e-mail
Should an agency or social worker care what it does to a woman who is pressured, and then later regrets her decision? Agencies are profitable businesses, right? What about the child? Should a child grow up with its original family if possible?
Adoption is a viable option for a child who cannot grow up with birth family. However, being relinquished does present lifelong issues for many adoptees. Is it morally right to put a child with another family if it is not absolutely necessary?
In the past couple of days, three different people have asked me about ethics in adoption – ethical agencies – ethical practices. Apparently, many people do not understand what is ethical and what is not. There are of course differing opinions on what is “ethical” as well.
Many triad members are now beginning to understand that many adoption practices that have survived for decades no longer make sense is today’s world. Several generations of children have grown up in closed adoption by now, and there is irrefutable evidence that closed adoptions affect adoptees sometimes in very significant and harmful ways. Not every adoptee is similarly affected by adoption, however, a significant number of adoptees have suffered by all the lies and secrecy that have existed in adoption for declades.
In law, there is a term called “informed consent”. This term is most often used in regards to a patient been fully informed of the risks before agreeing to a certain type of medical procedure. In some countries, if a woman says that she is considering adoption for her child, she is fully and accurately informed of the all the possible risks, all her options and is provided with resources to parent her child.
No pre-birth matching is allowed, nor are private adoptions. All adoptions are facilitated by one central agency that is carefully monitored.
Whenever I mention the possibility of all adoptions being centralized and all being handled under one roof, I generally get at least a comment or two from adoptive parents who think that is a really bad idea. The whole concept scares them and I am not certain why it does. Maybe it is the thought of having the government handle something as sensitive as adoption?
To Be Continued………………………………..
Oh, informed consent. I wrote about that once. Neglecting to tell an expectant Mother than open adoptions are not legally enforceable is neglecting to inform her of everything that adoption entails. When she finds out after her signature is on the line of the TPR… it’s too late. Ah, coercion.
*grumbles*
Interesting… The international adoption blogger in me would like to know what countries function like this and more about their procedures. In part 3, perhaps?
I would assume that adoptive parents who are negative have dealt with the foster care system. This is the first experience many folks have with a “state” centralized adoption authority.
Many states have a long way to go in protected the child/saving the family unit. It can get very, very ugly and drag on way too long. And each situation is unique and complex.
The Hague treaty on adoption requires a centralized adoption authority. The US has almost completed setting up the “central” authority for families adopting international.
Adoptive families aren’t thrilled about this because they have to pay the bill. I don’t know the direct cost to American adoptive families yet. But in Canada.. when they implemented the Hague it cost adoptive parents an extra $900 to have paper pushed.
Maybe it is because the government does such a poor job with the part of adoption it already controls. Does a day go by without reading about a child killed or injured by foster parents (approved by DFCS)? How many blogs have we read about DFCS workers who used their power to hurt, humiliate and terrorize potential parents? And we should trust them with the most important decisions of our lives — “whether we are allowed to become parents” and “whom we will be allowed to parent”?
Sandra all the Hague adoption countries must have a centralized adoption authority.
Here is the list of countries that have ratified/implemented the Hague.
http://hcch.e-vision.nl/index_en.php?act=conventions.status&cid=69
As Moose has blogged.. Guatemala are going to be problemtic when the Hague is implemented in the US in 2007.
Here is the US State Department’s take on the issue.
http://www.travel.state.gov/family/adoption/notices/notices_2858.html
The Hague Convention on Adoption only impacts Americans adopting from other countries that have implemented the Hague.
From my experience there is NO WAY I would want our local DFS handling all adoptions. Ok, yes I am an adoptive parent, but my reason stems from my birth family connection to adoption. 12 years ago when my brother & his 1st wife went through a bitter divorce their three children ended up in foster care. My husband and I tried to adopt them. My brother & his wife were willing for us to do adopt the kids, but the state DFS said NO. They did not even allow us to visit them & we learned their intent was for the children to be adopted by their foster parents from the get go(they had them all of 2 weeks & of course were much more bonded to them then their Aunt & Uncle).
Needless to say there are too many problems to be worked out (at least where I live) and I would never want to see this a reality.
Thanks, Angela. I know how the Hague works in intercountry, but I was asking about these rules in domestic adoptions in other countries. Does it dictate procedure there, as well? And, if so, does that mean that the countries must provide all that Jan mentioned, “…she is fully and accurately informed of the all the possible risks, all her options and is provided with resources to parent her child.”
Sandra, I’m going out on a limb here; I know little about international adoptions. However, I am guessing that if in the U.S. we do not generally provide much info about risks, etc.,poorer countries such as heck do not. Plus, women probably do have way fewer options in many desperately poor countries, right? The U.S. hasn’t passed the Hague convention, right?
“The U.S. hasn’t passed the Hague convention, right?”
Right.