Baby Veronica is going home!!!!

[roomthreeseventeen]

The father never agreed in writing or by any legal document that he wanted to sever ties to his child.
.

He was a deadbeat father who refused to support her.

 

[alc571]

Yes, but if he was interested in his child, how would he have not known the baby was put up for adoption? It is implied that he was nowhere near the baby for months. I guess it was okay to ignore her as long as she was with the mother, but not anyone else? Just seems odd to me.

http://www.myvacationcountdown.com/

I'm with you. If he really cared about this baby so much, he would have been there for the birth and as much time as he could thereafter. This poor baby girl was ripped from the only family she knew, and given to a stranger simply because of biology. She is the only one whose rights should be considered here. If the adoptive family she's known since birth, are loving, caring providers, than why take her away from all that she knows simply because her biological father suddenly has an interest. You can't tell me he didn't know of the baby.

 

[sunshinehighway]

He was a deadbeat father who refused to support her.

I think he has a different side to that story.

At least its over. I feel bad for the child.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

I think he has a different side to that story.
.

From the ruling: The couple’s relationship deteriorated, and Birth Mother broke off the engagement in May 2009. In June, Birth Mother sent Biological Father a text message asking if he would rather pay child support or relinquish his parental rights. Biological father responded via text message that he relinquished his rights.

 

[jrmasm]

I think he has a different side to that story.

At least its over. I feel bad for the child.

It's not over. More legal proceedings are expected.

 

[Coonhound]

Sorry, it's his child. Nothing else matters except that he didn't sign away his rights to his child. The adoptive family can be Nobel peace prize winners for all I care. Providing a safe, loving home does not give you the right to steal someone else's baby.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

Sorry, it's his child. Nothing else matters except that he didn't sign away his rights to his child. The adoptive family can be Nobel peace prize winners for all I care. Providing a safe, loving home does not give you the right to steal someone else's baby.

He DID sign away his rights. Then he changed his mind.

 

[jrmasm]

From the ruling: The couple’s relationship deteriorated, and Birth Mother broke off the engagement in May 2009. In June, Birth Mother sent Biological Father a text message asking if he would rather pay child support or relinquish his parental rights. Biological father responded via text message that he relinquished his rights.

An article I read several months ago said that he relinquished his rights to the birth mother because he was trying to gain her favor since he wanted them to get back together. If I remember correctly, he specifically said she was not to be put of for adoption.

I think he's made a lot of mistakes but I also believe that the birth mother was dishonest and that the adoptive family ignored issues that they were aware of early on. He should have been given custody when she was 4 months old.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

Also, this case was never about whether the father was entitled to custody of this child. He never was, under US law. This case was only about whether Native American law granted him the right to custody of his child. The Supreme Court has found that it doesn't.

 

[palmtreegirl]

It's not over. More legal proceedings are expected.

Yep. Found this-

The Supreme Court did not grant the couple an adoption, but threw out the South Carolina court decisions awarding custody to the father.

The court returned the case to the South Carolina state courts for further proceedings.

 

[Hoodie]

An article I read several months ago said that he relinquished his rights to the birth mother because he was trying to gain her favor since he wanted them to get back together. If I remember correctly, he specifically said she was not to be put of for adoption.

I think he's made a lot of mistakes but I also believe that the birth mother was dishonest and that the adoptive family ignored issues that they were aware of early on. He should have been given custody when she was 4 months old.

Yup, this exactly.

First, she should have been given to him at 4 months. Adoptive parents prolonged that and the poor child had to change families at 2. Now at 4, she's going to be taken away from her father and given to, what at this point amounts, to complete strangers. I see years of therapy in this poor little girls future, brought on by her birth mother and her adoptive "parents".

 

[zippingalong]

Also, this case was never about whether the father was entitled to custody of this child. He never was, under US law. This case was only about whether Native American law granted him the right to custody of his child. The Supreme Court has found that it doesn't.

You are exactly correct.

Under NO law would a man who fathered a child, knew the woman was pregnant, put in writing that he was giving up rights to said child and not attempt any interaction with the child for months be given custody of that child because he changed his mind.

Using ICWA was his only option and he used it. It has been found by the Supreme Court that it was used incorrectly and I agree with the findings.

The rest is purely technical. In SC that father would have had NO rights to the child under state law except for ICWA. She will be returned home.

 

[sunshinehighway]

An article I read several months ago said that he relinquished his rights to the birth mother because he was trying to gain her favor since he wanted them to get back together. If I remember correctly, he specifically said she was not to be put of for adoption.

I think he's made a lot of mistakes but I also believe that the birth mother was dishonest and that the adoptive family ignored issues that they were aware of early on. He should have been given custody when she was 4 months old.

That's what I read too. The birth mother ran out on him and he wanted to get married and was trying to get her back. You can't help someone who runs out on you and refuses your help.

 

[sbtrfly74]

You cant "give up your rights" then say "but you cant do this" its a done deal.... over.

 

[zippingalong]

That's what I read too. The birth mother ran out on him and he wanted to get married and was trying to get her back. You can't help someone who runs out on you and refuses your help.

He never OFFERED any help. He made NO attempt to support the mother, or the baby. He knew she was coming and never made any offer at contact with her.

He was NOT her father except in the biological sense.

The Supreme Court agrees.

 

[Janepod]

The Supreme Court's decision is that the Native American claims are irrelevant to the custody decision and that South Carolina has to review the case and decide custody without using the Native American laws as a basis for its custody decision.

So all we know right now is that the decision is still not final. She will stay with her biological father for now while the court reviews the case and makes its decision.

Don't call the father a deadbeat dad. It's inaccurate. He was living on an army base, waiting to be deployed to Iraq, at the time of the birth.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

Don't call the father a deadbeat dad. It's inaccurate. He was living on an army base, waiting to be deployed to Iraq, at the time of the birth.

Where he lives is irrelevant. The fact that he texted the mother that he relinquished his rights to the child, and then signed a piece of paper saying the same thing is what matters.

 

[zippingalong]

The Supreme Court's decision is that the Native American claims are irrelevant to the custody decision and that South Carolina has to review the case and decide custody without using the Native American laws as a basis for its custody decision.

So all we know right now is that the decision is still not final. She will stay with her biological father for now while the court reviews the case and makes its decision.

Don't call the father a deadbeat dad. It's inaccurate. He was living on an army base, waiting to be deployed to Iraq, at the time of the birth.

With free legal counsel available to him. And he still signed away his paternal rights.

 

[Janepod]

He never OFFERED any help. He made NO attempt to support the mother, or the baby. He knew she was coming and never made any offer at contact with her.

He was NOT her father except in the biological sense.

The Supreme Court agrees.

False.

"Baby Veronica was born in September with the would-be adoptive parents—the Capobiancos—present, but Maldonado told the hospital to deny she was there if Brown called. Four months later, less than two weeks before Brown was to be deployed to Iraq, the Capobiancos’ lawyer sent a process server with relinquishment papers. Thinking he was relinquishing to Maldonado during his deployment, Brown signed a form entitled “Acceptance of Service” but immediately asked for the paper back, saying he wanted to talk to an attorney. The process server threatened him with criminal prosecution if he touched the paper. Brown consulted an army attorney, and filed a stay of the adoption in South Carolina, establishing paternity, seeking custody (offering to place the baby with his parents until he returned from Iraq), and promised to support Veronica."

http://www.ncrw.org/public-forum/real-deal-blog/guest-blog-feminists-and-baby-veronica-case

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

False.

"Baby Veronica was born in September with the would-be adoptive parents—the Capobiancos—present, but Maldonado told the hospital to deny she was there if Brown called. Four months later, less than two weeks before Brown was to be deployed to Iraq, the Capobiancos’ lawyer sent a process server with relinquishment papers. Thinking he was relinquishing to Maldonado during his deployment, Brown signed a form entitled “Acceptance of Service” but immediately asked for the paper back, saying he wanted to talk to an attorney. The process server threatened him with criminal prosecution if he touched the paper. Brown consulted an army attorney, and filed a stay of the adoption in South Carolina, establishing paternity, seeking custody (offering to place the baby with his parents until he returned from Iraq), and promised to support Veronica."

http://www.ncrw.org/public-forum/real-deal-blog/guest-blog-feminists-and-baby-veronica-case

Immediately = the next day.