Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Two what if scenarios

What if you find out the place you used for the adoption of your child has been known to use coercive tactics? Should you go to your child's birthmother and ask if she was coerced? What if she was and insists she never would have done the adoption if she didn't believe what she was told?

What if you find out the birthfather knew nothing about the pregnancy or that his ex-girlfriend that he doesn't see anymore went though adoption instead of parenting herself? What if he decides he wants to raise his child?

In both cases, the parents did not know what was going on. The adoption is already finalized and they are legally the parents.

If they are caring for and loving a child as their own and have formed a bond within their family. The child is old enough to know them as the parents. What is considered the moral thing for them to do if situations such as these arise?

 
Anonymous

Asked by Anonymous at 12:06 AM on Sep. 4, 2009 in Adoption

This question is closed.
Answers (37)
  • You do what so many of us have done - you make the best out of what cannot be taken back and re-Done. You learn that while the pain was unnecessary, that it most often isn't the fault of the people who are left to deal day in and day out with the aftermath.

    And you do what you can to ensure that others are more aware than you were.
    PortAngeles1969

    Answer by PortAngeles1969 at 1:45 AM on Sep. 4, 2009

  • That's a loaded question. The best thing to do as an adoptive parent is to make sure the agency they go through doesn't use coercion tactics. At this point, there is no going back. The only thing to be considered is what is in the child's best interest and that would be to stay with the parents the child already knows.

    legalmommy101

    Answer by legalmommy101 at 12:31 AM on Sep. 4, 2009

  • There probably isnt one amom on here who is going to answer they would give the child back. Not one. And use the justification that its "best" for the child not to.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 12:37 AM on Sep. 4, 2009

  • I speak only for me but as a birthmother that real,by any definition,coercion tactics were used on I would want my son to stay with the people that had been parenting him --his adoptive parents .A strong evolving open adoption would be the moral thing to do..IMO that would be a solution for an unknowing birthfather also, though not fair to him either, it would have to be the best interest of the child and breaking formed bonds is never good .This of course saying there is no serious type issues such as on going drug addictions and such.

    drfink

    Answer by drfink at 1:04 AM on Sep. 4, 2009

  • cont.just to be clear you are not talking newborn.In the first few months I do think he should have been returned but closer to a year and on my first answer stands,

    drfink

    Answer by drfink at 1:36 AM on Sep. 4, 2009

  • It would have to be true coercion to even consider anything and true coercion is ILLEGAL and would have never made it through the extensive legal processes/waiting periods that exist today. (If the bmom was being told she was going to be jailed if she didnt surrender etc). If that was the case, I would help her get an attorney, but I would not give my baby to anyone. I would also have a similar suit against the agency for malpractice and would at minimum want my $30k back.

    IF her defense years later is that the agency called a couple times or she read a billboard saying
    "adoption was a loving option", then I would not even entertain that.

    As for the bdad scenario, that is why there are registries, etc. If you didnt care enough to check to make sure someone wasnt pg, then you bear some of the responsibility. I would allow the adoption to open to him, but that is all.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 6:56 AM on Sep. 4, 2009

  • IMHO, Drfink, said it best. One should leave the child with its parents, and do what IS morrally right, discuss with Both the firstparents, , if they would entertain the thought of an "open-type' adoption, which in MOST cases is designed to be the best case scenario for the child. I as a firstmom, would never have taken my twins away from their parents, and the stability they have known...never! Adoption, even if finding out coercion was used, IS and should be what is BEST for the child. The child is MOST times going to benefit from knowing their origins. Blessings, C.J.
    ceejay1

    Answer by ceejay1 at 7:15 AM on Sep. 4, 2009

  • In my case the birthfather (I found out later, I am not sure if it is true)
    coerced the birthmother.

    He told her that if he put the baby up for adoption that they would stay together.

    Not sure what is the truth, because the birthfather says that never was said and the birthgrandmother said is was true.

    I don't think that the truth will ever rise in my case.

    I would have never taken an adoption if the birthfather did not know about the baby.
    Dannee

    Answer by Dannee at 8:47 AM on Sep. 4, 2009

  • My daughter's bdad told her that if she didnt have the abortion, he would help raise the baby and they would stay together. He left her the month after abortion was viable. I guess that is coercion too, but I dont regret for a minute that it happened and I know the bmom doesnt either.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 9:09 AM on Sep. 4, 2009

  • So anon :56, you would want your money back AND you get to keep the baby! Win - win for you eh? And the bmom gets......oh yeah nothing.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:48 AM on Sep. 4, 2009

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN