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.
But if, as the US Department of Child Welfare states in info provided in their links for 'adoption plan' , addressing pre-adoption agreements about contact for example:
"Your lawyer or agency should be able to tell you the laws in your State about these agreements, what they can include, and if they can be enforced in any way. In most cases, these agreements cannot be enforced. There is no State that lets an adoption be overturned if adoptive parents refuse to allow contact between their child and the child's birth mother".
Reading further I learned that the 26 states that honor some agreements, none of them cover infant adoptions but rather things like stepparent adoption & adoption from state agencies.
So what really is an adoption plan? Is it just letting the birth parent make a wish list? planning the pregnancy and birth? Some say it gives the birth mother 'control' - maybe the act of making a plan gives her some personal control like list making does, but what if any other control does it give her?
I understand that there are adoptive parents who honor agreements because of their personal ethics, but they are not legally bound to do so. Should these adoption plans even attempt to address anything after relinquishment, like pictures and letters, when they are not enforceable?
I'll come back to this later when I've thought some more about it. It's a good topic.
But I did want to say that I do think prospective birth mothers and prospective adoptive parents should definitely be discussing contact after birth. If that cones under the vague heading of an adoption plan, so be it. No, it is not legally enforceable, even in the states that claim it is (judges rarely find for the birth parent, and it's a lot of money to go to court in the first place). But it is still important to talk about this and give both parents a chance to fully understand expectations. It is wrong that these agreements aren't enforceable, legally binding contracts. But you can't ignore the fact that these discussions between the parents are really important.
What I want is, in the absence of binding contracts (which seems highly unlikely), is for agencies and adoptive parents to be honest. I met our daughters other parents the night before they gave birth. But I still managed to ensure that we discussed their wishes for contact after relinquishment. I also made sure that I was very clear that this was not a legally binding agreement. It was a very delicate situation, and one I didn't relish being in (I was concerned that they would take my honesty as a veiled warning-we had just met, after all) but I didn't trust the agency to be fully open about it. I shouldn't have been in that position; it should be a legal requirement for the birth parents to sign documents indicating that they fully understand that once the papers are signed, that is it. The APs can walk away and never look back. This is a hugely important factor; many women choose adoption because they are promised openness. I believe that instead of veiled statements and assurances of letters and pictures, the prospective birth parents should be told the precise and actual facts- that this is merely a "gentlemen's agreement" and nothing more.
I had every intention of keeping our promises. We wanted an open adoption. But I also don't think it's right that major decisions are made without having all the facts. It's not right, it's not fair, and I think it should change.
There are many of us who take our promises of openess incredibly seriously. But I also believe that we are the ones who would also be 100% behind making sure prospective birth mothers knew the facts, and that we were 100% sure they understood them fully.
I think it is also important to realise that a plan is just that - a plan. I know that some people consider a woman with an adoption plan who ends up deciding to parent to be "backing out of her plan" as if equal to "breaking her contract".
Btw I think the adoption.com description given above is probably the most informative of the links.
Last edited by susankate; 03-27-2013 at 10:58 PM..
Women should never be guilted to stay with an adoption plan. That's why I personally do not like the way it's handled by today's adoption agencies. Even more slightly veiled coercion going on than in the baby scoop days. Open adoptions should all be enforceable by law for instance. You promise it, you keep your word, end of story. They entice the pregnant woman with perks to relinquish rather than try to find ways to keep families together. Take the profit out of the equation, and you most likely will see clean and ethical adoptions or none at all. P-aps need to do their part too. Fine if a woman includes you in her plan, but imo, it would behoove everybody if they backed off, and gave her some breathing room during the "planning time" Sure it should be her choice, but relinquishments are serious stuff, and even if she wants you there every step of the way, it's not the best idea. Until the "t(s) are crossed, the "i"(s) dotted on the consent form, please don't think of her plan as your baby. P-aps at the hospital delivery should be legally banned forever more. I speak from experience as a relinquishing first mother.
Women should never be guilted to stay with an adoption plan. That's why I personally do not like the way it's handled by today's adoption agencies. Even more slightly veiled coercion going on than in the baby scoop days. Open adoptions should all be enforceable by law for instance. You promise it, you keep your word, end of story. They entice the pregnant woman with perks to relinquish rather than try to find ways to keep families together. Take the profit out of the equation, and you most likely will see clean and ethical adoptions or none at all. P-aps need to do their part too. Fine if a woman includes you in her plan, but imo, it would behoove everybody if they backed off, and gave her some breathing room during the "planning time" Sure it should be her choice, but relinquishments are serious stuff, and even if she wants you there every step of the way, it's not the best idea. Until the "t(s) are crossed, the "i"(s) dotted on the consent form, please don't think of her plan as your baby. P-aps at the hospital delivery should be legally banned forever more. I speak from experience as a relinquishing first mother.
We were asked to be there, so I don't know if I would say banished exactly. There was no agency involvement at that point, either, just the request of the parents. But I definitely can see your point. I don't like revealing anything about my daughter's other parents, so I will just say there was a reason that I think we were asked to be there, so i think it should still be left up to the parents.
But we stayed in the waiting room, and only spent a few minutes with our daughter several hours after she was born (her first parents spent the first few hours with her alone, with our encouragement to do so). I think boundaries are super important at this time, and looking back, there are several things I would have changed had everything not happened so fast that I couldn't think straight. By changed, I mean in favor of my daughter's other parents, not things for me. I'm trying to decide if listing them is overshading or not... some are quite personal, not for me, but for the first parents.
In our case, the parents had 30 days to sign the relinquishment papers. They took 24 days. I'd like to see that be made the standard, along with a certain period of days where they can change their minds after they sign as well. I lived loving my daughter and calling her mine for 24 days while knowing that her parents could decide to take her back. It was incredibly hard, no doubt, but it was (IMO) a healthy thing for the other parents because it gave them time to really think and be sure. After all, I have never understood why one couple's feelings are considered greater than the others. People say, "but taking the baby away from you after you brought her home is so cruel!" Yes, it would hurt. But sp would the other side- if after a week, the other parents thought better of their choice, wouldn't it hurt them to live without their child? It's a huge decision; there is nothing to prepare anyone for the feeling of relinquishment. So I think mothers should be given a chance to allow the hormones to settle and reality to set in so they can be sure if the biggest decision they may ever make.
It's only fair and right, and I think adoption is hugely tipped in favor of handling APs with kid gloves. It should be about the best interests of the child, and 30 days to allow a birth mom to change her mind, while hard for APs, would be, IMO, better for the child.
We were asked to be there, so I don't know if I would say banished exactly. There was no agency involvement at that point, either, just the request of the parents. But I definitely can see your point. I don't like revealing anything about my daughter's other parents, so I will just say there was a reason that I think we were asked to be there, so i think it should still be left up to the parents.
But we stayed in the waiting room, and only spent a few minutes with our daughter several hours after she was born (her first parents spent the first few hours with her alone, with our encouragement to do so). I think boundaries are super important at this time, and looking back, there are several things I would have changed had everything not happened so fast that I couldn't think straight. By changed, I mean in favor of my daughter's other parents, not things for me. I'm trying to decide if listing them is overshading or not... some are quite personal, not for me, but for the first parents.
In our case, the parents had 30 days to sign the relinquishment papers. They took 24 days. I'd like to see that be made the standard, along with a certain period of days where they can change their minds after they sign as well. I lived loving my daughter and calling her mine for 24 days while knowing that her parents could decide to take her back. It was incredibly hard, no doubt, but it was (IMO) a healthy thing for the other parents because it gave them time to really think and be sure. After all, I have never understood why one couple's feelings are considered greater than the others. People say, "but taking the baby away from you after you brought her home is so cruel!" Yes, it would hurt. But sp would the other side- if after a week, the other parents thought better of their choice, wouldn't it hurt them to live without their child? It's a huge decision; there is nothing to prepare anyone for the feeling of relinquishment. So I think mothers should be given a chance to allow the hormones to settle and reality to set in so they can be sure if the biggest decision they may ever make.
It's only fair and right, and I think adoption is hugely tipped in favor of handling APs with kid gloves. It should be about the best interests of the child, and 30 days to allow a birth mom to change her mind, while hard for APs, would be, IMO, better for the child.
You are a good person. It radiates in your posts. If I had to do it all over again, I'd run away from home and raise my son in a gypsy camp,... but in reality, every first mother should be so lucky as to have our children call you mother, mom, mum, mommy. I sincerely mean this.
You are a good person. It radiates in your posts. If I had to do it all over again, I'd run away from home and raise my son in a gypsy camp,... but in reality, every first mother should be so lucky as to have our children call you mother, mom, mum, mommy. I sincerely mean this.
I read this a dozen times in a row. It was like a word hug from someone whose opinion I respect so very much. Thank you.
I read this a dozen times in a row. It was like a word hug from someone whose opinion I respect so very much. Thank you.
No thanks necessary, but you are more than welcome. Your d/m stung my eyes with tears, and gives me hope that all adoptive mothers are as empathetic, and loving as you are. You don't have to prove that to any of us here. We already know that you are a wonderful mother to your children.
But if, as the US Department of Child Welfare states in info provided in their links for 'adoption plan' , addressing pre-adoption agreements about contact for example:
"Your lawyer or agency should be able to tell you the laws in your State about these agreements, what they can include, and if they can be enforced in any way. In most cases, these agreements cannot be enforced. There is no State that lets an adoption be overturned if adoptive parents refuse to allow contact between their child and the child's birth mother".
Reading further I learned that the 26 states that honor some agreements, none of them cover infant adoptions but rather things like stepparent adoption & adoption from state agencies.
So what really is an adoption plan? Is it just letting the birth parent make a wish list? planning the pregnancy and birth? Some say it gives the birth mother 'control' - maybe the act of making a plan gives her some personal control like list making does, but what if any other control does it give her?
I understand that there are adoptive parents who honor agreements because of their personal ethics, but they are not legally bound to do so. Should these adoption plans even attempt to address anything after relinquishment, like pictures and letters, when they are not enforceable?
NJ,
You have identified the difference between how an agency (etc) markets the "adoption plan" and the reality as defined by US Child Welfare.
It is all part of the marketing plan to promote to an expectant mother to choose adoption. If you read both the wording, and the sequence of importance the agencies use in listing things to consider and what they help you with - it is just marketing plain and simple.
The concept is to make the expectant mother feel in control, they just forget to mention once the papers are signed and the mother has surrendered all rights - the control is gone - forever. Take the American Adoptions link you provided.
The first item is carefully worded using "feel" that they are looking after your best interests - not even a statement that they are. And guess what - they even have a "birthmom" scholarship program hook for "birthmoms" who surrender - to me it feels a lot like a financial incentive - perhaps it is valid but when you only qualify for the program if you surrender to me that is problematic.
Second up is the support system - very important that you only have people who support your decisions - aka no one asking the tough questions that will allow you to make an educated decision - and we will help you weed those people out.
Third up is picking the family - note there "is no science" as if people pick guardians for their child out of the yellow pages - just let the pictures tell you what you need to know.
Fourth up expenses - note the first one is the cost of delivery/prenatal expenses as something they will help you figure out and at the very end, tell you they will help you find other resources = medicaid which will actually cover that first up big scary cost and they know that as fact for the majority of mothers. Second up is legal expenses that has always been paid by the adopting parents and should simply be noted as such but that is also another scary cost that they will make sure is covered for you.
Fifth up the hospital stay - note the very first item - will you want the AP's in the L&D room - should not be first, or even second when talking about L&D. L&D should be about having the baby, classes, your physician, the type of delivery you want, the hospital, support person who will help you through labor, will you be breastfeeding, do you want the baby to room in with you if all goes to plan.
Sixth up - deciding what contact you want which as Child Welfare states is basically unenforceable but no mention of that whatsoever and again the sequence of points is important.
It is all just marketing and couched in terms of control. It is part and parcel of making adoption as a positive brave and selfless decision that you aren't good enough to parent your child and anybody else is better than you / the flip side of the shame game with the same result. Frankly, I am appalled that the fair advertising standards allows it without any type of legal disclaimers.
The most important aspect though is the control and creating the mindset that the mother is not giving up her baby rather making an adoption plan - as in the new positive adoption language choice.
What if the birth mother becomes someone you do not think should know about the child? What is she becomes involved with drugs or an abusive relationship or mentally ill?
Maybe the adoptive parents will think it is in the best interest of the child not to maintain openness.
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.
