Adoption is a rewarding, but often expensive and frustrating option for many South Dakota families. As a member of the bipartisan 'adoption caucus' in the Senate I have tried to make adoption a more viable option for loving parents. During the past couple of years, we have made major improvements in adoption policy including legislation: giving parents of adopted children the same time-off rights as those who give birth; outlawing racial or ethnic discrimination in adoption; automatically giving foreign-born adoptees American citizenship; and implementing international agreements to outlaw trafficking in children and promoting international adoption. These laws have resulted in an increase of adoptions nationwide by cutting much of the paperwork and bureaucracy of the adoption process. Yet there are still almost half a million kids in foster care nationwide, and a large number of those are minorities and kids with special needs. There are even more families who want to adopt, but simply can't afford to. More needs to be done. For too many South Dakotans, adoption is not an option because of the high costs associated with it. By some estimates, an adoption can cost upwards of $25,000 in fees, paperwork, and legal assistance. I am pleased to be an original co-sponsor of bipartisan legislation called the Hope for Children Act.
Dusty Johnson: “Adoption is a rewarding, but often expensive and frustrating option for many South Dakota families. As a member of the…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the challenges and policies related to adoption in South Dakota.
Share
More from Dusty Johnson
as my colleague from Louisiana wishes we were all here voting on the deal and that my colleagues on the other side had taken yes for an answer to open up the government, I wish that is what I was on the floor here today to do. That is not…
Let me address that. I think this brinkmanship has got to end. I have been here 15 years. We should have passed 180 appropriations bills before the end of the fiscal year. We passed six. A lot of people worked in good faith to do that. OK…
Again, I am trying to keep this--let's not argue. OK? Let's focus on areas of agreement. So reduction in force, again, I think we probably have a philosophical disagreement there. I am not associating myself with anybody else's remarks…





