Is anyone following the Veronica Rose story?

[leight]

Cases like this- and certainly the Baby Jessica and Baby Richard case- are why there needs to be a national overhaul in adoption laws. Rather than have each state have their own laws and each party could be in a different state and filing in different state courts, there should be one national law stating how the father has to be informed; how long the mother has to change her mind, how long before the adoption is finalized. JMHO

 

[PaulaSB12]

Cases like this- and certainly the Baby Jessica and Baby Richard case- are why there needs to be a national overhaul in adoption laws. Rather than have each state have their own laws and each party could be in a different state and filing in different state courts, there should be one national law stating how the father has to be informed; how long the mother has to change her mind, how long before the adoption is finalized. JMHO

Don't forget baby Emma her father had legal custody where she was born and that was ignored. We have been telling boys and men they should be more responsible for the children they father yet when a boy or man does that by saying no I don't want my child to be raised by stranger I want to raise him/her myself he is being told his is being selfish for preventing a married couple from raising that child. yes I agree before birth the mother should have the right to chose to have the baby or not but after birth it has to be the choice of both parents to adopt and if not both (and stop adoption agencies from getting between parents so the mother can claim abandonment, baby Richard's mother for example told the father he was dead) the father should be the next person to be able to raise the child. Only if both agree should adoption be considered, but while babies are treated like commodities by private adoption agencies we will have more cases like this as fathers fight to keep their children.

 

[snarlingcoyote]

Actually, in this one case there is a national law. The birth mom, adoption agency and the prospective adopters tried to lie their way out of that law.

 

[PaulaSB12]

http://www.adopting.org/adoptions/biological-fathers-rights-in-adoption.html

Lack of attention to biological fathers' rights can have serious consequences, a lesson courts are handing down with more and more frequency. While the Baby Sam case filled the headlines for several years, this certainly wasn't the first case where a father's rights have landed on the front page.

The Baby M Case

In 1996, Baby M was relinquished by her mother and placed with Darrell and Cindy Matthews. Alphonso Andrews, the baby's father, never signed any consent forms and contested the placement. A Pennsylvania State Supreme Court ruling sent a message to adoption agencies and attorneys about failure to get consent from both birth parents. Genesis of Pittsburgh, Inc. failed to get Andrews' approval for the placement and, as a result, custody of Baby M is being decided four years - instead of a matter of days or weeks - after placement, a bittersweet victory for Andrews and a devastating one for the Matthews.
Arguments in the case included comparisons of Andrews' and the Matthews' education and financial stability, which caused one lower court judge to rule initially in favor of the Matthews; however, the higher court found that neither the agency nor the Matthews had proper authority to assume the role of parent. A baby cannot be adopted without the termination or relinquishment of both parents' rights, and Andrews' rights were alive and well.
Andrews is quoted as saying, "They said it was for the best interest of the child. But that is not their child. It is mine. I can't help it that they are unable to have children. That doesn't give them the right to take mine."

 

[PaulaSB12]

http://www.startribune.com/featuredColumns/168543276.html?clmob=y&c=n&refer=y

They are going to the Us supreme court and the above article is so wrong in all the other cases of children being returned they did fine. They find one that didn't and the implication that if this repulsive couple don't get what they want that Veronica will end up being a no hoper satanic following mess. They have gone from being fanatical to plain evil. If this was allowed it would lead to horribl baby stealing. After all if you can say that it's in the best interest of a child to stay with people who have had them for a year or two why bother adopting just grab a baby keep it for 2years and it's yours.

 

[Caseheidi]

After reading many of these comments, I just want to make a few points. I am an adoptive parent myself, so quite familiar with the process. I do not know much about this individual story, but was once counciled by an attorney that part of the reason these stories become so big is that they are unusual. A reputable agency/ lawyer would obtain all the background needed in a case, but they have to trust their source (usually the Birth Mother). Adoption is a very expensive process, and they do not dig too deep into the Birth Parents backgrounds other then what is offered by them.

Also, the only way a Birth Parent can change their mind after they have relinquished their rights and the time allotted by the state the adoption is being completed in is thru fraud. If this Father had been lied to, then the agency should be in trouble. It is their responsibility to make sure the Birth Parents have been given full disclosure and are making an informed decision. This does not mean that the Birth parent has to fully listen and believe what they are being told. It is the Birth Parents accountability in the process. If they sign because they fill pressure, that is still their choice.

I would also like to address the issue of the Adoptive couple not just handing the baby back over at 4 months when he set this in motion. I don't care that they did not give birth to this child, as soon as that child was placed in their arms it was as if they had. That was their child, and they adored her. So what that it was not final. Their hopes and dreams of several heart breaking years had finally come true. They had done everything right, and their world crashed down around them. If they had an open relationship with the BM, they were most likely open to one with him as well. I have a real hard time with the comments of how the adoptive parents just have to accept it as they knew the risks. The BF knew that there was a baby being born, and his reaction was delayed. As we don't know the full story here, and are getting accounts from not fully reliable sources and people who are fully emotional, we really shouldn't judge either side. When our birth parents placed their daughter into our care, it became fully clear that our joy was at the expense of someone else's pain. I still cry for them three and a half years later, and they share in our joy. Unless you have been involved in this process, you really don't know the pain that is experienced on both sides. And it really can be a beautiful thing. I love my DD birth parents like family, and am honered to have them in our lives.

Just to complete my soap box (sorry, don't really mean to lecture, but some of this just needed to be said) a story like this harms adoption so much. It makes couples who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant hesitate to explore adoption. It makes couples who are aching for the joys of parenthood shy away from adopting. It makes people who have not been touched by adoption make negative assumptions. Please remember that most adoptions are not this messy. Most adoptions work. Especially with open adoptions, it is so much better. Adoption can be a positive experience for all involved. My heart goes out to both sides of this issue. They are all hurting right now. I just hope that a solution will come soon

 

[PaulaSB12]

After reading many of these comments, I just want to make a few points. I am an adoptive parent myself, so quite familiar with the process. I do not know much about this individual story, but was once counciled by an attorney that part of the reason these stories become so big is that they are unusual. A reputable agency/ lawyer would obtain all the background needed in a case, but they have to trust their source (usually the Birth Mother). Adoption is a very expensive process, and they do not dig too deep into the Birth Parents backgrounds other then what is offered by them.

Also, the only way a Birth Parent can change their mind after they have relinquished their rights and the time allotted by the state the adoption is being completed in is thru fraud. If this Father had been lied to, then the agency should be in trouble. It is their responsibility to make sure the Birth Parents have been given full disclosure and are making an informed decision. This does not mean that the Birth parent has to fully listen and believe what they are being told. It is the Birth Parents accountability in the process. If they sign because they fill pressure, that is still their choice.

I would also like to address the issue of the Adoptive couple not just handing the baby back over at 4 months when he set this in motion. I don't care that they did not give birth to this child, as soon as that child was placed in their arms it was as if they had. That was their child, and they adored her. So what that it was not final. Their hopes and dreams of several heart breaking years had finally come true. They had done everything right, and their world crashed down around them. If they had an open relationship with the BM, they were most likely open to one with him as well. I have a real hard time with the comments of how the adoptive parents just have to accept it as they knew the risks. The BF knew that there was a baby being born, and his reaction was delayed. As we don't know the full story here, and are getting accounts from not fully reliable sources and people who are fully emotional, we really shouldn't judge either side. When our birth parents placed their daughter into our care, it became fully clear that our joy was at the expense of someone else's pain. I still cry for them three and a half years later, and they share in our joy. Unless you have been involved in this process, you really don't know the pain that is experienced on both sides. And it really can be a beautiful thing. I love my DD birth parents like family, and am honered to have them in our lives.

Just to complete my soap box (sorry, don't really mean to lecture, but some of this just needed to be said) a story like this harms adoption so much. It makes couples who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant hesitate to explore adoption. It makes couples who are aching for the joys of parenthood shy away from adopting. It makes people who have not been touched by adoption make negative assumptions. Please remember that most adoptions are not this messy. Most adoptions work. Especially with open adoptions, it is so much better. Adoption can be a positive experience for all involved. My heart goes out to both sides of this issue. They are all hurting right now. I just hope that a solution will come soon

This will carry on until private adoptions are got rid odd, to private adoption agencies babies are a commodity and it's been proved they will do anything to stop fathers having rights from helping girls to hide from them so they can claim abandment to taking a baby to Utah even though the father had legal custody of his daughter. Her father is raising his daughter and that is where she should stay not given to the couple who are constantly pan handling for money using her image.

 

[cornflake]

After reading many of these comments, I just want to make a few points. I am an adoptive parent myself, so quite familiar with the process. I do not know much about this individual story, but was once counciled by an attorney that part of the reason these stories become so big is that they are unusual. A reputable agency/ lawyer would obtain all the background needed in a case, but they have to trust their source (usually the Birth Mother). Adoption is a very expensive process, and they do not dig too deep into the Birth Parents backgrounds other then what is offered by them.

Also, the only way a Birth Parent can change their mind after they have relinquished their rights and the time allotted by the state the adoption is being completed in is thru fraud. If this Father had been lied to, then the agency should be in trouble. It is their responsibility to make sure the Birth Parents have been given full disclosure and are making an informed decision. This does not mean that the Birth parent has to fully listen and believe what they are being told. It is the Birth Parents accountability in the process. If they sign because they fill pressure, that is still their choice.

I would also like to address the issue of the Adoptive couple not just handing the baby back over at 4 months when he set this in motion. I don't care that they did not give birth to this child, as soon as that child was placed in their arms it was as if they had. That was their child, and they adored her. So what that it was not final. Their hopes and dreams of several heart breaking years had finally come true. They had done everything right, and their world crashed down around them. If they had an open relationship with the BM, they were most likely open to one with him as well. I have a real hard time with the comments of how the adoptive parents just have to accept it as they knew the risks. The BF knew that there was a baby being born, and his reaction was delayed. As we don't know the full story here, and are getting accounts from not fully reliable sources and people who are fully emotional, we really shouldn't judge either side. When our birth parents placed their daughter into our care, it became fully clear that our joy was at the expense of someone else's pain. I still cry for them three and a half years later, and they share in our joy. Unless you have been involved in this process, you really don't know the pain that is experienced on both sides. And it really can be a beautiful thing. I love my DD birth parents like family, and am honered to have them in our lives.

Just to complete my soap box (sorry, don't really mean to lecture, but some of this just needed to be said) a story like this harms adoption so much. It makes couples who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant hesitate to explore adoption. It makes couples who are aching for the joys of parenthood shy away from adopting. It makes people who have not been touched by adoption make negative assumptions. Please remember that most adoptions are not this messy. Most adoptions work. Especially with open adoptions, it is so much better. Adoption can be a positive experience for all involved. My heart goes out to both sides of this issue. They are all hurting right now. I just hope that a solution will come soon

We're all adults, I think we're aware this is rare.

As to the bolded - no one has suggested they didn't love her at the beginning. That i the point, after all.

However, yes, people involved in adoption know very well what the timelines are and what can happen.

The criticism comes from that they knew he petitioned and that, in nearly all of these cases, a biological parent in before a finalized adoption wins. Thus, if they *really* cared about her and knew it was at least likely he had a good chance - keeping her from him (even from visits) was not in her best interests.

It seems as if they simply kept her hoping that so much time would pass that they'd be able to argue that to place her with him was detrimental. That's pretty much never worked, it's treating a child like a possession an it's, imo, beyond wrong.

Then, to go to the media, perpetuate what seem to be lies about him at every turn, it's just... they do not come off as if they care about her, but about "winning."

It

 

[SaraJayne]

After reading many of these comments, I just want to make a few points. I am an adoptive parent myself, so quite familiar with the process. I do not know much about this individual story, but was once counciled by an attorney that part of the reason these stories become so big is that they are unusual. A reputable agency/ lawyer would obtain all the background needed in a case, but they have to trust their source (usually the Birth Mother). Adoption is a very expensive process, and they do not dig too deep into the Birth Parents backgrounds other then what is offered by them.

Also, the only way a Birth Parent can change their mind after they have relinquished their rights and the time allotted by the state the adoption is being completed in is thru fraud. If this Father had been lied to, then the agency should be in trouble. It is their responsibility to make sure the Birth Parents have been given full disclosure and are making an informed decision. This does not mean that the Birth parent has to fully listen and believe what they are being told. It is the Birth Parents accountability in the process. If they sign because they fill pressure, that is still their choice.

I would also like to address the issue of the Adoptive couple not just handing the baby back over at 4 months when he set this in motion. I don't care that they did not give birth to this child, as soon as that child was placed in their arms it was as if they had. That was their child, and they adored her. So what that it was not final. Their hopes and dreams of several heart breaking years had finally come true. They had done everything right, and their world crashed down around them. If they had an open relationship with the BM, they were most likely open to one with him as well. I have a real hard time with the comments of how the adoptive parents just have to accept it as they knew the risks. The BF knew that there was a baby being born, and his reaction was delayed. As we don't know the full story here, and are getting accounts from not fully reliable sources and people who are fully emotional, we really shouldn't judge either side. When our birth parents placed their daughter into our care, it became fully clear that our joy was at the expense of someone else's pain. I still cry for them three and a half years later, and they share in our joy. Unless you have been involved in this process, you really don't know the pain that is experienced on both sides. And it really can be a beautiful thing. I love my DD birth parents like family, and am honered to have them in our lives.

Just to complete my soap box (sorry, don't really mean to lecture, but some of this just needed to be said) a story like this harms adoption so much. It makes couples who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant hesitate to explore adoption. It makes couples who are aching for the joys of parenthood shy away from adopting. It makes people who have not been touched by adoption make negative assumptions. Please remember that most adoptions are not this messy. Most adoptions work. Especially with open adoptions, it is so much better. Adoption can be a positive experience for all involved. My heart goes out to both sides of this issue. They are all hurting right now. I just hope that a solution will come soon

It already has. She's with her father, where she belongs.

 

[PaulaSB12]

They put in for it to go to the supreme court is it possible that the court will refuse to hear the case? If they do refuse is ther anywhere else they can go or is that it?

 

[fae]

The Court can absolutely refuse to hear the case (and it probably will), and then that's it. The appeals process ends with SCOTUS.

They put in for it to go to the supreme court is it possible that the court will refuse to hear the case? If they do refuse is ther anywhere else they can go or is that it?

 

[leight]

Actually, in this one case there is a national law. The birth mom, adoption agency and the prospective adopters tried to lie their way out of that law.

Very true, but that was simply because the dad is Native American. For all other races, it falls back to state laws which can vary dramatically.

 

[leight]

After reading many of these comments, I just want to make a few points. I am an adoptive parent myself, so quite familiar with the process. I do not know much about this individual story, but was once counciled by an attorney that part of the reason these stories become so big is that they are unusual. A reputable agency/ lawyer would obtain all the background needed in a case, but they have to trust their source (usually the Birth Mother). Adoption is a very expensive process, and they do not dig too deep into the Birth Parents backgrounds other then what is offered by them.

Also, the only way a Birth Parent can change their mind after they have relinquished their rights and the time allotted by the state the adoption is being completed in is thru fraud. If this Father had been lied to, then the agency should be in trouble. It is their responsibility to make sure the Birth Parents have been given full disclosure and are making an informed decision. This does not mean that the Birth parent has to fully listen and believe what they are being told. It is the Birth Parents accountability in the process. If they sign because they fill pressure, that is still their choice.

I would also like to address the issue of the Adoptive couple not just handing the baby back over at 4 months when he set this in motion. I don't care that they did not give birth to this child, as soon as that child was placed in their arms it was as if they had. That was their child, and they adored her. So what that it was not final. Their hopes and dreams of several heart breaking years had finally come true. They had done everything right, and their world crashed down around them. If they had an open relationship with the BM, they were most likely open to one with him as well. I have a real hard time with the comments of how the adoptive parents just have to accept it as they knew the risks. The BF knew that there was a baby being born, and his reaction was delayed. As we don't know the full story here, and are getting accounts from not fully reliable sources and people who are fully emotional, we really shouldn't judge either side. When our birth parents placed their daughter into our care, it became fully clear that our joy was at the expense of someone else's pain. I still cry for them three and a half years later, and they share in our joy. Unless you have been involved in this process, you really don't know the pain that is experienced on both sides. And it really can be a beautiful thing. I love my DD birth parents like family, and am honered to have them in our lives.

Just to complete my soap box (sorry, don't really mean to lecture, but some of this just needed to be said) a story like this harms adoption so much. It makes couples who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant hesitate to explore adoption. It makes couples who are aching for the joys of parenthood shy away from adopting. It makes people who have not been touched by adoption make negative assumptions. Please remember that most adoptions are not this messy. Most adoptions work. Especially with open adoptions, it is so much better. Adoption can be a positive experience for all involved. My heart goes out to both sides of this issue. They are all hurting right now. I just hope that a solution will come soon

Not trying to be mean, but this is a little naive. There are still some agencies today that are still employing coercion and pressure for young moms to relinquish. Crisis pregnancy hotlines should not be answered by adoption agencies. There is simply a conflict of interest there. Agencies should not be calling young pregnant women 'birthmother' until the relinquishment papers are signed a reasonable time after she has recovered from the birth.

There are still adoption agencies that will transport moms to Utah to give birth because of the ridiculous restrictions/law that Utah has regarding the birth father to file for custody. One of the Utah Adoption Council Board resigned because of this. Wes Hutchins is an adoption attorney but realizes that something is just wrong in this. This is why there needs to be national laws....there may be some wonderful agencies doing wonderful work, but until this is no longer 'big business' it needs to be more actively regulated.

again... this is jmho... and I am an adoptee- so intimately involved with adoption.

 

[Caseheidi]

I. Actually do support adoption reform, but have to say that it has come a long way in the past few decades. It is difficult that the laws vary so much from stat to state, and it needs to be more uniform. And Birth Fathers need to be fully involved in the process to relinquish their rights, but the truth is that a large percentage of adoptions the birth father wants nothing to do with the process.

As for agency's roll in perpetuating fraud and brokering babies, there needs to be tighter restrictions on licensing. I have actually heard of agencies losing their licensing and being shut down for such activities. This is a step in the right direction, but are all states following up on this.

I would also like to see birth parent contracts for both birth parents required in all states and enforced to protect both sides. This is something unheard of 20 years ago.

My response was mainly emotional to those posts I read that seemed to be uninformed emotional responses that were a little mean. Especially when we do not know the people and the reasons for their action. This was directed at both sides of the issue, and I really feel for both sides. It is not easy for any of them.

 

[snarlingcoyote]

It's not only possible, it's likely. The Supreme court's function is not to allow people to endlessly squabble because they didn't like a lower court ruling. The court has rule numerous times that the IWCA is a valid law and I don't think that's something that will change. As the state's verdict was based on this properly applied law, I think it's highly doubtful the Supreme Court would hear the case.

If they refuse to hear the case, there's no other recourse, generally. They can fight to get the ICWA act repealed for other people's future adoptions, but I really don't see that one happening either. The tribes would ALL be up in arms. That act stopped American Indian kids from being forcibly and deliberately removed from their families and their heritage.

 

[SaraJayne]

Since they are all about helping themselves,I don't see them doing anything that won't personally benefit them.

 

[Teresa Pitman]

http://www.startribune.com/featuredColumns/168543276.html?clmob=y&c=n&refer=y

They are going to the Us supreme court and the above article is so wrong in all the other cases of children being returned they did fine. They find one that didn't and the implication that if this repulsive couple don't get what they want that Veronica will end up being a no hoper satanic following mess. They have gone from being fanatical to plain evil. If this was allowed it would lead to horribl baby stealing. After all if you can say that it's in the best interest of a child to stay with people who have had them for a year or two why bother adopting just grab a baby keep it for 2years and it's yours.

It is not true that in "all the other cases of children being returned they did fine." I have worked in child protection and seen that there are many that did not go well. In one case, the mother refused to give the father's name at the time of the adoption. He found out and applied to have the child when he was six months old, and won, despite some negative things in his background. Within three months, the baby was found with cigarette burns on his arms and legs, weighing less than he had at the time his father got him back. He was placed back with the adoptive family and is now doing well.

I know nothing at all about this case, but the best interests of the child should always be taken into consideration.

TP

 

[PaulaSB12]

It is not true that in "all the other cases of children being returned they did fine." I have worked in child protection and seen that there are many that did not go well. In one case, the mother refused to give the father's name at the time of the adoption. He found out and applied to have the child when he was six months old, and won, despite some negative things in his background. Within three months, the baby was found with cigarette burns on his arms and legs, weighing less than he had at the time his father got him back. He was placed back with the adoptive family and is now doing well.

I know nothing at all about this case, but the best interests of the child should always be taken into consideration.

TP

From what I saw from the supreme court ruling and others I found a few things. That they knew the child's father was native american. They refused gifts sent by him and his family for her and in an attempt to run "best interest of the child" refused to let him see her. They let her mother see her but not the father. And this best interest of the child can not be the only deciding factor or it will lead to child stealing after all why adopt when you can grab a baby keep them for a couple of years and then say its in the best interest of the child. For example remember the woman who burned down a house and took the baby, she was found at age six, do you think she should have stayed with the woman who stole her?

 

[leight]

I appreciate the lively exchange of thoughts/opinions.

I am probably a broken record, but for the best interest of the child, for the emotional wellbeing of both sets of parents, it would be best if there were National Regulation of adoption.

one timeframe for a mom to sign relinquishment paperwork and a specific timeframe for her to change her mind.

Requirements for notifying the father. If not sure,then there should be a default that indicates that after the child is legally adopted (not placed) that a father can only recieve visitation rights, unless clear indication of fraud on part of agency, mom or adoptive parents is shown. (Legal ramification of lying about the father should be clearly outlined to mom before relinquishment) As an adoptee, I think it would still be destructive for a dad to file for custody after I've been adopted and attaching to my adoptive family. But if he really was not informed, he should not be denied the ability to know, love and share family with his child.

Specific language and counseling requirements for birth families to explain ALL options prior to an adoption plan.

Legally enforceable agreements for open adoption. Many, many open adoptions close at the chosing of the adoptive parents. There are also many birthparents who also close contact. Frankly, I think it should be enforceable on the adoptive parent side but birth parents should have the choice. Sometimes, they just can't deal with seeing their children in the other family- but I think they owe their child some contact thru the agency.

This is such an emotionally charged topic... and I am by no means offering the only solution. But whatever the law- it should be national so that there can be clearly defined decisions for the birthparents when they make the hardest choice of their lives.And agencies shouldn't be netting so much profit from placing babies. We're the only country that allows this...

 

[Teresa Pitman]

From what I saw from the supreme court ruling and others I found a few things. That they knew the child's father was native american. They refused gifts sent by him and his family for her and in an attempt to run "best interest of the child" refused to let him see her. They let her mother see her but not the father. And this best interest of the child can not be the only deciding factor or it will lead to child stealing after all why adopt when you can grab a baby keep them for a couple of years and then say its in the best interest of the child. For example remember the woman who burned down a house and took the baby, she was found at age six, do you think she should have stayed with the woman who stole her?

What I said is that it needs to be taken into consideration. A woman who is the kind of person who would burn down a house to kidnap a baby is highly unlikely to be a good parent. Neither is someone who would steal a child. Those behaviours would mean, in my opinion, that it would not be in the best interests of the child to stay with them.

That's very different than caring parents who adopted a child in good faith, legally, and then had a previously-uninvolved father attempt to take the child. I think in these situations the best interests of the child should be carefully considered. Both sides will have arguments to make, and I think the child should have a lawyer too to express the child's interests.

TP