Where would your own children go if you were to pass away?

Question

Do you have provisions made in case this happens?

So, would you prefer your OWN children be kept within your own family (or a close family friend), or do you just want them to be adopted out to strangers?

Adoption is such a wonderful thing, after all; is this the loving choice you have made for your own kids?

Answer 1

a relative would have taken mine but now they are all grown and married and have kids i am lucky nothign happened.

Answer 2

Strangers!  Oh my god, no, no, no!  Too many normal looking nut jobs running around out there.

I have six brothers and sisters, my husband three.  My husband's family was out - loads of money but very shallow people (GOOD people, but so freaking boring).  My family is more in tune with our values so that was our first cut.  We decided on my sister who is closest in age to me.  We grew up sharing a room and confiding in each other - our deepest, darkest secrets and our loftiest dreams.  I know her heart and soul.

However, what cruzgirlz3 wrote was exactly what my husband and I had to face.  Our family lived several states away so once our children were in high school it was a WHOLE different story.  We changed the guardians to our dearest friends who are also our son's godparents.

Well, happily our kids are all grown up now!

Answer 3

well, the law follows what will happen -- next of kin and through the line.

i imagine that if there was someone who could/would adopt these children intra-family they would've or they wouldn't be in the adoption or foster system.  also, aren't these mean family members usually the ones that are coercing/pressuring the mom to give up the baby?

Answer 4

I don't have kids but I don’t think most parent(s) would arrange for their children to be adopted upon their deaths. I think good parents would have made arrangements prior to this and a guardian would be named for their underage children in their will.  Even if they were careless and didn’t surely someone in their family or a close friend would step up and take the child(ren) in.

That being said the only way I could see a child(ren) who was unfortunate to either lose their only parent, or both parents at the same time or lose both before they came of age be adopted. Would be if they had no family /friends of parents that would take them or was willing too. Then they would end up in the FCS and might be adopted out but it might depend on their age. Say the child was 14 or older they might just end up aging out of the system.

Answer 5

Quite frankly, yes, children who are adopted as infants will have a MUCH easier time being adopted by strangers than a child who has a family that he/she knows and then loses it.  You can look at any group of children who were orphaned by one or both parents.  If any of the children was an infant when their parents died, they almost always have a much easier time adjusting to life with the aunt, uncle, or adoptive family than do the children who were older and knew their moms and/or dads.  Even a co-worker of mine admits that she had a much easier time when their mother passed away because she was simply not old enough to know the difference.  

I'm not saying adoption is completely painless, but infants are much MUCH more resiliant than older children.  After all, mother mortality in childbirth was sky high for most of human history.  Evolution has guaranteed that infants are able to easily adapt to a new "mother".

Answer 6

They would stay with my husband or if he was to pass away with me then my mother would take them and if she couldnt take care of them then I have an older sister they would go to. Either way they would end up with CLOSE family, I would not stand for my children to be adopted out, No offence but I want my children to be with family that they already know and family they have. They don't need a new family if they already have one.

Answer 7

I would stipulate that they go to family. I think it's important. I know adoption is a good thing but if my family could have them then that would be my first choice. :)

Answer 8

We were required to name guardians as part of the adoption process. We chose our dearest friends, who have 2 children a few years older that love playing with our daughter. My sister has a wonderful steady partner now (would be married probably, but laws don't allow 2 women to marry), and a new baby, so they would be good also, though our daughter doesn't know them nearly as well because they live out of state.

So for us we chose close friends over family, but we would, of course, never want her to go into foster care or be adopted by strangers. As an adopted child, she has already lost 2 families (first parents and a foster family she was with for 13 months). To lose us also would undoubtedly be devastating to her. And she would need the love and support of others that already know and love her -- and that she knows and loves -- to get through and to heal.

So you are right, it does seems strange that children would go to people that don't know them and have a connection already. And actually in situations that might lead to "stranger adoption" it does often happen that a young mother raises the child with the help of her parents, or that grandparents, aunts and uncles, or close friends end up as guardians, de facto parents, or adoptive parents to the child. In fact I think that is what happens most of the time. And as was suggested in another question, in my experience in communities of color there is an even greater likelihood to keep kids in their family of origin.

And really that is the best thing for kids, if it is at all possible. Not that adoptive families cannot be wonderful families, but there is always a loss at the center of it.

Answer 9

Rachael gets them if my husband goes with me.

Answer 10

They would go with my mother in law and father in law if they were still alive. If not then they would go with the eldest uncle and all 4 of my brother in laws would provide for them until the eldest son was old enough to take care of his siblings.

Answer 11

My kids go to my husbands parents, if they can't take them, to one of his two sisters.  We have made sure we have more than enough in life insurance and other means that they would be supported financially.  It's a horrible thing to contemplate but it's important that parents think it out and plan ahead so that their families aren't torn apart fighting over the kids.

Answer 12

We have a fairly large extended family, and so this isn't really an issue for us.  Both my wife and I have siblings we would trust with our kids and who would take them.  And, if they couldn't, we have living parents and cousins who would step in if needed.  If anything, our problem would be the opposite, fighting among our family on who would their primary guardian.  (I have a brother-in-law who jokingly threatened to 'steal' our daughter).

However, like I said, we trust most of our family to raise our kids with love and care, should something happen to us.  I have seen families and known people who don't trust their families, and so prefer to look outside to friends as possible guardians.  

Like always, it is whatever is best for the kids.  Sometimes that is family, sometimes, it isn't.

Answer 13

uh, they would stay with family...why give them to strangers, they need someone close to help comfort them as loosing a parent is very hard to deal with. putting them with strangers would just make things harder.

Answer 14

My husband and I have struggled with this.  We truly want our children to be with those who love them and Yes, family would be first choice.  But we have teenagers, and keeping them in their hometown/state is important to us too. Unfortunately, we do not have siblings who we feel are in the best situations to meet the needs of our kids.  We are fortunate to have amazing friends who are like family to us.  We have decided that our girls would be best staying in their hometown, surrounded by a loving community, WITH the love and support of their extended family who do not live near us.

That's just our choice.  Biology was one factor in decision, but it was certainly not the only or most important factor.

Adopting them out to strangers...well now that was an option we hadn't considered.  Hmmmmmm.

EDIT: You cannot be serious!  Yaaa. I do think it would be quite a bit easier to lose parents at birth (not talkin' foster care here) than to tragically lose both parents whom you have grown up with your entire life.  It's unbelievable to me that you could even compare the two.

ETA-Thanks so much for understanding grapesgum :)

Answer 15

My girls would go to my sister and her hubby. Never again will any member of my family be lost to adoption or raised outside of their biological roots. NEVER!