Friday, March 09, 2007
The Queen Has (Mis)Spoken!
.
Queen Latifah, in USA Today 3/9/07 "Latifah: It's the 'right time' to be a mom" By Donna Freydkin, talks about possibly adopting.
Latifa says: "I can understand why people go outside the U.S. You can adopt someone here, and the birth parents have three years and come back and get the child. That's terrifying."
IF ONLY!!
Write and set USA Today and their readers straight: editor@usatoday.com and accuracy@usatoday.com
If you know the revocation time in your state - or have a personal story of trying to reverse an adoption, by all means share it!
I contacted Elizabeth Samuels and asked her to write. She saisd she's very busy but will try. However, she gave the folllowing suggestions of what you might want to include in a letter:
Consents to adoption quickly become irrevocable in all the states, except in cases of fraud or duress, which usually must be established within a limited period of time and in any event is virtually never established. In a majority of the states, consents to adoption become irrevocable either immediately or within days of being signed and in almost all the states they become irrevocable in less than one month.
(A simple change of mind is not grounds to revoke consent in any state that does not have a revocation period, and in those states that do have brief revocation periods, a simple change of mind is not grounds for revoking consent after the revocation period.)
My letter follows:
Queen Latifah is quoted (It's the 'right time' to be a mom 3/9/07) as saying: "I can understand why people go outside the U.S. You can adopt someone here, and the birth parents have three years and come back and get the child. That's terrifying." Indeed that would be terrifying…if it were true.
Prior to any legal adoption taking place, the original parents’ rights are permanently and irrevocably relinquished either voluntarily or involuntarily. States have varying time periods from hours to days – far less time in most other countries - during which consent to adopt can be attempted to be revoked with good cause, such as fraud. Few birthparents can afford the legal fees involved and fewer still get their cases heard.
In reviewing attempts by mothers to revoke consent to adoption, Elizabeth Samuels[1] notes that most states rule that a “change of mind is not sufficient to invalidate a relinquishment.” The majority of states, even with cause to invalidate the relinquishment, will require the mother to prove fitness, which almost never happens because that “fitness” is a contest between the mother and a married, prosperous couple who have custody and possession of the child. In 2001 a mother’s signed relinquishment was found in Texas to be “sufficient evidence on which the trial court can base a finding that termination is in the best interest of the child.”[2] “In a sense, the social and legal systems have failed [birthparents] in any case in which an infant’s mother asks a court to overturn her consent,” states Samuels.
It is therefore sad and incorrect to disseminate false fears and encourage international adoption as preferential over domestic adoption. Many international adoptions take children that are stolen or kidnapped from corrupt countries. All of these problems can be avoided by adopting a child through a reputable, recognized state agency that places only children who truly orphaned and/or have been legally relinquished for adoption.
Queen Latifah, in USA Today 3/9/07 "Latifah: It's the 'right time' to be a mom" By Donna Freydkin, talks about possibly adopting.
Latifa says: "I can understand why people go outside the U.S. You can adopt someone here, and the birth parents have three years and come back and get the child. That's terrifying."
IF ONLY!!
Write and set USA Today and their readers straight: editor@usatoday.com and accuracy@usatoday.com
If you know the revocation time in your state - or have a personal story of trying to reverse an adoption, by all means share it!
I contacted Elizabeth Samuels and asked her to write. She saisd she's very busy but will try. However, she gave the folllowing suggestions of what you might want to include in a letter:
Consents to adoption quickly become irrevocable in all the states, except in cases of fraud or duress, which usually must be established within a limited period of time and in any event is virtually never established. In a majority of the states, consents to adoption become irrevocable either immediately or within days of being signed and in almost all the states they become irrevocable in less than one month.
(A simple change of mind is not grounds to revoke consent in any state that does not have a revocation period, and in those states that do have brief revocation periods, a simple change of mind is not grounds for revoking consent after the revocation period.)
My letter follows:
Queen Latifah is quoted (It's the 'right time' to be a mom 3/9/07) as saying: "I can understand why people go outside the U.S. You can adopt someone here, and the birth parents have three years and come back and get the child. That's terrifying." Indeed that would be terrifying…if it were true.
Prior to any legal adoption taking place, the original parents’ rights are permanently and irrevocably relinquished either voluntarily or involuntarily. States have varying time periods from hours to days – far less time in most other countries - during which consent to adopt can be attempted to be revoked with good cause, such as fraud. Few birthparents can afford the legal fees involved and fewer still get their cases heard.
In reviewing attempts by mothers to revoke consent to adoption, Elizabeth Samuels[1] notes that most states rule that a “change of mind is not sufficient to invalidate a relinquishment.” The majority of states, even with cause to invalidate the relinquishment, will require the mother to prove fitness, which almost never happens because that “fitness” is a contest between the mother and a married, prosperous couple who have custody and possession of the child. In 2001 a mother’s signed relinquishment was found in Texas to be “sufficient evidence on which the trial court can base a finding that termination is in the best interest of the child.”[2] “In a sense, the social and legal systems have failed [birthparents] in any case in which an infant’s mother asks a court to overturn her consent,” states Samuels.
It is therefore sad and incorrect to disseminate false fears and encourage international adoption as preferential over domestic adoption. Many international adoptions take children that are stolen or kidnapped from corrupt countries. All of these problems can be avoided by adopting a child through a reputable, recognized state agency that places only children who truly orphaned and/or have been legally relinquished for adoption.
# posted by Senior Mom @ 6:41 PM 
