It is my understanding that many women who give birth, and give their children up to adoption through an agency use the U.S.'s welfare programs (WIC, Medicare) to feed and deliver their children. I'm guessing this adds up to several thousand dollars.
So here's what I don't understand, or maybe just have a moral issue with? Shouldn't either the AGENCY or the APs (after the adoption is finalized) have to RE-PAY the government? Why should the rest of us taxpayers foot the bill for these agencies/attorneys or the "better equipped" adopters? And the adopters get to 'write off' this new kid for 10K, no? Bio mother of child gets nada, right?
Are the rest of us subsidizing infant adoption?
2010-03-09T20:19:21Z
MK: At the time I took out loans from the government for college I was a student, when I became a graduate, I had to pay back the loans. Maybe the APs ought to pay back the benefit when they become that child's "parents".
I wonder how much th federal govt. has invested in infant adoption over the last couple decades...
Wellspring2010-03-10T03:18:05Z
Favorite Answer
The adoption industry uses medicare
1.) as a selling point to make adopting less expensive - when they advise pap's to look for an expectant mother who has their own medical insurance, is on medicare or is living at home.
2.) as an essential part of facilitators, referral services, agencies, and lawyers adoption procedures - they get expectant mothers to sign onto Medicaid and guide them through it's application process, so they are either making adopting less expensive or
3.) they are also charging pap's full cost of medical expenses (known as "double dipping") If it's a closed adoption who can question it?
The adoption tax credit is also applicable for pap's when mothers change their minds.
First of all...thank you for thinking of adoption vs abortion. I was adopted at 2 months old. I have since met my biological family. I will say that it was the biggest and most wondeful blessing of my life to have been given up for adoption. As a child I didn't understand as much, but as an adult - I realize the impact my bio-mom had on my life. I ended up with the MOST AMAZING parents and life. I am so grateful. There is always a choice. Adoption is absolutely a wonderful one. People want babies so badly who can't have them and this is a way.
1) Tax write-offs for adoption expenses is disgusting. Just...disgusting. One of my major pet peeves.
2) And I actually agree with you. If an adoptive parent/couple engages in pre-birth matching, they should be on the hook for all medical expenses incurred. I know this won't be a popular answer, but as far as I'm concerned, if AP's are audacious enough to assume ownership of someone's child while she is still pregnant, they can pay for the delivery...It's "their" baby, right? The only downside to this is the obvious coercion issues...If AP's are paying medical expenses, it's one more way in which a mother may feel obligated to hand over her baby. Maybe it's a blessing in disguise that taxpayers are paying it...It might safeguard against a mother feeling beholden because the P/APs are paying her medical bills. Or maybe "repayment" is the way to go. That way, if the expectant mother keeps her child, medicaid covers it and no one can lean on the mother to give away her baby.
You are right, Sunny. Not all APs who adopt via a private agency pay for things for first parents. They paid not a dime for my rent, medical care, food, etc. I had a job (without medical benefits) and paid for my home, food, bills etc. (and paying taxes) so medicaid covered pre-natal, L & D and post natal for both me and my son.
The APs did not reimburse the state but they did give the agency over $30,000 in fees. None of those fees paid for anything for me or my son. The APs even stayed WITH ME during the last several weeks of the pregnancy instead of a hotel so they could be at the delivery. All I got were broken promises.
ETA: I would be interested to know too. Unfortunately, there would be no way to find out as the US doesn't really keep records for/about adoption statistics.
ETA2: Kari, would you rather these women NOT get prenatal care and deliver children at home without assistance? Or should all pregnant women who's employers do not assist with health insurance just have abortions? You make it sound like these women are turning down private insurance and "choosing" to receive state assistance. Do you know of some other option that the rest of us don't know about?
ETA3: So who should pay for pre/post natal care?
ETA4: Then why should anyone pay for pre/post natal care?
I never understood getting money back for adopting a child. That is way beyond my comprehension.
However, I do not think AP's should pay back the US gov't. The pregnancy wasn't created at the behest of AP's. I'm not saying they didn't benefit. I'm saying they came along AFTER the pregnancy was carried through to birth. And sorry...but eventually, a choice is made. I don't even pretend the bio mom is any kind of winner in this scenario. But other than free counselling for the long term...what else should she get? Money? I believe that's called buying a child. Just because she would get "nada" doesn't mean the AP's should be made to pay back what the bio mom chose to use as resources.
I still reject the idea of AP's being able to claim a write off. That just smells bad to me.
As for "footing the bill" and "subsidizing infant adoptions", I suppose someone could look at it that way. Or, if one chooses to look at it another way: It's a hand up to women who may have chosen adoption believing their financial situation made they unable to parent. If they get support during pregnancy, it helps them and their child stay healthy.
And perhaps they would be more likely to turn to these resources in the future BEFORE considering adoption...thereby making them more likely to keep their children. Perhaps in the end, it's one way to subsidize family preservation.
Whether you meant it or not, I read your question as slamming bio parents for accessing resources available to them. I get you want AP's to pay in more ways than one but the bill is not being incurred by the agencies or AP's, it's triggered by one thing. The pregnancy. And a safe and healthy mom and baby is worth a few thousand bucks.