Item number 9 in the Oklahoma code states:
"Promote and strengthen the integrity and finality of adoption by limiting the time and circumstances for a consent to be withdrawn or a challenge to the adoption filed; and"
Comments:
Does anyone catch the first part of that code: "promote and strengthen the integrity and finality of adoption?" So adoption needs to be strengthened and promoted to have integrity and finality. Those words seems to contraindicate any rights, best interests, civil rights, or support of the family from which that child comes. The words are in support of adoption, a thing that happens to a child who has been stripped of his/her biological family. By all means, let's strengthen what is already so skewed and flawed in the first place that by writing codes into law, the best interest of the child gets completely buried.
Going back to the way this code begins: "The Legislature of this state believes that every child should be raised in a secure, loving home and finds that adoption is the best way to provide a permanent family for a child whose biological parents are not able or willing to provide for the child's care or whose parents believe this child's best interest will be best served through adoption."
So in order to be sure that the state has validity to promoting adoption as the answer for a parent who "believes" the child's best interest will be best served..." the codes are written to "protect" the adoptive parent so that IF biological parent(s) make a decision to place a child for adoption, the states is going to back up the adoption plan by not allowing the biological parent (who made the decision believed to be in the best interest of their child) to change their mind because all of a sudden, after making that initial decision, they no longer have the sense God gave a goose to change their minds. After all, that would not "strengthen the integrity and finality" of that adoption plan.
So the codes now state that the time is limited for withdrawal of consent AND circumstances are narrowed to be able to challenge the adoption. Once again, who does this code protect? The child, NO. If the biological parent changes their minds, how does not allowing them to change their minds protect the child? The child belongs with the biological parent. Being with the biological parent is willing and able IS the best thing. Who decided to act like God and "legally" strengthen adoption codes to protect the "heartache" of the adoptive parents from the the biological parents changing their minds?
