How do you define "ethical" adoptions?

Question

How do you define "ethical" adoptions?

Answer 1

That's easy.  An ethical adoption is one where the first mom has been truly counselled about ALL of her options and resources, and has been counselled by someone who does not benefit from whatever choice she makes.  She should also be counselled about her legal rights completely, including her right to change her mind about adoption even after the baby has been born.  In addition, she should also be counselled about the loss she will feel, and the loss that the child will feel if adoption becomes inevitable.  

In a situation where the child is in foster care because of abuse or neglect, then an ethical adoption is one where the parents have received services to help them with whatever they need to do to be re-unified with their child.  Parenting classes, drug rehab, etc..., and has continued to fail to meet the standards of safety as determined by the Court.  And, I might add, that an adequate search for appropriate relative placement has been exhausted, with no appropriate relatives found.

Answer 2

I would define an *ethical adoption* as one in which adoption is in the best interest of the child, there is no coercion done to the b-parents or the a-parents, and everything is out in the open - no lies, no misrepresentations, etc.

I also believe that *ethical adoptions* include both b-parents being involved in the process so that they are both aware of what they are doing and the ramifications of their decision.  

Everyone should be respected and treated fairly - with the child's welfare and safety being at the center of the process.

Answer 3

Ethical would be done right by the parents I would think.If you just take the baby without consent or the baby is taken from the parents for no reason then that would unethical but if the baby were taken for good reason that may be considered ethical. Hope that helps some.

Answer 4

go on yahoo and look for it

Answer 5

One where no one was coerced.

The birth parent(s) shouldn't be coerced into relinquishing custody.  The adoptive parents shouldn't be coerced into doing anything they don't feel is above board.  The social worker should do a good job of background checks and interviewing the adoptive family to make sure they'll make a good place for the child to grow up in.

I guess that's what I would call ethical...in short: ** An ethical adoption is one in which the best interest of the CHILD is put above anyone else's interes **

Answer 6

Parents who are unable or unwilling deciding without any outside force that they believe their baby's best interest would be met being raised by adoptive parents.

or

Children who have been neglected, abused or drug/alcohol affected being placed into an adoptive family that will take care of the child and consider their best interests.

Honesty about the history (both the positive and negative information)

Access to Original Birth Certificate and information about family history (both the good and the bad)

As soon as there are NO Children needing Substitue Parents then this question will no longer be needed. As long as there are children who need to be raised in a home with parents who love them---and those parents are not the ones "who gave birth" to them then we need to worry if it's ethical or not....

Things just get messy when people create life and then for Any Reason decide or prove to be unable to parent.... When all children are born to families wanting to parent and doing so in a safe non abusive or neglectful way---Adoption will die out and there won't be any reason for any concern.

Until this time there is going to be a certain number of Unethical issues that arise. The best that we can do is point it out and do our best to end anything that appears to be unethical.... Hopefully one day we won't need adoption but, until then there will be a certain amount of crime that takes place just like nearly every other "process" there is on earth...

*

Answer 7

an ethical adoption is an adoption conducted under the best legal circumstances with the best interest of the child in consideration.  Both parties (adoptive parents and birth parents) have a full understanding of the situation and agree to terms that are upheld legally.  There are no favors, bribery and the rights of the bio parents are lawfully terminated.

Answer 8

Well the easy answer is when a child is trully in need of a family..meaning he/she is an orphan, not legally, but as in both parents are dead and there are no other extended family members to care for said child.

The, assuming we have live parents involved, the relinquishing parents MUST know what and trully understand what long term risks and consequences they face for themselves, their children, their yet unborn children, their extended family members on both sides and of course, the furture adopted person.

The problem is that with adoption being a profit driven business, that the people who are most often 'counselling" a couple/ woman facing the posisble surrender, have an alterior reason for the adoption going through.

This could be from pre birth contact between the prespective aoptive couple who have their hopes and dreams meshed with the aquistion of the baby. Or the agency/ socila worker who could be driven by their need to finialize the adoption and have happy paying clients , the adoptive parents. OR they could have a moral/ reliious bent regarding the circumstanes of the pregnancy.. think unmarried. Or the laywers who make their profits and the way of living from the finializations and fees.

Unfortunalty, out of the hundreds of adoption websites I have viewed I have yet to see ONE that profits from adoption and actually puts the scientifically proven facts about the risks of relinquishment to a mother  in a visable place or even acknowledges them at all.

It's really fasle advertisement when an agency claims that "in time your sadness will be replaced with peace and contentment" when in reality, studies  have shown that relinquishment carries life long altercations and that the grief and loss increase over time.

It is also completely unethical for a mother to not be given any time after the birth of her chilkd to allow for the natural effects of motherhood to be processed. We have professionals that have of the job of barging into a mother during birth to "remind her why she choose to make an adoption plan to begin with" and to cousel her that " it's just hormones...now it the time to think with your head not with your heart".

Basically any website for any agency that refers to an expectant mother who is considering adoption as a "birthmother" is guilty of a level of subtle coersion and is not ethical.

If they do not inform a mother of all the facts, then they are guilty of fraud.

it is also unethical for an agency to move a mother away from her home and family..or not inform the father...or cut off support form family members who do not want to see the adoption go through..or make it seem like an open adoption will not be painful and visits and such will somehow nullify the loss....which it doesn't and often is harder for the relinquishing parents..... ah, the list goes on.

The federl governement recognizes that it takes  weeks after birth for a woman to recover physically, but immediatly to 72 hours after birth, a woman can relinquish her rights to her child frequently signing surrender documents while still on pain medication. If it was any kind of real contract, it would be illegal and of duress as most mothers are not "of sound mind and body" when they are on meds and filled with racing hormones.

It is also unethical for that final decision be made based on situational issues... money, life experince, lack of support.. all solvable issue that , IF we honored mothers and children, then we would find ways of fixing the issues rather than raping the spoils.

Look into adoption laws in Australia. They have it right now..and their numbers of domestic infant relinquishments have fallen to only a handful per year. America, on the other hand is so pro adoptiona and we have federally funded ( by your tax dollars) agency based lobby groups that openly promote adoption and want to increase numbers. If we look at our almost 15,000 domestic infant adoptions per year and compare population #'s to Auz..the US should really see about 300 DIA a year.

So that means that over 1400 mothers and babies are separated NEEDLESSLY every year. But it would also put a big whole in the 3.6 billion dollar industry.

Ethical adoptions- very few. I do know many adoptive who WANT ethical adoptions and actiuvely seek to ensure that they are. It is possible...but not nearly as often as some peoples wallets ..and hearts..might want it to be.

Answer 9

For me ethical adoptions is when parents (both sets) have been given all of their options, the original parents have truly decided to give their child up, or if the child has been removed from their parents, and the adoptive parents do everything to ensure birth family or roots connection AND adopted child is respected through the process, including identity etc. AND the agency does not make profit and only charges reasonable amountr or even better yet no charges and state run.

Then maybe it is ethical.

Answer 10

Interesting question.  Most people would probably say that my adoption was "ethical" because I was adopted from foster care.  But considering that I was removed from my home due to abuse, would it really qualify as "ethical"?  I mean if the reason that my adoption was necessary was because of something illegal and unethical to begin with, wouldn't that also make the adoption "unethical" to a degree?  Interesting question.  This one definitely has me thinking today.