Estate Planning: Making a Will, 7 Things You Should Consider

Filed under: estate planning Tags:

Written By Attorney Tim Bishop on Articles Free UK

However much you might like to try and ignore it, death, like taxation, is unavoidable. With a valid and up-to-date will, however, you can make sure that your assets are distributed according to your wishes, and that you have made proper provision for your loved ones.

Before making a will, however, you will need to consider the following:

1. Your property – make a list of everything you own and how much it is worth. Include your home and any buy-to-let or holiday property you may have, money in bank or building society accounts, shares, pensions, insurance policies, any personal valuables and any business interests you own.

2. Providing for your loved ones – who do you want to leave your property to? Make sure that you make proper provision for your spouse or partner, children, extended or previous family members and friends. Do you want to leave some money to a particular charity? Do you want to put any conditions on any of your legacies? A common condition is that children must reach a particular age, say 21, before being entitled to the money that you leave them.

3. Guardians – do you have any minor children? If so, who would you want to care for them if you were to die before they reach the age of 18?

4. Your business interests – what would you like to happen to any business interests you may own after you die?

5. Any other wishes? Do you have any particular wishes for the arrangement of your funeral? In particular, would you prefer to be buried or cremated – or is there something else you would prefer? How do you feel about organ donation?

6. Appointing Executors – executors are people you appoint to administer your estate i.e. carry out your wishes under the will when you die. This could be a family member or close friend, or an experienced professional such as a solicitor. A common and often sensible combination is to appoint both a family member and a solicitor. Make sure that you appoint someone who understands financial issues and don’t forget to make sure that they are prepared to take on the role of executorships should you die. This is important as without checking with them first, you run the risk of them refusing to act as executors and leaving the estate without someone you have chosen to administer it. Remember that the responsibilities of the will can be quite long lasting – especially if your will involves the creation of a trust, for example with regard to your children.

7. Finally don’t forget to make sure you are aware of the tax implications, particularly with regard to inheritance tax, of your will.

It is good advice to review your will at least every 5 years and especially on any major life changes such as marriage, divorce, or having a child. Although it is possible these days to prepare your own will, there are serious risks involved and sadly the number of incorrectly drafted wills being contested is rising rapidly – at vast financial and emotional cost to the estate of the deceased. You should think about getting some professional advice from an experienced wills and probate solicitor – they should be able to draw up a simple will for you for a reasonable fixed cost.

For more information about Estate Planning or Contact Us.

Estate Planning: Why You Should Hold Title to Your Home in a Living Trust

Filed under: estate planning Tags:

Written and posted on Playa Vista Listings

After months of dealing with the complex process of buying a new home – from selecting an agent, to viewing properties, to securing a loan, to negotiating a purchase price –homebuyers often think that once the ink is dry on the escrow papers, the deal is done. However, taking the extra step to determine how best to hold title to your home can potentially save thousands of dollars in fees and taxes, and prevent costly title defects that can hinder your ability to sell the property. Holding title to your home in a living trust – as opposed to “community property”- is the single best way to avoid these complications. The living trust is a self-settled revocable trust (you created it) that, when someone dies, causes their estate to avoid the public probate process. Like a will, a trust specifies who is to inherit your home and other assets when you die. Holding title to your home and your other assets in a trust ensures that your instructions on how to distribute them will be carried out after you die. Additionally, if a husband and wife hold title to a home as community property, instead of in their names as trustees of their living trust, and one of them dies, the surviving spouse is prevented from selling the residence as quickly as it would be if it were in a living trust. One of the other reasons for utilizing a living trust is to avoid the exorbitant statutory fees associated with the probate process. For example, on an estate of $1 million, fees will run about $46,000 ($23,000 payable to the attorney and $23,000 payable to the Executor), whereas the costs of administration of a living trust is generally much, much less. In addition to real estate, assets including liquid cash accounts, savings accounts, stock brokerage accounts and personal effects like jewelry, furniture and other personal items can also be transferred to the living trust. The consequences of your home being in the name of an individual or as “community property” between spouses or registered domestic partners, upon the death of you or your loved one, is a formal court proceeding known as probate (proving of the Will). If you had a living trust upon your death and your successor trustee can prove that you intended for your home to be in it, a quicker and easier judicial process known as the “Heggstad petition” may result in a court order transferring the assets to the successor trustees of your living trust. The probate process is generally a nine-month minimum period whereas the “Heggstad petition” process can usually obtain the needed court order in about six to eight weeks. Both the probate process and the “Heggstad petition” court order transfer the assets to the successor trustee of the living trust. When an attorney assists with the creation of the living trust, he generally prepares and assists with the recording of deeds with the appropriate county(ies) transferring title to the trustees of the trust. Often times though, certain assets do get transferred to the living trust, but somehow are transferred back into the individual name of the settlor(s) of the trust. This happens most often with the family residence as a result of a refinance. Some lending institutions want the borrower’s name on the deed before they will lend and as a result, ask that the property be deeded back to the settlor of the living trust before the loan can be completed. This is just fine, however, one should never allow for their real estate to be transferred out of the living trust without clear instructions that it is to be transferred back into the name of the living trust immediately after securing the loan.

For more information about Estate Planning or Contact Us.

Estate Planning: What We Don’t Do Can Really Hurt

Filed under: estate planning Tags: ,

Written by Christopher Heritage, Esq. on SDGLN.com

We have talked about powers of attorney, Wills and probate processes in the past couple of months. Possibly you nodded off while reading them, or skipped them entirely. I understand. We don’t like to think about incapacity or death. Also, estate planning is not really for you—it is for those you leave behind. It often takes an unexpected jolt or tragic occurrence to make us say “Oh no! I should have…” or “How awful! He forgot to…” But at that point, it is often too late.

Let’s look at two real life incidents that may make you take action:

Scene 1:

Dee and Joanne were registered domestic partners in California, and both had Wills. State law views them as “spouses” who can inherit community and separate property assets from each other, often without going through probate. When Dee passed away, Joanne discovered that their home was not titled in joint tenancy. It is solely in Dee’s name. To make matters much worse, Dee had handwritten some beneficiary changes on her Will. Although the Will provided that Joanne inherit the house and most of Dee’s assets, the Will is invalid because she wrote on it. Dee had passed away “intestate”—without a Will.

Joanne, in poor health herself, was heartbroken. She had to file a probate petition and retain an attorney to help sort things out, and only now, nearly a year and a half later, has the court determined that the house and other assets may be legally transferred into Joanne’s name.

Just two simple errors caused a huge heartache, a huge expense and a lot of wasted time. It is easy to title your assets correctly. It is easy to make legal changes to your Will. Find an attorney. The cost of correct titling or a simple codicil to a Will may be as little as a couple of hours of the attorney’s time. Compared to the frustration and enormous financial and psychological cost of intestacy or other errors, you owe that to your loved ones.

Scene 2:

Jeff was pleased with himself. Five years ago, at age 65, he had his attorney set up a living trust to pass on his house and savings; a durable power of attorney; and health and personal care directives. His assets were modest, but he felt secure. If he became incapacitated, his nephew Jay, who was named as his personal agent, would manage his assets and his medical care.

Jeff and his best friend, Two Cents, a Yorkshire terrier, lived comfortably until suddenly Jeff suffered a stroke and was rushed to the hospital. Like clockwork, the terms of the power of attorney and directives took effect, and that day, Jay assumed management of Jeff’s financial affairs and his medical care. It was clear that Jeff’s memory and speech were seriously affected and he would have a long period of incapacity.

Jay forgot about Two Cents until he entered Jeff’s home two days later. Two Cents was unfed, un-walked and frantic. Jay had no place to keep the dog, and knowing that Jeff might not be returning home for a long time, decided to take the dog to the pound. He wanted to be a good custodian of Jeff’s financial affairs. He shouldn’t be spending Jeff’s money on a dog.

Several weeks passed, and Jeff was recuperating. As his speech and memory began to improve, his first questions were about Two Cents. Was he all right? Was Jay feeding him the right food? Could Two Cents come to see him? When could he go home to be with Two Cents?

Well, you know the rest. If only Jeff’s attorney had added a simple statement to the durable power of attorney directing Jay to spend the money needed for the care of Two Cents, the pet would be here now to help Jeff on his long road to recovery.

None of us would consciously hurt our partners, spouses, families or pets. We are disturbed and angry when we hear about such things happening to others. But we still fail, time after time, to review our own plans and how they may affect our loved ones if something happens to us. It costs us so little to be sure they will not be harmed by something we forgot to do. Please, review your plans for their future today.

This article is part of an ongoing series of articles pertaining to legal issues in the LGBT community. Previous articles can be viewed at heritagelegal.com. This information is intended for general information purposes only, and is not intended to provide legal advice. Christopher Heritage is an attorney in Palm Springs, who focuses on LGBT estate planning, domestic partnerships, same-sex marriage, probate, trust administration, and consumer bankruptcy.

For more information regarding Estate Planning or Contact Us.

Estate Administration: Congress Throws Estate Plans Into Disarray

Filed under: estate administration Tags: ,

Written By Ashlea Ebeling on Forbes.com

Lawyers see litigation and administrative nightmares resulting from political impasse.

Barring a last-minute political deal, the federal estate tax is set to disappear as of Jan. 1, 2010–for just one year. Democratic leaders of Congress are vowing to resurrect the tax retroactively sometime next year, but the impending lapse has estate planners in a tizzy. They worry the lapse could turn into a nightmare for some families.

“We may have to change every other client document,” laments Carol Harrington, the head of the Private Client Group at McDermott Will & Emery.

The one-year repeal of the estate tax has been a part of the law since the Bush tax cuts were passed in 2001. In 2011, when those tax cuts expire, the estate tax will come roaring back to life with a $1 million per estate exemption from tax and a 55% top rate. By contrast, for those dying in 2009, $3.5 million of each estate is exempt from federal tax and the top estate rate is 45%. 

But the reality is that the families of those who die during the lapse–including those who aren’t so wealthy–may not save any tax and could face a real mess. “Beneficiaries will deal with uncertainty for years,” warns Kaye Thomas, a tax lawyer who opines on tax issues at his Web site, fairmark.com. “Having a brief period when the estate tax doesn’t apply will almost surely lead to questions as to whether wills and trusts drafted under the assumption that the tax would remain in force truly reflect the intent of the decedent,” he adds.

An unlimited amount can be left to a spouse tax-free. So estate planning documents drafted for couples often include formula clauses designed to preserve the estate tax exemption of the first spouse to die. But those clauses could spell trouble during the lapse.

Here’s how one such clause might backfire: A man has $6 million in net worth and his will gives his children from his first marriage the “exemption” amount with the rest going to his second wife. If he dies in 2009, when the exemption is $3.5 million, wife No. 2 is left with $2.5 million and the $3.5 million going to the kids is exempt from estate tax. Sounds fair and tax-savvy.

But if the man dies on Jan. 1, his will could be interpreted to leave the entire $6 million to his children with his widow left out in the cold. Imagine the family feuds–and litigation.

Even if the family gets along, and with no second-marriage issue, a will that unintentionally transfers all assets to the kids could create huge problems, including incurring extra state estate taxes (23 states and the District of Columbia have their own estate taxes).

In addition, if Congress reinstates the estate tax retroactively, some heirs of those who die during the no-estate tax time period are likely to put up a fight instead of paying big bucks in estate tax. “If there’s a significant estate, you’re going to have litigation,” predicts Donald Hamburg, an estates lawyer in New York City.

The question for the courts would be: “Is the retroactive estate tax an unconstitutional ex post facto law?” To be sure, a constitutional challenge is a long shot. Taxpayers sued and lost on whether it’s constitutional to retroactively increase the top estate tax rate in Nationsbank of Texas v. U.S. In that case, a woman died in March 1993, when the estate tax was 50%, with a $28 million estate. But as part of the 1993 budget deal, Congress later raised the rate for 1993 deaths retroactively to 55%. Her heirs sued over the extra tax, took it up to a Court of Appeals and lost. They were denied a hearing by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Still, the retroactive imposition of a tax–as opposed to a retroactive tax rate increase–is arguably different, says Blanche Lark Christerson, managing director at Deutsche Bank Private Wealth Management.

Heirs would have to wait until the constitutional issue is resolved in the courts before they get their inheritances. “It certainly will mean that inheritances will be delayed in whole or in part,” says Linda Hirschson, an estate lawyer with Greenberg Traurig in New York.

As a practical matter, people can take the position that the tax is retroactive and they’re not going to fight it, or they can take the position it’s not retroactive and gear up for a fight with the IRS and later in the courts. If they take the latter position, they’d better keep funds in the estate until things have cleared up, Hirschson says.

While only perhaps 5,500 estates over $3.5 million would have a tax problem with the retroactive imposition of the estate tax, tens of thousands of smaller estates still face a logistical and tax mess during the period the law has lapsed. As part of the current law, during the one year that the estate tax disappears, so too does a provision which gives all inherited assets a “step-up” in basis to their value at the time of the owner’s death. (Step-up means heirs can sell right away without owing any capital gains taxes.)

Instead, for the one year of the estate tax lapse, only the first $1.3 million in assets gets a step up in basis. That means heirs of some estates larger than that will have to pay lawyers and accountants extra to figure out which assets to include in the $1.3 million. Moreover, they may not even know what the original cost of various assets was.

Harrington notes that if there’s a surviving spouse, he or she can get an additional $3 million of assets that have been stepped up. So in theory, some estates might be able to shield up to $4.3 million from capital gains, depending on how an estate plan is drafted.

Still, the loss of step-up is a key reason planners assumed the politicians–if they wanted to keep their jobs–would change the law before 2010. Congress actually repealed step-up once before, but never allowed the provision to take effect because of the outcry from families, lawyers and accountants.

With all these problems there is a potentially huge planning opportunity, says Hamburg.

Along with the repeal of the estate tax is the repeal of the so-called “generation-skipping tax” (GST), a stiff extra tax that applies to transfers to grandchildren and others, which is designed to limit multigenerational gifts that skip a generation of tax. Wealthy grandma can make significant gifts to grandchildren using multigenerational trusts, paying a gift tax (which isn’t repealed) but no GST. “Lawyers are talking about setting up these trusts in January,” Hamburg says. It’s not clear if this will work if Congress reinstates the GST retroactively and it is held to be constitutional.

Where will this all settle? An estate tax with a $3.5 million per-person exemption ratcheting up to $5 million over 10 years, and a 35% top rate (or perhaps a top rate tied to the top personal income tax rate), predicts Dean Zerbe, national managing director with the AlliantGroup and former tax counsel to Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa.

“This is a classic football exercise–you get politicians on both sides posturing,” Zerbe says. “The biggest winners out of this are the estate tax attorneys. It’s a sad day for everybody else.”

 

While planners have bemoaned the uncertainty since 2001, few believed the politicians would be reckless (or deadlocked) enough to let the tax expire and then come back. They always assumed there would have to be some sort of a political deal before time was up.

“I’ve never seen Congress do anything so stupid,” says Harrington. “The uncertainty is paralyzing. We were not cynical enough.”

You might think heirs of those who die between Jan. 1 and the signing of a new estate tax law will be in luck. That’s why there have been jokes about 2010 being the year to “throw mama from the train” or to send Dad hunting with Dick Cheney.

For more information on Estate Administration  or Contact us.

How to Terminate Temporary Child Guardianship

Filed under: Guardianship Tags:

Published on eHow.com By Vivian Pearson, Contributing Writer

If you have temporary relinquished guardianship of your child due to illness, homelessness or financial problems and wish to regain physical custody of your child, you will need to submit a petition to the court that heard the initial guardianship case. After you file your petition with the court, you will need to attend a hearing in front of a family court judge, who will determine whether to return custody of your child.

Step 1

Prepare a petition to terminate temporary guardianship. Your petition should list the child’s full name and date of birth, your full name and relationship to the child and your reasons for wanting to terminate the temporary guardianship arrangement.

Step 2

Sign the document and have it notarized. Before submitting your petition to the court, execute it in the presence of a notary public.

Step 3

File the petition with the court. To have your petition reviewed by a judge, you will need to submit it to the clerk of the court, who will assign you a hearing date.

Step 4

Make your case in front of the family court judge. At your hearing, explain your reasons for wishing to terminate temporary child guardianship.

Step 5

Present evidence to back up your claims that you are willing and able to care for the minor. If you relinquished guardianship due to problems caring for the child, you may be asked to call in witnesses and provide written evidence to establish that you are a fit custodian.

For more information about Guardianship or Contact us.

Is Probate Necessary?

Filed under: estate administration Tags: ,

Published on NapaValleyRegister.com By McNichol & Tillem

Dear Len & Rosie, I have heard conflicting information about trusts vs. wills regarding probate. If you only have a will, does it have to go through probate in California? If so, how long does that process take and how much does the family lose to probate? – Charlotte

Dear Charlotte, The answer to the question, “Is my estate going to pass through probate,” does not depend on whether or not you have a will. The need for probate depends on the value of your probate estate, which consists of everything titled in your name upon your death, outside of a trust and without joint tenants or pay on death beneficiaries.

If the total value of your estate is less than $100,000, your heirs can collect your estate 40 days or more after your death, with small estate declarations described in section 13101 of the California Probate Code.

Many banks have their own forms for this, so a lawyer may not be needed at all. Transferring real property of small value is harder. Your heirs will have to have the property appraised by a California Probate Referee and petition the court. But it’s still a lot easier, faster, and cheaper than a full-blown probate.

If the total value of your estate is $100,000 or more, then probate is necessary. Probate is time-consuming and typically takes anywhere from 12 to 18 months. Probate is also expensive. Probate lawyer fees are set by statute as follows:

• 4 percent of the first $100,000

• 3 percent of the next $100,000

• 2 percent of the next $800,000

• 1 percent of the amount above $1 million

The lawyer for a modest $500,000 estate gets paid $13,000. Since the executor gets the same amount, the total fee is doubled to $26,000. And this does not count “extraordinary” fees that are routinely approved by the court for “extra” work such as selling your home.

How can you avoid this? The operative word here is “estate.” Assets in your probate estate must pass through probate or by small estate declarations and petitions. The trick is to hold title to your assets outside of your probate estate so they will not be subject to probate after your death.

You can avoid probate by holding title to your assets in joint tenancy with your heirs, or by using bank account pay-on-death beneficiary designations.

Surviving spouses inheriting an estate can also avoid probate with a spousal property petition. The problem is that joint tenancy can backfire.

Your children may decide to take the money and run — it happens sometimes. Also, if your children are on title to your home, you’ll have to ask them permission if you want to sell your home or take out a new loan. Your home could even be subject to the claims of their creditors.

For these reasons, the best way to avoid probate is with a revocable trust. Trust assets are not part of your probate estate and are therefore not subject to probate.

A revocable trust is also completely under your control so you will not have to seek your children’s approval for what you do with your own property.

For more information about Probate or Estate Administration or Contact Us.

The Price of Adoption

Filed under: Adoption Tags:

Posted on Think Christian on December 14, 2009 by Amy Adair (Guest Blogger)

“How much did she cost?” the cashier at the grocery store asked, pointing to my daughter.

I nervously shifted Evie, on my hip and swiped my credit card. My husband and I had just gotten home from Beijing, China, with our new daughter and I wasn’t prepared for prying questions from strangers.

“How much did you pay for your car?” I shot back.

She wrinkled her forehead, frowned, and was obviously offended by my question.

“I’d just heard that it was $100,000 to adopt from a China,” she hissed.

“It’s not $100,000,” I sighed. “She didn’t cost a penny. We did, however, pay a social worker and an agency to help facilitate the adoption.”

As I headed back to my car, I had a sinking feeling that more people would ask the same question. I was right. The first week Evie was home, my dentist, a neighbor, and a stranger at the park all wanted to know: How much?

It is true, adoption isn’t cheap. There are a lot of fees that add up quickly. We paid for a home study, visas, passports, immigration papers, plane tickets, and hotels. Quite honestly, it is a financial sacrifice. But so are other things that people don’t question, like sending your child to college. People find a way to do it. Much like financing a college education, there are grants, loans, and federal tax credits available to adoptive parents.

I wonder, though, what’s the cost of not adopting? It was never God’s intention for children to grow up in an orphanage without the love of a mother or father. Clearly God weeps for those who suffer, especially the fatherless. In fact, in Matthew 19:14, Jesus berates his disciples for turning children away from him. Jesus invites the children to stay and declares that the kingdom of Heaven belongs not to the grown-ups but to the kids. It is one of the many beautiful pictures in the Bible that illustrates God as our Abba or Father.

It is also a call to action. Just as Jesus welcomed the children, he asks us to reach out to the neediest to the least of these.

Imagine what would happen if every Christian world-wide cared for orphans? I know not every Christian is called to parent an orphaned child. But I do believe that Christ calls every Christian to care for and support the fatherless. That could be praying for an adoptive family, supporting an adoption cause, or sponsoring a waiting child.

Financing an adoption isn’t the price tag that should shock people. It’s the cost of standing by and doing nothing that should leave Christ-followers speechless.

(Amy has written children’s books, a teen magazine column, interviews, and adoption applications. She is the proud mother to two boys who are 7 and 4. Her latest adventure led her to Beijing, China, with her husband Jonathan where they met their newest addition to the family, a two year old little girl.)

For more information regarding adoption or contact us.

Probate Question and Answer

Filed under: estate administration Tags: ,

Question:
From Bryan, TX:  My 10 year old son inherited property with his father as trustee. Currently all title and tax papers all show the deceased still as the owner and responsible party. Should the lawyer have changed all this after the will was probated. We used the same lawyer to probate as the one who wrote the will for the deceased. Where do I start?

Answer:

James P. Frederick, Attorney licensed in Michigan, states: I would call the lawyer first and make sure that things are actually as you believe them to be. Title should be changed as part of the probate process. Indeed, that is generally the only reason to go through probate administration, in the first place. If the estate has been closed, you need to check to make sure the PR still has legal authority to transfer title. If the lawyer does not give you a clear answer, I would consult with another lawyer or go to the probate court. I am not sure what tax papers you refer to, but it is probably that those can be changed, outside of the probate proceeding, once you are sure that ownership has changed.

Answer:

Steve Fromm, Attorney licensed in Pennsylvania, states: The prior lawyer makes some good points. After the estate administration is completed, it would seem that the property has to be placed into a trust for your son and that transfer of title is imperative. In addition, such trust needs its own employer identification number. You need to ask the attorney for a roadmap of how things will proceed and the timetable he thinks will be needed.

For more information regarding the Probate process or contact us.

Social Barriers Remain for Adoption

Filed under: Adoption Tags:

By David Castellon with Visalia Times-Delta and Tulare Advance-Register

Of the hundreds of teenage girls going through unplanned pregnancies that Karen Pringle deals with in her job, few — maybe 1 percent — tell her they plan to put their babies up for adoption.

Pringle and others who work with teenage and pregnant girls in Tulare County say rarely does the subject of adoption come up. And when it does, the girls and young women often don’t think much of the idea.

Pringle is perinatal services coordinator for the Tulare County Health and Human Services Agency.

Maricela Lupercio, director of Latinos4Life, an anti-abortion group based in Visalia, said adoption seems to be particularly taboo among Hispanic girls and young women.

She recounted a recent conversation with a woman who had an abortion at 15, became pregnant again and gave birth to a child.

She now is pregnant for the third time at 19 and was considering another abortion, Lupercio said. “I asked her if she had ever considered adoption, and she said, ‘Oh, no. I could never do that.’ ”

Lupercio said that for some girls, particularly Hispanics, adoption has a bad image — even worse than abortion for some.

“As far as I know and [among] the people who I know and I’ve met, in the Hispanic culture, it’s not as common to adopt babies,” she said.

So a lot of Hispanic girls often aren’t exposed to adoption and never see the positive outcomes of it, Lupercio explained.

They believe “adoption is some taboo thing to do,” and it just doesn’t enter their minds as an option in dealing with unplanned or unwanted pregnancies.

Sharon Phillips, a school nurse who teaches health and sex education classes for 12 Tulare County school districts, the closest being the Tulare Joint Union High and Farmersville Unified school districts, agrees.

“I never hear adoption [brought up] very much,” she said.

Sex education instructors contacted for this report said abortion or adoption aren’t part of their curriculums. And if students bring those subjects up during their classes, their responses usually are limited.

For example, “If they were to ask me, I would tell them where they could go to ask about adoption,” said Aracelly Oros, program coordinator for the Proteus Inc. Community Challenge Grant, which provides comprehensive sex education classes to Visalia middle and high schools.

It’s not something many parents or friends of pregnant teens want to hear either, said Shyla Erich-Smith, a Tulare-based adoption attorney.

“It seems to be a theme that I’ve heard that they’re being pressured to keep the children by their peers, by their parents. There just seems to be a cultural thing in this area,” she said.

And that pressure can lead to some bad decisions, including girls hiding their pregnancies — or at least trying to — so they can have their babies adopted without family and friends finding out, Erich-Smith said.

During her murder trial in October, Nancy Ortiz testified she had hidden from her family three pregnancies, secretly had given birth over nearly two years and had abandoned all three newborns in her Orosi neighborhood.

One of those babies died of hypothermia.

Ortiz, 24, convicted of second-degree murder and child abuse, claimed she never considered abortion or adoption because she didn’t believe her family would have allowed her to do either, even though she was an adult.

Erich-Smith said she’s had several clients who have hidden their pregnancies by wearing baggy clothes, as Ortiz did.

Many pregnant minors aren’t aware that the law says they can make decisions about their babies that their parents can’t override even though they aren’t adults, said Peggy Schulze, adoption services manager for Chrysalis House Inc., a Fresno-based adoption agency.

Still, even with the law on the minor parents’ side, some still give in to family and peer pressure in deciding whether to keep their babies, Erich-Smith said.

Adding to the pressure on young parents is the belief that once they arrange an adoption, they never will see their children again, Schulze said. “It just doesn’t seem a positive choice.”

But that’s not necessarily true, as those sorts of “closed adoptions” aren’t the only options available, she said.

“A closed adoption is where [a mother] may or may not choose the adoptive parents, but there is no identifying information exchanged, there is no contact after placement. That is very, very rare now. Most women don’t choose closed adoption,” Schulze explained. “Most women want to know how their child is doing down the road. They want updates. They want pictures, and we explain to them they have this right.”

As such, the birth mother — and the baby’s father, if he chooses to be involved — have options ranging from periodically receiving photos and updates on the child to having occasional visits with the child to becoming extended family, depending on the agreement made with the adoptive family, Schulze and Erich-Smith said.

In addition, the birth parents can set guidelines for choosing the adoptive parents, including religion, race and whether there already are other children in a household.

In adoptions arranged by lawyers and adoption agencies, mothers can choose to meet with potential adoptive parents and pick who will get their babies.

If birth parents don’t want to deal with a lawyer or private adoption agency, the county’s Health and Human Services Agency also has an adoption unit, said Kathleen Trevino, the agency’s adoption team leader.

“They can give us some parameters [for selecting adoptive parents], but a lot of our families aren’t looking to do open adoptions like the private agencies,” she said.

Health and Human Services doesn’t have as extensive a list of people looking to adopt as adoption lawyers and adoption agencies may have, Trevino added.

Parents working to adopt their children through the county would have to surrender those children to the county through a relinquishment process that can begin before the child is born but can’t be finalized until after the birth and the mother has been released from the hospital.

Adoption lawyers and adoption agencies may offer counseling to the birth mothers and fathers before and after the adoptions, and Trevino said her office’s social workers can provide counseling or refer the parents to Tulare County Mental Health Services if they need more extensive treatment.

Newborns given up through California’s Safe Surrender Program also may be put up for adoption, though parents have a 14-day cooling period to change their minds and reclaim their children. After the 14 days, parent may still be able to regain custody of their surrendered children once authorities determine they are fit to care for them.

In some cases, parents may not have choices about adoptions if their children are removed from their custody because of abuse or neglect.

“In most cases, we try unification” to bring the families back together, which may involve parenting classes, substance-abuse counseling or the resolution of the situations that resulted in the children being removed, said Charlotte Wittig, a Tulare County Superior Court commissioner whose duties include overseeing adoptions of children who have become county dependents.

In the year ended last June 30, 123 children who were county dependents were adopted, down from 204 in the previous year, according to Health and Human Services records. Since July 1, 70 county dependents have had their adoptions finalized.

By David Castellon with Visalia Times-Delta and Tulare Advance-Register

For more information about adoption…

Adopted Children, By the Numbers

Filed under: Adoption Tags:

The New York Times, Motherlode Column

By LISA BELKIN

Whenever the subject here is adoption readers point out that while the difficult cases make the news, most adoptive families are happy and most adopted children are healthy and well-adjusted.

Today is the final day of National Adoption Month, and a fitting time to take a look at the report “Adoption USA: A Chartbook Based on the 2007 National Survey of Adoptive Parents” which was released recently by the Department of Health and Human Services. Based on interviews with parents of 91,642 adopted children, its authors describe the report as “the first ever survey to provide representative information about the characteristics, adoption experiences, and well-being of adopted children and their families in the United States.”

Among its findings: the overwhelming majority of families whose children came to them through adoption are doing just fine.

Eighty-five percent of the children are described as being in “excellent or very good health”, the same as the general population. Eighty-one percent of the parents described their relationships with their child as “very warm and close,” while 42 percent say those relationships are “better than ever expected,” and only 15 percent say they are “more difficult” than they had expected.

In some categories adopted children can be considered measurably better off than the average American child.They are, for instance, more likely to be read to daily when they are younger (68 compared with 48 percent), to be sung to or told stories every day (73 compared with 59 percent), or to participate in extracurricular activities as school-age children (85 compared with 81 percent).

That does not mean that there are not bumps and difficulties on the adoption path. While only the minority of adopted children have “special health care needs” (39 percent) or “moderate to severe health difficulties” (26 percent), or a diagnosis of asthma (19 percent) these are all higher numbers than those of the general population (which are 19 percent, 10 percent and 13 percent.)

Similarly, while “only a small minority of adopted children have ever been diagnosed with disorders such as attachment disorder, depression, attention deficit disorder or attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or behavior or conduct disorder,” the report says, the percentage of each of these appears higher in the subset of adoptive children than in the general population. (There are no statistics on the prevalence of attachment disorder in the general population, but 12 percent of parents of adoptive children report such a diagnosis; while 4 percent of the general population of children have been diagnosed with severe to moderate A.D.H.D., 14 percent of adopted children have; the statistics for “behavior or conduct problems” is 2 percent vs. 8 percent, while reported “problems with social behaviors is 9 percent vs. 14 percent. All these problems are more prevalent in children who were adopted out of foster care than in those adopted internationally or privately.)

As so many of you have said on this subject, no one case represents the whole of adoption. On the flip side, statistics like these can paint a large scale picture, but not capture the truth of your particular family.

Do these numbers ring true to you? Do you find them reassuring or worrisome?

For additional information regarding the adoption process…

Other Adoption Options – Safe Haven for Abandoned Babies

Filed under: Adoption Tags:

Written by Patricia Wen, Globe Newspaper Company

It was nearing dusk on the first Sunday of last December when a young woman carrying a newborn walked through the automatic sliding doors of Whidden Memorial Hospital in Everett and told a desk clerk in a calm voice: I can’t take care of the baby. I’m leaving her here.

The clerk called the emergency room. Linda Fuller, a veteran secretary, came out first, her heart racing. She knew about the state’s relatively new Safe Haven law, but had never been part of any dropoff.

Without hesitation, the woman, who seemed in her early 20s, handed the infant over to Fuller. She said the baby girl, who had hazel eyes and blond hair and was swaddled in a blue blanket, was less than two days old. Before Fuller could ask more questions, the woman turned and left through the same sliding doors.

“She seemed very resolved,’’ Fuller recalled.

The baby would later be given a tiny ankle hospital bracelet, which read: “Doe, Jane. Homeless.’’

Massachusetts was slow to embrace the idea of anonymous drop-offs for desperate mothers. When it passed the Safe Haven law five years ago, it was the 47th state to adopt such a statute. Critics expressed concerns it would legalize child abandonment, and that these babies would never know their biological origins because no answers were required from parents. On that December day, Baby Jane Doe lost virtually any chance of knowing her past as soon as the woman – referred to legally as the “Unknown Mother’’ – left the hospital.

But if the primary goal is to save babies from being left in dumpsters or on doorsteps – and to give these children a second chance through adoption – recent statistics suggest the law has made a difference.

Baby Jane Doe is one of 12 babies so far who have been surrendered under the law, which permits a parent to anonymously drop off any infant under a week old to any hospital, police station, or fire station, without legal repercussions. Most mothers have chosen hospitals as the refuge for their babies, and some have even been convinced by counselors from the 24-hour Safe Haven hotline (866-814-SAFE) to give birth anonymously in a hospital, rather than at home, to ensure a safe delivery.

Safe Haven officials said most of the mothers who have given up their newborns had contacted the hotline at least once with questions before they surrendered their babies.

The mother of Baby Jane Doe took good care of the newborn in the baby’s earliest days.

The preliminary assessment by the Whidden medical staff around 4 p.m. on Dec. 7 showed the baby girl was in robust health: She weighed about 7 pounds, showed strong vital signs, and was clean and well-nourished. The baby showed no signs of abuse or sickness.

Because Whidden Memorial had no pediatric or maternity wards, the newborn was transferred by ambulance that evening to Cambridge Hospital’s pediatrics ward. There, she was given tests to rule out drugs, alcohol or other foreign substances in her system. All came back negative.

Based on the age of the umbilical cord, the staff believed the mother delivered at home, and probably within four or five days – as opposed to one or two, as they were initially told.

“The baby looked beautiful and healthy,’’ said Dr. Assaad Sayah, chief of emergency medicine for the Cambridge Health Alliance, which oversees the Whidden and Cambridge Hospitals.

On Monday, the day after Baby Jane Doe was dropped off, the adoption supervisor for the Cambridge office of the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families, Ann Beck, arrived at her office to hear the news from colleagues. As required by law, hospital staff had called the agency to announce a new Safe Haven baby.

She was the 11th baby left under the law, and Beck’s second experience with such a case. Compared with the emotional and legal complexities of virtually every case in her office, Safe Haven baby cases are relatively simple. The biological parents are unknown, so the legal process of “terminating parental rights’’ proceeds like a formality. And babies – particularly healthy ones – are easy to place. Right away, they dispensed with the need for temporary foster parents.

“From the very beginning, you’re looking for a long-term permanent home,’’ Beck later said.

Amid the hundreds of files in her office, Beck instantly thought of one couple.

Irene Kasper, 46, worked as a cashier for an area municipality, and her husband, James, 51, was a landscaper. They were married four years ago. Given their age, they decided against having a child of their own, and went through the state’s training program to become adoptive parents. Adoption had special meaning to them too: James, as an infant, had been adopted through Catholic Charities. They initially told social workers that, given that they would be older parents, they preferred a child between the ages of 2 and 6.

In late October 2008, the state had placed a 2-year-old girl into their home for possible adoption. The couple was immediately drawn to the high-energy toddler. But after only two days, the child’s uncle surfaced seemingly out of nowhere, offering to take his niece. Almost as quickly as the girl arrived, the child was plucked from the Kasper’s home.

The couple was devastated, though they understood the priority given to relatives. Social workers felt badly for the Kaspers, and noted the compassion they showed.

“They understood, even though it hurt,’’ Beck said.

Irene Kasper was at her office desk going over paperwork when her telephone rang.

“We have a newborn who was dropped off,’’ said a social worker from Beck’s office just hours after they heard about Baby Jane Doe. “Would you be interested?’’

Irene was taken aback. She never thought the agency would offer a newborn to her and her husband, given their age. The social worker suggested the couple may want to visit the baby, who was on the fifth floor of Cambridge Hospital.

When Irene and James saw the baby, they were smitten. The girl seemed calm in her bassinet, her complexion rosy and healthy. Irene snapped a picture with her cellphone.

The next day, barely able to contain her excitement, Irene phoned the social worker: “We are very much interested in that baby.’’

Baby Jane Doe would remain at the hospital another four nights for observation. Each night, Irene came after work to give the baby a bottle, change her diapers, and hold her in the rocking chair.

As soon as the couple brought the girl home, they decided she looked Irish and should have a typical Irish name, so they called her Caitlyn Rose. Irene is Portuguese on her father’s side, but Irish on her mother’s. Within two weeks, Caitlyn began sleeping through the night, her favorite mobile whirring and playing lullabies above her. The girl adjusted well to a family day care run by a friend of Irene’s.

In the months ahead, as Caitlyn began sitting up, playing with her rattle, and eating solid foods, the joy the couple felt was tempered by anxieties born of their recent past. They didn’t want to risk losing her if the mother suddenly reappeared. For this very reason, the couple had been discreet about revealing to others where they live.

They couldn’t bear the idea of life without the infant who was now calling them “Mama’’ and “Dada.’’

As they prepared for a Thanksgiving feast with family and friends this month, the Kaspers had an important date on their calendar: the Nov. 20 finalization of their adoption of their girl in Middlesex Juvenile Court in Cambridge, the same courthouse where James had been adopted as an infant. This was a big day for the couple because it would erase all their insecurities with one simple word – that the adoption would be “irrevocable.’’

The date happened to be National Adoption Day, and so they appeared in court with scores of other families, as well as state dignitaries. As Governor Deval Patrick, DCF Commissioner Anthony “Angelo’’ McClain, and judges gave prepared remarks to a packed audience, little Caitlyn rested on her father’s shoulder, wearing a black and pink dress and patent-leather Mary Jane shoes. When the song “We are Family’’ began playing over the loudspeakers, James lifted his hand to Caitlyn’s – and they did a high-five.

After a lengthy wait, the Kaspers were called to Courtroom Three. After Judge Gwendolyn Tyre reviewed the legal paperwork involving “Baby Jane Doe,’’ she turned to the couple holding their baby.

“The child’s name is now changed to Caitlyn Rose Kasper,’’ the judge declared to the smiling couple. “This adoption is final and irrevocable.’’

Elated that Caitlyn is now legally theirs, Irene and James said they know their daughter will someday be curious about her past. Irene has a special box where she keeps memories for Caitlyn – including the Winnie the Pooh outfit and white cap that she wore on the day she was dropped off.

James has felt the void of not knowing about his genetic past; he grew up without any information about his birth parents. When Caitlyn is old enough to understand, they plan to pay tribute to the woman who took loving care of Caitlyn in her earliest days, and then made an agonizing decision.

Irene has already thought about what she will eventually tell Caitlyn about the biological mother who walked out the automatic doors of that Everertt hospital.

“I give her all the credit in the world for what she did,’’ Irene said. “She took great care of this girl.’’

Patricia Wen can be reached at wen@globe.com

© Copyright 2009 Globe Newspaper Company.

If you have additional questions regarding safe haven law…

Thomas Taneff | 600 South High Street, Suite 201 | Columbus, Ohio 43215 | Phone: (614) 241-2181 | Fax: (614) 241-2160