Posted on 08/03/2011 3:43:52 AM PDT by lowbridge
Return unused portion for refund. It’s the traditional safety net when a product fails to please or perform.
But should returns be allowed for adopted children?
The Tulsa World reports that parents Melissa and Tony Wescott want to return their 11 year-old adopted son to state custody because they say he had severe behavioral problems not disclosed prior to his 2007 adoption, including reactive detachment disorder, disruptive behavior disorder, major depressive disorder, post traumatic stress disorder, and fetal alcohol syndrome.
The Wescotts say that soon after the adoption, the boy attacked a neighbor child with a board, killed and injured animals, began regularly running away, and hid butcher knives and lighters in his room. “He tried to burn our home down,” said Melissa Wescott. “The note read: ‘I’m sorry you had to die.’”
State documents described the child as “polite and well mannered.”
Because the Wescotts can’t afford the lengthy legal process of having the adoption “dissolved,” they are asking the state to enact a law allowing adoptive parents to return children under certain circumstances.
(Excerpt) Read more at responsibility-project.libertymutual.com ...
I am assuming this is a domestic adoption of an older child. If so, the state knew of his circumstances. Many of the “America’s waiting children” are on medication of all sorts and have horrible history’s of sexual abuse, physical abuse and neglect. That is why I am always OUTRAGED when I read a story about an infant being burned with cigarettes or starved and the birth parents take a parenting class to get the child back. At some point, a child is damaged beyond repair. Sorry to say that but it is true... all the love, patience, understanding in the world WON”T cure them. That is one of the main reasons that my husband and I chose to adopt from China (not that abuse doesn’t occur but the children were younger and there was some medical documentation). We stayed away from Russia because of the RAD... a frightening diagnosis which I interpreted as simply the child will NEVER bond with you in any form. Would I adopt an older child domestically ever? Yes... but only after I fostered the child in my home for at least a year. Just a thought.
I've not been directly involved in an adoption before, and I'm sure that there are FReepers who can correct me.
However, I have several close friends and relatives who have adopted children through the state. The number of hoops that they need to jump through are legion (and many of them are ridiculous), and the entire process - from start to finish - took years. Plenty of time to spot warning signs.
For this behavior to "suddenly" show up triggers my BS detector. Not saying that it couldn't happen, just saying that I don't think we're getting the entire story.
I see what you are saying but the parents could have had short visitation while the adoption was going through. With RAD, the child isn’t stupid. He or she knows their best option is to get adopted instead of staying at a foster house. Did your friends adopt young children or infants? The reason that I am asking is that those adoptions go more slowly simply because they are more “desirable”. That is why I said I would choose an adoption of an older child if he or she lived with me for a year. You can hide some psychological damage for a period of time but not that long... it will surface with the child being more comfortable. I guess my main point is this: I fear a law where parents are forced to remain parents if they aren’t handling it well and are doing more damage than good. I have no problem with a parent surrendering a three month old baby when they realize that they can’t cope. Thus, I have no problem with parents surrendering an older child if they can’t cope as well. Not for the parents... but for the safety of the children.
Like I said - I'm sure that there are exceptions. But, in the instances that I'm familiar with, the adoptive parents were completely familiar with the children that they were adopting.
In fact, in two cases that I can think of, they needed to fight to keep the adoption on track, and ran up substantial legal costs in the process (both cases involved a biological mother who was a drug addict refusing treatment, but also refusing to relinquish parental rights).
The adoptive Parents were special people in both cases. I couldn't have had an issue like that hanging over my head, and been subject to the whims of a drug-addled mother, a bunch of senseless bureaucrats and/or a court. Especially when common sense went out the window completely. For instance, in one case, the adoptive parents are pretty well-to-do. The child was receiving Social Security checks. *AFTER* everything went through, the father looked into getting the checks stopped...they weren't necessary in the least.
He was told - in no uncertain terms - that they could not be stopped, and if he continued to pursue the issue, it would be investigated by Social Services and would put the adoption (the *completed* adoption!!) back in jeopardy. Amazing. So, he said "AllRighty" and banked the checks. His son used the money to go to college, and is now a teacher who works with undrepriviledged kids (he's the wrestling coach...that one of the ways he makes a connection). A happy ending, and tax dollars well spent, IMHO. But completely ridiculous (and honestly, scary..."you'd like to do something sensible, and we'll threaten to take your kids for it") to go through at the time.
We have friends that adopted domestically and they went through the ringer. One baby was put into their care and they wanted so badly to adopt him. (they even had him baptized). The infants was found in the front seat of a “suspicious vehicle”. The birth mom was “retarded” (as defined by social services), a prostitute and a drug addict. The baby was put into the front seat by the mother while she was with (performing) on a john. Okay... you would think that this woman couldn’t take care of a baby (since she wasn’t taking care of herself, right?) No... the baby was returned to his birth mother after a year. She had completed one clean drug test and had gotten into a half way house. Social Services accompanied by the police literally showed up on their doorstep and took the child. (the depression of the couple afterwards was heart breaking)
That is why we chose to adopt a “foreign” child. Plain, simple and possibly selfish to some?! I wanted to know after 2 years and five months of medical tests, criminal background, MVA backgrounds, interviews with a social worker, my other kid’s interviews and medical backgrounds, financial statement, house inspections (etc, etc, etc) that the child put into my arms WAS now MY child. I didn’t want to fear someone from the state taking her. Our group of nine parents all shared the same fear: we all discussed how we didn’t think we could handle it psychologically if a grandparent, Aunt, distant cousin etc... came out of the closet and demanded the “genetic” child be returned to them. Your friends sound like amazing and wonderful people. I truly respect them!
when the adoption agency conceals material facts like mental disorders or chronic illnesses not only yes, but yes with a right to damages.
Adoption agencies should not be able to use desperation of wanabe parents as a means of dumping.
The story IS about adoption.
Adoption is an artificial statutory creation.
The documents and contractual obligations undertaken were based on a fraud in the inducement.
like it or not, this child adopted is a product.
if this is allowed to stand it will kill off the entire public adoption agency system.
I agree.
It is also about much more than adoption. The question of "what do we do with unwanted humans?" is part of this picture.
It's not just about adoption.
The story IS about adoption.
Adoption is an artificial statutory creation.
The documents and contractual obligations undertaken were based on a fraud in the inducement.
like it or not, this child adopted is a product.
if this is allowed to stand it will kill off the entire public adoption agency system.
The first answer to “what do we do with unwanted humans” is we do not LIE and falsify documents in order to dump them without warning on addoptive parents.
I hope someones head rolls in the state.
FReerider Ping
Another close friend went through that. Inspector dinged him because the kids' bedroom window only opened 19" instead of the requisite 20".
That's not the funny part. No "fire ladders" were required, and the windows opened up to a 30' drop on to a cement patio. Friend asked the inspector "So having a window not opening wide enough is *bad*, but my kids falling to their death is *OK*?"
Yup. Bureaucrats are not known for their sense of humor.
Buddy put in a fire ladder (he was planning to, anyway) and had the local volunteer fire chief "inspect" his property and write a letter stating that remediation measures were adequate. Problem solved.
I'm sure that you have your share of horror stories, too.
that sign is used for DISCLOSED obsolete or defective product.
in this case these adoptors were lied to and decieved.
they should do what that mother returned the defective adoptive child to a russian adoption agency. She dumped him right on their doorstep and they had to take it back.
My nephew and his wife adopted (at great expense) a Russian baby when he was 1 year old. He was a beautiful child and seemed just fine until a couple of years ago when behavioral problems began to crop up.
Since then, he’s been in and out of counseling and temporary institutional situations. It’s been a very heavy financial and emotional burden on their family, especially his younger brother.
Naturally, there was absolutely nothing in the records to show his family’s mental health history, much less how he was treated in that orphanage for his first year of life. Very sad situation all around.
I have no problems with these folks sending the kid back to a government agency. In essence, the law will take him pretty soon anyways...
Now, as it comes to celebrities, if they decide that they didn’t get a big enough PR boost from adoption, not as favorable. I wonder, are there any high profile cases of that having happened? I’d think the media would be all over that, unless they got bought off.
One of the main reasons Russia was removed from my adoption list. The majority of children have fetal alcohol syndrome which greatly affects their development, not to mention the almost feral conditions at Russian orphanages.
There is probably some organic problem there (possibly fetal alcohol syndrome), as well. Sometimes that’s not that detectable at birth, unless it’s so severe it results in physical abnormalities, but I’m sure the family’s history was known to the Russians and they just preferred not to disclose it.
It is very sad. The family I knew had adopted 2 brothers, one of whom (the younger) was fine, but the older child began to have problems in the first year of adoption and they eventually ended up institutionalizing him, after having taken part in every therapeutic program in the US or probably in the universe.
There was a horrible case in Connecticut a couple of years ago where two men carried out the home invasion robbery of the home of a doctor, killing (after raping and torturing) the wife and daughters by setting fire to the house, believing that they had already killed the doctor (who was tied up and unconscious in the basement). The leader of the pair was a Russian adoptee who had been bad from the start and too hard for his family to handle. He had been caught torturing small animals and breaking into houses from about the age of 8.
Perhaps orphanages that can manage and civilize the difficult to manage kids would be more appropriate.
They think enacting a law like this won’t be a “lengthy process”?
But it will be affordable in a way that hiring a lawyer is not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.