Chance or not?

Andraya

I placed my son in foster care to seek treatment for anorexia. I wish I had been given 18 months. I was given 10. Ten months to secure treatment in a time when eating disorders were not treated in mainstream medicine. Ten months to get into and COMPLETE treatment. Ten months to recover from an addiction that had been 10 years in the making. I never abandoned my son. He and I were abandoned by the foster care system.

amyburt40

Foster care adoption and infant adoption are two different creatures. With foster care, the natural mother has the right to get her children back after she goes through all the necessary programs required by the courts. If her rights are terminated, then no she doesn't have the right to come back. Only if there was coercion, deception and those situations can she come back. I know of several cases right now in my area where the parents should have had their rights terminated but they haven't. This has spanned over a few years. These are cases where the rights should have been terminated. There are still other cases out there where the mother's rights were terminated without due cause. In one state either Tennessee or Kentucky, they had that issue.

I am sorry she considered you less of a parent.

alexaxxownss

i dont think that the birth mother should be able to take them back.
you obviously want whats best for the child and if there birth mother cared about them in the first place do you think she would have treated them like that?
she had a chance, and she blew it.
soo, i think the one chance is enough.

idiots

I am currently in the process of adopting 2 girls and also have 3 of my own birth children. I say no because the parents were not parents to begin with. Giving birth to a child does not give a person the right to abuse over and over again and then turn around and expect the system to be okay with it. I also have a friend who has lost her children to the system so, even though I know that it is hard to watch your children being taken away from you it is even harder to watch them go through abuse. No one has the right to fight for their child if their rights were terminated. It takes alot for them to remove rights to begin with.

Crucio

No Iâ€™m sorry they donâ€™t. In most cases birthparents have a chance to better themselves and if they donâ€™t take that opportunity when they have it that is their loss. They cant just decide to better themselves 5 years after they had a chance. It probably do more harm then good to the child to yank them away from the family that has had them all that time. Theyâ€™d probably ask if their birthparent cared for them why didnâ€™t they do what they were suppose to back then.

You know the bond of love.

LaraSue

I agree with you. And just because you haven't given birth does not mean you don't have a bond with your children.

BPD Wife

While there is an exception to every rule, I think typically if a child is removed from the home due to neglect or abuse, then they should not be able to "fight" for their children after the adoption is finalized. Prior to that, "maybe" - if they can prove that something has changed or that their rights were terminated illegally.

This is a hard question for me because I've been on the adoptive side as well as knowing that at any time someone could accuse me of Munchhausen's by proxy because of my son's rare disorder. Many of the parents who have children with this disorder have had their child temporarily removed from them because "someone" thought they were poisoning their child. I do not think it is fair that any child should be removed without adequate proof and follow up to insure that the abuse or neglect is totally legitimate.

But as an adoptive parent, I also believe that at some point (some) people need to understand that while we may not have a blood bond, we do have a parental bond. I would do as much to protect my child as my friend who has a bio child. I am no less this child's mother than the person who gave birth to him. And it infuriates me when people think that because I didn't give birth, I cannot understand what "motherhood" is about. : )

Torrejon

I agree with you! And I totally disagree with your friend's idea that you have to be a blood relative to know what is right for your child.

Amie M

I agree with you. They shouldnt get there children back. People dont seem to understand. Just bc we have adopted a child that we dont have a bond with these children. BUT WE DO HAVE A BOND WITH THE CHILD WE ADOPT!!!!!! To be a prent doenst mean you have to have a child.
Why I say no they sholdnt get there kids back:

My four siblings and I are all adopted. My birth mom and dad(who I know) gave us way. They didnt want us anymore. This is what they said to the court. I was old enough to be there and here what they said. I was ten years old. MY borthers who were 1 and half (twins) and a newborn had no choice in life bc they didnt want us. They would rather be in the streets doing drugs, beating us and not giving us a home. So, they gave us to my bio grandparents, who beat us, then who in return gave my twin brothers to another family memeber where they got beat. So, you aregoing to sit on here and say oh yea the birth parents should have there kids back as long as they can clean up there act. NO they shouldnt.
So then ones on here that say yes a child should go back to the birth mom IF she cleans up her act is ok. Well, what about the child that has been adopted and ONLY knows the parents that adopted him/her. SO, you say its ok to take that child from them and cause so much pain bc they dont know that person? Before you say yes think about the child. Everyone on here that is against adoption doenst think about the child that has lived for the adoptive family for years but you want to take him or her from the only family they know.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: