What Would Happen If Agencies And Attorneys Were Not Allowed To Use Or Agree To The Term, “open” Adoption?
Since it isn’t enforceable and really isn’t protected by any laws, I think that they need to take “open” adoption out of the equation. No woman should be under the impression that she has some type of legal recourse.
I am thinking that they need to tell all women adoptions are closed and that’s it. What are your thoughts?
Tags: Agencies, Agree, Allowed, Attorneys, Happen, Open, Term, Were, What, Would
February 16th, 2010 at 4:25 AM
Yes, I think it is a lure and many women are mislead about ‘open adoption’
There are some great adoptive parents who stand by their promises of open adoptions, but it is a sad fact that some will just use it as a lure to get a baby and shut out the bmom as soon as the ink is dried on the TPR
ETA What would happen if agencies didn’t use this lure? I guess there would be less adoptions because most women don’t want to be cut off from their offspring forever and never know what happened to them
February 16th, 2010 at 9:13 AM
the adoption rates would drop.
currently, most adoptions are “open.” hence, it’s clear that many f-moms want some sort of contact. if adoption returned to the days of “breed, birth, be-gone!”, more women would opt–IMO–to either parent or terminate.
February 16th, 2010 at 1:31 PM
You know I have thought about that too. I often wonder what would have happened if I had the opportunity to have an opened adoption. I think that if I was told I was going to be involved in an open adoption and then the door was slammed on me I would have been in worse shape than I was with a closed adoption. I made a decision knowing full well that I was walking out of her life forever. Was it hard, yes. Would I have given anything for a picture, yes. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s wonderful that people can be big enough and secure enough to do this, I just don’t know how it would have worked out for me. I will never know, but find the stories about this happening most upsetting. Part of me thinks that adoptions should be looked at as being closed and if you get a secure set of aparents that are willing to see the importance of nparents in an adoptees life that’s great, but being as I am a nmom I can see the devistation and heartache of watching your child grow from a disance and then a few years later poof gone. It was hard enough at birth, I have a very hard time imagining what that must have felt like after being allowed to bond, even a little bit.
Does this make sense to anyone? I am not against opened adoption, I think it’s awsome. I can see both benifits and problems that would arise but over all I think it is a good thing. I just dont’ know how much more pain I could have taken if I was one day cut out of my daughters life after being told I was going to be a part of it. It seems to me that would be worse than preparing yourself for the terms of a closed adoption, which was hard enough.
February 16th, 2010 at 7:39 PM
But then they will have to find a different shiny penny to lure and coerce with…
Yeah close em all.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:52 PM
Excellent question with no clear answer.
Yes, i think “open” adoptions should be fully explained that they are NOT enforceable and guardianships offered as an option.
I also agree that to really make the point that “open” adoptions are unenforceable, they should be told they’re closed.
but by the same point, even closed adoptions really don’t cut a woman from her offspring forever and ever . . .look at all the people on this site involved in reunion.
??Now What?? — I could be completely wrong but don’t a few states recognize open adoptions? I know WI doesn’t but i thought there was a baby’s handful of states that did.
February 17th, 2010 at 4:55 AM
I believe that Ohio has the first bill pending in house right now, that would legalize an open adoption contract.
I could be wrong.
I think there needs to be more awareness on this issue as well. Its misleading in a big big way.
February 17th, 2010 at 6:27 AM
Abortions would skyrocket.