Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Adoption advocates press committee to clarify law allowing out‑of‑state parents to use Massachusetts surrender forms
Loading...
Summary
Adoptive parents, adoption-agency staff and family-law attorneys told the Joint Committee on the Judiciary that inconsistent probate-court interpretations are delaying or jeopardizing adoptions when birth parents from other states sign Massachusetts surrender forms and urged statutory clarification (S.1046) to restore predictability.
A string of adoptive parents, adoption-agency staff and family-law attorneys urged the Joint Committee on the Judiciary to clarify Massachusetts law so that out‑of‑state birth parents may choose to sign either their home state’s surrender form or a Massachusetts form when consenting to an adoption.
Senator Cindy Creem (testifying virtually) opened the adoption panel in support of S.1046, telling lawmakers the proposed language would restore choice for out‑of‑state birth parents. Multiple adoptive parents described cases in which courts later declined to recognize out‑of‑state surrenders or applied a new interpretation that introduced uncertainty and delay.
Amy Cleary described traveling to Georgia to be with her infant and finalizing the adoption using the interstate compact; she said the family only managed to complete the process with great effort and urged statutory clarity so other families do not face similar uncertainty. Catherine Alford recounted that her family temporarily faced the risk of not having an adoption finalized because of a judge’s new interpretation; she called the experience “the most painful months of our lives.” Mario and Emily Gagliardi said their scheduled finalization in Pittsfield was canceled on short notice when a court staffer raised a jurisdictional interpretation problem; they reported at least $5,000 in added legal fees and months of delay before finalization.
Adoption-agency representatives and family-law attorneys described routine safeguards already used in interstate adoptions: the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC), out‑of‑state counsel for birth parents, conflict-of-law statements and opinion letters from out‑of‑state counsel that explain the effect of signing a Massachusetts surrender. Attorney Amy Berlin Cook and Amy Cohen (Adoptions with Love) said the ICPC process and opinion letters provide additional protections and that judges’ refusal to accept the longstanding practice has re‑traumatized birth parents and created unnecessary legal hurdles.
Several witnesses reported that post‑placement supervision requirements (typically six monthly reports in Massachusetts) and ICPC administration already provide significant oversight of out‑of‑state placements. Witnesses asked the committee for a favorable report to make the state’s practice explicit, reduce delay and avoid added costs for adoptive families and birth parents.
No formal committee vote occurred in the hearing; committee chairs invited written testimony and indicated written submissions would be made publicly available.
