Disney Information Station Logo

Go Back   The DIS Discussion Forums - DISboards.com > Just for Fun > Community Board
Find Hotel Specials & DIScounts
 
facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS UpdatesDIS email updates
Register Chat FAQ Tickers Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read





Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 09-08-2012, 08:29 AM   #271
sunshinehighway
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,145

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulaSB12 View Post
So its possible this could hang on until 2014, surely if it does that the father can claim that being with her for the same time as the paps makes it possible for him to use the same arguments as they did. Mind you the fact that they want this go hang over the head of a child even longer is disturbing, why don't they let it go now as painful as it is and try for gestational surrogacy.
I don't think you can bring up new arguments with the Supreme Court. My understanding (which could be wrong) is the lower court rulings are what is looked at. Its not like a regular court with witnesses and all that. The lawyers basically use laws and other cases to argue why the lower court made a right or wrong decision.
sunshinehighway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2012, 03:43 PM   #272
cornflake
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,656

Quote:
Originally Posted by sunshinehighway View Post
I don't think you can bring up new arguments with the Supreme Court. My understanding (which could be wrong) is the lower court rulings are what is looked at. Its not like a regular court with witnesses and all that. The lawyers basically use laws and other cases to argue why the lower court made a right or wrong decision.
You're correct in that the child's current state and etc., will not be at issue with the Court as yes, they're basically a court of appeals. Their interest lies in the Constitutional issue. The argument is about the Indian Child Welfare Act and its use.
cornflake is offline   Reply With Quote
|
The DIS
Register to remove

Join Date: 1997
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,000,000
Old 09-08-2012, 03:56 PM   #273
Mickey'snewestfan
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 4,551

Quote:
Originally Posted by cornflake View Post
If they want to have contact, fine. The poster was talking about making it somehow illegal for parents to 'close' open adoptions, which is giving parental power to people who are not the parents while removing it from those who are.

What if the biological people start getting overly involved? What if they start saying they're the REAL parents and telling the kid their parent are wrong; telling them they don't have to listen, that they can come live with the biological people, badmouth the actual parents - what if they just want to keep visiting and the kid isn't interested and doesn't want to see them, but they have the right to force visits? It's not their kid, period, the end. If the kid cares, they can contact. If not, tough.

That puts the actual parents in the role of sitters, imo, and not only is it offensive, it's legally untenable.
The "biological people"?

Most kids in this country have more than one parent with legal rights to them. Does the fact that Dad can potentially get visitation rights make mom "a sitter"?

As a parent in an open adoption, I do think open adoption agreements should be enforceable. I think most open adoption agreements should specify a minimum amount of contact, whether that's letters 4 times a year, or one visit, or whatever. If more is comfortable, then I'd say go for it (we do a phone call about once a week, and an in person visit every couple of months). If either party becomes uncomfortable then three should be provisions for mediation.

As far as what if the kid "isn't interested"? My kid has 2 grandma's. Sometimes I have to drag him to both, because he'd rather play video games or hang with his friend. I don't see any difference between saying "Hey, get dressed, we're going to see Nana (my mom), and "Hey get dressed we're going to see Grandma (his firstmom's mom).

As far as "if the kid cares they can contact", there's a huge assumption that the birth mother, and other family members, will still be alive when the child turns 18. In our case that didn't turn out to be true.
Mickey'snewestfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2012, 02:47 AM   #274
PaulaSB12
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kettering, UK
Posts: 6,044

They have put up the argument for the appeal I wont put all of it but here are the main questions

The Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA), 25
U.S.C. §§ 1901-63, applies to state custody proceedings
involving an Indian child. A dozen state courts of
last resort are openly and intractably divided on two
critical questions involving the administration of
ICWA in thousands of custody disputes each year:
(1) Whether a non-custodial parent can invoke
ICWA to block an adoption voluntarily and lawfully
initiated by a non-Indian parent under state law.
(2) Whether ICWA defines “parent” in 25 U.S.C.
§ 1903(9) to include an unwed biological father who
has not complied with state law rules to attain legal
status as a parent.

What are the chances this will be listened to?
PaulaSB12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 06:34 AM   #275
PaulaSB12
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kettering, UK
Posts: 6,044

The Veronica Rose case is going on Dr phil on thursday (we in the uk do get the show but way after you do) so can someone who watches tell me how it goes. The show has been put on the website with this comment

Matt and Melanie adopted Veronica after her birth mom handpicked them to be her parents. Two years later, Veronica’s biological father, Dusten, decided he wanted to raise Veronica, and Matt and Melanie were forced to hand over their daughter. Dusten, who is part Cherokee Indian, was able to reclaim his daughter pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), which was enacted “to protect the best interests of Indian children and to promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families.” Devastated, Matt and Melanie petitioned the United States Supreme Court to regain custody of Veronica. Should she be returned to them, or should she remain with her biological father? Dr. Phil, along with Troy Dunn, who has reunited thousands of lost loved ones on his hit TV show The Locator, delves into this controversial story. And, Chrissi Nimmo, assistant attorney general for the Cherokee Nation, and Les Marston, attorney and tribal judge, explain why they believe Veronica’s father is the best person to raise her. Then, find out why Johnston, who adopted two boys who are part American Indian, says the ICWA is racist, unjust and hurts children.
You see the words two years after the adoption took place which is totally wrong, they have the attorney general for the Cherokee nation coming so hopefully they will get the truth out, because if someone from a different country can then the show should do a better job of it.
PaulaSB12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 07:25 AM   #276
ronandannette
DIS Veteran
 
ronandannette's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,317

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulaSB12 View Post
The Veronica Rose case is going on Dr phil on thursday (we in the uk do get the show but way after you do) so can someone who watches tell me how it goes. The show has been put on the website with this comment

Matt and Melanie adopted Veronica after her birth mom handpicked them to be her parents. Two years later, Veronica’s biological father, Dusten, decided he wanted to raise Veronica, and Matt and Melanie were forced to hand over their daughter. Dusten, who is part Cherokee Indian, was able to reclaim his daughter pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), which was enacted “to protect the best interests of Indian children and to promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families.” Devastated, Matt and Melanie petitioned the United States Supreme Court to regain custody of Veronica. Should she be returned to them, or should she remain with her biological father? Dr. Phil, along with Troy Dunn, who has reunited thousands of lost loved ones on his hit TV show The Locator, delves into this controversial story. And, Chrissi Nimmo, assistant attorney general for the Cherokee Nation, and Les Marston, attorney and tribal judge, explain why they believe Veronica’s father is the best person to raise her. Then, find out why Johnston, who adopted two boys who are part American Indian, says the ICWA is racist, unjust and hurts children.
You see the words two years after the adoption took place which is totally wrong, they have the attorney general for the Cherokee nation coming so hopefully they will get the truth out, because if someone from a different country can then the show should do a better job of it.



Hi Paula,

Not sure exactly what you're trying to say, but the reference to the "Cherokee Nation" does not imply a different country. It's a term commonly used for Indian tribes to identify themselves as they have certain (limited) degrees of self-government on their reservations within the US and Canada.
__________________
DL & Monarch of The Seas 2004 * WDW & Mariner of the Seas 2006 * DL & DCA 2011 * DL & DCA 2013 * DL & DCA 2014
ronandannette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 11:15 AM   #277
PaulaSB12
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kettering, UK
Posts: 6,044

Quote:
Originally Posted by ronandannette View Post
[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]

Hi Paula,

Not sure exactly what you're trying to say, but the reference to the "Cherokee Nation" does not imply a different country. It's a term commonly used for Indian tribes to identify themselves as they have certain (limited) degrees of self-government on their reservations within the US and Canada.
What I meant (sorry posted after a long night shift weekend) was if I in the UK can find that the adoption hadn't been formalised and that the father had been fighting for her since she was 4 months old and not waited for the two years the tv show said then why can't they?
PaulaSB12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 05:50 AM   #278
PaulaSB12
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kettering, UK
Posts: 6,044

They have changed the story on the web site
from this
Matt and Melanie adopted Veronica after her birth mom handpicked them to be her parents. Two years later, Veronica’s biological father, Dusten, decided he wanted to raise Veronica, and Matt and Melanie were forced to hand over their daughter. Dusten, who is part Cherokee Indian, was able to reclaim his daughter pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), which was enacted “to protect the best interests of Indian children and to promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families.
To this which changes the whole slant of the story rather than say he waited two years they at least say he started fighting for her at 4 months


Matt and Melanie adopted Veronica after her birth mom handpicked them to be her parents. When Veronica’s biological father, Dusten, was notified about the adoption four months later, he decided he wanted to raise her, even though he had little involvement during the pregnancy and with the birth mother since Veronica’s birth. Dusten, who is part Cherokee Indian, was able to reclaim his daughter pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), which was enacted “to protect the best interests of Indian children and to promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families.”
PaulaSB12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 05:09 AM   #279
PaulaSB12
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kettering, UK
Posts: 6,044

I saw the program on youtube and this and the program about Morgan Ingram's death does not show him in a good light. He was racist to the native americans especially the bit where he took these kids to a reservation and asked did you want to be part of that. Mind you that was nothing to allowing a total lunatic accuse a teenage girl, her father and ex of killing their daughter. According to Morgans parents on their blog 7 people broke in their house through the front door without the parents knowing or two dogs reacting and killing their daughter. How does he get away with rubbish like this? Or the surrogate mother who kept the twins after finding out the mother had a mental disease very closely linked to Paranoid schizophrenia she hears voices has a history of cocaine use and he wants her to be given two babies not related to her.
PaulaSB12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 08:51 AM   #280
tomthebarncat
DIS Veteran
 
tomthebarncat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Germany to Beijing to Germany to Jiamiusi China
Posts: 970

Quote:
Originally Posted by cornflake View Post
I don't know anyone in the military but I assume they don't actually have access to counsel unless, like anyone else, they're charged with a crime.

Do they really have access to legal counsel they can call up for personal matters who will advise them, read documents, etc. for free because they're in the military?! That's... nuts, if that's true.
Actually it is true, every base has a JAG office with lawyers, etc. They do personal business also. I am married to a government employee here in Germany, I used the base legal office to review my Chinese work contract before I left for China. I have also used them for a German work contract, so yes they do provide advice, insight, etc. You only have to have a military ID card and wait for an available appointment. Since the loser dad in question deployed, he would have had to see the JAG office prior to deploying as it is mandatory. Also if he really cared, he could have married the woman and she would have gotten benefits and his life insurance if anything happened. I feel for the adoptive parents and the dad well...time will tell!
tomthebarncat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 08:59 AM   #281
SaraJayne
Stop moving those smilies!
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,075

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthebarncat View Post
Actually it is true, every base has a JAG office with lawyers, etc. They do personal business also. I am married to a government employee here in Germany, I used the base legal office to review my Chinese work contract before I left for China. I have also used them for a German work contract, so yes they do provide advice, insight, etc. You only have to have a military ID card and wait for an available appointment. Since the loser dad in question deployed, he would have had to see the JAG office prior to deploying as it is mandatory. Also if he really cared, he could have married the woman and she would have gotten benefits and his life insurance if anything happened. I feel for the adoptive parents and the dad well...time will tell!
That "loser dad" now has 100% full legal custody of his daughter.

So ~ yeah.
SaraJayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 10:38 AM   #282
sunshinehighway
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,145

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthebarncat View Post
Actually it is true, every base has a JAG office with lawyers, etc. They do personal business also. I am married to a government employee here in Germany, I used the base legal office to review my Chinese work contract before I left for China. I have also used them for a German work contract, so yes they do provide advice, insight, etc. You only have to have a military ID card and wait for an available appointment. Since the loser dad in question deployed, he would have had to see the JAG office prior to deploying as it is mandatory. Also if he really cared, he could have married the woman and she would have gotten benefits and his life insurance if anything happened. I feel for the adoptive parents and the dad well...time will tell!
You can't marry someone who breaks up with you, moves away and refuses to have contact with you.
sunshinehighway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2012, 11:06 AM   #283
PaulaSB12
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kettering, UK
Posts: 6,044

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthebarncat View Post
Actually it is true, every base has a JAG office with lawyers, etc. They do personal business also. I am married to a government employee here in Germany, I used the base legal office to review my Chinese work contract before I left for China. I have also used them for a German work contract, so yes they do provide advice, insight, etc. You only have to have a military ID card and wait for an available appointment. Since the loser dad in question deployed, he would have had to see the JAG office prior to deploying as it is mandatory. Also if he really cared, he could have married the woman and she would have gotten benefits and his life insurance if anything happened. I feel for the adoptive parents and the dad well...time will tell!
He wanted to marry her she didn't was he supposed to drag her to the alter against her will. She lied to every one she told them he was native american and that would stop the adoption. She pushed the father of the other two children out of their lives. As for the adoptive parents no sympathy at all they got friends to call the press, the loons on the save veronica page on facebook are still calling him a sperm donor. A man who didn't want his child wouldn't have fought for two years for her she is home with him and that is where she should stay.
PaulaSB12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 03:40 AM   #284
PaulaSB12
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Kettering, UK
Posts: 6,044

Here we go again another mother sneaking behind her HUSBAND'S back to put their baby girl up for adoption. The judge sided with the father who claimed he supported his wife even though he had to go out of state for his work. She gave the adoption agency the wrong address to make sure he didn't find out in time, the adoption agency TOLD the paps that the father would object when he found out but they still went with it and they are blogging for donations to keep the child from the father

http://www.blackbluedog.com/2012/12/...-for-adoption/


This is what the potential adoptive parents said after being told to give the child to her father

“We knew that we were not done having children, but after years of sudden infertility and several miscarriages … we discovered somewhere down the line that Kristi had advanced endometriosis, and would not likely conceive or carry another child again.”
“Since that eventful day, we have, as a family, come to know that this dream was a righteous desire blessed to fruition by God, and that Leah would be that child – and yet, little did we know the challenges and trials that awaited us in finding and fighting for this little girl.” (The Frei family named Achane’s baby Leah)
According to The Tribune, Bland had given the adoption agency Achane’s former address in Texas for contact, while being fully aware that he was not there. She did this intentionally so that it would appear that he did not contest the adoption.

Once Achane found out his daughter had been given up for adoption, he contacted the agency but the adoption agency was not helpful. The agency claimed that it was standard procedure to not share any information with a father of a potential adoptive child.

Speaking about how long it is taking for him to get his daughter back, Achane said,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-returned.html
Speaking of the drawn out legal battle, he said: 'If they prolong it, that is more time away from my daughter. There are precious moments I can’t get back. ... It has been a year and a half now. There is no court order saying they have the right to my child. I just won the case. I want to get my daughter and raise my daughter,' he said.
Judge Darold McDade berated the Adoption Center of Choice's handling as 'utterly indefensible.'
'This is a case of human trafficking,' Mr Achane's attorney Mark Wiser told the Tribune.
'Children are being bought and sold. It is one thing what [adoption agencies] have been doing with unmarried biological fathers. It is in a new area when they are trying to take a child away from a married father who wants to have his child.'
'It has been a year and a half now. There is no court order saying they have the right to my child. I just won the case. I want to get my daughter and raise my daughter'
- Terry Achane
When an attorney for the Frei family contacted Mr Achane, asking him to consent to the adoption, he said no and demanded his little girl returned to him - to the Frei family's complete surprise.
'Over the last 19 months, despite the law requiring that a father show interest in his child and at least attempt regular communication to establish a bond, the father has never shown any interest in Leah other than to hire an attorney,' the family writes in their blog.
Despite a judge's order to return the child within 60 days, the family now asks that his parental rights granting him custody of her be terminated.
They accuse him of abandoning both the mother and baby during her pregnancy and therefore demonstrating no capability for raising the girl.
'The right of a fit, competent parent to raise the parent’s child without undue government interference is a fundamental liberty interest that has long been protected by the laws and constitution of this state of the United States, and is a fundamental public policy of this state,’ said Judge McDade.
He added that there is no law requiring the father to 'prove himself' as fit to father his own child.
'Once Mr Achane contacted the Adoption Center of Choice ... to let them know he opposed the adoption and wanted his daughter back, that should have been the end of this case,' said Mr McDade.
Not going down without a fight, the Freis vow to appeal the judge's decision, asking friends and family to support their case financially through their blog.
They note having paid for 'two already expensive adoptions (each costing around $25,000),' with a continuing fight only requiring more money.
Their online petition has since raised more than $20,000.
A hearing has been set for January 16 of next year on the child's transition back to her father.
Read more:


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz2ESAoj2Ji
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Last edited by PaulaSB12; 12-08-2012 at 04:04 AM.
PaulaSB12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 04:17 AM   #285
Robbi
DIS Veteran
 
Robbi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,694

Our adopted daughter is 18. If anyone had tried to take her away when she was a toddler, we'd have disappeared.
Robbi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS Updates
GET OUR DIS UPDATES DELIVERED BY EMAIL



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright © 1997-2014, Werner Technologies, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

You Rated this Thread: