The hit television show Glee has been lauded for its tolerance and diversity, as well as its soundtrack, since it first came on the air in 2009. The show has tackled a host of story lines that have been both controversial and groundbreaking for a prime-time television about high school students, including homosexuality, teen pregnancy, developmental disability, obsessive compulsive disorder, and adoption. Glee’s portrayal of that last topic has of late irked some watchers, in particular Amber Austin who recently started an online petition which urges Fox to set the record straight about the realities of adoption.
For those of you who don’t know the difference between a gleek and a regular old geek, here’s a short synopsis: In the first season of Glee, we met Quinn, a beautiful, popular, and secretly pregnant, cheerleader who, to chagrin of her cheer leading coach, joined the glee club. Eventually, Quinn makes the decision to place her child with an adoptive parent. And, after giving birth, the baby girl is adopted by another character on the show (who just happens to be the birth mother of yet another character on the show, Rachel, who was adopted by a gay couple, and grows up to be one of the glee club’s biggest voices).
Now, right around this point in the story is where I personally stopped watching Glee so my knowledge of the current story line is limited. However, according to various news outlets, we can currently find Quinn battling the adoptive (and now legal) mother of her birth daughter in an attempt to “get her daughter back.” And, this is where Ms. Austin comes in. According to her petition, the show is perptuating one of the most “most pervasive and harmful myths about adoption” – namely, that the birth mother of a child can simply pop back up in the child’s life at her whim. I tend to agree.
As Ms. Austin correctly points out, in a legitimate adoption, a birth parent has a limited period of time in which to change their mind about an adoption. In the State of Washington, for example, a birth parent can only ask to rescind their consent to adoption at two points: (1) before the court formally approves the consent; or (2) within 48 hours of the court’s approval of the consent.
After that time has passed, the birth parent cannot ask the court to rescind the consent to adoption (or the adoption itself, once finalized) unless she can prove that her consent was obtained by fraud or under duress – both of which are very difficult to prove.
Ms. Austin also points out that many adoptions today are “open”, meaning that the birth parent or parents continue to be a part of the child’s life in some, limited capacity. The type of involvement a birth parent can have varies, but it may be limited to having a right to receive periodic updates about and pictures of the child from the legal parents, or it may allow the parent to have some visits with the child.
Of course the realities of adoption are unique to each family, but Ms. Austin is right – it’s important that adopted children, adoptive parents, and birth parents are portrayed not only with sensitivity but also with accuracy – even when that reality is bittersweet, as it appears to be for Seattle writer Dan Savage’s family. Check out his moving and honest account of his own family’s experiences with open adoption in a 2005 New York Times column here.
Story via Time Magazine.
