Today staffer Brandy over at the forums posed a very interesting question.

What does “adoption friendly state” mean to you?

I think it really takes no amount of guess work to figure out that the “adoption friendly” definition of laws in any state are really described as such with adoptive parents in mind. This is not to say that there are not states with laws that are in fact more ethical for placing parents, but then that is generally where the adoption agencies begin to steer adopting parents to the more “friendly” locations.

The thing is that laws differ from state to state. Some have longer revocation periods, some nearly none, some allow an adoption to be final in a matter of weeks, others months. Because of the vast disparity from state to state, adoption agencies look for locations to promote to adopting parents that seemed “friendlier” than others. Does that mean that a particular state is more adoption friendly, as in more ethical in it’s legal approach to adoption, or does it mean that it is more friendly to adopting families in the sense that it better promotes what they are seeking, a quick, easy adoption? I believe it is the latter. When an “adoption friendly state” is talked about, it means a state that quickly and easily processes an adoption to the benefit of those adopting.

Rather than steer couples to states where the laws allow them a quick adoption, which probably in the long run makes more prospective birthmothers afraid of choosing adoption (or severely regret choosing one), lets look at a few other options. (And hey keep in mind before you go crazy that these are my personal thoughts here and there is always room for expansion!)

1) How about laws that are more uniform across the U.S. in place of the current hodge-podge that exists? If laws are similar across the board then more mothers will feel safe and fairly represented no matter where they are. They will also find it easier to know and understand the law when making such an important choice.

2) Allow a decent amount of time for a mother to withdraw her consent. Non of the current too short here, or so long it’s excruciating there. A healthy amount of time to reconsider, available to everyone no matter where they give birth or place.

3) Require counseling. If it’s not possible to be done before the birth and relinquishment, then it should be offered during the waiting period before consent is irrevocable. Give a mother ways to best consider her options and you can feel more assured she has made a fully informed choice.

4) For those who select open adoption agreements make them a legal part of the completed adoption. This is not to say that if a mother and the adoptive parents she selects do Not wish to have an open adoption that they must, but if they agree to one lets give everyone involved the legal right to see that the agreement is upheld.

5) Consider caps on adoption costs. Why it can cost $40,000 to place one baby and $15,000 to place the one in the bassinet next to him I will never quite “get.” Well I guess I do get it, it’s called non for profits, profiting. If fees for adoptions are placed with in a scale with a standard minimum and maximum fewer unethical people will be tempted to profit (or be able to).

6) Define and consider the ethical best interests of the child being placed. After all he is the one the decision effects the most, and who is able to have the least say. Lets make sure we are protecting his rights.

While I am sure there are a ton of things I could tweek here and amend there, I think you get the just. To me creating an “adoption friendly state” means making a condition where adoption, when needed, can be achieved fairly, ethically, and morally for those involved. ALL those involved. In the end it should not matter Texas, or Ohio, Florida, or Wisconsin, where the “state” is, as long as the state of the “state” is friendly for everyone.


Photo Credit- Edmund Keene