[FauxClaud]

This came up on another ( supportive) thread...and it made me curious...

As an adoptive parent, what would you do if you found out that your child's adoption was not legally done? Or if you found out, say weeks after placment, that the mother had huge regrets and wanted her baby back?

What if she was passed the revokation period? What if she just had no legal recourse but was extremely distraught and you knew it? Everyone says they want to be sure that their child's mom was OK, but what if she wasn't?

What if you found out that the agency lied to her? If they said she'd owe money if she didn't place? Or if her parents made her sign off with the threat that she would be homeless if she came home with the baby? What is real cohersion to all?

I know one story where the adoptive parents didn't legally have to return a baby, but they did out of morals and ethical responsiblity.

I'm just wondering if anyone would really return a baby if they felt they had to morally....would you do it if you had to legally..,or would you do it because it was right? Would you fight it?

[LisaCA]

wow. what a hypothetical. I have to say that in our case, we would have relinquished to bdad if he had surfaced before his rights were terminated (which meant dd would have been about 45 days old). It would have ripped our hearts out, but we would have done it. If bmom had come to us in that period, again we would have consented. I have to say that in our case, the decision was an easy one. I know that if dd would have been raised by her bmom and bmom's family, she would have been fine, and turned out to be a lovely woman. There were many reasons why her bmom chose adoption for dd and they're good ones imho. They're good because they're her reasons and I trust her. However her family would have stepped up to the plate and helped dd have a good life. The real changes would have been to bmom's life.

one of the concerns we had about adoption was that it would be difficult to know what bparents were promised, whether agencies follow thru on counseling etc. we chose a facilitator to double check everything, to talk to bmom herself and offer counseling (lifetime counseling I might add). We also spoke to bparents to know whether our facilitator had a good reputation.

I know we all as aparents think about his hypothetical situation. each case is so different, that we can't make any real judgements about others. It's just what you can live with, what is best for the child , etc. we never wanted to be in a situation where we could have fought and possibly won: we swore we would do what was best for the child and allow them to have a stable home situation. That said, I don't judge others who choose to fight: they know their situation best.

[missingmyboy]

As a bmom I can say I don't know that "it is right" just becasue she changed her mind and has regrets. Babies are not possessions to be passed around.

Shell

[HOPEFULINPA]

Originally Posted by missingmyboy

Babies are not possessions to be passed around.

Shell

Amen.

Having the adoption not legal and having regrets are two TOTALLY separate issues in my opinion. If it's not legal it's not binding. With that said there are attorneys enforcing laws in place governing the amount of time a birthmother has to change her mind about relinqishing. If some instances this time is SIX MONTHS. Six months of an aparent cringing every time the phone rings. 30 DAYS even seems like an eternity. Aparents sometimes have failed adoptions 4 or 5 times. Dreaming and planning for a child and then having that dream extinguished again.

If the adoption WAS legal and the birthmother just changes her mind suddenly I just don't know. It would depend on ALOT. How she had acted before the birth, things she had said, etc. If I had developed a close relationship with her prior to the birth then I think yes..I would feel morally obligated to let her raise her child. I would probably never want to keep in touch with her from then on though.

[Cobb]

Originally Posted by EggyMother24

As an adoptive parent, what would you do if you found out that your child's adoption was not legally done? Or if you found out, say weeks after placment, that the mother had huge regrets and wanted her baby back?

What if she was passed the revokation period? What if she just had no legal recourse but was extremely distraught and you knew it? Everyone says they want to be sure that their child's mom was OK, but what if she wasn't?

What if you found out that the agency lied to her? If they said she'd owe money if she didn't place? Or if her parents made her sign off with the threat that she would be homeless if she came home with the baby? What is real cohersion to all?

These are the reasons that my husband and I decided that domestic infant adoption was not for us... there were too many "what ifs" that we couldn't live with.

Right now, we're in the process of adopting through foster care and have found that it doesn't entirely allieviate our concerns. Could things have been different if her parents had better access to services? Is adoption the best solution to the problems that our little one faced? (i.e. Would guardianship be better instead of "erasing" ties to her family?) Does the fact that our foster care system doesn't have permanency options other than adoption a problem that needs to be addressed? (In our state, the exception to this would be a child over 14 or sometimes with relative placements.)

<sigh> I don't know the answers... or, I should say, I don't know how to go about making things better...

[LisaCA]

I agree, babies aren't possessions, they're living breathing individuals who deserve the best in life. That's what makes this question so difficult to answer in the abstract-it depends on so much. I guess my gut would be what's best for the child. Sometimes it's hard to see past your own pain to think about what's best for others.

adoption at its best is about trust and committment, about building family, about what is best for the child. At its worst it's solely about the needs of individuals other than the child.

[Cobb]

Originally Posted by LisaCA

I agree, babies aren't possessions, they're living breathing individuals who deserve the best in life. That's what makes this question so difficult to answer in the abstract-it depends on so much. I guess my gut would be what's best for the child. Sometimes it's hard to see past your own pain to think about what's best for others.

adoption at its best is about trust and committment, about building family, about what is best for the child. At its worst it's solely about the needs of individuals other than the child.

I completely agree.

[sneezyone]

What would you do if you found out that your child's adoption was not legally done?
We'd do what we could to make it legal/right (assuming the bparent was still in favor of the placement).

Or if you found out, say weeks after placment, that the mother had huge regrets and wanted her baby back?What if she was passed the revokation period?
Emotionally, you're prepared for this possibility until the revocation period ends. During that period, I'd give the baby back. It'd hurt, but I'd do it. After the revocation period, I'm not so sure what I'd do. You let your guard down at that point. I don't think I could raise a child knowing another woman is out there suffering that way, but I also know that it would absolutely devastate me if I gave the child back and I don't think I'd ever recover from it.

I really trust people to keep their word and be honest with me. I can't stress enough how important that is to me. I literally refuse to have people in my life who abuse my trust. So, if the mother was honest with me all along about having second thoughts or mixed feelings, and I could choose to avoid the situation or accept the risk, I'd definitely return the child b/c I would have been prepared either way.

But if I had no warning, if it was after the TPR, it'd be a lot, lot, lot harder. I'd hope that the bparent(s) would call personally and discuss things with us. I don't think I could return the child to someone who didn't speak directly to us. That said, if I did return the child, I don't think I'd ever want to hear from the bparent(s) again or ever hear about adoption again and I know my husband would feel the same.

What if you found out that the agency lied to her? If they said she'd owe money if she didn't place? Or if her parents made her sign off with the threat that she would be homeless if she came home with the baby? What is real cohersion to all?
To me, this is coersion and I didn't want an agency middle person for this reason. I needed to hear from the bmom myself that she was making the choice of her own free will. As a student of the law, I couldn't in all good conscience accept a placement where the pbmom was relinquishing due to lies/threats.

I know one story where the adoptive parents didn't legally have to return a baby, but they did out of morals and ethical responsiblity.
I'm really not sure what this means. Ethical to whom? For whom? What is the moral thing? Is it dishonest of the bmom or pbmom not to disclose that she's under those kinds of pressures? The paparents need to have all the information they need to make an informed decision about whether or not to get involved in a given situation. Is it moral or ethical to ask an aparent to accept a child when you are 'on the fence' about placement or are placing because it's what someone else is forcing you to do? Essentially you're just shifting the burden of moral/ethical decision-making from the bparent(s) to the aparent(s) and I don't think that's right. It automatically makes the person who says no, I wouldn't return the child, the bad guy. When the person who said, "Here, I want you to raise my child" is equally responsible for making moral/ethical decisions.

It seems to me that what you're asking is, would you sacrifice yourself (and possibly your marriage) for another person (who may be a virtual stranger). When framed that way, it's not quite as simple as what's ethical or what's moral. I'd use the best interests of the child standard but we really don't know what's in the best interests of the child, we can only guess. Each set of adults is acting in the interest of self-preservation (which doesn't necessarily equal selfishness) and invoking the best interests of the child argument when neither has any real claim to it. Can we honestly say that one person's self-preservation instinct is more important than another's?

Tough all around.
It's late, I must be rambling.

[missingmyboy]

Lisa, the problem with "whats best for the child" is that everyone sees whats best as something different.

Shell

[sneezyone]

Thanks for saying that way better than I could have in my sleepy-eyed state.

Originally Posted by missingmyboy

Lisa, the problem with "whats best for the child" is that everyone sees whats best as something different.

Shell

[missingmyboy]

Sneezy it is 2 am here and I must get up for a 10 hr work day at 6 am. I am sleepy but not ready to sleep. Funny you said that as I was thinking, I am tired and that sounds funny and not quite as good as I meant it to sound. LOL. Glad you got my point.

Shell

[Cobb]

Originally Posted by missingmyboy

Lisa, the problem with "whats best for the child" is that everyone sees whats best as something different.

Shell

Good point. Thus making it even more difficult to discuss in the abstract...

[sneezyone]

Nod nod. I'm totally pooped and it's only 11 p here...I ought to be in bed. *heading off that way...*

[LisaCA]

yep, heading to bed myself.

yes, everyone has a diff idea of what's best, but sometimes you just have to do what you think is best, step up to the plate and do what you feel you need to do. That might be walking away from a situation in which you might win or might not, but the child will definitely suffer. Or it may be fighting to do what is right. Sometimes these issues take 2-3 years to resolve themselves. It's that splitting the baby issue. Sometimes someone needs to put their own needs aside. This is not to say that either side is right or wrong, just that it can be noble to step outside yourself and do what you feel is right for the child.

and so I'm going to finish watching south park and go to bed, probably having some dream about this thread .

night,

Lisa

[missingmyboy]

I agree with what you say Lisa. It is just that my guess is the bmom will think it best to get babe back and the aparents will think it best to keep baby. So there is the problem.

Shell