I shouldn’t see the harm in having a child representative for infant private adoption finalizations. After all, aren’t the agency and the adoptive family all saying they’re concerned with the child? I would have been fine with it, that’s for sure.
I’d have added birth family in that, but I guess my reasoning there is that already their rights have been terminated/signed. So at THAT point, there’s not the need for them to have legal counsel. And after all, at TPR they should HAVE legal counsel.
Though I suppose in the case of a child’s respresentative in finalization with domestic infant adoptions, they have had the social worker evaluating the whole time to make sure that things are ok with the placement, etc….so that IS a safeguard for the child. And at court since the infant can’t speak even to tell their representative something, the results would be the same as having a rep at the finalization….so perhaps that’s the reason? I know that they did go over our social worker’s notes, etc, formally at finalization.
At any rate, I can’t see why anyone would want less representation or rights for the child. Unless of course you’re just a crappy person and are not doing it for the child anyway, and in that case, perhaps you should not adopt/be an adoption worker. As for first parents, the right to keep custody or not needs always be preserved. Anyone can find themselves in a situation like that, even those who don’t think that’s true.