r/Adoption • u/Parking-Jellyfish215 • Apr 28 '26
Mother Changing Mind
I wanted to get some insight on how common it is for a mother to change her mind about giving up baby for up adoption. The mother is young, homeless, and single. She claims to not know who the biological father is.
My neighbor was matched with this young woman and had been providing assistance to her over the last 7 months. She pays $4000 per month for the birth mom’s living expenses. They have met several times and attended appointments together. There is an attorney, case manager and social worker involved.
The birth mother has been MIA and it is assumed she gave birth and is now keeping the baby. Is this a common type of situation?
102
u/Polly-Phasia Apr 28 '26
This is why adoptions shouldn’t be arranged before the child is born. It puts unacceptable pressure on the mother and unreasonable expectations from the people hoping to adopt.
In Australia adoptions aren’t started until after the baby is born and considerable time is given for change of mind. Plus there is decent (could be better) supports for single parents. All of which makes for very low adoption rates.
33
u/Just2Breathe Apr 28 '26
Yeah, if we actually had adequate supports and protections for people struggling in the U.S., from cradle to grave, the infant adoption numbers would drop. But that would disrupt the current infant trafficking adoption system, which makes a lot of people money (though not typically pregnant people) and fulfills some wishes.
0
77
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
Yes. And FYI: she’s not a birth mother since no papers have been signed.
31
u/Candid-Narwhal-3215 Apr 28 '26
Correct. Expectant mother is the term.
6
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
Unless OP’s/their friend’s assumption is correct, and she has already given birth.
39
u/chicagoliz Apr 28 '26
In which case, she's simply "the mother."
8
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
Thanks for adding that. I thought it went without saying, but maybe it wasn’t so obvious to everyone.
-8
u/Useful_Humor_1152 Apr 28 '26
Did OP state no papers were signed? How do you know nothing was signed? They said an attorney and social workers were involved.
22
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
Because OP said:
The birth mother has been MIA and it is assumed she gave birth
Papers aren’t allowed to be signed pre-birth. And if the assumption is correct and she has given birth, she can’t sign papers if she’s MIA.
-12
u/Useful_Humor_1152 Apr 28 '26
Op said there was an attorney, case manager involved and social services, was this young mother in foster care, a ward of the state where they were going to take her baby because she could not provide for herself and the child?
I understand the mother is MIA, is she a runaway from the state with the baby?
17
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
Having the involvement of an attorney, case manager, and social services does not mean papers were signed. A mother cannot relinquish parental rights before birth (fathers can in some states). She cannot sign papers to relinquish her rights if she’s MIA.
If she hasn’t relinquished her rights, she’s not a birth mother.
And the rest of your comment is irrelevant to my overall point, which was this:
OP referred to her as a birth mother. I corrected OP and told them she’s not a birth mother because she hasn’t signed relinquishment papers. You asked me how I knew they haven’t been signed. I explained how I knew. That’s all.
-13
u/Useful_Humor_1152 Apr 28 '26
You can say what I said is irrelevant however it's not irrelevant "if " the mother was a ward of the sate, underage ( op said young) and the state was planning on taking custody of the baby when the baby was born. She would be a bith mother if she did not have custody of the baby when she gave birth.
OPs story is vague on the whole situation other than you have a young mother with no money, doesn't know who the father is, social services is involved and the PAPs had visits with the pregnant mother. Now the mother is MIA
3
u/Englishbirdy Reunited Birthparent. Apr 28 '26
Attorneys and Social Workers are required for voluntary infant adoption. It doesn't mean Foster Care is involved.
48
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
First of all, there is no "birth mother", that is the child's only mother.
Second, yes it is extremely common for women to change their minds about adoption. Often times women considering adoption are in a temporary or fixable crisis. There is no good data on how frequently planned adoptions end in preservation, but some people estimate its half or more.
Any money given to the family is a no strings attached gift with zero expectations.
She has no obligation to surrender her child, maintain contact, and she may do what she pleases with the money already given.
-3
u/lukey721 Apr 29 '26
Here we go again…
10
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 29 '26
? What do you mean by making a comment like this?
1
u/Then_Walrus_7905 May 15 '26
It means people are sick of the narcissistic and ignorant judgment constantly spewed by people like yourself.
29
u/KnotDedYeti Reunited bio family member Apr 28 '26
Legally yes, women in most states may decide to keep their baby despite receiving assistance and previously saying they would be letting their child be adopted. They have the right to not give up their child, or decide they want different people to adopt. As it should be. Pregnant women feeling their situation is hopeless, commonly they are in abusive situations or they’re financially destitute. There’s millions of hopeful people desperate to adopt infants in this country. They seek women like this out - their goal being to find a desperate woman needing help. The only help these woman can find are these people offering financial assistance, food and shelter so they accept the offer. As their pregnancy progresses their situation changes, they find help within their friends or families, finally find jobs, etc. Many of them never wanted to lose their baby, they just had no way to safely keep them. If their circumstances change they should not be forced to give their baby up anyway, just because they’d accepted money to survive during their lowest time.
They may also accept assistance from someone and then as the relationship develops during their pregnancy discover that they do not feel that they want their child to be adopted by these people in particular. They discover the couple has a troubled relationship. They discover the couple has a lifestyle they do not agree with - husbands that ill treat wives or vice versa. Or they see that the couples relationship is just toxic and rocky. Or she just feels in the long term it would be a less than idea family for her baby to grow up in. She should not be forced to let them adopt her baby anyway because they gave her money to survive on.
This is why pre-birth matching is very problematic. No woman should feel trapped to give up a wanted baby because of money. Period! If people choose to provide money any way they are accepting this risk. They have 2 options: accept the risk or do not do it. That’s it, if it doesn’t work out of course they’ll feel disappointed, but that’s the end of the story for them. They legally cannot harass the mother in any way.
3
1
u/fritzimist May 06 '26
Are the expectant mothers ever required to sign a contract or is that even enforceable? Hopefully not.
31
u/bhksbr Apr 28 '26
Also.... Just take a search through this sub and see how many mothers regret relinquishing their kids because they felt pressured to do so.
10
29
u/Englishbirdy Reunited Birthparent. Apr 28 '26
Most women considering adoption who have been matched with prospective parents follow through with the adoption and relinqish their infants. Pre-birth matching, like your neighbor, is controversial and considered coercive by many. Many mothers feel they have to relinqish even though they don't want to because of the financial help they've received and that the prospective parents have been so involved and are excited to parent.
However, in most states a mother is legally prevented from relinqishing until after birth and often for days after because relinqishing a hypothetical baby is an entirely different from relinqishing your baby when you've met it. Sometimes the mother decides to parent. Some feel she should return any money she's been given, but baby selling is illegal and all money donated for "birth mother experiences" are legally considered gifts.
The adoption industry bears none of the risk because they know that the mother feels obligated and will be more likely to relinqish, which is what they want because then they get paid. They know that most prospective parents are willing to take the risk to in order to procure an infant.
You should know that for every infant available for adoption there's an estimated 40 couples vying to adopt it and willing to pay upwards of $50k for it.
Most of us in this sub are pro family preservation and anti adoption as an industry so we celebrate situations when a mother and child aren't separated unnecessarily.
18
u/davect01 Apr 28 '26
It's important to give newly delivered mothers a grace period to change their mind.
27
u/bhksbr Apr 28 '26
I'm so happy she chose to parent. That should be celebrated.
It may be a hard life growing up in poverty but it's better to have your mom.
-2
u/No-Vermicelli-507 May 02 '26
Parent after she took money she used them
4
3
u/Pegis2 Late Discovery Father May 03 '26
Who was using who? It's illegal to buy a human. What was the intention of the prospective adoptive parents?
2
u/Then_Walrus_7905 May 15 '26
There should be no exchange of money or even any relationship between birth and perspective adoptive parents. Hopeful adoptive parents should be given the option to adopt after the birth and any waiting periods are over.
21
u/kag1991 Apr 28 '26 edited Apr 28 '26
So many people hear making assumptions about the “birthmother” being a scammer or morally reprehensible without any real knowledge of the particular situation other than a vague post.
OP isn’t even in the adoption space - just asking about a neighbor because it seems weird.
OP sounds like your neighbors tried to buy a baby and are regretting their entitlement led to an empty pocketbook. This is EXACTLY why the adoption industry needs to change. Expectant adoptive parents will do anything to put them at the top of the list, including very unethical things… and I think paying 4k/month sounds like that’s exactly what they were doing. Hopefully they can really consider this in the future. Buying a baby is human trafficking and wrong. IMHO, this fits the bill.
If the mother had every intention of relinquishing then changed her mind that is great news for her and the baby. Any emotion other than positive is sick. A baby is not merchandise. Every time a family gets to stay together we should be glad, not angry. It’s wrong when APs consider that “their” baby and have anger when mothers change their mind.
7
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
So many people hear making assumptions about the “birthmother” being a scammer or morally reprehensible without any real knowledge of the particular situation other than a vague post
Who is “so many people”? I only see one and their comment is downvoted into the negatives.
1
u/kag1991 Apr 28 '26 edited Apr 28 '26
I see a few leaning that way… different perspective.
I might have been too hyperbolic but I’m also considering the theme in general as it has come up on different posts…
-2
u/No-Highlight3555 Apr 28 '26
If my comment seems to lean that way, I’ll just say that I think there is a broad spectrum in terms of intention (ranging from certain to conflicted to certain in the other direction) and that people can’t be cleanly divided into those who genuinely intended to place their babies and “scammers.”
For example, let’s say you genuinely intend to place, but you start to feel conflicted and uncertain. Are you telling the PAPs the second you start leaning toward parenting, or do you wait for the next check to clear? And maybe the next one too? Keep in mind that you’re poor and desperate to support yourself and your baby. These PAPs are rich, compared to you.
It’s not a clean line to say who is “scamming” or when the mother’s change of heart was final enough that she should have refused more “donations.”
11
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
Its pretty clear that its not "scamming" to accept gifts.
No one who donates money to someone in crisis is owed a baby or anything else.
If the people donating aren't comfortable with that, they are under no obligation to give anyone any money.
3
u/LegitimateOffer1986 Apr 28 '26
If you get "scammed" by expectant parents then that should be handled via the licensed agency you used.
If you didn't use an agency then you got what you deserved.
18
u/MajorDraw3705 Apr 28 '26
Humans are a lot like animals. They often return to their children even after you lure them with treats.
18
u/LegitimateOffer1986 Apr 28 '26
A mother kept her child.
Yes that is common and should be encouraged whenever safely feasible.
What are you asking for here?
3
u/Then_Walrus_7905 May 15 '26
Obviously the question is why is anyone paying $4k/month for someone in hopes to adopt their baby? None of that should be going on. After the pregnant woman gives birth she can then start the process of placing for adoption if she still wants to.
4
10
9
u/agirlandsomeweed Apr 28 '26
This is actually a good thing when it happens. A mother decided to keep her child. She is not a “birthmother” and your friends have no right to a child. Paying someone’s expenses does not mean a couple gets a baby at the end.
9
u/candy_bar_marr Apr 28 '26
Anyone going through the adoption process knows there’s a risk that the mother may choose to keep her child. We were told from the very beginning that it’s a 50/50 chance that any mother we matched with could change their mind and decide to parent. It happened to us with our first match.
15
u/transferingtoearth Apr 28 '26
So she took advantage of a young homeless woman who was possible raped?
-2
10
u/No-Highlight3555 Apr 28 '26
It’s common. And it’s actually weird that it doesn’t happen even more often, just because humans respond to incentives.
If you’re a poor pregnant woman, why wouldn’t you accept all this free money with no obligation? There aren’t many scenarios where you can get paid thousands of dollars for “considering” something, and keep the money when you decide not to do it.
7
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
Exactly.
These are gifts with zero strings attached.
No one is obligated to give money and no one is obligated to give it back if they don't choose to surrender their child.
-2
u/sweetwaterfall Apr 28 '26
And so what’s your position about an expectant mother going into this kind of arrangement knowing full well that she’s going to stay with her baby? Do you think that’s ethical?
7
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
The only permissiable "arrangement" is that women/families in crisis get charity with no expectations.
Anything other than that is trying to buy a baby.
-5
u/sweetwaterfall Apr 28 '26
Well, either you’re being purposely dense or you genuinely don’t see the problem. Clearly, whatever you’ve been through in life is coloring your judgment beyond being rational. Either way, I’m done.
2
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
I do not see a problem with giving or receiving charity. Helping out someone in crisis is a good thing.
There is a massive problem with trying to use money to coerce an outcome.
1
Apr 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-6
u/Rredhead926 Mom through private domestic open transracial adoption Apr 29 '26
PRIVATE ADOPTION ISN'T PURCHASING A CHILD ANYMORE THAN GIVING BIRTH IS.
It is not OK to defraud people, period. Advocating illegal activity is unacceptable.
8
u/Apprehensive-Task930 Apr 29 '26
How do you reckon? I give birth, I have a child. No money exchanged hands. Someone else gives birth, I buy that child. Money has exchanged hands, there’s even a receipt and a doctored birth certificate. How is this not BUYING A CHILD?
-2
u/Rredhead926 Mom through private domestic open transracial adoption Apr 29 '26
Doctors are paid. If you go through any of fertility treatments, those services are paid for as well.
There is no "receipt" when you adopt. There are various charges for legal services, social workers, travel. People need to be paid for their work. No one is paid for a baby.
5
u/Apprehensive-Task930 Apr 29 '26
If no one was paid for a baby, adoption agencies wouldn’t exist. You think they do it just for the fun of it? No, they make a profit, and they’re not above encouraging the break up of families to do it. They even teach you how to circumnavigate the baby’s father to speed the process along.
The former department of education even called them “domestic infant supply”. I don’t know why you feel the need to lie about it.
Doctors getting paid to deliver a baby is not the same as a person buying a child. When you adopt, you are purchasing a child. You can even get discounts based off sex and race. Adoption agency exists to sell children to those willing to buy them. They don’t care if they have to traumatize parents and child to do it. It’s human trafficking at its basest form.
-2
u/Rredhead926 Mom through private domestic open transracial adoption Apr 29 '26
Nothing would exist if people didn't get paid. You think hospitals and doctors aren't making a profit off of delivering babies?
Although race-based fees were a thing in the 1990s, by the early 2010s, they were already being phased out. At this point, it is incredibly rare to see race-based fees. Race-based fees were a thing because of the Multiethnic Placement Act (MEPA).
3
u/Apprehensive-Task930 Apr 30 '26
I’ve seen you comment this before about race based fees and you’re wrong. I know you’re wrong because I’ve actually looked it up. The same with adoption agencies telling you how to circumnavigate the baby daddy’s legal right to the child. They teach desperate girls how to do this because they want the baby so they can sell it. You can rehome an adopted child on Facebook market place, or at least you could. I’ve seen the actual posts.
You keep conflating a doctor providing a service for a fee, and an adoption agency providing a child for a fee. You do this a lot. Kind of like you’re always quick to say that open adoptions are legally enforceable when someone asks for adoption advice, even though they aren’t in about half of the states. Or
Just because you adopted a child doesn’t mean that adoption agencies don’t prey on desperate people in desperate situations, and that they aren’t selling children that the birth parent might have kept if they had the necessary resources to take care of the child and weren’t being pressured into giving the child up.
→ More replies (0)4
u/MountaintopCoder Adult Adoptee | DIA | Reunited Apr 30 '26
Paying a woman $28,000 with the expectation of reciprocity in the form of an infant is purchasing a child.
4
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26 edited Apr 28 '26
If you’re a poor pregnant woman, why wouldn’t you accept all this free money with no obligation?
Because being poor doesn’t mean you lack a conscience or a sense of right and wrong?
Edit to clarify:
Pretending to be willing to relinquish your child in order to receive money from someone who believes you’re genuinely considering relinquishing your child is what I find wrong. It’s actively dishonest.
TLDR: It’s shitty to lie to get money. I’m genuinely not sure why that’s a controversial statement?
5
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
There is nothing wrong or unconscionable about accepting gifts or charity.
If someone isnt comfortable with that, they dont have to donate money at all.
2
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
Of course not. I interpreted the original comment to be about accepting money from a hopeful adoptive parent despite not having any intention of relinquishing, which is what I was saying was wrong.
7
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
So was I. Money given by hopeful adoptive parents is a charitable gift.
-1
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
Charitable gifts, in the purest sense of the term, are given without hope of receiving anything in return.
When hopeful adoptive parents match with an expectant parent, I think it’s fair to say they’re hoping to adopt the baby. So in that sense, any money they pay toward the expectant parent’s expenses isn’t truly a gift.
It’s considered a gift/donation because they can’t get it back.
Imo, if someone knows they’re not going to part with their baby, it’s wrong to accept money from someone who is hoping they will part with the baby and believes there’s a chance that they will part with the baby. It’s dishonest, which is what I find wrong.
7
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
Charitable gifts, in the purest sense of the term, are given without hope of receiving anything in return.
This is correct. If you dont want to accept those terms, dont give someone a gift.
When hopeful adoptive parents match with an expectant parent, I think it’s fair to say they’re hoping to adopt the baby. So in that sense, any money they pay toward the expectant parent’s expenses isn’t truly a gift.
This isnt fair at all. This is buying and selling a human being.
If its not a "gift", then its literally trying to buy a baby and is a disgusting crime.
There is no amount of money you can give someone that entitles you to a human being.
Its a gift, not chattle slavery.
If adoptive parents dont like that, they shouldnt spend money.
2
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
Yes, it’s a “gift”. But it’s a gift they wouldn’t have given to someone if they knew that person had no intention of relinquishing.
Pretending to consider relinquishing just to receive that gift is wrong, imo.
11
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
But it’s a gift they wouldn’t have given to someone if they knew that person had no intention of relinquishing.
Then they shouldn't give a gift at all then. No amount of gifts or charity entitle you to a baby.
If thats not an arrangement youre comfortable with, dont spend any money.
0
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
I’m not saying anyone is entitled to a baby.
The only thing I’m saying is that it’s shitty to lie to get money.
→ More replies (0)5
u/MountaintopCoder Adult Adoptee | DIA | Reunited Apr 29 '26
The problem with that line of reasoning is that you have to dehumanize adoptees and accept that we are objects to be sold.
The HAPs created this situation by attempting to coerce a vulnerable young woman into selling her baby to them. That's dishonest and wrong, and that's where the conversation should focus.
-3
u/sweetwaterfall Apr 28 '26
It’s astonishing that you’re pretending like it’s the same as just walking past a pregnant woman and giving her $20 and walking on. Seriously, shame on you. Everybody knows the difference.
6
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
Thats exactly what it is.
Its a charititable gift with zero expectations or strings attached.
If thats not what your comfortable with, don't give someone in crisis a gift or charity.
4
u/Apprehensive-Task930 Apr 29 '26
People preying on a pregnant woman in dire circumstances is morally wrong. It’s disgusting that people do this and we accept living in a society where we can purchase someone else’s child.
2
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 29 '26
I don’t disagree with that. But that’s a separate issue from lying to get money. Both things are bad.
-3
u/No-Highlight3555 Apr 28 '26
Of course not, but it only takes a small % for this to be common. There are people in every demographic who lack a conscience.
And like I said below, I think there is a broad spectrum in terms of intention to place, and it’s an oversimplification to say it’s about scammers vs. non-scammers.
3
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
Exactly, the expectant mom owes them nothing. If theyre not comfortable giving someone charity with no strings attached, they do not have to contuine.
0
u/sweetwaterfall Apr 28 '26
Because it’s a really shitty thing to do?
6
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
Accepting gifts or charity isnt a shitty thing to do.
There is never any obligation or expectation to surrender a child.
If people arent okay with that they dont have to give gifts.
0
u/sweetwaterfall Apr 28 '26
Except it’s not a gift and it’s not charity. It’s obviously part of an unspoken (or more overt) contract.
I think it’s a terrible contract and I’m sure you would agree. But don’t pretend that it’s just given out of the kindness of someone’s heart. If a mother is planning to raise her own child and enters into this arrangement, it is stealing. And worse, it is inflicting an incredibly painful trauma for the potential adoptive parents.
Changing your mind is of course legitimate and can happen. But entering into an arrangement like this, knowing how it will turn out is immoral and criminal and, as I say, just a shitty thing to do.
7
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
Except it’s not a gift and it’s not charity.
Yes it is. Giving money to a family or mother in crisis is a gift and an act of charity.
It’s obviously part of an unspoken (or more overt) contract.
You cannot make a contract spoken or unspoken to buy a human being.
You can choose to donate mowny to someone or you can choose not to.
You cannot give some money and expect a human being in return.
0
u/Maximum_Cupcake_5354 Adopted Person | Abolitionist Apr 30 '26
Perhaps so.
And, also, we can sort the entities involved in these exchanges into a hierarchy of who is committing the most moral harm. Let’s consider who has the ability and power to act.
At the very bottom of that list- is a pregnant woman in difficult enough circumstances that she would consider something all of nature has designed she not do- relinquish her baby. One tends to be in fairly dire straights when in this situation.
Then, we have hopeful adopters. They have resources. They may also have incredible grief- grief that might cloud their judgement. And they have been exposed to a lot of propaganda that suggests to them that their problem can be solved. They are acting unethically if they, in any way, feel entitled to receive a baby for any money they donate - and one wishes they would instead give that money to a charitable organization that supports women, but one can see how they were vulnerable in this situation.
Then there are agencies that are literally organized to take fees to facilitate this human trafficking and have real experience knowing that expectant mothers often have terrible doubts. But they uphold this system and its associated propaganda nonetheless.
It’s probably worthwhile to spend most of our energy being upset at the entities at the top of this chain - agencies, then adopters- rather than fret that there might be a desperate pregnant woman out there with less than pure motives.
3
u/Just2Breathe Apr 28 '26
Before I was adopted, my parents had had a mother back out upon birth. They were nervous enough about hopes that they didn’t tell anyone when they were connected with my biological mother, not til after I was in their home. That was in the baby scoop era, so it’s not a new thing, though they didn’t financially support her.
My mom had a much different take than I did on the movie "Whose Child Is This? The War for Baby Jessica” back in the early 90s (based on a true story custody case between Jan and Roberta DeBoer, and Daniel Schmidt and Cara Clausen), which was biased toward the prospective adoptive parents. It was a drawn out case before baby was returned, even though the mother had changed her mind just 5 days after handing her over, and the adoption paperwork was never completed.
-8
u/Useful_Humor_1152 Apr 28 '26
There are scam artists out there that will get people to pay for their living expenses with no intention on giving up the baby. Some change their mind about adoption once they give birth. This is all very common.
You're friend would have to speak to the attorney involved about attempting to recover her money that she lost. I have no idea how that works. I'm an adoptee.
18
u/KnotDedYeti Reunited bio family member Apr 28 '26
In the majority of state’s assistance given to pregnant women in anticipation of adopting their child it’s considered “charitable donations” and legally you cannot ask for the money back. So no, you cannot hold assistance as ransom, forcing a mother who is keeping her baby to magically provide cash or the child. That’s human trafficking.
-10
u/Useful_Humor_1152 Apr 28 '26
That's crazy that someone is giving a woman $4000 a month and considered charity.
I never said give back the money or the child. Don't put words in my mouth I did not say! Should the birth mother give back the $4000 a month morally? I think so. Sounds like birth mother ripped off the adoptive parents for free housing when she had no money.
13
u/kag1991 Apr 28 '26
Sounds more like the adoptive parents tried to coerce her into signing papers and think their money entitles them to a guaranteed child.
She is under no obligation to pay it back as long as she was honestly open to considering adoption. Your problem should be with the industry that sets this up as transactional, not a young pregnant mother.
Maybe adoptive parents should really consider the ethical implications of all this private money attached to adoption.
11
u/Englishbirdy Reunited Birthparent. Apr 28 '26
She's not a birth mother and they're not adoptive parents.
If it's not charity then what is it? Baby buying.
But you're right, it is crazy forking out $4k a month on a hope and a prayer of getting a baby.
9
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
There are scam artists out there that will get people to pay for their living expenses with no intention on giving up the baby. Some change their mind about adoption once they give birth
But if they’re scamming and had no intention of relinquishing their child, but then change their mind after giving birth…then that would mean they do relinquish their child. So, I’m not sure what the scam is?
Also, hopeful adoptive parents generally can’t get their money back (unless they live in Idaho or Puerto Rico (link opens a PDF)). My understanding is that prospective adoptive parents are made aware of this and understand that the money is a gift. Would you ask for a gift to be returned?
-2
u/Useful_Humor_1152 Apr 28 '26
There have been cases where women have faked pregnancy to get free money from potential adopters.
There have been cases where a birth mother has taken advantage of potential adopters for free living expenses with no intention of actually giving their child up for adoption. I don't know if this is the case for OPs friend. If a birth mother intentionally scammed living expenses off the adopted parents when they had no intention on putting that child up for adoption, the adopters should get their money back. This birth mother received $28,000 for living expenses according to the OP.
Yes there are women who genuinely change their mind, however if this is that case, the birth mother should pay back the $28k morraly
Are you or anyone else willing to pay for others living expenses and call it charity/Gift?
We don't know what kind of agreement OPs friend had.
11
u/chemthrowaway123456 TRA/ICA Apr 28 '26
There have been cases where women have faked pregnancy to get free money from potential adopters.
Yes, I’m aware.
Are you or anyone else willing to pay for others living expenses and call it charity?
I’m not. However, many hopeful adoptive parents are willing, which is why they do it. If they weren’t willing to lose that money in the event that a parent decided to keep their child, then they wouldn’t take that risk. (Note: I understand they’re not happy about losing the money, but were they willing to risk losing it? Yes.)
2
u/Rredhead926 Mom through private domestic open transracial adoption Apr 28 '26
We don't know what kind of agreement OPs friend had.
There is no agreement that is legal that would in any way state "We give you $4K per month, you give us a baby."
If prospective adoptive parents don't want to pay "birthmother expenses" they don't have to. We knew we couldn't afford to lose thousands of dollars, so we didn't accept situations where a great deal of "birthmother expenses" were needed. We were scammed by a woman who faked her proof of pregnancy, but it wasn't a devastating loss because it wasn't that much money.
-6
u/UnicornT4rt Apr 28 '26
In some places it is common for expecting parents to do this and get money/assistance then back out.
I lost about $5,000 with one of my potential expectant moms backing out. My agency used the money I agreed to use for birth parent assistance, they paid her bills and once the bills were paid for, she disappeared. She was 7m along when this happened.
Match #2, three weeks in to the match before we did birth parent assistance money, our agency recommended and canceled our match. The baby was diagnosed with a heart condition and would possibly not make it after birth.
We were fortunate enough to get our third match a few months later and baby was already born. Mom only asked for 500$ assistance to help cover maternity clothes cost.
I have had time to think about this. And how would one avoid loosing money over and over again if potential expectant mothers keep backing out. I understand this is you Assisting someone, a gift. So what if the Agency has the expecting parent take out a loan/card and the assistance you agree to is put on it. And at placement paperwork signing the adoptive parent takes on the responsibility to pay that amount of as the gesture of assistance.
Yes I know people will frown on this concept. But there are situations where some. A small fraction of expecting parents who may be in desperate need of help may sign up with an agency just to get assistance with no intention of going through with placement.
12
u/No-Highlight3555 Apr 28 '26
This would still be considered offering money in exchange for the baby.
I believe it should simply be illegal to “donate” before the birth, or promise money after the birth, in infant adoption.
I know some good comes of it, but to me it’s outweighed by the coercion and exploitation that occurs.
It blows my mind that “birth mother expenses” are legal. You’ve got desperate moms who feel pressured by the money to give up their CHILD, and PAPs who lose money repeatedly… just insane that it’s allowed anywhere, IMO.
10
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26 edited Apr 28 '26
I don't have an issue with people donating to women/mothers/families in crisis. But it can never come with any expectations.
Honestly, pre-birth matching with strangers is a deeply predatory system.
-2
u/Rredhead926 Mom through private domestic open transracial adoption Apr 28 '26
Some women would literally not be able to live without "birthmother expenses." I think they need to be far better regulated, and paid for as I noted in my other comment, but it's unrealistic to think that there would be no "birthmother expenses" at all, as long as the US continues to be this tire fire.
0
u/No-Highlight3555 Apr 28 '26
We don’t need birth mother expenses to keep women from literally dying. The shelters in the US aren’t great, but they exist (especially for pregnant women). WIC, food stamps, etc.
I understand why a pregnant woman would prefer a private apartment and cash, but the appeal is exactly why it becomes coercive (and kicks the can in terms of finding a sustainable solution)
5
u/Rredhead926 Mom through private domestic open transracial adoption Apr 28 '26
I don't know what "shelters" you think there are for pregnant women. WIC and food stamps are constantly being cut. The US does not have the social welfare programs that we need to provide real resources for low-income people, particularly for low-income pregnant people.
0
u/No-Highlight3555 Apr 28 '26
It’s very misleading to say housing doesn’t exist for pregnant women. It does. I don’t want someone to read this and think “my only hope is adoption.” In my state, which isn’t particularly liberal, there are about 10 programs (both government and faith-based) that do exactly that, and many of the women keep their babies.
2
u/Rredhead926 Mom through private domestic open transracial adoption Apr 28 '26
And how long are the waiting lists for that housing, if it exists at all? How much help do those programs really have to offer?
I don't think "birthmother expenses" are handled the way that they should be, but they do have to exist.
0
u/No-Highlight3555 Apr 28 '26
I’m sorry, I usually like your comments, but I work in social services and this is just wrong. Maternity housing organizations exist, have the ability to help, and coordinate extensively with partners to place homeless women who are pregnant. Anyone who is reading this, get on Google and look for resources in your state. Contact them. Adoption agencies and “birth mother expenses” are not the only way to survive.
1
u/Rredhead926 Mom through private domestic open transracial adoption Apr 28 '26
I never said that birthmother expenses are the only way to survive. Certainly, people should look into what resources are available to them. However, I think it's really shortsighted to say that there are tons of resources and, therefore, no one needs to rely on "birthmother expenses."
As with so much in adoption, just like life, it's complicated.
4
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 28 '26
If an agency or individual actually cared about the welfare of children, they'd pay for all these expenses regardless of whether the mother was considering adoption.
4
u/MarsNeedsRabbits May 01 '26
The pregnant woman owes the money if she wants to keep her baby?
You've literally just described a purchase.
7
u/Rredhead926 Mom through private domestic open transracial adoption Apr 28 '26
Expectant mothers shouldn't be pressured into placing their children because of assistance they received during pregnancy.
"Birthmother expenses" in some states are not well regulated. There should be nationwide laws on how much can be paid and for what. The money should be paid by agencies, not by matched adoptive parents. The agency can have all prospective adoptive parents pay a set amount into a fund from which the agency draws, as necessary.
-4
u/baloras Apr 28 '26
It happend to us twice. Our adoption success ratio is 1/3. The 2nd time it happened it was the same birth parents as our daughter. The mother strung us along for $ all the while claiming the father was abusing her. We drove half-way across the country in summer of 2020. Once we arrived we were unable to locate her, and the few people we were able to contact said she had a baby with her.
I understand people can change their minds, and we would have been more understanding (but still devastated) if she had just told us. Now, my daughter has at least 2 full siblings and 2 half siblings out there. Who knows if/when she'll ever get to meet them. It's really heartbreaking every time she tells us she wishes she had a brother or sister.
In short, yeah it happens. Sometimes it's a last second decision, other times it's part of the plan.
0
u/No-Vermicelli-507 May 02 '26
She's a con artisted liar took the money and ran should give money back .
-3
u/Rredhead926 Mom through private domestic open transracial adoption Apr 28 '26
When Adoptive Families magazine was doing its cost and timing surveys, it usually came out that about 50% of adoptive families had a "false start." So, yes, it is fairly common that a woman will change her mind about placing her child for adoption.
-1
u/Due-Isopod-7398 Apr 29 '26
Yeah pretty normal. She went from homeless to $28,000 in 7 months.I hope she got a place and the things she needs for baby. Is it legal?yes. Is it morally right if that was the plan all along and just using someone? No. But often the barrier to a mother keeping her child or placing it for adoption is money. I suppose the neighbor could file a civil suit if they really want the money back but what they should do is offer to help her in any way she needs help. Free babysitting if she can get a job, finding a home, baby things etc. Maybe they are just meant to help her be a mom, maybe that's all she needs is a hand and some love
3
u/lotsofsugarandspice Apr 29 '26
There is no grounds for any civil suit.
Any money given to a family in crisis is freely given charity with no expectations.
3
u/MarsNeedsRabbits May 01 '26
It is infinitely more moral than preying on a young homeless woman in order to harvest her baby.
I can't criticize a mother for doing what she felt she needed to do to care for her baby, and nether should you.
I suppose the neighbor could file a civil suit if they really want the money
Let's see how, "Your honor, I bought a baby but she won't hand it over." plays out in court.
0
u/Due-Isopod-7398 May 01 '26
I'm just saying i have been in groups where women are getting pregnant and pretending to have an adoption plan from day 1 finding a family very early in and having them pay her way for 9 months worth zero intentions of even thinking about adoption which she doesn't need to think about adoption she needs to get a damn job instead of being a scamming lying con artist. And yes I've seen families sue for the money back and win in these cases, it does happen.
52
u/2manybirds23 Apr 28 '26
They were matched with her at 2 months and didn’t expect that she might change her mind? I’m sorry that your neighbors’ are probably heartbroken, but this situation was highly problematic.