Open Adoption question?

Question

As a foster kid who was removed from an abusive b-family, I wanted (and still do not want) anything to do with my b-parents. However, if my b-mom would have left my b-dad, he would have been held accountable for child support & had to pay money to insure that I received the help that I needed along with the other things in life (i.e. college). B-parents are expected to provide for bio children regardless of whether or not they retain custody. Right?

So my question is this. Is it fair that b-parents "expect" adoptive parents to assume all responsibility for a child but then still "demand" to have an open agreement - just so they can see the child? Shouldn't a b-parent who wants an open agreement have to contribute "something"? I understand if you have willingly made an adoption plan that you are choosing to place your child with someone else. Why then are adoptive parents who do not want an open adoption, frowned upon?

Answer 1

I guess in an open adoption i feel the first parents are contributing something just by having a relationship with the child.

As i watch my daughters face light up when she emails her first family and as we make plans for visits, it just has to be the right thing for adopted children to remain in contact with first families in most cases.(drugs, abuse etc. excluded)

Truthfully, it feels like the least we can do as aparents is to keep the first mother informed that her child is loved and safe.  As a mother i think i would go clinically insane if i didn't know where my baby was and if my baby was happy.

No offense to your friend, I question people who don't want open adoptions.  What is the motivation behind it?  Why wouldn't you want what is healthiest for your child?  I'm trying hard to see the disadvantage of having a open adoption, but i think someone is going to have to explain it to me cause i don't see any.

Best wishes

Answer 2

Because it's not about the parents.  It's about the child.  Adoption should never be about who gets what rights with the child.  Adoption, if it is ethical at all, needs to be about what's best for the child.  If the first family is abusive, then it may be best to have nothing to do with them.  If they aren't abusive, then it is likely to be in the child's best interests to have that contact.  

Adoption should only ever be about the child and what's best for him or her.

Answer 3

It is certainly a different *spin* on things, I'll say that.  I think that some people are missing the fact that you are a former foster child and thinking that you are questioning open adoption from an AP's standpoint rather than as a former foster kid who has questions and is trying to make some sense of adoption as you know it.  

I can tell you our situation.  Our son's bio grandparents actually offered to help us with the legal expenses when adopting our son because they "wanted" us to be his parents and knew that it was an expensive process.  We knew that it would create the appearance of an illegal adoption and told them "NO" if they wanted to do something, they could start a trust fund for him.

Once our adoption was finalized, our son's bio grandparents have remained in close contact with us.  Our son's bio parents have chosen to walk away from the open agreement that they signed (but I assume that in this case it was the best because my son was neglected).  I would hate to see them being held financially responsible for a decision they made to benefit the child by making an adoption plan for him.  That being said, our son's bio grandparents have set up a college savings fund for him - at their choice - because they want to do something for HIM.  I respect that.  But I certainly wouldn't "expect" it.  

However, you raise some interesting points in your question.  I think that some people reading this may be missing the idea that the money would be for the child - just as child support is - not for the adoptive parents.  Interesting spin.  I'm not sure that I agree with the thought process, but I can see the point you are trying to make.  

As for your friend, she needs to do what she feels comfortable doing.  Just as with bio parents, she shouldn't let anyone push her into something that she isn't comfortable with.  Good luck to her.

Answer 4

Open adoption gives the CHILD the opportunity to know more of his/her own truth.   What the adopted person chooses to do with it is entirely up to her/him in the long run, but the truth is offered.

It's not about how it "benefits," "affects," "doesn't' benefit" the adults.

Answer 5

I don't know because I have never thought of this issue with my adopted children...

I do know that my ex and I believed our kids should grow up and earn their way through college...so we never planned to mortage our future for theirs.... BUT--because we were divorced and my ex had to pay child support he had to continue while they were undergrads or until age 24....

Seems they actually gained a lot and I personally don't think it is logical....  no other parenting position requires by legal order parents to continue to support adult children except for Child Support orders....?

Answer 6

i feel that if your b-parents wanted to keep you your b-mom would have done anything to keep you thank god for your adoptive parents because they love you and would never let anything happen to you i don't feel that it's right that your b-mom would be able to see  she had her chance and blew it  just keep your head up and proud and thank your adoptive parents if your b-mom wants to see you i feel that she should contribute something   yes what ever she can  

good luck

Answer 7

I think that, for me and my family anyway, what is most important is the child's needs.  We're adopting through foster care, so I do hear what you're saying.  The biological family of our kids most likely will not have a lot of contact due to safety reasons.  But if it's in the child's best interest to have contact with his/her biological family, then that's what will happen.  And if it were somehow beneficial to the child for our family to be receiving money from the biological family, I imagine the courts would find a way to do that, although I can't imagine a situation where it would benefit the child.

Answer 8

Well, I'm against all forms of adoption, but I'll save that rant for another day and answer your question.

Given that open adoption exists, and I can't do anything to eliminate it entirely, yes I DO think the real parents should be contributing something, depending, of course, upon their income.

For instance, if the real parent(s) have the internet, a cell phone, and ipod, etc etc then they can mostly certainly afford to buy a box of diapers or some formula now and then.

More over, I think that abandoned out children/adults should be entitled to inheritances from their abandoners, with the same rights and privileges as any raised children.

If abandoned out children/adults thusly receive two inheritances from their real and paper families, so much the better as we have suffered enough.

Answer 9

Open adoption is NOT about what is best for the parents.  It is about what is best for the child.

Open adoption cushions the loss that adoptees experience, kids are able to have a relationship with both families,and get their questions answered.

Open adoption is not the easy road. It takes as much work as a marriage.  Maintaining open communication is extremely important.

Your friend needs to do more research into what open adoption actually involves before she dismisses it.

Answer 10

Well, aparents ARE getting something in the exchange, right?  A child to raise, which is what they wanted.  In most cases if the natural parents hadn't SHARED their child, the aparents wouldn't have a child.

There is no 'demand' in an open adoption anyway.  They are not legally enforceable agreements.  They're based on the honor system, which sadly most aparents chose to renege on--having lied to the agency, the natural parents, and ultimately the child.

Answer 11

You need to wrap your head around what open adoption really is. The vast majority of natural parents in open adoptions are given letters and pictures, nothing more. Some open adoptions allow contact, usually very infrequently. A few open adoptions actually are open, meaning the natural family is present in the child's life and the child has access to them.

The amount of contact is determined by the adoptive parents NOT the natural parents. Open adoptions agreements are not legally binding and can be closed by the APs at any time, unlike a parenting order between separated parents. So what you want is for nparents to be financially accountable for a child they have no legal right to see... Wow what a backwards step for family unity and adoptee rights.

Open adoptions are positive for the CHILD, who cares what the parents feel. It isn't about them, it is about the CHILD knowing their family history, having genetic mirroring, having open and honest answers to their questions and a host of other things.

Answer 12

Often times, bparents that have their children taken away end up in prison, or on the streets.  

Although in a perfect world, they should be taking care of their kids, sometimes, to just get the kids away from them without having to go to court so many times, and dragging the kids through the process, adoptive parents adopt the children, and at that time, the bparents are dissolved on taking care of children.  It can depend on the state that they live in, however, it would take the system so long to try to collect the money, it costs too much to do it.  The kid would be 90 before his or her child support would be paid up.  

Sometimes, a child is placed for adoption because of extreme financial difficulty, health reasons, a parent living with an abusive parent who can't take care of the kids and has to get away to save their own life.  Adoption is often a choice of love, because they love the child enough to want it to have a better life than the one they are in, and as that bparent, they love the child, and I understand them wanting to see the child, love the child, etc.  

Adoptive parents who do not want an open adoption are frowned upon some, because it limits the children available to them. Our adoption of our 6 month old is legally closed, but we have invited BMom to come to dinners, see our son, and she chooses not to.  I've even offered to let her come to the house when I'm not there, with a babysitter who she's good friends with and introduced us, however, she still chooses not to.  But eventually, she'll want pictures, and sometimes BGrandparents want to have contact also.

In over 90% of open adoptions, where the Bparents are supposed to have a few visits and pictures, the Bparents don't show up.

Answer 13

I can only answer based on my thoughts, the experiences of those close to me, and my evolving view of open adoption as we've gone through the adoption process.

(ETA: Long answer from me, again - but I am pretty passionate about this topic.)

When we first started to look into adoption - I was honestly more than a little freaked out by the thought of an open adoption, on any level.  I think most of that came from a lack of real understanding of adoption, the issues involved, and too many Lifetime movies.  Just like most people, my thoughts were based on misinformation, the media bias and some really great advertising campaigns.

I am, by nature, a researcher. So I approached our adoption with the same fervor I approach everything else - I researched and read, found people to discuss things with, asked a lot of questions.  And my view of open adoption has completely changed because of it.

First of all, I don't think "openness" has anything to do with financial responsibility.  As an AP, I am fully aware that my child will be my responsibility - financially, emotionally, academically - all of the ways a parent is a responsible for their child. Few birthparents "demand" an open relationship. Because these agreements aren't legally binding, it's more of an "asking."  As we hear about all too often, the openness is agreed upon, and then the AP shuts it down - for whatever reason - IMHO most often it is because of insecurity. In some cases, it is because of a fear for the safety of the child, but I think that is less common (though I admittedly have no statistics on this.  I think the idea that if you have the open relationship that the birthparents are going to "come take the child back" is based upon that lingering stereotype of the poor, uneducated, uncaring, unstable, morally ambiguous birthparent.

But an open relationship shouldn't be about the APs.  I want an open adoption because I want what will be best for my child, and I believe with my whole heart that knowing their birthparents and whatever family they have is what is best for them. How can it be wrong for my child to have a whole bunch of people in their lives that love them? Why would I deny them that?  Why would I want them to go through what so many adult adoptees have lived through - the pain, uncertainty and muddy waters of reunion? It doesn't matter if I'm uncomfortable having to "share" - I wouldn't be a parent if someone hadn't chosen me to share this with them.  I may be in the minority, but I think of this as more of a partnership between myself and the birthmom (and my husband, and birthfather) that we're all making the decisions and charting our course to do what is best for our child.

I do know people who have completely open relationships. There is no clear, marked path. There are hurdles, and like every serious relationship, there are occassionally hurt feelings and stepped-on toes.  But you work through those things, for your child.

The answer is obviously quite different when you are talking about a situation where there has been abuse, or their is legitimate fears for the safety and well-being of the child to have continued contact.  In the end, it is always always about what is best for the child.

Answer 14

I'm a Mom to three young boys, ages 11 and almost 10 year old twins. My ex husband and father to them is giving up his parental rights so my current husband can adopt them. It's an open adoption for us as well.

The only difference between an open and a closed adoption is a piece of paper that says you promise to allow a certain amount of contact between the birth parent and children. This is not a legally binding contract and is totally up to the adoptive parent as to if the birth parent gets to have that contact.

My husband and I realize that my ex is giving up his rights AND his responsibilities. We are totally responsible for everything the boys need from here out. We're ok with that as well since my ex is tough to deal with. Maybe someday he'll want to help them with things... But there's no rule that says he has to. Adoption places all that on the adoptive parent.

Hope that helped :)

Answer 15

Your friend can specify closed adoption but that limits the children coming her way.  Open adoptions are pretty much the norm.  We have openish adoption coming, where we send annual letters and pic (non identifying), we think its important, but visits are out because bio parents had rights taken away due to neglect and it is not in best interest of child to see their b parents.  Thus the point, what is best is whatever is best for the child.

Answer 16

Wow Good Question. You have a point. if a bio family wants an opened agreement then I can see where they should want to contribute to the childs well being and education. However, if they get a newborn most times that child comes from a young mother who has no means of support. Closed adoptions are hard for everyone. AP's need updates for medical purposes. Adoptee's need that bond with their bio families. They need to know where they come from, who they look like, who's hands or nose they have. Natural families need reassurance their decisioin was a good one. Please do not assume that just because a child is relinquished it is not cared about. I understand your question but it seems  that closed adoptions are a lose lose lose situation and maybe this is what your co-workers are trying to tell the PAP, that their desire for a closed adoption is not going to benefit anyone, especially the child. Your situation was under different circumstances. Does your co-worker intend to give a home to an abused child? There are different guidelines for abuse. Keeping in contact with the bio family truely is what is best for the child. There are many stories about medical nightmares and adopted children. Consider how you would feel every time you took the child to the doctor and could not fill out the forms, or if the child got very ill and the doctors had no family history to go by because the AP refused contact with the Bfamily. All issues to take into consideration.