How to enforce open adoption idea-what do you think?

Question

I know that open adoption can't be enforced because the law wouldn't ever take the child back because the open adoption wasn't followed, but has anyone ever thought to try to enforce it by putting a steep fine on it. Perhaps, "If a contact per year, and pictures 3 times a year aren't given to (first mom's name), a fine of $7500.00 will be charged as a criminal contempt of this order"????? This added to an open adoption where the adoptive parents can't just move and not make contact would make sense. There would probably need to be an addition of, "providing (names) provides a forwarding address at all times. Wouldn't this make sense???

Answer 1

I'm really torn on this.  On the one hand, I know that adoptive parents sometimes promise open adoptions when they have no intentions of honoring it.  That is discustingly dispicable and there needs to be some sort of deterent.  It makes my blood boil.  Some say that open adoptions are coersive because of this, which implies that negotiating open adoptions is a bad thing, but I think the trend toward open adoptions, while it has a long way to go, is good and benefits adoptees.  

On the other hand, I just don't see how it can be made legally enforcable.  First of all, since adoption is the legal transfer of rights and responsibilities to people other than the biological parents, to enforce open adoption would be to legally change that and not give adoptive parents equal rights, because parents have the right to decide who their child can have a relationship with.  And adoption means also that the birthparent doesn't legally have any of the responsibilities of parents.  Wouldn't requiring keeping an open adoption contract put a legal responsibility on birthparents?  People compare it to a divorce custody agreement.  But in that case both parties are the legal parents - both have the rights and responsibilities.  That isn't the legal case in adoption.  That doesn't mean that I don't think there is a moral obligation on the part of both adoptive parents and birthparents to honor open adoption agreements.  I just don't see how it could be legally enforced.

Answer 2

If open adoption can't be legally enforced, then it stands to reason that the penalties are not legally enforceable, either.

And it still wouldn't be a criminal act - it would be breach of contract.  So the burden would be on the birth mother to sue.  That's pricey.

It seems more reasonable to study the reasons open adoptions fail.  Do the kids get older and feel confused - even threatened - by the arrangement?  Or, as I suspect is the case, do the adoptive parents begin to feel that it's a burden to keep involving this third party in their lives?

It's unfortunate that they don't succeed all the time - a friend of ours adopted openly and is, six years into it, still dedicated to keeping her daughter in contact with her birth mother and feels it's best for all.  But I think you need to look at the reasons for breakdowns in the relationship before you can assume that a penalty - that probably isn't easily enforced - will fix it.

Answer 3

Criminal acts are not determined by us but by laws enacted by Congress.  Breaking a contract at best may be grounds for a civil lawsuit based on the promises made and it can be very costly to the birthparents.  It really sucks that people lie about wanting an open adoption and then change their minds.  Parents should look out for the best interst of the child and a yound woman placing a baby up for open adoption should only do that when they can verify that the adoptive parents are already in an open adoption arrangement with another birthmom.  It is very easy for first time parents unable to have other kids get selfish and feel theratened by the bilogical parents.  Hard to find people with ethics today who belive that their word is law.  Think very carefully about placing your baby up for adoption.

Answer 4

It's would be nice, but would it go both way, as in if the first mom agrees to vists but doesnt' show up, should she be fined? same with divorced parents.

If people would just care abot what is best for the baby/kid/teen. this wouldn't be an issue. People looking to adopt ned to be honest about what they are open too. If they can't handle an open adoption then shouldn't pretend they are.

When we had our adoption classes, we were told that being open to an open adoption would increase a persons chance to "get a match". We already had out son with us and wanted an open relationship by choice, but it makes my think that people might claim they are open to whatever.

Come to think of it I think there is a phrase I see pfter in online "dear birthmother" letters looks like this:

"we are willing to negotiate an open adoption if that's what you wish"

That doesn't make me feel like they truely WANT an open adoption. but if thasts what it take to get a baby then so be it right?  I see it all the time and it should be a red flag.

If they WANT an open adoption, they should say so and be firm. Unless of course the child is in danger. even then the child should have the parents info and have a choice.

Answer 5

Adoption is a very private issue and nobody should ever attempt to force open adoptions on anyone.  The parent/s may have had alot of bad things going for them when they chose that option, and not to be rude, may not want to be contacted any time in the future.  Their personal informtion was and should always be kept confidential, given out ONLY with their explicit consent.  I was adopted and it was a closed adoption.  That was my mother's right.  Don't try to over rule it!  To do so would be a violation of rights, privacy, and what we as ethical American citizens believe.

Answer 6

Perhaps if open adoption (OA) AGREEMENTS carried the same legal weight as a visitation & custody order, OA would be enforceable in a court of law.  Not a perfect solution by any measure, as anyone who's had the unpleasant experience of fighting over custody & visitation in court can attest to!  Yet, shouldn't it be as enforceable as a custody & visitation order?  

As another person mentioned, just b/c a parent has visitation doesn't necessarily mean that they'll exercise it.  Very sad for the child involved!  And of course, OA rights has nothing to do with disrupting an adoption (taking away custody of the child) after the adoption is final.

Does OA always involve visitation? I thought OA originally meant that the mother choose the adopting parents and that they met each other during the adoption and later could include the exchange of photos & letters (not necessarily visits).  It may involve direct meetings in each others' homes or in public places, phone calls, letters, and sometimes contact with the extended family.

Once an adoptee is an adult, they should be allowed their information.  That doesn't necessarily mean they'll initiate contact with their first family.  

As for the comment about (first) parents not wanting to be contacted; closed adoption was not a CHOICE before sometime in the '80's. We can't know if our first parents "may not want to be contacted" unless we ask THEM.  

Open adoption was not an option when I was adopted.  Had my first mom said she didn't want contact (which I was prepared to hear), I would have honored her wishes, of course! Instead, she was THRILLED when I found her. She said she would have looked for me but feared disrupting my life (as I feared doing in her life).  

And, BTW, I never gave my "explicit consent" to anything related to my adoption.  As an American citizen & an adult, I too have rights. Well, actually I don't.  But I should!  I should have a right to MY information.  It is MINE too! Contact & information are two separate issues/decisions.

Answer 7

Won't work.  OPen adoption is at this time a moral and ethical construct, not a legal one.  As in all agreements, circumstances change and situations may change that the adoptive parents or the original parents need to alter it.  Someone may move.  The openness may be too hard for origin mother.  The boundaries may be getting blurred.  Child may not want contact.  Etc. etc. etc.

I think right now it is a risk, and thus, people need to be made 100% aware of the risk.  IF they are that concerned about contact, then my guess is they may want to explore options about keeping the child.

In our case, there is no contact allowed due to abuse by original family.  I can't imagine if, say, the parents had cleaned up a bit and we agreed to openness (it could happen).  Then five years later they go back to old ways (drug abuse) etc....should we be legally bound to an agreement set in place when parents were in healthy place?

Another situation:  open agreement with visitation rights is made.  Six years later adoptive father/mother loses job, tough market, have to move many states/provinces over.  Should that person be required to not take the job and put family in financial hardship to make the visits work?

These are a couple examples where I can see problems with legal enforcement.

This being said, if someone goes into a moral agreement, then changes their mind because of inconvenience or other small issue, then I cry for that child, because parents are not thinking of what is best for the child.

Answer 8

Visitation agreements are enforceable in divorce cases so why not in adoption

Open adoption is a lure to encourage relinquishment.   It can work when the adopters are trustworthy and mean well but for those who are not and just making empty promises so they can get the baby, it's unspeakably cruel.

Answer 9

What would you suggest in my dd's case?

First mom wants limited to no contact and we have no problem with her knowing where we live or our phone number on any other information. But the natural father is a registered s*x offender. I would NEVER have agreed to an open adoption with him...not EVER!  He was dx as a sociopath and posed a danger to children. He is now incarcerated for another rape.

I say if adoptive parents do not live up to the agreement of their first adoption they should never be allowed to adopt again.

Imagine the outrage if an adoptive parent suggested fining a "birthmother" $7,500 for not keeping contact!!!

Answer 10

Totally unenforceable in any court in the US.

Legislatures, and Congress on the national basis, make laws determining what activities are criminal, not individuals.

If you are unwilling to relinquish control of the child, don't do it.

Answer 11

There really should be some form of punishment. Fines might work if they could be enforced but, I'm not sure if that would be possible.

When I was forced by my mother to put my son up for adoption when I was 15, I opted for an open adoption.

I was told by the adoption agency that the open adoption contract that I was signing was a legit contract. They just failed to mention that it would never hold up in court.

I was 15, I was dumb, I was naive...I signed. I was told all those little sweet nothings that they use to reel you in. "Oh, it won't even seem like an adoption! He'll have TWO mothers! It will be like one big happy family, etc.".

First year was great. I got my photos, letters, phone calls, and I even got to visit my boy a few times. Then contact started slowly diminishing over the next 11 years.

He is 12 years old now and I have no clue if he is dead or alive. All contact ceased almost 3 years ago. They moved away and I can't find them.

In the contract, it clearly states that they must give me photos at least annually and that they have to inform me of any change in residence or phone number. So...what now?

I gave supposedly the "best gift" I can give anybody (well according to those adoption agencies) and I can't even get a measly photo of my own child.

It is Mother's Day today and my heart is being ripped in half. I don't even know if my son is healthy and happy.

He had his birthday last month and I still went out and bought him his card and present. I'm keeping it all in a big box just in case. Maybe someday I will get the opportunity to give it to him.

Sorry about rambling on...I'm just really sad today.