|   In the course of these investigations, 
              the clinic was called upon to assist in the evaluation of the child. 
              At first the idea of indiscriminate placement of children in adoption 
              seemed primitive. As, however, most babies are pretty normal and 
              most people pretty decent, it became apparent that many of these 
              placements seemed perfectly good. And then an extremely bad placement 
              would turn up and point out that adoption is a serious matter, profoundly 
              affecting the lives of at least three people, and that it does not 
              seem right that it be entrusted to the law of averages. To test 
              this point of view a series of both agency and independent adoptions 
              was reviewed. . . . 
            THE INDEPENDENT ADOPTION 
            If agency placements are so much better, then why 
              do independent placements occur? There are many and good reasons 
              such as ignorance of the value of the agencies, and the naïve 
              assumption that any person who wants to adopt a baby is fit to do 
              so. . . . 
            Independent placements entail a far greater risk, both to the child 
              and to the adopting parents. The advantages to the parent are that 
              they can get babies this way, and they can get very young babies. 
              The only advantage to the infant is that he is placed early and 
              thus spared possible institutional placement for long periods, or 
              the possible necessity of making adjustments to a series of foster 
              homes. The advantages to the natural mother are that she is relieved 
              of the responsibility of her child, quickly, cheaply, and easily. 
              These are some of the reasons why independent placements are made, 
              risk or no risk. . . . 
            SUMMARY 
             1. The present study shows that the social agencies do better 
              adoption placements than does the well-intentioned or expedient 
              laity. 
             2. Agency adoption placements are well done, on the whole, but 
              they do not place enough babies, they do not satisfy enough adopting 
              parents, and they work too slowly. Independent placements will continue 
              as long as the agencies operate as they do now, which will certainly 
              be until they have much more money and many more workers. 
            3. The probationary period should be, among other things, an escape 
              clause. It should be implemented not only by the power to remove 
              the child from the home, but by the courage to do so when necessary 
              in the child’s behalf, over the protests of the adopting parents 
              if need be. 
            4. Our efforts must continue to educate the public, which will 
              include potential adopting parents; lay persons who tend to become 
              involved in arranging independent placements; the legislators who 
              frame our laws; and the courts which render decisions on each adoption 
              situation. Thus there will be a wider understanding of the great 
              risks involved and of what constitutes good, safe, and decent practice. 
            5. The alternative to a bad adoption placement is not homelessness 
              or the orphanage but a good placement. 
             |