Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Committee approves HB51 to tighten oversight of private adoption agencies, set payment limits and add consent protections
Loading...
Summary
HB51 creates a DHHS‑overseen consortium of private child‑placing agencies, clarifies allowable payments to birth parents, adds a 72‑hour revocation window for consent given under duress or fraud, limits late‑term travel for birth parents and requires notification steps by hospitals. Sponsor and multiple advocacy groups said the changes protect birth parents and deter exploitative, "adoption tourism" practices.
Representative Hall presented HB51, a package of adoption amendments she described as intended to curb exploitative practices and strengthen transparency across private child‑placing agencies.
Hall said Utah’s adoption rate (cited in committee as about 11.1 adoptions per 10,000 households versus a national average of 4.9) prompted a multi‑committee review. The bill would create a DHHS‑overseen consortium of private child‑placing agencies to collect consistent adoption data, develop bylaws and adjudicate requests for additional assistance to birth mothers; require reporting and notification where hospitals take enforcement actions against agencies; restrict recruiting or placement activity after 36 weeks’ gestation to reduce travel risks; and clarify allowable payments to adoptive parents with limits for living expenses and preference for payments to service providers rather than direct cash.
The bill also establishes a 72‑hour revocation period allowing a birth parent to revoke consent before finalization if consent was given under duress, fraud, or undue influence, and expands access to legal and mental‑health support for birth parents. Representative Hall said most agencies are already nonprofit and that only a small number (she estimated 3–5) would need to change legal status to comply.
Stuart Young of the Utah Attorney General’s Office said the office studied coercion, fraud and trafficking risks and supports the bill’s approach to eliminate for‑profit incentives that drive bad actors. Adoption researchers, child‑advocacy groups and birth‑parent advocates testified in favor, while one public commenter said higher adoption rates alone are not inherently problematic and raised questions about state authority.
After discussion and questions about data collection and Medicaid disclosure lines, the committee adopted the fourth substitute and voted to pass HB51 out favorably.
