[restalyne]

you are absollutely right on.....

[timni]

OK I voted only in certain circumstances and I want to clarify my point.

I think it is usually a very bad choice....however I think there are always circumstances that can warrant an exception. What if a bmom was put out on the streets or beeing abused etc.. I know that if that had been the case with E (bmom) I would have been in my car picking her up and bringing her to my house until things could be sorted out. We were planning on becoming an extended family and yes it could have caused HUGE problems but I could have done no less.

Thankfully most of us are not in this situation so we get to speak hypothetically but If we make die hard rules with no leeway we can end up causing more pain. So I guess that is my explanation.

Please let me reitterate I think it is usually a very bad choice. But you just never know.

[adoptionsearchblog2]

Nooooo! Too much chance for it to create pressure on the young pregnant woman - IMHO, no exceptions. If a young woman is homeless, etc. there are other options. I believe that we must make some hard and fast rules - it is necessary to prevent coercion to have stricter laws re this sort of situation.

Any contact before birth between adoptive parents and a pregnant woman should not be allowed. (I know many adoptive parents disagree and some birth parents too.) I know that some people think that extreme - but, there is just too much potential for pressure. I do not believe that adoptive parents are generally evil and intend to pressure young women, but, it happens. They may not even understand or know what causes undue pressure.

Plus, it is subjecting adoptive parents to potential pain and grief to get attached to a woman and/or her baby. If she changes her mind - it is harder for them if they know her and are thinking that getting her baby is a done deal.

[lahdh4]

I don't think that it is a good idea for this situation at all. It just puts WAY TOO MUCH pressure on the bmom to then place the child with this couple.

[MelissaJohnson]

Ok I too think that living with the family you wish to place with is a bad idea, but what if the agency had a program where you could sort of foster a person who is pplanning on placing. So that the pbmom could have a place to be that is suportive and safe (hopefully) but there wouldnt be the expectation that she place with that family. This could still place expectations on the woman by the agancy but it seems like it could be an ok idea.

[Mommy24]

Melissa, are you saying that an expectant mom who is considering placing stay with a potential adoptive family from the agency but not the potential family she may chose? That may be a good solution to an expectant mom who needs housing. Very interesting idea!

[SchmennaLeigh]

I would prefer to foster a woman who was pregnant in order to help her parent. I'd like to see THAT program start up in our area. Sigh.

[rose524]

I think it would be a good idea for folks to foster a pregnant woman, as long as those folks are not potential adoptive parents. IMHO it does not help anyone if the foster family is looking to adopt. Too much pressure on the pregnant woman, and too much disappointment and expectation on the fostering couple.

[Isabo]

Originally Posted by adoptionsearchblog2

Any contact before birth between adoptive parents and a pregnant woman should not be allowed. (I know many adoptive parents disagree and some birth parents too.) I know that some people think that extreme - but, there is just too much potential for pressure.

I completely agree with adoptionsearchblog2. I am from the "older generation" of middle class teenage mothers who relinquished in the closed adoption era due to societal pressure and shame and the single minded pressure (coercion) from the "family services" agency for me to relinquish my son for adoption. ANYTHING that potentially pressures a pregnant woman to relinquish should be avoided, including "matching" with or living with potential adoptive parents.

Isabo

[kune]

Isabo
I too am a birthmother from the closed era. The only other young women I personally knew who relinquished their child in 1969 did so to a family she lived with for the last three months of her pregnancy. They were her daughter's to-be family - treated my friend as a friend - and for the last 35 years she has known exactly what her daughter was up to; known the family who raised her, and on occasions, shared in their highs and their lows. I on the other hand, lived in ignorance - never even knowing if my son was alive and well. We have been in reunion now for 4 years, but I can't replace those missing years.

In certain circumstances, living with the prospective adoptive parents is the best situation.

Ann

[Leigh131313]

Kune,

thats a very interesting perspective, thank you for sharing it. I still don't think in todays world that I'd be comfortable with it, but you do raise a good point.

[Isabo]

Ann,

I agree with you that in the circumstances you described, that was the best situation. In the closed adoption era, if you were white, middle class, single and pregnant and you did not have your family's support, it was a foregone conclusion that you would lose your child to adoption. There was really no "choice," no matter how much we kid ourselves or others protest. Society, family services agencies, churches and even our own families condemned us and turned their backs. The coercion was inescapable. So, it sounds like your friend made the best of a very bad situation.

In today's world, there ARE options for young women. However, I still see naive young women getting sold a bill of goods, believing that their only option is to relinquish. I see it all the time. We only have to look at the millions of dollars spent by adoption agencies on marketing the "miracle of adoption" to vulnerable girls in crisis pregnancies. We also see prospective adoptive couples writing coercive "Dear Birthmother" letters to girls who are not birthmothers but only potentially so. These letters treat the girls as if the decision has already been made - that relinquishment is a given and that these potential parents have SO MUCH MORE to offer. They are propaganda plain and simple and don't begin to tell the whole truth. What they don't tell those girls (for instance), and what my son's adoptive parents hid from the agency and therefore from me, is that the super dad just had an affair with the neighborhood whore and left his wife during the affair, and that the mother is a control freak and noone and nothing will ever please her or make her happy. They also might fail to mention that when they have a biological "miracle" baby of their own, the adopted one will forever be ignored, criticized and left wanting (including being denied medical attention). And of course, those particular facts aren't true of most, but some milder version of it probably is, and it is certainly was true in my son's situation.

I got a little off track, but my point is that coercion is part and parcel of adoption today but girls do have real options, unlike when we relinquished. Therefore, I hate to see a girl live with prospective parents and feel the pressure not to disappoint these people she may come to love, and so may relinquish out of guilt and pressure. I just saw a grieving prospective adoptive parent on another thread say that she was convinced that this baby (that the mother chose to parent) was meant by God for her, the potential adoptive mother. What kind of pressure did that put on the pregnant mother?

Adoption should be about finding homes for children in genuine need, and not about creating situations where child are separated from their mothers and purposely placed in need so that prospective adoptive parents get their baby.

And of course I understand that no-one will see themselves or anyone else in this post, and everyone will have a fit. God forbid anybody be honest about the downsides of the adoption industry, especially someone who has been taken for that particular ride. So be it.

[Leigh131313]

As a moderator on this forum, I'd just like to post a few friendly reminders.

Please remember to use family friendly language when posting on this forum. It is also important not to use sweeping generalizations when discussing issues on the forum.

If you have a concern regarding a specific thread, please comment directly to that thread. Do not bring the issue elsewhere, where the original poster cannot have a say.

Adoption is a very emotional issue for all of us. At times we can get carried away with our emotions, but it is very important here to be respectful of everyone, and not pass judgement on other members.

Thanks guys!

[kune]

Isabo
I also work through the forums and gain perceptions and understanding from the different threads. How often have I read of birthmothers making decisions based on the mutual agreement of both parties agreeing to an open adoption, only to find down the track that the adoption is closed - sometimes with the adopting family moving out of State and leaving no forwarding address. Until such time as open adoptions are legally binding in all respects, if the birthparent with no other support, and in need of care and accommodation, can form a solid friendship or family relationship with the prospective adoptiing family, I can think of no safer way of ensuring that you have an enduring place in your child's life while they grow up.

At birth, you still have an option to parent; noone today forces a birthmother to sign the relinquishment papers and any young woman who changes her mind would have the support from social services if this was their wish.

I agree that our children are not given by God to specific families - they are relinquished by mothers who value life and want the best for their children.

You wrote....

my point is that coercion is part and parcel of adoption today but girls do have real options, unlike when we relinquished.

Adoption is never without pain but it is the best we have got at the moment (and 35 years ago) for children born at the wrong time or in the wrong circumstances.
I say to any birthmothers reading this thread....do what is right for you and your child. Weigh up the options carefully and remember......the child you carry is yours until such time as you agree to relinquish your parental rights. If in doubt........don't sign.

Ann

[bromanchik]

Originally Posted by kune

At birth, you still have an option to parent; noone today forces a birthmother to sign the relinquishment papers and any young woman who changes her mind would have the support from social services if this was their wish.

Oh if only this were true. Increasingly there are fewer supports for young mothers. Welfare reform has put restricyions on how long welfare can be received and as a result we are seeing more and more women relinquishing second and third babies, Cuts in section 8 housing grants made last year put an estimated 250,000 families on the street, so there is no help there for the young mom who has no support from family or friends.

I think "force" is a subjective term. Are there really options for the mom who is homeless? Without support from family and friends? For the mom whose family will disown them? (and, yes, this still happens today) Further, how free of a decision can it be when papers are pushed under the nose of a new mother only hours after birth? Quite possibly still on pain medication, obviously with hormones completely out of whack. How much of an informed decision is it for the new parents who have received "adoption" counseling instead of true options counseling. How many of these parents are getting any real counseling at all?

Unfortunately force is alive and well in American adoptions.