Do you agree or disagree with open adoptions?

Question

I disagree that mother is willing to give that baby up for whatever reason, she gives up all rights to see it.

Answer 1

I think open adoptions are kind of like "leasing" a kid, its hurtful in the end.

Answer 2

I believe that completely open adoptions are not healthy for the child if less then 3 years old at time of placement. That child will adjust to their new home better if birthmother isn't visiting. If the child is 4 or older, I do believe that the birthmother should be involved somewhat. In both cases I do not believe in the child calling both adoptive and birth mothers "mom". Adoptive parents should be the mom and dad, and should be the decision makers in the childs life. However, I plan on only adopting young children, and I would not do more than send pictures and letters to our adoption agency for the birthmother to get through the agency.

This doesn't work for everyone though, and some people really want to have the birthmom around. It think is is one of those things that there isn't a right or wrong across the board.

Answer 3

So, when it comes to open adoption, your opinion is that a birth mom should give up all rights to see her baby? I'm confused. That is why there is an option of 'open adoption'-so there can be contact.

In an open adoption, both birth mom and adoptive family agree to what is 'right', and must live by those rules.

There really are no other rules other than one ones that have been implemented and agreed upon by all parties in each individual adoption. What is wrong for one adoption, might be perfectly 'legal' in another.

I am a birth mother who contracted with an adoptive family upon signing. It was agreed that I could contact the mother at any time (via telephone) as long as I did not identify myself as 'birth mom'. (I know her family, and know where she lives, and how to reach her.) I promised to chat only with Adoptive Mom and/or Dad. I also promised that I would not be the one to make initial contact to meet.

That was in the summer of 1986. There has been no contact since the baby turned 13. I had felt that I was imposing, and given that teenage years are quite a confusing time, I decided that I should not continue contact, because of added pressure I may have been giving with my contacts.

I have kept my promises, and I am sure that this daughter has been better off for it. Yes, I am hoping that she sees my keeping a distance as a loving gesture to both her and her family. Time will tell, I guess.

My sister is an adoptive mother of six children. She has agreed to send pictures to only 2 out of the six birth mothers, because of issues that the other birth mothers had/have. There is no other contact whatsoever.

Each adoption is different. Giving a child up is the most difficult decision a birth mother will ever have to make. Typically, she gives up a child so that her baby will have a shot at a better life.

It is unfair for others who have not been in this situation to make assumptions about what is right and what is not. Also, it is not fair for a woman to be critical of another woman's decisions, even if they have been in the same situation, and the outcomes were different.

Thanks for the oppertunity to vent on this subject.

Calista

Answer 4

I agree with open adoptions but only because in the long run, the child has the right to accept or refuse the parent that gave them up for adoption. Not all people give up their babies willingly...an open adoption is a link to let that child know the reasons. I believe with open adoptions, there should be strict guidelines to protect the children.

Answer 5

This may be the case with private adoptions, however, most agencies are encouraging "open" adoptions now. The word Open, means many things. It can be a simple as letters and pictures twice a year, to physical visits. This of course is an agreement between the birth mother and the adoptive parents, and usually, facilitated by the agency. In any case, I think closed adoptions are unfortunate. A child deserves to know his/her history, genetic links, "their story" in this life. To hide this information from any person is a detriment to their identity and individuality.

Answer 6

Well I agree with open adoptions. Its not that the birth mother gets to visit with the child its just that maybe once a year whom ever adopts and agrees to an open adoption will send a letter and/or picture. This lets the birth mother know that her decision was a good one.

Answer 7

I agree with them, though in most cases an open adoption should be more like a guardianship rather then an adoption. There is a legalish term for it, but I cannot for the life of me remember it.

It would probably not be your choice to place your child for adoption, however, you cannot force your choices on others. You do not know what it is like to be in their shoes, so you cannot point fingers at them.

Also, it is very important, in cases where children are not legal orphans (abandoned by their bio parents or both bio parents have died) for the children to have some connection to their "roots". Even in cases of abandoment and death, the child, later in life, wants to know where he or she came from. It is only natural. Not saying ALL adopted children feel this way, but some do. An open adoption makes this easier...in a TRUE open adoption, it makes it almost second nature, because the child knows all along his first family so there is never any question of where he/she came from.

Answer 8

It is not about the "rights" of the birthmother, or the "rights" of the adoptive family! This is not about them! Adoption is about the child! Why do some people always try to see birth and adoptive parents as polarizedr?

Statistics have shown that children benefit greatly if they are able to have contact with their birthmother! That doesn't mean she is always there, comes to the adoptive parent's home every holiday, or calls them weekly, or visits the child monthly. (Unless everyone wants that!)

I have worked in adoptions for over 20 years, and most birthparents do not choose open adoption because they do not want to "interfere" with the child's life! I wish I had a nickel for everytime I have heard that from a birthmother! That is real generosity.

And despite the myth, it is usually the birthmother who does not keep up with contact in semi-open and open adoption, not the adoptive parents. Birthmothers are characteristically not these needy, intrusive, pushy parents who needle their way into their child's life! (That's a LIfetime movie!)

Most are loving and caring mothers who truly want the best for their child, and believe that the best thing is for them to feel secure with their adoptive parents. They are so protective of them, that they often choose to live in pain rather than "interfere", and by mostly choosing closed or semi-open adoption.

Another myth is that the birthmother may try to "reclaim" her child if there is open adoption. Just the opposite is true. Open domestic adoptions have a much higher success rate than closed ones. Why? Everyone, especially the birthmother, feels secure.

Another myth is that children are confused about who is "really" mother in open adoption. Not true at all. Children know who their mother is, but can also have a loving realtionship with their birthmother, if she chooses that. It should always be her decision.

Answer 9

I think it depends on the what both parties agree on. I am adopted and so is my sister, but both of the adoptions were closed.

I don't think the birth parent should have the right to tell the adoptive parents how to raise the child or what they can and can't do, but I think open adoption is ok.

Answer 10

So, do you think that when we place a child, we no longer care about that child? Have you ever even HAD a child? Unless you are involved with a situation such as this, keep your narrow-minded opinions to yourself. Open adoption is a very good thing. We do not intrude on the family, we do not ever interfere with how the child is raised....we only want to ensure the child is recieving what we had hoped: LOVE. I was given the option of open adoption when I placed my daughter. I agreed to semi-open (occasional photos and letters telling me how she is doing) because I wanted to make sure that her and her new family could bond. Just as one of the above posters said....I did not want to interfere. But there are some that work out well with completely open adoption. Think of all the love the child gets. (but that grandma was out of line to offer the child to come live with their "real" family, very out of line). As long as the birthfamily does not interfere with how the child is raised and does not try to convince them to leave their adoptive parents, open adoption can be a blessing to the child.

And the reason SOME adoptive parents close the adoptions is because they are insecure of birthmama being in the picture (or they just wanted her as an incubator)....while it is their right to close it, they should not sign papers or verbally agree and just go back on their word. It is not fair to the child or the birthfamily. And they should appreciate what the birthmother did, because if it weren't for us, the childless ones would still be childless. Be thankful for your blessing and be thankful to whom it comes from!

Answer 11

Open adoption is supposed to be for the child's benefit, in the child's best interest. That you seem concerned with "punishing" the mother leads me to believe you haven't researched the issue at all.

You should understand something thoroughly before you decide if you agree or disagree with it.