Do you think that women who place for adoption should receive post-partum expenses?

Question

many adoption agencies state that they (or aparents) will pay living expenses and support "pregnant" women prior to birth.

yet, many of the women who do the "loving thing" and place their children for adoption, do not have FMLA or sick leave to take the time off after childbirth. furthermore, many of these women are working poor, perform shift work, must take leave without pay, and risk losing their job for extended absences. hence, i wonder if those who are so supportive of adoption, would support legislation to offer temporary financial assistance for women who deliver babies placed for adoption?

ps. i'm not a huge fan of any financial assistance prior to birth because i think it's mildly coercive. yet i'm on the fence about leaving young women without financial assistance when they are physically unable to work, or lose their job due to childbirth. hence, why i think if it's done, it should be provided by the county/city or state, not the agency or aparents.

thoughts

Answer 1

I see where you are going, but would this not be "added incentive" to allow the parent to give their child for adoption?  In Canada, anyone who gives birth is entitled to EI benefits for 17 weeks.  Here is a link that explains the program:

http://www.adoption.ca/news/051020quelea...

I would agree wiht Sunny that in teh USA there shoudl be more government funded parenting classes etc. as there is here in Canada.........

Answer 2

Two weeks to recover??????  Obviously, this woman has never pushed out something the size of a watermelon thru something the size of a quarter...or had her stomach sliced open thru muscles, tendons, organs.....Holy c**p, the ignorance of some friggin people.  Both my oldest and youngest were born c-sections and all I remember really is the fact that I could barely move for several weeks.

If a woman goes thru with the adoption plan she should recieve after-placement counseling and some financial help during recovery time (at least 6 weeks worth).  Tho, I do not think the $$$ should come from the AP's because it almost makes it look like the woman sold her child.  Yes, she most certainly needs something to help her out, but where that money comes from is rather iffy.

Answer 3

Please don't cringe (LOL) - but I have to say that I'm sitting right next to you on the fence with this one.

I worry that more b-moms would be "coerced" into making an adoption plan by a "bonus" of money after placement.  I also worry that it would project the perception even more that a child is being bought & sold, especially in a situation where someone feels they can "make" money on the "deal".  

However, I do AGREE that everyone who gives birth needs to have access to services after the child is born, and I believe even moreso that many b-moms who have placed their child for adoption, need additional services because of their loss.  Many states (if not federal) have enacted pregnancy laws that help to some degree to insure jobs, etc., but they have a long way to go (just like adoption reform).  

As an AP, I would not mind paying additional fees to an agency if I KNEW that it was being designated to help the b-mom through the after-pregnancy weeks/months.  But after what I've read here in Y!A about some agencies, I worry that even if they said that is where it was going, that it might not be used for the intended purposes.  

Great thought-provoking question; thanks.

Answer 4

I think adoption agencies make so much profit from adoption - that they should be the one's to cover such expenses.

They make the profit - they should be helping out these mothers.

Sadly - too many want the baby - and run when the ink is dry on the paper.

I do also agree that it could be coercive.

Here in Australia - NO adoption plans are made prior to birth.

Therefore the mother is given all kinds of post-birth services and financial help as do all women in Australia.

They also receive emotional help in coming to terms with what lays ahead - helping them to parent first and foremost - instead of just trying to grab their baby.

It's disgusting - in my opinion - that women are treated so badly in the US.

It's cruel - and it's wrong.

Answer 5

I think that we should have something.  I was out of work for 6 weeks, I had my doctor sign my paperwork allowing back to work at 6 weeks even though I had a csection because I couldn't afford to be out of work any longer.  There was a mistake in my paperwork and I didn't get a paycheck until 9 days AFTER I started back to work.

So besided the counseling that the aparents paid for as it is in the costs I had to ask for some assistance.  I received less then 1000$ total.  What help I received allowed me to get groceries, have my phone turned back on and to have my gas remain on.

All of this was after TPR was signed.

I hated to have to ask for this but I would not get help any other way as I "made too much money"

Answer 6

I never thought of that before, but, YES, absolutely. It is such an emotional time, and with those added hormones, could be detrimental.

Answer 7

I would think that these women would still be able to get FMLA or disability while they are recovering.  How would anyone know they gave the child up for adoption anyway.  There is still medical records, and a birth certificate that states they gave birth, so why wouldn't they get FMLA?

Answer 8

Maybe some kind of counseling would be good.

Answer 9

Earlier this week, I saw a post from an infertile AP declaring that it "only takes two weeks to recover" from a pregnancy and delievery.  The usual maternity leave is just for infant bonding, acccording to her.  (!)

I don't know Tish.  Giving any money to expectant/relinquishing mothers to promote adoption is not an idea I can get behind.  If I were to advocate tax dollars go towards pregnant women in crisis, it would be for parenting classes and support for mothers raising their own children.

Answer 10

Ooh I feel very uncomfortable about the whole thing - poor women being pressured to give up their children to strangers who just happen to have a bigger bank balance.  The whole thing smells of "Rent a Uterus" to me.  Nasty.

The charities which support adoption would be better off supporting poor or disadvantaged families, helping them get housed, get jobs and be able to stay together!!!

Sunny - only "two weeks" to recover?  I had a uncomplicated, natural delivery and it took me about 3 months at the very least.  In fact I'd say its a good year or so before you really start to feel like yourself again.

Answer 11

EVERY woman should be given at least eight weeks to recover emotionally and physically from child birth....however in the case of woman who are relinquishing children for adoption they should receive up to three months paid leave.

Complications can arise after the birth of a child your body does not care what the circumstances are......and neither should employers. It seems to be this should be a basic civil right....but alas it is not. YES I would absolutely support legislation and any woman who does not....Shame on you!!!

Answer 12

Yes, definitely.  I feel that adoptive mothers should be able to get financial assistance to take at least a 6  week maternity leave.  Also they should get help with counseling and support for as long as they need it.

Answer 13

Women who ultimately relinquish their children receive pre-relinquishment financial aid so that they'll have a better chance of delivering a healthy baby.  After all, the agency is working hard to provide the PAP's with a healthy baby.  Unfortunately, after the mother has done her job in the eyes of the agency, she is no longer needed by the agency.

Pregnancy is a medical condition.  There are medical needs that continue after birth.  Women who had pregnancy-related health problems, required surgery or develop PPD are particularly concerning.

I think all women who relinquish need to have financial support.  These women have just made an unbelievable sacrifice in the name of doing "what's best."  It's wrong to just leave them out in the cold with no assistance when it comes to the recovery phase of the pregnancy.

Answer 14

After having my daughter I also had to heal from:

The tearing and stitches

The hemorrhaging

Loss of blood

Inability to stand on my own

Massive pain when using the bathroom

Emotional problems

The natural repositioning of my hips (yes, they have to go back to pre-pregnancy position, it's not instant)

Breast pain

And I had a vaginal delivery, I can't even imagine the h**l it would be for those who have a c-section. Some of the above healed in 2 weeks while many things effected me as long as 6 months.

I didn't ask the adoptive parents to help, but they did anyways and I'm thankful now that they did because doing it without any help would have been h**l.

Answer 15

Thank you, this is a fantastic question.

I had a c-section that left me with hanging skin, that I will hopefully correct with surgery within the next few years. For me it's not "cosmetic" surgery, it's been a psychological scar and reminder of a baby I relinquished. I also had to have surgery on both arms, so in less than 6 weeks, I had 3 surgeries and I really could have used some help. I had to go look for a job the week I got out of the hospital. All I had to wear was a maternity dress that fit. I could have used at least 2 decent outfits and for the kind of jobs I was looking for.

If Aparents can get paid maternity leave to "bond" with a child through adoption, wouldn't it make sense that a mother who has just relinquished a baby needs to have time to get back in shape? I would have liked to have gone into hiding for 6 - 12 weeks to get myself in at least good physical shape, because everyone can tell you had a baby and what the h**l do you say? I hope no one wants to try to compare this to having a baby and then losing it through death, which is horrible. We don't have any support system. We don't have a community that grieves with us. We cry alone. We can't say "my baby died", and then have an outpouring of concern and sympathy. If we even mention that we relinquished a child we are bombarded with questions or disgust. Two completely different scenerios.

Answer 16

Two weeks after delivery?  Maybe, possibly for a marathon runner in peak physical shape with an easier-than-normal delivery.  Or a superhero.  But in the real world, it takes two weeks before you're starting to move around without pain.  Let alone a C-section delivery.  Abdominal surgeries of any sort take a good six weeks recovery time.  That's a LOT of muscle and tissue that get cut!

OKay, but to the question at hand, I have always believed in better support for any post-partum mother, regardless if adoption is in the picture.  Other countries do that and the fact that the US has one of the highest infant moratality rates of any "first world" country speaks to the fact that we're doing something wrong.  

As to adoption, I'm also not one hundred percent adoptive parents giving financial assistance to birthmothers because it does seem like buying a child, or putting the feeling of obligation on the part of the birthmother to follow through with the adoption, even if they are having second thoughts.   I think that postpartum assistance falls into this same catagory.  Certainly if the child's mother changes her mind and does not complete the adoption, the would-be adoptive parents shouldn't be obligated to pay for post-partum expenses.  

I think that postpartum assistance should be provided by the government for all mothers.  Leave adoption out of it.