What about the biological parents? Just because they are deemed to be "unfit" to raise their children should they be absolved from financially supporting their care? Do none of the work? Do none of them have any income? What attempts are made to secure their assets to provide for the children that they brought into this world? Lots of questions on this issue!

I'm confused by this story/headline. The state shouldn't be paying anything to people to adopt. The state should be paying people for fostering kids, which is different than adoption. What is an adoption payment? Why wouldn't we be doing away with it rather than hiking it. Wouldn't it be more legal and productive to put that money toward fostering kids?

No one should be paid a monthly amount for adopting a child unless that child had medical expenses prior to adoption that continue after adoption.

I'm confused by this story/headline. The state shouldn't be paying anything to people to adopt. The state should be paying people for fostering kids, which is different than adoption. What is an adoption payment? Why wouldn't we be doing away with it rather than hiking it. Wouldn't it be more legal and productive to put that money toward fostering kids?

Soooo, you get PAID to adopt a child? I understand payment of foster homes but when you adopt a child you are becoming that child's parent. I disagree with paying after that adoption has happened.

"No one should be paid a monthly amount for adopting a child unless that child had medical expenses prior to adoption that continue after adoption." - Hadn't thought of that. Makes sense to me.

The state pays people to adopt foster children, but not if they go through adoption agencies. Why? Because paying people to provide stable homes for troubled foster children who have gone through the ringer of horrible bio parents, bounced from home to home and display a host of behavioral and emotional problems is cheaper than housing these kids in juvenile detention centers and eventually jails.

A lot of these kids have medical problems and mental health services they need to continue receiving even when adopted. If adoptive parents had to cover the entire financial burden (which is often extensive with this demographic) even fewer couples would be able to adopt these troubled kids.

"The state pays people to adopt foster children" - Still not getting it, adopting children is a choice that should not be state financed. Fostering children should be. the costs of raising children, adopted or natural born, is not the states responsibility. Fostering them, you bet. Educating them. Yep. But not adopting them.

We wouldn't have anymore unwanted children if we set up a $1Million trust fund for each kid. Stop breeding if you can't be responsible to raise you own spawn.