Yesterday at 12:58 AM, Lessa had her baby. Today, at 12:30, if she carried through on her plans, she signed papers relinquishing the baby for adoption. Less than a day after the baby was born. The intended adopters are a couple from Farmington, Alan and Lynette Blood. The Blood's will pay for their purchased baby by paying "fees for services" to LDS Family Services, the baby selling arm of the LDS Church.
I would like to ask all of the mothers out there if they were capable of making an informed choice about anything, let alone giving a baby up for adoption less than 24 hours after your first delivery and following 72 hours of labor?
Yet Utah law permits a young, naive mother to sign away her child under just such circumstances. And the law provides no rescission period. Once the papers are signed, they are permanent and irrevocable. I ask all of you, is this just?
In every professional field that deals with adoption there is a code of ethics. In every single code of ethics is a requirement to disclose conflicts of interest. LDS Family Services, and all other private placement adoption agencies in the United States depends for its existence on fees paid by adopters. How can such an do its duty to protect the best interests of the child when its very existence requires it to advocate for one, and only one, option? An option that is known to harm children and mothers both.
Every code of ethics associated with the adoption industry requires that the professional disclose adverse information to the option they are advocating. There is substantial research data that establishes that adopted children suffer from more psychological and social issues than the general population, and that birth mother's grief is comparable to that of death of a child. LDS Family Services does not disclose this information. Instead it presents cutesy anecdotes of reportedly successful adoptions. To LDS Family Services and the other adoption agencies that make their living selling babies, the ethical value of integrity seems to be secondary to using whatever marketing mechanism or fallacious appeal to emotion will convince the naive mother to relinquish. In the case of LDS Family Services, they have even gone so far as to publish false information about statistical research. Is Satan not the father of lies?
These unscrupulous agencies prey on the unsophisticated, emotional young mother that is not able to evaluate the research information, wouldn't know where or how to find it, and fear their own abilities, and who trust the authority of the social worker, and even more distressing, religious leaders, who should be taking pains to ensure that these girls are well informed and capable of making an informed decision. This is not only a breach of ethics, but a breach of trust. It is one of the most pernicious instances of evil I have ever encountered.
I have vowed that I will not rest until I put an end to this practice.
At 1:00 PM this afternoon, I mailed a letter to my LDS Bishop, with a copy to the LDS First Presidency renouncing my membership in said church, and denouncing the LDS First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as false prophets. I have asked the leaders of the church to defend their policy of encouraging all unwed mothers unable to marry to relinquish their babies. They have failed to answer my charges from the two previous letters I have sent to them. They cannot, because Jesus of Nazareth has nothing to do with this policy. It is the work of men-- bigoted men -- and an act of violence against both birthe mothers and children. May their God curse them to suffer all of the anguish and agony their self-righteous policies have visited on the innocent children ripped from their mother's breasts to be sold by LDS Family Services, and may they feel all the pain of the mothers grieving their missing children. Any deity that would take a newborn infant from its mother and sell it to the highest bidder is not worthy of worship. Such things are of Satan, not Jesus.
After sending my letter to the church, I wrote to my representative in the Utah House, and suggested several changes to the current Utah law. My preference would be to outlaw private placement adoption agencies entirely, but I recognize that may be impossible. Instead, I have suggested the following changes:
I would like to ask for all of you to join with me to effect these changes. My plan is to create an organization to work toward the goal of removing the incentives for corruption from Utah's adoption process. Please let me know if you can help.
I would like to ask all of the mothers out there if they were capable of making an informed choice about anything, let alone giving a baby up for adoption less than 24 hours after your first delivery and following 72 hours of labor?
Yet Utah law permits a young, naive mother to sign away her child under just such circumstances. And the law provides no rescission period. Once the papers are signed, they are permanent and irrevocable. I ask all of you, is this just?
In every professional field that deals with adoption there is a code of ethics. In every single code of ethics is a requirement to disclose conflicts of interest. LDS Family Services, and all other private placement adoption agencies in the United States depends for its existence on fees paid by adopters. How can such an do its duty to protect the best interests of the child when its very existence requires it to advocate for one, and only one, option? An option that is known to harm children and mothers both.
Every code of ethics associated with the adoption industry requires that the professional disclose adverse information to the option they are advocating. There is substantial research data that establishes that adopted children suffer from more psychological and social issues than the general population, and that birth mother's grief is comparable to that of death of a child. LDS Family Services does not disclose this information. Instead it presents cutesy anecdotes of reportedly successful adoptions. To LDS Family Services and the other adoption agencies that make their living selling babies, the ethical value of integrity seems to be secondary to using whatever marketing mechanism or fallacious appeal to emotion will convince the naive mother to relinquish. In the case of LDS Family Services, they have even gone so far as to publish false information about statistical research. Is Satan not the father of lies?
These unscrupulous agencies prey on the unsophisticated, emotional young mother that is not able to evaluate the research information, wouldn't know where or how to find it, and fear their own abilities, and who trust the authority of the social worker, and even more distressing, religious leaders, who should be taking pains to ensure that these girls are well informed and capable of making an informed decision. This is not only a breach of ethics, but a breach of trust. It is one of the most pernicious instances of evil I have ever encountered.
I have vowed that I will not rest until I put an end to this practice.
At 1:00 PM this afternoon, I mailed a letter to my LDS Bishop, with a copy to the LDS First Presidency renouncing my membership in said church, and denouncing the LDS First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as false prophets. I have asked the leaders of the church to defend their policy of encouraging all unwed mothers unable to marry to relinquish their babies. They have failed to answer my charges from the two previous letters I have sent to them. They cannot, because Jesus of Nazareth has nothing to do with this policy. It is the work of men-- bigoted men -- and an act of violence against both birthe mothers and children. May their God curse them to suffer all of the anguish and agony their self-righteous policies have visited on the innocent children ripped from their mother's breasts to be sold by LDS Family Services, and may they feel all the pain of the mothers grieving their missing children. Any deity that would take a newborn infant from its mother and sell it to the highest bidder is not worthy of worship. Such things are of Satan, not Jesus.
After sending my letter to the church, I wrote to my representative in the Utah House, and suggested several changes to the current Utah law. My preference would be to outlaw private placement adoption agencies entirely, but I recognize that may be impossible. Instead, I have suggested the following changes:
- A minimum waiting period before a birth mother may relinquish custody.
- A rescission period to allow the birth mother to change her mind.
- Legally mandated disclosure of conflicts of interest. These agencies need to be upfront in acknowledging that they represent their paying customers, not the child, and certainly not the mother.
- Legally mandated disclosure of adverse information
- Appointment of a state paid advocate to represent both mother and child charged with providing a balanced view of all options rather than marketing the adoption option.
I would like to ask for all of you to join with me to effect these changes. My plan is to create an organization to work toward the goal of removing the incentives for corruption from Utah's adoption process. Please let me know if you can help.
Comments