*IF* open adoptions were legally enforceable...what do you think the consequence...?

Question

Reminder: That I have a personal rule of never TU or TD questions to my own questions. Just so ya know.

Answer 1

Open adoption legally means that the paperwork is open.  Perhaps if "open" adoption were put into terms of permanent visitation in the orders, it might actually be enforceable.  Unfortunately, many lawyers who work in this field are AP's, and many don't want to address the issues, and small town judges don't want to rock the boat.  It will take a celebrity or a VERY strong person to challenge this in the proper courts.  Unfortunately, the ones who need to challenge it usually don't have the money, nor the confident personality, to fight this, otherwise, they probably wouldn't be in a position that they would place their child.  We are matched now, and am starting the process as an AP to put this into the order, addressing visitation, and the fact that if something happens to me, that the bio parents would inherit my home and life insurance policies to raise the kids.  Finally, she's coming around to visiting.

Answer 2

What happens to divorced parents who share custody when they disregard a judge's orders?

Same to the adopters.

Answer 3

I do not think open adoptions should be legally enforced.  Once the child is adopted the birth parents have no rights.  I do not think it is fair to have children in limbo where they have one true set of legal parents, but then those parents always have to visit another set.  How confusing would that be to a child.  Now I do think open adoption is good, where you send letters, pictures and have yearly visit, but I do not think they can be enforced because only the legal parents have rights.

Also, what happens if the birth parents do not keep the open adoption moving...vice versa.  If you are going to recommend a consequence to the adopted parents the same has to be in place for the birth parents.

Answer 4

I think there should be a series of consequences for infractions in open adoptions, for BOTH sets of parents, ranging from fines and supervised visitation for missed visits to a loss of custody/ adoption disruption for serious infractions.  It should work just like a custody arrangement in a divorce, with either party able to apply for relief from the courts.

Answer 5

Same as it is for the bparents.

Answer 6

I've thought a lot about this.

The only way I can see is for open adoption agreements to be settled like a custody arrangment.  I think it should be open-ended enough to be revised later on.  I mean, if it went from pictures/letters, opening it up to visits, if both parties agree.  

Conversely, there should be consequences for not honoring the open adoption and not respecting the boundaries in place.  

If something happened where there was a legitimate reason to restrict or close the adoption, it should be brought before a judge.

ETA: Yikes, L@r@!  Scary vampire teeth!

Answer 7

I think it would be a good thing if open adoptions were enforceable.. Not sure exactly how it would work.

Of course not ALL adoptions should be open.. Most should.. But in cases of abuse/drug use, etc.. I can see good reasons for denying the birthparents rights to see their child

But if both parties agree to an open adoption, and sign the papers that way.. then it should be enforceable.

a birthmother doesn't HAVE to chose an open adoption.. Nor does she have to chose Aparents who are not amenable to an open adoption, if she (birthmother) wants the open adoption..

Aparents do not have to chose a birthmother who insists on open adoption.. but hopefully they'd have a hard time finding one who didn't... thus weeding out the APs who aren't educated enough about adoption to see why it's important..

Answer 8

I have been told by a social worker in Australia that open adoptions are legally enforced down there.  It hasn't caused their nation to fall apart yet ...   there is nothing preventing them to be enforced here.

The ONLY reason that open adoptions are offered in the first place is that they convince mothers to surrender babies who otherwise have kept their babies. (see references below)  

"the potential benefits of open adoption may persuade some adolescent mothers to relinquish a child who would not otherwise have done so" (Cocozelli) etc.

“In a very general way, openness benefits prospective parents because it may increase the pool of adoptable infants.  For biological parents to be able to have some continuing knowledge about their relinquished child may help them to choose adoption as an option [Barth, 1987], thus increasing the number of children available and decreasing the wait for an adoptable child” (Berry, 1993)

Obviously nothing more is going to be offered to mothers, no legal changes are going to be made to provide protections, as long as the industry can keep their profit margins healthy enough.   Throw them only as much as it takes to get that signature on the surrender papers

Answer 9

I agree with Sunny 100%.

Thanks, Jennifer L, I think they bring out my eyes!

Answer 10

I would think it would be like any other contract.  If it's broken then one party should be able to sue the other.  I can't see it being anything other then a civil matter though.  It's not as though it could be (or should be) a criminal matter.