Anti-Adoption Activism News

Adoption: Legalized Lies' Statement on Madonna's Adoption Attempt

2009-04-03T08:28:00.000-07:00

CNN recently asked Adoption: Legalized Lies to comment on Madonna's recent and very highly publicized adoption attempt. As of Friday morning, her plea to adopt a three year old girl named Chifundo has been denied, in accordance with laws that require adopters to spend the 18 months prior to an adoption in Malawi.

Clearly, we are exceedingly pleased that the judge has chosen to act ethically in this situation, refusing to export yet another child to the aging pop star. Not only would a second adoption have violated the country's laws (as Madonna's first adoption did), it also would have taken Chifundo even further away from her loving grandmother and extended family -- family who allowed the child to live in an orphanage so that she could receive food and shelter they were unable to provide themselves.

With Madonna's fame and fortune, she could easily have worked privately to assist this little girl's grandmother financially, so that Chifundo could return home and be raised in her own culture, surrounded by family. The money she spent on her lawyer for the adoption proceedings alone could likely have helped even more Malawian children return to their poverty-stricken families. Instead, she squandered that money in a selfish attempt to remove Chifundo from Malawi.

Perhaps even sadder than Madonna's ridiculous fight is the backing she received from the government in Malawi. Cited as saying they would waive the 18 month residency rule in order to allow the adoption to proceed because Madonna had donated so much money to the country. Last time we checked, it was both highly unethical and usually illegal to buy favors from government officials. Madonna and others like her should be making donations to help people living in extreme poverty because that's the right and socially responsible thing to do -- not because they want an entire nation to feel indebted to their wealthy, powerful selves.

Ultimately, the judge in this case decided in the favor of justice, truly a victory for Chifundo and any other Malawian children Madonna and her ilk may have been targeting. Poignantly, Chifundo means "mercy" in Chichewa, and indeed, that is exactly what the judge showed to this child and her family.

Adoption Alternatives: What They Are and Why We Need Them

2008-06-23T17:57:00.000-07:00

By Jessica DelBalzo

Americans rarely think to question the practice of adoption, instead assuming that it is an acceptable option for children who cannot be raised by their natural parents for various reasons. Adopting is almost universally seen as a loving act with benevolent intentions, and as of this writing, the United States congress is working to pass a house resolution praising parents who surrender their infants to the adoption industry. The media is saturated with positive (though quite obviously one-sided) stories about celebrity adopters and others who have acquired children internationally, domestically, and through foster care. Finding the time and space in which to question adoption is not on the agenda for the average American.

However, having worked in the family preservation and anti-adoption movements for the whole of my adult life, questioning adoption comes to me as naturally as breathing. After compiling a massive collection of books, research studies, and other evidence illustrating the damage caused to children and families by our billion dollar adoption industry, I have come to the conclusion that adoption is neither an ethical nor a healthy option for children.

Of course, giving mothers and fathers the support they need to raise their own babies is the best course of action. Programs like Canada’s Moms & Mentors and Albany County’s Mentors & Moms, as well as the support services offered by Adoption: Legalized Lies, KeepYourBaby.com, and other similar groups are the ideal when it comes to adoption prevention. These services can help vulnerable parents avoid pressure from the adoption industry, giving them the tools they need to refute mal-informed, coercive “counseling” sessions that portray adoption as the “right” or “loving” route for young, poor, or single parents.

Beyond that, more and better family preservation programs are needed in the realm of child protective services. Countless studies have shown that children fare better with their natural families than they do with others, and family preservation programs have proven to be fiscally responsible as well. Though reunification is still cited as a main goal for children in foster care, government policies seem contrary to this bit of time-honored wisdom. Federal adoption bonuses, time limits on foster placements, and increasingly erroneous reasons for removing children from their parents prove that far too little emphasis has been placed on reunifying families.

Of course, even the best efforts to promote pregnancy prevention and family preservation will never address every single unwanted pregnancy nor every instance of unsafe parenting. That does not mean adoption is a necessary evil; however, it does mean that there will always be some children who need care outside of their families.

Permanent legal guardianship is an existing, ethical alternative to adoption that prevents many of the issues associated with adoption from developing. Guardianship has also been used successfully in Australia, where domestic adoptions are rare and largely discouraged, making that country an ideal model for nations like the United States where adoption is still seen as a requirement for many children.

Unlike adoption, children in legal guardianship arrangements are not deprived of their names, birth histories, and overall identities. They are not issued an amended (or more accurately speaking, falsified), birth certificate, and their natural parents remain their only parents in the eyes of the law. Legal guardianship allows for provisions to be made mandating contact between children and their parents, and also allows the parents to retain certain rights as long as it is safe for them to do so. Most importantly, guardianship is a respectful arrangement that provides children with loving homes without the damaging pretense that they are family “as if born to” their caregivers.

The differences between permanent legal guardianship and adoption are important from an ethical standpoint. Currently, adopted people do not have universal access to their original birth certificates. Few states allow them limited access to these documents, but adoptees have often been described as second class citizens, the only Americans restricted from knowing their own personal histories. Additionally, the government certifying of a document known to contain false information is absolutely unethical. It is not too much to ask that a birth certificate list the parents responsible for a child’s birth!

As one might expect, the falsifying of birth certificates in adoption is not only problematic from an ethical perspective. It can also be linked to many of the psychological problems faced by adopted people, especially issues of identity. In an adoption-friendly society like our own, adopted children are frequently told (both implicitly and explicitly) that being adopted is no different than being born into one’s family. Amended birth certificates, which support this myth, further the expectation that an adopted person will fit into his or her adopter’s family without a hitch. The reality could not be further from the truth.

While some adoptees may coincidentally share interests, mannerisms, and other traits with their adopters, others will grow up feeling entirely out of place, not knowing a single person who looks, acts, or thinks like they do. In both cases, adopted people understand early on that any similarities are the product of chance, and any differences contradict the familial expectations laid out for them by the adoption industry.

As a result, adoptees often report feeling conflicted about expressing their true selves. Others report a sense of belonging nowhere, being unlike their adopters and yet too far removed from their original families and cultures to fit in with them.

By ensuring that children grow up without false pretenses about their families, and by insisting that the honest, respectful nature of guardianship is critical to making the experience a successful one for the child involved, children who cannot be raised by their families can benefit from the security of a safe and loving home.

When we stop thinking of adoption as a catch-all solution, and instead recognize it as the ethical and social problem it is, the billion dollar adoption industry loses, and the children win. It doesn’t get any better than that.

Statement to the Press on Honest Adoption Language

2007-12-14T17:31:00.000-08:00

Adoption: Legalized Lies urges members of the press to reconsider the use of so-called "Positive Adoption Language," the adoption dialect proposed by adoption professionals and pro-adoption lobbying organizations. Advocates of this deceptive adoption-speak are interested in promoting adoption through the media, attracting more potential customers, and securing more infants to increase their bottom line. They tout these terms as being "respectful" and "positive," without concern for the fact that their words are demeaning to natural families, dismissive of the adoptee's experience, and misleading for expectant parents. Accepting the adoption industry's terms as if they were indisputable is tantamount to using the KKK's preferred language for people of color. No reasonable journalist would ever try such a thing!

In place of "Positive Adoption Language" (which is clearly biased in nature), members of the press should strive to use Honest Adoption Language (HAL). Most of the terms used in HAL were conceived prior to adoption becoming a billion dollar industry. In addition to being clear and accurate, they are also more respectful of natural mothers and fathers, adopted people, and the realities of adoption as an institution. Rather than looking to "sell" the public on adoption, Honest Adoption Language is interested in depicting the experience with sensitivity and equality.

Below, you will find a glossary of preferred adoption terminology. We urge the press to use HAL in place of the adoption industry's heavily biased language when reporting on adoption, adopted people, and natural parents.

Adopted Adult/Adopted Child: When discussing someone who is adopted, it is important to take his or her age into account. As the term implies, an adopted child is a young person who has been adopted away from his or her natural family. It is degrading to refer to an adopted adult as an adopted child. Many adopted people resent being infantilized by state governments which have sealed their records and denied them access to their own personal information indefinitely. When the press and the public refer to adopted adults as adopted children, it only adds insult to injury.

Adoptive Caregiver/Adopter: "Positive Adoption Language" recommends dropping the "adoptive" prefix and referring to adopters as parents without reservation. This is a very deceptive practice, as it denies the adopted person's heritage and natural relationships. We believe that the terms adoptive caregiver and adopter are more accurate. Around the world, adopter is most commonly used on adoption paperwork, and we feel it most clearly reflects the relationship between the adopted person and his or her caregivers.

Natural Mother/Natural Father: Honest Adoption Language is not at all comfortable with the use of "birth" and "biological" as prefixes to describe parents who have had children taken by the adoption industry. We believe that these terms are designed to distance parents from their children, implying that they are vessels of conception rather than human beings. Many mothers and fathers are highly insulted by words like "birth mother" and "biological parent." Instead, we prefer to use the more inclusive term natural parent (or natural mother/natural father) in situatons where parent is not descriptive enough. Exiled parent, true parent, and real parent are also acceptable, though simple parent is typically preferred by many mothers and fathers.

Reunited: Honest Adoption Language uses the term reunited to describe the coming together of family members who were previously separated by adoption. In an effort to further distance parents from their children, pro-adoption terminology has suggested the phrase "made contact with" to describe reunions. Once again, "Positive Adoption Language" is inaccurate and biased against real families.

Surrendered to Adoption/Lost to Adoption: Honest Adoption Language rejects terms like "gave up for adoption" and "made an adoption plan" because these terms do not accurately reflect the adoption experience for the vast majority of parents. Terms like surrendered to adoption and lost to adoption more clearly depict the fact that natural mothers and fathers were given little say in the taking of their children by the adoption industry. The recent, "Positive Adoption Language"-inspired phrase, "made an adoption plan," is absolutely inaccurate and creates a sense of power and control for expectant parents when they are actually quite vulnerable. It should never be used.

The discrepancies between Honest Adoption Language and "Positive Adoption Language" are discussed in greater detail in Unlearning Adoption: A Guide to Family Preservation and Protection.

New Organization to Probe Adoption Abuses

2007-11-16T06:55:00.000-08:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(PRLog.Org) – Nov 14, 2007 – The Baby Scoop Era Research Initiative, also known as BSERI, was founded in October 2007 by two mothers, Karen Wilson-Buterbaugh and Barbara Franks-Morra. Both lost newborns to adoption during this period.

Franks-Morra explained that maternity homes radically changed after 1945. As social workers took over management from altruistic religious organizations, homes that had once sheltered single mothers and prepared them to raise their children began instead to promote closed, stranger adoption.

Wilson-Buterbaugh stated, “The social work profession brought a psychological bias to their work with single mothers. They introduced the untested notion that single mothers were ‘neurotic’ and could be cured by taking their babies. This idea radically altered the outcomes for single mothers during this period. These practices persisted through 1972, when the number of domestic adoptions began to drop dramatically.”

“These homes, which were sometimes little more than reformatories, often used coercive practices such as shaming, blaming, and removing or withholding babies from new mothers to force adoptions. Mothers were then told to ‘go on with their lives’ as if nothing had happened. Obviously this was impossible for most of them.”

Franks-Morra said, “We demand acknowledgement of the historical truth surrounding past adoption practices in the United States. We demand recognition for the millions of women who were systematically denied their inalienable right to raise their infant sons and daughters.”

“The Baby Scoop Era has become a footnote in American social history, except to the mothers who survived these practices. These women have carried into their adult lives burdens of worry, grief, pain and a corrosive secret. The lifelong consequences of these forced adoptions are still operating in the lives of millions of American women.”

For more information, www.babyscoopera.com or email bseri@babyscoopera.com.

# # #

An Interview with Wes Unruh

2007-09-27T17:59:00.000-07:00

Alterati.com editor Wes Unruh was kind enough to post an interview with yours truly on his blog this week. It's always nice to be interviewed by someone who really understands the issues involved in adoption and who can hold a reasonable discussion about them. I'm not sure I'll be as lucky with the local newspaper reporters when they call next week (which they are supposed to do).

Wes picked some of the big issues in adoption to focus on, and hopefully his interview with be enlightening for the young, hip Alterati crowd. Go check it out!

First Annual "Demons in Adoption" Award

2007-09-24T10:05:00.000-07:00

PoundPupLegacy.org has started voting for the first annual "Demons in Adoption" Award. Nominees include Adoption.com, The Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute, The National Council for Adoption, The National Safe Haven Alliance, and The NYC Administration for Children's Services. While all of these organizations are certainly deserving of this award, only one can win. Cast your vote today!

Designed to raise awareness about "the other side" of adoption, the Demons award is a match for the Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute's "Angels in Adoption" awards which are given out annually in October.

Click here to vote for your favorite pro-adoption demon, and check back soon to see who won!

Praise for "Unlearning Adoption" from Jane Jeong Trenka

2007-09-08T07:18:00.000-07:00

Unlearning Adoption: A Guide to Family Preservation and Protection is a wonderfully commonsense overview of why adoption as it is practiced in the U.S. must be abolished. Ms. DelBalzo covers vast territory quickly, including the pro-adoption bias of the media, the false promise of "Save Haven" laws and open adoption, and alternate models for childcare, including guardianship and non-American adoption practices. Ultimately, DelBalzo' s message is one of deep compassion, hope, and vision. "The anti-adoption movement, "she writes," may be very small, but it is growing in number and strength, not unlike women's suffrage and civil rights, both of which were originally dismissed as radical and implausible. "

--Jane Jeong Trenka, author of The Language of Blood: A Memoir and co-editor of Outsiders Within: Writing on Transracial Adoption.

Web Site Updates

2007-08-30T08:35:00.001-07:00

Last weekend, Adoption: Legalized Lies received a major overhaul. I'm still working on things, but I wanted to invite you all to visit the site and offer your feedback. What should we add? What should we change? Whose links are missing from the links page?

The newest addition to the site -- so far -- is the press statement on adoption language. More press statements are forthcoming, as are some more links to helpful sites and related blogs. Do you blog? Want to be linked? Post here or send me an email, and I'll get that set up for you right away.

Ricky Martin the Next Celebrity Adopter?

2007-08-14T12:19:00.000-07:00

New Book Criticizes Celebrity Adoptions

Flemington, NJ - August 14, 2007 -- In the wake of yet another celebrity announcing his plans to adopt, adoption activist and expert Jessica DelBalzo has released a new book criticizing celebrity adoptions. The book, which is titled Unlearning Adoption: A Guide to Family Preservation and Protection, includes an entire chapter examining famous adopters like Rosie O’Donnell, Angelina Jolie, and Madonna.

DelBalzo says celebrity adoptions “are setting a dangerous trend.”

Though most Americans support the act of adopting, the author does not. She says that being adopted is unhealthy for children and damaging to their natural parents as well. Her claims are based on ten years of research and time spent working with expectant parents, and mothers, fathers, and adult children who were separated from their families by adoption.

Unlearning Adoption praises Oprah Winfrey for her efforts to help African children without removing them from their homeland. The book goes on to condemn other celebrities who have recently adopted children.

DelBalzo says the money and influence available to these famous adopters should be used to assist families who want to raise their children at home and abroad. She cites Madonna as an example. “The child she is adopting has a father who loves him. Paying for little David to stay in Malawi with his family would have been an act of compassion. Removing him from there -- and from them -- is selfish.”

As the founder of Adoption: Legalized Lies, a grassroots organization that helps expectant mothers find the resources needed to keep their babies and assists parents in contested adoption cases, DelBalzo says she has insight into adoption that few Americans have. She has previously been cited as an expert in newspaper, radio, and television segments criticizing adoption practices and supporting legal decisions that favor natural parents over prospective adopting couples.

The author says Ricky Martin’s adoption intentions are part of a greater problem. “Few people realize the grief and loss associated with adoption for children and their natural families. They think they’re saving children.”

“Saving children means supporting their families. The material benefits of a celebrity upbringing are not enough to counter the grief and loss associated with losing one’s natural parents,” DelBalzo says.

Unlearning Adoption encourages celebrities and others to follow in Oprah’s footsteps rather than O’Donnell’s or Jolie’s.

DelBalzo‘s advice is, “Follow the celebrity trends when it comes to fashion. Ignore them when it comes to family.”

###

Unlearning Adoption for Sale on Amazon.com

2007-07-27T12:44:00.000-07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

FROM: Adoption: Legalized Lies
CONTACT: Jessica DelBalzo, author
PHONE: (908) 764-6998
WEB SITE: www.unlearningadoption.com
EMAIL: info@unlearningadoption.com
DATE: July 27, 2007

RE: Controversial New Book Condemns Adoption

New Jersey resident Jessica DelBalzo looks like an average, 20-something mom, but for the past ten years, she has been active in a small but growing radical movement to eradicate adoption. Her new book, Unlearning Adoption: A Guide to Family Preservation and Protection, released this week, offers a controversial look at what she terms, “the sinister side” of American adoption.

DelBalzo’s book details legal and ethical issues involving adoptions of the past and present, as well as psychological consequences faced by adopted people and surrendering parents. In addition to critiquing domestic infant adoption and international adoption, Unlearning... presents the sets of problems that are unique to foster care and modern legalized abandonment laws.

Overarching themes throughout the book include advice for individuals and professionals working with adoption affected people, ways to prevent adoption, and alternatives for children who require substitute care.

The book has received glowing reviews from authors, activists, and researchers. Joss Shawyer, author of Death By Adoption, says Unlearning . . . is a “must-read.” She goes on to say, “If you want to know the truth about North American adoption, read this book.”

Psychotherapist Joe Soll, founder of New York-based Adoption Crossroads, states that the book is, “a thoughtful, well-written expose of adoption.”

DelBalzo, who is neither an adoptee nor a surrendering parent, says that she came to her anti-adoption perspective “from a completely neutral place.” She explains that she began researching adoption as a student and learned of “the atrocities committed against marginalized families” at home and abroad.

The author founded Adoption: Legalized Lies, an anti-adoption organization which assists families in keeping their children, in July of 1998. DelBalzo reports that divulging her anti-adoption status has frequently landed her in hot water with people who are uninformed about the movement. “There are so many misunderstandings about who we are and what we believe,” she says. “Unlearning Adoption was written as a guide for the average person, dispelling the myths and offering up real alternatives for families in need.”

The book is in paperback form, comprised of 145 pages. It sells for $12.99 on Amazon.com.

A New Look for Our Site

2007-05-26T10:25:00.000-07:00

I just updated the website with a more accessible FAQ, prettier logo, and cleaner look. I think I like it . . . what do you think?

Adoption: Legalized Lies

The "Why Oppose Adoption" link is under construction. I have an article going up on Associated Content that I'm going to link from there.

I'd like to do more, but I am going to have to start promoting The Book soon so I'm not sure when the main page will be updated again.

Enough is Enough: Send Baby Evelyn Bennett Home NOW!

2007-04-15T15:59:00.000-07:00

Stephanie Bennett was put in a precarious position the moment she became pregnant in 2005. The baby’s father began making threats against Stephanie’s mother and step-father, which prompted her to conceal the pregnancy from her family until she was only weeks away from giving birth. Even so, Judy and Ranza Bennett were immediately ready and willing to support Stephanie in her new role as a mother. Still facing repeated threats against her family, Stephanie told her parents that one of her male friends from school was the baby’s father.

Baby Evelyn Joann Bennett was born on April 17th, 2006, and named after her mother’s great-grandmother, grandmother, and mother. Stephanie planned to raise her daughter and continue her schooling with support from stay-at-home mom Judy and her husband Ranza.

Over the next five months, the new mother and her baby appeared to be doing very well. However, Evelyn’s father continued to make frightening, serious threats against Stephanie, her parents, and her infant daughter. Months of emotional abuse had worn down her resolve, and during a meeting with school guidance counselor Thomas Saltsman, Stephanie mentioned the word “adoption.” Instantly, Saltsman put aside their planned discussion of the high school student’s schedule and pulled a brochure from A Child’s Waiting adoption agency from his desk. He set up a meeting between Stephanie and the agency for the following day.

On September 8th, the initial paperwork to begin the adoption of baby Evelyn was signed. Stephanie had not received counseling from A Child’s Waiting, and the attorney who was present to look after her interests regularly handled the agency’s adoptions. Her guidance counselor signed as a witness. Judy and Ranza Bennett were not informed; they never suspected that Stephanie’s school would attempt to interfere in her parenthood. This was one of only two times the young mother would meet with the adoption agency.

In order to evade the Medicaid-mandated paternity test which was supposed to take place on September 12th, a representative of A Child’s Waiting advised Stephanie to run away from home. They met with her in Carroll County, OH, away from her home, in an effort to prevent her parents’ involvement. It was there during this second and final meeting between the mother and the agency, that Evelyn was removed from Stephanie’s arms.

The next month was a harrowing one. Judy and Ranza Bennett were granted temporary custody of their granddaughter by the Summit County courts (a decision which was later over-ruled because the adoption had taken place in Carroll County). They spoke to A Child’s Waiting and were told that the agency had not done business with their daughter. Two weeks later, they were notified by the Canton, OH police that they must appear in court the following day. They were not given a reason.

On October 17th, accompanied by A Child’s Waiting, Stephanie faced her parents in court. Evelyn’s father had made allegations of abuse against Judy and Ranza Bennett, stating that neither girl was safe in the Bennett home. The court placed Stephanie in respite care.

The next day, Stephanie ran away from the respite home and called a friend. The friend called her caseworker, who suggested that he taken Stephanie to Family Court. There, she stated that she wanted to return home to her family. The lawyer for Child Protection told the judge that there was no sign of abuse or neglect in the home, and Evelyn’s pediatrician reported that he felt Evelyn was safe there as well. Stephanie was finally back home with her mother, step-father, and sister.

Since that time, the family has continued to fight for Evelyn’s return. Just this month, the Bennetts received a copy of the complaint they filed against A Child’s Waiting; the report found the agency to be non-compliant in numerous areas. Jennifer Lowry, Stephanie’s attorney, is hopeful that a reunion will soon take place between the young mother and her daughter.

What has happened to Stephanie and her daughter is not uncommon. Unethical adoptions take place every day in the United States, and loving parents who lack the financial means to pay for legal representation are permanently separated from their children. The Bennetts are still fighting, and will continue to fight for the return of baby Evelyn. You can help.

A petition has been started in support of Stephanie and Evelyn Bennett, and organizations like Adoption: Legalized Lies are working to raise funds for their legal fees. Supporters can sign the petition here and purchase t-shirts and buttons from CafePress.com.

Petition in Support of Stephanie and Evelyn Bennett

2007-02-04T08:48:00.000-08:00

Please take a moment and sign the petition which has been created to show support for the return of baby Evelyn Bennett to her natural family. We are aiming for 1000 signatures and would like the petition to be completed as soon as possible.

Anti-Adoption Press Pass

2007-01-31T08:37:00.000-08:00

We uploaded a new page to the Adoption: Legalized Lies site this morning, encouraging the media to contact our group for a different perspective on adoption stories.

The media bias in favor of adoption is really disturbing, and we are certainly an authority on "the other side." If the press wants to distribute accurate and balanced reporting on adoption, they need to hear from us at least as much as they hear from adopters and baby brokers.

Journalists, producers, and editors can visit our Press Inquiries page for more information on the types of stories Adoption: Legalized Lies is qualified to comment on.

New email list for activists

2007-01-29T19:16:00.000-08:00

The Adoption: Legalized Lies email list, formerly hosted by Topica.com, has moved over to RiseUp.net. Click here to join.

Here's a reminder of our mission for anyone who may not be familiar with it, taken from our mailing list:

Adoption: Legalized Lies is a grassroots activist organization working for social change in adoption practices. We believe that the adoption of children is a human rights violation, and we support the implementation of initiatives to preserve natural families and allow adopted individuals access to their birth records and medical history. We are lobbying for legislative changes that will protect parents and children throughout the adoption process, as well as advocating alternative custody arrangements for children who cannot be raised by their natural families.

A large portion of our work goes toward public education about adoption as a violation of human rights. To this end, we have conducted letter writing campaigns, art displays, rallies, and speak-outs. This list will include articles, activism updates, and discussion for those interested in being a part of the movement to abolish adoption. Join up to meet like-minded citizens and learn how to use your voice to make a difference politically and socially.

Protecting Parents' Values in Foster Care

2007-01-18T13:20:00.000-08:00

I just received this article by email, and wanted to commend the assemblyman for his efforts.

Lawmaker wants parents' values respected in foster care

This is something I was thinking about a few months ago, and I'm pleased to see someone is working on it, somewhere. Michael Lange is a Republican, and I'm sure I'd disagree with him on many other issues, but he is on the right track here. To ignore the family's values in a foster placement is only adding insult to injury.

I sent the following letter:

To the Editor:

Though I am a staunch liberal and about as far from House Majority Leader Michael Lange's constituency as possible, I strongly support House Bill #217 (Lawmaker wants parents' values respected in foster care, 1/18/07).

As an advocate for families at a national level, I have witnessed how quick child protective services is to separate parents and children unnecessarily. Children are being placed into foster care due to false allegations, misunderstandings, and minor infractions at an alarming rate. Allowing the parents to have a say in the moral and religious upbringing of their children while working on reunification is a wonderful step in the right direction.

While more time and money may be spent ensuring that the foster care placement matches up to the family's values, the benefits of consistency for the child and peace of mind for the parents are absolutely worth the effort.

Lange is to be commended for his compassion toward foster children and their natural parents.

Sincerely,
Jessica DelBalzo
founder, Adoption: Legalized Lies

Ohio Residents -- Rally for the Bennett Family

2007-01-16T13:34:00.000-08:00

The Bennett family goes to court this Friday, January 19th to fight once again for the return of baby Evelyn.

A Child's Waiting adoption agency coerced Stephanie Bennett into running away from home and surrendering infant Evelyn in September. Since that time, the Ohio courts ruled in favor of Stephanie and her family, giving grandparents Judy and Ranza Bennett custody of their granddaughter. Instead of immediately returning Evelyn to her home, A Child's Waiting has refused to disclose her whereabouts.

Supporters of the Bennett family will be gathering at Summit County Courthouse in Akron, OH at 9a.m. on the 19th. Anyone who can attend is encouraged to do so.

Aniston Jumping on the Adoption Bandwagon?

2007-01-08T08:48:00.000-08:00

Another one bites the dust. A recent smattering of gossip mags have reported that Jennifer Aniston of "Friends" fame is thinking about adoption. Sources say she wants a boy.

Really, this news shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Adopting has become as big a celebrity trend as toting around a tiny pooch in designer doggie duds. Celebrity wealth enables the successful to sink into a comfort zone where everything -- even motherhood -- is available for a price.

What Aniston (and her predecesors in adoption) are failing to realize -- or worse, choosing to ignore -- is that purchasing parental rights involves doing a great disservice to both the adopted child and his original parents. In the case of international adoptions like those conducted by Angelina Jolie and Madonna, I would argue that entire cultures are being wronged when rich Americans see fit to sweep in and remove their children.

Still, even I can admit that the adoption industry has done a fine job of marketing itself. The mere mention of adoption conjures up a pretty image of a poor, forlorn child being taken in by a loving benefactor and living happily ever after. Really, though, the adoption fairytale come true is about as likely as that new diet pill turning a morbidly obese woman into a supermodel. You can't believe everything you see on television. Celebrities, of all people, should know that!

Fundraising for the Bennett Family

2007-01-05T16:58:00.000-08:00

Adoption: Legalized Lies to Raise Funds for Bennett Family

By Adoption: Legalized Lies -via PRLog.OrgJan 05, 2007 19:56:59

New Jersey based anti-adoption organization, Adoption: Legalized Lies has created a line of t-shirts and buttons in support of an Ohio family who claim their youngest member was unfairly taken by an adoption agency. The organization will be donating all of the money raised to the Bennett family to assist with their legal fees.

Young mother Stephanie Bennett was introduced to A Child’s Waiting adoption agency by her high school guidance counselor. The agency allegedly persuaded her to run away from home in order to surrender her infant daughter, Evelyn, without involving the baby’s grandparents.

Now, the entire family is fighting for Evelyn’s return.

Adoption: Legalized Lies volunteer Sandy Young spoke with grandparents Ranza and Judy Bennett on January 3rd. Young says, “They have custody of the baby. All they need is an address to pick up their granddaughter.”

According to a December 31st story in the Akron Beacon Journal, A Child’s Waiting refuses to disclose Evelyn’s whereabouts.

The Bennett family is facing a potentially long and arduous legal battle. Adoption: Legalized Lies is not a wealthy organization. “But our volunteers are determined and devoted,” says founder Jessica DelBalzo.

The organization added a selection of t-shirts and buttons to its existing Cafepress.com store Friday afternoon. The shirts read, “Stop the Adoption of Evelyn Bennett.” The buttons: “Send Evelyn Home.”

Young and DelBalzo say they are hoping to raise awareness and funds for the Bennetts at the same time.

The Adoption: Legalized Lies web site states that coercive practices are common in adoption. Young says she expects the Bennett case to have a real impact on future laws that will protect mothers from being pressured to surrender their babies.

Supporters of the Bennett family can purchase t-shirts and buttons at http://www.cafepress.com/antiadoption/.

# # #

An Overview of Adoption on Squidoo

2007-01-04T13:01:00.000-08:00

Readers can now find an excellent overview of adoption and the many problems associated with adoption on Squidoo.

The Adoption Prevention site includes information about infant adoption, adoptions from foster care, and the effects of adoption on children and natural parents. It also features recommended reading, web links, and anti-adoption merchandise.

Quets Case Raises Questions About Adoption Ethics

2007-01-04T12:57:00.000-08:00

N.C. Adoption Dispute Raises Questions About Adoption Ethics

Flemington, NJ (PRWEB) January 3, 2007 -- New Jersey based Adoption: Legalized Lies is speaking out about the alleged kidnapping of North Carolina twins Holly and Tyler Needham by Allison Quets, who conceived and birthed the twins after undergoing IVF. Volunteers from the anti-adoption organization say Quets' case is a sign of bigger problems at play in the adoption industry.

Gail Quets has gone on record stating that her sister Allison was faced with intense pressure to surrender the newborns for adoption. Quets goes on to say that the 48 year old woman, recovering from a traumatic pregnancy and birth, revoked her consent almost immediately and has been fighting for the return of the children ever since.

Shortly after the twins were born, Allison Quets contacted anti-adoption activist Jessica DelBalzo. Through Adoption: Legalized Lies, DelBalzo put Quets in touch with volunteers who advised her to seek legal counsel and revoke the consent that she had signed. "This advice, along with words of support and encouragement, is typical of what we tell all parents who come to us for help confronting the loss of their children," DelBalzo says.

The activist, involved in the movement to abolish adoption for nearly 10 years, continues, "Quets' story is indicative of many problems with the way adoption is handled."

DelBalzo says she has been in touch with countless mothers and fathers who were coerced into surrendering their children. She says their attempts to use the court to lobby for the return of their babies have been met with legal roadblocks, media criticism and financial strain.

"I've never told a mother to take her baby and run, but I've often thought it," DelBalzo says. "Justice rarely prevails in these cases. The odds are stacked against these parents from the very beginning."DelBalzo and her fellow anti-adoption activists blame a culture that is biased in favor of adoption for the alleged lack of justice in contested adoption cases.

"A mother says, 'I want my baby.' You don't tell her to wait. You don't make her get a lawyer. You return her baby," DelBalzo says. "The whole process shouldn't take a week, let alone a year or more."

DelBalzo argues, "The would-be adoptive couples who withhold a wanted baby -- those are the real kidnappers."

Asked what she believes needs to change in adoption, DelBalzo says, "I would be thrilled if the entire institution were non-existent." She goes on to say that "in the meantime," a longer period of at least six months during which parents could revoke their consent should be mandated nationally and strictly enforced by the law."

DelBalzo also says that prospective adopters who refuse to return a child whose parents have revoked their consent should be charged with kidnapping. "What the Needhams, and others like them, have done," she says, "is inexcuseable. Withholding a wanted child from a loving mother is unconscionable."

Parents who feel that they are currently being or have recently been pressured into surrendering a child for adoption can contact Adoption: Legalized Lies by email or phone (908) 764-6998 for assistance.

###

Anti-Adoption Mailing List

2007-01-04T12:49:00.000-08:00

After nearly a year on hiatus, the Adoption: Legalized Lies email list is back up and running, thanks to riseup.net.

If you'd like to be involved in activism against adoption and in support of children and natural families, sign up. The list is designed for discussion, sharing thoughts and ideas, as well as support for victims of the adoption industry. Parents who are fighting to overturn an adoption or who are being pressured into surrendering a child for adoption will find the list to be an invaluable resource for both encouragement and information.

To sign up, visit this page or email donotadopt@aol.com.

Off to a late start . . .

2006-07-15T13:25:00.000-07:00

I've been neglecting this blog lately in favor of other (paying) jobs, but I will make every effort to start posting more as time allows.

If you haven't already, please check out Adoption: Legalized Lies. Whether you're considering adoption, looking for post-adoption support, or just looking to get more information about the anti-adoption movement, you'll find it there.

Are you already convinced that adoption has no place in a civilized society? Come to the conference on family preservation taking place in New York City this fall. I'd love to meet you!