Adoption from Foster Care or Agency or Attorney. Same Babies?

Last night at adoption class one of the social workers told us that there are two situations in which a child would be automatically taken from the mother and put on an adoption track:

300(f) Conviction of Child’s Death – This means that another child has already been killed while under the care of the mother. I’m not talking about the baby had a heart defect and died. I’m talking about the baby died through abuse or neglect. The family is seen as an ongoing danger to the child so the child is removed.

300(h) Freed for Adoption – This means that the mother has already had her rights terminated for one child so they feel that it’s likely that this new child will be left in similar neglect or will be subject to similar abuse so they remove the child from the home.

It is my understanding that when this happens to a mother several times, she may choose to put her child up for adoption instead of having the courts terminate her parental rights. Why? When she makes an adoption plan she is allowed to get living expenses. Have you seen the adoption “situation” ads?

We are seeking a family with a completed home study for a Caucasian baby, sex not yet determined. No recent drug history. No reported health issues. Baby is due in February 2013. Mother has completed two previous adoptions in California, and wishes to have expense reimbursements of $10,000 like she received in California the last two times. The first part of those fees would be paid in monthly installments of $1,000 beginning immediately. Fees are $20,000.

Looking for a single or married couple to adopt full Latin baby (repeat birthmother x3) due in late February. California couple preferred. No drugs. No smoking. No alcohol. Total fees including birthmother expenses $26,500.

Stacey is 32 years old and pregnant with a baby girl, 25% Caucasian, 25% Hispanic and 50% African American. Baby is due in March 2013. Stacey does need immediate assistance with living expenses and is open to heterosexual couples and/or a single female

The social workers said that sometimes people stay away from foster care adoptions because they think the babies are damaged and don’t realize that when you adopt from an agency or attorney you might be getting a baby from a family has been involved with child protective services for three generations. You might be getting a baby that the mother knows is going to taken into foster care anyway  … so why not get some living expenses until the baby arrives.

The world of adoption is much stranger than I ever imagined ….

Just throwing this one in ’cause it bugs me:

looking for a family that is home study ready, and Financially ready to adopt. We need a family for a full Hispanic baby Girl due 10/28/12. This is an excellent situation for the right family. Bithmother will consider a caucasian couple with dark hair childless , or hoping to have adopted a hispanic child. There are no drugs or substance abuse, No history of mental illness. She has 5 children she parents. We have medicals and photos of Birthmother and Her children. All very fair skinned.


4 thoughts on “Adoption from Foster Care or Agency or Attorney. Same Babies?

  1. I think there’s another reason why some moms who will lose their kids to foster care will make private adoption plans: Choice. They can CHOOSE the people their children will end up with. They might be able to have an open adoption, which a lot of foster/adopt parents traditionally have not considered. They can spare their child the issues of spending the first 6 months or more in foster care. They don’t have to deal with the state themselves. Without putting too fine a point on it, I have some experience with this.
    Adoption fees have spiraled out of control, there’s no doubt about it.
    It’s also my understanding that some CA counties have outsourced all of their infant adoptions to private agencies that are licensed to work with foster care. Aspira is one agency/network that comes to mind. I have the magnet from another one on my fridge at home. (It’s a really cute magnet.)

    • Someone was talking about it at adoption class. They kept saying that mothers that had too many kids born with drugs in their systems automatically had their tubes tied after the 3rd birth. I had to find out if it was true and when looking online I found the petition.

      While I can understand that those kinds of actions are a violation of a person’s civil rights, I also have to wonder about the people that have 6, 8, 10 kids like that. One of the social workers told us that in our county they have had parents that had ALL 7 of their kids taken at the hospital due to drugs and TPR’d.


      • I just think there are better ways to deal with it that don’t trample on a person’s civil rights. The blogs “Love Is Not a Pie” and “I’m Still a Good Mother” come to mind. ISGM had issues with drugs, but ultimately kicked them. (Her first two kids were taken, and the mom at LINaP adopted one.) Her last two kids were not born while she was addicted, but for reasons I no longer remember, tested positive. She went through hell to prove she wasn’t using and could keep her kids.

        Yeah, it’s probably easier to just sterilize someone, but the potential for mistakes is just way too high (you know, on top of the civil rights issue).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s