Adoptive Couple Vs. Baby Girl

Should adopting a child be free? As a first response, many people would answer “Yes, adoption should be free,” arguing that there should not be a price tag on children, or that adoption is unreasonably expensive. Others may argue that “No, it should not be free,” because it may unknowingly put the adoptees at risk for danger, while the children are easily accessible. Adoptions were created to give children, whose biological parents could not care for them, a new and affectionate home, and for couples who wanted children, but could not have them biologically because of health reasons. Today, many people adopt children to add on to their family. With adoption being free, many “unfit” people would qualify to be

Adoption is the process in which a person takes over the parenting of someone else’s child and permanently transfers all the responsibilities and rights from the biological parent or parents. Giving up a child for adoption is a very difficult decision for a mother to make. Today, many children are being parented by a single parent, a grandparent, a stepparent, foster parent or other parent figure. Making adoption an option is done by providing loving, responsible, and legally permanent parents to a child when their biological parents are not able or will not take care of them.(Carter)

Even though adoption as a process has negative results for adopting children, some people still takes this act to be a good act where children who are deprived of parents still have a

As well as through the lens of indigenous, “the radicalization of American Indians and the politics of cultural authenticity, inviting a nuanced analysis of implicit racial bias in the courts.” (2016). The ICWA provides practices and protections for Indian children, families and tribes, but is only applicable to a small fraction of Indian families. What makes Adoptive Couple v Baby Girl so important is that is sought to clarify if a non-custodial parent can invoke the ICWA to stop the adoption process to a non-Indian parent and if ICWA’s definition of “parent” included unwed biological fathers? (Beardall,

Parents wishing to adopt have challenged the adoption laws regarding American-Indian children. For many decades, people wanting to adopt African-American children from disturbing situations have been put through several issues. A law was passed called the “Indian child welfare act” to end what was then a common practice. The state claims they thought that American-Indian children were better off in homes with non-Indian parents. A handful of recent lawsuits say the federal law and similar legislation at state levels make it harder to find stable homes for children. they’ve had many cases fall apart, because parents adopting don’t want the children. Most adopting parents believe it's unfair to them if they can’t adopt American-Indian children.

The Indian Child Welfare Act effected tribal members from over 565 federally recognized tribes and reaffirmed these nation’s sovereignty (Leake, 2012). The ICWA also impacted the way that federal, tribal and private child welfare programs as well as the way adoption agencies worked on a daily basis. According to Bussey (2013), the Act also forced CPS departments at both the state and county level to develop, “…formalized protocols to identify Native children by asking about American Indian/Alaska Native status beginning with the first telephone or in-person contact with a family.” In addition, courts and judges have been impacted by the ICWA because they now have a responsibility to, “inquire about Native heritage at each court appearance until heritage is ascertained” (Bussey, 2013). Early detection of Native heritage is especially important for placements since it could potentially interrupt the adoption process (Turner, 2016). Furthermore, “Among the benefits of early identification of Native children are improved tribal notification and involvement, increased focus on locating relative placements, and timely referrals to culturally-responsive services” (Bussey,

When a couple or individual decides to adopt a child, they know they are going to take on the responsibility of taking care of someone else’s child. Due to the biological parent(s) who can’t take care of that child anymore, because of either drug abuse, alcohol abuse, abuse to the child or if the parent(s) had died and there is no other care for the child. So that’s why this gives other couples who cannot have kids, the opportunity to promise themselves to be a great parent to a child in need. Though there are some bad things about adoption as well. Like adopting a child from another country of another race, because once that child is adopted into an American family, he or she will be cut off from their culture and never know about their

The case is about a couple living in Virginia, Mildred Loving, a black woman and Richard Loving, a white man. Mildred got pregnant when 18 years old in Washington D.C. hence avoided

Although these children were put up for adoption their families didn’t want them to lose their Indian culture or privileges. In 1978, The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) and the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) were established. Weiser (2015) stated,” ICWA addressed the widespread practice of transferring the care and custody of Indian children to non-Indians. It recognized the authority of tribal courts to hear the adoption and guardianship cases of Indian children and established a strict set of statutory guidelines for those cases heard in state court.” (Weiser, 2015, p. 6) ICWA made it easy for Indians to be able to discover information about their ancestors and find their biological parents. This Act also created an environment that doesn’t allow growth. Even though these children are raised close to home, ICWA doesn’t allow them to grow and experience the world off of a reservation. Some parents wanted to give their child up for adoption to offer them a better opportunity but ICWA doesn’t allow these children to go very far from the environment they were born into. Most reservations are in poverty and if someone was to try to leave his or her tribe behind they would be shamed. Weiser (2015) continued, “The American Indian Religious Freedom Act promised to "protect and preserve for American Indians their

In this article, “Doing What’s Best for the Tribe”, author Marcia Zug, an associateof law at the University of South Carolina. Describes a court case that involves a Cherokee Nation father and a non-indian mother. Few months into the the mother's pregnancy, she began to look into adoption. The mother soon found a non- indian family and decided to go through with the adoption without the father knowing. The father had no information until after baby Veronica was four months old. Dustin Bowen, the father was determined to fight for his daughter. After two years in the South Carolina Supreme Court finally made their ruling. On July 26, baby Veronica was reunited with her

There was a court case, Baby Girl v. Adoptive Couple, in which a child who was partially Cherokee Indian, because of her father, and Hispanic, because of her mother. The adoption of Baby Girl was a difficult one due to the fact that she has an ancestry of Cherokee Indian. Therefore, under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), the adoption of Baby Girl seemed impossible because Biological Father had the right to have custody of his child, Baby Girl, if he chose to. So, the court greatly sees that by giving Baby Girl back to Biological Father would be in the child’s best interest under the ICWA, because there is the assumption that if she is with her Biological Father and her culture, she will not suffer any type of emotional distress. For

Adoption is a big decision for birthparents (and adoptive parents). There are so many factors to consider when putting a child up for adoption and also when adopting a child. A majority of the time the birth father isn¡¯t even considered in the decision. Birthparents often begin to second guess their decision of adoption usually after the birth of their child. They get attached instantly and don¡¯t want to give the child up. There are lots of pros and cons and some people don¡¯t even consider when they make comments about adoptive parents and children and open adoption.

While this time may be difficult time for the family who wants to be the adoptive parent or parents to that child, it allows the mother the crucial time she to reflect on her situation and make the right decision for her and the baby she is carrying.

Statistics show that the vast majority of independent adoptions in California are completed without a hitch; less that 2 percent are even contested. But when an adoption is contested, the anguish felt by both the adoptive and birth parents is unimaginable. Linda Ribordy, a family specialist who represented a birth mother in a legal case says that “if a birth mother changes her mind, it’s automatic that they get the baby back.” But the adopting parents feel furiously and emotionally different. “We have no legal status, no legal rights, none,” says Inger Bischofberger. “But he calls me Mama. The only thing that keeps me going is that I can’t turn my back on him, I can’t just walk away from him because all the grownups in his life have messed up.”

The carrier, and the biological parents have to come to an understanding that the carrier must be aware that once the child is born they no longer have any type of custody of that child. The carrier must understand and agree that after giving birth to the child, the have absolutely no relationship/contact with the child. The