U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting > Adoption
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-23-2014, 01:00 AM
 
1,851 posts, read 2,988,820 times
Reputation: 2365

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by djmaxwell View Post
My wife was a CASA when we previously lived in another state. I think your assumptions about CASAs are wrong.
You're welcome to your opinion. But you're obviously not the only person who has knowledge about CASAs. Your assumption that your wife's motives in your specific state are the same as ALL CASA's in EVERY state is likely wrong also. I said most, I could've said "some," meh. No need to take it so personally.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-23-2014, 08:58 AM
 
Location: Texas
1,029 posts, read 1,219,153 times
Reputation: 1985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaded View Post
You're welcome to your opinion. But you're obviously not the only person who has knowledge about CASAs. Your assumption that your wife's motives in your specific state are the same as ALL CASA's in EVERY state is likely wrong also. I said most, I could've said "some," meh. No need to take it so personally.
That's the problem here. I see a lot of assumptions, based on "facts" not in evidence in this case.

You've assumed that the CASA in this case came in biased, rather than think that perhaps she's seen enough of this case now to make a determination.

You've assumed that the father is going to fail as a parent and Sonya will be taken away again, because that has happened in other situations.

Etc, etc.

And ALL of the assumptions are against the father and in favor of the foster parents.

All I know about this case is what I've read, and my opinions come from that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 10:35 AM
 
1,836 posts, read 2,204,700 times
Reputation: 2833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaded View Post
You're welcome to your opinion. But you're obviously not the only person who has knowledge about CASAs. Your assumption that your wife's motives in your specific state are the same as ALL CASA's in EVERY state is likely wrong also. I said most, I could've said "some," meh. No need to take it so personally.
Thank you for allowing me to have an opinion. It is very gracious of you.

I make no assumptions about all other CASAs nor do I believe that I am the sole holder of knowledge about them. You applied your experience to a larger population than you should have. "Some" would have been the appropriate term.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 10:52 AM
 
1,851 posts, read 2,988,820 times
Reputation: 2365
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmaxwell View Post
Thank you for allowing me to have an opinion. It is very gracious of you.

I make no assumptions about all other CASAs nor do I believe that I am the sole holder of knowledge about them. You applied your experience to a larger population than you should have. "Some" would have been the appropriate term.
Reread your post...you applied your experience to a larger population than you should have. I used the word I wanted to. Whether you like it or not is really irrelevant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 10:55 AM
 
1,851 posts, read 2,988,820 times
Reputation: 2365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aggiebuttercup View Post
That's the problem here. I see a lot of assumptions, based on "facts" not in evidence in this case.

You've assumed that the CASA in this case came in biased, rather than think that perhaps she's seen enough of this case now to make a determination.

You've assumed that the father is going to fail as a parent and Sonya will be taken away again, because that has happened in other situations.

Etc, etc.

And ALL of the assumptions are against the father and in favor of the foster parents.

All I know about this case is what I've read, and my opinions come from that.
I assume nothing. We just don't agree on this case. And, she's not her CASA, she's the court-appointed guardian ad Litem. We're looking at the same facts, we just disagree. I'm against the birth father, you're not. So be it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 11:21 AM
 
Location: Denver 'burbs
21,873 posts, read 23,176,756 times
Reputation: 37276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaded View Post
I assume nothing. We just don't agree on this case. And, she's not her CASA, she's the court-appointed guardian ad Litem. We're looking at the same facts, we just disagree. I'm against the birth father, you're not. So be it.
See that's a problem in my opinion. Some people are seeing themselves as "against" a party here. We should all be "for" both the child and the law. The child should never have been taken from her father in the first place. The FOSTER (not adoptive) parents had custody only under very questionable circumstances. To allow the foster family continued custody sets a disturbing precedent that adults can obtain and maintain custody by defying the law. This whole situation is unfortunate and poor decisions have been made by pretty much everyone, but the father of this child has rights and wants his child returned. Much of the sadness and drama would have been avoided had that happened when it should have.

I am not against the foster family and I'm sure they are heartbroken, but they are complicit in the whole drama as well. They are not victims.

I see all kinds of parents raising their children in ways I might disagree with or find distasteful. Doesn't give me the right to take their children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 12:49 PM
 
9,224 posts, read 9,292,231 times
Reputation: 28913
I really wish I could understand the desire of some people to "reunite" a child with father who has been convicted of a violent felony. Illegally transporting firearms across state lines is a violent felony. There is a "back story" here. The federal government only brings people up on charges like this when something is involved like selling guns to gangs or the firearms were used for a drug crime. That's the kind of person you are dealing with. Plus, he had a felony record before that.

I don't believe the child is in a safe home. She was taken from one where she was safe, regardless of whether she got there in the most appropriate manner or not.

You see, I don't automatically believe that a child is best off with biological parents. In fact, there are some parents a child is better off having completely out of their lives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 12:59 PM
 
Location: Denver 'burbs
21,873 posts, read 23,176,756 times
Reputation: 37276
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
I really wish I could understand the desire of some people to "reunite" a child with father who has been convicted of a violent felony. Illegally transporting firearms across state lines is a violent felony. There is a "back story" here. The federal government only brings people up on charges like this when something is involved like selling guns to gangs or the firearms were used for a drug crime. That's the kind of person you are dealing with. Plus, he had a felony record before that.

I don't believe the child is in a safe home. She was taken from one where she was safe, regardless of whether she got there in the most appropriate manner or not.

You see, I don't automatically believe that a child is best off with biological parents. In fact, there are some parents a child is better off having completely out of their lives.
You see I don't automatically believe that children should be taken from parents who have not lost their parental rights and those who defy court orders should be rewarded. It about much more than this case. We've already heard here that "overflowing ashtrays" and cigarette smoke should be a legitimate basis for losing custody. Then what? Alcohol in the house? Dog hair? Not having the ability to provide a college education? Religion? Where exactly do you draw the line that allows someone to simply keep another person's child when the law doesn't support it? I have no doubt that the father is under close scrutiny; if it turns out his home is unsafe or otherwise unfit, he will lose custody post-haste. As he should. But that doesn't appear to be the case. If you don't agree with the law, work to have it changed but right now, this child belongs with her father. If the adoption had been legal the discussion would be very different. But it wasn't. And that is the bottom line.

Last edited by maciesmom; 05-23-2014 at 01:34 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 01:04 PM
 
Location: The New England part of Ohio
18,678 posts, read 23,284,047 times
Reputation: 48876
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmaxwell View Post
Thank you for allowing me to have an opinion. It is very gracious of you.

I make no assumptions about all other CASAs nor do I believe that I am the sole holder of knowledge about them. You applied your experience to a larger population than you should have. "Some" would have been the appropriate term.

Actually, it was you who took it personally. CASA volunteers are like everyone else some good and well intentioned, some well intentioned, but who do not adhere to the goal of CASA, to be unbiased and only to represent the best interest of the child. Not the child's parent. Not the wishes of the foster or adoptive parents. To be a Special Advocate, a voice for the child.

Why does a child end up having any interaction with a CASA volunteer? This is not the result of an unfounded CPS investigation.

Some terrible things had to happen in the home of that child for them to even know a CASA volunteer.

Your wife may be a good CASA volunteer.

I have had one interaction with a CASA worker, and I was not impressed. It involved a neighborhood boy who came to us for help. We had known this boy for some time and his father was feared as a "bad ass" in the neighborhood. It was rumored that he dealt drugs and well known that he was in an out law motor bike club. He had a white supremacist tattoo. He'd been in jail several times for crimes involving violence.

He asked for asylum with us. He had two black eyes and numerous other wounds and bruises. We took him to our doctor who photographed these injuries. We photographed them too.

When we met the CASA volunteer, we had high hopes that she would be an advocate for this boy. At 16 in in that state at that time, he had the right to live where he wished, as long as he remained in school.

What he needed was for someone to believe him. He also wanted his younger sisters removed. we were not interested in taking in these girls, but we shared his fear for their safety.

The CASA volunteer disappointed the boy terribly. She had several grandchildren removed by CPS. She was hardly unbiased and said "my goal is to find a way to return this boy to his real parents".

Had she listened to the boy, and truly been his advocate, she wuld have known that reunification was not his goal. His goal was to never see his parents again. And to have his father prosecuted to the fullest extent of he law.

She did not listen to him and speak his wishes to other adults. She failed.

My experience with a CASA volunteer.

Last edited by sheena12; 05-23-2014 at 02:12 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2014, 01:18 PM
 
1,836 posts, read 2,204,700 times
Reputation: 2833
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheena12 View Post
Actually, it was you who took it personally. CASA volunteers are like everyone else some good and well intentioned, some well intentioned, but who do not adhere to the goal of CASA, to be unbiased and only to represent the best interest of the child. Not the child's parent. Not the wishes of the foster or adoptive parents. To be a Special Advocate, a voice for the child.
Absolutely, that is the role of a CASA. And I would expect that there are some that are good and some are bad, just like there are some good foster parents as well as bad or adoptive parents or natural parents. On the other hand, to suggest that most of some group is bad is, well, jaded.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting > Adoption
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:52 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top