Log In Sign Up

Consequences for failed adoption?


Forum: Heated Debates

Notices

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to boards@justmommies.com.

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Heated Debates LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #1  
March 1st, 2010, 02:37 PM
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,225
So, I've recently started watching Desperate Housewives, from the beginning, and a situation in there, along with the Dr Phil surrogate who kept the babies got me thinking. In the cases of failed adoptions/surrogacies where the intended parents provide monetary compensation for the surrogate/birth mother's medical and other expenses, should the birth parent be required to pay that compensation back should she decide not to go through with the adoption/surrogacy?

*I have no clue what the laws currently are. It's my understanding that they currently aren't required to pay that back, but if I'm wrong, please clue me in!*
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2  
March 1st, 2010, 02:40 PM
foxfire_ga79
Guest
Posts: n/a
My first reaction is to say that yes she should pay it back. What would stop a woman from pretending she would place the baby for adoption just to get someone else to pay for things?
But I'm sure there are other POV's I haven't thought of yet....
Reply With Quote
  #3  
March 1st, 2010, 02:45 PM
HappyHippy's Avatar Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Pavia, Italy
Posts: 5,959
Yes. The intended parents should get all their money back.
__________________
Mama to G, L & twins F & M
Started off 2013 homebirthing suprise twins Fia Celesta & Maddalena Isabella
Reply With Quote
  #4  
March 1st, 2010, 02:50 PM
glasscandie's Avatar What I make is what I am
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Near Washington, DC
Posts: 15,982
Send a message via AIM to glasscandie Send a message via Yahoo to glasscandie
I don't see why they wouldn't get the money back - they're paying her for a service that she didn't provide :shrug: I don't know if it's the law or not, it's probably not lol
__________________
I predict a riot.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
March 1st, 2010, 04:08 PM
zzz's Avatar
zzz zzz is offline
Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California
Posts: 1,719
Yes, the birth parent should reimburse all expenses paid.


Lisa
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #6  
March 1st, 2010, 05:48 PM
Earthy.Mama's Avatar .*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 14,029
Agree with everyone.
__________________

Co-Host July 2014 DDC









Reply With Quote
  #7  
March 2nd, 2010, 02:34 AM
Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,966
I think the the surrogate/birth mom should give the money back.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
March 2nd, 2010, 03:42 AM
KimberlyD0
Guest
Posts: n/a
I think birth moms who decide not to go through with adoptions should pay everything back.

I don't think surrogates should be allowed to change their mind. More often then not these moms are carrying babies who are genetically not theirs. Either they're eggs and spurm from the perspective parents, or the perspective parent paid for the eggs spurm. The surrogate on Dr. Phil really angered me. She has no right to play god and decide who can and can't be a parent.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
March 2nd, 2010, 06:39 AM
IAmMomMomIAm
Guest
Posts: n/a
In theory, the birth mother should have to pay back the money. However, in practice, it's most likely not going to happen. Most birth mothers (I'm sure some are wealthy, but most aren't) would never be able to afford a birth and pregnancy out of pocket. As an adoptive parent, expecting to get that money back would be unrealistic. You can't get blood from a turnip, and all that.

I'm torn on surrogacy. There are a lot of risks, few or none protected by law, and anyone choosing that option should realize this and be prepared to deal with the consequences. It's a risk you agreed to take, and therefore you shouldn't expect perfect results. I don't think the birth mother should be legally required to pay back the money unless that was specifically stated in the contract. Just like I don't think the intended parents should be required to pay child support or further medical expenses if, at the end of the process, they decide to not take the baby.

Last edited by IAmMomMomIAm; March 2nd, 2010 at 07:35 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
March 2nd, 2010, 06:44 AM
eash's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,969
Surrogacy, yes.

Adoption, no. A birth mother needs to make her adoption plan free of any external pressures. If she feels that she owes the adoptive parents anything, it may influence her decisions. The adoptive parents do not have to give her funding and there is a risk to it. This is, most likely, the largest decision that a birth mother has to make in her life and it is has to made free and clear of any feeling of obligation to anyone but herself and that baby.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
March 2nd, 2010, 08:07 AM
mama_reese's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 3,577
She should pay it back no matter what. It's not the potential adoptive parents fault she changed her mind, so why should they have to pay for a babies birth that is not theirs?
__________________




Reply With Quote
  #13  
March 2nd, 2010, 09:08 AM
eash's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,969
Where is the birth mother going to get this money from to pay it back? She is typically young, broke and sometimes without family support. To say she is going to pay it back is similar to saying we should all just pay off our cars or homes on a whim. The money is not there to pay back. Adoptive parents take this risk.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
March 2nd, 2010, 09:57 AM
Irish_Wristwatch's Avatar Running with Scissors....
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 16,275
if they are paying for IVF, IUI, ect then i think that should the surrogate mother become pregnant, deliver the child(ren) and then not hand them over to the intended parents she should pay back the money. But i do believe most places honour the surrogacy agreement/contracts as legally binding documents (unlike michigan where the lady on dr phil was from)

as for adoption im not so sure, i dont think that potential adoptive parents are required to pay for the birth mothers medical care so in doing so they are running the risk that she might change her mind, and in that case its her biological child and she can choose to keep it, morally i think that if she can pay them back than she should but i dont think she should be legally obligated to either.
__________________
Bree
Mom to 3 boys
07.10 - 10.11 - 03.13



Reply With Quote
  #15  
March 2nd, 2010, 10:06 AM
Jarheadwed's Avatar Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,658
I think she should have to pay it back. I think there should be a monthly payment, because odds are she won't have the lump sum, and it should be treated as seriously as any monthly payment. If she defaults, it should go on her credit report, etc. Adoption and surrogacy is still a financial business transaction. And before anyone accuses me of being insensitive to the adoption process, my mother and brothers are all adopted, I get that its an emotional process too, but it still has a business attached to it.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #16  
March 2nd, 2010, 10:19 AM
IAmMomMomIAm
Guest
Posts: n/a
I can see the "it's a business" side of the argument, but at the same time it's a gamble. You are investing money into a project assuming you will see the intended results. Unless there is a contract stating that the money needs to be paid back, I don't see why it should be required automatically. The adoptive parent took a chance, and it didn't pay off.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
March 2nd, 2010, 10:29 AM
eash's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarheadwed View Post
Adoption and surrogacy is still a financial business transaction. .
Adoption is NOT a business transaction. Children are not bought and sold and traded to the highest bidder.
That is an extremely rude way to look at adopted children, putting them as commodities to be bought and sold.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
March 2nd, 2010, 10:35 AM
IAmMomMomIAm
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by eashley View Post
Adoption is NOT a business transaction. Children are not bought and sold and traded to the highest bidder.
That is an extremely rude way to look at adopted children, putting them as commodities to be bought and sold.
Except sometimes they are, depending on the birth mother.

But I don't think that's what she meant, heh. She meant that money goes into the process of adoption, and that needs to be considered as a factor, and not completely disregarded. It's illegal to sell your children, but it's not illegal for potential adoptive parents to basically "bribe" the mother all along the way.. and many of them do.

This is why I don't think the birth mother needs to pay it back. if you bribe someone to do something for you, then you don't get your money back when they change their mind.

"bribe" is a harsh term for what happens with an adoption, but it basically fits a lot of the time. The potential parents can pay for the birth mother's medical care and living expenses, including buying her a car, renting an apartment, giving her a credit card.. the list goes on. They are giving her money all along the way, in exchange for her giving them her child when it's born.

They aren't doing it to coerce her to give them her child, and they have good intentions. But. Emotional factors aside.. it is what it is.

Last edited by IAmMomMomIAm; March 2nd, 2010 at 10:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
March 2nd, 2010, 10:35 AM
MissTorrieIfYou'reNasty's Avatar Co-Host of Heated Debates
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Green-Vegas South Carolina!
Posts: 4,805
There's an excellent book by Ann Fessler called The Girls Who Went Away. There are multitude of stories from young women who were essentially coerced into giving up their babies. In many of these stories, doubting women who wanted to keep their babies were told by the people pressuring them to sign that if they didn't sign away their babies, they would be forced to pay back all the money the home, adoptive parents, whoever had paid for their care during the pregnancy. In one story, the young mother looked to her mother, who looked back at her daughter with tears in her eyes and said "What can we do? We don't have that kind of money."
She signed away her child, and the emotional consequences were devastating and far-reaching.

It's barbaric to ask a woman to sign away a child she wants, or suffer devastating financial consequences. I cannot support a policy that could too often be used as coercion.
__________________

"I love mankind, it's people I can't stand."
Reply With Quote
  #20  
March 2nd, 2010, 10:42 AM
eash's Avatar Mega Super Mommy
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torrie View Post
There's an excellent book by Ann Fessler called The Girls Who Went Away. There are multitude of stories from young women who were essentially coerced into giving up their babies. In many of these stories, doubting women who wanted to keep their babies were told by the people pressuring them to sign that if they didn't sign away their babies, they would be forced to pay back all the money the home, adoptive parents, whoever had paid for their care during the pregnancy. In one story, the young mother looked to her mother, who looked back at her daughter with tears in her eyes and said "What can we do? We don't have that kind of money."
She signed away her child, and the emotional consequences were devastating and far-reaching.

It's barbaric to ask a woman to sign away a child she wants, or suffer devastating financial consequences. I cannot support a policy that could too often be used as coercion.
Exactly...an amazing book. I think people who are removed from adoption can look at people and say "pay the money back" but do not understand how a 16 year facing the most difficult decision of her life can feel coerced when money, adults, and promises have been made. The birth mother has every right to change her mind even if her medical expenses are paid for.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:01 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0