Ok, this question is purely out of curiosity - no offense intended?

Question

Is it moral for a couple to adopt a child, raise it for a few months and then return it back to the center because one of the parents was not able to get along with the child well?

Answer 1

yes i believe it to be very wrong .. children weather adopted or not do not come with gift receipt's

Answer 2

No, thats ridiculous, everyone at some point in their life doesnt get a long with their child well.  Especially during their rebellious phase or teen years.  A child is not a dog, a person should never just return it when they just dont want it anymore.  I also don't know how anyone could possibly think they completely know a kid with only being with them for a few months, thats not even trying to make it work.  I would say morally thats wrong and that the person is a quitter.

Answer 3

Part of the waiting time between placement of the child in a home and the finalization of the adoption is for the agency to do post-placement supervisory visits.  Part of what they check is to make sure that the parents & child are bonding with each other.  If there are attachment and bonding issues, then the adoptive parents have that choice, or the agency can  decide to take the child back.  As bad as it sounds, do you think it would really be better for the child to be raised in an environment where one parent was emotionally detached?  I'm sure it's VERY VERY RARE for this type of situation to occur.  Usually adoptive parents want a child so badly that they would never dream of returning a child once it is placed with them.  Also, sometimes it's possible that the baby has issues from drug use, etc. that were unknown to the couple before the baby was placed with them for one reason or another and they may feel that they are unable to deal with these issues once they surface.  I hope this helps.

Answer 4

Once you adopt you are their parents- if you had a biological child, you could not send him/her back.  Sorry, don't mean to seem so blunt- but adoption is very special to me, I am adopted and have 2 adopted children-  we have had some problems with one of our kids, but I would never say, "hey,take him back will ya"

Answer 5

I agree with Spidermomma, she made a lot of good points.

I don't know if moral is the term I would use, but I would rather have people return adopted children than abuse them as sometimes happens, sometimes the reality just doesn't line up to the expectation, people should go through more screening before they adopt.

Answer 6

I would find it hard to believe that this could happen.  Most state do trial placement prior to the adoption.  Most cases it takes a while, if the parent and child hadn't bonded, it would be during that time...not after the adoption was finalized.

Comment to "Sunny"...that's incorrect. My two children were asked several several times, if they wanted me to adopt them and if staying with me for their forever home was what they wanted.

Answer 7

I felt crazy that I may be offender if I answer this question.

Separate your PSYCHOLOGICAL perceptions from you, youwill know how you are fighting with YOURSELF.Your conscience will help you to get along with your self & the cute, loved adopted baby and the whole world.

Getting along with others begins at HOME..

Answer 8

Certainly not.

Answer 9

If you want the kid to be more demented than it already is then sure go ahead.

Answer 10

NO! This is part of the reason there are so many children in foster care!

Answer 11

That would be a horrible, awful situation. The child would likely be badly scarred by that, and children who have been adopted already have had one loss, that of their first family, so adding another loss of a family would make it that much more likely that the child (and later the adult), would have a very hard time forming healthy attachments to others. A good life for this child might take years of incredible therapy along with incredible adoptive parents willing to go through the tough stuff -- and even then I would expect scars.

But, well, as awful as it would be, imagine how much worse it would be for the child to be kept in that family where they were clearly not wanted. That is a recipe for certain disaster, and much more likely to result in long term suffering for the child. Imagine spending your whole time growing up knowing that your family had tried to "return" you.

The only moral way to resolve this is if it had not happened in the first place. Adoptive parents (at least in the USA) need much more intense scrutiny before they are allowed to adopt. There should be psychological testing, intensive training on issues faced by adopted children and adoptive families, counseling about infertility or desires to rescue a child, and on and on. In the majority of cases this does not occur now in the US, though through the foster care system it can be quite a bit better.

Answer 12

it's terrible...how many biological kids & parents don't get along and those kids can't be returned. An adopted kid is your just the same...no returns please!

Answer 13

that's kind of weird, but i think its possible.

Answer 14

Personally, I feel this would be wrong. Children are not like a shirt you get at wal-mart to be returned if it dosen't "feel right"

If a couple is considering adopting a child, especially one that owuld be old enough to "not get along with"; they need to be absolutley 100% SURE they can commit to this child. If BOTH paretns are not 100% sure then they do not need to adopt.

What happens if a couple gives birth to a child and then one parent "can't get along" with it?  You don't consider calling up an adoption agency and putting that child up for adoption. The same should be true for a child you adopt.

JMHO

Answer 15

it would be moral, because the adoptive parents weren't mature enough to handle the responsibility.

Answer 16

IBefore adopting, ts better if the couple get used t the child staying in the orphanage or where the child live, check the compatibility of every one and then adopt. Prevention is always better than cure!!!

Answer 17

Yes, it would be moral.

It is sad in that situation that it didn't work out, it always would be better to get things right the first time around.

However, things don't always go right the first time around. Maybe one of the new parents wanted the adoption so much that the other went along with it not really wanting it themselves. Or maybe the new parents just aren't as prepared as they thought they would be.

But if the situation is that you can not give the proper care to that child, or the environment is not healthy for them, then it is their responsibility to help make sure that the child does find the situation and environment that will be good for them.

This doesn't mean you're free to just give up though! If you agreed to take care of a child, you should do your very best to do that!

--Edit--

Sorry to those that disapprove of my answer. I just know someone in a very similar position to this. The new mother wanted a child, and they ended up with two foster kids. From what I understand the new father has little patience with them and tends to yell at them a lot.

I think this is a sensitive issue and there is no one catch-all answer. Each case has to be looked at individually.

Answer 18

Hi Crazytamil,

I'm assuming you do not mean to offend so I'll answer your question.  

When a child is placed with a family, there has already been some screening done to hopefully make a proper match that will meet the child's needs to begin with.  But the adoption is not final yet.  There is a minimum waiting time of 6 months of the child living with the new family before they can go to court and have that adoption finalized by a judge.

No, it is not moral to purposely disrupt an adoption, as the child has already sufferred one major loss in his/her young life.  Adoption is meant to be permanent and couples seeking to adopt are aware of that.  Their goal is almost always to have a permanent new member added to their family.  Although disruption does happen, it is not good for the child.  However, that being said, if one of the parents truly feels they are not equipped for whatever reason to meet the needs of the child, despite taking advantage of help and services offered, then yes, it would be in the child's best interests to find another home where the child will be nurtured and loved by both parents.  Better that than to be abused in that home.

If that did happen & I were the social worker with that case, I would think long & hard before considering placement for another child in that home.

Thank you for asking.  Hope that answered your question.

julie j

reunited adoptee

Answer 19

Kinda like test driving a car or enrolling in a trial at a gym before signing the membership forms... except here we are dealing with a child. Even some bio kids do not mesh well with their families, are they "given back"?

In my opinion there is nothing moral about this.

Answer 20

that's a toss up, maybe it will save the kid from idiot ap's.

What does morality have to do with adoption anyway?

Answer 21

I would say that is completely immoral. I am not experienced in this field but as a mother would imaging the bond between adoptive parents and child may take a long time to establish, Some parents of "natural" children find it hard to establish this bond but where would we return our children to?

I would also hope that anyone who were to return children in this way would not be allowed to adopt again as they do not have the right temperament to be parents.

Answer 22

i don't think it is right to do that.alot of things could be worked out by therapy or just talking to the child.try and find out if something is bothering the child if the child is being difficult.maybe you all could come to a better place by trying something different.

Answer 23

Definitely not OK. The Creator does not let you choose your child or how it will behave, or which of the two parents it will bond with first. If you give that child unconditional love, as you should your own and show them the right way of things and give them respect, they will grow into a good person that will love you as much as your own child would. This person would seem selfish and uncaring, perhaps the whole reason they must look to adoption instead of being blessed with children.

Answer 24

You didn't indicate the age of the child, but I'm looking at the child being a baby. Somebody before this adoption took place didn't do a very good job at what type of household the child was going into,and should be fired.

You know some might see it as a moral issue, which in no way am I saying it isn't, but that child will be far better off in a home that it will be loved, not abused after a certain amount of time.

My hope would be that these people never have another chance to be involved with another child to be adopted. They really need to satisfy each others needs and abandon the idea of having a child in their home.

Answer 25

NOOOO. A kid is not like a new car, you can't just take it back.

Answer 26

No, no it is not.  If you have a personality conflict with your biological child do you shove it back into your uterus?!

Adoption, like all parenthood, should not be entered into lightly as it is a lifetime commitment.

Answer 27

Sounds like it's a car or pet. These days you can't even return a vehicle without paying huge penalties. It sounds uncaring to the child to adopt him and return him to the center. Some people are so immature. I just don't understand something like that.

Answer 28

I personally think they should have given it more time.  I believe most states have a waiting period before you can legally adopt.  This is in place for these situations.  They want to make sure it's going to work out for the child and parent.  

I'm not sure it's a question of morality.  Maybe this was best for the child in the long run.

Answer 29

It's tragic. That is why there are post-placement interviews. If this happens, and it is rare, it's the agency and social worker who didn't do their jobs correctly and they are the ones who should be held accountable and considered immoral. It causes untold heartbreak for the child and the parents.

heather, can you prove "adoptive parents do it all the time"? No, I didn't think so. Would it kill you to leave your warped opinions and lies out, just once?

Answer 30

In most cases, no it is not moral or ethical or responsible or loving....I could go on an on and on.  

However, there are few (and I mean few) cases out there where a child is brought into the home and found to be abusive to other children.  My husband (a police officer) just had a case where a foster child was molesting another child in the home.  In "that" type of case, YES - removing the child from the home is in the best interest of everyone.  

That being said, I think that if the child was adopted, then the parents still have a right to obtain help for the child, provide support, etc - not just "give him back".  They should treat the situation just as though it was a bio kid with the same problem.  You wouldn't just stop loving your child because they did something horribly wrong - you would want to help them in any way possible.  

Foster care offers an entirely different set of challenges so I can see in the cases like I described above, such as abuse, where a child may be put back into the foster care system until a more suitable placement is found and the child is receiving help.  

But for the most part, YES "giving back" a child is immoral.  Children are not possessions that can be "returned" because they didn't work.

Answer 31

Human beings do not come with guarantees, exchange policies, nor warranties.  If you commit to a child, it has to be forever.