washingtonpost.com: Welcome to Live Online. Mary Bissell is here to take your questions on the reality of adoption.

_______________________

15th and K, NW: Ms. Bissell, Media coverage of child welfare issues seems to focus heavily on tragedies in the system--and now 20/20 is airing an exploitative, game show-inspired piece on adoption. How can the media play a proactive, positive role in improving child welfare in this country? Thank you for your thoughftul article and your important work on this issue.

Mary Bissell: Good question.

The media can start by focusing on some of the progress that has been made in the child welfare system, programs like subsidized guardianship, home visiting, family group conferencing, post-adoption services, and others that are working well across the country.

They can also portray the real joys that adoptive families face. In addition, it would help if the media portrayed the true diversity of adoptive families -- not just married couples, but single individuals (female and male), gay and lesbian adoptive parents, etc.

I am certainly not suggesting that the media overlook the problems in the system or the challenges that families face, (in fact it is essential that they keep the pressure on for change) but if the public simply throws up their hands in the face of another tragedy, then we are nowhere.

_______________________

Takoma Park, Md.: What do you think in general of the process that private agencies now generally use for selecting adoptive parents for a particular baby? Many readers may not be aware that the situation depicted on 20/20 is not so far fetched. Today, prospective adoptive parents prepare "scrapbooks" including a "dear birthparent" letter and photos depicting their lives. Agencies typically present up to five scrapbooks to birthparents, who choose among them. If they wish, birthparents can meet the adoptive parents. You write that "A contest in which another human being is the prize is reprehensible, no matter how positive the outcome for the child." Many adoptive parents do feel they are "competing" to appeal to birthparents, and that their scrapbooks are marketing ploys. If you agree, how do you think the process should be changed?

My husband and I are currently undergoing a homestudy (the approval process required prior to all U.S. adoptions). My husband likes the fact that birthparents choose the adoptive parents in domestic agency adoptions; he says the process is somewhat "organic" and, if some qualities about us appeal to a birth parent, this may compensate partly for our lack of genetic ties with a baby. I like the process because it empowers birthparents, who have often been exploited in the past, and because it may promote healthy openness in adoptive relationships.

On the other hand, two major concerns I have are whether birthparents are truly empowered -- including receiving sufficient social and economic supports -- to choose to parent their babies, and whether some prospective adoptive parents face too many socio-economic barriers to be able to adopt.

Mary Bissell: I agree that the idea of the competition is not so far-fetched and acknowledge that in the piece. In addition to feeling that scrapbooks and other essentially marketing tools can sometimes unfairly skew the process, I have had many friends who have adopted children through private agencies say that they feel like they are competing with other parents who are more well-off (and perhaps have better connections than they do).

It's a difficult question that you raise, because birth parents should have the right to have a say in who adopts their children and, in the case of open adoption, an ongoing role in the child's life. On a practical level, how do you make the choice -- videos, scrapbooks, letters, a formal application?

I think that most private agencies do a good job of allowing birth parents a means by which to make their choice fairly. That's why the idea of a 30-minute interview to "make your case" -- the format filmed by 20/20 -- is so irresponsible.

I also agree with you, however, that in most cases, the birth parents don't have the same choices that Jennifer has on the show. This is especially true for lower-income birth parents who are involved in the child welfare system.

I would love to see a grassroots group of adoptive parents come up with some guidelines for agencies. They are the true experts.

_______________________

Concord, N.H.: I read your piece and must say I do not really understand your complaint. Is it solely with 20/20, the Mouse marketing people, or, more broadly, with the domestic adoption system in America?

Mary Bissell: My problem lies mainly with 20/20 and the private adoption agency that came up with this format. Barbara Walters reminds us on the ABC News website that 20/20 is just reporting what they see. With journalism, that is certainly true. For example, you would never hold CNN responsible for a soldier who is brutally killed in Iraq just because they covered it.

But in news magazine programs like Dateline and 20/20, journalists and producers have more control of the stories they choose to cover. They also are (or have the responsibility at least) to weigh in on how their particular news piece is marketed. And finally, surely ABC journalists, producers, and camera folks had an influence on how the interviews with the prospective parents would take place, etc. In this sense, 20/20 doesn't simply cover what happened, it has an ongoing proactive role in facilitating this competition.

There are deficiencies in the adoption system in America as well in how all of us support adoptive families, but my beef is with the decision 20/20 made to cover this as opposed to, for example, a piece that will delve into the implications of open adoption, the child welfare system or other important (but less sensational topics.)

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: First, I'd like to thank you for calling ABC to account for making adoption into some sort of game show. The same criticism also applies to the child welfare or adoption agency that allowed ABC's cameras into the room.

However well intentioned ABC and the agency may have been in thinking this show would help promote adoptions for the 126,000 children waiting in foster care for adoptive homes, the program offers the public no suggestions about how to help find permanent homes for these children. In my view, the show does nothing to help -- in fact, the show's approach may lengthen their wait for a home by suggesting that there are not enough children to adopt and certainly there is no need for additional loving, adoptive families.

Could you make some suggestions about what the public and policymakers can do to help find loving homes for these waiting children -- children who generally are not infants like the child in tonight's 20/20?

Mary Bissell: This is a great question and exactly the one that I wished 20/20 had explored. It is also an especially difficult one.

I think everyone has a role in finding adoptive homes for the children in foster care. The media can help by publicizing the positive and more profound rewards of adoption while being honest about the fact that the process is not always easy. Policy makers at the federal and local level can help by increasing financial supports and post-adoptive services available to families who choose to adopt. The public can be helpful by considering adoption or supporting those families who do choose to adopt and by teaching their children that families come in all shapes and sizes and compositions.

Finally, we have to look at all of the systems that support families (Medicaid, child care, etc.) to address some of the issues families face before a crisis occurs. How do we prevent teen pregnancy? How do we improve educational systems? Are we addressing America's mental health needs.

These aren't easy things to do, but there must be a better way to do it than the adoption contest.

_______________________

Arlington, Virginia: I agree with the writer from Takoma park that the adoption process can feel like a competition -- and also that it is important to empower birth parents. I am an adoptive parent of a child who first came to live with me as a foster child.

We need to keep children and their interests at the forefront of any conversation. That includes letting birth parents have some say in who will adopt their child. It includes making sure that adoptive parents are prepared to provide the care needed, not just the love, by a child -- particularly a child with special needs. It does not include putting that process on TV. What will the child on TV tonight feel like in 15 years when someone finds the show on a video archive on the internet?

Mary Bissell: I agree and thought about that, too. Same for the 16-year-old featured. It is clear that both the girl featured tonight and her parents (as well as the couples) are all well-intentioned and are trying to do the right thing, but will she regret giving the public a view of a very private decision? Only time will tell on that one.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Child welfare systems across the country are in trouble, as evidenced by almost daily stories about tragedies befalling children in the state's care. Are there any examples of states or communities that are doing a good job with child welfare, foster care, and adoption? How do you think these systems can be improved?

Mary Bissell: There are many, many great examples of states and communities that are doing a great job with child welfare, foster care and adoption. In some jurisdictions, for example, there are things called "Adoption Saturdays" -- where families come together to have their adoptions finalized and to celebrate their commitment to children who need them.

In child welfare, for example, there are emerging programs like community partnerships that have sprung up in different regions of the country. They are based on the premise that protecting children is everyone's business and that businesses, faith-based groups, and others need to help support families and children.

In terms of overall systems improvement, there is SO much to be done. But we can start at the federal level by increasing the resources that are available to the child welfare and adoption systems. I am not suggesting that we throw money at the problem, but I do feel strongly that if you are going to make the necessary changes, those changes are expensive.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Are you saying that 20/20 caused this agency and birth mother to do something that was different or even unique from the normal process followed by this agency in having the birth mother slect the adoptive parents? Or, as Ms. Walters says, were they only reporting what happened (or would have happened anyway)?

Mary Bissell: I am not suggesting that 20/20 contacted the agency and set this up. To the contrary, I assume that the agency floated the idea with 20/20 and they chose to cover it. I honestly do not know how the story was conceived.

What I do know is that it was a poor decision to decide to cover open adoption in this way and then market the competition in the way they have (even in their toned down marketing efforts).

I am not aware of the normal process this agency uses, but I would be disturbed to think that each couple only gets 30 minutes. Seems like with adoption of all things, the couple and birth parent should have a less articifical opportunity to talk things over with one another.

I do think that just having cameras in a room changes the process, but I think little can be done about that.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: As a social worker who has worked in adoption agencies and provided post adoption counseling, I am very concerned about the ethics of the agency. The young birth mother has no idea of the ramifications of participating in this show. Any agency would forsee the grief she will feel afterward, and that she may view her participation in a very different light. Offering a 16 year old the opportunity to meet with a star like Barbara Walters and to be on a TV is like offering alcohol to a child. They might drink it, but not know the after affects.

Shame on her parents as well. This is their grandchild and they should have been protecting their privacy. I wonder if Barbara Walters would have put her own daughter through this... Has she commented on what she thinks the emotional fall out will be for this young woman and her birth child?

Mary Bissell: I do not know if Ms. Walters has commented on the potential "emotional fallout". She does say on her website that the girl and her parents chose to be a part of this to show how difficult these decisions can be and that open adoption is an important option. I think we would all agree, however, that our judgement at 16 would not be our judgement at 40.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: I had missed this story until I read your piece and find it shocking that 20/20 would host such a program, or at least advertise it so poorly. Are you aware of any efforts by the network to respond to the criticisms and try to educate viewers on some of the important issues surrounding teen pregnancy and adoption, like the ones you point out in your column?

Mary Bissell: Sorry if this was already posted:

I am going to take this opportunity to say that I think that 20/20 and the journalists who work on it are responsible journalists. In fact, I watch the show regularly and have been impressed with some of the adoption shows (and adoption work) that Barbara Walters has done in the past. I am aware that 20/20 did tone down some of their on-air promos for the show (and made them less reality tv-like). Barbara Walters was on Good Morning America yesterday to apologize for the over the top marketing. There is also a letter on the website that explains things. However, when I last checked, there are still game show like descriptions of the competition on the website (including the acknowledgements by one of the participating families that the process is like Bachelor." I do not know if 20/20 has changed or edited the story they are going to air in view of the criticism.

Laurel, Md.: AS exploitive as the 20/20 story appears to be, there is a kernel of truth in it. Every day prospective adoptive parents do have to "compete" with each other to convince a mother-to-be to place her child with them -- even if they don't do it in front of television cameras. Do you have any ideas for maintaining the goal of open adoption while taking away the AD-AGE atmosphere that domestic adoption seems to create?

Mary Bissell: There is a kernel of truth. You'd just think an hour news magazine would strive for more than the kernel.

As I pointed out in my piece, the idea of this competition underscores some of the deficiencies in the current system. In terms of the ways we can maintain the goals of open adoption in a more sensitive way, I would like adoptive parents who have been through the process to answer that. They are the true experts in this regard. National organizations that work in this area everyday, such as the North American Council on Adoptable Children and Voice for Children, would also be good to contact about these issues. Thanks for the question.

_______________________

St. Louis, Mo.: I read in the Post Express that Uri Geller is suing the producers of the 20/20 show, claiming that the show was his idea. Since most of our reality shows come from Europe, to your knowledge, has this sort of show appeared before?

Mary Bissell: I do not know the answer to that. Sorry.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: I fail to see the problem here. This stuff happens every day, competition for adoptions. Maybe putting it on TV will show the majority of us not involved in adoption what the process is really like.

Mary Bissell: My contention is that there are simply better ways to show what adoption is really like. Given the talent, the financing, and the high journalistic reputation of a show like 20/20, I am confident they could have figured out a better way to do so.

If there are competitions for adoptions in some cases, then do a program where you talk to couples who have been through it, experts who are trying to fix the system, and policy makers who are responsible for regulating these things. Don't reduce adoption to a competition, because I think most adoptive parents will tell you that the process is much more complex than that.