Shouldn't natural parents be required to reimburse adopted parents when they decide they want the child back?

Question

Shouldn't natural parents be required to reimburse adopted parents when they decide they want the child back?

Answer 1

PAPs know it's a gamble when they play the adoption game.  Sometimes you win, sometimes people wake up and realize they'd be nuts to give their children up to be raised with strangers.

Answer 2

if they are adopted, the natural parents have no rights , they gave that up when they agreed to the adoption, and apart from that , i can't see anyone wanting to pursue something like that , they would be to heartbroken over the loss

Answer 3

That depends on whether the adoptive parents were abusive or not. If so, then the biological parent(s) sue sue the adoptive parents.

Answer 4

No monies should ever be put forward.  If the potential adoptive parents are paying for something the mother (the one having the child) would have had to pay for anyway, then I guess it is her responsibility.  I think this is why you go through reputable agencies and such...if anyone is putting money towards medical expenses that a birth parent would have had to pay anyway then I suppose the birth parent (mother) is to pay anyone back for the actual expenses.  (just medical not anything above and beyone)

But again this shoudl not be the case.  (there are no medical expenses for anyone giving birth in Canada, it is universal and already embeded in our taxes)

Interesting question I guess.  Kind of a scary process to have to "put up money" to have a kid....sounds kind of shady

Answer 5

Natural parents should not even get the choice to have the child back. They should deal with the adoption they have decided about

Answer 6

That's a tough one.  I would have to say 'no', because otherwise it seems like the adoptive parents are "buying" a child, then getting a refund.  

BTW, adoptive parents are not obligated to pay for medical expenses, living expenses, etc for the birthparent.

Answer 7

ok first of all when the adoption goes there its a done deal, the people that put the child up for adoption have six months to change there minds if they dont its done,  I adopted a beautiful baby boy 21 years ago and once its final its final, and he is mine through and through, and no one can take him away from me but God.

Answer 8

All I can say is that the agency I have used has placed an awful lot of emphasis on adoption not being 100% until the judge signs the papers.  (Em's adoption became official nine months after she was placed with us)

Much like a baby can get sick and die after child birth, an adoption can fall through is an analogy they use.  As an AP, I know full well what I am getting myself into and the risks associated with it.  While I would be heartbroken if a placement did fall through, I think that voice in the back of my head would remind me that I was well aware that this could happen and that for whatever reason, this just wasn't meant to be.

Answer 9

There are situations where a pregnant woman will find three or four families, tell them that if they pay her bills she'll give them her child, and then when the baby is born, she runs off with all that money.  

So, I'll throw this out there, repeating what a few others have said.  No money should be exchanged until AFTER the child is born (not just for the above reasons...coercion has already been mentioned, and is much more common than the above scenario...just wanted to point out another possibility).

Answer 10

I don't think any amount of money could fix that problem.  The adopted parents would be inconsolable with money.

Answer 11

When you put chips (or money) down on the table and then roll the dice (don't know the outcome) it's called gambling.

You are gambling on the outcome of a woman giving her son or daughter to you before she's even met them in this world!!!

PAPs should not be involved with any agency/attorney that allows payment for anything for a woman who is thinking (or even says that she's going to) surrender her child - ESPECIALLY before the baby even comes into this world.

Answer 12

This is one of the great problems with private/pre-birth match adoptions.  Prospective adoptive parents will often pay for many of the expenses related to the birth of the baby.  However, that child is not legally theirs.  The mother has not relinquished.  She doesn't owe HER baby to anyone.  Paying for these expenses is a form of coercion all its own.  Some mothers have gone through with the relinquishment, when they did not want to do so, because they were told they would have to pay back huge amounts of money they could never pay.  And the PAP's are upset by the whole change of heart.  

But, getting rid of private/pre-birth match adoption could eliminate  nearly all, if not all, of these problems.  With no pre-birth matching, no PAP's are expecting a certain child and no parent is feeling obligated to give up the child.

ETA: Heather is right.  PAP's do know this is a possibility and go into it knowing that.  It's not a car deal.  It's someone preparing to give up her own flesh and blood, for crying out loud.

Answer 13

some of the times when a child is addopted the natural parennts usually have to sign their rights over  before a child can get addopted most of the time the child cannot be addopted untill the natural parents sign over the rights.the addoptive parents along with judges and caseworkers decide whether the child can have any visitation rights   but that sounds  pretty bad addopting is a long process but its really great when its all done

Answer 14

NO.  The pap's know what the risks are when they walk into adoption.

This is a major problem with prebirth matches.  The Mother has the right to change her mind at any time up until the point that there is no turning back for the first parents.

Answer 15

The natural mother does not 'owe' her baby to anyone and does not relinquish parental rights until after the baby is born.  If at that time she decides to parent, she is quite within her rights to, because she is the mother of the baby

Anyone handing over any money prior to relinquishment ought to be aware that there is a chance the mother will decide to parent.  If they are not aware of this, the agency is not doing its job

Answer 16

In my opinion there should be a law preventing any type of pre-birth relations or expenses being paid for PRE-birth/adoption of child.

Its the mothers/fathers right to parent their child, paying expenses for them before hand is ridiculous and no pap should ever do that. It is destined for failure and isn't giving the baby a fair opportunity to be raised by his/her parents.

If someone is a pap, and they are paying the expenses of an expecting parent, they should know that there is a chance of the parent, parenting the child. Its a faulty loophole, one that needs amendedment in my opinion.

Answer 17

Its a nice theory ... but when it comes down to  it ... you can't buy a broken heart and no matter how much money is given back, your still missing the one thing .. the child.

Answer 18

because of this so many people step back form adoption

Answer 19

Yes, if everything was done legally...  although I don't know how you put a price on the anguish that both the child and the adoptive family will go through.  

On the other hand if the birth mother was coerced to give up her child, she shouldn't have to pay expenses and damages- the person or group who did something illegally, should be sued.

Answer 20

Absolutely NOT.  No woman should feel obligated to hand over her child or face a hefty bill.  PAP's know the expecting mother might change her mind.  She's within her right to do so without the fear of coughing up thousands of dollars.  This is why public assistance comes in handy.  As many others have said: take the $$$ out of the equation altogether and no one is taken for a ride.

Answer 21

I know that our agency accepts NO money from adoptive parents until AFTER the birthmother has chosen to legally relinquish her rights.  But then we are a dinosaur out there.  NO agency should offer birthmothers a "match" with an adoptive family until the last 2-3 weeks of pregnancy. and those that "match" at 3 months are in my book unethical.  Someone asked before what we do if the birthmother decides to parent (which 40% do)?  Well, THAT is where all those previously paid fees that adoptive parents have paid go.  To the expenses associated with those 40% of birthmothers who decide to parent.  THAT is why our fees are what they are.  A birthmother is allowed by law to be reimbursed for ALL of her expenses if she is considering adoption.  If we did not charge the fees we do, then no birthmother would get financial help.  That would be fine with the agencies, but what about women considering adoption?  If they are barely making it, and come to the agency because they can't pay rent, buy groceries, get diapers, etc., etc. for her other children, then what will she do if there is no help from the agency?  We suggest they turn to family for support and help with the pregnancy -- but most refuse.  And most are already linked up with social service agencies, so that is not enough.  And encourage a woman who does not want to parent a child, to parent that child?  Tread softly here.

Answer 22

WOW!  I feel so bad for the adoptive parents! I agree that no amount of money can console the adoptive parents!  however, I do believe that the natural parents should have to pay back the monies that the prospective parents have dealt out for medical bills and so on...

Answer 23

First of all, there should be no exchange of money what so ever.  Honestly no but if adoption is done right.  Money is taken out of the equation. Situations like this lead to coercion.

Answer 24

No, they shouldn't.

PAPs know what the possibility and risks are when they are matched.  It is something we willingly accept.  There are ways to adopt and agencies that don't require a PAP to pay for the medical expenses - so if the risk is too great for someone to take on, there are other choices.

It would definitely be considered a form of coercion if the natural parents were required to pay back the PAPs.  They would know that if they didn't sign TPR, they would receive a huge bill.  This is why it is the law in most states that they can't be asked to reimburse for any expenses.  Sure, it leads to some situations where PAPs are losing a lot of money, and susceptible to fraud - but, again, this a risk they willingly accept - but no one should ever be forced to place their child for adoption because they would then owe someone a lot of money.  That's just beyond horrible.

Until TPR is signed and any waiting periods have expired, and then it's made legal by a court - the PAPs are just that: "potential."  Nobody owes them their baby, and the natural mother has every right to not go through with adoption.

PAPs should research and fully understand these risks - as a PP said, if you don't know this, the agency (or attorney) isn't doing their job.

Answer 25

It probably would help if there was no matching prior to the birth. It would also keep some birthmothers from scamming those looking to adopt. Though there is the reclaim period which can be a few days to few months, but that’s just a risk people looking to adopted know about. One can certainly adopt a baby that has already been surrendered or that has truly be abandoned, rights have been stripped of the biological parents for whatever reason.  etc.

As far as should they pay back i don't know maybe at most medical costs. As far as food, clothing, money for these things etc no.

Answer 26

NO! Money shouldn't be exchanged prior to the mother relinquishing. If that has been done, then that is illegal. There is always a chance that the mother will want to parent the baby. Nothing is set in stone until a judge signs papers. Adoptive parents need to keep this in mind, if they are adopting.