I'm sorry but I disagree slightly with you. Although I think it is selfish to want the baby back if you knew you could not handle it, I dont think it's fair for that baby to have a sibling less then a year apart. How much attention can that adopted child get when he will have a sibling a few months from now. Thats not fair either. My kids are 18 months apart and its hard enough at that age.
My understanding, is not that she wants the baby for herself---that, I would understand--she wants it back, and to go to another adoptive couple.
My middle 2 children (of 4) are 1 year and 1 day apart to the minute....You don't take a baby back that you gave up in the first place because the parents finally have a chance of having a biological child...the chance and ability to have a child of your own from your own body is something that so many don't get a chance to do for so many reasons...I'm sure they love that baby as much as they will their own...this I know from experience....so I hope with all my heart that they get to have and keep both their babies.
she gave her baby up for adoption so she doesnt have say anymore...she isnt the legal guardian....maybe she should of thought about that...as for the family that the baby went to i say congrats...god chose to bless them twice this year i dont think the biological mother has any right to disrupt that...the paperwork is done...along with her rights as the mother....
all i wanna be is a mommy!!
I completely agree with you, however, the fact that the Omaha Children's Home Society is involved is, sadly, going to make it a harder fought battle for the adoptive family. I am not sure what the Omaha Children's Home Society is? I know they aren't affiliated with the South Dakota Children's Home Societies, but do they do the same thing?
I believe some Children's Home Society's such as Nebraska and Minnesota (there are probably others) do adoption domestic/international adoption services such as LSS and Catholic Family Services in South Dakota. SD Children's Home, as far as I know, doesn't do adoptions, unless children are placed with them through the state/courts and are available for adoption that way.
I am very familiar with SD children's home society because I work there--I just wasn't familiar with the other states. Thanks :)
That is a great point you made. the birth mother did pick this gal cuz she didnt have other kids and the birth mother wanted her child she could not care for have the undivided attention. But I really do not think it is fair to do that to the poor women she is probebly so happy to have been choosen to adopte that little baby and probebly just as happy to have found out she is pregnant to. Really it does not matter how close in age the kids are its how good of a parent you are. And I really hope this goes into effect here when they go to court. I always think how its not fair that some one can just keep popping out the kids and not caring for them and loving them and you do not need to be screened and then when someone can not have a child on their own they have to spend a ton of money and time adopting a child and going through all that paperwork and people coming to their house to make shure their fit. Im shure this lady has enough love in her heart for both children and I hope the court just makes the best choise for the baby.
( disclamer: the popping out kids comment is not aimed at anyone on here I just have known some unfit parents in life that I think they should have been court ordered clipped lol )
Sorry, but I totally disgree with you, mlautwein. I have a one-year old and am expecting twins, I can guarantee that my children will have an unlimited amount of love and attention, their closeness in age isn't going to matter in the least. I'm sure the same goes for this adoptive family that has been blessed with a second child to love.
Ya I think kids get along better the closer in age they are. But have to give you props 3busybabies for being able to do that ( well Im shure you didnt know when you thought about having another baby that it would be twins ) but twins and a one year old will be tons of work but Im shure way more fun :)
I have to say I disagree with mlautwein, as well. I think that it is totally unfair to say that a parent who has children close in age is unable to give adequate attention to both. I have two children 11 months apart, and they not only got a tremendous amount of attention from me, they are incredibly close (they are not 9 and 8 years old.) There is so much to be gained from a sibling relationship, and having another child, in my experience, only makes you appreciate the others all the more, as well. I think that whatever the conditions she had when she was choosing the adoptive family, she should not have the right to take the baby away simply because the circumstances changed. This poor mother longed for a baby, then God blessed her twice...it seems more than unfair to punish her for that.
I agree. My twins and little girl are 1 day shy of 13 months apart, and they get all the attention they need. Just because they are close, doesn't mean their care will be any less. It brings your family closer in my opinion!!
Stacie
Mom to 3
i know the point has already been made, but i have to say this because the statement bothers me.
i have twins.. are you saying that we can't give them both enough love and attention that they both deserve?!
also
me and my brother are 11 months apart and it was awesome because i always had someone to play with.. if anything i got more attention because i would get my parents and then if they were busy or something then i would have my brother. and we had tons in common since we were so close in age.. (ie both into make believe or ninja turtles or hide and seek or whatever) and we were one grade apart so we hung out in high school and were debate partners and are really close.
This is the agency's guideline so I don't think the family did anything wrong and although I feel for the birth mother, obviously she regrets her decision, she doesn't have a legal right to this child any longer. This family has been waiting for an adopted baby since 2005 and the woman has been through multiple miscarriages I don't blame her for waiting until after she made it past the first trimester to state she's pregnant.
"Couples with children under 18 months cannot apply to adopt children from the agency, according to the private agency's eligibility requirements. And couples must wait until their own children are 2 years old before the agency will place a child with them."
What a sad story. Prayers...
Thank God for technicalities then, as they do NOT actually have a child under 18 months--the baby hasn't been born yet...and since the child has not been born yet, they don't have a child of their own, that needs to be 2 yrs old first. I hope they have a good attorney. When we went to court with our birth mom, the judge told her that once she terminates her rights, she has no say as to where the baby ends up. For example, if we had decided we didn't want the baby, then the birth mom doesn't get the baby back, or get to choose another family. The baby would just be awarded to the state. I understand that the mom may be upset, but she didn't want the baby. It is possible that she lacks the kind of parenting experience that would reassure her, that it IS possible to have an adopted and a biological child and love them both exactly the same amount. More importantly, how lucky for that little baby to be getting a sibling close in age. The birthmom should be happy for him. I wonder how old the birth mom is. I wonder if this is her first pregnancy. I see her point a little, but you can't understand a situation like the adoptive family's, unless you have been there. She doesn't know what they are capable of. Love is an amazing thing.
I think you all misread my first comment, I do not think this lady should get her child back but I see her point on how frustrating it would be for you to pick a family based on the attention and things your child would get just to find out that there having another in less then 1 year. And like I said I also have 2 children close in age and I LOVE THEM BOTH! But it can be hard and I dont think anyone can honestly say that it isn't hard at first, totally worth it but hard! I don't think its selfish of that lady to be upset selfish to try and take him away but ya I hope this slightly clears things up I don't want you ladies thinking I dont love my children or having kids close in age is bad b/c It's not I actually want all my kids close in age but she picked them based on a reason just to have that taken away.
I am sure the only reason she picked them wasn't just because they didn't have a child. She had to have liked them, and their home/lifestyle/total package, to have chosen them. A new sibling shouldn't change things between her and the adoptive family.
I completely agree. I do you happen to have a link to the news article?
The link is at the top of the post
"We're all dysfunctional, get over it!"
I know what you mean, both families are in difficult positions and my heart and prayers go out to them. I hope that the court works quickly to ensure the baby gets to live in the best home possible he deserves that. I just feel that the adoptive family didn't violate the rules and so they shouldn't be punished. I know alot of women who get pregnant shortly (5-6 wks postpartum) after having their first or even second baby and they do just fine. I'm sure this baby and his sibling new brother or sister will grow up close and happy. I have 4 sibs and never felt like I lacked the attention or love of my parents and I'm a middle child.
Rita
I agree with that and Im sure she did really like them and she really still should, but if I didnt have any kids and was in that situation I could certainly see her concern, but I DO NOT think she should get the baby back. But how is she really to know that her child is still going to get all the love and attention it deserves. I supopse that is a risk you take with adoptoin I just sympathize with both families. I cant imagine what it would be liek to give up a child and Im sure she is just worried about what is going to happen. I think adoptions is a great thing and I dont want to bring that down at all I just know that it must be hard for the birthmother not knowing things.
It is so sad to hear this. It is stories like these, something that happens one time in a million, that furthers peoples misunderstandings of adoption. It scares both future adoptive parents and contemplating birthparents when they read stories like this one. We had a lot of questions about the media hyped adoption stories when we adopted, but we found out those situations are very RARE. I don't want to take anyone's side on this one, you probably could find fault on both sides. But I do hope they take into account what is best for this little baby. If this drags out, is it really fair to take him from the only family he has known?
Has anyone stopped to think what is actually best for the baby, whose needs should come before anyones? It would be very difficult on a child to be taken out of the only home they've ever known, and that's something the birth mother should heavily consider rather than her own beliefs on what's right/wrong. The baby is the ONLY person that should matter in this situation.
I totally agree if this baby is happy, loved, cared for, taken care of ect then taking the baby away is a horrible decision. How do they know that if they take the baby a put them with someone that that person wont have a child close to this baby in age or even give this child a good life.
If the situation works dont fix it.
Until parental rights are terminated, the birthmother still has a voice. Until you are in a situation where you are choosing a better life for your child than you could ever provide, it doesn't seem fair to pass judgement on either party. As the other moms said, it is the baby's best interest that needs to be at hand not who had the baby first or who choose who.
"There isn't a ruler, yardstick, or measuring tape long enough in the world to measure the capability inside of you."
I also think that they need to look at the total picture. Just because someone is pregnant should not mean that they can not keep their baby that they adopted. That is probably the last thing that the adoptive mom needs is to lose the baby she has and then to have the stress and worry about the possibility of losing the baby she is carrying. Already going through three losses and then looking at going through all of that grief one or two more times would be devastating. Can you imagine how you would feel as a parent if someone came in and took your baby and gave them to someone else based only on the fact that you are pregnant? Poor baby.
I am with the adoptive parents on this issue. I personally know 2 families that had tried and tried for years to get preg. and were unable to. They then stated the adoption process and soon after got pregnant. The Drs working with both mothers said this happened b/c the pressure to get pregnant was off.
I understand the birth mom just cus i gave my frist son up and i wanted my son to go to a family with no older kids like teenagers. I meet the family and they have a little boy that is a little oder then my son. I dont understand why the adoptive mom didnt tell her worker. if u would of know my adoptive mom was pregnant i dont know what i would of done but that is just what i say.
okay was the mother pregnant when she applied to adopt?
that makes a difference in how strongly opinionated i am about it, but either way, i think it is wrong to take the child away
for everyone involved (except maybe the selfish birth mother).
for one, the child. why toss him/her around? they made their way into a loving family and to someone who truly appreciates children and would not take (either) for granted.
for two, the family. they've gotten attached to the child.. i can't imagine having a child (birth or adopted) and having them in my home and bringing them into my family and loving them and someone trying to take them away!
i guess i would have to read the contract.. it sounds like they just say you can't adopt a child from there if you already have a child 18 months or younger.
but i don't know.. either way .. why are they making it difficult to adopt?
we should give children to any loving parents who would love to have a/another child (if they pass the child services evaluation that they go through).
that is, unless - and i HIGHLY doubt this would be the case - they will start to neglect the child once their own comes. but i think she would - and will continue to - appreciate and cherish her children.
|
|
|
Have you seen this today??
http://yankton.net/stories/021108/new_245736731.shtml
A birth mom found out that the mother that adopted her baby boy, is pregnant, and so now the birth mom and the Omaha Children's Home Society are trying to take away their baby, only because she wanted it to go to a home with no biological children. The adoptive mother had previously lost 3 pregnancies, so she didn't say anything, as she was newly pregnant, and probably didn't want to get her hopes up, in case she lost another child. It is so sad. I hope that the couple wins in court. What a selfish thing for a Birth mom to do. That is terrible. I hope the birth mom and Omaha Children's Society lose in court. How selfish.