“Court Termination” versus “Child Taken Away”

Parental rights can be terminated for a variety of reasons. Sometimes they are voluntarily terminated, such as when the birthparents make an adoption plan and sign relinquishment papers. Other times, parental rights are involuntarily terminated by a judge through the court system.

There are many reasons why a court might terminate parental rights. An obvious reason for terminating parental rights is if the birthparents have neglected or abused the child. People often assume that this is the only reason that parental rights would be terminated involuntarily, but there are other reasons that do not involve harming the child.

For example, birthfathers often refuse to sign relinquishment papers, even though they have no intention of preventing the child from being placed for adoption. According to our adoption agency, this is actually the norm for most of the adoptions that it handles. I was surprised to learn this and inquired why. According to our agency, many birthfathers are not opposed to having their parental rights terminated by a court, but they do not want a piece of paper showing that they CHOSE to relinquish those rights. Our agency told us that, in most of their adoptions, the adoptive family must go to court for the finalization. The birthfather is given notice of the hearing. The birthfather will often not show up, which is his passive approval of terminating his parental rights.

Because there are many reasons why parental rights might be terminated, it is inaccurate to say that a child was “taken away” from his birthparents. In the example of the birthfather who chooses not to sign the relinquishment papers but does not oppose the adoption, he is still making an adoption plan in a passive way. His birth child is not being “taken away” from him. He could stop the adoption and choose to parent at any time before the court terminates his parental rights.

The phrase “child taken away” implies that the birthparents have done something wrong, and this is often not the case. The phrase also sounds like a child is being wrenched out of the birthparents’ arms, which is simply not true in most cases.