In 1994, the Uniform Law Commissioners promulgated the Uniform Adoption
Act (1994) (UAA). It replaces two earlier efforts to promote uniformity
of adoption law, an original Uniform Adoption Act of 1953, and an amended
version of this original act in 1969. Both of these acts were declared
obsolete prior to the work on the Uniform Adoption Act (1994), and had
not been actively promoted in the states for some years preceding 1994.
The Uniform Adoption Act (1994), although a technical revision of these
earlier efforts, must be regarded as an entirely new act. It is a far
more comprehensive and complete effort than the earlier acts were. It
is the result of five years of intensive drafting work. The first draft
was prepared in 1989.
Adoption law is essentially procedural law designed to accomplish one
thing. An adoption proceeding ends an initial legally-recognized (and
enforceable) parent-child relationship and replaces it with an entirely
new legal parent-child relationship. In the law, with the exception of
step-child adoptions, the new parent-child relationship attaches to the
adoptive parents and child as if the child were born of the adoptive parents.
The former relationship (in most jurisdictions) is treated as if it had
never existed.
That bare description of what happens in an adoption proceeding, however,
does not begin to communicate the com-plexity of the action and the difficult
policy decisions that must be made in the course of drafting a comprehensive
act. In adoption law, we invade and challenge the core concept of the
nuclear family about as deeply as it is possible to do so. Drafters must
confront the issues of the rights of both birth parents and adoptive parents,
of the best interests of children, and of the needs of society in working
on a uniform act pertaining to the subject. These issues are the core
substance of "family" as we view it. Drafting decisions are
not easy. Opinions on all constituent issues are not uniform. Passions
run high on some of them. Balancing rights and interests is, at best,
uneasily accomplished.
The Uniform Adoption Act (1994) reflects these facts. It has stretched
its drafters' collective judgment to the absolute limits. It contains
many studied compromises in the effort to be as fair as possible to all
parties, but there are no illusions about the satisfaction that the Uniform
Adoption Act (1994) will provide to many people with committed interest
in adoption issues.
Scope of Act
The fundamental adoption proceeding takes place in a court of law, but
some of the procedures may be described as administrative or quasi-administrative
in character. The initial proceeding involves obtaining the consent of
the birth parents to place their child for adoption in a direct placement
action, or relinquishing it to a qualified agency, if the adoption is
to be an agency adoption. This is not necessarily a judicial procedure,
though it can be. UAA contains a procedure for a pre-placement evaluation
of the qualifications of the prospective adoptive parents. It is not a
judicial proceeding.
The adoption proceeding in a court of law can include a proceeding to
terminate the rights of a birth parent who has not consented to the placement
for adoption or who has not relinquished the child to an agency. A termination
proceeding is an adversarial, fault proceeding in court directed against
the non-consenting or non-relinquishing parent. Within the adoption proceeding,
there is also a mini-proceeding to identify any unknown father, or if
that is not possible, to publicly notify an unknown father of the adoption
proceeding.
UAA provides somewhat separate court proceedings for the special cases
of step-parent adoption and adult adoption. And beyond the specific proceedings
for the adoption itself, are further provisions for the retention of adoption
records, for maintaining their confidentiality, and procedures for obtaining
non-identifying information from those records, for obtaining a protected
party's consent to open adoption records, and for petitioning an applicable
court for opening adoption records that otherwise remain sealed. These
procedures are all court procedures.
There are provisions and procedures for establishing and maintaining a
registry in which birth parents, adult adopted children, adopted siblings,
and adoptive parents may register their consent for disclosure of identity
to the other parties otherwise unavailable in the sealed records. The
registry is an administrative activity.
Last, but not least, the Uniform Act regulates fees that may be charged
for adoption services offered by professionals, and it provides penalties
for violations of its provisions.
The bare bones of the act have been, at this point, described. No short
summary can do justice to the whole of the issues resolved in the Uniform
Act. It shall be the effort in the rest of this summary to discuss the
major issues and their resolution and then, finally, to discuss step-parent
and adult adoptions. The three major issues are: direct placement of children
versus agency placement; birth parents' rights; and confidentiality of
records.
Direct and Agency Placement of Children for Adoption
A direct placement adoption occurs when birth parents directly place
a child with adoptive parents for adoption. Most such adoptions take place
through private agents, frequently attorneys, who find children available
for placement and who arrange the placement and adoption between the birth
parents and the adoptive parents. In existing law, most of the states
permit direct placement adoptions, and most of those allow direct placement
adoptions to occur as an alternative to agency placement adoptions.
A few states permit only agency placement adoptions. These adoptions occur
when birth parents relinquish a child to an agency, which then places
the child for adoption and consents to the adoption. The agency steps
into the shoes of the birth parents upon relinquishment to the agency.
State governmental agencies may conduct agency adoptions, but many are
handled by non-profit agencies that are licensed and regulated by the
states in which they operate.
Direct placement adoptions are widely criticized as commercialization
of adoption, as subject to price gouging as a result of that commercialization,
as subjecting the best interests of the child to the profit motive, and
as being the most error-prone mode of adoption. A substantial number of
proponents for agency placement adoptions actively oppose any direct placement
adoptions.
However, the bulk of the states have clearly continued direct placement
adoptions in the face of criticism. For all of the criticism there are
too many very successful direct placement adoptions and qualified professionals
to assist such adoptions. Agency placement adoptions also have their critics.
The agency system is often seen as a bureaucratic impediment to placing
children for adoption, as sometimes engaging in discriminatory practices,
and as, generally, not serving the best interests of children as a result.
It is also not necessarily a cheaper alternative to direct placement adoptions.
The Uniform Act continues both direct and agency placement adoptions.
It attempts to reduce the perceived abuses of both forms. For example,
adoptive parents must have a pre-placement evaluation by an independent
professional before becoming eligible to adopt a child. This requirement
applies to both direct and agency placement adoptions, but operates as
a particular safeguard for direct placement adoptions. In the bulk of
the states, direct placement adoptions occur without such evaluations.
The specific procedures for obtaining the consent of the birth parents
in the Uniform Act also constitute one of the major safeguards for direct
placement adoptions. By requiring a procedure before an independent tribunal,
in which the birth parents sign a document of consent and which assures
full disclosure of the effect of adoption, the rights of birth parents
are better protected and the prospect for error in handling birth parents'
rights is considerably diminished. The consent procedure also encourages
the identification of unknown fathers. If direct placement adoptions are
more error prone, these are the kinds of safeguards, or checks and balances,
that eliminate opportunity for error.
The Uniform Act requires up-front disclosure of fees and costs that adoptive
parents will have to bear. The court must scrutinize the fees paid as
part of the adoption proceeding, and UAA quite clearly spells out what
the adoptive parent is allowed to pay for. Fees for professional services
are included, as are certain expenses of the birth parent. A child may
not be purchased by a direct payment of money to anyone. Coupled with
the judicial approval of costs, these provisions help to foreclose fee
gouging in direct placement adoptions.
The Uniform Act provides safeguards that should eliminate the problems
of direct placement adoptions. At the same time, adoption of the Uniform
Act should streamline the bureaucratic process in most states. It should
eliminate the differences between state agencies that delay interstate
agency placements under the Interstate Compact for Placement of Children.
The Uniform Act approach is to improve the two sides of the adoption equation,
not to eliminate one of them.
Birth Parents' Rights
Birth parents' rights are the second major issue governed in the Uniform
Act. Birth parents have legal obligations toward their children and have
a right to their custody at birth. Biological fathers are legally obligated
to support their children and have rights with respect to the custody
and control of them, unless adjudicated otherwise, even though they are
not married to the mothers of these children. Adoption of children by
other persons requires that these rights be properly ended so that new
rights and obligations can be assigned to the adoptive parents. If these
rights are not properly ended, there can be serious conflict between birth
parents and prospective adoptive parents.
The consent and relinquishment procedure is the first part of protecting
birth parents' rights. The consent or relinquishment must be in a signed
writing which recites that the birth parent understands the nature and
effect of his or her consent. Full disclosure of the nature and effect
of the consent or relinquishment to the birth parent becomes essential
to effective consent. Among the disclosures that must be made is that
the birth parent is entitled to advice of an independent attorney.
The procedure itself requires an examination of the birth parents by an
independent tribunal. It may be a judge in a court of law, an attorney
who does not represent either party in the adoption proceeding, a magistrate
appointed specifically by the court for the purpose, or, for military
personnel, a military officer. The options permit flexibility for facilitation
of the procedure, but guarantee the scrutiny and examination by an objective
third party with professional and\or official status to assure that informed
consent or relinquishment actually occurs.
A consent or relinquishment for placement of a newborn infant is not effective
until the child is born and may be rescinded without any reason within
192 hours after it is born. This extends the birth parents' capacity to
consider and reconsider the decision to place the infant for adoption
for a substantial period of time before the decision is final. For children
who are not newborn infants, the consent or relinquishment is effective
immediately upon execution.
The petitioner in an adoption proceeding must provide the court with the
names of those whose consent or relinquishment of the child has been obtained,
and "the name or relationship to the minor of any individual whose
consent or relinquishment may be required, but whose parental relationship
has not been terminated, and any fact or circumstance that may excuse
lack of consent..." Notice of an adoption proceeding must go to any
person whose consent or relinquishment is necessary, but also to "an
individual whom the petitioner knows is claiming to be or who is named
as the father or possible father of the minor adoptee and whose paternity
of the minor has not been judicially determined..." The court has
an obligation in an adoption proceeding either to identify an unknown
father that the court learns may be involved in the adoption proceeding,
or to provide notice of the proceeding if identity cannot be determined.
These requirements are designed to assure that birth parents are identified
and that they are given fair opportunity to enter the adoption proceeding
in the event they desire to contest it.
The converse problem of birth parents' rights is speedy adjudication so
that an adoption, once concluded, cannot be upset, and provisions for
termination of parental rights that allow a court to consider a particular
version of best interests of the child in the adjudication of a termination.
Generally, it is not difficult to identify the birth mother of a child
that is placed for adoption. The birth mother makes the initial decision
to place her child for adoption in the large majority of cases. The determination
of the father is the problem, if there is to be a problem. Unknown fathers,
those who the birth mother simply cannot name, or thwarted fathers, those
whose identify does not become known for some reason before the placement
of a child, are the more difficult cases. The Uniform Act strives to protect
the legitimate rights of birth fathers, but in those instances in which
protection of those rights conflicts with the best interests of a child,
the balance in the Uniform Act swings to the side of the child. It is
possible under the Uniform Act to terminate a thwarted birth father's
rights in favor of the adoptive parents if not terminating them would
be detrimental to the child.
It is not fully clear that the consent or relinquishment of all fathers
is necessary for an effective placement. The developing case law does
not provide complete guidance. The Uniform Adoption Act (1994) requires
consent or relinquishment only from fathers who have a specific parenting
relationship with the child. The kind of relationship that would give
rise to a presumption of fatherhood under the Uniform Parentage Act, generally,
means a consent or relinquishment must be obtained. That forces a putative
father, who does not qualify as a presumed father, to come forward and
file to establish paternity if that father wishes to maintain any rights
with respect to the child. He has 20 days to do that after receiving notice
of the adoption proceeding. Otherwise, his rights may be summarily terminated
and he has no power to enter or thwart the adoption proceeding.
Any man who asserts a claim for paternity in an adoption proceeding, and
who has not executed a consent or relinquished the child, may still have
his parental rights terminated. A termination requires a finding of some
fault on the part of the father. Generally, the grounds in the Uniform
Adoption Act (1994) relate to de facto abandonment of or avoidance of
responsibility for the child. But even if fault cannot be proved, the
court has the option of considering termination on the basis that not
terminating his rights would be "detrimental to the child."
The fault grounds in a termination proceeding may be proved by a "preponderance
of the evidence," but to prove that rights should be terminated because
it is "detrimental to the child" requires "clear and convincing
evidence." The latter is a higher standard of proof. In addition,
the court must consider a variety of factors in its determination under
these grounds, such as "respondent's ability to care for the minor,"
"the duration and suitability of the minor's present custodial environment,"
and "the role of other persons in thwarting the respondent's efforts
to assert parental rights."
In addition, once an adoption proceeding is concluded, it is final. Rights
to appeal the decision run very quickly. The statute of limitations runs
only for six months. After that, no unknown or thwarted father can upset
the adoption, even if rights have not been terminated in the adoption
proceeding.
All these provisions are designed to balance the legitimate interests
of all parties, birth parents, children, and adoptive parents. The Uniform
Act tries to preserve legitimate birth parent's rights. On the other hand,
it tries to expedite the adoption process so that adoptions are not upset
by the untimely assertion of birth parent's rights. The balance ultimately
swings to the stability of the adoptive home for the child and the best
interest of the child. When that occurs, birth parents' rights become
secondary to that interest. Subtle and fair balance are the underlying
imperatives in all these provisions.
Confidentiality of Records
The third major issue is confidentiality of birth records. For the most
part over the last 40 years, state law has regarded the birth records,
including the original birth certificate, and the record of the adoption
proceeding as confidential. These records are normally sealed. In addition,
the names of birth and adoptive parents are kept confidential.
There has been considerable controversy over the continuance of full confidentiality.
There are advocates for completely open records, citing the rights of
adopted children to know what their birthright is. On the other hand,
there are advocates for complete confidentiality. Part of that advocacy
relates back to what adoption is -- the complete severance of the child
from the birth parents and complete recreation of a new family for the
adopted child. But the rest arises from concerns for both birth parents
and adoptive parents. Most infants put up for adoption are not born to
married women. Illegitimacy has its stigma, and many children have been
put up for adoption on the condition that the birth parents' identities
be kept secret. Adoptive parents have their concerns as well. Most people
adopt a child, not the birth family of the child. They adopt on the condition
that the birth family not know who the adoptive parents are.
Given the equities between all parties, there is no clear right or wrong
answer to the confidentiality question. Any decision to make a radical
change in current policy in most states may benefit some people who are
not now benefitted, may not make any difference at all to other persons,
and may cause real injury to others. Nobody in a position to make policy
decisions can be sure about those decisions, no matter which position
is taken.
UAA takes the position that if it is not clear what the effect of radical
change would be, then try to find a way to meet the immediate needs of
parties to the adoption process, but, otherwise try to avoid harm. The
fundamental policy of the Uniform Act is to retain confidentiality of
records and the identity of birth and adoptive parents. But under the
Uniform Act confidentiality is confidentiality with qualifications.
Parties to the adoption process may clearly volunteer to have their identities
known to the other parties. Birth parents have the clear opportunity under
the Uniform Act to choose adoptive parents. Every birth parent must be
given the opportunity to consider disclosure of identity as part of the
process for obtaining consent or relinquishment. Adoptive parents have
the option of revealing their identities from the outset. Voluntary open
adoption is clearly permitted in the Uniform Act, and waiver of confidentiality
is permitted.
If the records are confidential and identities are secret, there are still
mechanisms to obtain information. The Uniform Act provides a procedure
for obtaining non-identifying information from the confidential record.
It also allows specific health information to be provided to the court,
which then notifies the party who may benefit from that information that
it is available.
The Uniform Act calls for the creation of a registry in which birth parents,
adoptive parents, adult adoptees, and adult adopted siblings can provide
permission to reveal their identities. This is coupled with a court procedure
to obtain access to identifying information to which permission for access
has been granted.
In addition to these provisions, the Uniform Act allows a petition to
the relevant court for obtaining identifying information for which no
consent to access has been granted. This procedure is a kind of equitable
procedure, not bound by exact rules pertaining to disclosure of the information,
in which the court weighs the equities and needs of all the parties. If
it finds that there is good cause for revealing the information, a compelling
reason for its disclosure, and "the benefit to the petitioner will
be greater than the harm to any other individual of disclosing the information,"
the court has the power to disclose the confidential identifying information.
The issue of health related information is of particular concern with
respect of these provisions. One of the problems with respect to health
related information is that it is frequently not available. Older records
will not have much genetic information, with health implications, that
will be of assistance to people. It is not possible to create information
that never was available. But the Uniform Act attempts to assure that
such information will be available in adoptions in the future.
Part of the information that birth parents must provide in the adoption
proceeding is health and genetic related information about the child.
This is information that must be provided at the initiation of the proceeding,
and which becomes part of the permanent record. This means that adoptees
and adoptive parents very likely will have appropriate health related
information available to them.
Step-Parent and Adult Adoptions
There are, as noted, specific procedures for step-parent and adult adoptions
in the Uniform Act. In general, these procedures can be truncated with
respect to obtaining consents (no relinquishments are involved) and such
matters as pre-placement evaluations. The major difference between a step-parent
adoption and an adoption of a child that is a stranger to the adopted
family, is that a step-parent adoption under the Uniform Act does not
cut off all rights against the birth parent or family of the birth parent
whose parent-child relationship ends in the adoption. Thus inheritance
rights of the child do not terminate. Rights of visitation for that parent
and for grandparents are not automatically terminated.
Adult adoptions, which are those in which the adopted person is an adult,
do not require the notices or consents that are required in the adoption
of children, because an adult can consent to his or her own adoption.
Such adoptions occasionally occur for family reasons, usually to influence
inheritance.
The Uniform Act is a comprehensive act. It pulls together the whole of
adoption law in a fashion that exists in no state's current law. It should
be considered in every state in the spirit of encouraging uniformity of
law in the United States. Uniformity of law, by itself, may do more to
improve the conditions in adoption than anything else.