un-married couples - Texas - foster/adopt

The new birth certificates of our boys have my maiden name (and its listed as "maiden name of mother") and my husband's name. Also they have our "ages at time of birth" and our race is listed - and our son's race as well (we are cc, they are aa). Of note, our bio son's Canadian birthcertificate ONLY has his name on it, date and place of birth and registration number. No other information is listed on the birth certificate. This is also the same for my birthcertificate from the same province. I have no idea why the state feels it necessary to list all that private information on a birth certificate, particulalry when so much of it is inaccurate. Its much more like a custody document than a certification of birth or citizenship, which is really what a birth certificate should be. Jen

I know in my PATH classes, there were several gay couples who were in the fost/adopt program. I'm not sure if we allow gay marriages in NJ but if we don't than I'm guessing that they were both being certified as single couples??? I'm not sure how that works. I just know that 2 of the gay couples in my class got newborn placements. Maybe only one of them will be able to adopt as a single person? I always wondered about that. Also the couple that is going to adopt my sons half sister are not married. They are have been engaged for a while. I think that the woman is the one who is going to be adopting the little girl. I'm not sure though. I'm sure those details differ from state to state. I guess you need to call someone from your local office and find out. Anna, I can't believe they wanted to know everyone you dated!? Wow, going back how far? I wonder if I could even remember all of the names of the people I dated? I might leave a few out. Why would they need to know that? Just curious.

Our state wanted to know the address of EVERY PLACE we EVER lived from the time we were born and EVERY ONE we ever lived with Period. Every school we ever went to--and every job we ever had..... I have no idea why they needed the WHOLE life history we just assumed it was part of the deal--but, we did joke once in awhile when a friend would ask about the process and remark they had thought about adopting from the state--one of my husbands friends has been married 5 times and my husband and I just looked at each other thinking--wow that will be a fun homestudy process! We also had to write a paragraph about our relationship with Each sibling as children and as adults....Tell who our biggest influences in our life was and why..... It took us WEEKS to dig up all the info we had to provide....Our homestudy started with 26 pages of open ended questions! My mother had to dig around in all her things to find the address of where we lived when I was 2-4 years old.... Thankfully for my husband and I we didn't have to make a huge long list of ex-lovers..... I had to provide my first marriage certificate and divorce papers..... It was crazy--guess that is another thing that depends on the state.

Wow Anna, we didn't even have to list the addresses of all the places we lived since we were married, let alone every place we'd live since we were born... I rented a room in a house with seven other roommates, there are some that I never even knew their last names... Relationships - we were only asked if we had been married before. Said no, end of discussion. In fact, I struggle to understand the relevance of past relationships that didn't result in marriage. Surely if I would have been able to produce a list, they wouldn't have contacted all those people. Personally, if someone I had dated was required to list me, I'd feel that my consent to be on that document would be needed. All in all, I find requesting that kind of information unnecessarily intrusive. Did they ever give you an explanation of why it was necessary? Obviously there are in fact varying criteria for different states. I would suggest you contact your local offices and ask whether you meet the requirements or not. For me, marriage has two components. The personal spiritual commitment that dh and I made to one another... we didn't need a marriage license for that and I would have been perfectly content leaving it at that. The other is the legal recognition by society... we went ahead and got that license primarily so that we could reap the legal benefits of a couple (survivorship, insurance benefits, etc.) and for our daughter. I wonder if the state wants couples to be married to ensure that the child has the advantage of those legal rights. Although, if both you and your partner are on the birth certificate, your child will reap those benefits in the same way they would if you were to have a bio child outside of a state sanctioned marriage. Personally, I find this requirement puzzling. If they're testing our commitment, well then, two years is nothing. If they're testing solidity of the family unit, well, people have been married for much longer and it doesn't necessarily mean that marriage is strong and with the ever present option of divorce, it gives no indication that the marriage will continue. You know, I really can't think of any way having been married for two years is an indicator of fitness to foster or adopt... In terms of it indicating an ability to follow through, I can think of lots of reasons a legally recognized union wouldn't be an issue with alot of people. I mean if someone truly has no person need to formalize their relationship, it's not a lack of follow through, but an indicator that they didn't waste thier time on something that wasn't necessary for their lives. If it's some moralistic standard - I know couples who have never married who have a deeper commitment to one another than others who went ahead with the ceremony... So, if that's the reason, then the requirement just bugs me! Someone shed some light on this for me!

Anna, did I read your post right??? Your ex's name is on your daughter's birth certificate and you weren't married to him when you adopted her but you were married to him when she was born? Just wondering if you can now sue him for child support LMAO j/k That is soooo strange Michelle

The only other thing that I can possibly think of is back to the old Straight Adoption issues..... I am aware of the fact that in Oregon the Foster to Adopt homestudy is different and one caseworker told me it is NOTHING like the straight adoption homestudy--I would guess that perhaps the difference there is the fact that Foster to Adopt has a likelyhood of a longer time of state involvement with the family whereas on the straight adoption situation they are basically deciding who the parents are without much experience with the family during a process where the state has more rights to change their mind? My husband had lived in several room-mate situations and the state was fine about that--they wanted the romantic relationship info.... They did however question him a length about HOW a man could get to the age of 37 and not live with a woman---it was somewhat a negative in the states tone of questioning (I personally had issues with this one too actually and was real careful before I agreed to marry the guy!) I know that MJ77 and I were talking about the Homestudy a few weeks ago and HOW long it took us to just turn in all the detailed info.... We worked on one-four questions a night for weeks filling in the blanks. As far as I know the only people who were directly contacted were the people we LISTED as our references. As for romantic relationship I don't think they were interested in contacting anyone so much as to see just how many relationship we had--and why they had ended. But our people we listed for references were sent 6-pages of open ended questions to answer--and NOT one person was ery happy about it--we ended up taking 6 different families out to rather expensive dinners as a thank you for spending all that time on the questions they were asked.... And the questions they were asked were also pretty strange: "What do you think of their parenting style?" "Why would you leave your own children in their care for a two week vacation?" ......guess it is different everywhere?

You know Anna, I really think it's a state to state difference... We were licensed as foster to adopt and literally our homestudy was a breeze. In fact, looking back on it, it seems kind of skimpy... The only paperwork we filled out were the homework assignments for our training classes. Our references didn't even have to fill out forms, the social worker asked them everything over the phone. Maybe it was because the girls were family members? But, to be eligible for Miss A, all we had to do was call our licensing worker and ask if we qualified for a non-family placement and the answer was yes. Maybe we'll have to go through an additional portion if we are able to adopt Miss A? Hmmm, interesting stuff...

Michelle--Yes and No---when I divorced my ex I kept his name so it was my name when our daughter was born! Had I known that I would have changed my last name back to my maden name but oh well.... So I had the same last name for all three of my oldest kids..... Sorry I didn't make that clearer.... We thought of the child support issue when we were talking about doing IVF and my oldest daughter offered (for a moment until she thought about what she was saying) us one of her EGGS! Genetically DNA would have possibly meant child support!!! HAHA Cobb--WOW--I just thought everyone had to write a short novel to finish the homestudy......Goodness...... VERY VERY interesting......

LMAO Okay, now I'm embarrassed. I didn't even think of that Anna. Sorry, I didn't mean to be nosey!!! We had to do a TON of paperwork for our homestudy but we did NOT have to list every person we ever dated. I also believe we only had to list places we lived since we were married. We did have to do the info on siblings and our relationship with them growing up and now. Your state is very thorough in everything it does regarding the kids and I'm not so sure that's a bad thing! As you said before, you don't have many disruptions so it must work well. Michelle

I was watching some court case on TV one night where a couple adopted as singles--Actually only one single gets to adopt--So, one of them got in an accident and died. Then, the grandmother/mother of the single who adopted got custody instead of the person she was living with. So, what I am saying is that they let single people adopt because if they die, the normal rules regarding orphans come into play. Imagine though if he was the one to adopt and if something terrible happened to him and his mother then got custody!! See, you would have no legal rights to the child. She could GIVE you rights but I would not want to have to depend on that. I would want to know that no one could take her away. I think you are quite right about what you said. No matter if you get married or not, you may still split up. 2 years does not prove anything. I do however undersand how the rule would make since for most people. When a couple waits until after marriage to move in together, I think waiting 2 years to get to know each other and establish their own routine and all is a good idea before adopting a child. I also think that waiting a little while before having children is a good idea. Why they made that rule is probably because they had to make some sort of a rule to ensure that the couple was stable. I guess it is easier to prove how long a couple has been married than how long they have lived together. There's not a test to test the marriage bond so i guess the 2 year rule was what they came up with. Who said the government ever made since. It makes more since than immigrants not having to pay taxes in my book .. :) Oh, and in my city, it is against the law for a ice cream truck to use the little jingle. That one makes no since either. Since you asked for someone to shed light on the moralistic standard I will. Those who believe in the Bible (and I mean really live their lives by it) do not have sex before marriage. It makes since then that one would be dieing to get married because they want in each other's drawers ;) I am sure this makes absolutely no since to most people but if you think about it, it really would solve a lot of the world's problems if they would do that. Probably a lot more divorces ... but it would slow down AIDS, stop teenage pregnancies, who's yo daddy issues, some of the unwanted pregnancies... Now that marriage is so far behind me, I wish I would have waited. But I guess it's easier said than done. I do know that sex was a lot better before we got married :) .. .

reandruss, I agree with what you're saying about the rights of survivorship. What I don't understand is why two single people can't adopt and have both their names on the birth certificate. Non-married parents are listed on birth certificates all the time... why not with adoption. Then the rights of survivorship would be clear. I also appreciate your views on the moral issues. The reason I differentiated between spiritual and legal marriage is that I concievably could be married before God under the requirements of my church, but still forgo the license and the legal recognition. Although in most states, after a certain period of time, legal rights would be gained through common law marriage. In all, the thoughts that were sparked in me were that ultimately, you can't legislate morality. Although we continue to legislate societal norms.

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you, Anna!! I too use me ex husbands last name. I am now single adopting a lil guy and do NOT want him to have my ex's last name. I will be going back to my maiden name NOW!! Tomorrow I go dwn twn to get all my I.D. switched back to my maiden name. Never even thought about this before. OMGoodness. LOLI have a live in relationship that has lasted 7 yrs. We have no plans on marrying ever. We know we love each other and we are committed to each other. The only way we would get married was if the CCAS said we had to in order to adopt our lil guy. It is I that will be named on the BC as parent bc in Ontario from CCAS, common law couples cannot adopt together. We knew that when we started the process. Our sw is well aware that we will be parenting together. For homestudy I was not asked to name all the places I had ever lived. We weren't even asked where we had lived as a couple. The ref letters were sent to 4 people of my chooseing and it consisted of 8 questions. For finances they took my word for it, and I (nor us), were required to show any tax papers etc to prove that what I was saying was correct. I found that strange! The sw talked to my adult bio's by phone and sent letters to the bank and the Dr.s office asking if they knew of any reason why MS._____ ______ shouldn't be allowed to adopt? Heck I dont even know my bank manager! I also had to get police clearance (canada wide). Mike was also asked to get the clearance as we have been very up front as I said, and the CCAS is aware that even though it is I adopting, that we will be parenting together. For the info on my sibs, I wrote "that we get along good and that there was no problems btw any of us". Thats all I wrote about that. The last thing we have had to do was increase our insurance and make a will.(stateing who I would leave our son to if something happened to me) I thought I had a long Home Study... looks like I got off easy compared to some. BUT... I was VERY upset when I learned that because we choose to not marry, our son will not have his fathers last name(on paper anyway). I think it's a dumb rule for all the reasons stated above.( ty Cobb) Cmon it is 2005!!!

In Missouri the rules state that two people living together in a situation simulating marriage will not be able to foster or adopt.

In Texas, if you live together with the intent to get married-engaged- for a certain perioed of time (I can't remember how long) you are recognized as married under the law. My sister lives in Texas and says that their "common law" statutes are very leniant. Signing documents with his last name, filing taxes together, or living together for a certain period of time places you in this category. Check it out and you may find that you can meet the requirements, even if they ask for marriage.

From looking at statstics from the past and present, it is apparent that following the model of marriage that you are talking about results in less divorce rather than more. I think this is because, if people are willing to follow the part about no-premarital sex, they are fully committed to Biblical marriage. This means treating each other with respect, love, and fidelity and having a marriage that is a covenant between the couple and God, not merely a contract-which is what our culture seems to consider marriage.