Gregory J. Chase

Abstract

Insurance and adoption seem like two ideas that can co-exist and mingle with one another. Yet, how have only a few people even ever heard of the term adoption insurance? Adoption is a market that seems fairly constant as there will always be a sizeable number of Americans interested in going through the process. There also seems to be little risk, especially since adoption disruption for domestic adoptions in the United States occurs at very low rates. So where did the miscommunication occur when adoption insurance finally was created? Who is to blame for the failure of the pioneered adoption disruption insurance? Is it possible to see adoption disruption insurance, like the one created by Philadelphia Insurance Company, in the United States any time soon? Well, most people might think adoption and insurance are two words that do not fit together. Not surprisingly, the two have only recently overlapped. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (OBRA-93) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), for example, were created with provisions that allowed adopted children to be insured under the adopting parents’ health insurance. These laws mandated health insurance companies that already provided employer-sponsored plans covering dependent children to include adopted children in those policies as if they were no different than biological children. But these laws seem to be the extent of how much the two words will ever overlap. One might think that the low rates of adoption disruption in America combined with the sometimes unbearable costs to adopt would bring about an avenue for insurance companies to mold a viable adoption disruption policy. But these two factors only describe a small portion of the considerations involved in pursuing adoption. One major factor is privacy. Insurance companies, like Philadelphia Insurance, might contend that overlooking the privacy factor proved fatal to their attempt to create an adoption disruption policy. Privacy remains crucial partly because a few high-profile adoption terminations brought about significant public disapproval for the families who terminated their adoptions. Thus, potential adopting parents are less willing to tell insurance companies—or anyone—that their adoption fell through because of them. Currently, former adoption disruption policies are mostly unknown to the public, as many individuals, adopting parents and non-adopting persons alike, do not know such policies ever existed. It seems that, based on insurance companies’ last attempt to generate interest in the policy, adoption disruption insurance will continue to be viewed as a myth for years to come.

---