Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thanks to everyone for the confirmation. It's pretty clear from the adoption professionals I spoke with and American Academy of Attorneys that adoption is only for couples between 25 and 40.
Thanks to everyone for the confirmation. It's pretty clear from the adoption professionals I spoke with and American Academy of Attorneys that adoption is only for couples between 25 and 40.
That is simply not true - you have been misinformed. Singles can adopt, and so can older couples and individuals. Please re-read this thread and do additional personal research.
That is simply not true - you have been misinformed. Singles can adopt, and so can older couples and individuals. Please re-read this thread and do additional personal research.
I think there is a difference between being theoretically possible and a realistic possibility.
"Abrazo requires that adopting parents be at least 25 years of age. While Abrazo doesn’t have an upper age limit, it is our prospective birth parents who choose their child’s adoptive family and few willingly consider couples over the age of 50 for infant placements."
This opinion is held by over 40+ agencies I've spoken to. I'm was somewhat amazed that several adoption professionals actually stated they are expecting finalized non-related adoption to fall below 5,000 this year.
- Foster Adoption - I'm sure you will disagree, but foster adoption is focused on re-unification. In my small corner of the world there has not been a single non-related adoption in the last ten years. The local foster care agency has been repeatedly fined and last year the foster care director was replaced. The new director has publicly stated that adoption is seen as a failure of the foster care system.
So based upon these possibility, what would you recommend for a 53/50 year old couple with no children? They are only going to accept a child 0 to 5 years old.
I've also contacted several foster care placement agencies. They also stated they don't work with older couples because they don't believe they have long enough lifespans and older couples frequently have medical problems that prevent these couples for parenting children exposed to violence and negligence.
So again, I think what you are saying is theoretically possible, but not realistic.
I would suggest that a childless couple in their fifties is being very unrealistic to think they can easily adopt a child under the age of five.
That rather rigid age preference appears to be the main problem, in the scenario you describe. Few agencies are going to pick a couple in their fifties as adoptive parents for an infant or preschooler, unless that child is part of a sibling group with considerably older children. That does not mean that such a couple cannot adopt at all, however - they just need to consider older children or young children with special needs, and as I stated before, those "special needs" can be quite minor and treatable.
It's possible but unlikely that this couple would have a biological child under five - considering children closer in age to the biological children they might have had under other circumstances would lead to many more options and would be a much better "fit". I'd give consideration to children age seven and up, if I were in this position. Probably ten and up, really.
I am aware that most foster programs focus on family reunification, and am unsure why you had the impression I was not informed about this. I wish the focus would change to the best interests of the child.
International adoption is still quite feasible from eastern European countries, China, and elsewhere. Have they investigated Ukraine? LOTS of beautiful older kids there are yearning for families, and Ukraine is fairly flexible with parental age. Parents must be married and meet other requirements (financial, health, etc), but otherwise - their ages would not be a barrier at all for this couple if they would consider children over the age of five.
Children who are adopted from the orphanage system usually are young for their ages, which might be a bonus. Given proper care, the children will usually make up time fast, of course.
There are also hosting programs from Ukraine and other countries, in which school age orphaned kids are hosted by carefully screened and prepared families for four to six week periods. There's no guarantee that a hosted child will be adopted, but it allows the child to get some caring individual attention, have minor health problems treated (dentist, glasses), and offers wonderful enrichment and an experience never to be forgotten.
It's not uncommon for adoptions of hosted kids to occur, sometimes by acquaintances of hosting families as well as the hosting families, or for hosts to stay in touch with the children after they return to their home country if they cannot see adoption as realistic.
Is this couple acquainted with any other adoptive families? I would urge them to make an effort to connect with other families and ask questions, and to read and learn as much as they can about adoption.
Did this couple look at the Reece's Rainbow website? Hundreds of children of various ages from a variety of countries are listed there...RR has brought over 1,900 children home to loving families during the eleven or twelve years it's been around. And many of the parents of those families are over fifty.
I would suggest that a childless couple in their fifties is being very unrealistic to think they can easily adopt a child under the age of five.
That rather rigid age preference appears to be the main problem, in the scenario you describe. Few agencies are going to pick a couple in their fifties as adoptive parents for an infant or preschooler, unless that child is part of a sibling group with considerably older children. That does not mean that such a couple cannot adopt at all, however - they just need to consider older children or young children with special needs, and as I stated before, those "special needs" can be quite minor and treatable.
It's possible but unlikely that this couple would have a biological child under five - considering children closer in age to the biological children they might have had under other circumstances would lead to many more options and would be a much better "fit". I'd give consideration to children age seven and up, if I were in this position. Probably ten and up, really.
I am aware that most foster programs focus on family reunification, and am unsure why you had the impression I was not informed about this. I wish the focus would change to the best interests of the child.
International adoption is still quite feasible from eastern European countries, China, and elsewhere. Have they investigated Ukraine? LOTS of beautiful older kids there are yearning for families, and Ukraine is fairly flexible with parental age. Parents must be married and meet other requirements (financial, health, etc), but otherwise - their ages would not be a barrier at all for this couple if they would consider children over the age of five.
Children who are adopted from the orphanage system usually are young for their ages, which might be a bonus. Given proper care, the children will usually make up time fast, of course.
There are also hosting programs from Ukraine and other countries, in which school age orphaned kids are hosted by carefully screened and prepared families for four to six week periods. There's no guarantee that a hosted child will be adopted, but it allows the child to get some caring individual attention, have minor health problems treated (dentist, glasses), and offers wonderful enrichment and an experience never to be forgotten.
It's not uncommon for adoptions of hosted kids to occur, sometimes by acquaintances of hosting families as well as the hosting families, or for hosts to stay in touch with the children after they return to their home country if they cannot see adoption as realistic.
Is this couple acquainted with any other adoptive families? I would urge them to make an effort to connect with other families and ask questions, and to read and learn as much as they can about adoption.
Did this couple look at the Reece's Rainbow website? Hundreds of children of various ages from a variety of countries are listed there...RR has brought over 1,900 children home to loving families during the eleven or twelve years it's been around. And many of the parents of those families are over fifty.
Let's examine your recommendation for International Adoption in Ukraine.
Three years ago, Russia seized and occupied Crimea.
If that is not enough of a problem, then let review the couple’s application through the eyes of their social worker.
- never parented a child.
- only interaction with children is via a non-profit organization.
- small rural town, no local hospital. (https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...o-we-save-them) And placement of special needs children currently prohibited in areas without local hospitals.
- limited education services.
- demographics of town limited due to being 99 % Caucasian. No cultural resources, no role models.
Then there are the logistic issues and costs.
- Two trips required to the Ukraine
- Cost of the adoption (45K)
- Medical difference between the US and Ukraine
- Only Special Needs Children available starting at age 9 and up.
I've looked briefly at Reece's Rainbow website. It appears to try and place children with Down's syndrome from international sources. Children with Downs would struggle in rural small towns. It's a cruel fact, but true. I also don't see the educational opportunities that would need to be in place to support an Down's child. The couple's school district has already been successfully sued for failing to provide special education services/ELS. Thus, the couple would have to decide to fight the town in federal court to provide services to their international adopted child or place the child in a facility that would be better equipped. Few couples are equipped to fund a federal lawsuit. Filing fees alone are in excess of 10k.
On a personal note, I don't see how couples adopt older children. I could not imagine being asked to NOT be apart of my child's life from birth to 9 years of age. There is a great deal of child development that occurs between birth and 9 years. And I don't see how a couple with no children, no experience at raising a child, could just jump into parenting with a community that has limited resources. Especially, children that have been raised in an institution for all their life.
I would suggest that a childless couple in their fifties is being very unrealistic to think they can easily adopt a child under the age of five.
That rather rigid age preference appears to be the main problem, in the scenario you describe. Few agencies are going to pick a couple in their fifties as adoptive parents for an infant or preschooler, unless that child is part of a sibling group with considerably older children. That does not mean that such a couple cannot adopt at all, however - they just need to consider older children or young children with special needs, and as I stated before, those "special needs" can be quite minor and treatable.
I thought I would address this comment separately. We are seeing many couples contacting us because they attempted adoption for years with little success. We had couples contact us due to their adoption agency filing for bankruptcy protection. We are assigned cases by the family court system, due to a Judge wanting a resolution on a case that is just not possible; but the Judge wants to avoid a lawsuit against the county. All of these couples are unhappy with the adoption industry. They also have the time and money to pursue judicial judgements.
We also see military couples inquire regularly about problems they experience during deployments. And we recently took on two cases where the school district is refusing to provide special education services under section 504 of the ADA. One of these cases concern a child that was adopted internationally. I would also state that the international adoptees I interacted with have "special needs" that are NOT "minor or treatable." I've also never seen an international adoptees with "birthmarks" that is considered "special needs."
Lastly, the couple I'm speaking about in this case has tried to adopt for more than 10 years. They had an adoption agency go bankrupt and another refuse to continue to work with them after several years due to their age. They attempted to adopt internationally, only to experience program closures. They have attempted to adopt via foster care only to run into the re-unification requirement. I'm also told that fewer adoption situations is cause for rejoicing. I'm not sure the 2 million childless couples agree. They sure are not going to be the "silent minority" that many adoption agencies want. It appears their voice grows louder every year.
Legally, there is no support to prevent older couples from adopting, even infant adoptions. Many couples see grandparents parenting children and wonder why not me? They also see many children "aging out" of the foster care system and wonder why these children could not be adopted. And the news stories about abandoned infants really cause childless couples anguish and sorrow. I don't think that the adoption industry is going to be able to force older couples to only adopt teenagers. I'm not saying there is not a need, but I just don't seeing childless couples being successful without parenting a child from birth. As a mother of six, I could not imagine my first child being a teenager.
Lastly, I think society wants these older couples to adopt. One of the situations we are seeing in our community is a tension between couples with children and couples without children. We seen this in our local governmental meetings where older couples demand senior services at the expense of the school district. So many are just fed-up with the current situation.
I'm well aware of the situation with Russia and Ukraine, as I have relatives who were adopted from Ukraine in 2007 and also have friends in that beautiful, hard-pressed country.
I also support Reece's Rainbow, as well as Bible Orphan Ministry in Ukraine. I've been an active advocate for orphans and part of that community for over ten years.
I am sorry none of my suggestions seemed helpful. I hope your friends will find happiness in other aspects of their lives, as they have had so much difficulty with trying to adopt.
I do disagree with your comments about RR and kids with DS living in small towns. Your conclusion is far too sweeping - some children do very well in small towns, some do well in larger communities, some don't do well in either situation - just like typical kids. Much depends on the family - and on the child himself or herself.
As for cost and travel requirements, RR does NOT place children, as it is not an adoption agency but an advocacy nonprofit. It lists available children (under pseudonyms), helps families locate potential children for adoption, assists with fundraising to help offset adoption costs, which are similar to those of having a biological newborn child, and helps cut through red tape both here and abroad. RR also helps connect translators and adoption facilitators for families in-country, and helps with locating accommodations and travel connections in-country. It provides encouragement and informative support for families once the adoption journey is complete and the child is home with their new family.
Travel requirements, like other adoption regulations, are decided by each country, not the US. It's possible to make one trip to Ukraine and stick around for the ten day waiting period following a successful adoption court, though most families choose to come home to prepare for their new child's arrival. That's entirely up to each family. In some cases of extreme health concerns, the waiting period may be waived by the judge so a newly adopted child can receive specialized health care asap.
RR is not limited to children with DS, btw, but also advocates for hundreds of available-for-adoption children who have other special needs, some very minor. Check out the "other angels" section of RR - while it includes some children who are severely impacted, it also includes other children with minor issues and sibling groups. Your definition of minor may not coincide with mine - I'd include kids with HIV, limb differences, cleft lip and/or cleft palate, or other facial differences.
Probably seeing kids in all these categories plus kids with more significant issues bouncing, jumping and rolling around on the giant "bouncing pillow" at last year's RR Family Reunion in western Kentucky affected my perception. They were all just kids, having a blast...
I am sorry your friends did not think international or special needs adoption was for them.
I'm well aware of the situation with Russia and Ukraine, as I have relatives who were adopted from Ukraine in 2007 and also have friends in that beautiful, hard-pressed country.
I also support Reece's Rainbow, as well as Bible Orphan Ministry in Ukraine. I've been an active advocate for orphans and part of that community for over ten years.
I am sorry none of my suggestions seemed helpful. I hope your friends will find happiness in other aspects of their lives, as they have had so much difficulty with trying to adopt.
I do disagree with your comments about RR and kids with DS living in small towns. Your conclusion is far too sweeping - some children do very well in small towns, some do well in larger communities, some don't do well in either situation - just like typical kids. Much depends on the family - and on the child himself or herself.
As for cost and travel requirements, RR does NOT place children, as it is not an adoption agency but an advocacy nonprofit. It lists available children (under pseudonyms), helps families locate potential children for adoption, assists with fundraising to help offset adoption costs, which are similar to those of having a biological newborn child, and helps cut through red tape both here and abroad. RR also helps connect translators and adoption facilitators for families in-country, and helps with locating accommodations and travel connections in-country. It provides encouragement and informative support for families once the adoption journey is complete and the child is home with their new family.
Travel requirements, like other adoption regulations, are decided by each country, not the US. It's possible to make one trip to Ukraine and stick around for the ten day waiting period following a successful adoption court, though most families choose to come home to prepare for their new child's arrival. That's entirely up to each family. In some cases of extreme health concerns, the waiting period may be waived by the judge so a newly adopted child can receive specialized health care asap.
RR is not limited to children with DS, btw, but also advocates for hundreds of available-for-adoption children who have other special needs, some very minor. Check out the "other angels" section of RR - while it includes some children who are severely impacted, it also includes other children with minor issues and sibling groups. Your definition of minor may not coincide with mine - I'd include kids with HIV, limb differences, cleft lip and/or cleft palate, or other facial differences.
Probably seeing kids in all these categories plus kids with more significant issues bouncing, jumping and rolling around on the giant "bouncing pillow" at last year's RR Family Reunion in western Kentucky affected my perception. They were all just kids, having a blast...
I am sorry your friends did not think international or special needs adoption was for them.
Congrats to your relatives that adopted 11 years ago from the Ukraine. I wonder if the international adoption situation has changed in 11 years?
As you state, each county has its own regulations that impact a couples ability to adopt. I wonder how small towns are able to care for "special needs" children given the lack of resources? The town in question here has no local hospital, no therapists (physical, speech, or other helpful resources to a child that has been institutionalized) There is only an EMT substation, a family doctor, a pharmacist and four nurses for this town. The state regulatory agency overseeing adoptions in my state says these resources are not adequate to meet the minimum needs of a "special needs" child and traveling to the next nearest city that is over four hours away is not acceptable to the law. What is the couple to do here faced with the realities of the state adoption laws?
International programs are closing. Given the number of these programs that are closing, I have to wonder if it is a good idea to proceed with another program that the US State Department, Office of Children Resources states is "not stable due to deteriorating relations with the US." I want my clients to succeed, not just sign up for programs and experience another loss. I'm glad that RR does all these great things, but it does not change the law that currently apply to all couples that reside in this town. There only option is to relocate to another more urban city and most of the couples are not in a position to take on that task.
I also wonder if this non-profit organization could possibly lobby the various governments to create one unified set of adoption laws instead of the mess we currently have. It's pretty difficult for a childless couple to navigate the maze of adoption laws we have. In my state, we cannot even get two neighboring counties to agree on what it takes to finalize an adoption, much less how someone goes about finding an adoption match. And don't get me started on what it takes to get another county (i.e. school district) to accept an finalized adoption from our county or another state!
Not to be insensitive (here goes nothing) but I think it’s incredibly selfish for a person in their 50th+ decade in life, that in half a century of life felt no pressing need to parent, to decide to do so at that stage.
It’s frowned upon for a reason, even when the child is biologically theirs. Whether we like it or not, there are optimal ages for parenting. The too young and the too old do not make for ideal parents if there is such a thing. That does not mean that 15 year olds don’t successfully raise children every day or that there aren’t 55 year old first-time parents in droves....but that does not make it a situation one would willingly place a child in.
The role of an adoption agency is to find the BEST possible situation for the CHILDREN they are placing. They are not in the business of preventing hurt adult feelings. A late-in-life adoption by previously childless senior adults is way short of ideal. I’m certain an agency would have many other options for that child. A laundry list of parents that have far better odds of actually getting that (probably traumatized) baby/child THROUGH childhood. In a situation where the older parents are looking to adopt a child they’ve already fostered for some time, it would likely lean more in their favor.
But for an older person new to the parenting thing, the obvious elephant-in-the-room question would be “why now?”.
Not to be insensitive (here goes nothing) but I think it’s incredibly selfish for a person in their 50th+ decade in life, that in half a century of life felt no pressing need to parent, to decide to do so at that stage.
It’s frowned upon for a reason, even when the child is biologically theirs. Whether we like it or not, there are optimal ages for parenting. The too young and the too old do not make for ideal parents if there is such a thing. That does not mean that 15 year olds don’t successfully raise children every day or that there aren’t 55 year old first-time parents in droves....but that does not make it a situation one would willingly place a child in.
The role of an adoption agency is to find the BEST possible situation for the CHILDREN they are placing. They are not in the business of preventing hurt adult feelings. A late-in-life adoption by previously childless senior adults is way short of ideal. I’m certain an agency would have many other options for that child. A laundry list of parents that have far better odds of actually getting that (probably traumatized) baby/child THROUGH childhood. In a situation where the older parents are looking to adopt a child they’ve already fostered for some time, it would likely lean more in their favor.
But for an older person new to the parenting thing, the obvious elephant-in-the-room question would be “why now?”.
Ageism is real but something doesn't sit right. Maybe they have been shopping for just the right human. Maybe they thought adoption was about them and not whats BEST for the child. Maybe they were foster parents fighting reunification, or were lousy at parenting, who knows. Maybe they don't understand potential first parents prefer younger people to raise their children.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
