Please help me understand? Why isn't there any news coverage on AP's who scam?

Question

The majority of adoptions now are "open", and yet AP's will move or a variety of other things that cut out the First Mom. Why isn't that headlines? It happens all the time. If someone took me to court and it could be shown that based on all the evidence, that I had made an agreement with someone and then bailed on them, I would be made to pay. How in the world is this any different? Has anyone ever sued an AP for this? If not, I'd be willing to be the first. How can I go about this?

Answer 1

Yes it should be more publicized so birth parents truly know what they are getting in for, but in the end the legal and true parents of the child have the right to make decisions in the best interests of the child.

Answer 2

There is a precedence setting case in Texas with Edna Gladney Agency.  Birthmothers do have recourse.  If the continuing contact was agreed upon by all parties, and it was documented and signed, it can be enforced just like visitation in a custody or divorce hearing.

Answer 3

Why was Joslin's answer thumbs downed???  It's TRUE!  If you want to have a legal recourse if parents close an adoption, then you have to have the adoption agreement (in terms of visitation etc.) in writing.  Then it can be handled by a family court judge just like any other custody arrangement or grandparent visitation rights.  It is totally unrealistic to expect the court to interfere in something that was not agreed to in writing - that opens up far too much "he said she said".  

As for Adoptive Parents suing - I've never heard of adoptive parents suing birth mothers except in cases of "private adoption agreements" and then it is only to recoop the money they gave her.  A potential birthmother has every right to back out of the adoption agreement at any point before the adoption is final - however, if she has previously received financial assistance from the potential adoptive parents, she is obligated to pay them back.  Obviously she probably can't come up with the cash all at once, but a reasonable agreement for repayment should be made and stuck to.  Otherwise, anyone worried about financing her pregnancy and birth costs could just enter into adoption agreements she never intends to keep.  

On the other hand, most of the Adoptive Parent lawsuits I have seen involve potential adoptive parents suing AGENCIES for unethical practices.  Since everyone on this forum is highly concerned with people who turn a profit from adoption not behaving ethically, I don't understand why anyone would be upset over this.  The most recent case I know about involves a couple who paid over $20,000 in agency fees for a particular baby they had an agreement with.  At some point during the mother's pregnancy, she found out she had cervical cancer and backed out of the adoption, afraid this might be her only chance to have a child.  The potential adoptive parents are not suing her, I believe they understand her position.  They are suing the agency because the agency NEVER TOLD THEM until after the baby was born!  The agency kept taking their money, and talking about an adoption they knew was never going to happen.  Now the agency has agreed to put the money they paid towards another adoption, but the couple doesn't want that.  They feel that since this agency already lied to them once, they'd rather work with someone more ethical.  Thus, they are suing to recoop their costs.  

One has to wonder - why didn't the agency tell the potential adoptive parents about the mother's decision?  The obvious reason is that they wanted to keep the PAP's money no matter what.  Still, what if another reason is because they thought they could convince the mother to relinquish after all, and thus complete the "transaction".  Maybe they weren't ready to give up on this "sale".  Obviously, the mother was strong enough that if they did try to continue to talk her into adoption she resisted and kept her baby, but that doesn't mean they didn't try.  This is not the type of agency I would think anyone would want to be involved with - adopters or birthmothers (and potential birthmothers), and certainly not one that any adoptee would want in charge of their records.  

BTW - The agency in the story was Adoption Services Worldwide

Answer 4

As an adoptive mom in a semi-open adoption situation, I am torn with this subject.  On one hand, I believe an open adoption should be enforceable, and yet on the other hand, I believe that I should have the right to make decisions for my minor child that are in his best interest.  

In our situation, we were supposed to have an open adoption with my son's bio parents.  They chose not to stay involved.  If they walked back tomorrow and had "changed their minds", I don't know if I would be receptive to the type of arrangement we originally agreed to.  How do I explain the inconsistency and reappearance to a 5 yr old?   I'm not saying that I wouldn't stay in contact with them, but I don't know that the openness that we agreed to in the beginning would be there.  We are fortunate that we have a wonderful open relationship with our son's grandparents, and they agree that our son needs stability and not someone who is going to walk in and out of his life when they choose.  

I believe open adoptions should be enforceable to a point.  I think that bio families that find it is too difficult for them to stay involved should have the option to walk away from the contract without being considered "liable" for breach of contract.  I also believe that if an AP feels that a child is in danger - mentally or physically - it is their responsibility to protect the child by walking away from the contract, again without "liability".  However, since anyone can claim "danger", I feel that if families involved with an open adoption want to close the adoption for any reason, they should have to go to court and present their case.  I also believe that a child advocate should be appointed for the child to insure that it is the child's best interest that is being protected.  I think that is the only way to hold both bio and AP families accountable for open adoptions that fail.  

I think by opening a legal precedent for APs to be sued if they do not abide by an open adoption, you are also opening the door for adoptees to sue bio parents for not staying involved in an open adoption.  I'm not sure that is necessarily a fair thing.

Answer 5

It's not reported because it would threaten the Hallmark card, rainbows and kittens view of adoption that our society is enthralled with at the moment.  No one wants to know the truth because they know it will mean that there will be fewer Mothers to exploit out of their children.  And, people don't want to view AP's as being anything other than the best possible people despite readily available evidence to the contrary.

Unfortunately most state laws regarding adoption, regardless of if it is closed or so-called "open," favor the AP's almost exclusively.  Once you hand over possession of your child to the AP's, they retain all legal rights to said child despite whatever agreement or contract the two of you have devised.  Because of this, it is almost impossible to sue the AP's for ripping you off.  The laws would have to change before anyone would be successful.  

You may want to try birth Parent organizations, they may have links to groups or attorneys willing to try your case.  You may also want to contact the ACLU because the fact that you are completely stripped of ALL rights regardless of the type of adoption that is agreed upon is a gross oversight of the law and the ACLU has been very good in the past at getting oppressive laws changed, even when the society at that time favored and supported the oppression.  

Birth father's and Mother's, especially, are exploited and oppressed in our society.  It's beyond time to change that.

Peace,

Jenn

Answer 6

open adoptions are not legally enforceable because the parents have every right to do whatever they want with their children regarding residence, education, medical, etc and they don't have to ask the birthmom for permission as she is no longer a parent.

If the parents move because of a better job, that's their choice and the bmom has zero to do with it because SHE SIGNED HER RIGHTS AWAY and the parents are the parents.  Period.

you can go about it by having a child, relinquishing it, entering into an open adoption agreement, waiting for the parents to exercise their parental rights and then spending a bunch of money to sue them to find out what the outcome will be.

Answer 7

Because of media bias which surely reflects the nations attitude as a whole

I find the way news is reported in the USA pretty biased anyways - people are so gullible about believing everything the way it is reported on the news and in the newspapers!   it's very subtle

I agree - get those stories out there, whatever happened to balanced reporting lol

Answer 8

Unless your "evidence" is written and signatures of you and your adoptive parents on it, then unfortunately, it would not be binding in court.

However, should you have this written out and signatures and all, then you should contact your agency and find out what is going on.

Adoptive parents aren't supposed to cut off contact in any semi-open or open adoption without notice as to why, and then it still has to be agreed upon by both parties before contact is closed.

However, if it's contact you desire, sue them for CONTACT, not money.

Why should anyone have to "pay"...an open or semi-open agreement does not stipulate that if either party bails, then the other party is entitled to money.

It's not like a contract to a fitness center that says "if you don't pay $500 by X, we can sue you for that amount".  

It says "X and X agree to X contact, at X intervals, for X amount of time".

I am sorry for your situation, and it really disheartens me that some adoptive parents can be like that...but if they have actually recently moved...who's not to say contact will resume once they're settled?  

My best and only real advice is to contact your agency and see if they can't contact the family.

Best of luck to you.

Answer 9

Adoption taking the move into the realm of open adoption does not mesh with current adoption rules and the mindset of our society.  Adoption is either seen as "saving the child," "a selfless act," "secret" or "something that everyone should talk about"  in our society.  As an adult adoptee and adoptive mom, I have heard each of these platitudes more times than I can count and really am sick of them.

I don't think there is anything that you can do to sue the AP who did not live up to their end of the agreement, yet on the other hand, if this opened up, it could easily go both ways . . . can I sue my daughter's birthmom for not staying in touch like she said she would?  Nope, can't and won't happen.  

Perhaps if there was a facilitator to work with you both, this could be solved to everyone's liking.  I think far too many APs feel the desire to have a baby, that they will agree to anything just to make it all happen.  And when push comes to shove, if they have not been completely honest with themselves and others, then there is a conflict that will certainly arise.  This is not to say that they are all liars nor that they are scam artists, they are human beings who want a chld more than life itself.

The whole contact after placement thing is relatively a new phenomenon and I really don't think that every party is fully prepared for this beforehand.  If more APs were better prepared and did some soul searching, perhaps only those who were really ok with open adoptions would be in an open adoption.

That all being said, I do think parents should be able to move or make the choices for the best interest of the children that they have adopted.  And right now, if my daughter's birthmom found us or resumed writing letters to us through the agency, I would gladly welcome her and embrace her at the door.  We have a semi-open adoption.

Best of luck to you!

Answer 10

There was a case in New York State within the last two years where a first mother took the adoptive parents to court over closing an open adoption and she WON.  Ugh - I am searching for it but can't find it.  I am sure that the adoption industry tried to have the media coverage squashed.  While that case gave hope to first parents who were duped out of their children via open adoption lies, it is true that adoptive parents frequently close open adoption agreements without penalty.  I know of 2 personally where the adoptive parents just out and out lied.

As for first parents who close adoptions, I am sure that some do because are not good parents.  I am equally sure that some first parents walk away from open adoption because they can't handle the pain of losing their child.  Open adoption is sold to first parents as "having the best of both worlds".  They fall for the sunshine and rainbows c**p and then find out that open adoption is still adoption with the inherent loss and pain.  Some of the first parents can't deal with the pain of their loss and have to turn away.

Thank you for asking about this very important issue in open adoption.  In many, many cases, adoptive parents agree to it begrudingly because they know that the likelihood of getting a baby these days in a closed adoption is very, very small.    Not a very pretty situation for the first parent who falls for the open adoption "carrot".

ETA - I found it!  It was in November 2006.  This is on the WEB site of an attorney.

http://divorce.clementlaw.com/2006/11/ar...