I know this has been talked about over and over again on other threads but I thought maybe others can read this and chime in and clarify...
Very recently my husband and I began going through the adoption process for DH to adopt my son (who he has been raising since he was a baby). I have a court order for child support from the birth dad but
nothing in regards to custody or visitation or termination of birth dad's parental rights.
We paid a hefty fee to meet with one of the (allegedly) best family lawyers in MN and we were told (I'm paraphrasing here) that our state automatically grants/favors birth mothers sole physical custody until the court establishes otherwise. Now I'm sure I'm off on the wording but the message was the same. I asked over and over again to clarify cause this was a big deal to me!
Meaning that, even if birth dad would not consent to my husband adopting our son and we lost our case, and birth dad's rights were not terminated - I have
no legal obligation to allow birth dad to see my son. Not until birth dad takes me to court and an order is established regarding visitation/custody.
Maybe this is a little different than what has been discussed here on the forum, as far as always allowing a parent to access their child unless a court order says otherwise.. but it sounds to me that legally, birth moms may have rights (depending on your state) to restrict the birth dad from accessing the child without a court order. Maybe I'm totally wrong here. Maybe there are other factors the lawyer didn't mention. Just how the two pieces seem to fit together to me.
I'm not saying it's necessarily right. I'll see if the lawyer we ended up hiring can give input on this.
On another note..
I
totally understand providers not wanting to get in the middle. It can be ugly and crazy.
I don't blame you.
For me though, it made a world of a difference having a provider who was willing to call me if birth dad were to have shown up. Birth dad was unpredictable (on methamphetamine), had a criminal history, and hadn't seen my son in almost a year by the time he started care. Legally speaking, his rights were not terminated. It's very difficult to terminate parental rights without having a suitable parent willing to take their place, so I was not in a very good position to get that ball rolling at that time. It ended up never being an issue. But if he had ever shown up to get my son, it could have been bad. Court orders take time, money, and are
not easy. Our legal system is not perfect. (I could get really deep here - you may say well, not my fault, shoulda known better who to procreate with. Yes, I should have. I was young and naive. He wasn't on meth at the time but he wasn't a good person either. But my son's safety shouldn't be jeopardized b/c of a past mistake I made. I can't predict what other people may do.)
I want to say she may have even agreed to
not release my son to birth dad, which would line up with what the lawyer told me a few months ago.
Before everyone jumps on her for doing something illegal, I'm not
100% sure she said that... but I do seem to recall a convo with her and her bf in which we were discussing these laws in MN and how they do favor birth moms right off the bat...
Plus, the preschool my son is at immediately put birth dad on a 'do not release' list when we told them we were initiating a case for adoption and we weren't sure how birth dad may react. This was without a court order establishing any custody, termination of rights, visitation, etc.
I respect a provider's decision to stay out of things and acknowledge there are
very good reasons for it. But, if you are a provider willing to do what mine did, it makes a
huge difference to some parents!
Anways, whew! Sorry for such a long post! Just some food for thought
