If you were a birth mother and decided to give your child up for adoption?

Question

would you go to a different state if the adoption agency payed your way to have your child. This is in order for the father or others to know about the birth. Would you go?

Answer 1

Yes I would.. and I have had one child adopted... he was adopted though at the age of 6 months.. but if I was planning on adoption from pregnancy... I'd definately share the experience with them... Best wishes ♥

Answer 2

I think hat a father has a right to know yet I can totally understand why someone would not want a father to know.

Adoption must be hard enough without having an abusive/oppressing father ruining your chances of happiness.

Answer 3

No, I would never go to another state to give birth just to keep the father from knowing when his child was born, unless he was  psycho and I feared for my life and my baby's life. I believe the father has the right to know his child.

Answer 4

Well, I was and still am in a committed relationship with the father of the baby we relinquished.  So no.  I think the decision should be made by everyone involved.  Hopefully everyone involved is mature enough to make a responsible decision.

Answer 5

The father has a right to know.  Even tho the father of both my children was an absolute jerk, I still had him served and gave him some time to fight it if he chose.  Sadly, all he was concerned about was not paying child support.

How is your son, Sam?  I hope he is still fighting that b**** woman who gave birth to his child and the greedy baby stealers she picked for parents.

***Rock on, Andraya!  My ex is still MIA (1 yr and 2 months) and not even my uncle, a retired PI, can find him (I know his soc #).  Everyone says I am too nice about wanting to share photos of both our children with him....he's still their father.  Even tho he is only legally a father to one, he is technically a father to two and he has as much right to their pictures as I do.  If only he would get his head out of his butt and at least call to let his daughter know he is alive.

edit:

Who's the idiot who keeps giving those of us who support father's rights the thumbs down?  Can't stand the truth, can you?

Answer 6

I don't think that's right.  The father has a right to know.  

If he is that bad of a person, he will not do anything anyhow.  

If he wants to keep the child himself, he has total rights to do so.

You need to do the right thing, you didn't get yourself pregnant, that child is from him as well.

Answer 7

yeah... if he really wants the baby then let him be with his child. and if u want to keep the baby then u should. but it's better to make a desicion that is best for ur baby.  but as long as it's not abortion then u'll be okay. :)

Answer 8

I don't know about any agency's will do that for you or not. But i do know that you could never give your baby to a couple that you picked without the father's consent. I have an open adoption and if i hadn't known where her father was they would track him down put up poster's ask ppl who knew him i mean everything to track him down before i could have not only given up my rights but to legally terminate his rights as well. But its really all about there back round if my daugther father did contest then they would look to see if he could provide for the baby and really look into his past and my lawyer told me that given his past and mine the judge would awarded me full custody so i could go ahead with the adoption. It really does depend on where you living at and the laws of that state.

Answer 9

Please be careful in your decision.  My husband and I are looking for a birth mother now and in trying to educate ourselves on the process we have learned that if a father is not contacted, then he could later go through the court process to get the baby back.  He needs to know that the baby is born.  If the agency has any idea who the father is they will try to contact him.  If not, there is a waiting period (differs for different states) that must be gone through where the father is notified through public means (newspapers and such) and given the chance to parent or legally give up his rights.  

Granted a father usually has to prove he has supported the pregnancy through out and things like that, but if he has and you hide the birth, the baby could end up with the father, even after the child is given to the adoptive family.  Keep in mind that in most states it is at least a 3-6 month process that adoptive families go through once the baby is in their custody before the adoption is final.  Be very open with your agency, there are rules and guidelines that need to be followed to make sure the adoption is completely legal and the adoptive family can keep the child.

God bless you in your decision...

Answer 10

It depends. All situations are different. If I felt I needed to take those steps to protect myself and my child, yes, I would do that.

Answer 11

I believe the father has the right to know, but if the mother fears for her safety or the safety of the child, then leaving the state may be the only safe thing to do.  Yes, there are programs that help mothers leave the state, and some adoptive parents will take the birth mother in while she is pregnant.  Talk to a couple of agencies.

Answer 12

Fifteen years ago I might have, back then I still believed that the adults around me wanted what was best for me. Now I know that most adults want what is best for themselves.

Currently there is no chance in h**l I would leave my home to breed for someone else. I wouldn't want to give birth alone with no support from those I know and love and I wouldn't want to make a heart wrenching decision alone. There is no way I would ever leave in order to s***w over my child's father. I have three children and I have fought with two men over them seeing their kids... trying to show them how wonderful their babies were and are. I WANT my kids dads to love them and want to be with them and I would move h**l and high water to see that happen. Even with the pain these men have caused me they are still dads and my children have a right to know and love them. As always it is and should be about the children, having loving parents is a right all children should enjoy and if the father is more willing than the mother to give that love then the father is the right choice to be the full time parent!

Answer 13

No. It is immoral and illegal to hide a child from it's parent without proving the parent to be unfit in a court of law.

If a father is abusive, I feel that his rights should be determined by a court of law rather than a mother "taking justice into her own hands" by concealing the existance of a child all together or omitting the father in decisions pertaining to an adoption. I have seen too many cases of women who claim "abuse" in order to shut a father out of a child's life. Divorce courts are full of them. (With the exception of rape, I always have to wonder,"If this man is so terrible, why did you sleep with him?")

I am not implying that a woman should not protect herself and her child from physical harm, merely that there are ways to protect one's self while still being morally and legally upright. I know there are exceptions and emergencies which call for special consideration, but in general, there is a reason we have laws concerning just this. We have systems and resources to help and protect women in these situations, use them. Restraining orders, battered women's sheleters, protective patrols, arresting abusers, etc. are all available for these women and children to use.

If a man is unfit, he should be stripped of his rights by the court. I realize our system isn't perfect, but to entirely disreguard the rights of another person without due process is wrong. I always want to ask these mothers, "Would you want someone to do this to YOUR son?"

This is an issue which is a huge problem for me in adoption. It causes heartache for fathers, their families, adoptive parents and the CHILDREN. It wastes court time and resources to have to hear cases where someone has skirted the law to place a child for adoption and the court must now determine who is entitled to a child. TPR of an unfit parent can be done in less time, with less damage and is morally far more respectable.

Putative father's registries are part of the problem. While the were invented to give "lip service" to father's rights. They essentially force a father to "claim" what is ALREADY rightfully his. They violate father's rights by allowing loopholes for pregnancy/child concealment, underhanded adoption practices and placing an undue burden of proof on father's in court.

Father's rights is a subject very near and dear to my heart and I could rail about it for hours, but I'll stop here! :) (I'll probably come back and add later though!)

Your son and his son should not have to be going through this. Your family is in my thoughts.

PS

I have several good links to info about father's rights on my MySpace page, you may find some helpful info:

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fus...

Answer 14

no (absent of abuse).

i wouldn't have conceived the baby alone nor would the adoption agency nor paps have anything to do with it the child's conception.  although i support a woman's rights to her reproductive autonomy, when one decides to place a child, the other half of the DNA (absent of abuse) should have a say.

Answer 15

Only if the father was a very real danger to the child.