn't go ahead with it. I doubt that they meant to hurt the prospective adoptive parents and they may well have felt really bad about doing so (I have seen this on other forums). Unfortunately, this is a common problem with prebirth matching when they are not handled correctly - both parties get in too deep emotionally and one wonders how much those emotions compromise the decision that the eparents must make. Many eparents may also have previously received at the beginning of their pregnancy options counselling designed at "giving them sound reasons that will counter the desire to keep their babies" and thus can be made to feel guilty about parenting their own child.
A lot of assumptions here. The post was, someone's sadness or anger[rage] but,
- no mention of money to the birth parents
- no mention of agency - just their lawyer
- no mention of the birth parents age
- no mention of any legal contract
- acknowledgement there was no counseling
- acknowledgement there were 'signs'
Look -- a friend's niece [or whatever]gets pregnant and someone thinks/hopes they can adopt the child without all the red tape. It's a gamble. It didn't work out. It's disappointing. Please don't use this to demonize those birth parents. The facts just aren't there, and neither were the professionals [at least not in any info in the post].
I was not demonizing the birth parents. If adoption is to be "child centered" how did the birth father consider the psychological well being of this child? He didn't. He thought of what he wanted. Since his former fiancee was legally out of the picture ( but it was an open adoption so she was still in Veronica's life) he could have complete control of the situation. Legally, Christina Madonado has ne right to see Veronica, if the court awards the baby to Brown.
I have no animosity towards the birth mother. I think that she tried to do what she thought was best for her daughter.
Brown appears to have the kind of impulsive and immature personality that is inconsistent with fatherhood.
Why did he "not understand what he was signing"? What was the problem?
I have never heard of an adoption without a contract or an attorney. But then I am from NY, where everything is strictly regulated.
South Carolina and Oklahoma may well be very different. I have never heard of anything such as this.
In our home state, one can not adopt a stepchild who's parent in dead with pout a home study, a contract, and I believe, an agency.
Similarly, if a relative, for example your sister and her husband are killed in a car accident, the sister of the deceased does not automatically receive custody. Nor do the grandparents.
Being related does not mean automatic custody. There is a home study, contracts and most likely an agency involved. The relatives must to petition the courts for custody and adopt the children, as though they are strangers.
If this is what people mean about regulation, I support that
I was not demonizing the birth parents. If adoption is to be "child centered" how did the birth father consider the psychological well being of this child? He didn't. He thought of what he wanted. Since his former fiancee was legally out of the picture ( but it was an open adoption so she was still in Veronica's life) he could have complete control of the situation. Legally, Christina Madonado has ne right to see Veronica, if the court awards the baby to Brown.
I have no animosity towards the birth mother. I think that she tried to do what she thought was best for her daughter.
Brown appears to have the kind of impulsive and immature personality that is inconsistent with fatherhood.
Why did he "not understand what he was signing"? What was the problem?
I have never heard of an adoption without a contract or an attorney. But then I am from NY, where everything is strictly regulated.
South Carolina and Oklahoma may well be very different. I have never heard of anything such as this.
In our home state, one can not adopt a stepchild who's parent in dead with pout a home study, a contract, and I believe, an agency.
Similarly, if a relative, for example your sister and her husband are killed in a car accident, the sister of the deceased does not automatically receive custody. Nor do the grandparents.
Being related does not mean automatic custody. There is a home study, contracts and most likely an agency involved. The relatives must to petition the courts for custody and adopt the children, as though they are strangers.
If this is what people mean about regulation, I support that
Sheena, I think you have mixed this thread up with the Veronica thread.
I think NJ185 is referring to your post at #2 on THIS thread.
Last edited by susankate; 01-07-2013 at 06:30 PM..
You guys may be right that there was no agency involved. I don't know why I just assumed that there was an agency involved even though the two couples met through a friend. Maybe this particular situation is a bad example but the scenario isn't uncommon and is a problem in many adoptions that leaves both bio and adoptive parents in pain.
Sheena,
I'm a bit surprised about what you read into the blog post. First the blog didn't say that the bio parents were teenagers, just that they were young. "Young" is so relative and to some a couple in their mid 30's could be considered a young couple.
Second, the blog didn't say or insinuate that the bio parents were pulling a scam and that's not what I got out of what was written. Of course none of us knows what was going on in the heads of the bio parents and maybe they had a grand scheme all along but it's also entirely possible that they didn't. That they actually had every intention to place their baby for adoption but started having doubts as the pregnancy went along and later decided to parent but felt too guilty, and maybe pressured, too speak up. It's very easy to make a sensible decision to place your baby for adoption early in the pregnancy when the baby is really just an abstract concept. It becomes very different when the baby starts kicking and you start seeing the little hands and feet on an ultrasound. The fact that the bio parents had decided to keep the baby before the day of the birth, according to the amom, doesn't mean that they had made that decision from th e beginning. For all we know the decision was made just days before the birth. I wonder why you jump to such extreme conclusions and judge so harshly.
So I finally got a chance to check out the blog post.
We connected with our daughter's parents through a mutual friend. We used an agency to facilitate because I was not comfortable with lawyers; I thought lawyers would be too heavily biased towards us. When I contacted the agency, the director (we had to do an accelerated adoption because the baby was due any day) warned me strongly that we needed to be ready for the parents to change their minds. She said this frequent happens when the parents have out off making any plans. I said I understood; she worded it a different way. I said I understood again, but over the next few days, she emphasized the fact that the parents could decide to keep their baby and we needed to be prepared. We could have been headed for great heartache, but we understood that the parents needed to make the right choice and that might or might not involve us.
I highly doubt there was an agency involved in this adoption because there didn't seem to be any acknowledgement of that.
The fact is, until the papers are signed (and even then, in some states it can still be changed), the prospective adoptive parents have zero rights. The expectant parents can change their minds. I told my husband about this, and he remarked on how this was a baby, not a car. It's a major life decision that doesn't feel real until you are holding the baby in your arms. In a world where adoption is about the child, I see no reason why parents who consider adoption should be forced to "hold up their end if the bargain" his to avoid hurting prospective adoptive parents.
Just as a note, the parents should not be referred to as "birth parents." That title defines a couple who has placed a child for adoption. This couple considered and talked about adoption. They made a plan. But at no point did the relinquish. The are simply parents.
ETA: I just read the comments, and one from the author mentioned a lawyer. So there was no agency.
i agree--having gone through an agency both sides are warned of the time period when decisions can be changed--but finalpapers done through an agency are very strict and court connected--to reverse a decision made in court by an impulsive birth father only seems incredulous to me
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
