Talk:Adoption/Hmmm
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hmmm
I'm not sure that this knows what it want to do. If it is intended to be a statement and explanation of laws, then it is dangerously inaccurate. If it is intended as an examination of the social and cultural contexts within which adoptions take place, then it is highly selective and not a little judgmental. I would propose that the two aspects be separated. A brief statement of the laws of particular states and the international regulation of transnational adoptions would be one page. Then taking the role of the state as parens patriae, an examination of how and why a state should become involved in adjusting parental relationships could be a second page. I would be prepared to rough out material for others to work on if the view of the editorial staff is that this page should be rebuilt from the ground up.
Davod91
-
- I am in favor of most of the changes you proposed. I am probably responsible for the preachiness, so if it can be made more NPOV and universal, I would wholeheartedly approve.
-
- Perhaps we need a very general Adoption page with links to adoption in various cultures. However, I don't think we're going to have much luck condensing international regulation of transnational adoption into one article or section. Each set of countries has different laws, so the web of relationships is astoundingly huge. Add to that individual agency regulations, state and local government laws, regulations of different agencies of various national governments etcetera, etcetera, ad nauseum.. Danlovejoy 05:22, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
I removed the following from the intro section - it smacks of opinion, and the actual external reference refutes the statement: An underreported fact is that open adoptions are not legally enforceable agreements in many jurisdictions[1]. I.e., an open adoption may be closed at any time for any reason.
Chrisa 20:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- How so? The external reference shows (as of '03) that only 22 of 50 U.S. states have made any reference to post-adoption contact in statute, which is a minority; and goes on to say "In most other States, the statutes are silent about the issue of post-adoption contact. Approximately eight other States do address the issue, but do not provide for enforceable agreements. For example, Alaska's statute merely states that contact agreements are not prohibited. Nevada allows visitation to any person who had established a legal right to visit the child prior to the adoption.
-
- Maryland allows agreements that have the mutual consent of both the birth and adoptive parents, but has no provision for enforcement. North Carolina also permits agreements by mutual consent, but specifies that they are not enforceable and failure to comply is not grounds to invalidate consent to the adoption. Ohio and South Carolina specifically state that mutual agreements for contact are non-binding and non-enforceable. Missouri and Tennessee leave decisions about contact and visitation with birth relatives to the sole discretion of the adoptive parents." Bastun 01:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
