Post-Adoption Contact Agreements: Oregon

In writing these little state reviews, I often look up interesting state facts when I’m not overly familiar with the state. I’ve never been to Oregon. But I just learned that Oregon has the most Ghost Towns of any other state. They also have something to say about post-adoption contact agreements.

Let’s see what it is.

What may be included in postadoption contact agreements?
Citation: Rev. Stat. § 109.305
Nothing in the adoption laws of this State shall be construed to prevent the adoptive parents, the birth parents and the child from entering into a written agreement, approved by the court, to permit continuing contact between the birth relatives and the child or the adoptive parents.

I find it interesting that “nothing” should prevent the families from having contact. Well, unless that pesky court doesn’t approve said contract. I’d have a hard time respectfully responding to a judge who tried to tell me, whether I was an adoptive parent or a birth parent, that our contact agreement was not being approved. I’d want to get all snide and snarky. However, that usually doesn’t create a positive environment in which your wishes are granted.

Who may be a party to a postadoption contact agreement?
Citation: Rev. Stat. § 109.305
The agreement may be made by the adoptive parents, the birth parents, and the child.

As used in this subsection, ”birth relatives” includes birth parents, grandparents, siblings, and other members of the child’s birth family.

And so, the agreement is to be made between the adoptive parents and at least someone in the birth family. I do like when other birth relatives are provided for in these statutes. I know a few situations in which adoptive families do not have contact with their child’s birth parents but they are in contact with the biological grandparents. I believe that adoptees should be afforded whatever contact to their original families that they can get!

What is the role of the court in postadoption contact agreements?
Citation: Rev. Stat. § 109.305
The written agreement must be approved by the court.

Well, that’s both to the point and rather vague at the same time. Okay, so the role of the court in all of this mess is to approve the written agreement. But, we ask, what would be those things that would cause an agreement not to be approved? What, exactly, are the courts looking for in an agreement? When you say, no doubt, whatever would be in the “best interest of the child,” what, exactly, is and is not in the best interest of the child? These are the particular areas that I would like to see states get a little (or a lot!) more specific in order to help families avoid confusion.

Are agreements legally enforceable?
Citation: Rev. Stat. § 109.305
An agreement made under the subsection above may be enforced by a civil action. However, before a court may enter an order requiring compliance with the agreement, the court must find that the party seeking enforcement participated, or attempted to participate, in good faith in mediating the dispute giving rise to the action prior to filing the civil action.

Okay. Legally enforceable via a civil action. While this is a step in a good direction, Oregon begins to tread on thin ice by neglecting to state what participants pursuing a civil action should or could expect. For example, many states with legally enforceable contracts will simply mandate that the offending party participate to the level in which they promised upon signing. Other states specifically say that monetary compensation is not allowed. Without stating either of those things, Oregon could have its hands full. This is not an area on which to be vague.

How may an agreement be terminated or modified?
Citation: Rev. Stat. § 109.305
The court may modify an agreement if the court finds that the modification is necessary to serve the best interests of the adopted child and that:

* The party seeking modification participated, or attempted to participate, in good faith in mediation prior to seeking modification of the agreement.
* The modification is agreed to by all parties to the original agreement.
* Exceptional circumstances have arisen since the parties entered into the agreement that justify modification of the agreement.

We’re again faced with the vague “exceptional circumstances.” I’m also left wondering what happens when one party wants the modification but the other party does not. I mean, why would mediation be necessary if they were in agreement in the first place? Basically, I’m confused. I’m wondering if Oregonian open adoption families are equally as confused.

In short, Oregon is awfully vague when it comes to post-adoption contact agreements. While saying something is better than nothing, they’re leaving a lot of room for assumption and, as such, problems.

//
For more on Post-Adoption Contact Agreements, read these posts.

//
Photo Credit.

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.