[jaenelle]

When you were considering placement/choosing adoptive parents for your child, what things about the adoptive family did you think of as requirements for them to be able to adopt your child?

I've been told by agencies that we will have an extremely hard time finding a birthmother who wants to place with us because we are younger, we both work, and we are only "comfortable" financially, not wealthy -- there are a whole bunch of other things, too.

So, what were the things you either had to have or wouldn't even consider? I'm trying to figure out if the things everyone says are so bad about us really are.

[kelceesmom]

Hi Kati,
I'm an adoptive mom but I wanted to add that when we went into our signing that we were told that it didn't matter that we were both working. Our bparents didn't mind either. So, hang in there the right person or couple it out there for you.

[marymartha]

I'm not a birthmom, but your agency is nuts. We were matched fairly quickly even though we were young, not weathy by any streach of the imagniation, in fact we don't own a home, we rent. My husband is in the navy. Don't be discouraged. There are things some moms are looking for that others aren't. Some women are very interested in just families that are wealthy with a stay at home mom etc... Our wait was only eight months with one failed placement before our final match.

[BrandyHagz]

Money wasn’t a consideration. I wanted them to have a home. I didn’t care of they both worked, for me, it just didn’t matter. Their age was a factor for me; I didn’t want to place with older people. I did have a few requirements, based on my own experiences as an adoptee.

I wanted a couple in their thirties who have explored and were done dealing with their fertility issues. I wanted medical documentation that indicated they would no conceive a biological child. I wanted a couple who was tall, at least six feet, so M wouldn’t seem like the ‘odd man out’ like I did when I was out with my adoptive family.

I looked at a hand full of profiles – although they gave me a whole book. I had asked my case worker to point out the ones who she thought would meet my criteria – she did, then pointed out the ones who had been waiting longest…

I stuck with my gut, met C and S, they agreed to meet all of my requirements and the rest was history.

I don’t think anyone should be telling you how it will or wont work for you – every expectant mother has her own requirements…her own desires.

[mommamarci]

We were also told we would be less desirable based on age and the fact that we both work. Money was not a factor. As far as I know the potential birth parents were not told of our financial status. I guess you could assume it based on pictures of homes and the way people dress??

Our wait was longer than we expected. The agency told us it would be a matter of weeks, but we would definitely not wait more than 3 months. After four months we found a match elsewhere. I am not sure if it was because we were younger and both working or if that is the way it just happened to work.

[HappyTwinsMom]

In my opinion, your agency is wrong. When we were waiting to be matched, we both worked, lived in a two-bedroom apartment, and didn't have a lot of money. Those things didn't matter to our girls' birthmom. She wanted a family for her children.

[jaenelle]

This makes me feel better, I think.

I should also clarify that it's not the agency we're going with for placement that told us these things, but the agency that did our homestudy. That was one of the reasons we didn't sign up with them for placement, too.

[blessedbybug]

Originally Posted by jaenelle

This makes me feel better, I think.

I should also clarify that it's not the agency we're going with for placement that told us these things, but the agency that did our homestudy. That was one of the reasons we didn't sign up with them for placement, too.

SOrry, yet another aparent chiming in... I know that wasn't what you were asking... Don't know if I've ever told you this before but we were told we would be hard to place too. For 3 reasons... our ages (I was almost 34, DH was 48 when we started... opposite "problem" that you...), our career choice and that we were in a small town, very rural. You know what? WIth Bug at least, those were three of the top reasons she picked us. She wanted an "older" couple (yikes, that hurts to say, lol!), she wanted a family who didn't live near her, and she appreciated the fact our career choice made us automatically part of a larger community. So don't let anyone tell you otherwise... there will be expecting parents who want you and only you... hang in there... I know this is tough.

[mumofone]

Wow, I cannot believe an agency would tell you that. Sure, there might be a few birthparents out there that would not choose you, but there are many who would choose you.

There could be any number of reasons why someone would pick a younger couple, older couple, SAHM or a working mom.

We are not rich, just comfortable. I left my job when we adopted our second son. I was 32, and DH was 35 the first time we adopted. The second time, I was a month shy of 40, and DH was 42 1/2.

I am now 41, and DH will be 44 in February, and we are waiting again.

Also, I know of very young adoptive parents.

[Jordan's bmom]

As an 18 yr old bmom, I wanted a christian couple and a stay at home mom or a mom who worked only part time. Probably because I had a hard time adjusting when my mother went back to work when I was 9 yrs old. My childs aparents were not wealthy and that didn't matter to me. They were a little older 30 and 35 and had been trying to concieve for 7 yrs, and waiting to adopt an infant for 3 yrs. They seemed committed and loving and that's what I was truly looking for. There is a bmom who will love what your heart not your wallet has to offer. I pray she finds you soon.

[Mommy24]

Kati, as a birthmom, I wanted a SAHM (though D isnt really a SAHM, they own their own business), I wanted them to be Christians, I wanted a family that had previously adopted a child ( I wanted my son to have a sibling, that understood and was older to possibly help him through any feelings he might have had with being adopted), I didnt want them to be able to have bio children, I wasnt concerned about them being "rich" just comfortable.

Good luck to you

[SchmennaLeigh]

A lot of my stuff was negotiable, I guess, when I think back.

I did have leanings towards families who already had children and bonus points for those who were interracial couples or had children who were transracial. I also liked the profiles that said that they would accept any child, no matter race or genetic issues.

Yeah. I just can't really think of any deal breakers for me. I mean, I guess if they had been totally the opposite of my religion, I would have declined them but other than that, I was pretty open.

[lahdh4]

I didn't matter to me if they both worked. Come to find out L's company relocated and she is a SAHM. The one thing we weren't negotiable on is that we wanted J to be an only child or eldest since we are both eldest children in our family. The only other that we weren't negotiable on was that we didn't want a religious couple. We aren't religious and have our own issues with religion and we didn't feel comfortable with couples talking about God in their profiles.
We leaned towards older couples only because of my age and L&B are only a few years older.

[taramayrn]

I required that there be a SAH parent. I also required that my parents and grandparents be involved in the baby's life, oh, and me be involved too.

[msdesi]

Well this was 1993 and I admit I was extremely picky and therefore probably not representative of the usual. I'll list my non-negotiables, but there is one circumstance where I would've been flexible on all of it. That is, if I saw those beautiful words "fully open preferred" on their profile. That was literally the first thing I looked at. As it was, the vast majority of couples listed in 1993 with that agency were looking for semi-open.

For semi-open couples:

I preferred the couple have no children, but 1 (no more than 1) wouldn't have been a deal breaker. Mainly because I wanted my baby to be the center of their attentions.

Ok...bearing in mind I was all of 18 and did not have as much life experience myself to see the total situation: It was non-negotiable that one parent planned to be a stay-at-home parent. Any situations with both parents planning to work outside the home I did not consider. It was my feeling at the time that I did not want my baby to be raised in daycare or by a nanny. Also I would've been concerned about their financial situation if they both had to work.

No couples in their 20's. I flipped right by those without looking. I wanted couples with more life-experience and since I was so young, to my youthful way of thinking this could only be had with age. By the same token, I really preferred they be in their 30's not 40's but in the end I was flexible because the couple I went with was in their early 40's.

I also looked for 10+ years of marriage. No newlyweds because I felt it important that they have established their own stable relationship to provide best environment for baby.

No couples seeking closed-only adoptions. No way, no how, no chance, and I didn't care how wonderful they were. I wanted contact.

Now again I must point out, every single non-negotiable would've suddenly become negotiable if the couple had wanted fully open adoption. I would've loved that so much. In 1993, most of the couples working with the agency I went with were seeking semi-open. Pictures and letters only. There were maybe 1-3 profiles that I saw seeking fully open, but sadly I did not meet their requirements that they listed.

I would say that the idea of contact and as much as possible was most important for me.