Why MaAn want to keep a mother away from her child? - Page 8

Originally posted by: Bodhianveshika

Sorry for my lack of knowledge, are the temporary foster cares specifically instructed to not let the child be adopted? If not, What happens if the child is indeed adopted? Would the biological parent(s) still be able to claim their right?

Reason I ask is @bold.

Not sure in India or rest of the world. In USA, some cases they are in foster for few months while the parent are in out of rehab or in group home. So it goes by month to month. My formal colleague works for the state doing just this. Where she has to visit each of her cases to see if the parents are allowed back their child. The parents have to show that they have job, apt, and child will have their own room, will attend school regularly. She has to report to court that yes the parents meet the requirements to get their child back. Even after they get their child back, she keeps a check on them once a month to see if parents are following through with their promises to do right by their child and that 2nd chance.

To answer your question yes, in some cases it says not to adopt. Some times the court gives the parent time to get their child back after they put their kids up for adoption as well. I have seen kids ask their foster parents to adopt them too. Sadly once the kids are in foster care here in USA, it isn’t easy for them to get out and back to their family from what I have seen and friend confirmed.

Some cases parents get their child back but some times they don’t. Unless a parent signs off on adoption, they can’t adopt, or on rare occasions, Helen has said she has recommended the foster parents adopt because kids are better off with them over their own drug-addicted parents, who are not getting cleaned. Foster parents have expressed interest in adopting and the child being older wants it too. In those rare cases judge has stripped the parents of their rights meaning the foster family can adopt or they are now in the state adoption system. @bold

Originally posted by: Rein123

@bold why can't they? It's not about whether they are obliged or not, the point is if I never told you to put my child for adoption and you do so without letting me know about it just because you assumed I have given up my rights when in reality that isn't the case then you are liable and answerable for what has happened. You can't make decisions like this based on assumptions. So yes they are obliged.

So you mean:

A person leaves the child at an "Adoption Centre" not to return in years without any information/instruction/request. But the "Adoption Centre" is supposed to assume the person hasn't given up rights of the child.

The child who is left in the home deserves to not adopted and find a family and home with the hope that one day the parent who has not come thus far, would come some day to re-claim the child.

Just an FYI, if a person who has run away from home or missing is not found in 7 years, he is declared dead. His marriage considered dissolved.

If that's the case why would any agency give a child who is just to be fostered to a couple who are looking for adoption?

From the time agency has given fostering responsibilty to a couple who are looking for adoption, the biological claim shouldn't be made. In case the adoptive parents are failing with their responsibility which should be judged by agency/court, the child should come back to the agency and from there, the biological parents can claim their kids again and not when the child is already with a couple.

If this fostering case happens within a family then there is also an understanding between family members and no one is going to allow the child to call foster parents as mumma papa.

Originally posted by: Rein123

Biological parents cannot claim the kids once adopted because adoption is a legal process where the consent of the Biological parents is taken before hand and they voluntarily give up their parental rights. There are legal documents signed here that can be shown in court. Once the child is legally adopted Biological parents have no claim.

Here it is not the case because CA is not adopted but rather just fostered, no legal procedure to adopt her has been completed and even if it has been initiated it will go down the drain given bio mom is there to stop and veto it. A child can be taken back from the foster home anytime which is why those people from the adoption centre had come back to take CA on Paritosh's complaint.

Coming to adoption, if the adoptive parents are neglecting the child then I guess the bio parents can intervene and drag the legal parents to court over the same. It all depends on the status of the child whether they are just fostered or adopted and how well they are looked after.

I don't understand, how can a parent leave their children in an orphanage temporarily just to take them back later?

What kind of a parent is this? And people are even justifying this.

If Anu was left in the orphanage for Maya to reclaim her back later, then how did the authorities let Anu go with MaAn?

Originally posted by: shubhK2308

I don't understand, how can a parent leave their children in an orphanage temporarily just to take them back later?

What kind of a parent is this? And people are even justifying this.

If Anu was left in the orphanage for Maya to reclaim her back later, then how did the authorities let Anu go with MaAn?

We DONT know what happened. There might be a 1000 reasons why, a good writer can show genuine, sympathetic reason

Maybe her life was in danger because she was a heir and she needed to be sent away without any connection to save her life

Originally posted by: Bodhianveshika

So you mean:

A person leaves the child at an "Adoption Centre" not to return in years without any information/instruction/request. But the "Adoption Centre" is supposed to assume the person hasn't given up rights of the child.

The child who is left in the home deserves to not adopted and find a family and home with the hope that one day the parent who has not come thus far, would come some day to re-claim the child.

Just an FYI, if a person who has run away from home or missing is not found in 7 years, he is declared dead. His marriage considered dissolved.

Why are you assuming that an orphanage is an adoption centre by default? Yes there are parents who leave their kids at the orphanage without any specific instructions hence they cannot assume that rights have been relinquished or given up. Giving up rights on the child is another legal process. What is so hard to understand here?

@red comparing a living parent who may have temporarily dropped her child at a facility other than her home with some one who is considered dead makes no sense at all. Moreover even then if the person shows up back alive then what are you still going to say that person is dead? Fact is unless there is a paper where she signed that she has given up her rights as a parent the orphanage cannot assume CA is put up for adoption.

Originally posted by: shubhK2308

I don't understand, how can a parent leave their children in an orphanage temporarily just to take them back later?

What kind of a parent is this? And people are even justifying this.

If Anu was left in the orphanage for Maya to reclaim her back later, then how did the authorities let Anu go with MaAn?

Simply because of circumstances, why judge them? When devaki sent her son away did anyone question her? Eventually he returned back to his original parents now didn't he? There are many parents like Maaya who are forced to temporarily stay away from their children due unavoidable circumstances or a difficult situation that could prove harmful for the child if kept with the parents so where is the question of justification even arising? Yes unless she gave up CA because she didn't want to raise the child or was not interested in having her back then MaAn keeping CA makes sense but if it isn't that and circumstances were to be blamed as she blamed her kismat then she doesn't require any justification.

Originally posted by: shubhK2308

I don't understand, how can a parent leave their children in an orphanage temporarily just to take them back later?

What kind of a parent is this? And people are even justifying this.

If Anu was left in the orphanage for Maya to reclaim her back later, then how did the authorities let Anu go with MaAn?

Simply because of circumstances, why judge them? When devaki sent her son away did anyone question her? Eventually he returned back to his original parents now didn't he? There are many parents like Maaya who are forced to temporarily stay away from their children due unavoidable circumstances or a difficult situation that could prove harmful for the child if kept with the parents so where is the question of justification even arising? Yes unless she gave up CA because she didn't want to raise the child or was not interested in having her back then MaAn keeping CA makes sense but if it isn't that and circumstances were to be blamed as she blamed her kismat then she doesn't require any justification

Originally posted by: deepzz

If that's the case why would any agency give a child who is just to be fostered to a couple who are looking for adoption?

From the time agency has given fostering responsibilty to a couple who are looking for adoption, the biological claim shouldn't be made. In case the adoptive parents are failing with their responsibility which should be judged by agency/court, the child should come back to the agency and from there, the biological parents can claim their kids again and not when the child is already with a couple.

If this fostering case happens within a family then there is also an understanding between family members and no one is going to allow the child to call foster parents as mumma papa.

That is something only the agency can answer because if at all CA was given up for adoption then why would that same agency tell the biological parents about the details of the foster parents knowing that they are back to take the child?

@bold As long as the child is not legally adopted the biological parents can claim the child and take them back anytime upon following some legal procedure, fostering is different from adoption, foster parents are different from adoptive parents like it was already explained the biological claim cannot be made only upon adoption and relinquishment of parental rights by the biological parents. Fostering is mostly temporary at the end of the day and not permanent, under fostering you're child is only put under the care of some random couple for a while till the biological parents are fit enough to come and take the child back. Now why they gave a child who is not put up for adoption for fostering to a couple looking for adoption is only something the agency would know, perhaps the answer is corruption.

Originally posted by: Rein123

That is something only the agency can answer because if at all CA was given up for adoption then why would that same agency tell the biological parents about the details of the foster parents knowing that they are back to take the child?

@bold As long as the child is not legally adopted the biological parents can claim the child and take them back anytime upon following some legal procedure, fostering is different from adoption, foster parents are different from adoptive parents like it was already explained the biological claim cannot be made only upon adoption and relinquishment of parental rights by the biological parents. Fostering is mostly temporary at the end of the day and not permanent, under fostering you're child is only put under the care of some random couple for a while till the biological parents are fit enough to come and take the child back. Now why they gave a child who is not put up for adoption for fostering to a couple looking for adoption is only something the agency would know, perhaps the answer is corruption.

Hmm probably corruption ..Glad to know such things can also happen..I know a couple who are looking for adoption...would suggest them to be mentally prepared in such situations and enquire abt adoption centres thoroughly before any commitment.