One of the presenters at this conference was Sandra Turley, who attended BYU and went on to play the role of Cosette on Broadway in “Les Misérables.” Turley focused very little on her success as a singer, but instead focused on the phases of motherhood, highlighting her experiences with adopting a child, and then having that child taken back by its biological mother.
This is a practice that should stop. It is unfair to the adoptive parents and the baby.
According to a report from the Children’s Bureau titled “Consent to Adoption,” only two states – Massachusetts and Utah – have stated that, “all consents are irrevocable upon their execution.”
Other states allow anywhere from a few days to six months for the biological mother to change her mind. Requirements for revocation of consent vary by state.
In her presentation, Turley spoke of the turmoil that she and her husband experienced while they tried to have a baby. They went to fertility clinics and experienced a miscarriage before deciding to adopt. They felt so lucky when they received a call that a baby girl was going to be born that would need a home. They quickly said yes and waited for the day that they could take their little girl home.
At that time, the Turleys were living in New York. The state of New York allows a biological mother 45 days to change her mind after giving consent. Close to day 40, they received a call that they would need to take their new baby back to its mother.
Needless to say, they were devastated. The story does have a happy ending, however — Turley now has four children she was able to conceive with medical assistance.
Turley’s story may have ended happily, but it still pains her to think of the baby that was hers for just five weeks.
While this is not a common occurrence, and most biological mothers don’t take their babies back, it is still heartbreaking when it does happen.
According to “Consent to Adoption,” “adoption is meant to create a permanent and stable home for a child; therefore, a validly executed relinquishment and consent to adopt is intended to be final and irrevocable.” From this statement, it is obvious that allowing a biological mother to take a child back goes against every intention of adoption.
What is even crazier is that most states require a waiting period to pass before consent can be
executed, with fifteen days being the longest waiting period. This waiting period is meant to give the mother time to decide if giving the baby up will be the best thing for the child. It is not fair to the child or the adoptive parents for the mother to change her mind after signing the papers. It uproots the child and devastates the adoptive parents.
Adoption is obviously a tough subject. Deciding to give up a child is an extremely hard decision. In order to lessen the unavoidable pain of adoption, each state should require a waiting time and make consent irrevocable after execution, unless the child is being mistreated or was obtained by fraud, duress or coercion.
Adoption is hard, but also worth it. Every child deserves the best chance possible, and adoption can give that to them. But in order for it to be effective, fully executed adoptions need to stay finalized, even if the biological parents change their mind.
Arnold Hansen • Dec 2, 2013 at 2:42 pm
Dear Kellie C you seem like an idealist like I was when I was in school and in the school of journalism. We were going to erase inequality and corruption and set the world on a better course. Then I grew up and dealt on a daily basis with some of the most evil people in the world. Some have babies and I have seen them “sell’ their babies to couples who give prenatal care and money to the expectant mother. this is easy because of our current adoption practices and it is totally legal. While in my opinion they are often “blackmailing” these desperate couples, the expectant mothers are usually living well with their current man friend on up front payments which they set with the adopting couple. At the point of conception, these mothers often demand more money or they will take the child back. Do you know Kellie when they do, they usually sign with another agency to adopt the child to another couple and the waiting period allows them to continue blackmailing the next couple. I know several who have adopted out babies for money and one single woman who said to me after completing the adoption process, “I have 3 more in me (meaning the ability to produce a baby) before I am financially where I want to be.”
Women have 9 months to think about their lives. I believe they are thinking clearer then, than the days and weeks immediately after delivery and the realization of benefits with a child denied to those without children. Just wanted to share what happens in the real world when some people choose to play the adoption game.
Kellie C • Dec 2, 2013 at 6:01 pm
I can tell you have very little respect for women in general. I understand there are people out there who will take advantage of desperate people. Which is exactly the reason consent should not be irrevocable upon signing. Unfortunately Sir, I have the experience of a desperate adoptive couple promising visits and a part in my granddaughters life only to renege on those very promises. And those promises from people I thought I could trust, my brother-in-law and his wife. My husbands brother whom I’ve known for over 30 years closed the adoption. I haven’t seen or held my granddaughter since she was 3 days old. Almost 4 years ago. I can’t prosecute them for what they’ve taken from us, and I would much rather have lost my life savings than my granddaughter. Why do you think our daughter picked a relative? So she would grow up knowing where she came from and who her relatives were.
I’ve heard far more stories of adoptive parents closing adoptions after promises of letters, pictures, and visits than I’ve heard of women scamming potential adoptive parents.
An idealist? That’s really funny.
Jennifer Hansen • Dec 2, 2013 at 7:50 pm
Actually, I can tell you, Kellie, because I live with him, and I see every day the good that he does for the women that he helps in his line of work, that there is not a man alive with more respect for women in general. For you to just decide that he has no respect for women is ridiculous. I am sorry that your situation did not turn out as you would have hoped, but to be so completely blind to the sad realities of life for so many children who deserve a better life, especially when there are so many who find themselves aging out of the foster care system, who could have had a home and a family had their birth parents made the thoughtful, courageous and caring choice to give them that opportunity. And before anyone gets all indignant and turns this into a, “well, then those adoptive families should all just choose older children” forum, the reality is that by the time a child in foster care is really and truly available for adoption, it is often at an age that it is much more difficult to establish that bond. And even when it is possible for families to still form that bond, I have seen so many children who are put back into bad situations time and time again, all in the name of not infringing on the rights of a birth parent, who sadly have been given back one time too many and never again had a chance for a happy life. Now, I don’t know your daughter, and I am certainly not going to assume that she would not be a good mother, but the foster system and sadly the cemeteries are full of children who tell the sad tell of unfit parents. And before you decide that I don’t know what I am talking about, let me tell you that I work in the funeral industry, my husband, who you have decided has no respect for women (please) is in law enforcement and I have many good friends who are shelter and foster care families and I can tell you that I know of what I speak. The truth is, when a couple decides to have unprotected sex and then finds that they are pregnant and it was not planned, the baby’s needs should be the only ones considered at that point and a baby needs stability. If the couple is mature enough and truly interested in raising the child together or at least as a team, even if not living together then fine, but if not the child deserves a good home with committed parents.
Arnold Hansen • Dec 2, 2013 at 2:42 pm
Dear Kellie C you seem like an idealist like I was when I was in school and in the school of journalism. We were going to erase inequality and corruption and set the world on a better course. Then I grew up and dealt on a daily basis with some of the most evil people in the world. Some have babies and I have seen them “sell’ their babies to couples who give prenatal care and money to the expectant mother. this is easy because of our current adoption practices and it is totally legal. While in my opinion they are often “blackmailing” these desperate couples, the expectant mothers are usually living well with their current man friend on up front payments which they set with the adopting couple. At the point of conception, these mothers often demand more money or they will take the child back. Do you know Kellie when they do, they usually sign with another agency to adopt the child to another couple and the waiting period allows them to continue blackmailing the next couple. I know several who have adopted out babies for money and one single woman who said to me after completing the adoption process, “I have 3 more in me (meaning the ability to produce a baby) before I am financially where I want to be.”
Women have 9 months to think about their lives. I believe they are thinking clearer then, than the days and weeks immediately after delivery and the realization of benefits with a child denied to those without children. Just wanted to share what happens in the real world when some people choose to play the adoption game.
Kellie C • Dec 2, 2013 at 6:01 pm
I can tell you have very little respect for women in general. I understand there are people out there who will take advantage of desperate people. Which is exactly the reason consent should not be irrevocable upon signing. Unfortunately Sir, I have the experience of a desperate adoptive couple promising visits and a part in my granddaughters life only to renege on those very promises. And those promises from people I thought I could trust, my brother-in-law and his wife. My husbands brother whom I’ve known for over 30 years closed the adoption. I haven’t seen or held my granddaughter since she was 3 days old. Almost 4 years ago. I can’t prosecute them for what they’ve taken from us, and I would much rather have lost my life savings than my granddaughter. Why do you think our daughter picked a relative? So she would grow up knowing where she came from and who her relatives were.
I’ve heard far more stories of adoptive parents closing adoptions after promises of letters, pictures, and visits than I’ve heard of women scamming potential adoptive parents.
An idealist? That’s really funny.
Jennifer Hansen • Dec 2, 2013 at 7:50 pm
Actually, I can tell you, Kellie, because I live with him, and I see every day the good that he does for the women that he helps in his line of work, that there is not a man alive with more respect for women in general. For you to just decide that he has no respect for women is ridiculous. I am sorry that your situation did not turn out as you would have hoped, but to be so completely blind to the sad realities of life for so many children who deserve a better life, especially when there are so many who find themselves aging out of the foster care system, who could have had a home and a family had their birth parents made the thoughtful, courageous and caring choice to give them that opportunity. And before anyone gets all indignant and turns this into a, “well, then those adoptive families should all just choose older children” forum, the reality is that by the time a child in foster care is really and truly available for adoption, it is often at an age that it is much more difficult to establish that bond. And even when it is possible for families to still form that bond, I have seen so many children who are put back into bad situations time and time again, all in the name of not infringing on the rights of a birth parent, who sadly have been given back one time too many and never again had a chance for a happy life. Now, I don’t know your daughter, and I am certainly not going to assume that she would not be a good mother, but the foster system and sadly the cemeteries are full of children who tell the sad tell of unfit parents. And before you decide that I don’t know what I am talking about, let me tell you that I work in the funeral industry, my husband, who you have decided has no respect for women (please) is in law enforcement and I have many good friends who are shelter and foster care families and I can tell you that I know of what I speak. The truth is, when a couple decides to have unprotected sex and then finds that they are pregnant and it was not planned, the baby’s needs should be the only ones considered at that point and a baby needs stability. If the couple is mature enough and truly interested in raising the child together or at least as a team, even if not living together then fine, but if not the child deserves a good home with committed parents.
Jennifer Hansen • Dec 2, 2013 at 1:02 pm
Adoption is obviously a tough subject. Deciding to give up a child is an extremely hard decision. In order to lessen the unavoidable pain of adoption, each state should require a waiting time and make consent irrevocable after execution, unless the child is being mistreated or was obtained by fraud, duress or coercion.
I copied and pasted the paragraph above from the article, if you look you will see that it is the 2nd to last paragraph and yes it clearly states that a waiting period should be required. And before you get your knickers in a knot, you also suggested that a period of time should pass for the birth parents to really decide. And seriously get real. You believe that the consent should NEVER be revocable, so you are suggesting that uprooting a child who has been with a family and bonded to that family and been loved by that family on the whim of a birth parent at any time THEY choose is appropriate? And you say that you are considering the feelings of the child? That is crazy.
Kellie C • Dec 2, 2013 at 5:33 pm
And just as I said below the article also states hat requiring a waiting time period to consent is “crazy”. Consent means the rights have been voluntarily terminated. This means no waiting time. Consent should never be irrevocable upon signing. Perhaps I did not clarify that well enough, but I gather that would not have made a difference to you. There should always be a “cooling off” period before the consent is irrevocable.
I used to think just like you and the subject of this article until I had a front row seat to an adoption. Until I witnessed a woman pushed up against the wall wanting to keep her child and absolutely NO ONE would help her not even her mother, and I have the privilege of being the mother of that very desperate woman. My daughter relinquished her daughter to her uncle and aunt. She signed papers 4 days after a c-section and while still on pain medication. She expressed her doubts that she was doing the wrong thing the night before she signed consent. I told her to “stick to her plan, it will all be okay.” It wasn’t and it never will be. When she reduced her pain meds a few days later and realized what a horrible thing she’d done, she begged for her baby back. This was 5 days later. 5 days!! Her consent was irrevocable upon signing. (BTW, Utah and Massachusetts are not the only states with irrevocable consent
Kellie C • Dec 2, 2013 at 5:45 pm
Con’t…. Illinois also has irrevocable consent and I suspect there are probably more. My daughter was cut out of her daughters life for over a year. She’s had a total of 4 visits in 3 years. We, her grandparents, have never been allowed to visit. The first and last time I held my granddaughter she was 3 days old. We, as a family, helped my daughter come to her decision. She was coerced into the decision she made by all of us with most of the pressure coming from her grandmother (my husbands mother). We pressured our daughter out of fear of losing our relationship with my husbands parents. My MIL yelled at my daughter in the hospital for letting the baby’s dad visit. She was bullied into signing the consent. Think that was enough to overturn the “voluntary” consent? No. We consulted 4 different lawyers and all of them agreed the coercion was not committed by the AP’s or their representative so it would be close to impossible to get it revoked. So, you may think you did everything right when you adopted your child but you have no idea what went on that you don’t know about. You do not know what kind of pressure is being applied to an expectant mom to convince her to relinquish her baby. So, I will never agree that consent should be irrevocable upon signing unless there are significant changes made to the way this country practices adoption.
Jennifer Hansen • Dec 2, 2013 at 1:02 pm
Adoption is obviously a tough subject. Deciding to give up a child is an extremely hard decision. In order to lessen the unavoidable pain of adoption, each state should require a waiting time and make consent irrevocable after execution, unless the child is being mistreated or was obtained by fraud, duress or coercion.
I copied and pasted the paragraph above from the article, if you look you will see that it is the 2nd to last paragraph and yes it clearly states that a waiting period should be required. And before you get your knickers in a knot, you also suggested that a period of time should pass for the birth parents to really decide. And seriously get real. You believe that the consent should NEVER be revocable, so you are suggesting that uprooting a child who has been with a family and bonded to that family and been loved by that family on the whim of a birth parent at any time THEY choose is appropriate? And you say that you are considering the feelings of the child? That is crazy.
Kellie C • Dec 2, 2013 at 5:33 pm
And just as I said below the article also states hat requiring a waiting time period to consent is “crazy”. Consent means the rights have been voluntarily terminated. This means no waiting time. Consent should never be irrevocable upon signing. Perhaps I did not clarify that well enough, but I gather that would not have made a difference to you. There should always be a “cooling off” period before the consent is irrevocable.
I used to think just like you and the subject of this article until I had a front row seat to an adoption. Until I witnessed a woman pushed up against the wall wanting to keep her child and absolutely NO ONE would help her not even her mother, and I have the privilege of being the mother of that very desperate woman. My daughter relinquished her daughter to her uncle and aunt. She signed papers 4 days after a c-section and while still on pain medication. She expressed her doubts that she was doing the wrong thing the night before she signed consent. I told her to “stick to her plan, it will all be okay.” It wasn’t and it never will be. When she reduced her pain meds a few days later and realized what a horrible thing she’d done, she begged for her baby back. This was 5 days later. 5 days!! Her consent was irrevocable upon signing. (BTW, Utah and Massachusetts are not the only states with irrevocable consent
Kellie C • Dec 2, 2013 at 5:45 pm
Con’t…. Illinois also has irrevocable consent and I suspect there are probably more. My daughter was cut out of her daughters life for over a year. She’s had a total of 4 visits in 3 years. We, her grandparents, have never been allowed to visit. The first and last time I held my granddaughter she was 3 days old. We, as a family, helped my daughter come to her decision. She was coerced into the decision she made by all of us with most of the pressure coming from her grandmother (my husbands mother). We pressured our daughter out of fear of losing our relationship with my husbands parents. My MIL yelled at my daughter in the hospital for letting the baby’s dad visit. She was bullied into signing the consent. Think that was enough to overturn the “voluntary” consent? No. We consulted 4 different lawyers and all of them agreed the coercion was not committed by the AP’s or their representative so it would be close to impossible to get it revoked. So, you may think you did everything right when you adopted your child but you have no idea what went on that you don’t know about. You do not know what kind of pressure is being applied to an expectant mom to convince her to relinquish her baby. So, I will never agree that consent should be irrevocable upon signing unless there are significant changes made to the way this country practices adoption.
Jennifer Hansen • Dec 2, 2013 at 10:12 am
You clearly didn’t read the full article, Kellie, the author clearly states that there should be a waiting period, but that period should be before the child is handed over to adoptive parents. She clearly states that the concent should be irrevocable after execution, which should be after a waiting period.
Kellie C • Dec 2, 2013 at 12:56 pm
A waiting period of what? 24 hours after giving birth? 48? 72? Would that be appropriate to you? A period when the mom is experiencing hormonal fluctuations and possibly still on pain medication? Such a GREAT time to be making life altering decisions for yourself or your child!
And your “clearly states that there should be a waiting period” is inaccurate. It states the following:
“What is even crazier is that most states require a waiting period to pass before consent can be executed, with fifteen days being the longest waiting period. This waiting period is meant to give the mother time to decide if giving the baby up will be the best thing for the child. It is not fair to the child or the adoptive parents for the mother to change her mind after signing the papers. It uproots the child and devastates the adoptive parents.”
I.E. they don’t want a waiting period. It’s “crazy” to even consider such a thing.
No adoption “plan” should be made before a child is born. It shouldn’t even be considered before the child is 6 weeks old. We even allow DOGS to stay with their mothers for the first 6 weeks of life. It’s inhumane to separate them any earlier. But hey a mom and baby anythings fair game as long as some needy couple wants and can pay for that newborn.
Jennifer Hansen • Dec 2, 2013 at 10:12 am
You clearly didn’t read the full article, Kellie, the author clearly states that there should be a waiting period, but that period should be before the child is handed over to adoptive parents. She clearly states that the concent should be irrevocable after execution, which should be after a waiting period.
Kellie C • Dec 2, 2013 at 12:56 pm
A waiting period of what? 24 hours after giving birth? 48? 72? Would that be appropriate to you? A period when the mom is experiencing hormonal fluctuations and possibly still on pain medication? Such a GREAT time to be making life altering decisions for yourself or your child!
And your “clearly states that there should be a waiting period” is inaccurate. It states the following:
“What is even crazier is that most states require a waiting period to pass before consent can be executed, with fifteen days being the longest waiting period. This waiting period is meant to give the mother time to decide if giving the baby up will be the best thing for the child. It is not fair to the child or the adoptive parents for the mother to change her mind after signing the papers. It uproots the child and devastates the adoptive parents.”
I.E. they don’t want a waiting period. It’s “crazy” to even consider such a thing.
No adoption “plan” should be made before a child is born. It shouldn’t even be considered before the child is 6 weeks old. We even allow DOGS to stay with their mothers for the first 6 weeks of life. It’s inhumane to separate them any earlier. But hey a mom and baby anythings fair game as long as some needy couple wants and can pay for that newborn.
Kellie C • Dec 1, 2013 at 8:54 pm
You are correct adoption laws do need to change, but not in the way this articles author states. There is so much rampant coercion and unethical behavior involved in convincing women to give up their children the laws need to change in what is and isn’t allowed in regards to the “counseling” these women receive from adoption agencies. Consent should NEVER be irrevocable. There should always be a period of time when the parents have the option to change their minds. Only after that time period should a child be placed with an adoptive couple. Make adoption ethical, take the money out of the equation (combined adoption agencies profit approximately $13 billion per year), provide unbiased counseling and a lawyer representing the expectant parents and not paid for by the agency or adoptive couple THEN I might feel sorry for the couple who has to give a child back to their biological parents.
Most important, adoption is about a child in need of a home. It is not about a couple needing a baby. If a mother decides she made a bad decision and wants her child returned, you should be happy for that child. Instead you are sad for yourself. It has NOTHING to do with that baby. It’s all about you. You should be embarrassed.
Kellie C • Dec 1, 2013 at 8:54 pm
You are correct adoption laws do need to change, but not in the way this articles author states. There is so much rampant coercion and unethical behavior involved in convincing women to give up their children the laws need to change in what is and isn’t allowed in regards to the “counseling” these women receive from adoption agencies. Consent should NEVER be irrevocable. There should always be a period of time when the parents have the option to change their minds. Only after that time period should a child be placed with an adoptive couple. Make adoption ethical, take the money out of the equation (combined adoption agencies profit approximately $13 billion per year), provide unbiased counseling and a lawyer representing the expectant parents and not paid for by the agency or adoptive couple THEN I might feel sorry for the couple who has to give a child back to their biological parents.
Most important, adoption is about a child in need of a home. It is not about a couple needing a baby. If a mother decides she made a bad decision and wants her child returned, you should be happy for that child. Instead you are sad for yourself. It has NOTHING to do with that baby. It’s all about you. You should be embarrassed.