Should birth fathers have the same rights as birth mothers? (babies, parents)
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.
Federal law doesn't govern adoption. State law governs adoption. Arguably, federal attempts to regulate anything other than foreign adoption would violate several provisions of the United States Constitution. If you don't like that, fine. Be prepared to get the Constitution amended. It will a 2/3's vote of Congress and ratification by three quarters of the states.
If you want to get an idea what's involved go watch the movie "Lincoln" with Sally Field and Daniel Day Lewis. Its all about the effort required to get the Thirteenth Amendment ratified. A warning: It was pretty difficult even for Abraham Lincoln when he had an issue as profound as abolishing slavery.
I agree with the Utah Supreme Court's decision in this case.
I happen to live in Utah. FTR, the Mormon culture in this state is the major reason the state has a strong Putative Father Statute. The belief here is that, generally speaking, a two parent family is a better place to raise a child than a one parent household is. The biggest problem with our law is when out of state people are involved in adoptions here. And, there have been several state supreme court cases which give birth parents more latitude as a result.
I think we Utahns are well aware that some others in this country do not share the particular values we have. They are entitled to:
1. Stay in their state and have their state legislature pass adoption and other laws which reflect their values;
2. Move to our state and try to persuade our legislature to change its laws;
3. Not become involved in adoption issues at all.
But, if you come off like we're a bunch of dumb cretins out of step with the rest of the country be prepared to be ignored. Go ahead and try to get a federal law "fixing this". It'll never happen. Your efforts might better be directed into open records laws for adoptees. I think you are six states down with about 44 to go.
Federal law doesn't govern adoption. State law governs adoption. Arguably, federal attempts to regulate anything other than foreign adoption would violate several provisions of the United States Constitution. If you don't like that, fine. Be prepared to get the Constitution amended. It will a 2/3's vote of Congress and ratification by three quarters of the states.
If you want to get an idea what's involved go watch the movie "Lincoln" with Sally Field and Daniel Day Lewis. Its all about the effort required to get the Thirteenth Amendment ratified. A warning: It was pretty difficult even for Abraham Lincoln when he had an issue as profound as abolishing slavery.
I agree with the Utah Supreme Court's decision in this case.
I happen to live in Utah. FTR, the Mormon culture in this state is the major reason the state has a strong Putative Father Statute. The belief here is that, generally speaking, a two parent family is a better place to raise a child than a one parent household is. The biggest problem with our law is when out of state people are involved in adoptions here. And, there have been several state supreme court cases which give birth parents more latitude as a result.
I think we Utahns are well aware that some others in this country do not share the particular values we have. They are entitled to:
1. Stay in their state and have their state legislature pass adoption and other laws which reflect their values;
2. Move to our state and try to persuade our legislature to change its laws;
3. Not become involved in adoption issues at all.
But, if you come off like we're a bunch of dumb cretins out of step with the rest of the country be prepared to be ignored. Go ahead and try to get a federal law "fixing this". It'll never happen. Your efforts might better be directed into open records laws for adoptees. I think you are six states down with about 44 to go.
Um. Federal laws govern lots of things not limited to the constitutional amendments.
Last I checked, anyway.
I find your post really offensive, misinformed, and ignorant, and I could say more, but you never respond, so there's no point.
Few single men want to raise a child. Those that do usually have extensive family to help out, and usually his Mother takes care of the child. But, if a man wants his child, he should have it. And the Mother is still obligated financially to support this child.
Agree. Our son was adopted as an infant. The single mother had planned for the adoption early on. She had broken up with her longer term boyfriend and had a sort of fling with someone else right away. The someone else thought he was the father and his mother flew in from a distance and they were insisting on taking the baby home rather than having it adopted. His mother refused to believe that this baby had DS even though the test showed that. The birthmother asked that a paternity test be done and it was and this man and his mother returned with the baby after having (and naming) him for 3 days. Then, the birthmother decided that she and the birthfather would take the baby home and after 10 days there and a new name he was placed in private foster care where he spend 2 weeks with yet another new name until we brought him home and we were his fourth home and name in his 4 weeks of life.
So, you see that it is important that these birthparents get their acts together since we are talking about the life of a baby.
A birth father married to a birth mother has those same rights and if they aren't married, I guess they better know the law and give some thought to the risks of sexual intercourse, one being pregnancy and more importantly, passing on STDs especially to a baby. I wonder, too, just how many of those guys are pressured by their moms to try to keep the baby from being adopted.
Thought: Having sex with someone that you really wouldn't want to have raising your child.
Agree. Our son was adopted as an infant. The single mother had planned for the adoption early on. She had broken up with her longer term boyfriend and had a sort of fling with someone else right away. The someone else thought he was the father and his mother flew in from a distance and they were insisting on taking the baby home rather than having it adopted. His mother refused to believe that this baby had DS even though the test showed that. The birthmother asked that a paternity test be done and it was and this man and his mother returned with the baby after having (and naming) him for 3 days. Then, the birthmother decided that she and the birthfather would take the baby home and after 10 days there and a new name he was placed in private foster care where he spend 2 weeks with yet another new name until we brought him home and we were his fourth home and name in his 4 weeks of life.
So, you see that it is important that these birthparents get their acts together since we are talking about the life of a baby.
A birth father married to a birth mother has those same rights and if they aren't married, I guess they better know the law and give some thought to the risks of sexual intercourse, one being pregnancy and more importantly, passing on STDs especially to a baby. I wonder, too, just how many of those guys are pressured by their moms to try to keep the baby from being adopted.
Thought: Having sex with someone that you really wouldn't want to have raising your child.
Re bold bit: Very true. That is why they need proper counselling rather than the type of counselling that many agencies, lawyers seem to provide in the US of A. Your adoption scene over there is messing up the minds and lives of many mothers and their children. The powers to be in adoption are more concerned about their version of Utopia rather than the child - very sad.
As for the rest of your post, are you one of those aparents who will praise their bparents on one hand for "being selfless" and on the other hand judge her for her sexual history?
Federal law doesn't govern adoption. State law governs adoption. Arguably, federal attempts to regulate anything other than foreign adoption would violate several provisions of the United States Constitution. If you don't like that, fine. Be prepared to get the Constitution amended. It will a 2/3's vote of Congress and ratification by three quarters of the states.
If you want to get an idea what's involved go watch the movie "Lincoln" with Sally Field and Daniel Day Lewis. Its all about the effort required to get the Thirteenth Amendment ratified. A warning: It was pretty difficult even for Abraham Lincoln when he had an issue as profound as abolishing slavery.
I agree with the Utah Supreme Court's decision in this case.
I happen to live in Utah. FTR, the Mormon culture in this state is the major reason the state has a strong Putative Father Statute. The belief here is that, generally speaking, a two parent family is a better place to raise a child than a one parent household is. The biggest problem with our law is when out of state people are involved in adoptions here. And, there have been several state supreme court cases which give birth parents more latitude as a result.
I think we Utahns are well aware that some others in this country do not share the particular values we have. They are entitled to:
1. Stay in their state and have their state legislature pass adoption and other laws which reflect their values;
2. Move to our state and try to persuade our legislature to change its laws;
3. Not become involved in adoption issues at all.
But, if you come off like we're a bunch of dumb cretins out of step with the rest of the country be prepared to be ignored. Go ahead and try to get a federal law "fixing this". It'll never happen. Your efforts might better be directed into open records laws for adoptees. I think you are six states down with about 44 to go.
No-one has said anything against Mormons - I don't think they have been mentioned at all. Many of us have a problem with certain loopholes being taken by some lawyers. Responsible young men are being denied their rights by Utah laws. We are not talking about irresponsible men who are out to cause trouble but young men who always thought they were going to parent. Also, just because a woman "choses" adoption, it doesn't mean she doesn't care for her boyfriend - part of the NCFA counselling program involves undermining the woman's support networks - part of the counselling involves making the woman believe that if she can't parent her child totally without the help of anyone else in the world at any time in her life then she shouldn't be parenting at all.
Also Warren, there are judges in Utah who do find the adoption laws for bfathers to be unfair.
What I will say re Mormons and adoption is that the following is a coercive statement:
When the possibility of a successful marriage is unlikely, unwed parents should be encouraged to place the child for adoption preferably through LDS Family Services.â€
Now, perhaps with a desire to better understand who you are and to learn something of your genetic inheritance from your biological parents, you may wonder if it is appropriate or advisable to seek out your birth mother and father. It is understandable that you would be curious about your birth parents and perhaps desire to know their identities. However, the First Presidency has advised: “Local Church leaders should discourage adopted children and their adoptive parents from seeking to identify the children’s natural parents. However, when adopted children have genetic or medical problems, the family may seek medical information about the natural parents but should be discouraged from seeking their identities.â€[40]
As for the following:
THE ADOPTED CHILD
As an adopted child, you should first understand something about your adoptive parents. You are an answer to their prayers and have filled a longing in their hearts to be parents. The fact that you were not born through their loins makes no difference to them. They love you as if you had been. They feel gratitude towards your birth mother and father for bringing you into the world and recognize it was an act of love, on their part, to enable you to become part of their family. They have thanked Heavenly Father for your birth parents and have prayed for their happiness and peace.
As an adopted child you may have many questions about whom you are, why you came into mortality in the circumstances in which you did, and what your potential is. To answer such questions, it is important that you first understand the doctrine of premortality. The Proclamation on the Family states: “In the premortal realm, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshiped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize his or her divine destiny as an heir of eternal life. . . . Each [human being] is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny.â€[20]
From these statements we can draw four points relative to the doctrine of premortality.
Well, thanks for bringing home to us whom the most important person in the adoption is. It sure as heck aint us kids.
Agree. Our son was adopted as an infant. The single mother had planned for the adoption early on. She had broken up with her longer term boyfriend and had a sort of fling with someone else right away. The someone else thought he was the father and his mother flew in from a distance and they were insisting on taking the baby home rather than having it adopted. His mother refused to believe that this baby had DS even though the test showed that. The birthmother asked that a paternity test be done and it was and this man and his mother returned with the baby after having (and naming) him for 3 days. Then, the birthmother decided that she and the birthfather would take the baby home and after 10 days there and a new name he was placed in private foster care where he spend 2 weeks with yet another new name until we brought him home and we were his fourth home and name in his 4 weeks of life.
So, you see that it is important that these birthparents get their acts together since we are talking about the life of a baby.
A birth father married to a birth mother has those same rights and if they aren't married, I guess they better know the law and give some thought to the risks of sexual intercourse, one being pregnancy and more importantly, passing on STDs especially to a baby. I wonder, too, just how many of those guys are pressured by their moms to try to keep the baby from being adopted.
Thought: Having sex with someone that you really wouldn't want to have raising your child.
No they shouldn't. The burden of child care, usually, falls to the mother and, as bad as having an absentee father is, having an absentee mother would be worse (I raised two step sons who were rejected by their birth mother and I can tell you this scars children.). It is in the best interest of the child to be placed up for adoption if its mother doesn't want it (for whatever reason including altruistic ones). What has to be considered here is the best interest of the child. Babies need to bond with their mothers whether they're adoptive or biological. It is maternal sensitivity that correlates to outcomes NOT paternal sensitivity. In order to make an argument that men should have the same rights here one must show that children fare as well in a motherless home as they do in a fatherless home (when in a situation where the other parent simply does not pony up. Death of a parent is different. Death is not a choice unless it was a suicide.). I don't think such a case can be made in general. I think if we were to look at the data, we'd find that children fare best when raised by mothers who want them whether they are their biological mother or adoptive mother.
No they shouldn't. The burden of child care, usually, falls to the mother and, as bad as having an absentee father is, having an absentee mother would be worse (I raised two step sons who were rejected by their birth mother and I can tell you this scars children.). It is in the best interest of the child to be placed up for adoption if its mother doesn't want it (for whatever reason including altruistic ones). What has to be considered here is the best interest of the child. Babies need to bond with their mothers whether they're adoptive or biological. It is maternal sensitivity that correlates to outcomes NOT paternal sensitivity. In order to make an argument that men should have the same rights here one must show that children fare as well in a motherless home as they do in a fatherless home (when in a situation where the other parent simply does not pony up. Death of a parent is different. Death is not a choice unless it was a suicide.). I don't think such a case can be made in general. I think if we were to look at the data, we'd find that children fare best when raised by mothers who want them whether they are their biological mother or adoptive mother.
Be very interested to see the data that makes up your post.
Be very interested to see the data that makes up your post.
I'd be very interested to see that data too. I really don't think babies care if their main caretaker is male or female.
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.
