Florida may be a pretty state to live in but I sure wouldn't want to be an expectant parent considering placement or a birth parent relying on a post-adoption contact agreement in that state. While Connecticut seemed mostly useless when it comes to specifics on various statutes, Florida is downright unfriendly towards biological families. It's rather disheartening to see this kind of law on the books today. If I lived in Florida, I'd be fighting the system to get something changed!

What may be included in postadoption contact agreements?
Citation: Ann. Stat. § 63.0427
The court may be asked to consider the appropriateness of postadoption communication or contact, including, but not limited to, visits, written correspondence, or telephone calls.

A bit more specific but, at the same time, a bit more vague than some other states have addressed this particular heading. While Florida writes out things to be considered (phone calls, visits), they don't address it in the same manner as, say, Connecticut, which talks about immediate openness, future openness and a closed adoption with medical record updates. If you were to combine the two states way of wording the issue, you'd have a perfect addressing of the topic!

Who may be a party to a postadoption contact agreement?
Citation: Ann. Stat. § 63.0427
The child shall have the right to have contact with his or her siblings or, upon agreement of the adoptive parents, the child shall have the right to have contact with the parents who have had their parental rights terminated or other specified biological relatives.

Interesting. From previous discussions about Florida law on the forums and in other various places, I know that this state uses these statutes to dictate foster-adopt openness. So, the wording here, referencing siblings before biological parents, is obviously a result of that mindset. Furthermore, the way the termination of rights is worded ("had their rights terminated" versus "voluntarily terminated their rights") lends to that mindset as well. I'm thinking, of course, that states had better start differentiating between the two kinds of relinquishments because, some day, someone is going to fight these things and win based on faulty wording!

What is the role of the court in postadoption contact agreements?
Citation: Ann. Stat. § 63.0427
A child whose parents have had their parental rights terminated and whose custody has been awarded to the department pursuant to § 39.811, and who is the subject of a petition for adoption under this chapter, shall have the right to have the court consider the appropriateness of postadoption communication or contact, including, but not limited to, visits, written correspondence, or telephone calls, with his or her siblings or, upon agreement of the adoptive parents, the parents who have had their parental rights terminated or other specified biological relatives. The court shall consider the following in making such determination:

* Any orders of the court pursuant to § 39.811(7)
* Recommendations of the department, the foster parents if other than the adoptive parents, and the guardian ad litem
* Statements of the prospective adoptive parents
* Any other information deemed relevant and material by the court

If the court determines that the child's best interests will be served by postadoption communication or contact, the court shall so order, stating the nature and frequency for the communication or contact. This order shall be made a part of the final adoption order, but in no event shall the continuing validity of the adoption be contingent upon such postadoption communication or contact, nor shall the ability of the adoptive parents and child to change residence within or outside the State of Florida be impaired by such communication or contact.

Again, this wording is all about children who have been removed from a home and with whom the state is working to maintain biological relationships with siblings and other relatives. It lends nothing to the discussion of what expectant mothers and fathers considering placement should consider when thinking about placing in the state of Florida. (Other than, simply put, not to since the subject is being widely ignored by lawmakers!)

Are agreements legally enforceable?
This issue is not addressed in the statutes reviewed.

Gee, that's not a surprise, now is it?

How may an agreement be terminated or modified?
Citation: Ann. Stat. § 63.0427
The adoptive parent may, at any time, petition for review of a communication or contact order if the adoptive parent believes that the best interests of the adopted child are being compromised, and the court shall have authority to order the communication or contact to be terminated or modified, as the court deems to be in the best interests of the adopted child. As part of the review process, the court may order the parties to engage in mediation. The department shall not be required to be a party to such review.

This is the first state (out of five now) that we have seen not demand that the parties attempt to work out this issue on their own before petitioning the court for a review. I'm curious, of course, if that means that the adoptive family can then accept an agreement, turn around two months later and petition for review to have the contract made null and void. The current wording that combines emphasis on adoptive parents' controlling the situation and a lack of emphasis on working things out on the parties' own time leaves the door wide open and thus endangers expectant parents who are relying on a contract for their placement plans.

Basically, while Alaska was the most vague of all states when it comes to addressing issues, Florida is, so far, the worst when it comes to birth parents rights in post-adoption contact agreements.

//
For more, read:

1. Post-Adoption Contact Agreements: Connecticut.

2. Post-Adoption Contact Agreements: California.

3. Information from the State Statute Search on ChildWelfare.gov in November 2007.


//
Photo Credit.