Jump to content

Adoption Risks


ElizabethAnn

Which part the adoption process do you fear most?  

37 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I was just scrolling through and happened across stennison's earlier post about risks and the losses they suffered in the course of their failed adoption plan--and there, to the left, was a darling new avatar, picturing the beautiful baby girl they would never have subsequently found, had it not been for those painful losses and their enduring willingness to endure the risks that come with adopting. (Isn't God the best?! Amazing miracles come out of some of the darkest unknowns.) That may sound naive or overly optimistic (but after almost two decades of working in this field, I'm pretty sure that I'm neither. tongue.gif )

Adoption is scary, and yes, it's filled with uncertainties and risks for every member of the triad (and even for those who do this for a living). There are things that happen, sometimes, for which there are no explanations, there are plenty of tears shed, and we all wish we had more control over the process than we do... but looking at that picture of little Brenli reminds me that while we may be faced with unknowns, He never is, and His placement plans far exceed any we could make on our own. Carry on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elizabeth, Thanks to you and your staff our dreams have come true once again. Yes at the time we were devestated and couldn't believe someone could do something like that to us. We were just not prepared for it. I have to admit I wanted to be in control of the situation. In fact I had everything all planned out. We were having the birthmom induced so we could be there for the birth and I had already cleared my work schedule and all was in place. I THOUGHT !! God knew way better than I did which baby was to be ours and I would not change a thing. It was ALL worth it. We have a beautiful baby and a wonderful birth family. Brenli's birthmom and grandmother came to visit on Saturday and it was so comfortable. In fact I trust them so much that I went to the store and left Dylan and Brenli with them..... ohmy.gif Our visit was great and we are looking forward to many more. This time there were no tears shed just los't of smiles and a family very happy to have each other. Yes GOD is so GOOD.........I can't wait to see everyone at the reunion..... smile.gifsmile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We too were faced with an adoption plan that failed after several weeks of expenses for our BP. At the time all of it was hard- the failed plan most of all but also the financial aspect. What Elizabeth stated so well though is today, we feel that this was the road we had to travel to bring us to our son. We have no regrets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sherrie,

We are so happy for you guys. Brenli is such a cutie! It is so nice that you have such a great relationship with the birthfamily. Our family is hoping for an outcome much like yours. It sure is hard when you are in the middle of all of the turmoil of a failed placement but I do believe that there is light at the end of the tunnel and that everything happens for a reason. And when it is meant to happen it will happen. Isn't it funny how things just kind of fall into place when you least expect them too! smile.gifsmile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marcelo said it so well yesterday. He shared with my sister that if everything had not occured just as it had, Dante would most likely not be in our lives. He said it would only take one minor change in the course of our lives to have changed the present. We too are so happy things turned out the way they did. It sounds kind of strange to be happy about losses, but that is the only way we grow as people.

Claudia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
Marcelo said it so well yesterday.  He shared with my sister that if everything had not occured just as it had, Dante would most likely not be in our lives.  He said it would only take one minor change in the course of our lives to have changed the present. 

Claudia

17766[/snapback]

Claudia,

Reading thru this topic tonight, I found your post from this summer, and it jogged my memory.

Just a week...yes, I believe it was just one week, more or less, before our B.O.G. Catherine was born....I was at work and Abrazo attempted to call me. I worked evenings then, taking claims calls for an insurance company, and I had left my desk for just a few moments to go to the bathroom. As I came back and approached my desk, I saw my private extension flashing. However, before I could reach my phone, the line stopped flashing. I picked it up and the caller was gone. There was no message.

When I got back home after work, I discovered that Abrazo had left a message on our home ans machine. They had also tried to reach my husband that evening as well (he frequently stayed late at work back then) but he wasn't able to take their call either. When I got in touch with Abrazo the next day, I learned that a couple had come into the office right at closing time with a toddler (I don't recall the exact age, but the child was under 2 years old) whom they could no longer care for, and wanted to make a placement plan that very evening! The reason Abrazo didn't leave a message on my work number was that they needed to get in touch with someone right then. I only missed their call by a few seconds!!

I often think back and say to myself...What if I had been at my desk to take that call? Yes, we might have become parents a week or so earlier...but of a toddler, not a newborn, and we would have missed all those milestones that happen in a child's first year of life! And the bonding experience would have been totally different.

No, I believe there must have been a reason why I was away from my desk at that exact moment. If I had taken that call, we might not have our Catherine today!!

Edited by marthaj
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
... While I respect a birthparent's right to change her mind (no matter how painful for the adoptive parents), I FIRMLY believe that all financial responsibility should become hers if she does decide to parent the baby.  Anything short of that is robbery.  Adoptive parents are not the social welfare system.  ...

Laura

15121[/snapback]

WOAH!!! what are you thinking? seriously. WTF?

okay, i'm a birthmom and if i had decided not to place, and was responisible for the money my AF used to provide for me, i would have been trying to parent with NO money and a huge debt. and that would have made parenting even harder, so to not have to pay this money i would have had to place my child. I placed my son because i love him. Got that? because i love him not to avoid having to reimburse the hollmans. putting something like that in place would result in all sorts of placements to avoid repaying the money and thats not right. adoption isnt just about you wanting/getting a baby, to think it is is selfish. would placing a huge debt on the would have been placing birthmoms be in the best intrest of the child? No. most birthmoms dont have much money, which is why they need financal help in the first place. besides that counds like you want to BUY a baby. if you pay for something and you dont get it you want a refund?you aren't supposed to be buying a baby. youre supposed to help keep your birthmom fed and from living on the streets and make sure she can get medical care. and if she changes her mind thats her right.

infact, how about it works like this, if your birthmom decides not to place, you get your money reimbursed, but if she decides to place, she gets to be there when the baby says its first word, when the baby takes it first steps, when the baby tries to learn how to ride a bike, when the baby cries for its mom. i think the birthmoms lose a TON more than your money could ever pay for. but they decide to make that sacrifice.

your comment offended me so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya know, Kristal, I am starting to like you very much!!!

Your reply there was right on the money!!$$$!!

I can't say that I understand Laura's frustration, because I am a birthmother.

However, what that BP did to Laura's family was sooo wrong. She gives good, honest birthparents a bad name. Shame on her!! It makes me angry to think that someone can be that heartless. It will come back around to haunt her. I don't understand what could have prompted her to disregard the family that she was creating a bond with and turn around and give her child to someone else. That, to me is what defines "giving up" a baby. Like it is some sick kind of birth control. Masachism at it's best, I guess. uck! That just leaves a bad taste...

Here's to better moments in life.

May the road rise to meet you-

May the wind be always at your back-

May the sun shine upon your face-

And, may God hold you all in the palm of his hand.

love-

Amanda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Way to go Kristal! Amen!

I would likt to add that this is why people think so horribly of birthmoms in general. It is a stigma we have been trying to overcome since the days where prenant unwed mom-to-be were ushered away to an unknown city "to birth" and then brought beck without their children, never knowing their name or in some cases if it was a boy or girl. I can only pray that you don't speak to anyone else, and if you have already that you go back and make it right! You are a sad sad shell of a human if you think that we dont have the right to the final say or that money should burden us more due to our decision to parent! Do you think I wanted help when I was preg? NO i didnt, but I needed help to get complete care, and to get the things I needed, like vitamins and things that made my son be a healthy baby. Which benefitted HIM not me, and as his AP's know now he was healthy and he is in their home, but they would have understood if he was in mine. After all, you may be infertile but you can never loose something you never had, can you? It's all a risk. Yours is a few dollars. Ours is our children's future, and with parents that have your attitude, I can only think that child is in a better place. Maybe you should speak with one of the GREAT gals at abrazo. You have a lot of issues and need counseling, they are trained for that. And they will not steer you wrong.

OR

How about this idea for you, we parent all the healthy babies or give them to parents willing to financially assist us, and you can have the unhealthy sick ones that didnt get care & what they needed because you thought you were to good to help their mom. How about years of financial tourmoil on you because you wouldn't help the helpless?

Do you spit on the bell ringers this time of year too? After all they dont help you get clothes and food and a warm blanket, or even a gift under your tree! With your attitude you might as well take the toys from the tots.

And no I am not sorry for my attitude. I am however very sorry you came to this forum with that attitude! You are only reaping what you've planted!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooooooh-wheeeee!!! What's that old saying, "cheese pizza hath no fury like a woman scorned?"

In Laura's defense, let me just say that perhaps she was in a different place emotionally when she expressed that opinion. Folks who are grieving (whether they're grieving the loss of the child they cannot have, or the loss of a child they cannot parent) are often struggling with anger and resentment, so it's not unusual for people in such pain to lash out at others.

Of course, those who view adoption like a business transaction or surrogacy arrangement do often think maternity support should be repaid, like a loan come due, if the baby isn't placed. (Here's something to make your stomach turn: when I first began working in adoption in 1987, agencies or attorneys could demand reimbursement, under Texas law; however, legislators came to their senses and prohibited such demands only a few years later, because it was too often misused to coerce indigent moms into giving up parental rights against their will.)

And let's be honest; there are plenty of grifters out there-- malicious, meanspirited people who impersonate birthparents and their intentions in order to gain financial support from adoptive parents or agencies. But (1) nobody should be giving out enough money to make this profitable, and (2) that's about fraud, which is a whole different story than a needy mom who initially planned for adoption but later decides it is best that she parent her baby herself after birth.

That said, let me say that I think birthmoms are right to speak out against those who cast aspersions on them. Birthparents have been disenfranchised and downtrodden and manipulated and shamed by society for long enough, and if their words or the emotions behind them make any of us a little uncomfortable (myself included!) perhaps it's because there's a grain of truth sanding down our defenses until we find the pearl of wisdom hidden within! wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Laura posted her comment about who should shoulder the financial responsibility in a failed match, she was for the most part responding to Sherrie's post about being out the $4000+ monies for the adoption in which the b/mother they were matched with, who was due in 3 days, left the state for a more lucrative financial arrangement in California. Obviously the b/parents must have been working "behind the scenes" with the adoption attorney in Calif, while still accepting monies from Abrazo. I saw Laura's post simply as her being sympathetic to Sherrie's plight. I know all of us who were on the Forum at that time were as hurt and outraged as Sherrie was.

But even this story had a happy ending, as Sherri's beloved Brenli came home not too long after that, and their hearts were healed!

So I did not view Laura's statement as an indictment against all b/mother's, but as a response to Sherrie's specific situation.

Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we all speak from the side that we know and understand. I am glad that both adoptive parents and birthparents are able to state their point of view. We just have to be willing to be open and try understand the other side. When we meet in the middle there is a beautiful baby!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i know that people have been ripped off by dishonest women looking for a hand out. but many people have been hurt by someone that is different from them. you can not live your life with sterotypes and expect to understood by people who are more open minded. i am white. i was raped by an asian man. just because an asian man hurt me doesnt mean i have something against asians. infact my boyfriend is asian. you can be upset about your situation and sympathetic to another persons situation without being disrespectful to a whole group of people. im sure someone else on this forum has been raped, but even if it was also by an asian man, i would not expect, or even think it was logical if someone posted back that they thought all asian men should be casterated. You have the right to judge a person by their individual actions. You do not have the right to pass that judgement on to other people that have the same qualities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we all speak from the side that we know and understand. I am glad that both adoptive parents and birthparents are able to state their point of view. We just have to be willing to be open and try to understand the other side. When we meet in the middle there is a beautiful baby!

24277[/snapback]

Sabrina,

Beautifully said! When we put our focus on what is best for the children, then everyone wins!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 11 months later...

Just a reminder: as of January 1, 2008, the legal risks of Texas placements have changed along with the "new, improved" laws about alleged fathers not being entitled to notice if they fail to register with the Voluntary Paternity Registry during pregnancy or within 30 days after the birth.

Whereas before, agencies like Abrazo told prospective birthmoms we had to know the identity of every possible father in order to contact and notify him of his potential legal rights in advance, the Texas Legislature now says that only legal fathers (i.e., husbands or men who have already adjudicated themselves in court as fathers) have a right to notice of a woman's decision to place her child for adoption, unless men suspecting they've fathered a child have registered (or do so in the month after the baby was born.)

This means that essentially EVERY placement in Texas is now at legal risk for at least a month after birth, unless every baby being placed were to be held in foster care for that 30 day period during which any man could still register, which is not in any child's best interests. It's not clear how Texas courts will resolve inevitable conflicts in which contests arise over babies fathered by men other than a birthmom's spouse, should they happen to register and/or sue for custody?

Even experienced adoption attorneys in this state are scratching their heads trying to figure out how this change in our laws came about and how long it'll take for a landmark lawsuit to get filed challenging this confusing new mazes of regulations!?! The best any of us can do, unfortunately, is to warn our clients of the "new, improved" risks it creates and keep on dotting our "i"s and crossing our "t"s and hoping our cases are legally sound...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quick Question on this -- if the birthfather is known and signs termination paperwork, would that still be at legal risk?? I realize those situations can be few and far between....still wanted to ask to build greater understanding. Thanks Elizabeth.

Just a reminder: as of January 1, 2008, the legal risks of Texas placements have changed along with the "new, improved" laws about alleged fathers not being entitled to notice if they fail to register with the Voluntary Paternity Registry during pregnancy or within 30 days after the birth.

Whereas before, agencies like Abrazo told prospective birthmoms we had to know the identity of every possible father in order to contact and notify him of his potential legal rights in advance, the Texas Legislature now says that only legal fathers (i.e., husbands or men who have already adjudicated themselves in court as fathers) have a right to notice of a woman's decision to place her child for adoption, unless men suspecting they've fathered a child have registered (or do so in the month after the baby was born.)

This means that essentially EVERY placement in Texas is now at legal risk for at least a month after birth, unless every baby being placed were to be held in foster care for that 30 day period during which any man could still register, which is not in any child's best interests. It's not clear how Texas courts will resolve inevitable conflicts in which contests arise over babies fathered by men other than a birthmom's spouse, should they happen to register and/or sue for custody?

Even experienced adoption attorneys in this state are scratching their heads trying to figure out how this change in our laws came about and how long it'll take for a landmark lawsuit to get filed challenging this confusing new mazes of regulations!?! The best any of us can do, unfortunately, is to warn our clients of the "new, improved" risks it creates and keep on dotting our "i"s and crossing our "t"s and hoping our cases are legally sound...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patti, I'm not a lawyer, of course, so this shouldn't be construed as legal advice, but here's my take on it; apparently, in Texas there no longer IS such a thing as a "Waiver of Interest" for an unmarried (or nonlegal) father to sign in advance, since there is no longer such a creature as an alleged (or nonlegal) father. (?!)

So "presumed" (legal) fathers, like mothers, cannot execute any legally-binding relinquishment until a child is at least 48 hours old, and even then, there's nothing to prevent any unknown other man from still registering with the Paternity Registry or contesting paternity in the weeks after that.

And regardless of whether paperwork is or has been signed, no termination is final until 30 days after it's been to court and the decree has been issued by a judge.

If this all sounds like a can of worms-- then you're seeing exactly the view we're seeing, from here. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And regardless of whether paperwork is or has been signed, no termination is final until 30 days after it's been to court and the decree has been issued by a judge.

Does that apply to the mother's rights too?

Doesn't that create a lot of extra lawsuits/court time/costs?

What does this new law do to the finalization time-frame?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a reminder: as of January 1, 2008, the legal risks of Texas placements have changed along with the "new, improved" laws about alleged fathers not being entitled to notice if they fail to register with the Voluntary Paternity Registry during pregnancy or within 30 days after the birth.

Whereas before, agencies like Abrazo told prospective birthmoms we had to know the identity of every possible father in order to contact and notify him of his potential legal rights in advance, the Texas Legislature now says that only legal fathers (i.e., husbands or men who have already adjudicated themselves in court as fathers) have a right to notice of a woman's decision to place her child for adoption, unless men suspecting they've fathered a child have registered (or do so in the month after the baby was born.)

This means that essentially EVERY placement in Texas is now at legal risk for at least a month after birth, unless every baby being placed were to be held in foster care for that 30 day period during which any man could still register, which is not in any child's best interests. It's not clear how Texas courts will resolve inevitable conflicts in which contests arise over babies fathered by men other than a birthmom's spouse, should they happen to register and/or sue for custody?

Even experienced adoption attorneys in this state are scratching their heads trying to figure out how this change in our laws came about and how long it'll take for a landmark lawsuit to get filed challenging this confusing new mazes of regulations!?! The best any of us can do, unfortunately, is to warn our clients of the "new, improved" risks it creates and keep on dotting our "i"s and crossing our "t"s and hoping our cases are legally sound...

WOW! This is very interesting to know. Thanks for the adoption eductation lesson today Elizabeth :)

Just for my personal clarification:

This means that essentially EVERY placement in Texas is now at legal risk for at least a month after birth,

This would not be applicable though if waivers were signed by the spouse or potential fathers correct? :unsure: or incorrect?

-A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm-- let's see if we can shed some light on what is an increasingly murky subject in TX nowadays.

"This means that essentially EVERY placement in Texas is now at legal risk for at least a month after birth"

This would not be applicable though if waivers were signed by the spouse or potential fathers correct? or incorrect?

Under the revised laws, it appears that WAIVERS (essentially a document stating "I admit nothing but IF this is/were my child, I waive any rights") no longer apply, because there now is no such creature as a "potential father."

There is now only a "legal/presumed" father, and this is either a man legally married to a woman who is pregnant (because any child born during a marriage is considered the "legal issue" of the marriage) OR it's a man who has proven paternity and been adjudicated by the courts as being the legal/presumed father of the child.

Spouses have always been considered "legal parents" (even if they were known not to be biologically related to the child born during the marriage) and therefore never could sign a waiver. Legal parents (mothers or fathers) can only execute a relinquishment, and only when a child is 48 hours old or older.

Now, only legal/presumed fathers have paternal rights to forfeit, and they can only do so by signing a IRREVOCABLE RELINQUISHMENT after the child's birth OR by failing to respond to service of citation and therefore having a court terminate their rights by default judgement.

Does that apply to the mother's rights too?

Doesn't that create a lot of extra lawsuits/court time/costs?

What does this new law do to the finalization time-frame?

Any ruling of the family court is made by decree, and any decree is not final (i.e., it can be set aside) until 30 days after issuance. A final decree of termination must address the ending of rights of all/both legal parents, so the decree terminating rights of a mother and father is generally considered final no sooner than 30 days after it's signed by the judge. (This is nothing new and thus creates no extra costs-- it's standard procedure under Texas law, as I understand it.)

The revisions eliminating the requirement of notification to alleged (possible) fathers doesn't do anything to the finalization time-frame necessarily; every adoptive family has to complete between 6 and 18 months of post-placement supervision before they can finalize and that's entirely separate from what's going on with the termination proceedings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's excessively confusing to us, too! especially when it seems Texas' legislators took such a huge backwards step where fathers' rights are concerned, but thankfully, we have an excellent attorney, Mr. Estrada, to guide us through the fog.

Interesting sidenote: Mr. Estrada was recently chatting with one of the state legislators who reportedly was instrumental in helping That Big Place in Fort Worth shove the bill for revision through, last session, and Bob made a passing reference to Abrazo being stunned by these changes. The lawmaker in question then chuckled, suggesting Abrazo could "thank (him) later" for this 'favor.' (?!?) Our attorney was struck by how oblivious this lawmaker seemed to the fact that any 'advantages' agencies gained through the streamlining of the process for denying alleged fathers' rights cannot possibly outweigh the resulting damage this legislation may wreak, in the lives of generations of Texas-born children deprived of ever knowing their true paternity...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a mess?!?! Sometimes you wonder what our politicians are thinking??!!

Edited by BrendaMikeGabe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...