Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, August 23, 1993 TAG: 9312170002
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A6 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: PETER C. MILLER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
The absolute results, which are immediate, should be obvious to all, and to those unfortunate childless couples considering adoption, their awareness will be acute.
When would the adoption be final? Possibly never!
The immense and disproportionate originating costs of any adoption must now also include a reserve to defend a reversal effort by the biological parent(s).
The adoptive effort should now include a legal opinion, comparable to a title opinion, in advance of any serious adoptive effort. Since this is only an opinion, it would be subject to the same kind of litigation and legal expense we have seen in Jessica DeBoer's case.
More importantly, the reasonable right of hundreds of thousands of innocent children to a proper, safe and loving upbringing will be dashed forever, as will the hopes of modestly endowed couples longing for a child or children of their own. They will opt for a dog or two and let it go at that.
With the market of adoptive homes effectively destroyed, the dependency costs once more will be born ineffectively by the taxpayer through higher social costs, and the salvage of the innocent to a productive lifestyle afforded by adoption will be lost in favor of a grossly increased percentage of the population, completely dependent and more likely permanently dysfunctional.
This incredible opinion comes at a time when adoptive homes are needed perhaps more than ever in our history, with unwanted and unplanned pregnancies an epidemic at every socio-economic level of our society.
A cursory examination will, however, reveal a silver lining. With the stroke of a pen, that court, in its ridiculous but well-calculated opinion, established an entire new field of litigation for the legal practitioners.
It is likely, also, that their servants in the insurance community will shortly offer a policy of indemnification to cover some portion of the post-adoptive legal costs, and all will be well so long as the adoptive parents keep up with their premium obligations until the child reaches majority. This money could perhaps be better spent for pre-college savings instead, but the security of the family unit will have priority. The insurance factor, if purchased, will not guarantee success of the litigation nor will it mend the broken hearts of parents and children alike, but it will perpetuate the wealth of the legal advocates on both sides of each and every contested adoption case, and extend the litigation period at least until the insurance money is exhausted.
The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and their charges should also benefit from increased animal adoption. To this writing at least, the legal fraternity has not found meaningful income potential in this area
Someone should send a pack of appreciative but hungry Dobermans out to the residence of the court official responsible for this latest travesty for a free five-course meal. Justice might then be truly served.
So long as we continue to send lawyers to elective office and let them select judges from their own ranks, our problems will expand, and be compounded, for the self-serving and exclusive benefit of our legal practitioners with incalculable costs to society.
Peter C. Miller of Wytheville is in motel/hotel operations.
by CNB