No Matter How Adoption is Done, Grief Remains for Mothers

“Putting an end to secrecy in adoption does not erase the grief or loss embedded in the adoption experience” according to the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute March, 2012 report, Openness in Adoption: From Secrecy and Stigma to Knowledge and Connections. With that caveat, the institute strongly endorses openness in adoption because "ending secrecy empower(s) participants by providing them with information and access so they can face and deal with facts instead of fantasies.”

IF adoption is necessary, we at First Mother Forum concur that openness is not only better but essential in voluntary infant adoptions.

WHAT MAKES A SUCCESSFUL OPEN ADOPTION

The number of completely closed infant adoptions (once considered necessary to create “forever” families) has shrunk to a tiny minority. Degrees of openness, however, are on a continuum from semi-open adoptions (mediated adoptions) where communications are through the adoption agency to completely open (fully disclosed) adoptions where the parties and their extended families interact at will. Adoptions that start as closed may become open while adoptions that begin with high expectations of continuing contact become closed. 

The Institute listed these factors as important to achieving successful open adoption relationships: 

• “Shared understanding by birth parents and adoptive parents about what open adoption is and is not
• "Empathy, respect, honesty, trust and a commitment to maintaining the connection
• "Ability of all parties to exercise self-determination in choosing and shaping open relationships
• "Development by all parties of ‘collaborative’ communication in planning for contact and in conveying needs”

Easier said than done, however.

OPENNESS PRIMARILY BENEFITS ADOPTEES AND ADOPTIVE PARENTS

Jane

“The primary benefit of openness is access by adopted persons--as children and continuing later in life--to birth relatives, as well as their own medical, genealogical and family histories," according to the report. Adoptive parents say there are benefits in their relationships with their adopted children, and reduced fear of, and greater empathy towards birth parents.

But when we survey agency websites, we see that open adoption is a marketing took to induce mothers into giving up their babies. Open adoption is touted as a benefit primarily to the mother as a kind of shared parenting, and that it will eliminate or at least reduce their pain. During counseling sessions before the child is born, agencies may convey a subtle message that if would be best for their child if they would forgo the privilege of contact, just “butt out.” Some mothers do just that, finding contact painful and unaware of the loss to their child because they have not been counseled about the long-term effects of adoption on the children themselves.

HE WHO PAYS THE PIPER CALLS THE TUNE

Mothers considering adoption are labeled “birth mothers” from the get go, implanting the belief that they are carrying the child for someone else and have little say in what happens after the relinquishment papers are signed. At the agency sites, we have found no use of the term "first mother" anywhere.

Mothers are unaware that they can negotiate the terms of open adoptions. Agencies or attorneys give them a canned form with an implicit “take it or leave it" message. Bethany Christian Services, for example, offered Catelynn and Tyler of 16 and Pregnant fame a semi-open adoption, never telling them they could have direct contact with the adoptive parents of their daughter, Carly. The producers of the show have arranged reunions between Catelynn and Tyler and their daughter; the tearful hugs make for great TV. Catelynn and Tyler have gone on to become spokespersons for Bethany, perhaps part of their continuing effort to convince themselves they did the right thing. Of course money may play a part. 

Adoption agency staff represent both mothers and prospective adoptors in developing the agreement, and are likely to be more supportive of the prospective adopters who are paying the bill. In independent or attorney-arranged adoptions, the same attorney may represent both parties. If the mother has her own attorney, the attorney is paid by the prospective adopters, calling into question who he or she may actually feel loyalty towards.

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

Mothers may not question the document put before them because they believe that those “nice people” will certainly agree to more contact after the baby comes. The agreement Gina Crotts entered into, prepared by the infamous Demon in Adoption, LDS Family Services, provided for photos and letters for the first three years, then an annual update until her daughter turned five. At that time, Crotts asked for the communications to continue. The adopters agreed to send an annual letter, but added they no longer wanted Crotts to write to her daughter. The same peculiar thinking that afflicted Tyler and Catelyn seems to have infected Crotts as well: She founded a non-profit company that sends gift baskets loaded with “comfort” items to new birth mothers, such as body lotions and fancy soaps, with a note praising them for their "courageous" decision. We fail to see how a nice-smelling bottle of anything provides much comfort for losing a child, and find the whole idea rather revolting.  Crotts' website says: bmb (birth mother baskets) provides a loving voice saying, "you are not alone, you are loved, you are brave and yes someone has felt this unbearable pain before." At least she acknowledges the pain of giving up one's child is unbearable.

ETCH-A-SKETCH AGREEMENTS

Etch-A-Sketch

First mothers may be unaware that open adoption agreements are not enforceable under the laws of their state and, that in all states, the failure of adopters to comply with the agreement does not nullify the adoption. Even if agreements are enforceable, mothers have to go through mediation with the agency before going to court. Agency social workers may “out talk” her, tipping the proceedings in favor of the adoptive parents who may be a future source of business, and who were a source of previous income to the agency. Court action is often an illusion because most first mothers lack the funds to hire an attorney. And of course, the adoptive parents may simply move and leave no forwarding address.

Mothers may even learn that the open adoption agreement never existed. Carla Moquin and her husband selected a couple to be parents for their soon-to-be born daughter that they thought they could not raise. They sat down with the agency representative and the prospective adopters, worked out an agreement, and signed the document. When the adoptive parents refused to honor the agreement, Moquin learned the agency had never filed it with the court, making it unenforceable.

Mothers “who have the highest grief levels are those who placed their children with the understanding that they would have ongoing information, but the arrangement was cut off” according to an earlier Institute report.*

AD TERROREM CLAUSES

Open adoption agreements may contain an “ad terrorem” clause providing that if the mother challenges the adoption, she will have no further contact with her child. This happened in Janette Barcenas' case; the adopters in effect punishing her son by denying him contact with his mother because Janette had the audacity to claim that her consent was coerced.

OPEN ADOPTION DEPENDS ON THE GOOD FAITH OF THE ADOPTIVE AND BIRTH FAMILIES

What it really all comes down to is the good faith of the adoptive and birth families. With that, written agreements may not even be necessary.  In 1992 Linda Schellentrager and her husband, Marty, adopted their son, Eric. Before the adoption, the parties connected through an 800 number supplied by the agency. During the phone call, the parties agreed to meet. After the adoption, Eric's mother and the Schellentrager's met at a hotel, and the parties developed a relationship which grew to include Eric's father and paternal grandparents. Linda reports that Eric is going fine. He just completed basic training in the Marine Corps.  

Good faith like this can’t be legislated, but states can put laws in place that make it more likely to happen.  Open adoption agreements must be legally enforceable, and all parties should be required to have adequate counseling about the merits of openness for the child, as well as the adults involved. Open adoption should not be used simply as a marketing tool to help convince mothers-to-be to give up their children, when they might instead find a way to keep them. The Institute could help by developing model legislation that states could adopt.

Additionally publicizing the benefits of openness will build public support, and more importantly, make both first mothers and the adoptive parents aware that openness is not just a way to transfer a child, but the way to raise a healthy adopted individual. We applaud both the Institute and the American Adoption Congress which has begun an "Adoption: No Secrets. No Fear" campaign for spreading this message.

_________________________

*Safeguarding the Rights and Well-Being of Birthparents (November 2006)

______________________________________

E. B. Donaldson Adoption Institute
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints recipient of Demons in Adoption Award
A gift of comfort, from one birth mother to another
'I want my daughter back'

From FMF:
Catelynn & Tyler's open adoption will stay open; for other first mothers, not so much
Doubly Damned by Adoption Turns Victim into a Fighter

How to make An Open Adoption work