[swd]

I've never worked with a private agency before, so I don't know how this all works. (My agency and I think my state forbids providing any living expenses to a birth family b/c it can be considered bribery/coersion in court later on.)

After reading some of the threads on here, and seeing PAPs getting burned time and time again, I have to ask: Don't they get their money back from the agency if the adoption doesn't go through due to circumstances beyond the PAPs control? Can an agency really allow a family to send thousands of dollars to a potential birth family with a history of arrests, drug issues, and DCS interventions, knowing that with a record like that, the baby will likely be siezed by caseworkers after the birth, no matter what agreement is in place verbally?

This just doesn't make any sense to me. If they're not due their money back, how does that prevent any pregnant woman from signing up with an agency, picking a family and having her pregnancy and then some paid for? All she has to do is say, "Oh I changed my mind" or just leave the hospital after the baby is born and the PAPs are left without a baby AND without their money.

Someone help me out here...

[Gs_Mom]

Crazy isn't it.

The flip side is that if PAPs could recoup their money, then if the potential birth mothers could not pay the money back they would be compelled to complete the adoption. No reasonable person would want that.

So, that would leave the agencies to eat the money. Now THAT is a crazy thought!

[SupaModel]

Originally Posted by swd

I've never worked with a private agency before, so I don't know how this all works. (My agency and I think my state forbids providing any living expenses to a birth family b/c it can be considered bribery/coersion in court later on.)

After reading some of the threads on here, and seeing PAPs getting burned time and time again, I have to ask: Don't they get their money back from the agency if the adoption doesn't go through due to circumstances beyond the PAPs control? Can an agency really allow a family to send thousands of dollars to a potential birth family with a history of arrests, drug issues, and DCS interventions, knowing that with a record like that, the baby will likely be siezed by caseworkers after the birth, no matter what agreement is in place verbally?

This just doesn't make any sense to me. If they're not due their money back, how does that prevent any pregnant woman from signing up with an agency, picking a family and having her pregnancy and then some paid for? All she has to do is say, "Oh I changed my mind" or just leave the hospital after the baby is born and the PAPs are left without a baby AND without their money.

Someone help me out here...

I am right there with you! I don't understand and I think I would seriously go crazy if that happened to me.

[mdesi]

I see you are in AZ. It is legal in AZ to pay expenses for the placing family. The first $1,000 does not have to go to a judge. Anything over that goes before a judge for approval.

IA. It is terrible that people pay all that money only to leave empty handed. That is why we have held firm to our placing parent expenses. We did pass on one situation b/c it was just a little above our limit. We knew, though, that was likely to change, and we had told our professionals exactly how much we are willing to pay.

[Fran27]

Yeah that's crazy, but it's one of the reasons it's really important to select your agency/attorney well IMO...

[mandirenee]

It is crazy, but mostly sad! I think that it's happening too...

Why does the flip side have to be that the mother is forced to choose adoption. Another option would be that the court garnishes wages or places a judgement to recoup the lost money over time. Same as if I made an arrangement or agreement and didn't go through with it in any other type of case. But this might be difficult, I just think there should be options.

BUT, I 100% agree with states that don't allow expenses and we chose to work with agencies that were frugal about expenses and we were only willing to pay $1000. Yes, it might mean that we turned some down, but we couldn't put our finances at risk ultimately meaning we might not be able to afford to adopt.

We completed both of our adoptions and only paid $250 in expenses (groceries) in our 1st adoption and $250 (medical expenses) in our 2nd adoption. So it's is possible.

[paigeturner]

I hate reading these types of stories. They make me so angry. I believe that hopeful adoptive parents should never give money/support/expenses directly to an expectant parent. In my perfect world (when I’m a benevolent dictator) there would be uniform adoption laws, uniform fees, and assistance would be assessed by professionals on an as-needed basis and paid from the agency to the expectant parent out of a fund. In the case of a failed match all dollars paid would be transferred to the next match.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…IMO someone is profiting from the placement of infants in this country and the current “system” makes it ripe for scamming and coercion. I believe there are agencies telling expectant parents that they can get support. I believe that there are agencies telling those that hope to adopt that the only way to get a match is to shovel out dollars to expectant parents. The money being charged for a domestic, infant adoption is an outrage.

[Bnoll]

Paige, I agree with you 100%. As a matter of fact, as I've been researching agencies/facilitators/lawyers I've seen SEVERAL that featured testimonials from birthparents in which they professed how they received financial assistance during their pregnancies. Does that not make it ripe for scammers and coersion?

Having said that, I think there's a definite difference between helping an emom with groceries and shelling out thousands of dollars to otherwise "able bodied" individuals. Then factor in the enormous fees charged by adoption "professionals" and to me it all seems unethical and tantamount to baby buying.

Am I alone in my beliefs here?

[Fran27]

Nope Bnoll, I totally agree with you. 'I'll pay your rent for 5 months if you let me have your baby' seems awfully like baby buying to me...

[SupaModel]

We signed up with the agency and paid $1500 fee that covered homestudy etc... All final payment weren't due until after baby was placed with us. Also any money that would have been given to emom would have gone through the agency and there's a legal limit in our state.

We actually didn't give any money to bmom because we didnt meet her until after DS was born. There is no way I would feel comfortable paying expenses because of what happened with another poster.

[loveajax]

Supa, we had the same (only paying fees post placement). I don't think I would be able to do it any other way now that I have seen what can go awry.


Paige, you are right. I think some a professionals "market" expenses. I have had some a parent friends really get put thru the wringer and asked to pay things that were in no way "ordinary" expenses. I also don't think people should be "enticed" to place with the offer of money. I do think agencies or whatever can help with expenses but that rthat should never be "tied" to a particular pap.

[Gwen72]

Our state only allows $3000.00 in emom expenses. The agency budgets $1500.00 in prebirth expenses for things like maternity clothes or groceries or whatever. Then the emom can get $1500.00 after placement since she will be off work recovering from delivery. She can use that for rent, utilities or whatever help she needs. I have no problem helping a girl out. However, I think states that allow unlimited emom expenses do open the PAPS up to be scammed. After everything PAPS have already been through, I think that is wrong.

[Steph-Jason]

Our agency we had the possibility to pay something for bparent expenses depending on the state. DD was born in MN & it is legal to provide bparent expenses. We did pay some- I can't really remember how muc though.... but since we met bmom when DD was born it was to cover her living expenses for the following month or two. DD's bmom had insurance so we weren't responsible for medical bills. I agree- it is scary though to think that those things would really be considered lost. With our agency I believe it was a % if the bmom expenses that could't be recouped- but now I can't really remember... that might have gone towards another placement.

[jerseymomtobe]

My agency now has programs that prevent PAPs from losing any 'at-risk' fees (such as living, medical and legal). If the PAPs are in a program for a caucasian newborn the over-all adoption cost may be slightly higher to help balance out what the agency's loses. If the PAPs are in a program for a bi-racial or AA newborn then it is automatic without higher match fees.

I think that this is how you tell the 'good' agencies from the 'weak' ones. If the agency has to start taking on some of the financial burden of failed placements then it encourages them and their SW/CWs to ensure good counseling services to the e-moms and to wait to match with PAPs until they have properly evaluated her and her background.

I think too often when I read about failed matches/placements and lost money there are situations where the agency matched the e-mom too quickly, and they didn't perform background checks or check to see if she was signed with other agencies (as I have seen happen).

Unfortunately, I think there is only one state which allows the PAPs to recoup fees from e-moms/fathers. I certainly believe that e-moms are the mothers of their children until they relinquish and they should never relinquish under pressure but I feel that there are some costs they would have had if they had all along decided to parent (medical costs, living costs) and thus those should remain the responsibility of the e-moms if they do choose to parent. Legal fees and any fees associated directly with an adoption should be the responsibility of the PAPs regardless of placement. Of course this is all IMO.

While we haven't made it through a match/placement yet with my agency - I feel financially safe even if a placement were to fail.

[mandirenee]

Paigeturner and Bnoll - WELL SAID!!!!

Fran - I agree, seems like baby buying to me.