Is anyone following the Veronica Rose story?

[holcombe5]

I have been following this situation since before Veronica was taken from her adoptive family. I'm close friends with them. However, I do consider myself an objective person and I do feel that Veronica should be able to have a relationship with all those in her families that love and care about her but as a mom, and in my heart of hearts, I know it is truly in her best interest to come home to the two people that never waivered in their love for her. When the birth father took her, he also took her from her birth mother. The adoptive family and the birth mother consider each other family. Also, it was not possible for legal reasons for them to 'just return her at 4 months'. Also, this guy didn't support the birth mom and had a past involving drugs (public records).

 

[NikitaZee]

Sounds to me, like the father decided to use all the resources available to him. Decided to research, found facts that he could use to help his case, and availed himself of them.

As would anyone.

Agreed.
I personally wouldn't hold it against him for needing time to get used to the idea of keeping this child and raising her himself (if this is the case - lots of details missing and the ones we do have are terribly biased).
ETA - by time, I'm referring to the months of pregnancy and the baby being an infant when he filed. Not years. I wouldn't think that was right.

 

[SaraJayne]

I have been following this situation since before Veronica was taken from her adoptive family. I'm close friends with them. However, I do consider myself an objective person and I do feel that Veronica should be able to have a relationship with all those in her families that love and care about her but as a mom, and in my heart of hearts, I know it is truly in her best interest to come home to the two people that never waivered in their love for her. When the birth father took her, he also took her from her birth mother. The adoptive family and the birth mother consider each other family. Also, it was not possible for legal reasons for them to 'just return her at 4 months'. Also, this guy didn't support the birth mom and had a past involving drugs (public records).

Sorry, I'm not willing to skewer the guy based on terribly biased info, which is all I've seen.

You aren't objective, since you're friends with the parents.

 

[tammymacb]

http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20120101/PC1602/301019972

Post and Courier article.

I went back to look for old records that I knew I read in the past. Several things have not been released because of the gag order and some of the facts were "taken back" when the gag order came into play.

The bio father admitted that he signed away custody and he did not belong the the Cherokee nation prior to the lawsuit.

 

[jrmasm]

http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20120101/PC1602/301019972

Post and Courier article.

I went back to look for old records that I knew I read in the past. Several things have not been released because of the gag order and some of the facts were "taken back" when the gag order came into play.

The bio father admitted that he signed away custody and he did not belong the the Cherokee nation prior to the lawsuit.

From the article:

One filing on behalf of the Capobiancos says Brown testified that he would give up his rights to Veronica to Maldonado so long as he "would not be responsible in any way for child support or anything else as far as the child's concerned."

Brown's attorney, Shannon Jones, said her client never made that statement. Jones said Brown thought that Maldonado planned to raise their daughter, and he thought he had signed away his rights to her.

"In his mind, he thought that would make her happy, and she would come back and marry him," Jones said. As soon as Brown learned of the adoption, she said, he fought it.

He said, she said.

 

[SaraJayne]

http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20120101/PC1602/301019972

Post and Courier article.

I went back to look for old records that I knew I read in the past. Several things have not been released because of the gag order and some of the facts were "taken back" when the gag order came into play.

The bio father admitted that he signed away custody and he did not belong the the Cherokee nation prior to the lawsuit.

Like I said, I'm still waiting to see something unbiased. That article is not what I would consider unbiased.

 

[tammymacb]

Exactly. He KNEW he signed away his rights. He admits it.

Now if he had some fantasy that he would sign away rights, make bio mom happy and live happily ever after, that's his problem.

 

[sunshinehighway]

http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20120101/PC1602/301019972

Post and Courier article.

I went back to look for old records that I knew I read in the past. Several things have not been released because of the gag order and some of the facts were "taken back" when the gag order came into play.

The bio father admitted that he signed away custody and he did not belong the the Cherokee nation prior to the lawsuit.

That's not what I'm getting out of that article.

He wasn't at the hospital because the bio mom didn't want him thrre.

He wasn't a member of Cherokee Nation earlier because the bio mom filled out the form incorrectly (not sure why he didn't fill it out himself)

He didn't know about the adoption and wanted to marry the mother.

 

[tammymacb]

and again, he also admits that he signed away his rights to the child.

 

[sunshinehighway]

and again, he also admits that he signed away his rights to the child.

Yes but he didn't know about the adoption. He was told the mom was raising the child.

Also it doesn't make sense that he refused to support the mother , in any way, during her pregnancy but, he signed away his rights in the hope that it would make her happy and he could marry her.

 

[jrmasm]

and again, he also admits that he signed away his rights to the child.

That was not a smart move on his part but if he is telling the truth, he did not agree to adoption.

I have no idea who is telling the truth or what really happened but it seems not to be indispute that when the baby was 4 months old, the father contested the adoption. IMO, it is criminal that the courts do not have a faster way to resolve these matters.

 

[holcombe5]

I hope the biological father wins, if they had done the right thing when his daughter was 4 months there would have been no trauma for the child. By dragging it out the adoptive parents have been the cause of the trauma. For the sake of the child parent bond they shouldn't see her again. It is going to sound cruel but if you find you are unable to have a child you should only be allowed to adopt if BOTH parents agree if one changes his or her mind and closes to raise the child that is how it should be.

The birth father didn't support the birth mother! She was put in a situation where she had to make a difficult decision. He stated to her numerous times that he wanted to relinquish his rights and agreed to the adoption. Sorry, but children shouldn't come with a return policy like a product you buy at the store. He made his decisions early on. He should live with them. BUT...if he were a man and owned up to his mistakes, then he should have a relationship with her but I don't believe he should be able to use a law that involves a heritage that he's not even connected with to rip apart a loving family.

 

[holcombe5]

Well, I know what I've seen with my own eyes and I know that my parents raised me to know the difference between right and wrong.

 

[SaraJayne]

Well, I know what I've seen with my own eyes and I know that my parents raised me to know the difference between right and wrong.

I thought you said you were objective.

 

[holcombe5]

I am an objective person but you pretty much disregarded my 'first-hand' account off the bat. Many people in this thread were stating they didn't know what really happened. The news articles aren't going to give all the facts. I was putting it out there that I do know the ins and outs of this unfortunate situation. I was saying that there is a part of me that felt compassion for the birth father but after witnessing what I've seen and how his side has handled this entire situation, that's pretty much gone now. My feeling is this is about Veronica's rights. Not his or the tribes.

 

[DizBelle]

From the article:

One filing on behalf of the Capobiancos says Brown testified that he would give up his rights to Veronica to Maldonado so long as he "would not be responsible in any way for child support or anything else as far as the child's concerned."

Brown's attorney, Shannon Jones, said her client never made that statement. Jones said Brown thought that Maldonado planned to raise their daughter, and he thought he had signed away his rights to her.

"In his mind, he thought that would make her happy, and she would come back and marry him," Jones said. As soon as Brown learned of the adoption, she said, he fought it.

He said, she said.

I don't think it matters what is "in his mind". What matters is what he signed. If he signed papers relinquishing all rights to the child to the mother, then that includes any decisions that need to be made concerning the child. This would include putting the child up for adoption. Why does he think "giving up his rights" still gives him rights?

 

[jrmasm]

I don't think it matters what is "in his mind". What matters is what he signed. If he signed papers relinquishing all rights to the child to the mother, then that includes any decisions that need to be made concerning the child. This would include putting the child up for adoption. Why does he think "giving up his rights" still gives him rights?

But maybe not if there was fraud involved.

 

[tammymacb]

But maybe not if there was fraud involved.

He admits he signed the papers. He had counsel available to him for free through the military.

How, exactly can there be fraud?

Let me ask you this...if someone had a child out of wedlock and bio mom decides to keep the baby. Dad doesn't want to pay support so he signs away his legal rights to said baby. Mom gets a fabulous job in China and moves across the world. Does Dad now get to fight Mom because he has no access to the baby and she's out of the country. Maybe forever?

No, he signed his rights away. Hence, he has no rights at all.

 

[jrmasm]

He admits he signed the papers. He had counsel available to him for free through the military.

How, exactly can there be fraud?
Let me ask you this...if someone had a child out of wedlock and bio mom decides to keep the baby. Dad doesn't want to pay support so he signs away his legal rights to said baby. Mom gets a fabulous job in China and moves across the world. Does Dad now get to fight Mom because he has no access to the baby and she's out of the country. Maybe forever?

No, he signed his rights away. Hence, he has no rights at all.

I have no idea what the conversations were between the two biological parents during the pregnancy. And neither do you.

Maybe she said if you don't sign your rights over to me, I'll make sure you never see this baby. Maybe she didn't. Maybe he's an idiot. Maybe he's a liar. Maybe she's a liar. We have no idea what really happened. With a gag order issed, I don't think we'll ever know.


But nothing you've posted or I've been able to find on my own convinces me that he shouldn't have custody of his daughter.



And to your scenario, since adoption and moving are such vastly different things I have no idea what you think one has to do with other.

 

[tammymacb]

Because if you give up your parental rights, you give up all your rights. He doesn't get to pick that the child can live with it's mother, and he won't support it, but she can't place the child for adoption.

It's pretty simple.

And if the fact that he ADMITS that he signed away custody of the child doesn't convince you that he should not have custody, you're not really worth arguing with.