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.
It's hard to tell the exact details in the stories I've seen, but it seems that the grandma had some interest in taking her custody immediately and it was thwarted for whatever reason--maybe she was an unfit guardian, but it appears the foster parents themselves have drawn this out in court. It seems ingenious to claim "welp, now she's 3, she stays with us" if the reason she wasn't with her family in the first place (or returned earlier) is them dragging it through court.
Also, it is so irresponsible to make this a media fight and putting her name and picture out there. One day this little girl is going to grow up and find these articles herself and see her adoptive parents maligning her father. She's going to be interested in meeting him someday, even if the adoptive parents win. I cannot see how it is going to go well after what they did.
Yep. I'd think the closest thing to an all-around humane Humane to whom? Certainly not the little girl.
solution here would be some arrangement of joint custody, split custodial placement, and/or visitation rights & who's going to going to come up with this arrangement? Monitor this arrangement? Manage this arrangement. Just how much money are "they.....we" going to spend on sperm donor felon dude?
between the adoptive/foster parents and the father, the "father" is the man who has worked each day providing for this little girl the past 3 years & who's spent time with this little girl each and every day for the past 3 years. That other guy has been incarcerated & has as much to do with the little girl as the liquid in a test tube.
but if they're taking a hard line against him - and participated in having his parental rights terminated without his consent - that's going to be a hard row to hoe.
Legally, if the father Sperm Donor cannot provide a safe environment for the child, or care properly for the child, Define "care properly". Obtain Section 8 housing and other benefits because he has custody....she lives with an unemployed ex con who at best will be a burger flipper as opposed to a loving family?? .....then he shouldn't be getting custody and/or placement. But if he can do so, What do you mean if he "does so"....provide a safe enviroment??? Would you put YOUR child in an environment where the only parent is a male ex con who has never met the 3 year old little girl who he is supposed to "care for"?? then he shouldn't have had all parental rights terminated in the first place - that's not done in cases where the parent is temporarily unable to care for the child.
Lots of folks seem to be more interested in sperm donor's "rights" (which we have already paid over 100K for and for which we all would have to pay hundreds of thousands MORE for)....instead of the safety, well being, & happiness of this little girl and what's BEST for her.
Lots of folks seem to be more interested in sperm donor's "rights" (which we have already paid over 100K for and for which we all would have to pay hundreds of thousands MORE for)....instead of the safety, well being, & happiness of this little girl and what's BEST for her.
And only a few seem to be interested in the law. Odd thought process.
Except he wasn't able to care for her, because he was incarcerated, and his family didn't foster her. How long should a child have to wait for a family while father serves his time? A year? Two? Five? Ten? Eighteen years?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frostnip
In this case, it was clearly three or less, so the hyperbole isn't really applicable.
It is possible to maintain a connection with someone who is incarcerated, if the people involved make an effort.
Although I certainly support the adoptive parents at this point I am not sure the adoption was 100% legal without the biological father's consent. My goal would be to change the law.
Although I certainly support the adoptive parents at this point I am not sure the adoption was 100% legal without the biological father's consent. My goal would be to change the law.
Those who believe it's a good idea to send this little girl back to her "biological" father must read this -
The narrative of this story in the news seems to be largely driven by the adoptive parents. The actual court ruling, which differs substantially, can be found here:
He apparently tried everything in his power to do right by his child from the moment he learned of the pregnancy. Here's the summary from the court ruling:
Quote:
The testimony at the TPR (termination of parental rights) hearing
established that Father—who had criminal charges pending prior to Mother's
pregnancy—turned himself in when Mother became pregnant so he could serve his
prison sentence before Child was born. Father communicated with Child, DSS,
and Child's guardian ad litem through letters and provided material support to
Child. Father also attempted to arrange for Child to be placed with Grandmother
during his incarceration; however, that plan was hindered by the lengthy Interstate
Compact on the Placement of Children process and Foster Parents' adoption action.
Based on the foregoing, we find clear and convincing evidence does not show
Father abandoned Child. Because clear and convincing evidence does not support
a statutory ground for TPR, we reverse TPR.
If the biological father had any compassion at all for his daughter, he would see and understand that what he is doing is NOT in her best interest. He would stop the legal fight over custody immediately. Then if he still wants contact with her he can begin the process of fighting for access ... as you say, "spending time together under supervision in a slower steady progression". What he is doing currently will not benefit the child in any way.
Those here who are arguing about the biological father's rights and his fitness to be a parent are missing the whole point! It's the child who will be harmed in all this. It's the child whose needs and stability should be considered. Tearing her away from what she knows as family could do irreparable harm at this point, regardless of the biological father's legal standing. Unfortunately the courts and the law don't see it that way. This is one of the tragedies of our adoptive process.
I pretty much agree, but the tragedy is that it appears the courts didn't do diligence in facilitating any relationship between the father and child. Going by his side of the story he did attempt to reach out which I'm sure is difficult from prison.
IME the courts don't really help in particular situations unless you have a truck load of money to pay attorneys.
Someone mentioned why the grandmother didn't file for custody? You would have to drop 5k just to get paperwork filed then your looking at 15-20K with little chance of gaining custody.
"Biological?" He is her biological father, no quotes necessary.
Plenty of children are abused by foster parents, adoptive parents, natural parents, and other caregivers. The issue is not where the child spent X amount of time, the issue is with the person who abuses. There is no guarantee anywhere that a foster parent will be a better caregiver than a biological parent.
Should we now link every story illustrating abuse and even homicide by foster and adoptive parents to counter your anecdotally deficient one? Why would anyone believe such a useless red herring is relevant here?
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.
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.
My goal would be to change the law.
