3 Open Adoption Myths This Attorney's 20-Year Journey Destroys
When Derek Williams received the life-changing phone call that his future daughter would be born in just three weeks, he was deep into 18-hour study sessions for the Utah bar exam. What followed was a remarkable journey that would shape not only his family but his entire legal career, offering unique insights into the evolving landscape of adoption in America.
As a partner at Campbell, Williams, Ference & Hall and a Fellow of the American Academy of Adoption Attorneys, Williams brings both professional expertise and deeply personal experience to the adoption conversation. Having adopted two children through LDS Family Services and subsequently building a thriving adoption law practice over two decades, his story provides a clear window into open adoption realities. His experience also highlights the dramatic shift in Utah's adoption landscape following the closure of LDS Family Services in 2014, which transformed his practice from 90% agency adoptions to predominantly private placements almost overnight.
Through his dual perspective as both adoptive father and legal professional, Williams' journey destroys three persistent myths that continue to discourage families from pursuing open adoption, despite overwhelming evidence of its benefits for children, birth parents, and adoptive families alike.
Myth #1: Open Adoption Creates Confusion and Divided Loyalties for Children
The most pervasive myth surrounding open adoption suggests that ongoing relationships with birth parents will confuse children about their family identity or create painful divided loyalties. Critics argue that children cannot psychologically handle multiple parent figures and that such arrangements inevitably lead to emotional distress and behavioral problems. This mirrors findings from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study, which reported that “the presence of multiple father figures inside and outside the family increased the likelihood of significant social tensions” for children in unmarried-parent households.
Williams' family experience directly contradicts this assumption. His daughter grew up calling her birth mother "hair mommy" because that's where her distinctive red hair originated, creating a natural and comfortable way for the child to understand her dual heritage. Rather than confusion, this arrangement provided clarity about her origins while maintaining clear understanding of her primary family structure. When people asked about her red hair, she had a simple, honest answer that satisfied her curiosity without undermining her relationship with her adoptive parents.
This approach aligns with LDS teachings about the eternal nature of family relationships. As President Gordon B. Hinckley taught in his 1994 general conference address "Save the Children," "When marriage is not possible, experience has shown that adoption, difficult though this may be for the young mother, may afford a greater opportunity for the child to live a life of happiness." Williams' experience showcases how this principle works in practice, showing that open adoption can indeed provide children with both happiness and clear family identity.
The transformation of adoption practices over the past several decades reflects growing recognition that transparency benefits children's development. Research now shows that only 5% of modern adoptions are fully closed, a complete reversal from mid-20th century practices when nearly all adoptions were closed by default. Studies consistently show that adolescents with ongoing birth parent contact report higher satisfaction with their adoptions than those without such relationships, directly contradicting fears about psychological harm.
Perhaps most telling is Williams' account of calling upon his children's birth mothers during difficult teenage moments when traditional parenting approaches weren't sufficient. When one of his children was struggling, the family reached out to their child's birth mother for support, and she traveled to spend time with the teenager during this challenging period. Rather than creating confusion or undermining parental authority, this intervention provided exactly the support the child needed from someone uniquely positioned to help. This example demonstrates how open adoption can create an extended support network that strengthens rather than threatens family bonds.
Myth #2: Birth Parents Will Interfere and Disrupt Adoptive Family Life
The second major myth portrays birth parents as potential threats to adoptive family stability, suggesting they will make unreasonable demands, interfere with parenting decisions, or attempt to reclaim their children. This fear drives many prospective adoptive parents toward closed adoptions or international placements specifically to avoid ongoing birth parent involvement.
Williams' experience with two different birth mothers over more than two decades provides concrete evidence against this myth. Both relationships developed along different timelines - one featuring immediate connection and another growing gradually over time - yet both resulted in respectful, boundaried relationships that enhanced rather than complicated family life. The birth mothers understood and respected Williams and his wife as the children's primary parents while maintaining meaningful connections that benefited everyone involved.
Even more challenging scenarios proved manageable with proper communication and boundary-setting. When Williams' son's birth father expressed interest in developing a relationship during the child's teenage years, the family approached the situation with careful screening and open dialogue. Rather than viewing this as a threat, they evaluated the birth father's motivations and intentions, ultimately creating another positive relationship that enriched their son's understanding of his origins while maintaining clear roles and expectations.
Research supports these positive outcomes, showing that birth mothers with ongoing contact experience lower levels of chronic grief and depression than those in closed adoptions. This improved mental health actually benefits adoptive families by reducing the likelihood of disruptive or problematic behaviors that might stem from unresolved grief or loss. When birth mothers can see their children thriving and maintain appropriate contact, they're more likely to feel satisfied with their placement decisions and less likely to experience the regret or resentment that could complicate relationships.
The key to successful boundary management lies in establishing clear expectations from the beginning and maintaining consistent communication about everyone's needs and limitations. Williams emphasizes that successful open adoption relationships require mutual respect and a genuine desire for connection from all parties, along with flexibility to adapt as circumstances and relationships evolve over time.
Myth #3: Open Adoption Is Too Complicated and Legally Risky for Families
The third persistent myth suggests that open adoption arrangements create legal vulnerabilities or procedural complications that make them unsuitable for most families. Critics argue that ongoing relationships with birth parents somehow compromise the permanency of adoptions or create legal ambiguities that could threaten adoptive parents' rights.
Williams' legal expertise provides unique insight into these concerns, and his experience demonstrates that properly executed open adoptions actually strengthen rather than weaken legal protections for adoptive families. Utah's legal framework, which Williams helped navigate both personally and professionally, provides clear guidelines for open adoption arrangements while maintaining full legal protections for adoptive parents. Utah's adoption laws are among the most adoption-friendly in the nation, historically producing adoption rates five times the national average.
The closure of LDS Family Services in 2014 marked a significant shift in adoption practices, but not because open adoption proved problematic. The agency's announcement cited changing demographics as the primary factor, noting that only 1% of births to unmarried mothers resulted in adoption placement, a dramatic decline from previous decades. The shift toward private adoptions and direct matching between families didn't increase legal complications; instead, it reflected evolving preferences for more personalized relationships and greater family control over adoption processes.
Williams' practice transformation from 90% agency adoptions to predominantly private placements exemplifies how legal professionals have adapted to support families seeking open adoption arrangements. Rather than increasing complexity, these changes often simplify processes by eliminating institutional intermediaries while maintaining essential legal protections. The rise of social media and internet-based matching services has made it easier for families to connect directly, reducing costs and increasing satisfaction for all parties involved.
The foundation of legally sound open adoption rests on several key principles that Williams has observed both personally and professionally:
Clear legal documentation that protects all parties' rights and interests
Professional guidance from experienced adoption attorneys and social workers
Realistic expectations about relationship development and potential challenges
Flexibility to adapt arrangements as families and circumstances change
Focus on long-term child welfare rather than short-term convenience
Embracing Evidence-Based Family Building
Williams' journey from anxious bar exam student to confident adoptive father and respected adoption attorney illustrates how personal commitment to relationship-building can create lasting positive outcomes for entire families and communities. His story challenges traditional assumptions about adoption while providing practical guidance for families considering this path to parenthood.
The convergence of research evidence and lived experience demonstrates that open adoption, when approached thoughtfully and with proper support, offers superior outcomes for children, birth parents, and adoptive families compared to closed alternatives. Studies show that 95% of modern domestic infant adoptions involve some level of openness, reflecting widespread recognition of these benefits among adoption professionals and families.
For families considering adoption, Williams' experience suggests that education and preparation matter more than specific relationship structures. The key lies in approaching open adoption with realistic expectations, professional guidance, and commitment to long-term relationship-building that prioritizes children's needs above adult comfort levels. The myths surrounding open adoption often reflect outdated assumptions rather than current realities, and families who move beyond these misconceptions discover opportunities for richer, more satisfying adoption experiences that benefit everyone involved.
President Hinckley's counsel remains relevant today: "My plea...is a plea to save the children. Too many of them walk with pain and fear, in loneliness and despair. Children need sunlight...They need kindness and refreshment and affection." Williams' journey demonstrates how thoughtful open adoption practices can provide exactly this kind of supportive environment, creating families where children receive love from multiple sources while maintaining clear primary relationships with their adoptive parents.
