Would you support an adoptee's right to dissolve their legal adoptive contract at age 18 if ...?

Yes. I have seen a few adoptees "dissolve" their adoptions and were adopted back (through adult adoption) by their first parents.

I would do it if I had been abused by my adoptive parents, or if I had found out my adoptive parents coerced my first Mother, or if I was a late discovery adoptee.

It would serve the adult adoptee...they would be taking back the power which was stripped from them and their first parents. I feel this should be an option even if the adoptee was NOT abused.

I think it should be an option for every adoptee, even if they are underage. There are no advocates for adoptees once their adoptions are finalized, and adoptees ARE abused by adoptive parents, just as bio kids are abused by bio parents.

I personally do not feel the need to do it, but I feel it should be an option for adoptees.

1

This is the dilemma that children are put in when surrendered by their parents and then parented by adoptive parents. They then have "two" sets of parents and have divided loyalty. It is unfair but it is what it is. So it is so hard for a child, no matter what age, to be completely honest with either parent. When asked by a birth mom do you hate me? They say no but may actually have hate in their hearts. When asked by an adoptive parent do you want to search, they may say no but they might really be curious. This is the permanent division that some adoptees feel, but not all. This was created by being surrendered by the person that all of society says would protect and care for us above all others. Then we have to make some kind of sense out of this when there are few examples of how to do this. Examples of total protection and fierce love are around us. But how do we justify being given up? That is tough and takes a pretty stable, healthy, giving and mature mind and heart. Not everyone in life has that. Therefore, some of us lie, some of us struggle, and some of us find ways to heal.

Once a child reaches majority or emancipation, the parents (adoptive or natural) are no longer legally responsible for the individual. The child takes the parent's name and has some rights of inheritance. To repudiate and adoption, the individual simply has to reject these "artifacts" of the adoption.

I've seen more than one step-parent adoption repudiated by a child reaching majority. They simply change their name back to their original surname, often as a protest against the mother & step-father's unilateral decision that the child's paternal relationship should be determined by the mother's marital/sexual relationship.

Dissolution is not a right while the child is a minor, but occurs when the adoption fails. Who determines what constitutes a failed adoption is another discussion entirely. I believe you are quoting statistics on disruption, which occurs when the adopting family backs out before the the adoption is legally finalized.

Sometimes, letting go seems like the easiest thing to do. But think about this: you've invested so much of your time and energy into another person; you've made a solemn promise; and you still know there's love, even if it's hiding underneath the surface. This website will show you how to save a marriage and avoid divorce, even if you're the only one trying https://tr.im/Dl94N

Absolutely I would be supportive to any adoptee wishing this as they were not party to this monumental decision that was made for them in the first place without any input from them. Essentially when an adoption order is made, like Randy pointed out, they don't get to sign anything, they don't have any say in the matter which is really a direct violation of their rights as human beings so it should be totally up to them when they become adults as to what they want to do with it.

Adoption violates both the United Nations Charter of Human Rights AND the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

In Muslim countries, an adoptee keeps his/her name, religious heritage (even if not Islam), family connections, and rights of inheritance from the biological family. The emphasis for adoptive parents is on caring for a child who needs it, not pretending the child is "theirs."

In the US, an adoptee loses these basic human rights (and others) as a matter of course, never to be regained.

So yes, when an adoptee reaches adulthood and is finally allowed to sign contracts, s/he should have the right to dissolve the contract that took all those rights away, if so desired.

yes, I would support this legal position.

I believe that non-adopted people can "disown" relatives. A young boy, Gregory Kingsley(sp?) legally "divorced" his bio-mother and got himself adopted. This set a precedent in law, and some other children did it, too.

I think that bio-relatives can disown relatives, and become "un-related." but, I don't know if this can be done without having someone else adopt them.

Adopted people have genuine legal concerns. One is that of inheritance. If the adopted person dies, adoptive relatives can claim inheritance rights of the adopted person's estate. The other concern is regarding their children. Adoptive relatives have a legal connection to the children of the adopted person. If the adopted person should pass away, the adoptive relatives may try to gain custody, or they may try to influence decisions that are made in the children's lives.

ETA: when mothers surrendered their parental rights, during the 'baby scoop era" their children became wards of the state in agency custody before they were adopted. At that point, the children retained their original names and birth certificates. They were not legally members of their mothers' families anymore(even though in most cases their mothers wanted them very much).But their legal birth identity was still intact.......unless and until they were adopted.

Sometimes that took many months, or even years.

In some cases, some children were never adopted, and they remained in agency foster care until adulthood and retained their OBC and birth names.

This still happens today. The only difference, is that usually the procedure happens as a result of CPS termination rather than coerced "voluntary surrenders" by unmarried mothers.

These children age out of the system, un-related to a family, legally.

I do support that right. I admit that it would be difficult for me if my children chose to do that, but ultimately I believe it should be their choice when they become adults. I would rather deal with something difficult on my own end, than forcibly keep someone I loved in a relationship they felt was hurting them.

My belief has nothing to do with what adoptive parents can or can't do, because I don't buy the premise that one group's rights should be dependent on another group's rights. I believe that because adult adoptees should have full rights on their own terms as citizens to decide who they will associate with, including the right to overturn legal decisions made for them as minors which they had no say in. The rights of adults shouldn't be in any way dependent on their parents.

I think making it possible would be quite easy, since it's not creating a new legal state but reverting to a previous one. It should just be a matter of filing paperwork.

The first thing you must know is if you want to save your marriage and if you find yourself alone in this desire, waiting for the other spouse to make the first move is the beginning of the end. Learn here https://tr.im/NojIi

If you are looking for someone to blame or someone else to put the emotional and physical work into saving the marriage, again, it's going to fail.