[loveajax]

stinky, dd's birth parents did not want or ''expect'' any money. but I have many aparent friends who did indeed pay ''bmom expenses'' and I wouldn't be surprised if that happens in at least fifty percent of the situations.I do agree with you, calamity, that the whole sutiation is ''set up'' by adoption ''professionals'' and is part of their ''marketing.'' I just think it's wrong. not fair to either e parents or paps.

[MommaKatja]

the more I think about it the more pre-birth matching and paying expenses seem to be unethical and coercive (even if its not always intentional). I'll stick with expenses for now since thats what this thread was about.

Its hard to say what the solution should be. I've sat her typing and deleting awhile now trying to come up with a way that helping a pregnant woman with expenses could not be coercive and each plan I have to "fix" it doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

Unless someone can come up with a way to eliminate the coercion I do not think adoption agencies or PAPs should pay expenses. I do think they should refer to places that offer maternity support services buthave no connection to adoption.

[MamaS]

While you all were debating, my daughter's friend, the expectant mother, told HER mother about upcoming Baby #3. Grandma kicked her out, but said she would continue to care for the two children she already had. Expectant mother talked to a lawyer, who knew a family. Result: Expectant mother has a six-month lease on a furnished apartment, a pre-paid cell phone, and a prepaid car service to take her to doctor's appointments. The PAPs are buying groceries, maternity clothing, etc.
The PAPs have been told the father is one of two possibles -- Mr. B or Mr C. The lawyer has said that both will have to be notified and tested and one will have to sign. She has said she will sign AFTER the father signs, to be sure there are no problems. She has NOT told them that if the father is Mr. C, that she will keep the baby and file for child support. My daughter told her that was unfair to the PAPs but she says it is perfectly legal. And she is right -- it is legal.

[RavenSong]

You know, folks, expectant mothers and birthmoms were NOT the people who thought up these financial schemes. Focus your anger on the agencies, the entire adoption industry, not the pregnant women.

Not many aparents and PAPs seem to care about the massive amounts of money they're being charged by agencies to adopt newborn infants. The only times I see anybody being incensed on the AP's boards are when the issue of discounting for AA and biracial babies comes up.

I saw a breakdown the other day on one of the AP boards of what an amom had spent on adopting her child. The marketing expenses were by far the greatest share of the pie. Excuse me, but MARKETING EXPENSES? How is this not buying or selling a baby??

When a new mother places her child for adoption thru an agency, the custody of the child is given to that agency. How is it not seen that the agency is selling that child? Is it only considered baby selling if it's done by the biological mother? Heaven forbid that a woman living in poverty gets any financial help while she's carrying the future child of an adoptive couple. But no one bats an eyelash at forking over thousands and thousands of dollars to the actual agency involved.

I have a feeling that if the government was the entity to fund the expenses of expectant moms that no one would care. After all, how many times have I read on these boards about agencies referring expectant moms to Medicaid to pay for childbirth and prenatal expenses? How many adoptive parents tell PAPs that they shouldn't have to pay any medical expenses for their soon-to-be babies? Just send them all to Medicaid.

Sorry about the rant, folks. I'm not in a very good mood today. I probably should just be quiet, but I'm kind of in a venting mood. And I'll probably wish I hadn't written all this in a few hours...

[lovemy2boys]

Ok - now I'm getting steamed and I don't even have a dog in this fight...

I just deleted my original post because I don't want to be the one to add fuel to the fire. In fact, I've edited this about 10 times because I want to express my disappointment, but don't want to come off as thinking my hurt is any more "valid" than anyone elses who have posted on this thread...

But the buying babies comment hurt, as did the medicaid comments. And our agency fees were minimal compared to some I've read of, so it's not like I'm trying to justify something.

Not much really upsets me on here - not in the way where I sit here in tears. But that was one of them.

[RavenSong]

Lovemy2boys, I apologize. I should have clarified in my latest post that I'm referring to agencies that are charging in the realm of $30,000 to $35,000 per baby. I am in no way saying that all adoption is buying or selling of a baby.

I have extremely serious doubts about the ethics of agencies that are charging exorbitant amounts of money, all in the name of "professional" fees.

I want to see the industry regulated in some way.

I'm sorry that I hurt your feelings. I truly did not mean to hurt you.

ETA: I told everyone that I would probably regret posting my vent. And I do...regret it...terribly. I was going to remove the post, but then figured that the subsequent post wouldn't make any sense. So I'm leaving it intact.

I'm sorry I vented here. It's so easy to misinterpret stuff in a forum...I do it all the time. Once again, I apologize. I'm going back under my rock now...

[lovemy2boys]

Raven - it's not you...not really...

It just seems like one of those "issues" that came up CONSTANTLY when we were trying to adopt...

EVERYONE would say "That's ridiculous that you have to pay for a kid" "It's not fair that you have to buy a baby...too many babies need a home" "I'll sell you mine"

It felt so dirty. And I know that's not what this thread is about...

I hate the whole fee situation. I hate that some paparents feel like they "have to" pay these expectant mom expenses...and I hate that expectant moms feel like they are coerced into placing their child because of these fees...

So anyway, no need for you to apologize...It's just my own hot button issue...

And spare your cat from your vents - of course you should vent here...just one of those days I guess

[Jackiejdajda]

I know Bill Pierce.. wrote on alt.adoption that he saw a large sum of money in the form of a copy of a check..or money order.

Bill Pierce: adoptions in the range of $75,000 to $90,000." - alt.adoption | Google Groups



Di Wellfare wrote (quoted) in 2003..

Mr. Gitelman is said to be favored by older, moneyed couples who want
quick, closed adoptions. Investigators have placed his fees at $50,000
and up; Mr. Pierce at the National Council for Adoption said he had
seen a photocopy of a check written to Mr. Gitelman, with endorsement,
"in the range of $75,000 to $90,000."

Bill Pierce replied in that thread..

>Bill Pierce witnesses big money transfer
I have posted to another thread on this topic, but it should be clear that I
have never said that I witnessed a "big money transfer." What I saw was a
photocopy, in color, of an endorsed certified check made out to a well-known
facilitator. That check was shown to me by a member of the media trying to do
a segment for television on that facilitator.
Bill Pierce

This thread (link above) is interesting.. and I personally do not think there is an aswer to all this..

lovemy2boys wrote
I hate the whole fee situation. I hate that some paparents feel like they "have to" pay these expectant mom expenses...and I hate that expectant moms feel like they are coerced into placing their child because of these fees...

I hate it too..

Jackie

[paigeturner]

I’ve been following this particular thread for days and trying to sort out my own feelings about it. Raven, I’m glad you posted what you did. Not because the tone of it or wording might have hurt feelings but because it helped me sort out what I’ve been feeling for a very long time. That a domestic infant adoption can cost 30-40k or more is outrageous. It isn’t the pregnant woman that is holding hopeful adoptive parents hostage; it’s the agencies, attorneys and those that work with them. I believe that any person or entity making an unreasonable profit off of a crisis pregnancy and the hopes and dreams of adoptive parents are in fact engaging in human trafficking.

For cripes sake, our government still regulates things like affordable telephone service, but the key people involved in the adoption triad are left to fend for themselves? It is wrong that agencies hold out a carrot of living expenses and other perks to an expectant mother and extort adoptive parents. This isn’t an “us vs. them” issue with “us” being birth parents and “them” being adoptive parents; this should be an “us vs. them” issue with “us” being ALL involved in the triad and “them” being the profiteers. Real reform can’t happen in a vacuum. Real reform can only happen in a strategic way with all of us working for the reform of our horrible adoption laws.

And, coercion…yes, IMO telling a woman who has just given birth and who has just said “hello” to her child that if you don’t hand the child back you’ll be forced to pay back support is coercion. Those dollars should not have been paid by the hopeful adoptive parents to the expectant mother in the first place. Adoptive parents are being extorted, but I don’t believe that the expectant parent in most cases is the one doing the extorting. In those cases where there is fraud perpetuated by an expectant mother to a hopeful adoptive parent – they should be prosecuted heavily. There should be protections in place for everyone and harsh punishments for those that are being unethical and fraudulent.

[bromanchik]

Originally Posted by loveajax

brenda, to be honest, I was referring to you (i thought I read somewhere that you were not licensed so I apologize).I have seen emoms ''counselled'' to parent even after they make an adoption plan....that's fine advice....it seems I never see added on ''don't accept any more funds'' or ''make sure you tell paps.''

actually, I am the first to tell people to not accept money from prospective adoptive parents. To be honest and straight forward.

[Janeytwo]

I am loathe to say this and I never thought I would; not open with you all.

But seeing what's going on out there with OA these days.....witnessing posts of the injustices on all sides?

Honestly, closed adoption was so much easier in some ways. Not that it was easy but more peaceful perhaps on some level.

I don't know how you young people do it; what kind of sheer guts it must take to traverse all this.

From open relinquish birthmothers to open adoptive parents......how does a person negotiate all of this and still stay sane?

You've all got my vote.

For all the long nightmare that Closed Adoption raked on women; well.....young folks are still being raked over the coals of the adoption world. And the adoptees are caught in the middle.

Is this crap never going to end?

Here is an honest question that I am certain many women from the Closed Era must surely ask themselves and I ask it of all of us here now..........

Would "baby buying" ever have occurred on such a seemingly rampant scale in the time of closed adoptions? I do not think so.

Dont' get me wrong. I'm not naive. We're talking about the human race here. If there's a sleazy underhanded way of doing business, one member of our stellar species will surely find it.

But that's not true of all of us.

Just my opinion. I would love to hear what the good women in here have to say.

I am serious here. Did closed adoptions offer some form of peace that open does not?

And if so, is there some legal way to meld the two so that we can ease the challenges for future generations on all sides of this triad?

Much hugs to all.

Oh and if any flamers decide to stop by to give me their superior opinion, you'll be wasting valuable ammo. Go shoot some other loser. I got laundry to do.

[Jackiejdajda]

loveajax

I have seen emoms ''counselled'' to parent even after they make an adoption plan

bromanchik

actually, I am the first to tell people to not accept money from prospective adoptive parents. To be honest and straight forward

In all the time I have been reading your posts on the net.. Brenda.. I have never seen you 'council' a woman to keep..

I just did a link to your home page.. (drop down menu under the name) and I think what you and others have put up there is very important to/for a woman considering relinquishing..

Jackie

[Jackiejdajda]

Janeytwo

Honestly, closed adoption was so much easier in some ways. Not that it was easy but more peaceful perhaps on some level.

I made the decision.. I contacted the agency.. I obeyed the darn rules..
The coercion to me was my relationship with my family.. the secret rules..

OA.. I think is the more humane way.. and I think the grief work starts right away..
No shut down of emotions that just fester and grow..

It starts out hard but may end up getting easier along the way (I sure hope so).. if no lies are told if there is no betrayal..
But then as you write.. we are humans..

Would "baby buying" ever have occurred on such a seemingly rampant scale in the time of closed adoptions? I do not think so.

Dont' get me wrong. I'm not naive. We're talking about the human race here. If there's a sleazy underhanded way of doing business, one member of our stellar species will surely find it.

There was the black market on babies in my time..
A terrible thing..


Jackie

[RavenSong]

Originally Posted by Jackiejdajda

I made the decision.. I contacted the agency.. I obeyed the darn rules.. The coercion to me was my relationship with my family.. the secret rules..

I personally view the coercion in my own life to have been perpetrated by the societal consensus back in the Baby Scoop Era that demanded children born out of wedlock be raised by two-parent families, i.e., placed for adoption.

There was also a lot of emotional coercion going on by the agency social worker and my juvenile probation officer. The coercion was mostly in the form of extreme pressure. I guess I was more pressured than coerced.

Originally Posted by Jackiejdajda

There was the black market on babies in my time.. A terrible thing..

I have three words that sum this up: Georgia Tann, Tennessee. There are also other examples that you can read about at the Adoption History Project website at the University of Oregon.

[RavenSong]

Originally Posted by paigeturner

For cripes sake, our government still regulates things like affordable telephone service, but the key people involved in the adoption triad are left to fend for themselves? It is wrong that agencies hold out a carrot of living expenses and other perks to an expectant mother and extort adoptive parents. This isn’t an “us vs. them” issue with “us” being birth parents and “them” being adoptive parents; this should be an “us vs. them” issue with “us” being ALL involved in the triad and “them” being the profiteers. Real reform can’t happen in a vacuum. Real reform can only happen in a strategic way with all of us working for the reform of our horrible adoption laws.

Paige, as usual, I totally agree with you. This is exactly what I was thinking about the other day, how our government regulates everything from public utilities, to business licensing, to "lemon car" laws, to building codes and building permits. I do NOT understand why all the private adoption agencies, facilitators, and adoption attorneys are not being regulated in any meaningful way. Why isn't the government concerned about the exorbitant amounts of money being charged to adoptive parents in order to adopt their babies? I just don't get it. We need reform of the entire adoption industry, and we need it quickly, IMHO.

If birthparents and adoptive parents could just get on the same page in regard to adoption reform, maybe we could really make a difference. You're the lobbyist, Paige. What do we do? How do we do this??