Is anyone following the Veronica Rose story?

[jrmasm]

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.

Cool, then don't respond to me.

I believe what he said is that he agreed for the biological mother to raise the child but that he didn't agree to her being put up for adoption. If she told him that she was going to keep the baby and then put her adoption, then in my mind, that's fraud.

And why does she get to change her mind and not him?

But again, no one knows what the truth is.

 

[Heidict]

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.

You seem to be taking this way to personal, or at least that is how all of your posts are coming across. Very aggressive and angry. Telling someone they are not worth arguing with because they don't agree with is not rational.

Just because someone isn't taking ONE news story and running with it and instead is objectively waiting to hear BOTH sides of the story before judging doesn't make them wrong. There is a gag order in place and limited information. For all we know he is lying through his teeth and shouldn't have custody, but you know what? The mother may well have been lying through her teeth about everything also.

Until there is a way to actually see what the court is seeing there is NO WAY anyone can say beyond a reasonable doubt what really happened.

 

[tammymacb]

Again. Because he signed away his parental rights. He admits that. His attorney admits that. You don't get to do that and then go wait, that's not what I want.

He doesn't even deny that he signed away his rights and if he cared so much, why would he do that at all? Oh, because he's already supporting another child with another ex...how many can he afford?

 

[sunshinehighway]

Again. Because he signed away his parental rights. He admits that. His attorney admits that. You don't get to do that and then go wait, that's not what I want.

He doesn't even deny that he signed away his rights and if he cared so much, why would he do that at all? Oh, because he's already supporting another child with another ex...how many can he afford?

The child is currently with him so I guess he does get to do that.

 

[DizBelle]

Cool, then don't respond to me.

I believe what he said is that he agreed for the biological mother to raise the child but that he didn't agree to her being put up for adoption. If she told him that she was going to keep the baby and then put her adoption, then in my mind, that's fraud.

And why does she get to change her mind and not him?

But again, no one knows what the truth is.

It doesn't matter wht she told him. What matters is what is in the document that he signed. If he gave up his rights to the child, it included the right to say who was going to raise her. If he gave up his rights, he has no say-so whatsoever in the childs upbringing. Zero, nada, zilch. That's what giving up your rights means.

 

[SaraJayne]

Again. Because he signed away his parental rights. He admits that. His attorney admits that. You don't get to do that and then go wait, that's not what I want.

He doesn't even deny that he signed away his rights and if he cared so much, why would he do that at all? Oh, because he's already supporting another child with another ex...how many can he afford?

Since he currently has custody, the courts disagree with you.

 

[jrmasm]

It doesn't matter wht she told him. What matters is what is in the document that he signed. If he gave up his rights to the child, it included the right to say who was going to raise her. If he gave up his rights, he has no say-so whatsoever in the childs upbringing. Zero, nada, zilch. That's what giving up your rights means.

Obviously, I disagree.

 

[luvmy3]

Since he currently has custody, the courts disagree with you.

I'm not sure the courts agree that he is allowed to change his mind after giving up his parental rights. More like they are forced to award him custody due to the ICWA.

 

[SaraJayne]

I'm not sure the courts agree that he is allowed to change his mind after giving up his parental rights. More like they are forced to award him custody due to the ICWA.

I'm not sure. I still can't find an unbiased source, so I don't know what the reasoning behind the custody transfer was.

 

[jrmasm]

I'm not sure the courts agree that he is allowed to change his mind after giving up his parental rights. More like they are forced to award him custody due to the ICWA.

That's what I thought happened too.

I guess at this point I'm wondering where things stand. Does he have temporary custody? Was the adoption ever finalized? Are there any other legal procedings in the future?

 

[SaraJayne]

That's what I thought happened too.

I guess at this point I'm wondering where things stand. Does he have temporary custody? Was the adoption ever finalized? Are there any other legal procedings in the future?

If you find out, could you let us know, please?

 

[Pea-n-Me]

It doesn't matter wht she told him. What matters is what is in the document that he signed.

Does it matter if the document was signed under false pretenses?

 

[jrmasm]

If you find out, could you let us know, please?

It's weird how little information is available.

Does it matter if the document was signed under false pretenses?

Only to me.

 

[PaulaSB12]

Again. Because he signed away his parental rights. He admits that. His attorney admits that. You don't get to do that and then go wait, that's not what I want.

He doesn't even deny that he signed away his rights and if he cared so much, why would he do that at all? Oh, because he's already supporting another child with another ex...how many can he afford?

That is nothing to do with this his daughter should stay with him, and by fighting the couple who wanted to adopt her will probably find that no adoption agency wants to deal with them. It is sad but being a parent is not a right infertility is a fact of life that another person doesn't have to solve, the biological father has changed his mind so stop expecting him to give someone else a child just because they can't have one.

 

[Mickey Fliers]

That is nothing to do with this his daughter should stay with him, and by fighting the couple who wanted to adopt her will probably find that no adoption agency wants to deal with them. It is sad but being a parent is not a right infertility is a fact of life that another person doesn't have to solve, the biological father has changed his mind so stop expecting him to give someone else a child just because they can't have one.

That is really all sorts of twisted.

 

[luvmy3]

That is nothing to do with this his daughter should stay with him, and by fighting the couple who wanted to adopt her will probably find that no adoption agency wants to deal with them. It is sad but being a parent is not a right infertility is a fact of life that another person doesn't have to solve, the biological father has changed his mind so stop expecting him to give someone else a child just because they can't have one.

Actually in this case it is, and he signed that right away and therefore legally doesn't have any ground to stand on as far as changing his mind. Unfortunately for that litte girl and her parents, there was a loophole he found. If there was no ICWA, this couple wouldn't have to be fighting for their child.

 

[tammymacb]

Actually in this case it is, and he signed that right away and therefore legally doesn't have any ground to stand on as far as changing his mind. Unfortunately for that litte girl and her parents, there was a loophole he found. If there was no ICWA, this couple wouldn't have to be fighting for their child.

Exactly. If she wasn't a minute bit American Indian, this would have been over a long time ago.

 

[Nennie]

I have a dear friend who lost her son when he was 6 months old, due to the ICWA.

That was 2 years ago, and she obviously still thinks about him every day. What's even more heartbreaking, is that his older brother still asks for him and has even asked more than once if his little brother had died, b/c he doesn't understand why he was taken away.

 

[tammymacb]

That's what I thought happened too.

I guess at this point I'm wondering where things stand. Does he have temporary custody? Was the adoption ever finalized? Are there any other legal procedings in the future?

The SC Supreme Court heard the case last month. Everyone is expecting a ruling in May.

 

[DizBelle]

Does it matter if the document was signed under false pretenses?

That's the point of a written out document. Everything is spelled out.

You can't sign a contract and then say "Oops, I didn't mean to." Did he not read the contract he signed?