Please note I am only speaking of the legalities involved in adoption here, NOT the relationships found within open adoption.
I am surprised at how many people seem to believe that ongoing contact means that adoption is somehow less permanent legally. Someone asked about it in the forum here, and I have gotten the question several times in real life "Since you have contact, what of she changes her mind in several years, can she take him back?"
It's easy enough to explain that legally it doesn't matter whether the adoption is open or closed -either type of adoption can be challenged/contested through legal channels with grounds like fraud or coercion- but those grounds must be evidenced in court. Otherwise, we are his parents in every legal sense.
There are other misconceptions as well; mostly from those skeptical that open adoption is emotionally healthy for DS or us ("Won't he be terribly confused?", "Don't you feel threatened when she is around?" that kind of thing), and again I happily educate people on why we think open adoption is best for us, and what the research indicates...I understand that, especially from those for whom adoption in general is mysterious, but this legal thing confuses me.
Any others encounter similar misconceptions only about open adoption vs. closed?
It is true that whether open
It is true that whether open or closed legally adoption is the same. People are just thinking selfishly, which is normal, when they think otherwise. Open adoption is about honesty and letting the children involved be the most important reason to do it. Many people have misconceptions about a lot of things. For instance, if I tell someone about my interests, like writing for example, I find a lot of people wonder why I don't have a job doing and making lots of money. Its really not that easy between wanting something and getting it but I find many people confuse 'want' with 'getting'. Just because I always 'wanted' my birthchild doesn't mean that its the best thing for my birthchild for me to parent! Not even if I am able in the future, when I am financially or socially able to parent does it mean that I should change the wonderful life my birthchild has! Why would I want to do that to my birthchild??! I boggles my mind the idea that people think everyone should do whatever possible just to get 'what they want' without thinking about the affects it has on all the others involved! I guess when the people who think these things are just not able to understand because they are not experiencing it.
I feel frustrated when
I feel frustrated when people assume that open adoption is "adoption lite" for Pennie. I think openness is pretty great but people sometimes say, "That's so great! She gets all the fun of seeing Madison without any of the bother of parenting!" (I read this, too, in policy discussions about promoting adoption.) I think this is a set up for expectant parents who need to know that openness is certainly a more humane way to do adoption but it's not a cure all for all the losses of adoption. I think it's pretty lousy when open adoption is advertised as the best of both worlds or something.