Adoption Story on Today Show

[Wall-E1]

I brought up Juno because she said she was getting an abortion, then changed her mind without consulting him, meaning now he would have to pay child support when he thought she was not having it. She then picked out the adoptive parents on her own, much like this case, didn't ask if his mother wanted it or him. sound familiar?

No, doesn't sound familiar at all.

In the movie, Bleeker told Juno to do what she felt was right. Juno then made the decision to find an adoptive family for the baby. After making the decision, she then went back and told Bleeker of her decision and he was okay with it.

In the father's story, the mother secretly snuck out of the hospital, knowing the father wanted to raise his baby. The father left voice messages, text messages, filed court papers; etc. stating his wishes. The birth mother secretly ran off to Utah and worked with an adoption agency that arranged an adoption, knowing that the biological father did not give up custody. The adoptive parents were advised that there the father was not on board with the adoption and may try to contest it.

So no, it doesn't sound familiar.

 

[aprilgail2]

So if the birth father had taken the child from the hospital & secretly adopted her out so he wouldn't have to deal with the birth mother, would everyone still be saying the child should stay with the adoptive parents? Even if the birth mother always wanted custody?

.

No then you would have the people here screaming for him to go to jail--it only seems to work one way, the mothers---the fathers wishes etc don't seem to. I can't wait for this child to grow up and find out what her birth mother and adoptie parents did-I can't see that ending well!

 

[Mkrop]

The problem here is that there are 2 totally sets of interests that need to be kept in mind. One is the interest of the child. Staying with the people who are currently raising her is probably in her best interest.

The other is the interest of society. If we establish a precedent that adoptive parents can drag things out in court and then win because the child has been with them "so long", then we're setting ourselves up for many more of these cases, and many more incidents where children and families are hurt.

Unfortunately, while I agree that a transition will be hard for the child, the need to prevent this situation from repeating itself takes precedence. The child needs to be returned and Utah's laws need to be seriously revamped to protect families.

How do we know that the current people raising her have her best interest? Giving what has been presented, they seem to be people who lied and manipulated to get this child at any cost.

 

[snarlingcoyote]

Here's the thing: I just don't get the whole "the child will be emotionally scarred for life" argument. If the adoptive parents really are good people, they'll make the transition easier. If the dad really is a good dad, he'll do the same. The child will be happy and healthy. Children of divorce deal with this sort of thing all the time, as do foster children.

For that matter, why aren't people screaming and up and arms about how often foster kids get pulled from one placement and put into another or live in a revolving door between a good foster parents' home and a bad parent's home? Those are the kids that we need more CASA advocates for. Not a child who is loved and wanted by two households.

Back to my original point, that child needs to go back to Daddy. I don't think there will be any deep scarring except to the adoptive parents and, quite frankly, I don't have much sympathy for them.

 

[RachaelA]

How do we know that the current people raising her have her best interest? Giving what has been presented, they seem to be people who lied and manipulated to get this child at any cost.

Agree! I hope the birth father doesn't give up and takes this to the US Supreme Court.

 

[PaulaSB12]

I brought up Juno because she said she was getting an abortion, then changed her mind without consulting him, meaning now he would have to pay child support when he thought she was not having it. She then picked out the adoptive parents on her own, much like this case, didn't ask if his mother wanted it or him. sound familiar?


I think it is very sad for the little girl and the man but should wake men up to the realities of having kids without being married. That they have very few rights if the Mother doesn't want them to have the child.

You cant use possession is nine tenths of the law here. Nor should adoptive parents use the best interests of the child to excuse child theft . This isn't the only dodgy illegal adoption being caught that little girl from guatemala has had the same excuse against giving her back to the parents who never wanted to loose her. I you think it's so good how about the for a question you give birth to a baby and he is stolen . It takes 2 years to find the baby are you going to leave the baby with the abductors after all they are the only parents he knows.

 

[jrmasm]

I brought up Juno because she said she was getting an abortion, then changed her mind without consulting him, meaning now he would have to pay child support when he thought she was not having it. She then picked out the adoptive parents on her own, much like this case, didn't ask if his mother wanted it or him. sound familiar?


I think it is very sad for the little girl and the man but should wake men up to the realities of having kids without being married. That they have very few rights if the Mother doesn't want them to have the child.

Are you ok with that?

 

[Hannathy]

Are you ok with that?

no I'm not. It takes 2 to make a baby and I think they both should be responsible for the child.

I also think that all Mothers should have to name the father on all birth certificates. something that was argued against very heatedly on this board a while ago. It should not be up to the Mom.

What I am saying is the way it is now the mom holds all the cards.
She didn't even have to tell him about the baby. She could have went to Utah and had the kid and never told him and I personally don't think that is right but as of now it is legal and that is what everyone has to live with.

there is the emotional side to this story and the legal side. And right now men should remember this story and if they get someone pregnant without marriage it better be someone they trust or they may not have much of a say in their child's life.

I still say the child should stay put. And I think the whole foster care system is terrible to the person who asked.

 

[alizesmom]

Hannathy, I asked this in general but will ask you straight out. What is going to happen to this child in about 10-15 years when she finds all of this out?

 

[hambirg]

There are legal ways to get that. They just need to do things legally.

And it sounds like he did.

Look, a mother does not hold all the cards unless she totally conceals the pregnancy. If a woman is pregnant and a man suspects he is the father, he can get a court ordered paternity test. . .at which point, if he is found to be the father, he most certainly has rights, whether the mother likes it or not.

There is nothing in this story that suggests anything else but that.

As soon as he found out about the birth, he pursued and was granted custody by the state that the birth took place in. When it comes to children, possession is NOT 9/10ths of the law. This borders on child trafficking. Quickly move the child across state lines to a state that poopoo's on the birth state's jurisdiction.

The child has to go back to the father. Any other outcome sets an UGLY precedent.

 

[PaulaSB12]

The child has to back or the message is quite clear steal a child and as long as you can hide from the parents for a couple of years then the child is yours. Look at that 6year old assumed to have died in a house fire she is back with her parents. By these standards the young woman found after being held for 18years should have been left with her abductors after all they where the only parents her children had ever known. If they had returned the child there was a chance for them to adopt again legally now what birth mother is going to let them any where near a baby.

 

[Hannathy]

Hannathy, I asked this in general but will ask you straight out. What is going to happen to this child in about 10-15 years when she finds all of this out?

I would hope and imagine what most adoptees feel that their Mother made the best decision she could for her best interest in the long run.

 

[KiminChicago]

What was really appalling to me was that this case isn't even the first one like this involving Utah. On Dateline they interviewed another man who had his child adopted in that state. In his case, he had documents that were filed and originally stamped with a received date that was well within the 20 days to contest an adoption, but then someone in the state offices in Utah crossed out that date and stamped them with a date that was one day passed the 20 day limit.

Oh, and in the case we're discussing, the countdown timer started (acccording to Utah's terms) as soon as the birth mother sent the text "You do understand that I am discussing adoption with an agency from Utah." Now how in the world would anyone in Virginia be expected to know that? The Dateline story says that he contacted the birth mother as soon as he got that text and she agreed that she wouldn't put the baby up for adoption. I thought I also heard in the story that he did in fact go to some of her appointments with her and made it clear from the very start that he wanted to be a father to the child.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

How do we know that the current people raising her have her best interest? Giving what has been presented, they seem to be people who lied and manipulated to get this child at any cost.

That's why I said "probably".

The point of my post was that even if it was in the child's best interest to leave her where she is, that's irrelevant. Society's need to show that breaking the law in this manner will not be rewarded, takes precedence.

 

[Mrs.Toad]

I cant beleive the adoptive parents dont feel wrong in keeping this child. This isnt like the guy showed up 3 years later, he filed FIVE days after the birth. I dont think I could knowingly adopt a child without consent from BOTH parents. I could not do that to the child.

nor could I. I am an adoptive mom, so I understand the immediate bond you feel with your child, even when the adoption is still at legal risk. We had to wait 12 weeks before our dd's birthparents rights were terminated. It would have ripped our hearts out to return our dd if one or both of them had decided to parent within that time, but we would have done it not just because we'd have been legally required to, but because it's the right thing to do. I could never live with myself if there was ANY indication that either of my child's birthparents didn't consent to the adoption. These adoptive parents knew that the birthfather wanted the baby. That makes them selfish, low-life, kidnapping scum.

I saw this story on Dateline last night. It amazes me how sick and twisted some people are. The birth mother and her parents are despicable pieces of trash. Their actions amount to nothing more than kidnapping. The adoptive parents are just plain evil. They were informed during the adoption process about the father, and are using their wealth to kidnap the baby. The attorney for the adoptive girls' parents is a complete sleazeball. he couldn't even look the birth grandmother in the eyes when she asked him how he would feel if someone took one of his kids. The attorney general for Utah is just as sleazy. His weak "the law is the law" excuse is a pathetic excuse from a pathetic man.

The federal court system really needs to step in on this since the judicial system and law makers of Utah seem not to have a moral compass, and are only interested in covering their own butts.

Completely agree with every word.

 

[kayrosek]

I personally know of a case almost exactly like this one. Where a very good friend of mine had planned on parenting his child from the moment he found out about her. He prepared a nursery, looked for a good daycare for when he was working, got recomendations for a peditrician and spoke to lawyer about what he needed to do to get legal custody. He checked on the mother often and was told he would be notified as soon as she went into labor. He went out of town on business with the understanding that the girl would call if she went into labor and he would fly back. Her doctor induced her during that time at the request of the mother and the child was immediatley placed for adoption without the consent of the father. He was not informed of the birth until several days later. My friend immediatley spoke to a lawyer who told him that the state of Utah (yes this was in Utah too) favors adoptive parents in a case like this and that he could file and try to fight it but chances are it would take years and the child would suffer by being dragged from the home she would know if (and it was a big if) he won his case. He did file but eventually withdrew his complaint when it became evident that the lawyer was correct. He loves his child very much and chose not to put her through that. He does get pictures of her, which he proudly displays but is allowed no other contact. He has never stopped thinking of his daughter and it is truly heart wrenching. He would have made an amazing parent and the fact that a deceitful girl and an unjust system kept him from his daughter is truly sickening. I hope that when his daughter is old enough she will look him up and they can perhaps establish some relationship then.

 

[robinb]

I wonder how many adoptions are made WITH the prior written consent of the father. My guess would be that there are very few of them. So, it would make perfect sense that this particular adoption would be flagged as an "at risk" adoption to the adoptive parents as the father had not already signed his parental rights away. I can't blame them for going ahead with the adoption under those circumstances. I also can't blame them for fighting to keep a baby (now toddler) they grew attached to. IIRC they did not find out there was a challenge to the adoption until 4 months after they brought the baby home. They are not monsters here.

I agree that the Utah law is messed up. It clearly puts adoptive parents far ahead of fathers. Maybe it will take a determined challenge from someone like this father to change it. I still think it is in best interest of the child to stay with her adoptive parents, but if her father can overturn this horrible state law then maybe it will save some heartbreak in the future.

 

[stm61]

I also saw the show on Dateline. It said that the birth mother named the father and even noted that the father did not want to give up the baby for adoption on the forms she filed out. They also had a copy of a letter sent to the adoptive parents from their lawyer which made a comment basically saying "you knew this was a possibility, that the birth father would fight for the child".

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

I wonder how many adoptions are made WITH the prior written consent of the father. My guess would be that there are very few of them. So, it would make perfect sense that this particular adoption would be flagged as an "at risk" adoption to the adoptive parents as the father had not already signed his parental rights away. I can't blame them for going ahead with the adoption under those circumstances. I also can't blame them for fighting to keep a baby (now toddler) they grew attached to. IIRC they did not find out there was a challenge to the adoption until 4 months after they brought the baby home. They are not monsters here.

I agree that the Utah law is messed up. It clearly puts adoptive parents far ahead of fathers. Maybe it will take a determined challenge from someone like this father to change it. I still think it is in best interest of the child to stay with her adoptive parents, but if her father can overturn this horrible state law then maybe it will save some heartbreak in the future.

Most infant adoptions in the states are made with birth father consent. In my son's case his birthfather couldn't be located, and I was told that was quite rare for the agency who placed him. If there is no consent, agencies have to go through a long process and show that they diligently searched. Unless they're in Utah, of course. Utah's laws need to be changed.

 

[Mrs.Toad]

Most infant adoptions in the states are made with birth father consent. In my son's case his birthfather couldn't be located, and I was told that was quite rare for the agency who placed him. If there is no consent, agencies have to go through a long process and show that they diligently searched. Unless they're in Utah, of course. Utah's laws need to be changed.

I could have written this post word for word, except substituting "daughter" for "son".