[035568]

I have a friend that just got a call about a birthmom that picked her; however, she is requesting rent and medical coverage and the agency told her it would be an additional $15,000 if they choose to accept. Well, they have been waiting for 3 years and just now get a call and they can't afford an additonal $15,000. I can understand the medical portion, but why as adoptive parents do we have to pay for their rent, new tires, etc...??? I'm having a real hard time with this and I'm sure some of you may get mad at me for saying this, but I think that this has gotten way out of hand. Why doesn't the agency take care of this. You pay all the heavy fees. It's almost like the birthmoms can just ask for anything they want and they know you are willing to do whatever it takes to get a baby. I feel like it's taking advantage of the adoptive parents. Now don't get me wrong, I understand helping with the medical part, etc, but some of it is a little on the ridiculous side. Please tel me I'm not the only one that feels this way.

[evildishrag]

You are not the only one who feels this way. I find it absolutely absurb. See this thread where I asked the very same question in another forum.
http://forums.adoption.com/showthread.php?t=235702

[Bubbette]

I think a lot of the times it's up to the agency...Granted I'm only in the beginning stages of the adoption process, but in my reading and in my speaking to a couple agencies asking questions, it seems like some agencies try to collect for everything imaginable for the whole 9 months, but there are some agencies out there who only do expenses for the last trimester.

I think it is excessive in some ways. However, I do understand the necessity for paying expenses as long as they are justified. I do think there should be some way the aparents don't lose money if the pbm decides not to place.

Good luch to your friends. Hopefully everything will work out.

[heartened]

I don't much care for the practice either, particularly when talking about things like buying tires for the car, etc.

On the other hand, if I were hoping to adopt someone's baby, I'd probably want to help ensure that they had the best possible resources available to them for the baby's sake - good food, a safe environment, medical care, etc. To me, this would all be a contribution towards the health of the baby.

Even if she chose not to place, I'd feel pretty good about having helped a baby to have the nutrition, medical care, etc. that it needs in-utero.

Keep in mind, though, that I'm not approaching this scenario as an adoptive parent. I can't think of any circumstances in which I'd adopt a baby - it's just not for me. But I have helped support pregnant women during their pregnancies - I met a young mother who was sleeping in her car a few years ago. She was eating 99 cent burgers from Wendys once a day as her meal. Hubby and I got her a studio apartment, helped her with food, medical, etc. Her son is now 4 1/2 and they are both thriving. She got a job and worked right up until a week before she delivered and was back to work 6 weeks after. Through her job, she met another single soon-to-be mother on a different shift. They exchanged babysitting with each other, shared a car and eventually got a really nice little house together.

Obviously that's not going to happen in every situation.

I just think that to some extent, by taking care of the mother's basic needs, you're taking care of the baby as well. I mean, if you were pregnant, you'd make sure you ate well, had medical care, housing, etc. during the pregnancy - you wouldn't be doing it for yourself, you'd be doing it for the health of your baby. I hear so many adoptive parents describe the adoption process as being akin to 9 months of pregnancy, so it seems logical to me that you'd be involved in the baby's care even before they were born, no?

Unfortunately, there are those who take advantage of this. So I'm not sure where the line is.

[LouiseT]

Nope- you're not the only one that feels this way.
This is one of the things that turned me off.
When we were pursuing adoption a few years ago (private, not an agency), I had calls from all sorts of birthmothers asking me to put them up in an apartment near where I lived for the duration of the pregnancy, things like that.
After all these years I still can't figure out why the entire burden must be put upon the adoptive parents.
In my opinion, it is not an adoptive parent's responsibility to support the birthmother.

[LouiseT]

Originally Posted by FH-heartened

I just think that to some extent, by taking care of the mother's basic needs, you're taking care of the baby as well. I mean, if you were pregnant, you'd make sure you ate well, had medical care, housing, etc. during the pregnancy - you wouldn't be doing it for yourself, you'd be doing it for the health of your baby. I hear so many adoptive parents describe the adoption process as being akin to 9 months of pregnancy, so it seems logical to me that you'd be involved in the baby's care even before they were born, no?

Unfortunately, there are those who take advantage of this. So I'm not sure where the line is.

Like you said, some people take advantage of this type of kindness.
The problem I have is that it's not really the adoptive parent's baby, at least not until after it's born and all the legalities are finalized. And not all potential adoptive parents can afford to help in the care of the baby while in utero, and then still end up with no baby. At least I can't!
Adoption (and the infertility treatments that sometimes precede it) are expensive, and while it may make you feel good to help out a pregnant woman, it becomes difficult when she may decide to parent the child or choose other adoptive parents, and now you are left with nothing but bills.

[AwaitingBeloved]

Yeah, this stinks.

I had an opportunity a couple months ago where it would be a quick placement (like days) and the agency was a "sister agency" to the agency we're using and would require an additional $18K!

There was no way on God's green earth we could come up with that!

So we turned it down. But it was the birthmother expenses plus the agency fee... which made no sense to me. Then we'd be paying TWO agencies! YIKES!

Yeah, I wish they'd do away with this aspect, too. I don't get it, but that's just me.

Then, I think about the pbparents we're currently matched with and I wish I could do more for them.

[035568]

I agree with you Louise!! You are not gauranteed that you will even end up with the child after you do all this. That's really what makes it so frustrating is you want to be able to help, but if you are not filthy rich, then it makes it hard. Believe me, I wouldn't want my bmom to be sleeping in a car, etc, but they shouldn't put that on the aparents. The agency should see to it that mother gets into a home. I know for a fact they have pregnancy homes. Many churches offer that as well. Also, I have heard of agencies allowing the bmom to stay with another acouple until they have the baby. Also, I really wander how much of the money the bmom actually sees. It's just a thought. My husband and I are about to start the process, but after hearing what my friend is going through, it makes us not want to adopt.

[SchmennaLeigh]

Actually, depending on what state they are in, it could be illegal to pay for new tires. New tires are not a living expense. They're a vehicle expense and vehicles are counted as a luxury when it comes down to stuff like this.

You can read more about state regulation (because it is a state by state basis kind of thing) of birthparent expenses here. Some states try to make sure things like what you're explaining DON'T happen by requiring an affidavit of monies spent at finalization. It's a good idea to find out if your state is one of those states so that once you get to finalization you're not going to have a long battle on why you bought tires for a birthparents' car.

[LisaCA]

If you can't financially pay bparent expenses, you can say "no". we set a financial maximum of what we could afford to spend and stuck by that. your friend should do the same with her agency. that way she won't be tormented by the "here's a match, oops it costs too much!" phone calls.

that said, maintaining pbmom is in the best interests of the child (financial costs to aparent aside). you want her to eat well, you want her to be safe. what good is making a woman decide between eating and driving on bald tires or driving safely but eating poorly? buying prenatal vitamins or buying clothes for her other child? it's a crappy situation.

i know your friend is having a hard time and I sympathize. Make sure she speaks to her agency to clarify their situation. no need to have situations she can't afford waved in her face.

hope she doesn't have much longer to wait,

Lisa

[LouiseT]

Yes, you can set a limit on how much you are willing to spend. But that seems unfair because now a couple, who otherwise would make amazing parents, is out of luck because another couple with more disposable income can meet the birthmother's demands. It 's like the baby is going to the highest bidder and that makes me sick.

[mommamarci]

Some states have caps on birth mother expenses. I live in Indiana and there is a state cap of $3000. We were so thankful that we lived in Indiana when we started researching. We have been told by our agency not to ever buy gifts or give money to a birth parent. We must always call the agency or the attorney and have it go through them, because it could be seen as buying a baby otherwise. Be careful and do your research.
-Marci
P.S. There are some agencies that charge a flat rate and that includes birth mom expenses. Your friend might want to look around some more. 3 years seems like a ling time to wait!

[Leigh131313]

I'm very confused by birthmother expenses as well. Since it is not allowed where I am, it is not something I had to deal with.

First of all, regarding the comment about even if it fell through, you'd be happy to have helped someone in need.

Uhhhm. I'm ALL for helping those in need. Donating baby clothes, maternity clothes, food, blankets...yada yada yada. BUT, we're talking about 15 THOUSAND dollars here. There is no circumstance where I would donate 15 thousand dollars to someone I just met for "living" expenses. It wouldnt happen, yet it seems to be a pretty typical amount that I have seen thrown around...

So...does this start to smell of baby buying at some point? I wouldnt just donate it, but I'll give it to you if say you 'll give me your baby.

and THEN, if the pbmom does chose to parent, how do you try to adopt again? You just gave away 15 THOUSAND dollars that you probably had to scrounge or take out loans to get in teh first place. What about going through this 2 or 3 times? that is 45 thousand dollars. All paid so that you could now raise a baby...which is very difficult with a 45 thousand dollar loan hanging on your shoulders.


NOW, let's think about that pbmom. You are sitting there, surrounded by all these "nice" things, nice room, good food...and you know that the couple who wants your baby gave you these things because they want your baby. Does this make you indebted to them? Do you then place with them out of obligation?

And then there is the agency. They gain all the profits when an adoption works out, yet take NO responsibility when matches don't work out.


Here is MY opinion.

IF there is going to be expenses allowed...
An agency should pay for birthmother expenses during the pregnancy. Once baby is in the adoptive parents family (no take back-sies) THEN the adoptive parents re-imburse the agency. If the pbmom decides to parent, tough luck for the agency..

I like the IDEA of the flat rate thing, as long as each pbmom gets the same amount. Otherwise, why is fair that one gets XXX amount, and another gets YYY ?

Ugg. money has no place in adoption.


Leigh

[sneezyone]

I'll be a bad guy!!
*frantically raising hand in the air*

It isn't the aparents pregnancy and it isn't the aparents baby until placement or TPR (whichever is later), right? That's drummed into our heads. This is the expectant parent(s)'s baby. So paying for living expenses that any other expectant parent is responsible for is a really tough pill to swallow - especially since if it were really the aparents pregnancy/baby most of us have health coverage that would pay most if not all of those costs with no out of pocket expenses. My pregnancy, I pay. Your pregnancy, you pay.

Sure, I like to help people when I can - but my generosity doesn't extend to handing over thousands of dollars to other ppl's kids/families. New/used clothes, Safeway gift cards, yes. My life savings, umm, not so much. Unfortunately, I'm not operating my own little mini-charity with 501(c)(3) protection and the tax advantages that come with that.

If you really buy into the argument that you're paying for a pregnancy as if the child were yours, then monies paid to support a pregnancy/birth that doesn't result in placement ought to be reimbursed. Of course, no one would agree to that as it's coercive etc. Better to just keep direct (or indirect) payments out of the equation entirely.

I suppose I can see paying get-back-on-your-feet expenses (a month's rent, utilties, etc). I can even see requiring aparents to pay for the child's in-hospital medical expenses (most insureres will do this anyway once guardianship is transferred) but paying all bmom living and medical expenses?? It just doesn't feel right to me.

I suppose that discomfort is partly why we matched with someone days before birth. *shrug*

[Kelli]

Originally Posted by sneezyone

I'll be a bad guy!!
*frantically raising hand in the air*

It isn't the aparents pregnancy and it isn't the aparents baby until placement or TPR (whichever is later), right? That's drummed into our heads. This is the expectant parent(s)'s baby. So paying for living expenses that any other expectant parent is responsible for is a really tough pill to swallow - especially since if it were really the aparents pregnancy/baby most of us have health coverage that would pay most if not all of those costs with no out of pocket expenses. My pregnancy, I pay. Your pregnancy, you pay.

Sure, like to help people when I can - but my generosity doesn't extend to handing over thousands of dollars to other ppl's kids/families. New/used clothes, Safeway gift cards, yes. My life savings, umm, not so much. Unfortunately, I'm not operating my own little mini-charity with 501(c)(3) protection and the tax advantages that come with that.

If you really buy into the argument that you're paying for your a pregnancy as if the child were yours, then monies paid to support a pregnancy/birth that doesn't result in placement ought to be reimbursed. Of course, no one would agree to that as it's coercive etc. Better to just keep direct (or indirect) payments out of the equation entirely.

I suppose I can see paying get-back-on-your-feet expenses (a month's rent, utilties, etc). I can even see requiring aparents to pay for the child's in-hospital medical expenses (most insureres will do this anyway once guardianship is transferred) but paying all bmom living and medical expenses?? It just doesn't feel right to me.

From one bad guy (gal) to another . . . you took the words out of my mouth!