Adoption abuse is the umbrella term for harms tied to the adoption process: physical, sexual, or emotional abuse and neglect committed by adoptive parents; the informal transfer of adopted children to strangers, known as rehoming; fraud or concealment by adoption agencies about a child’s medical or family history; and trafficking, coercion, and document falsification in intercountry adoption. It is addressed through a fragmented mix of federal statutes, state criminal and civil laws, court-developed doctrines, and pre-placement background checks. Severe cases keep surfacing because oversight largely stops at finalization, and no single agency tracks what happens to a child once an adoption crosses state lines.
The Four Main Forms of Adoption Abuse
The abuses documented in child welfare research, litigation, and investigative reporting fall into four broad categories.
The first is maltreatment inside the adoptive home after placement. The second is unregulated custody transfers, where parents hand a child off to another household without any court or agency involvement. The third is wrongful adoption, in which agencies conceal or misrepresent what they know about a child’s history. The fourth is fraud and trafficking in intercountry adoption, including the sale or abduction of children, coercion of birth parents, and falsified paperwork identified by UNICEF as the core abuses in the system.1UNICEF. Intercountry Adoption
A note on scale: adoptive families as a group are underrepresented in child maltreatment cases. A Dutch study found the risk of certified maltreatment in adoptive families was eight times lower than expected given their share of the population.2Psychology Today. Are Adopted Children at Risk for Abuse? The cases that do occur, however, tend to involve children whose prior histories make them especially vulnerable, and they have exposed real gaps in how the system detects and responds.
Abuse Committed by Adoptive Parents
Two cases illustrate both the severity these situations can reach and the pattern of missed warnings.
The Hart Family
In March 2018, Jennifer and Sarah Hart drove their SUV off a cliff along the Pacific Coast Highway in Northern California, killing themselves and their six adopted Black children: Markis, Hannah, Abigail, Devonte, Jeremiah, and Ciera. A coroner’s jury ruled the children died “at the hands of another” and both women died by suicide. Investigators found that Jennifer Hart had accelerated to roughly 20 mph at full throttle without braking. Sarah Hart’s cellphone contained Google searches about lethal dosages of Benadryl, suicide methods, and death by drowning, and toxicology reports showed significant amounts of Benadryl in the systems of Sarah and three of the children. Jennifer Hart’s blood alcohol level was 0.104 percent.3KNKX. Coroner’s Inquest Into Hart Family Deaths Devonte Hart’s body was never recovered.
The children had been adopted in two sibling sets from Texas, in 2006 and 2009. Warnings surfaced repeatedly across multiple states. Minnesota schools reported at least six incidents between 2010 and 2011 involving children rummaging through trash for food or stealing food from peers. When a school nurse reported that Hannah had not eaten, Sarah Hart told school officials to “just give her water” and accused the child of “playing the food card.”4The Washington Post. Hart Family Abuse and Interstate Adoption Sarah Hart pleaded guilty in 2010 to misdemeanor domestic assault against six-year-old Abigail, admitting she “let her anger get out of control.” The children remained in the home.5The Appeal. Before Children’s Grisly Deaths, a Family Fought for Them and Lost
After the family relocated to Oregon and then Washington, further reports of malnourished children followed, but investigations were closed without action. Neighbors in Washington reported that Devonte repeatedly begged for food and said his parents withheld meals as punishment.3KNKX. Coroner’s Inquest Into Hart Family Deaths A 2013 case document noted that the Harts evaded suspicion because “these women look normal,” causing professionals to trust the parents over reports from children and neighbors.4The Washington Post. Hart Family Abuse and Interstate Adoption Because no national database tracks child abuse allegations across state lines, no single agency ever saw the full picture. Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman said the deaths might have been preventable with better interstate oversight.
The Jackson Case
In 2015, Carolyn Jackson and John Jackson, a former U.S. Army Major, were convicted in federal court in Newark of conspiring to endanger the welfare of three adopted children. The abuse, which occurred on the Picatinny Arsenal military base in New Jersey between 2005 and 2010, included physically assaulting the children in ways that fractured their spines, skulls, and arms, withholding food and water, and force-feeding the children red pepper flakes and hot sauce. Carolyn Jackson was convicted on 11 substantive counts and John Jackson on nine.6FBI. New Jersey Couple Convicted on Federal Child Abuse Charges
Rehoming: Custody Transfers Outside the Legal System
Child welfare professionals call it “unregulated custody transfer.” The public knows it as rehoming: adoptive parents handing custody of a child to a stranger through informal channels, typically online, with no court or social services involvement.
The practice was brought to national attention in 2013 by Reuters journalist Megan Twohey, whose 18-month investigation, “The Child Exchange,” documented an underground network operating largely through Yahoo and Facebook groups. Reuters analyzed 5,029 posts over five years from a single Yahoo group called “Adopting-from-Disruption” and found that a child was advertised for a new home on average once a week. At least 70 percent of the children offered were foreign-born, most ranged in age from 6 to 14, and the youngest was just 10 months old. Parents transferred custody using notarized power-of-attorney documents that functioned as little more than receipts, bypassing the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children, which is supposed to require vetting for any interstate placement of a minor.7Reuters. The Child Exchange
The outcomes documented were severe. Quita Puchalla, a teenager rehomed from Wisconsin to Illinois, reported being physically and sexually abused by her new guardians, Nicole and Calvin Eason. Nicole Eason had previously had her biological children removed by the state for neglect and had faced accusations of sexual abuse involving children she babysat. Another individual connected to the network, Randy Winslow, was later convicted of trading child pornography.8NPR. Series Reveals Underground Market for Rehoming Adoptees No legal action was taken against the Easons by authorities in New York, Illinois, or Wisconsin.7Reuters. The Child Exchange
The Reuters series prompted Yahoo to shut down six rehoming groups and triggered a 2014 U.S. Senate hearing.7Reuters. The Child Exchange A 2015 Government Accountability Office report found that no federal agency tracks unregulated custody transfers, so their true prevalence is unknown. In a 15-month review, the GAO identified 23 instances on social media of parents seeking to transfer children, a figure likely capturing only a fraction of the activity.9GAO. Private Rehoming of Adopted Children
Wrongful Adoption: When Agencies Hide a Child’s History
A separate legal problem involves adoption agencies that deliberately or negligently withhold critical information about a child’s medical, psychological, or family background from prospective adoptive parents. Courts have recognized this as “wrongful adoption,” a doctrine developed through a line of cases.
The foundational case was Burr v. Board of County Commissioners in Ohio in 1986. An agency described an infant as a “nice big, healthy, baby boy” while concealing records showing developmental delays and severe mental illness in the birth mother. The child was later diagnosed with Huntington’s Disease. An Ohio court upheld a $125,000 damage award for medical expenses and emotional distress, establishing for the first time that an adoption agency could be held liable for fraud.10Florida Law Review. Ignoring Distress Signals: Emotional Distress Damages in Wrongful Adoption Claims
Later cases broadened the theory. In Meracle v. Children’s Service Society (Wisconsin, 1989), a court recognized negligent misrepresentation, holding that once an agency voluntarily undertakes to explain a child’s health history, it cannot do so negligently. In M.H. v. Caritas Family Services (Minnesota, 1992), a court held that once an agency begins disclosing background information, it must convey it completely and accurately; in that case, the agency had concealed that the child’s biological parents were siblings. In Juman v. Louise Wise Services (New York, 1997), the court recognized wrongful adoption in New York for the first time after an agency intentionally withheld that a birth mother had schizophrenia and had undergone a frontal lobotomy.10Florida Law Review. Ignoring Distress Signals: Emotional Distress Damages in Wrongful Adoption Claims
Many wrongful adoption cases settle under confidentiality agreements, making the full scope hard to gauge. Under Illinois law, agencies are required to disclose detailed medical and mental health histories of the child and birth parents if known, and courts have imposed a duty to conduct reasonable investigations into a child’s background.11GovInfo. Background Checks for Prospective Foster and Adoptive Parents
Fraud and Trafficking in Intercountry Adoption
UNICEF identifies the core abuses in intercountry adoption as the sale and abduction of children, coercion or manipulation of birth parents, falsification of documents, bribery, and improper financial gain for intermediaries.1UNICEF. Intercountry Adoption
Guatemala became a focal point. In 2007, American parents adopted 4,726 Guatemalan children, making it the second-largest source country for U.S. adoptions after China. Before 2008, private notaries facilitated adoptions for fees of around $30,000 in about nine months. A Guatemalan judge in 2011 ordered an American couple, Timothy and Jennifer Monahan, to return their six-year-old adopted daughter to her birth mother after determining the child had been kidnapped or coercively obtained through falsified records.12University of Toronto IHRP. Child Trafficking in Inter-Country Adoptions Guatemala ratified the 1993 Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption in May 2007, and in December 2007 the country’s Congress passed legislation to regulate the industry, effectively halting intercountry adoptions.13JURIST. UN Raises Alarm Over Guatemala Illegal Child Adoptions
In February 2026, United Nations experts raised concerns about historic illegal adoptions during Guatemala’s civil war (1960–1996), when children were reportedly forcibly removed from parents or taken from children’s homes and placed into private international adoption for profit. The UN specifically identified former Attorney General María Consuelo Porras as having allegedly handled the transfer of at least 80 Indigenous children to foreign adopters while serving as director of a children’s home in 1982. The Guatemalan public prosecutor’s office dismissed the allegations as “baseless” and “completely malicious.”13JURIST. UN Raises Alarm Over Guatemala Illegal Child Adoptions
The Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption, ratified by 95 countries, is the primary international framework for preventing these abuses. It requires that adoptions be authorized only by competent authorities with informed consent from all parties.1UNICEF. Intercountry Adoption Its reach is limited: when the U.S. processes adoptions from non-signatory countries, Hague standards do not apply, and those children are left with weaker protections.12University of Toronto IHRP. Child Trafficking in Inter-Country Adoptions
Why Background Checks and Post-Placement Oversight Fall Short
Federal law requires states to run fingerprint-based criminal background checks through national crime databases and to check child abuse and neglect registries for all prospective foster and adoptive parents, plus any other adult living in the home. Registry checks must cover every state where the applicant has lived in the previous five years. Automatic disqualifiers include felony convictions for child abuse or neglect, spousal abuse, crimes against children (including child pornography), sexual assault, homicide, and drug-related felonies within the past five years.11GovInfo. Background Checks for Prospective Foster and Adoptive Parents
Those checks did not stop the Harts. They passed background checks and home studies in Texas despite Sarah Hart’s later guilty plea to domestic assault in Minnesota. The adoption agency that placed children with them, the Permanent Family Resource Center in Minnesota, was itself cited for “repeated and serious violations” in 2009 and closed in 2012. The structural problem is that background checks capture a single moment in time and, for adoptive parents, end at finalization. There is no federal oversight of interstate adoptions, and post-finalization monitoring of adoptive homes is minimal.4The Washington Post. Hart Family Abuse and Interstate Adoption
Federal and State Laws That Apply
The primary federal law addressing child abuse and neglect is the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA), enacted in 1974 and most recently amended in 2019 as part of the Victims of Child Abuse Act Reauthorization Act of 2018.14OCFC PA Courts. Overview of Federal and State Child Welfare Legislation CAPTA includes the Adoption Opportunities program and was amended again in December 2024 by the Jenna Quinn Law.15Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 42 USC Ch. 67: Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment and Adoption Reform Titles IV-B and IV-E of the Social Security Act provide the principal federal funding for child welfare services, including adoption assistance and guardianship.16ACF. Children’s Bureau Laws and Policies
Federal legislation aimed specifically at rehoming has advanced slowly. In 2021, Senators Amy Klobuchar and Roy Blunt introduced the SAFE Home Act, which would amend CAPTA to classify unregulated custody transfers as a form of child abuse and neglect, require HHS to report to Congress on the practice, and issue guidance to states on identifying and responding to these transfers.17Senator Klobuchar. Klobuchar and Blunt Introduce Legislation to Protect Adopted Children The bill was reintroduced in the House during the 118th Congress as H.R. 6658 but was not enacted; a successor, S. 1658, has been introduced in the current 119th Congress.18GovTrack. SAFE Home Act, H.R. 6658
State law has moved faster in some places. As of 2022, multiple states have enacted laws criminalizing unregulated custody transfers, restricting the use of power-of-attorney documents to delegate parental authority, and prohibiting the advertisement of children for informal placement.19Child Welfare Information Gateway. Unregulated Custody Transfers of Adopted Children As of 2015, at least seven states had enacted legislation and three had modified child welfare programs in response to the rehoming issue.9GAO. Private Rehoming of Adopted Children
Mandatory reporting laws add another layer. In Ohio, for example, mandatory reporters include any person performing assessments under the state’s adoption statutes, foster caregivers, guardians ad litem, and court-appointed special advocates, and reports must be investigated within 24 hours.20Ohio Legislative Service Commission. Section 2151.421, Mandatory Reporting of Child Abuse California, which receives over 400,000 CPS reports annually but substantiates only about one in ten, has been overhauling its system. A 2022 law clarified that “general neglect” should not include economic disadvantage, and a 2025 law established a Mandated Reporting Advisory Council to develop standardized training and connect families to community-based support rather than funneling every concern into an investigation.21Casey Family Programs. Mandated Reporting: California
Recent Policy Developments
In November 2025, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Fostering the Future for American Children and Families,” directing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to publish an annual state-level scorecard measuring outcomes including the reduction of child injuries and fatalities caused by caregiver abuse and neglect, the acceleration of permanent placements, and a decrease in time between maltreatment reports and investigations. The order also directs HHS to promote the use of technology, including predictive analytics, to improve child matching and caregiver recruitment. The fiscal year 2026 budget included $25 million for foster youth.22The White House. Fostering the Future for American Children and Families
California’s 2025–26 budget reflects a different approach. The state is implementing a tiered foster care payment system based on individual child needs rather than age, with full rollout scheduled for 2027–28, and has launched a five-year federal Medicaid waiver program called BH-CONNECT to expand community-based behavioral health services aimed at preventing children from entering or escalating within the child welfare system. California is also building a new child welfare case management system, CWS-CARES, with a statewide launch targeted for October 2026 and a budget of $256 million.23California Legislative Analyst’s Office. Child Welfare in the 2025-26 Budget
The underlying problem remains what it has been for decades. States maintain their own registries, courts operate independently, and no single entity tracks what happens to children after adoption is finalized across state lines. Until that changes, the same warning signs that appeared in the Hart file, the Reuters rehoming posts, and the wrongful adoption case law can continue to appear one at a time in different jurisdictions, with no one in a position to see them together.