Wife gave baby up for adoption without permission of husband... who should raise the baby now?
Post ReplyPost New TopicPosted 12/5/2012 by mapchic in NSBR Board
1 2 3 4 >
 

mapchic
Top Tier Pea

PeaNut 31,157
February 2002
Posts: 12,607
Layouts: 55
Loc: Chicagoland

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:19:27 PM
I may have missed a thread on this but when I read the news story I thought ... this is a story for a 2peas!

When a husband was transferred for his job (military) his wife stayed behind in Texas. The marriage was by all accounts on the rocks, but the husband maintains that he was planning on returning for the birth of his daughter and hoped that his wife and daughter would move to where he was transferred after the birth.

Instead, the wife went to Utah had the baby and gave it up for adoption to a couple in Utah. The husband/father was not informed and did not consent to the adoption.

Since he found out about the adoption he has been fighting to get custody of his daughter and the adoptive parents have been fighting to keep her. The most recent legal decision was that he should get custody and the adoptive family has 60 days to turn over the baby.

So... what say the peas? Who should get the baby?

I know there are lots of peas in Utah for whom this may be a local story. What kind of details are known to locals that aren't making it into the national reporting?

Here is a story from ABC news

A judge has ordered a Utah couple to return their adopted toddler to her biological father after it was revealed that his wife gave up the child without the father's knowledge or permission.

The couple, Jared and Kristi Frei, now has 60 days to return the 21-month-old girl to her father Terry Achane, a U.S. Army drill instructor. But the Freis' lawyer told ABCNews.com that they will not give up the girl, whom they call Leah, and will appeal the judge's ruling.

"They believe the district court made some fundamental errors in its decision and they will raise those with the appropriate appellate court. Yes, they will appeal," their lawyer Larry Jenkins told ABC News.com.

Achane, 31, was stationed in South Carolina on March 21, 2011, when his estranged wife gave birth in Utah and immediately turned the baby over for adoption.

Achane is now thrilled with the judge's ruling and the prospect that he will be united with his baby.

"He is extremely pleased with what [the judge] ordered," his lawyer, Mark Wiser, told ABCNews.com.

Achane initially feared that his wife, Tira Bland, followed through on a threat to have an abortion. It was several weeks after the baby, whom he calls Teleah, was born that he learned the child had been adopted and was in Utah, according to his lawyer.

When Achane contacted the adoption agency who facilitated the baby's placement with the couple, he was stonewalled, denied information and ignored when he told them he had not consented to the adoption, his lawyer claimed.

In his ruling, Judge Darold McDade said he was "astonished and deeply troubled" by the actions of the agency, the Adoption Center of Choice, calling its treatment of Achane "utterly indefensible."

According to Achane, Bland gave the agency Achane's old address in Texas where he lived prior to being stationed in South Carolina, and suggested he would not consent to the adoption. The agency attempted to contact him once in Texas, but seems not to have made any other efforts to receive his consent, Wiser said.
You can read the rest of the story here on ABC - warning video starts autoplaying





"When someone asks you 'think about what Jesus would do', remember that a valid option is to freak out and turn over tables" -- Unknown

“I am a Roman Catholic - the one true faith, (the Microsoft of Christianity) and I know Roman Catholicism is the one true faith because Roman Catholicism tells me it’s the one true faith... And if you remember from earlier in this sentence Roman Catholicism is the one true faith – so how could it be wrong?” ~ Stephen Colbert ‘The Word’ 11-28-06

Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit

beaucat
BucketHead

PeaNut 180,877
December 2004
Posts: 854
Layouts: 97

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:21:55 PM
Wow, that's cruel of the wife.

The father should be given the baby back.

How in the world did this drag on until the little girl was 21 months old? That would be so hard for all the parties involved!

scrappower
Allons-y Alonso

PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 15,347
Layouts: 0

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:22:20 PM
The father should get custody, what a disgusting story. Although I have heard Utah is known for stories like this.



justalittletike
AncestralPea

PeaNut 434,313
August 2009
Posts: 4,503
Layouts: 26

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:22:36 PM
I think it sucks for the adopted parent but he is well within his rights to have his child IMO especially if they were still legally married when she delivered.

Kudos to him for stepping up and taking care of his child.


Uploaded with iPhone client

pennyring
Thrift Ninja

PeaNut 226,011
October 2005
Posts: 23,246
Layouts: 40
Loc: Rite Aid

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:24:19 PM
Very, very, sad. The birth father absolutely deserves to have his daughter. How horrible for the adoptive family and little girl though.




gritzi
PeaFixture

PeaNut 275,594
September 2006
Posts: 3,394
Layouts: 0

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:25:30 PM
I think the biological father has the right to raise his child. Sad that the mother placed her child in that situation.

isithebe
PeaNut

PeaNut 283,814
November 2006
Posts: 230
Layouts: 0

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:25:34 PM
This story is sad on so many levels. I feel for the Bio Father, the Adoptive Parents and the little girl. Who is being taken away from the only parents she has ever known

angievp
Ideay pues?

PeaNut 143,106
April 2004
Posts: 7,296
Layouts: 36
Loc: Miami

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:25:46 PM
The father should get his child back. The wife should be smacked upside the head for causing so much strife to all the parties involved.

SillyRabbit
PeaFixture

PeaNut 104,457
September 2003
Posts: 3,050
Layouts: 12
Loc: Where The Grass Is Blue

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:26:37 PM
That is awful. I feel badly for the adopted parents but did nobody question the father's whereabouts at the time? How does that even happen? Dad should definitely get his baby.


Cindy

Uploaded with iPhone client

janet r
AncestralPea

PeaNut 22,327
October 2001
Posts: 4,230
Layouts: 17

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:27:30 PM
The biological father should get the baby.

jalapenette
BucketHead

PeaNut 415,025
March 2009
Posts: 1,167
Layouts: 143
Loc: Southwest USA

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:28:02 PM
This should have been resolved a long time ago, back when the father first talked to the adoption agency when the baby was only a few weeks old. The father should have been given back the child then- it would have been way less painful for all parties involved.


-Rachelle


*Mommy to Adam, born October 2010, and Tommy, July 2012*



KikiNichole

PeaNut 69,597
February 2003
Posts: 27,738
Layouts: 2
Loc: Follow the Yellow Brick Road

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:28:07 PM
Well, in a perfect world the father should absolutely have custody. What's happened to him is unthinkable and there should be some sort of repercussion for both the wife and the adoption agency.

But I think the thing we need to remember is that there is a child involved here...and a child who has only known one set of parents for the total of his almost two years of life.

I think, because of that, the courts should have to treat the relationship between the adoptive parents and the biological parent as a divorced couple and set custody arrangements accordingly.

If both parties were thinking of the child, instead of just themselves, they would be willing to work together to find the best answer for this real, live, breathing *person* that they're both fighting over.


~Kristen~

scrappower
Allons-y Alonso

PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 15,347
Layouts: 0

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:28:32 PM
Another story with more info. I am sorry but I don't feel very sorry for the adoptive family, this whole thing seems shady.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55373764-78/achane-adoption-bland-child.html.csp#disqus_thread



eebud
Doxie Pea Mom

PeaNut 52,841
October 2002
Posts: 33,165
Layouts: 25

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:30:19 PM
There is nothing in that story that makes me think that the little girl's father should not have custody of his daughter. I would like to know why it has dragged this long since it sounds like he started trying to get his daughter within a few weeks.

I then think that he should be granted full custody and his ex should have to pay child support.

***edit because I left out a REALLY important word





Hans on left, Bud in middle, Gretchen on right

scrappower
Allons-y Alonso

PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 15,347
Layouts: 0

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:30:33 PM

Well, in a perfect world the father should absolutely have custody. What's happened to him is unthinkable and there should be some sort of repercussion for both the wife and the adoption agency.

But I think the thing we need to remember is that there is a child involved here...and a child who has only known one set of parents for the total of his almost two years of life.

I think, because of that, the courts should have to treat the relationship between the adoptive parents and the biological parent as a divorced couple and set custody arrangements accordingly.

If both parties were thinking of the child, instead of just themselves, they would be willing to work together to find the best answer for this real, live, breathing *person* that they're both fighting over.


I couldn't disagree more. This father basically had his child stolen from him....he is innocent and should receive full custody and should've from the beginning. We don't reward those who break the law and like it or not laws were broken here.



thatgirlintexas
Get off my lawn!

PeaNut 43,787
July 2002
Posts: 8,892
Layouts: 255
Loc: the world wide web

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:33:11 PM
If I found out that one of the parents of a child I adopted did not give consent and there was no danger to the child in going back to that parent, I would give that child back. It would be heartbreaking but I would know I was doing that right thing.


Sara

We don't just embrace INSANITY here. We feel it up, french kiss it and buy it a drink.

my goodreads profile my pinterest profile




KikiNichole

PeaNut 69,597
February 2003
Posts: 27,738
Layouts: 2
Loc: Follow the Yellow Brick Road

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:33:59 PM

.he is innocent


So is the child...who has bonded, right or wrong, with the adoptive parents.

Now, I haven't read the second article so I haven't made any sort of judgment on how much they knew or didn't know.

Regardless, you can't just whip a child away from the only parents he's ever known (assuming they've been nurturing and loving) and throw him into a strange situation.

Even if the father is granted what he so obviously deserves, it needs to be done gradually, to save that child from any more traua.


~Kristen~

Epeanymous
PeaFixture

PeaNut 15,108
May 2001
Posts: 3,043
Layouts: 1

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:34:23 PM
Sometimes I think these cases are hard, but I don't think this one is hard.

BioDad gets the baby back. Period.

KikiNichole

PeaNut 69,597
February 2003
Posts: 27,738
Layouts: 2
Loc: Follow the Yellow Brick Road

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:35:21 PM

If I found out that one of the parents of a child I adopted did not give consent and there was no danger to the child in going back to that parent, I would give that child back. It would be heartbreaking but I would know I was doing that right thing.




I would too. But it's so hard to imagine that situation...


~Kristen~

jalapenette
BucketHead

PeaNut 415,025
March 2009
Posts: 1,167
Layouts: 143
Loc: Southwest USA

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:36:23 PM

The adoption agency informed the Freis that the father did not know his daughter had been placed for adoption in Utah it was likely he would contest the placement if he found out. The Freis, the judge noted in his ruling, "acknowledged this risk but decided they wanted to proceed forward with the adoptive placement anyway."




An attorney later contacted Achane, confirmed an adoption was in process and asked for his consent. Achane refused and told the attorney he wanted his daughter returned to him.

Instead, the Freis proceeded with the adoption. In their adoption petition, filed in July 2011, the couple acknowledged Achane was married to Bland when the child was conceived and born and that he had never consented to the adoption. They asked that his parental rights be terminated because he "abandoned the natural mother during her pregnancy"



Kristi Freis told the court that although they knew Achane wanted his child, she and her husband felt they had no obligation to return the baby.


After reading more information on this article, I am horrified by the actions of the adoptive family. While the father, who they knew from the beginning had not consented to the adoption, was fighting to get his child back they just turned a cold shoulder to him. They fought to keep a baby that was not theirs and whose father was fighting for her. They had her for years after he tried to get her back.

Their behavior is selfish and horrible.


-Rachelle


*Mommy to Adam, born October 2010, and Tommy, July 2012*



eebud
Doxie Pea Mom

PeaNut 52,841
October 2002
Posts: 33,165
Layouts: 25

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:36:51 PM
I think the judge allowing 60 days to return the child to her father is doing the child a disservice. She should be returned immediately.





Hans on left, Bud in middle, Gretchen on right

Maria Pea-a
BucketHead

PeaNut 54,978
November 2002
Posts: 686
Layouts: 3
Loc: Utah

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:39:07 PM
This story made me mad from the very beginning. The father tried to get custody of his daughter as soon as he found out she was alive, which wasn't too long after she was born. What really irks me was that the adoptive parents knew at that time that the baby's father had not consented to the adoption but didn't think they should have to give the baby back. In the article I read they said they didn't feel they had any obligation to return the baby. Really??!!

I question the fitness of parents like that when they don't see anything wrong with their actions. I understand how heartbreaking it would be to have to return the baby to his father but they've just dragged this out for so long it's making it more painful for everyone involved. It's a sad situation and I hope the adoptive parents come to their senses and the father gets his daughter back soon.


Maria
Wife, Mom, Food Scientist and occasional Scrapbooker

busypea
boring + nerdy

PeaNut 52,817
October 2002
Posts: 27,737
Layouts: 145
Loc: Oregon

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:39:24 PM
I have not read any other responses, but the father absolutely should get custody. Unless there are extreme extenuating circumstances (and they would have to be very extreme), a mother should not be able to give a child up for adoption without consent of the father.

MerryMom937
PeaFixture

PeaNut 472,567
June 2010
Posts: 3,701
Layouts: 0

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:40:21 PM
The father has a right to be notified via certified mail service from the courts or a legal publishing if the name or location of the father is unknown. If his name was known and the service was not legally correct, then the adoption is not valid.

If the mother committed perjury when she signed an affadavit listing the father's information, the adoption is not valid.

Also since the parents were married, in many states, the husband is the "legal father" of the child, even if he is not the biological father.

The child should be returned to the father.

I've worked in child welfare for many years and our adoptions are done via a termination of parental rights or voluntary surrender. Those judges and courts are quite stringent about meeting the legal requirements of an adoption.

However, for private adoptions, I can tell you horror stories about private adoptions not done correctly or legally. (Especially Utah!!).


writermom1
Thrift Whisperer

PeaNut 114,407
November 2003
Posts: 22,729
Layouts: 66
Loc: At the intersection of Hooterville and Stars Hollow

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:40:56 PM
I do not understand why, when there are two interested bio parents, the female parent somehow outranks the male.

If the female does not want the child then common sense would indicate that the next most invested person - the father - have custody of the child.

I cannot imagine the pain and panic of all involved here. The adoptive parents, however, are culpable in allowing themselves to be "the only family she has ever known" when it appears they should have returned her much earlier.

Their heartbreak would have been unimaginable but they could have spared the baby.

The story is almost biblical.

Can the bio mom be charged with anything?



Uploaded with iPhone client

asr70
PeaAddict

PeaNut 508,279
May 2011
Posts: 1,047
Layouts: 0

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:41:47 PM
The child belongs with the father. That's awful I felt for the adoptive parents until I read the longer article. Now I'm not so sure they are innocent in this. What a tragic mess.




Simply_Lovely
AncestralPea

PeaNut 463,295
April 2010
Posts: 4,171
Layouts: 3
Loc: New York City

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:41:50 PM
The father!! What a horrific situation. I can't believe the adoptive parents are prolonging this nightmare too. And the adoption agency should be fined to high heaven. To allow for an adoption without making sure the father does not object is negligent, if not malicious.

And FWIW the child is only 21 months old, there is still a huge chance she'll forget about the whole situation if it is not prolonged much more.

Kiki - you are wrong. That's all I am going to say b.c I don't want to be nasty.




Meow!

Darcy_Collins
PeaFixture

PeaNut 514,615
July 2011
Posts: 3,042
Layouts: 0

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:41:52 PM
I have often taken KikiNichole's view on situations like these. Where an adoptive family is unaware of a custody dispute and raises a child for years and a parent pops up. But this is NOT that case. According to the news article the baby was less than 3 months old when the adoptive parents learned that the father had not consented to the adoption. My sympathy with the adoptive couple ends at that point. I'm sorry, but it is inexcusably that they denied that man his child for 18 months. They can't play the "we're the only parents she knows card" when it's THEIR FAULT.

The mother should be crimminally charged with fraud. She knowingly gave false information to the adoptive agency.


KikiNichole

PeaNut 69,597
February 2003
Posts: 27,738
Layouts: 2
Loc: Follow the Yellow Brick Road

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:41:56 PM
Wow. After reading the additional information it appears 'kidnapping' would be a better term to apply than 'adopted'.

I still can't help but feel compassion for the other innocent party in this situation: the baby.

I guess it's not a perfect world and as such, the child should be returned to the father, with lots of prayers that the poor baby suffer no longer term emotional needs.

And the biological mother? She and the adoption agency should be charged...with something. And the adoptive parents? Probably shouldn't be allowed the opportunity to adopt again.


~Kristen~

likescarrots
BucketHead

PeaNut 563,786
August 2012
Posts: 596
Layouts: 0

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:42:34 PM

I think, because of that, the courts should have to treat the relationship between the adoptive parents and the biological parent as a divorced couple and set custody arrangements accordingly.


I disagree. The adoptive parents knew pretty immediately that the child's father wanted the child. They chose to fight it instead of giving the child back and moving on. It doesn't really seem like fit parenting to me, to drag out this battle with little regard for how the child would be effected.

(ETA I pasted the wrong section of the post I was quoting)

jalapenette
BucketHead

PeaNut 415,025
March 2009
Posts: 1,167
Layouts: 143
Loc: Southwest USA

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:43:07 PM
At first when I saw the article, I thought that maybe suddenly dad showed up after two years and wanted his daughter back. But this is not what happened.

The adoptive parents knew from the onset that the father had not given consent. They went ahead- illegally- and continued with the adoption. Dad found out a few weeks later and fought to get his daughter back. The adoptive parents fought to keep the child. They knew all along that it was a probability that they would have to give the child up. It's not like it was a shock.

They are in the wrong here, and it is entirely their fault that that poor baby girl is losing "the only parents she has ever known." They knew her father wanted her back. They surely talked to lawyers and therefore knew that legally the child belongs to her father.


-Rachelle


*Mommy to Adam, born October 2010, and Tommy, July 2012*



mapchic
Top Tier Pea

PeaNut 31,157
February 2002
Posts: 12,607
Layouts: 55
Loc: Chicagoland

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:46:03 PM

Well, in a perfect world the father should absolutely have custody. What's happened to him is unthinkable and there should be some sort of repercussion for both the wife and the adoption agency.

But I think the thing we need to remember is that there is a child involved here...and a child who has only known one set of parents for the total of his almost two years of life.

I think, because of that, the courts should have to treat the relationship between the adoptive parents and the biological parent as a divorced couple and set custody arrangements accordingly.

If both parties were thinking of the child, instead of just themselves, they would be willing to work together to find the best answer for this real, live, breathing *person* that they're both fighting over.
I disagree. That would be like giving partial custody to a kidnapper because they have bonded with their captive.

scrappower - thanks for the link to the longer article. The more I read about this the worse the whole story seems.

The real villains appear to be the biological mother and the adoption agency. They seem to have colluded to deny the father his parental rights.

The adoptive parents aren't' exactly innocent. They KNEW that the biological father had not given consent and yet they still went through with the adoption. Then when the father found out and tried to claim his daughter they have dragged this out through the courts for a year and a half.





"When someone asks you 'think about what Jesus would do', remember that a valid option is to freak out and turn over tables" -- Unknown

“I am a Roman Catholic - the one true faith, (the Microsoft of Christianity) and I know Roman Catholicism is the one true faith because Roman Catholicism tells me it’s the one true faith... And if you remember from earlier in this sentence Roman Catholicism is the one true faith – so how could it be wrong?” ~ Stephen Colbert ‘The Word’ 11-28-06

Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit

giatocj
Ancient Ancestor of Pea

PeaNut 6,331
August 2000
Posts: 5,330
Layouts: 143
Loc: Beautiful New England

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:46:24 PM
I haven't read the article, so I'm not sure if this was addressed, but what will the mother's punishment be? Has she committed a crime or is she just a morally bankrupt bitch? THis type of story sickens me.

Jennscraps
PeaAddict

PeaNut 57,128
November 2002
Posts: 1,110
Layouts: 180

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:48:59 PM

I think, because of that, the courts should have to treat the relationship between the adoptive parents and the biological parent as a divorced couple and set custody arrangements accordingly.



What a horrific precedent that would set. Keep somebody's baby long enough to let them bond, and you automatically get to share custody with no repercussions. Which of your children would you let somebody take away from you for two years and then share custody of them for the remaining 16. If they really wanted to be proactive in doing what is best for this baby, they would spend the next couple of court ordered months working with the dad so little one gets to know him. They knew this was coming.

Would you feel the same if this was a kidnap situation? Because in my eyes, a family who agrees to willfully retain custody and control of a child that they should not have is essentially kidnapping that child. They went into this knowing the dad didn't know and didn't consent. Shame on them. If there were charges that could be thrown at both them and the bio mom, I would hope somebody would hit them with them.


Jennifer
Jenn's Junque


busypea
boring + nerdy

PeaNut 52,817
October 2002
Posts: 27,737
Layouts: 145
Loc: Oregon

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:49:06 PM
It would seem to me that she at least is guilty of custodial interference - and for that matter, perhaps the adoption agency and adoptive parents are too.

KikiNichole

PeaNut 69,597
February 2003
Posts: 27,738
Layouts: 2
Loc: Follow the Yellow Brick Road

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:51:11 PM

Would you feel the same if this was a kidnap situation?


Please read my latest post.


~Kristen~

jodster70
To the right, To the right

PeaNut 51,257
October 2002
Posts: 6,190
Layouts: 28
Loc: Usually NSBR, an un"pea"dictable place :)

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:54:44 PM

I hope he gets her back and is a good dad with a great support system. On the plus side, his ex-wife's rights have been terminated and she has no claim to the baby now or ever. That should simplify his life. What she did is so beyond defensible I don't know what to say, other than once he gets custody it would be entirely appropriate to sue her for all of the costs of regaining custody of his own child.


I agree. I feel so badly for the dad, who was robbed of the first 21 months of his baby's life, and for the poor baby, who is going to be so bewildered.


**Jody**

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."
Patrick Henry

jalapenette
BucketHead

PeaNut 415,025
March 2009
Posts: 1,167
Layouts: 143
Loc: Southwest USA

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:55:09 PM

Marital status is COMPLETELy irrelevant.


Maybe in regards to morality, but not legally. Legally, if the parents are married a father does not have to prove paternity- he is legally the parent of the child. If they are not married, the father might have to prove paternity by taking a paternity test.


-Rachelle


*Mommy to Adam, born October 2010, and Tommy, July 2012*



PEAce sign
i'm not superstitious, but i am a little stitious.

PeaNut 274,722
August 2006
Posts: 13,434
Layouts: 0
Loc: OH-IO!

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:57:48 PM
The father should get the girl back immediately, no question. The agency should be sued! There are procedures for this. The mom must have lied.

The little girl will be crushed, and this will always be a part of her, even at 21 months. But kids are resilient. Maybe the father could find it in his heart to let her continue to see the adoptive parents on supervised visits, present a united front for the baby...hard, I know.

Every time a kid is removed from their family, you can expect an 18-24 month delay in development in some or all areas. It's traumatic. At some point, that child will grieve the loss of her first family. That can appear as many different behaviors.

Poor kid. Poor dad. What a witch to inflict that on purpose.

Simply_Lovely
AncestralPea

PeaNut 463,295
April 2010
Posts: 4,171
Layouts: 3
Loc: New York City

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:01:02 PM

Sorry, that's probably irrational, but I am just outraged beyond words at the actions of the birthmother, the agency and the adoptive parents. THEY are to blame for any psychological scars for this poor baby.


I am with you. I am so outraged I am seething. What horrible, selfish people. And to do this to a caring innocent father and then blame him?? And they are trying to justify this with religion too....well God giveth and God taketh away. Sick sick people.




Meow!

justalittletike
AncestralPea

PeaNut 434,313
August 2009
Posts: 4,503
Layouts: 26

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:01:04 PM
I just meant it isn't like he is some person who didn't know he was making a baby like a one night stand or walked away from them, they were married.

And yes that doesn't mean he wouldn't have right but they would have more room to stand.

And paternity is an issue as someone else stated


Uploaded with iPhone client

aprilfay21
Mommy to Maximus!

PeaNut 270,034
July 2006
Posts: 12,667
Layouts: 116
Loc: Houston

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:01:58 PM

Poor kid. Poor dad. What a witch to inflict that on purpose.
I wonder if the adoptive family honestly thought they could win, or thought that if they continued to fight the bio dad would give up.

Poor baby, she's not much older than my son and I can see how attached he is to certain people. It breaks my heart to think of her losing those people, although I wholeheartedly believe she needs to be immediately returned to her father.




This is Texas. We don't have regular seasons here. We have Summer 1, Summer 2, Summer 3 and January.

"As you attempt to make big differences, remember to appreciate the small differences. And remember that you don't always have to reach the goal you set in order to make a difference." - Win Borden

My Personal Pinterest - MissApril82

My Business Pinterest - PlatinumWeds

Please Like me on Facebook - Platinum Wedding Event

Follow me on Twitter - PlatinumWeds

PlatiunumWeddingEvent.net

Advocare - We Build Champions

twinsmom-fla99
AncestralPea

PeaNut 203,642
May 2005
Posts: 4,082
Layouts: 0

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:02:09 PM

think it sucks for the adopted parent but he is well within his rights to have his child IMO especially if they were still legally married when she delivered.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marital status is COMPLETELy irrelevant. He has a right to retain his parental rights no matter what the marital status is. If he never married the mother I would still say he should have the baby if he didn't agree to place her for adoption.
Morally, yes it is irrelevant whether or not they were married. Legally, however, it can make a huge difference.

A father who is married to the mother at the time of the birth is legally assumed to want the child and to be involved in the child's life. He doesn't have to do anything other than "exist" to be presumed a fit parent. In many cases, this is true even if he isn't the biological parent.

On the other hand, a father who is not married to the mother at the time of the birth has to take steps to show that he intends to be involved in the child's life, and he generally has a limited time to do so. The requirements vary by state, but a bio-dad who is not married to the mother is not a slam dunk to get custody of the child if the mother gives it up for adoption.

It may not be right (and I don't think it is), but married fathers are treated much differently than unmarried ones when it comes to child custody.

SweetPeasMom
Ancient Ancestor of Pea

PeaNut 186,656
January 2005
Posts: 8,099
Layouts: 7
Loc: GRITS

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:03:15 PM
Reading the 2nd link w/more details, it appears that the bio-father was unable to locate his wife and child for several months after the birth. When he contacted the adoption agency immediately, they denied him access. Why the courts allowed this to go on for so long before a ruling was made, is beyond me. I get that courts are backed up. But given the fact that a child was in the middle of this and that the bond she was forming with these people was growing stronger each day,they should have had an emergency hearing on this.


Wendy



mapchic
Top Tier Pea

PeaNut 31,157
February 2002
Posts: 12,607
Layouts: 55
Loc: Chicagoland

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:04:16 PM
Reading more on this subject and it almost seems like the adoptive parents are trying to argue that since they spent $25,000 dollars on the adoption it shouldn't matter that the father didn't consent. It is very disturbing, almost like a human trafficking case.

The birth mother went to Utah where there is evidently a lot of history of disregarding birth father's rights. That also makes me think it is some sort of creepy trafficking of children going on with efforts being made to give birth to them and process adoptions in the place least likely to look closely at the situation.

Outside of the particular players in this drama I think this reflects badly on Utah adoption and family courts. The fact that this has taken so long to resolve just shows how little respect they seem to have for biological fathers.




"When someone asks you 'think about what Jesus would do', remember that a valid option is to freak out and turn over tables" -- Unknown

“I am a Roman Catholic - the one true faith, (the Microsoft of Christianity) and I know Roman Catholicism is the one true faith because Roman Catholicism tells me it’s the one true faith... And if you remember from earlier in this sentence Roman Catholicism is the one true faith – so how could it be wrong?” ~ Stephen Colbert ‘The Word’ 11-28-06

Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit

cocoanmom
StuckOnPeas

PeaNut 285,775
November 2006
Posts: 2,685
Layouts: 31

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:09:44 PM
I think in cases like this the courts really did a disservice to the child. They took WAY too long to work this out. It could have been worked out very quickly. But with all the legal mumbo jumbo..this seems to happen. Then the child is put under stress. I am an adoptive parent and I can see why the Adoptive parents wanted to fight but it was taking a risk that the child will now suffer.So the AP really did make this worse. I do think that a time frame needs to happen to transition the child to the Bio Dad. What I read on the AP website is that he never sent gifts or cards or called to check on the childs health and well being all this time..it was always just the lawsuit. If that is true that does not sit well with me. He should have tried to be involved all this time. Dont know if that is true or not.

Who knows what the bio mom told the AP about the bio dad.

Really Red
Pea-ceful and Hap-pea

PeaNut 24,951
November 2001
Posts: 8,836
Layouts: 1

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:10:01 PM
I think the adoption agency should have its license taken away.

I think the mother should go to jail. What she did/is doing to her child is child abuse, IMHO.

I do feel a little sorry for adoptive parents, but I think they were in a bad situation. I just would be interested in knowing how often a situation like this occurs - that is to say, how often do adoption agencies say, "we don't have permission from the dad, but he cannot be found." So that they thought it was a reasonable conclusion that the baby could stay with them.

And I think the dad should have his daughter.

Poor, poor little girl.


Andrea

When one door of happiness closes, another opens; But often we look so long at the closed door that we do not see the one that has been opened for us.
Helen Keller

jalapenette
BucketHead

PeaNut 415,025
March 2009
Posts: 1,167
Layouts: 143
Loc: Southwest USA

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:10:55 PM
This


"We have not lost our conviction that we are in the right!!!!!!" Kristi Frei wrote after McDade’s Nov. 20 ruling dismissed their adoption petition. "We have only ever wanted to do right by Leah, and have always felt we have been acting in her best interest to keep her with our family and raise her as our own. Our hearts have demanded it — there has never been any question to us that she is OURS!!!"


makes me sick.


-Rachelle


*Mommy to Adam, born October 2010, and Tommy, July 2012*



scrappower
Allons-y Alonso

PeaNut 174,150
October 2004
Posts: 15,347
Layouts: 0

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:11:46 PM

What I read on the AP website is that he never sent gifts or cards or called to check on the childs health and well being all this time..it was always just the lawsuit. If that is true that does not sit well with me. He should have tried to be involved all this time. Dont know if that is true or not.


His lawyer might have advised him to do this to keep things on the up and up and not look odd. You just never know.



mapchic
Top Tier Pea

PeaNut 31,157
February 2002
Posts: 12,607
Layouts: 55
Loc: Chicagoland

Posted: 12/5/2012 3:16:07 PM
The more I read the less I like these adoptive parents. Usually in cases like this I have compassion for the adoptive parents but this time... not so much.

They have a website to raise funds and tell their side of the story. You can see it here at this link.

What is striking in reading what they have posted there is just how very self absorbed it is. The whole thing seems to be about them, and their wants and needs and what they think God wants for them.

The fact that they present a husband being transferred in the military as leaving his wife "her husband left her without any money, a car, or details of his whereabouts." just is beyond the pale. The biological mother knew exactly where her husband was. He was paying the mortgage and utilities and had his family on his insurance.

The use of faith and 'God told us' as a justification for this kind of bad actions just turns my stomach.





"When someone asks you 'think about what Jesus would do', remember that a valid option is to freak out and turn over tables" -- Unknown

“I am a Roman Catholic - the one true faith, (the Microsoft of Christianity) and I know Roman Catholicism is the one true faith because Roman Catholicism tells me it’s the one true faith... And if you remember from earlier in this sentence Roman Catholicism is the one true faith – so how could it be wrong?” ~ Stephen Colbert ‘The Word’ 11-28-06

Vocatus atque non vocatus, Deus aderit
1 2 3 4 >
Post Reply . Post New TopicShow/Hide Icons . Show/Hide Signatures
Hide
{{ title }}
{{ icon }}
{{ body }}
{{ footer }}