Fathers
Deserve Proper Notification of Their Child's Pending Adoption
August 22, 2002
A
new Florida statute requires that mothers who seek to put their children
up for adoption must first make a substantial effort to notify their children's
fathers. To those who believe that fathers should have the right to be
an integral part of their children's lives, this is a reasonable law.
Yet to the National Organization for Women it is an "outrage." And to
Jeanne Tate, executive vice president of the Florida Association of Adoption
Professionals, the statute's requirements are "horrible," "degrading,"
and "reminiscent of The Scarlet Letter."
What is truly an outrage is NOW's and the FAAP's lack of consideration
for fathers and children. Agonizing and emotional custody battles between
biological and adoptive parents--like those in the well-publicized Baby
Richard and Baby Jessica cases--demonstrate the need for an effective
notification system which can prevent children from being adopted against
their biological fathers' wishes.
Although previous laws required birth mothers to place notices in local
newspapers concerning pending adoptions, the new statute, enacted last
year, requires that these notices be more detailed and comprehensive.
Now a mother who is seeking to put her child up for adoption and who is
not in contact with the child's father must, as a last resort, attempt
to notify the father by placing a notice in an appropriate newspaper.
The notice must contain the age, race, hair and eye color, and approximate
height and weight of the child's mother and also of "any person the mother
reasonably believes may be the father."
NOW, the FAAP, and other opponents of the new statute argue that its notification
requirements can be humiliating for women who have had multiple sex partners
and who are unsure of the identity of the father. While this is a legitimate
complaint, it is unreasonable to suggest that a birth mother's embarrassment
is more important than a father's right to raise his child.
In addition, depriving a child of knowledge of his parentage can have
damaging medical and emotional implications. For example, for children
facing life-threatening illnesses such as cancers requiring bone-marrow
transplants or other medical emergencies, knowing their biological heritage
can be a matter of life or death. Also, many adopted children, no matter
how much they may love their adoptive parents, will one day want to seek
out their biological parents.
The statute's opponents also argue that a woman who has been raped should
not have to give notification that she is giving the child up for adoption.
This is a valid concern but one which has already been addressed by the
Palm Beach County circuit court. In May, the court issued a ruling
which declared that the statute's notification requirements are an unconstitutional
invasion of privacy for women who became pregnant as a result of sexual
assault.
The underlying assumption made by the opponents of the notification statute
is that men do not want their children. While some parents (both male
and female) are irresponsible, often the problem in adoptions is not that
unwed biological fathers do not care about their children, but that they
do not know of their existence.
In fact, many unwed fathers struggle desperately to remain a part of their
children's lives. They are often thwarted by mothers who find them inconvenient,
and family court systems and policies which do little to enforce their
right to be a meaningful part of their children's lives.
Detailed notices in newspapers are a reasonable (although imperfect) solution
to the father notification problem. A better alternative is for
the state to allow women to use its Parent Locator System--the system
used to track down parents who owe child support. State systems are tied
into the Federal Parent Locator System, and they are often remarkably
effective at finding parents where other agencies fail.
The locator system would help women find their children's fathers and
thus reduce the need for the public notices in newspapers. Since this
system is routinely used to track down fathers who owe child support,
why can't it be used to unite fathers and their children?