Adoption: Safe Havens for Abandoned Infants

Filed under: Adoption Tags: ,

In 1999, the Texas legislature enacted the first law addressing infant abandonment. Nicknamed “Baby Moses laws” after the biblical story of Baby Moses whose mother placed him in a wicker basket to save him from death, infant safe haven laws have been enacted in roughly 47 states and Puerto Rico. The purpose of safe haven laws is to encourage parents who abandon their child to leave the infant with persons who can provide the care needed for their safety and well being.

Ohio’s Safe Haven Law

No two state safe haven laws are exactly the same. Safe haven laws vary in the maximum age at which an infant can be surrendered, who may surrender an infant, and to whom the infant can be surrendered. Most states exempt parents who safely surrender their infant from criminal liability by either declining to prosecute a parent for child abandonment or providing that the surrender of a child under these circumstances is an affirmative defense in any prosecution of the parent or his/her agent for any crime such as abandonment or neglect against the child.

In Ohio, an infant who is thirty days old or younger may be voluntarily surrendered by that child’s parent to a peace officer, hospital employee, or an emergency medical service worker. Prior to the enactment of Amended Senate Bill 304 of the 127th General Assembly, Ohio would only permit an infant seventy-two hours or younger to be voluntarily surrendered without the threat of criminal penalties. The intent of the bill, which became effective on March 24, 2009, was to allow a parent more time to safely surrender the infant rather than abandon the infant under unsafe conditions or subject the infant to potential abuse or neglect.

 Unless the infant has been surrendered in a condition that reasonably indicates abuse or neglect, the parent who delivers the child is not guilty of a criminal offense, is not subject to criminal prosecution, and has the right to remain anonymous. Once the child is delivered, a rebuttable presumption is established that it is not in the child’s best interest to return to the child’s natural parents.

The safe haven provider (i.e., peace officer, hospital employee, or emergency medical services worker) to whom the child is delivered is required to perform any act necessary to protect the child’s health or safety and must notify the local public children services agency that a surrendered infant is in their possession. The provider cannot coerce the parent to reveal the identity of both parents or pursue or follow the parent after the child has been delivered. If possible, the provider can make available to the parent forms that are intended to collect medical information, as well as provide written materials that describe services that are available to assist parents and newborns, but cannot force the parent to complete the forms or take the written materials.

The public children services agency takes emergency temporary custody of the infant and must prepare case plans, conduct investigations, conduct periodic administrative reviews of case plans, and provide services for the surrendered child as if the child were adjudicated a neglected child. The infant may then be eligible for placement in foster care and ultimately for adoption.

Criticism of Safe Haven Laws

While safe haven laws appear to be a safe and humane response to the problem of child abandonment, they are not without their critics. Safe haven laws have been seen as a “band-aid approach” to a much larger problem. Many child welfare experts, for instance, cite the lack of a comprehensive strategy for the prevention of infant abandonment and the need to integrate these laws into a much larger effort to improve services for those women most at risk of abandoning their child.

Others question the effect on fathers’ rights. The abeyance of criminal prosecution and the anonymity enjoyed by the abandoning parent or their agent can often conflict with the rights of the other parent. The father may not even know that he is a parent or that the mother is abandoning the child. Critics believe that safe haven laws should provide the unwed father his due process rights to notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Some adoption advocates have their reservations about safe haven laws as well. Safe haven providers cannot compel an abandoning parent to disclose family and medical history information and the lack of this information can affect the child’s adoption prospects later on.

Others believe that these laws encourage abandonment by women who would not do so otherwise because it seems easier or less invasive than receiving counseling, help with parenting skills, or making an adoption plan. Safe haven laws have been said to propagate “baby dumps” by making it convenient for mothers to abandon their infants and shirk their responsibility. It is thought that these laws send a signal that there is no need to assume responsibility for actions taken and that discarding one’s child is acceptable behavior.

The most damning indictment of safe have laws is that they simply don’t work. In spite of the number of states who have enacted safe haven laws, abandoned infants continue to be found on porches, doorsteps and near trash piles.

Throwing the Baby Out With the Bathwater?

The abandonment of children is certainly not a new phenomenon; reports from the mid 1800s indicate the occurrence of over 900 abandonments over a period of ten years in New York State alone. Safe haven laws, then, may be seen as a new(er) approach to an age old problem. They may not be able to completely prevent the unsafe abandonment of children, but can serve as a valuable part of a comprehensive strategy addressing the issue of abandonment. Admittedly, safe haven laws do have their disadvantages, but when the lives of children hang in the balance, their value cannot be disputed.

In spite of its critics, safe haven laws do work. In Ohio alone, the Department of Job and Family Services found that 63 babies have been safely surrendered since enactment of Ohio’s safe haven law in 2001. While Ohio’s safe haven law didn’t prevent the recent abandonment of a newborn by the side of a road, it has resulted in the safe surrender of children who could have been left in a much more vulnerable location or under dangerous conditions. Ohio has been pleased with the success of its safe haven law and has recently extended the time in which a parent may safely abandon an infant to an authorized safe haven provider from 72 hours to 30 days to encourage more parents to pursue this option.

For additional information about Adoption or Contact Us.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Twitter

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

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