U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting > Adoption
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-16-2013, 11:23 PM
 
1,851 posts, read 2,976,988 times
Reputation: 2360

Advertisements

I think when a parent (mother/father or both) wishes to not parent any longer, society should listen. I'm not talking about parents having a bad day with their child(ren)...I mean parents who just can't, won't, or don't want to parent, period.

I believe that in the long run, forced reunification and forced parenting; which really, this is what state agencies are doing when they are providing services to families who've been separated by child protective services due to neglect and abuse, only makes a bad situation worse.

Sometimes terminating parental rights or a parent's relinquishment of a child is the only and best solution so that an adoption can be made and a child saved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-18-2013, 08:07 PM
 
16,487 posts, read 20,976,373 times
Reputation: 16165
Quote:
Originally Posted by susankate View Post
I don't think anyone is saying that things should stay as they are, I am just saying that before actually relinquishing a child, one does need to make sure there aren't underlying issues that might be making a parent feel a certain way. It may be that it is eventually in the child's best interest to be relinquished but I wouldn't want to be suggesting that until one makes sure there isn't an underlying issue that can be resolved. Certainly though, things shouldn't stay as the status quo and as you point out, just saying "you can't check out of parenthood" to a struggling mother is hardly constructive help.
Sure, that makes sense. You could have a woman that is having health issues or a particularly stressful incident within the family and she needs help and guidance for a short while to make sure she is making the right choice for all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2013, 08:51 PM
 
12,861 posts, read 15,315,664 times
Reputation: 14785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lizita View Post
Someone brought a website posting to my attention and I have to say that I'm a bit stunned. There is very little info in the posting but the little info there is is disturbing. It's on an adoption agency site that lists children (born and unborn) whose mothers are considering adoption. The posting says that the birth mother is wanting to find a Christian adoptive family for her 6-year old son who would be able to deal with his behavioral problems. She says that she wants letters and pictures after adoption - no contact.
WTF? Is this woman seriously wanting to give her son away because he has behavioral problems?
Thoughts?
Maybe she is...maybe she can't deal with the boy on her own and has no help...maybe she feels angry about his problems and takes it out on the boy...maybe she knows this and ( because she loves the boy) is looking to give the child a better life than she can.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2013, 01:43 PM
 
Location: Chicago area
1,105 posts, read 2,889,516 times
Reputation: 2106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaded View Post

I believe that in the long run, forced reunification and forced parenting; which really, this is what state agencies are doing when they are providing services to families who've been separated by child protective services due to neglect and abuse, only makes a bad situation worse.

Sometimes terminating parental rights or a parent's relinquishment of a child is the only and best solution so that an adoption can be made and a child saved.
Moderator Cut. Of course there are cases where the parents should never lay an eye on their kids again and where a swift adoption would be best for the child but those cases are not the majority. To argue that simply because separation has happened it should always be permanent shows a lack of understanding and knowledge of the reality of the situation, just like claiming that reunion equals forced parenting. Considering the active steps a parent with kids in the system has to take to get them back it's quite clear that nobody is being forced to parent or reunite. It's not always best for the kids but often it is.

Contrary to popular belief the majority of kids who are removed from the home are not abused. The vast majority are removed due to neglect which is a very broad term and if often directly linked to poverty. I don't get how one can reasonably argue that it's best for the child to make the child lose his or her parents forever due to a problem that can be rectified with some help. Considering that some problems can be rectified with the proper help it would be irresponsible, inhumane and neglectful to the child for authorities not to provide services to these families. It's the child centered thing to do and the child is the one we care about, right? Children should live with their family as long as they're safe, happy and provided for. If that's possible, with or without assistance, that's what should happen.
I agree that TPR and adoption is sometimes the best thing but the emphasis should be on "sometimes". It's not always the case and removal from the home doesn't prove otherwise as some seem to think.

Removal from the home isn't always due to a parent's wrong doing as a parent, if it is it's not always serious and unfixable and it doesn't mean that the child will always be unsafe in the home. Sometimes the situation is bad due to something that is outside of the parent's control, sometimes it's a temporary problem, sometime one parent is unsafe while the other one isn't, and sometimes the reasons are completely frivolous.
The case of the Arizona couple who had their kids taken away after some Walmart employees had seen (innocent) pics of their naked kids is a good example of a frivolous case that should give people pause when they argue that removal by authorities is evidence of serious maltreatment that should lead to termination of parental rights.

In some situations the problem is temporary such as temporary homelessness, or due to poverty such as in cases where the house is unsafe. Then there are situations like that of my husband's niece who had her infant son placed in foster care after his father broke his leg. It was of course a case of horrible abuse and initial emergency placement in foster care was very much justified. But the abuse had nothing to do with the mother who was as horrified as everyone else.
Her son was placed in kinship care with his grandparents after a short stay in a foster home and eventually went back with his mother. Nine years later they are both fine. It would not have been in the best interest of the boy, his mother or society to terminate the mother's rights. She did get some services from the authorities before she got her son back, like parenting classes, and I really don't get how providing those services and reuniting mom and baby made a bad situation worse or how adoption would have been better for the boy when he has a capable mother.

It's very naive to believe that removal and TPR will provide each kid with a great new family and they will live happily ever after. That just isn't how it works for most kids. Fact is that placement in foster care is a trauma in itself and so is separation from parents for many kids. This should only be done if absolutely necessary and if a parent can become an adequate parent with help that help should be provided. Not for the parent's sake but for the kids'. Why risk having a kid be bounced around from foster home to foster home and lose anything resembling a home or a family in the process if their bio parents can properly care for them with some help?
Society owes it to the kids to do what they can to keep families together. That's not forced parenting or making a bad situation worse. It's beyond me why someone would think that helping families in trouble is a bad thing.

Last edited by Jaded; 04-24-2013 at 04:53 PM.. Reason: Personal attack
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 10:48 AM
 
5,322 posts, read 5,248,407 times
Reputation: 12465
Quote:
Originally Posted by no kudzu View Post
Finally the child was placed with a single woman who lived in a trailer in rural Florida and thrived.
Her wallpaper must have been spectacular!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2013, 09:20 AM
 
Location: Kansas
19,187 posts, read 14,903,699 times
Reputation: 18241
I have never heard of parents giving away their children without the government, the legal system of the state, being involved. I don't understand how the "new" parents would have any legal rights unless documents were signed and approved by the courts. It is also not easy to get a child placed in a temporary foster care situation depending on the state.

With a 6-year old old, the child should be in school so I would think that if the child had disabilities, the school would be addressing that. Maybe the new boyfriend doesn't want the kid around?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2013, 09:51 AM
 
10,362 posts, read 8,327,213 times
Reputation: 19087
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
I have never heard of parents giving away their children without the government, the legal system of the state, being involved.

Private" rehoming" of adopted children is quite common - attorneys are involved and custody is declined by the original adoptive family and assigned to the new family. It is quite legal, but other than a family judge, "the government" doesn't get involved. Obviously documents have to be redrawn, so I suppose that could be considered governmental involvement.

Sometimes families are overwhelmed by unexpected health crises of other family members - I know of one such family right now, in which another child was diagnosed as terminally ill shortly after a child with special needs was internationallly adopted. It was in everyone's best interests to "rehome" the adopted child, who had not yet bonded with the first adoptive family and deserved and needed more attention than was possible to give, considering the terminally ill child's condition and needs. The child who was rehomed was quite young, and is doing well.

I don't understand how the "new" parents would have any legal rights unless documents were signed and approved by the courts. It is also not easy to get a child placed in a temporary foster care situation depending on the state.

See my comment above.

With a 6-year old old, the child should be in school so I would think that if the child had disabilities, the school would be addressing that. Maybe the new boyfriend doesn't want the kid around?
Not necessarily - many states do not require that a child be in school until age seven, and it can be fairly simple to claim that the child is homeschooled, as state requirements vary considerably. A child with special needs can qualify for special education and therapies through the public school system from age three, but there is no legal requirement that such children participate, though it's obviously in their best interests to do so in most cases (some families feel that private therapies are superior or are better suited to their children's particular situations).

As for boyfriends, this could be an issue, though there's nothing here to indicate that's the case at all. My guess is that the little boy has behavior problems, perhaps has little self-control of his temper and may be acting out violently or hurting other children, in or outside of his family. There's no mention of any other special needs or of any background which might help explain any of this, so we're all just surmising. It's sad that his mother does not feel able to adequately assist the child in coping with his difficulties, but again - we don't know the entire story, and this may be the best option for all concerned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2013, 07:40 AM
 
47,576 posts, read 60,387,118 times
Reputation: 22268
Many parents have family members who end up taking their kids off their hands. I know people who took in their nephew/cousin and raised him because his mother, their aunt partied most of the time.

Adoption is often the only solution for those without willing relatives.

Adoption is nothing new.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2013, 07:43 AM
 
47,576 posts, read 60,387,118 times
Reputation: 22268
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
I have never heard of parents giving away their children without the government, the legal system of the state, being involved. I don't understand how the "new" parents would have any legal rights unless documents were signed and approved by the courts. It is also not easy to get a child placed in a temporary foster care situation depending on the state.

With a 6-year old old, the child should be in school so I would think that if the child had disabilities, the school would be addressing that. Maybe the new boyfriend doesn't want the kid around?
I have -- more often than you might think. I know kids being raised by grandparents, by aunts and uncles. No legal system involved. In the past, it was very often done without the legal system involved and kids that grew up in orphanages were often not true orphans, many had at least one surviving parent who for whatever reason chose to give them up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2014, 07:56 AM
 
1 posts, read 1,277 times
Reputation: 10
I can understand were your is coming from my son is 13 and lately ive been feelin the same he tell me he dosent want to be if he leave he never call me again H.ere I work to provide for him but I feel like its hard as a young single mother of a teen boy I feel like maybe he would be better off and happier somewere else idk what to do ive done everythin for my son since he ws born nd he acts out in school lies steals and it hard so I understand I really do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting > Adoption
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top