Reforms to U.S. infant adoption practices??

Question

I have just read an amazing essay written by a first/birth mother - Heather Lowe - written in 1999 - in regard to suggestions for reform in adoption.

http://www.adopting.org/BirthmothersViewOfAdoption.html

It's lengthy (grab a coffee) - but I would appreciate views on the essay if you have the time to read it.

Many of these practices do not occur in Australia or the UK.

Do you think these reforms are achievable in the U.S., where adoption numbers per year are quite astounding??

(over 130,000 per year)

Do you think that prospective adoptive parents would benefit from reading this before adopting??

Answer 1

I agree with some things like counseling  for birthmothers,  Open records for all adoptee once they turn 18, training hospital staff.  Birthmother should have more then 72 hours to change their minds, but I don’t think it should be as long as 3months.

I also don’t feel closed adoptions should be eliminated not everybody wants an open adoption that goes for adopters and birthparnets. No one should be forced to do something that they don’t want or are not comfortable with.

Answer 2

The nine basic points in the essay should be implemented ASAP.  They would benefit all parties involved.   And yes, PAPs ought to read this sort of thing.  I'm frightened at how naiive some of them are.  When they fail to educate themselves, they not only risk the mental health of any kids they adopt, they risk getting scammed.

Will it happen?  I don't know.  Perhaps if we could convince PAPs that the number of adoptions wouldn't drop if adoption were more ethical, more of them would get behind reforms.

Answer 3

I agree with every word of it, Possum.

But I bet the adopters here didn't read it, and if they did, they'll never have the b*lls to comment.

I sure wish the PAPs would read it though.

Answer 4

Hi Possum,

Excellent reading!  You ask would adoptive parents benefit from reading this before adopting?  Absolutely!  Every government & private agency could benefit as well.  What Heather Lowe has written, if implemented, would turn adoption into a totally ethical practice in the U.S.  

Many of us have said these very things until we are blue in the face and it seems to fall upon deaf ears.  When you hear adoptees say they are in favor of reform, this is exactly what they are talking about.  It is not about eliminating adoption completely.  It is not about hating their adoptive parents.  It is about correcting the wrong practices in the system from which they have first-hand knowledge.  It's about equal rights for all.  It's about making as fair and ethical situations as possible from ones that currently cater only to those shelling out the big bucks.  

When the closed system was first started some 50 years ago, it's unlikely the full effects on all parties were known then.  Adoptees have grown up and are speaking up now about the effects & about the injustices in the adoption industry.  Adoptees are not going away.  The situations themselves are not going to go away either until they are fully addressed.  You would hear very little complaining from adoptees and first families if these practices became standard, as they are in other countries.  I want to believe that U.S. adoptive parents want to make adoptees and first families happy too.

It has been mentioned in this forum many times before that it's largely up to the adoptive parents to lead the adoption community into doing the right things.  The lack of action thus far gives the appearance that perhaps some people still do not understand or that they could be adopting for the wrong reasons.  Only by making everyone happy, will we truly have the best win-win possible scenarios.  That's something everyone should strive for, and everyone should be able to live with.  We can and should be doing so much better for our children!

Thank you again Poss, for providing a well-written article that is very sensible, very clear, very fair, & very desirable.

julie j

reunited adoptee

& rights activist

Answer 5

I agree with her entirely.  All points should become law.  I never thought about the idea that people who adopt internationally are probably trying to get out of having involvement with the birth family.  I just thought it was a "Look at how good I am" complex!

Very thought provoking.  Too bad those that think adoption is all roses will never read this and ignore any concept that there is a negative side to adoption.  I know that there are good ones out there, where all the parties involved are honored, but with all the bad ones you hear about, something needs to be done.  And open adoption should be legally enforceable!  The only way an adoptive parent should be allowed to cut contact is if the natural mother proves to be a risk to the child (and "confusing" the child doesn't count!).  If a couple promise pics, visits, letters, etc.....GO THRU WITH IT.  Just because they legally got the child does not give them the right to suddenly back-out of their agreement.  They made a promise,  they need to keep it.  Not that hard.

Answer 6

That was a great article and points out some very important changes that need to take place.

I see a huge absence of responses from adopters.  I wonder why they don't care.  So sad.

Answer 7

I agree with her whole heartidly. Point 9 has really touched a nerve with me, my mother was given custody of her friends child after she had died. Granted my mother was young(around 20) but she LOVED that child, and his mother felt that my mother would be the best home for him after she was gone. Well his doctors ( he had a mental and physical handicap) wanted him, they pushed and pushed and made my mother feel unable and incompitent to care for such a special boy, she never had enough money not enough knowledge of his condition, not enough experiance, wasn't old enough to grasp this situation all that c**p about how they know what is best and can provide the best because they are both doctors who deal with him his condition daily and they have been working with him for years. She gave up her rights to him after they promised and promised again to keep her in contact, to send pictures and reports, to tell her of his health and how he is doing in school, to ensure her that he was a happy healthy developing little boy. Papers were signed and she was totally cut off from his existance. They changed his name and their phone numbers, wrote return to sender on her mail. She has searched for years for him, with only his original name to go on with no luck. It is over 20 years later and she agrees she wasn't smart enough, she was fooled by them. She still wonders out loud sometimes how he is doing and prays to his mother to forgive her.

Open adoption is needed and it needs to be upheld. If someone gives up their right to raise a child under the terms of continued contact then it should be upheld. Everyone deserves to know where they come from which is also why I think closed records are terrable. I have never understood them, why do that? Many of the mothers want them open so who are they locked for?

Answer 8

I know the writer of this piece as well.  If you knew her attorney, trust me you would say something else besides sour grapes. His policy is utter compliance.  He intimidates and humiliates these women.  I have seen him do this to countless women.  

I too agree with what she says.

Answer 9

Some of you have stated that "adopters don't care" or that we don't have the "balls" to respond, but here I am. I'm sure there are other adoptive mothers on this forum who read the article but chose not to post simply because they were afraid of being attacked or given thumbs down for their responses. I'm not afraid, so here goes:

The author states that she was 27 when she relinquished her baby. Then she goes on to say that she didn't fully understand what she was doing. That sounds a bit like sour grapes to me. Do I know firsthand what she went through? No. I can't even imagine how difficult it must be to relinquish a child! But to lay blame on others and say that she didn't fully understand what she was doing at the age of 27 just doesn't ring true to me. It sounds more like she deeply regrets what she did and wishes she could go back in time and do it differently. I don't fault her for that at all. But ultimately it was *her* decision to relinquish her baby; no one else 'made' her do it.

As for eliminating biased social workers: yes, I totally agree! The person who was 'counseling' the author was a bad choice. I can't believe they'd give an adoptive mother that position! That is a position that should be given to someone who has also relinquished a baby so that the pregnant woman can hear what it is *really* like from someone who knows. Counseling for birth mothers and training hospital staff to be sensitive (I think they should be professional and not offer opinions for either "side") are great ideas!

Not allowing adoptive parents in the delivery room? That should be on a case by case basis. If the birth mother wants the adoptive parents there, she should be able to have them. If she doesn't, she shouldn't have to. End of story. Abolishing irrevocable consent is also a good idea as it will save many children from being torn from their birth mothers and it will save many birth mothers the pain of realizing they didn't make their decisions with a clear head. However, it will cause a lot of pain for the potential adoptive parents who have been chosen by the birth mother and then had their dreams dashed because, after everything, there will be no baby. I know you adoptees will thumbs down me for saying that; go ahead. But that pain is just as real as any other pain there is. Which is why I think that birth mothers should not be allowed to choose adoptive parents for her child (and potential adoptive parents should not be matched with an unborn baby) until the baby is born and the birth mother has relinquished parental rights.

Baby soliciting and advertising for babies is disgusting. Period.

I disagree on the point regarding closed adoptions. Sometimes it *is* in the child's best interest not to have contact with the birth parent(s). Some perfect examples are children who are adopted from foster care. Maybe this letter is just about private adoption. If that's the case, then I don't really know how I feel about it as private adoption wasn't part of my experience. Open records are a good idea and adoptees should be able to access them either at age 18 or younger, if their adoptive parents agree.

I honestly had never thought about adoptive parents not honoring an open adoption agreement. I'm just not that kind of person, I guess. I can see where that might happen -- some people might be so desperate for a baby they'd do anything to 'secure' one and then go back on their word once the baby was home with them -- but it's shameful and sad. I think that open adoption agreements should be enforceable but I also think they should be reviewed periodically and revised as necessary. For example, the birth mother might move to another town or visiting days might have to change because of school commitments or sports. (OK, those are lame examples, but you know what I mean.)

So there you have it: the opinions of an adoptive mother who read the article, who cares, and who has opinions.

Answer 10

This was an amazing essay.  This should be required reading by prospective adoptive parents (with a test afterward to check for reading comprehension) and for potential "birth" mothers who should be certain their interests are being protected.  

Are these achievable in the U.S.?  I hope so.  Every adoption story breaks my heart.  Another child has lost something special.  (Before others point it out, it might be for the best, but the child has LOST something.  If you don't understand that, you have no business talking about adoption.)  

But I fear that, before these changes can happen in the U.S., we need a sea change in attitudes.  Unless and until adoptive parents, who have the power in this industry*, speak out in behalf of change, I think it will be a long and difficult road (if it's even still possible).

We, as a society, have to get over the belief that only by being a parent can we be complete as human beings.  Once we are past that, prospective adoptive parents can make more reasonable decisions in this process.

*Adoptive parents have the power because they have the money.  If they demand changes, as a group, then the agencies won't have a choice.  As long as adoptive parents are willing to pay for questionable adoption practices, those practices will continue, whether or not the adoptive parents approve of them.  40 years ago, one might have claimed ignorance.  Now, we all know these things go on.  Any ignorance is willful.