I am the birth mother of a 41-year-old son, whom I relinquished three months prior to his fifth birthday. There are many parallels between domestic custody suits and the circumstances surrounding the relinquishment of an older child to foster care and/or adoption. In our case, there was a prior relationship with the adoptive family, going back to my son’s toddler years. This family was granted foster-parent status when, shortly before his fourth birthday, it became evident that I was in need of help; he was taken from our home, I was formally charged with neglect. Social & Rehabilitation Services (SRS) was involved; I was receiving financial and housing assistance at the time. He remained in their care for seven months, during which time court hearings were postponed three times. This, combined with infrequent, hour-long supervised visits, wore me down. I simply did not know enough about the legal system, nor did I have the confidence in myself, to fight for my son’s custody, although I very much wanted to keep him. At the very least, I wanted to continue to be involved in my son’s life, should we lose the case. However, I walked into my attorney’s office, a few days before the next hearing was scheduled, and I signed the adoption papers. I was overwhelmed by the lack of support from those who had been close friends at the time, I was confused by the legal proceedings, and I felt I could not win. Custody was permanently severed. A verbal agreement, not carried out, was made with the adoptive family to continue having contact with my son.

At the time, we did have an excellent Guardian Ad Litem, but there were no programs providing support to parents, nor did CASA (a Kansas program), exist at the time. Family preservation was not a “movement” or philosophy with Social Services. The press was toward complete severance and closed adoption, regardless of a parent’s love for their child, regardless of potential for development of a healthy parent-child relationship with appropriate assistance.

As it turned out, there were unforeseen problems with this adoption, of which I was unaware for many years. Perhaps due in part to the adoptive mother’s connections with the legal system (she was a secretary in the local District Court) and cancellation of what might have been the final hearing, the family was not thoroughly scrutinized as to their suitability as adoptive parents. It was not a good situation for my son, especially because of strong attachment to the adoptive father, whose alcoholism went undetected prior to the adoption. I learned of these facts from my son, who, shortly before his sixteenth birthday, found my contact information, and he requested a visit. Both the adoptive family and I were residing in our mutual hometown at that time. The adoption proceedings had also taken place there. Therefore, it was easy to contact me.

In summary, had proper care been taken to look into this family’s reasons for wanting to adopt my son, and their suitability as potential parents, and had I understood what was happening regarding my legal defense, the outcomes for both my son and I could have been much different, and more positive. Instead, the ongoing resistance on the part of the adoptive family to my son’s desire to re-establish contact with me, resulted in much pain for everyone, and fissures in the relationships between all members of our “triad,” which continue to this day.