Should biological parents be able to take back their children later on if they gave them up for adoption?

Question

this is a topic for my English class

why or why not?

i've done some research already I just want to make sure

as much info as possible thanx "]

Answer 1

That is called foster care.  Adoption in permanent.

Answer 2

ABSOLUTELY NOT!  That would be terrible for the child to be ripped from his or her family and "reunited" with a stranger.

Answer 3

I dont think so. Usually the orginal parent was to young/ was doing drug or was abusive.  Ripping the child from some one they loved twice would hrt them deeply

Answer 4

I was adopted and I think if my birth father came to take me back away from my family (adopted family) I don't know what I would do.  It was hard enough to meet my biological father but having to leave my family and live with him thats just nuts. No definately not.  Once a child has bonded with their adopted family thats it...thats their family.   I can tell you that blood or no blood my family is my family.

Answer 5

No, it's a done deal. That's why there's adoption reform in the works to rid society of this barbaric practice. Adoption is a  permanent solution to temporary problem. Most First moms just needed some help and guidance.

However, there needs to be a serious overhaul in the process of adoption. A very thorough mental evaluation of the AP's has to be done.

There are alot of AP's that have the bank account for adoption, but not the mental capacity for handling it. They have to realize this is about the child and not be selfish and think it's about them. Adoption and the way people view it is changing at a very rapid pace. I believe that in my lifetime I will see it become extinct as far as coercing vulnerable pregnant women with lies about "open" adoption. I believe we will see AP's being matched up with children in foster care.

I believe the time will come when AP's and first moms will both have rights and they will have to do what's right for the child, not what the AP's want. I believe the AP's will be held accoutable for scamming First moms and will suffer serious consequences for not following through with the promises and arrangements set forth before the adoption takes place. I think the time will come when it will be politically incorrect to take a child from a mother who has fallen on hard times. I believe that society now sees how these first moms have been taken advantageof and people who have morals and ethics will look upon these predators for what they are.

Answer 6

yes they can but it is a really small window. it like maybe 1 month after they give them up. after that you cant take them back. my one friend had her first child at 14 and gave it up for adoption and realized afterwards that they is not what she wanted to to. she wanted to raise her daughter and she got her back.

Answer 7

It depends on the situation if the child is still very young and the biological parent can actually care for the kid, I think It should be possible but I also think they should go to counseling first. If the child is school age You would have to consider their emotional need first but If they want to have something to do with their child I think supervised visitation should be allowed. I don't think they should be able to come take their kid back.

Answer 8

I think the child's best interests should always be considered before saying yes or no.  Depending on the child's age, the reason for adoption (whether the child was removed from the biological parents or whether the parents gave the child up on their own accord), psychological and drug testing and most of all if they are able to provide a suitable home for the child.  I understand it can be heartbreaking for a adoptive parents to have their children taken back but at the same time if you gave your child up under duress, post partum depression or were "forced to" by family I believe they should be given a second chance assuming its done in a timely manner (preferably within 6 months of birth) too much past that and I would worry about long term repercussions.  I think if the child is removed from an abusive, drug addict, or otherwise unhealthy living environment and the child has been in a home for a year I believe the parents rights should be terminated if not done already. The healing process from neglect or abuse can take a long time and removing a child who has become accustomed to a stable home environment can cause them to regress and/or deteriorate further.  There is no easy yes or no response, it's all based on the details of the adoption and the living environments.

Answer 9

Aneska this is not about contact the person is basically asking if biological parents should be able to reclaim their birthchild after the adoption is finalized and the reclaim period has passed.  So say Eve has a baby in March 2008 she places the child for adoption, then a few years later in June 2010 or Oct 2013, she decides she wants the child back.

If a birthparent(s) decided to reclaim during their reclaim period or even before the adoption is finalized that is one thing. Not years later the only exception to that would be if say the father never consented the adoption or it wasn’t done legally.

Answer 10

Absolutely not. This would be a total disruption to the children's life & their adoptive parents. When the children reach the age of 18, they can then make contact. But under no circumstances should parents who give up their children be able to take them back- they gave up rights. Relationships can be made further down the road if desired.

Answer 11

If the biological parents give their children up for adoption, then the "most" they should expect is an open adoption...one in which allows some sort of contact (letters, pictures, calls) with the birth mother and the adoptive family.

Some adoptive families feel that birth families try to "co-parent"...and in some cases, like family adoptions, it may work...but in your "scenario"...well...I'll briefly shed some light on my opinion.

I adopted my kids in 2006 from foster care.  Their birth mother is essentially a "dog" and never even tried to correct her poor behaviors and it led to my children being put into foster care.

Many broken promises later, we were matched.

Now, say in 6 years, she has her "act together" and wanted my children back?

Hello...NO WAY.

I am the children's mother now, and though I will always acknowlege they have different genes than I do, the most their birth mother would get is a reunion after they're grown.

If they ask, I will support them in finding her...but to just say "sure, you're better, I'll give them back" is asking WAY too much.

She's got a pattern of "getting better" than a few years later, going right back down that road again...and I would no more give her to them than I would expect to lie in a street in front of a car.  

Read up on RAD (reactive attachment disorder) and find out why broken bonds hurt children so badly...and then consider why children put up for adoption should not go back to their birth families.

Answer 12

Should they? No. Does it happen? Yes. Happened to my parents.

Answer 13

In most states the biological parents have 72 hours after the child is born to change their mind. Once they sign their parental rights termination forms however it's too late.

Answer 14

NO they should not be aloud. Confusion for the child, emotional issues for the bio mother and not letting the aps be parents. There is nothing right about it at all. If you adopt a child out then face the consequences of doing so. Once that child is signed over, that child is no longer their child. That is how it should be.

Glad to hear that the subject is being baught up in schools!

Answer 15

No, they should not.  They need to think it out before putting their child up for adoption.  Once the papers are signed then that should be the end of it.  It is not like a puppy or a possession, it is a child.

Answer 16

I feel it depends on why they want the child back and how long it's been.  I don't think real life contains many absolutes.  What if the first mother was coerced?  What if the first father never knew?  What if the adoptive parents turn out to be abusive?  If the adoption is not legally finalized, of course, the first parents have a perfect right to the child because it is still theirs.

The amount of time a first mother currently has to change her mind after relinquishment varies from state to state and might make an interesting research topic.

Answer 17

There is no right or wrong answer here as far as emotions are concerned. Technically, biological parents gave up any right and any claim they had to a child when they gave them up... Emotionally however (having been adopted myself), circumstances are not always perfect, great or even just tolerable growing up as an adopted child. Sometimes one of the adoptive parents never made peace with the fact that they couldn't have kids themselves and resents the adopted child years later... So to answer your question, I would rather say that it should be the child's choice whether he/she wants to meet his biological parents and ultimately whether he/she wants to have a relationship with them. Obviously this decision should only be made at a certain age to ensure that the child knows exactly what he/she is letting themselves in for. So by law, biological parents have absolutely NO right to ever search for or contact their child again... unless such contact is initiated by the child.

Answer 18

why? so the birth mother can feel better about herself?  sounds very selfish to me.  once a child is adopted, the child belongs with a new family, and this is permanent.

Answer 19

As an adoptive parent, I feel that a bio parent should be given a significant amount of time to make a decision without being coerced.  However, once an adoption is finalized by the courts, I feel that a bio parent should not have the ability to contest the adoption unless it can be proven that there was something illegal that took place.   Otherwise it is the child who suffers because of the instability, etc.

Answer 20

No, absolutely no way. Why cause the child unnecessary trauma? Can you imagine living with your family and suddenly strangers come in and say I'm going to take your child that I gave birth to?

Answer 21

Since you're in school, you've probably got a boyfriend... look at it from this perspective.

You meet a guy, fall in love - get married.  You're living blissfully happy ... have bought a place together, settled, got a pet... talking about kids, both of you are just in heaven with your own life together.

Suddenly, your parents decide they want you BACK.  They decide that NO, you're too young to be married, or they decide they'd rather you have married James instead of Ben or they just want you back because they're feeling lonely and miserable and old and want you to come clean their Depends three times a day.

You're probably laughing at that... pretty ridiculous.  But the thing is... your mind says no way because the idea of your being torn away from your love, your life is so wrong and offensive that it's laughable.  

Tearing a child away from loving parents, where that child has a life, an identity - is just as wrong as the scenario above.

Ridiculous because its beyond wrong, it's horrific.

Answer 22

If the baby is in a good home then leave it where it is.  The baby bonds quickly and removing it from people it has bonded to can cause major troubles later in its life.

Answer 23

Not if the adoption has been done legally.   It is a different story, though, in cases where coercion can be proven of if a father never signed away his parental rights and wishes to parent his child.

Answer 24

No way that is more detramental to the child.  They get settled into a home only to change in a year or two because now they have enough money or better housing. What about the adoptive parents who  love this child and are rasing them as their own.

Answer 25

NO! Not unless it was agreed upon beforehand- which would be unusual. So absolutely not!