[bajj]

Another thread got me to thinking about this. Are adoption agreements the best? I mean, should you really stick to an agreement for x amount of pics and x amount of visits when the child hasn't even developed a personality yet?

IMHO, agreements need the chance to change and both sets of parents need the chance to "grow" together. Take my first ds, his first mother didn't want any pics or letters at all at first. Now she gets them (no set amount of space, I send them frequently) and she sees him and we are opening even more and more each year. My youngest ds first mom hasn't wanted to meet yet and hasn't picked up her packet of pics yet. Does this mean I should stop sending them? I think not. I think it means I need to keep sending and hopefully someday we will get to meet. Even if she's not comfortable meeting dh and I, I pray she meets ds someday.

So, what do you guys think? Should adoption plans have room for growth or should we just stick to the original agreement no matter how the child or either set of parent feels?

[mommamarci]

I do not like agreements. We signed one. It was kind of a shock to me. When we met Cam's first mom the agency SW brought the agreement. If I would have had more time and if E would not have been there, I would have talked to the SW about not signing it. Please don't flog me. I have every inention of keeping in touch with E. I want her to be a part of our lives. I just don't want to sign a piece of paper that says what sould be done. I think it should be deicded on a case by case basis. (This was a generic form that said monthly pictures, annual visits, etc.) My husband also was not there so he had no input. However, this form is not legally binding, it is just a good faith agreement. I think I would have refused to sign something legally binding. If a situation ever came up where I felt Cameron would be better off without contact (drugs, alcohol, violence) I would want to be able to cut it off without worrying about legal action. (Want to add, I would still send pics in these circumstances, just would not be willing to visit or allow phone calls between E and Cameron.) Bottom line, I need to do what is best for my son.

[Mommy24]

Nothing in life is guaranteed and IMO nothing should be "set in stone" things happen, life changes. I clearly believe that there should be a (healthy) connection to one another as birthparents and aparents for the child. Now should the child grow up and decide that he or she doesnt want contact with bparents, I do agree that their feelings be taken into consideration, I however have a hard time believing that if the relationship has been ongoing and is healthy, it seems to me that wont be an issue.

I definitley think that everyone should agree to the bare minimum of what they think they can follow through on and definitely leave it open to allow for more if it happens.

[timni]

If there was a binding agreement between dd bmom and us I think we would have less contact and more hurt feelings then we do now. We have been able to grow and adjust. There was a time when dd bmom was feeling depressed and very guilty so we upped the visits etc.. anyway I like it our way only because we are all honest with eachother

[thornbird]

I'm nowhere near there yet (just beginning our homestudy), but these are my thoughts.

At our agency, we have to say in general what sort of contact we're comfortable with, and then we'll be profiled only to women seeking the same level of contact.

But I do think things change over time. For example, I think as a new parent I would be less comfortable with a great deal of contact - I don't know why, that's just where I am right now - but I can see myself over time becoming comfortable with more contact if my child's birthmother was open to it.

So when we had to indicate to the agency what level of contact we're comfortable with, I selected the lowest of the levels I think I'd be comfortable with (in my case, meeting once either before the child is born or after placement & sending photos and letters through the agency). I figure this is the way to go because if, over time, my comfort level changes, it'll change *up*. I'd hate to say, "Yes, I'd like to have face-to-face meetings twice a year" & then find I'm not comfortable with it, but I think it's OK to start out with photos & letters and then, if everyone agrees, wind up with more contact than originally agreed.

I think when it comes down to it I'll leave the final say on the level of contact (within whatever my comfort level is) to my child's birthmother. I'll send photos & letters even if she never picks them up, so they'll be there when she's ready. If I'd like more contact but she's happy with things the way they are, they'll stay the way they are - until and unless she decides she'd also like more contact. Just like I would never want to provide less contact than originally agreed, I'd also never want to push a higher degree of contact than she's comfortable with.

Just my 2¢.

Edited to say, wow - I went off on a really long tangent & never really got around to saying what I meant to. So here's what I meant to say: I think adoption agreements are a good thing to outline minimums, but should be able to be revisited later on if everyone wants to expand on things. And I think the minimums really speak more toward what the adoptive parents will do (so, for instance, if I had an agreement to exchange letters & photos at given intervals, I would make sure to send letters & photos AT LEAST that often); I wouldn't be upset if my child's birthmother went a long time out of touch because...I imagine contact would be a bittersweet thing for a birthmother, and her ability/desire to deal with it might wax and wane over time.

Not sure if that's any clearer. I think I need another cup of coffee.

[HappyTwinsMom]

I think of the agreement we signed when our daughters were born as a sort of "jumping off point." We agreed to what we felt comfortable with - at the time - but realized that things could change over time, as do all relationships. The agreement was the *minimum* we would do - not the *only* thing we would do.

Do we NEED to have signed agreements? I wish I could say no, but there are an awful lot of people out there who promise one thing and deliver something else. Maybe having a reminder of what we've promised can be a good thing. If we're unwilling to sign an agreement, maybe we need to ask ourselves if it's because we're uncomfortable with what's being requested. And, if that's the case, maybe this isn't the match for us.

[ChristieS]

Originally Posted by bajj

Another thread got me to thinking about this. Are adoption agreements the best?

Having been there done that let me please tell you what CAN happen with a binding "Agreement". In my case the birthmom has used her "Agreement" NOT to visit - but to turn around and continue to file motion after motion against us - keeping us in court and keeping the "finalized" adoption from being final.

Four (4!) years of this has greatly changed my views on open adoptions and particularly on any sort of "Agreement."

For those who are tempted to bash this let me ask that you reconsider who you are bashing. I AM THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS FOLLOWED THE AGREEMENT and I have followed it to the letter - only to be beat up time and time and time again by the birthmom who will not let it go - will not show for visits - but will use her free legal services to keep us in and out of court.

BEWARE - before you sign ANYTHING - please know what can and does happen. It is horrifying, extremely expensive, and betrayed. I have no words to describe what we have been through - it has been tragic.

[LegalEagleMom]

As an adoptive parent, I feel open adoption benefit all parties if you willing to work at it. With Kaitlyn’s birth mom, I make it a point to send a letter and pictures at least every 6 months to let her see how she is growing up. Sadly, I wish she would pick up the letters at the agency to see how Kaitlyn is growing up. I would be open to occasional visits and contact when Kaitlyn is older, but that is Kaitlyn’s decision as to what she wants. All I can do advise my daughter and give her my thoughts, but ultimately it’s her decision.

[DebCsMom]

I believe a MINIMUM agreement should be made & followed. We have told all our children's Birth Moms that we can offer you X amount of contact & visits a year. I was honest & told them the minimum will never change, but lives change & people change. Our agreement can be more then but never less than our agreement. I also told them that it is the best interest of our child. If events in thier life make it too difficult or dangerous for our child, then it's back to the minimum. We have only had to do this once so far. Our daughter's Birth Mom understands & when things get "Better" so will our contact.

Basically, I really believe in sticking to a minimum. It's a promise we make & trust is built from that promise.

Deb

[Mommy24]

Christie, I am truly sorry for what you and your family have been through, I cant imagine as a birthmom,putting my bsons family through that kind of pain and chaos. I to know the "other side" of agreements that arent kept, my bsons parents chose to cut off all pics and letters after 7 years without even telling me. Our agreement was a moral agreement nothing legal but had it been I wouldnt have took those steps, simply because I just couldnt bare the thought of putting my bson through that pain of being pulled from one side to the other. I will respect their decision (whatever reason they have) and let them answer his questions as to why someday
Good luck to you!!

[ChristieS]

Thank you Michelle.

All I know is that one day my son will know just how hard we tried and all of the many things we did to try and create an open adoption and that we did everything in our power to encourage positive relations - in fact our current attorney said he can not believe what all we have done - and what all we have been put through.

One day it may be as hard for my son to understand what she did to us, as it is for us to understand. I wish he could be spared the pain - but I don't know yet how to do that.

There is absolutely nothing else we can do - nothing. SHE may have some explaining to do one day - our conscience is perfectly clear.

[loveajax]

Here's my story (for what it's worth).

DH and I say that we want a closed adoption. DH was raised as an adoptee in a closed situation -- thinks it's the BEST thing yada yada (what can I say at the time, cuz what the heck do I know? and honestly I thought it preferable too).

Well, our DD's birth parents want to meet with us after they "chose" us from the profiles. We met three times, hit it off pretty well, etc. The agency had us sign a "standard" agreement that after 2 years requires only written yearly updates. Fine. I guess they never talked to birth parents about this, because anyway after our DD was home with us, birth mom told agency that she wanted to have yearly visits and quarterly updates. Frankly, at that point, I would have amputated my leg. (We got the call in a "whispered" tone from SW while birth mom was signing relinquishment papers -- talk about coercive (on agency's part, obviously not birth parents' part)!). So we signed the Agreement.

DH thinks we should do ONLY what is in the Agreement. I actually would like to do MORE than is in the Agreement (and we have done more, an extra visit, phone calls, etc.). But I think it is good that there IS an agreement (at least in my state). And the law in my state says flatly that the Agreement can be revised (in the best interest of the child) to allow lesser contact, but never more. And it also says that it does not affect the legality of the adoption EVER and is just specifically enforceable in Court.

I will say that it is really sort of "touchy" at first when everyone is trying to work out their boundaries (I set some boundaries at first that I probably would not set today, etc.). Recently, though, when we had our "designated" annual visit, it went so well, that DH and I have talked about having other "undesignated" visits (he is coming around a little, I guess!). In any event, I always say that if we are faithful to the agreement (at the minimum) than I think I can look DD in the face and say that we were always "fair" and respectful. But honestly as time goes on, I totally see the benefit of more openness too.

The other funny thing is that many of my adoptive parent friends who wanted (and got) closed adoptions now really are ruing it. It is hard to describe how fully you are a child's parent until you have lived with that child (I think potential adoptive parents have a lot of unfounded fears about "coparenting," etc. when they hear "open" adoption). You end up wanting your child to know undeniably how much their birth family loved them, and you don't end up viewing it as "competition" at all. In fact, on our visit, I didn't want to hold my DD at all -- I loved seeing her interact with her birth parents. Anyway, sorry for the novel!! I guess I just wanted to share how things can really take a 180!

PS: Christie, I meant to add that if the agreement could be used as it has in your case, I obviously would feel VERY VERY differently. I am sorry for all your heartache.

[bajj]

OK. I am thinking that a minimal agreement might be necessary in some cases. However, I do believe you need to leave growing room. This seems to be what most of you think so far, too.

Christie and Michelle, I am so sorry for what you've been through!

[BestLight]

Had our agency presented us with an agreement, we probably would have signed, thinking, "this is how open adoption is done."

But instead, our agency wisely said that it was up to us and the expectant parents to negotiate any agreement -- and live up to it.

So we looked at it from the lens of the Golden Rule. How would we wish to be treated if we were the birthparents? There's a one-word answer: respectfully.

Rather than codify our agreement with a x visits and y photos, we simply vowed to treat each other respectfully. This has worked well for us, and I am grateful to our children's birthmoms for more than holding up their end of the deal.