Sheila and Michael have spent the past seven weeks delighting in their newly adopted son, Sean, who will be eight weeks old on Monday.
But the suburban couple, who asked that their last name not be used, say they still think constantly about another baby they brought into their home, only to give him back to his biological father due to a Cook County judge’s ruling.
“A day doesn’t go by that I don’t think about the son that we lost,” said Sheila, 34, an attorney.
Her experience with the court system is similar to that of another Illinois couple who on Thursday was ordered by the Illinois Supreme Court to return their 3 1/2-year-old adopted son to his biological father.
The toddler, identified only as “Baby Richard,” had been with his adoptive parents since he was four days old.
Local and national adoption agencies and organizations say such cases, like the 1993 U.S. Supreme Court decision that returned Jessica DeBoer to her biological parents and a similar case in Arizona, have increased the anxiety level of adoptive parents. Some are even turning to overseas adoptions because natural fathers might be less likely to appear.
In addition, the agencies are working harder to find biological fathers and obtain their consent before adoptions proceed.
But questions remain about whether a father should be required to demonstrate an intent to help raise the child before he is given a say in an adoption. Counselors say they have seen many cases where fathers disrupt an adoption just to spite the mother.
“The real nub of the matter is the relationship between the birth mother and birth father,” said Paul Denhalter, executive vice president of the National Council for Adoption.
In Iowa, where Jessica Anna was taken to live with her birth parents nearly a year ago, unmarried fathers must claim paternity and agree to care for and support the child before they can approve or reject an adoption, Denhalter said.
“States are beginning to grapple with the issue of what interest the birth father has earned to either consent to or deny an adoption,” Denhalter said. “That is the movement that we are seeing more and more. The father has to establish his interest in a child or forfeit his parental rights.”
But adoption counselors warn that care must also be taken to protect the rights of biological fathers who are genuinely interested in raising their children.
“Fathers have certain rights, and if they choose to exercise those rights, they have to be respected,” said Sandy Arbit, adoption supervisor at the Family Counseling Clinic in Grayslake.
“Adoptive parents are going to be terrified after this,” Arbit added. “But they have to realize that we can’t always produce a neat package for adoption.”
Catholic Charities of Lake County, in Waukegan, already works vigorously to find the fathers of the babies they place in adoptive homes.
But Catholic Charities officials say they depend on the mother to tell the truth about the father, and women are sometimes afraid to do that. Some fear for their physical safety. Others do not believe the father would make a fit parent.
In light of Thursday’s decision, the agency will redouble its efforts, said Jean Merczak, director of family services.
“We will very definitely be looking at how and what we do, so that we don’t find ourselves in this situation,” Merczak said. “We’re seeing that birth parents’ rights are now very key, as far as the courts are concerned.
“Adoption is a very complicated, intense, emotional issue for everyone involved, and it just became more so.”
For a child to be adopted under Illinois law, the mother must sign a form surrendering the baby. She is not allowed to sign until 72 hours after the birth.
The father must also surrender his rights, if he can be found. He can sign before or anytime after the birth.
More Top Picks Best Amazon Prime Day Cordless Vacuum Deals 2026
If the father cannot be found or does not come forward to declare paternity within 30 days, a notice is placed in a newspaper, usually the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, telling him that his parental rights will be terminated in court on a certain date if he does not object. If the father’s name is not known, the advertisement is directed to “unknown father.”
Since 1972, under a U.S. Supreme Court decision, an unmarried father has the right to object to a mother’s plan to place their baby in an adoptive home.
In a separate decision, the adoption is finalized at six months.
In the Baby Richard case, the mother directed her uncle to tell the father that their baby, born in March, 1991, had died. The baby’s parents were not married, and she had been told falsely that he had married a former girlfriend while visiting his native Czechoslovakia.
Two months later, when the mother told the father that their baby was alive, he immediately began a three-year battle to get the boy back.
The father, Otakar Kirschner, married the child’s mother, Daniella, in September 1991.
Two lower courts said the boy should stay with the adoptive parents. The adoptive parents, who have not allowed their names to be used, may appeal the ruling giving the boy to the Kirchners.
Sheila and Michael did not appeal the court decision that took their adopted son, John, from them.
“It was going to kill us, whether he was 6 months or 3 years old,” Sheila said. “We had to give him back (then) because the transition would be easier for him.”
It took the couple more than a year to get to the stage where they could even talk about adopting another baby.
They had gone through a private agency to adopt the first boy, who was just 4 days old when they brought him to their west suburban home. When he was 28 days old, the biological father came forward.
They challenged his fitness as a father, but in November 1992, six months after they had taken John home, Cook County Circuit Judge Dorothy Kinnard ruled in the father’s favor.
Sheila and Michael packed all the toys and clothes they had bought for John. The birth father took custody. They have not seen the boy since.
“It was the most devastating loss for my husband and me,” Sheila said. “We will never be the same people because of it. It’s becoming clearer and clearer that (in adoption cases), biology rules.”