|
Anna, as I've been following the thread of the past few days that morphed into a *ahem* discussion on legally enforceable open adoptions, I've honed my views a little. And they really line up almost entirely with what you have written.
What Leigh wrote on that thread was very poignant about how a legal agreement might be limiting a relationship by following it to the letter, I'd like to add that stiffling the natural progression of a relationship by over-specifying in the agreement (such as visitation commitments, etc.) can be a recipe for disaster, too. If with the best of intentions adult parties enter into an agreement that cannot be upheld to the letter, due to life changes, personality clashes, whatever, in a perfect world the "adults" would renegotiate. We all know that the world isn't perfect, and adults aren't always adult in their actions. If things are following the agreement to the letter, they would be likely to at best feel resentment in the relationship, and at worst pitch it all.
I liken it to a pre-nup agreement ... the majority of couples about to get married feel that that's not a great idea because you're setting yourself up to expect failure. I know that's not entirely a parallel, since the pre-nup is the contingency for failure. But isn't specifying consequences for not upholding a visitation schedule in the legal agreement similar?
I absolutely agree what you stated about pictures, letters and updates being legally enforceable for both parties, aparents and bparents.
All that being said, I wholly support that open adoption expectations and provisions should be documented clearly and shared between adult parties. That would include visitation, travel, access, how birthfamily is named/referred to, gift giving protocols (e.g. with respect to other siblings), and any other expectations that are important to one or more parties. But when it comes to the legal enforcement, I do believe that bringing the legal system into intimate relationships can be a recipe for disaster.
I do believe that there should be legal provisions for anyone falsely representing themselves (there was an example given of an afamily immediately moving away from the birthfamily and not leaving a forwarding address). That should be considered fraud.
|