Adoption law should balance needs of birth fathers in state

The following article can be found at: http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/Opinion/Editorials/opnOPN12061207.htm

Florida has seen too many dramas pitting birth father against adoptive parents. It made sense that the Legislature would look for ways to ensure that children have safe, permanent homes free of turmoil. But so far, their efforts haven't worked out. Problems often arise when parents split up before a child is born. A father can lose touch with his former partner -- in many cases, he might not even realize a baby is on the way. In a few cases, birth fathers found out only after adoption proceedings started.
A 2002 law attempting to deal with this problem went much too far. The so-called "scarlet letter law" put the burden on pregnant, single women, ordering them to publish a list of any men who might be the father of their baby before making arrangements to give the child up for adoption. The outrage over that bill was so vehement that the Legislature repealed it at its next opportunity. The replacement law was subtler -- but in a way, almost as bad.
Even before 2002, the state maintained a registry of "putative" fathers -- men who suspect they might have fathered a child and want to register an objection to adoption. But the registry is poorly publicized, and only a few dozen men sign up each year. Under the new law, to assert rights, they must register before a baby is born, and go on to fill out paperwork asserting they're ready and fiscally able to take care of the baby should the birth mother decide to give it up for adoption.
It wasn't long before the new law caused problems. In 2005, a Tampa man learned he was about to become a father. He filed a paternity suit to keep the child from being adopted -- but under the law, that didn't count, because, unaware of it, he didn't sign up with the registry. The baby was immediately adopted, but the court battles over the child's status continue, and reached the Florida Supreme Court last week.
Attorneys for the man, identified in court records as J.A., argued that the cards were stacked against him. The birth mother never tried to provide notice of the pending birth, or warn him that adoption was imminent. As justices were quick to realize, the law provides a heavy incentive for a woman to lie about the identity of her baby's father, or conceal her condition.
The adoption agency countered that argument, claiming that men get notice of potential pregnancy whenever they have sex. That argument doesn't hold water -- obviously, most intimate encounters between unmarried people don't result in pregnancy. It's ridiculous to expect the state to keep paperwork on each one.
No matter what the court decides, the Legislature should revisit this issue. At the least, lawmakers can provide enough funding to have the registry widely publicized. But they should also work harder to recognize the claim of biological fathers, especially those who make attempts to take responsibility for their children but don't know exactly what they need to do.
Prior to 2002, state law required birth mothers to at least demonstrate an attempt to contact their babies' fathers before finalizing an adoption. That might be one element of a solution. But the guiding principle should be fairness, and nobody -- not even the attorney defending the law before the court last week -- could say the current law is fair.
Florida has seen too many dramas pitting birth father against adoptive parents. It made sense that the Legislature would look for ways to ensure that children have safe, permanent homes free of turmoil. But so far, their efforts haven't worked out. Problems often arise when parents split up before a child is born. A father can lose touch with his former partner -- in many cases, he might not even realize a baby is on the way. In a few cases, birth fathers found out only after adoption proceedings started.
A 2002 law attempting to deal with this problem went much too far. The so-called "scarlet letter law" put the burden on pregnant, single women, ordering them to publish a list of any men who might be the father of their baby before making arrangements to give the child up for adoption. The outrage over that bill was so vehement that the Legislature repealed it at its next opportunity. The replacement law was subtler -- but in a way, almost as bad.
Even before 2002, the state maintained a registry of "putative" fathers -- men who suspect they might have fathered a child and want to register an objection to adoption. But the registry is poorly publicized, and only a few dozen men sign up each year. Under the new law, to assert rights, they must register before a baby is born, and go on to fill out paperwork asserting they're ready and fiscally able to take care of the baby should the birth mother decide to give it up for adoption.
It wasn't long before the new law caused problems. In 2005, a Tampa man learned he was about to become a father. He filed a paternity suit to keep the child from being adopted -- but under the law, that didn't count, because, unaware of it, he didn't sign up with the registry. The baby was immediately adopted, but the court battles over the child's status continue, and reached the Florida Supreme Court last week.
Attorneys for the man, identified in court records as J.A., argued that the cards were stacked against him. The birth mother never tried to provide notice of the pending birth, or warn him that adoption was imminent. As justices were quick to realize, the law provides a heavy incentive for a woman to lie about the identity of her baby's father, or conceal her condition.
The adoption agency countered that argument, claiming that men get notice of potential pregnancy whenever they have sex. That argument doesn't hold water -- obviously, most intimate encounters between unmarried people don't result in pregnancy. It's ridiculous to expect the state to keep paperwork on each one.
No matter what the court decides, the Legislature should revisit this issue. At the least, lawmakers can provide enough funding to have the registry widely publicized. But they should also work harder to recognize the claim of biological fathers, especially those who make attempts to take responsibility for their children but don't know exactly what they need to do.
Prior to 2002, state law required birth mothers to at least demonstrate an attempt to contact their babies' fathers before finalizing an adoption. That might be one element of a solution. But the guiding principle should be fairness, and nobody -- not even the attorney defending the law before the court last week -- could say the current law is fair.