Adoption Law Update

Keeping Adoption Secret from the Adoptee

jvmac@mac.com — 2008-01-30T17:48:09-06:00

Not so sure this is a good idea.

Alberta, Canada, made the news today with a story from the Edmonton Journal that an adoptive family obtained an order allowing the family to keep secret from their adoptive child the fact that the child is adopted. The paper says:

That feature is in a section of the Child, Youth and Family Enhancement Act that lets adoptive families apply for a veto so biological parents can't see the adoptees' files. The veto can be used if the adoptive parents have not told their adoptees they are adopted, and where enlightening them "would be extremely detrimental to the adopted person."

Adoption records in Alberta have been open to adult adoptees and their biological parents since 2004. The object of the law has been to allow adoptees and their biological parents to learn about each other and possibly to reunite.

But what about the instance where an adopted child might have genetic indicators of disease? Would it be right to withhold medical information from that person? It is for that reason that adoption proceedings (other than within a family, such as a stepparent adoption or adoption by grandparents) invariably require medical information about the child to be furnished.

Second Parent Adoption: Proud Parenting dot com

jvmac@mac.com — 2008-01-28T11:14:06-06:00

While scanning the news today, I ran across some articles on second-parent adoption. Second-parent adoption takes place when one gay partner has adopted a child and then the other partner adopts, too.

Three states prohibit second-parent adoption: Florida, Mississippi and Utah. But that might be about to change in Utah. A Democratic state representative is proposing House Bill 318 which, if it became law, would remove Utah's ban on second-parent adoption.

There's even a website devoted to parenting by gay partners which of course includes lots of information on second-parent adoptions. The website is called Proud Parent and can be found at www.proudparenting.com

The website says it's in beta. It looks nice but is very slow. So be patient.

Visitation After Termination of Parental Rights?

jvmac@mac.com — 2008-01-19T16:43:57-06:00

Last year, Stephen Grant murdered his wife, Tara. Tara's sister, Alicia Standerfer, who lived in Ohio, took the children in. Later, she and her husband tried to adopt them. But Mr. Grant's sister, Kelly Utykanski, and her husband wanted the children. The Utykanskis, unlike the Standerfers, are childless.

When the case came up for trial, Judge John Foster mediated an agreement between the two couples rather than put them to trial. Under the agreement, the children will continue to live with the Standerfers, but the Utykanskis will have visitation rights.

Mr. Grant's parental rights were terminated. Under the law, the children no longer have any legal relationship with him. Had the Standerfers then adopted the children, they could have prohibited the Utykanskis from seeing them. Avoiding adoption of the children led to a compromise acceptable to all.

Guatemalan Adoption Law, Privacy and Baby Max

jvmac@mac.com — 2008-01-15T10:24:00-06:00

Guatemala adopted a new adoption law, effective January 1 of this year. The new law makes it more difficult to adopt Guatemalan babies. Of course, no one wants Guatemala to turn into a baby farm, but according to WRAL.com in North Carolina, the new law is delaying the adoption of 5,000 children by U.S. families.

In more adoption news from North Carolina, a new law makes it easier for adoptees to search for their birth families. The new law "allows adoption agencies to help connect people with their biological parents. Until now, people searching would have to go through the courts."

Finally, nine-month-old Baby Max finds himself in the eye of a storm in Missouri. A judge refused to allow Gary Stocklaufer to adopt his cousin's baby. Stocklaufer claims it's because he's obese. The judge denied that accusation and said Stocklaufer violated Missouri law when he brought the child to Missouri without a court order. What the judge is referring to is the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC). You can read a copy of Texas' version here.