[Hadley2]

Hi,
One of the biggest issues I read about over and over is first families saying that adoption agencies misinform, mislead and manipulate women in crisis to get them to place their babies instead of actually helping them make fully informed decisions including all options.

At first it struck me as an odd thing to say because it seemed as if, well, of course, an adoption agency is going to try to persuade you to place, that's what their business is. Why would you expect them to discuss anything else?

Then I began to realize that some women turn to these agencies because they know of no other place for help (although my understanding is that PP does provide counseling that covers or tries to cover keeping and placing as well as abortion). And if there are other places, they usually have a single agenda or may be faith-based in a way that isn't comfortable to the woman, etc. and/or just aren't nearly so good at marketing themselves and being visible and accessible as the adoption agencies are.

More importantly, though, the adoption agencies are working both sides of the street. And that strikes me as an obvious and big conflict of interest.

I wonder if anyone has brought forth the idea that adoption agencies could only legally represent the interests of prospective adoptive parents and be required to disclose that and the fact that other options may be more appropriate at every contact with the family in pregnancy. Then, that some other type of agency should counsel and represent the family in pregnancy.

I'm not liking my analogy, please forgive its crassness, but I'm thinking along the lines of how real estate agents must remind prospective buyers that they work for the sellers and represent the sellers' interest.

It just seems that if the two things could be separated so that the adoption agency becomes one of several possible post-counseling destinations instead of the counseling destination, a lot of regret, bitterness and anger could be avoided. (Not all, but maybe a lot.)

I don't know how it would work or who would represent the family in pregnancy, but wondered if anyone on this forum would like to brainstorm this starter of an idea or knows of how it might already be implemented somewhere?

[SchmennaLeigh]

Technically speaking, expectant parents have the right to their own legal counsel. However, in my case, I was not informed of that right and therefore, absolutely no one was looking after my best interest, my legal rights to be fully informed of what open adoption entailed in our state of placement and other necessary bits of information.

Your idea is good; having separate agencies/attorneys. Until we see a vast change in ethics, which many of us are pushing for, I don't see it happening. It's "easier" the way that it is right now. Sigh, right?

[Isabo]

What you really need to do is to advocate for a change in the laws of your state. For instance, in Kentucky, it is unethical for a lawyer to represent both the prospective adoptive parents and the expectant mother. BUT, IT IS LEGAL for an adoption agency to do this!! I could not believe it when I heard this, but yes, I heard right. I discovered this while sitting in a Continuing Legal Education class listening to a lecture by a Family Court Judge. After the lecture, I spoke with the Judge for a few minutes. I asked her whether she interviews the mother in private before she proceeds with the termination of parental rights. The judge said no, that she felt that this would be an insult to the mother, as she must have put a lot of thought into her decision, and it was not her place to question it!!! I explained to the Judge that there was sometimes/often a lot of pressure and misinformation given to these mothers, and that she should really talk to them privately so she can get a feel for their mental state and their level of understanding about what their rights were. This judge told me that she would think of our talk whenever she was in this situation and act with our discussion in mind.

As far as a mother having separate counsel ... here is a case I know of personally, where the adoptive parents paid for the mother to have legal counsel. They got her a TITLE attorney (an attorney who specializes in land deals) to represent her. This attorney didn't know ANYTHING about adoption and utterly failed to inform her of her rights. Luckily, this expectant mom reached out to a group I am a member of, and those members helped her find good legal counsel. She used that legal counsel to stop the relinquishment. Once she knew her rights, understood what was happening to her, and found emotional and intellectual support, she felt empowered to parent. I am very happy for her. So yes, having separate legal counsel is a great idea, but it needs to be legal counsel that has experience in adoption and is not hired by the adoptive parents or the agency.

[Juliana13]

The agency we went through is set up for expectant mothers and their families. They are upfront to us, as prospective adoptive parents that their priority is not to find us a child, but instead to provide counseling and resources to expectant mothers and their families. We - the pool of hopeful parents - are one of their resources, should adoption be chosen. They do not promise any length of a "waiting period" (might be a month, might be 10 years, depending on when an emom chooses us). They DO offer classes and counseling and help with preparing profiles, etc. to us, though. As well as do the homestudies and arrange the legal stuff.

That should be a deterrent, it would seem for aparent wannabes, but I find it comforting. I know that the birthmothers of my children were give good info, good counseling (pre and post-placement), and weren't coerced into anything. The agency is also non-profit (being through our church), so there is no financial motivation for them. (It is also cheap, relatively, so that works for us, too.)

I agree with what's been posted. I think there should be an agency, or liason, or advocate who is assigned to protect the rights of the birthfamilies, to make sure they have correct information and resources, and allow them the power to change their minds without guilt. Of course, in many instances, that would mean the cost would go up some, but I think it's important. I like the security of knowing that my children's birthmothers made the choice themselves, to do what they felt was right for them, not because they felt they had to, or that they had no other choice.

I remember a defining moment for me was when we were on our way to the hospital to pick up our son, and the caseworker called to say she'd talked with the birthmother, and everything was good. That we were to meet her and her mother at the hospital as she was being discharged, and leave with her (sparing lots of extra paperwork). Then she'd give us our son, and come in the next day to sign relinquishment papers. I said, "Wait! YOU'RE not going to be there?????? Then who's in charge?" She paused and patiently said, "The birthmother is in charge." Of course. It went beautifully, but forever pressed into my mind and heart that she was, indeed in charge of that decision. It actually brings me peace when I think about it.

Anyway, I think it gives a lot of security and peace, both immediately and in the long term, for ALL members of the triad, to know that all decisions were informed, well thought out and not pressured.

[bromanchik]

Originally Posted by Juliana13

The agency we went through is set up for expectant mothers and their families. They are upfront to us, as prospective adoptive parents that their priority is not to find us a child, but instead to provide counseling and resources to expectant mothers and their families. We - the pool of hopeful parents - are one of their resources, should adoption be chosen.

This is the same philosophy as the agency I went through. In fact, as they were a complete Mental Health facility, the maternity counseling was a separate program with separate funding. Maternity service funding was not tied to how many adoptions they did. This is the most important point. In my mind, this is they way it needs to be. All else brings conflicts.

As far as I know there are only a handfull like this in the country.

[Isabo]

Originally Posted by Hadley2

Hi,
One of the biggest issues I read about over and over is first families saying that adoption agencies misinform, mislead and manipulate women in crisis to get them to place their babies instead of actually helping them make fully informed decisions including all options.

At first it struck me as an odd thing to say because it seemed as if, well, of course, an adoption agency is going to try to persuade you to place, that's what their business is. Why would you expect them to discuss anything else?

Hadley,

My mother took me to a family services agency when she discovered I was pregnant. The agency failed to consider myself and my child a family and instead were serving the clients paying the agency to acquire a family for them. The agency was unethical and didn't explain that I wasn't considered a client but instead was a means to an end and my son was a commodity. So, I did think I was going to a full services agency, but I was naive and I trusted people who had an air of authority. I believed what they told me was best.

So, my anger at the agency stems from their lack of counseling for me and that they failed to explore ways that I could parent my child. Instead it was adoption "counseling" all the way.

[BrandyHagz]

12 years ago, when I was faced with an unplanned pregnancy, I looked in the phone book.

I didn't call an 'adoption agency' - I called a 'charity' who promised to help me with my unplanned pregnancy.

They were faith based, like so many others, and never mentioned 'adoption' in their name or ad.

To me, thats where the problem starts. If you're going to call yourself "(Insert Religion) Charities" or "(Insert Religion) Family Servies" - then you need to provide a service beyond adoption.

[MommaKatja]

I too believe there there need to be pregnancy options counseling centers with NO connection to agencies. I being my MSW program in the fall and have been searching for an internship at such a place and (at least near me) they dont exist. So my plan ,if I can't track one down in a reasonable commuting distance by the time I have to have my internship, is to intern at one of the better family services agencies that does offer adoptions but also parenting programs and then work toward starting my own pregnancy options counseling center.

[krystabelle]

I agree that the two should be completely separate. The adoption agency needs to represent one or the other... I have a hard time believing they have everyone's interests at heart.

I used an attorney...looked him up in the phone book actually. He specializes in family and criminal law. He's done work with the Gladney center here in the Dallas area. He made it perfectly clear that if I chose to raise my daughter that he would gladly do whatever was necessary to see that I had custody and child support coming in. He was wonderful and has become a dear friend.

He knew of several couples that were hoping to adopt and recommended I meet up with a few of them and see what I thought. I fell in love with the first couple. They hired their own attorney.

I never felt like I was not being informed of my options as my attorney repeatedly reminded me that I had choices and he was working for me.

After going through the process and it being finalized last week, I honestly think this is the best way to do an adoption. I don't see how an agency who is catering to both sides can truly have both interests at heart.

I agree there's a major conflict there.

[Leigh131313]

I know we've had threads with this type of discussion in the past - and as an aparent I completely agree. I think adoption agencies should be just that - ALL about adoption. That way things are upfront and black and white.

I think the thing is - if that were the case, there would have to be a new type of facility made. It sounds like one along the lines of planned parenthood - but honestly I don't know a THING about them, heck they aren't even in my yellow pages.


So, we need an agency that takes eparents and offers councelling as well as helps people with parenting plans and can give info on ALL options to someone in a crisis pregnancy - HOWEVER they would NOT be involved in the matching process.

Now, the problem I see is - who is paying for this? It clearly has to be an unbiased party - if it were faith based, alot of eparents may assume there would be that pressure to place and not alot of info on alternatives.

With an adoption agency - the prospective adoptive parents foot the bill.

So, when it comes down to it - I think the reason agencies do all this is because aparents may be some of the few people WILLING to foot the bill - no questions asked. What hopeful aparent would refuse to pay "birthparent councelling" ...

But I do agree...I think adoption agencies should stick to what they do best- Adoptions.

[Hadley2]

I agree the financial incentive is not there and nonprofits often seem to have--at least by reputation--a single or at least a main agenda or focus whether it be placement, abortion, or parenting. Some of the new groups starting up centers to help eparents parent are faith based and that can be off-putting to some mothers, especially younger ones. Public agencies might be subject to the moral politics of the administration, I suppose, and therefore not be as neutral as you would hope.

Any outside-the-box ideas on how to overcome such barriers?

[SuddenlySusan]

It seems to me that no matter what type of agency an expectant mother uses, she should be advised to obtain an attorney once she decides to place her child for adoption. I think all emoms considering placement need legal advice from someone who represents only their interests. Upon agreement by both parties, the judge can direct the aparents to cover the emom's attorney fees. I don't think any adoption should take place without an emom/bmom having legal representation. Ever. Just my opinion, however.

Peace,
Susan
mother-out-law
(bmom in reunion)

[Hadley2]

How about court-appointed? --I know there is probably not an allowance for this now, but what if there were?

[Leigh131313]

Ok - one thing about aquiring a lawyer without the agency....

If the eparent decides to parent - who foots the bill? Is the eparent then responsible?

See, with our agency - we take on the fees.....If the emom decides to parent, the lawyer fees are still ours to pay. but if doing it independent of an agency.....i don't know how that would work.

I agree - I'm just pondering the way it would have to work.

[Hadley2]

If court-appointed, the state would be paying for those birthparents who cannot pay. Birthparents who can pay, would.