For birth moms: would it have made a difference in your decision if?

Question

you had had someone in the L&D room with you who had only your best interests at heart? Someone not connected to the hospital, the agency, the adoptive parents, or your family, like a doula?

Answer 1

I think that some kind of family support is critical for solo moms who want to parent their children.  That is why adoption agencies and lawyers do everything that they can to separate potential "birth" parents from their familes.  If they cannot do it physically by moving them away from their family, they try to sour the relationship with the family.  As far as a doula goes - I don't that is a realistic scenario.  If a young woman is considering adoption, the agency and probably the adoptive parents will make darned sure that there is no one anywhere near her to look after her best interests, especially in L&D.

Most of the young women I know who successfully parented their children had strong family support.  These families become very close to the child, often providing day care for work and/or school.  I know a few whose friends or parents of friends helped them.

Answer 2

i dont think it would have changed anything for me. Granted my son was adopted by my great uncle and auntbut my family didnt butt in. The best advice i got was from my mother. Do what is best for the baby.If it means you keeping him then i will help, if it means you giving him up i will support you.  my thoughts anyway..

Answer 3

As an 18 year old in 1972, we were only counseled in how to give up your baby and not how to keep your baby. I was pressured by the adoption agency, his parents and him. My mom was like, do what you want. It was a hard time for everyone and a decision we shouldn't have had to make. I think that more supportive parents would have helped us. They were so concerned about how this would reflect on them that they ceased to think about the baby and who knew back then the ramifications of adoption on either the b parents or the child.

Answer 4

Ditto what Magicpointe said.

By the time of labor and delivery, I'd already been indoctrinated/brainwashed into thinking I couldn't parent and adoption was the way to go. The ONLY thing that would have made a difference, post-birth, was if my daughter's adoptive parents 1. did not exist, or 2. hadn't applied to adopt through the agency I placed with. Because when it came down to it, I still didn't have adoptive parents picked out when I went into labor; but I'd set up an interview with her adoptive parents (then potential adoptive parents), and after the birth, I felt like I owed it to them to call them back and interview them and consider them. I went into my conversation saying, "If they are not THE PERFECT parents, I'm parenting." Well, they turned out to meet all the criteria I'd set in place for adoptive parents.... so I felt like I couldn't parent, I felt like I somehow owed the agency, adoption itself, my baby.

This is why pre-birth matching is such a bad idea (we didn't even match pre-birth, and I felt the pressure just from looking at their profile and setting up an interview!) and why moms shouldn't be looking at adoptive parent profiles until AFTER termination of parental rights, IMO.

A doula? Nope, couldn't have talked me out of it.

Answer 5

Most hospitals have a social worker that talks to the natural mothers who is completely seperate from the adoption agnecy. The one that worked with my son's natural mother actually helped a girl decide to parent instead of adopt just the week prior to my son's birthmother giving birth.

This lady was actually more pro keeping the child with the natural mother. So much so, that she started making my son's natural mother feel really guilty for her decision to adopt. My natural mother didn't like her because she was very happy with her decision and didn't like the way this lady made her feel like she was abandoning her child.

I think that having a social worker seperate from the adoption agency is great. I also think they should make sure the natural mother knows she has the option to parent. However, when a natural mother is clear in her decision, one way or the other, she should support her, not make her feel guilty.

Answer 6

A doula?  Sigh.  That would have only made a difference in the quality of my labor and birth, not any difference in the adoption plans.

Seriously though, the time for discussion options of relinquishing versus parenting isn't at birth or just after birth.  Part of the recommendations of adoption reform are:

"THE TIMING OF RELINQUISHMENT AND REVOCATION PERIODS

If the best interests of birthparents are to be supported, along with those of their children, then sound laws and practices have to be developed relating to when a woman or man can sign a relinquishment and whether the decision can be revoked. To permit a woman to make a reasoned judgment - which can be difficult in the days and weeks after childbirth - there should be a significant period of time before she can sign a legal relinquishment, and there should be a reasonable revocation period during which she can change her mind about placing simply because she wants to be a parent and without having to jump through legal hoops.

Every society, including our own, accepts that it is generally in the best interests of children to be raised by their biological parents unless they cannot or do not wish to do so. Placing a baby for adoption is an extremely significant, emotionally fraught decision that has consequences for the biological parents and their children for the rest of their lives. State laws should provide every reasonable protection to ensure that the decision is sound, reasoned and informed. That resonates as intuitively fair before the child is born, but it also should apply to the period afterward because that is when post-partum hormonal changes need time to abate; when the reality (and finality) of the choice often becomes most real; and when mothers and fathers need to be allowed to reflect on the "rightness" of their decision. Though some adoptive parents and practitioners might balk at the lengths of time involved, they ultimately serve everyone's interests because the adoption is on firmer legal and ethical foundations and adoptive parents can feel more secure that the birthparents were sure of their decision and will not try to reclaim their child.

At least 28 states specify a waiting period after the birth of a child before legal relinquishments can be signed; only six states mandate a waiting period longer than three days. Ideally, state laws would require a minimum of four to seven days after childbirth before allowing a woman (or man) to sign a relinquishment. In most instances, that would allow time for the mother to leave the hospital and for her to make a reasoned judgment after the immediate physical impact of delivery has abated.

At least 17 states and the District of Columbia have adoption laws providing a specified number of days after the signing of a relinquishment (ranging from three to 30 days) during which parents can revoke their decisions without having to prove fraud or best interests of the child. A few additional states allow revocation before court action terminating parental rights. In many other countries, including the majority in Europe, consents for adoption do not become final for about six weeks; in approximately half of U.S. states, irrevocable consent can be established four days after birth or less. In reality, lengthening waiting and revocation periods requires other considerations - most notably the care of newborns during this period and the timing of placement with adoptive parents - be addressed. Policy-makers need to weigh the interests of all parties in deciding how long these periods should be."