Advertisements
Hi All,
I apologize if this is in the wrong forum, but there are many categories this question seems to fit. I'm looking to adopt through the foster system, but I'd like to straight adopt vs using the option of adoption legal risk. It was explained to me that with regular adoption if you'd like a child under 6 without any special needs then you'd be placed on a waitlist which is on average 2 years. I asked the person running the information session why in the world anyone that wanted to adopt would choose legal risk over adoption. I really did not get a good answer. It was very vague. Can someone help me to understand? Why would someone put themselves through that emotional turmoil (the child could be returned to their family) when they could just go to straight adoption? There isn't a wait for regular adoption, unless the child is under 6 AND not special needs. Could that be why? Maybe they who want a younger child, but don't want to wait so they are willing to go the legal risk option with the hopes they will get a child under 6 and not have to wait? I feel like i'm missing an important part of the puzzle, or could that be it? That's the only benefit I can see. The only reason I am considering it is because I'm 40+ and really would rather that 2 years be spent bonding with a child vs spending 2 years on a waitlist that may never come to fruition.
Thanks in advance!
Like
Share