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.
Status:
"Smartened up and walked away!"
(set 26 days ago)
11,780 posts, read 5,795,007 times
Reputation: 14201
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by kokonutty
That's the question. Does the adoptive family benefit from the misdeeds of the judge? What if they were complicit? It wouldn't matter to a four year old; that doesn't make it right. There is still an injured party here - the father who was harmed by the illegal, immoral acts of the judge. How is he made whole without harming the child?
1. Your presumption that the judge was paid off - you can't even prove and there has been no news to even suggest that happened - so let's table that.
2. Since we do not have the case transcripts - we have no idea why the judge ruled as he did. Did the father's behavior in prison maybe suggest that he would not be a responsible parent? Was he affiliated with the wrong group of inmates - we can't assume but we have no idea what the decision was and what decided it.
The father was not harmed by anyone but himself - he chose the path he followed which ended him up in jail. Funny tho - we wouldn't even be talking about this if the biological mother had an abortion or miscarriage - because there would be no child. I've read too many stories where foster children were given back to their biological parents only to be abused or found dead. There are some people that should not conceive and if the child gets taken away - there is most likely a good reason.
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?
I am guessing it's someone else's fault that he was in prison when this child was born? Must be a really cool guy as I keep hearing stories about many who are locked up for no reason I am not saying that this child should never go back but dad made a mess and he really needs to clean it up and put some effort to show that he's a different person now.
Last edited by toosie; 02-14-2017 at 07:18 AM..
Reason: No political trolling please
Of course there is!! The state pays you money to adopt kids..
No... No, it probably doesn't. In SC adoption assistance is only available for certain "special needs" kids, of which this child almost certainly does not qualify. And even if she did, the assistance is a flat fee of $1500. You'll burn through that pretty quickly to support a young child.
The state pays you to foster a child, but not necessarily to adopt one.
Of course there is!! The state pays you money to adopt kids..
Unless things have changed, or it varies from state to state, or maybe if the child is considered "unadoptable" for some reason, then perhaps what you said is true. And, come to think of it, I think I have heard of the state giving a SMALL subsidy in some cases where the only factor prohibiting someone from adopting is not enough household income, although I don't personally know any adoptive families who have received such a subsidy.
However, in our case (adopting TWO special needs kids in 1998 through our local human services department), we only received free Medicare for the kids (which we only used for their psychotherapy, btw), and we even had to pay the legal fees to adopt (about $200 back then). So, again, unless things have changed in the last 20 years,, adopting kids does not automatically mean the state will pay adopting families anything -- except, as I said, for medical bills. If anyone has any info to the contrary and can provide a link, please share.
Unless things have changed, or it varies from state to state, or maybe if the child is considered "unadoptable" for some reason, then perhaps what you said is true. And, come to think of it, I think I have heard of the state giving a SMALL subsidy in some cases where the only factor prohibiting someone from adopting is not enough household income, although I don't personally know any adoptive families who have received such a subsidy.
However, in our case (adopting TWO special needs kids in 1998 through our local human services department), we only received free Medicare for the kids (which we only used for their psychotherapy, btw), and we even had to pay the legal fees to adopt (about $200 back then). So, again, unless things have changed in the last 20 years,, adopting kids does not automatically mean the state will pay adopting families anything -- except, as I said, for medical bills. If anyone has any info to the contrary and can provide a link, please share.
In a number of states, foster parents who adopt their foster children continue to receive all or part of the foster payments for some period of time. I have no idea whether this is true in South Carolina.
1. Your presumption that the judge was paid off - you can't even prove and there has been no news to even suggest that happened - so let's table that.
2. Since we do not have the case transcripts - we have no idea why the judge ruled as he did. Did the father's behavior in prison maybe suggest that he would not be a responsible parent? Was he affiliated with the wrong group of inmates - we can't assume but we have no idea what the decision was and what decided it.
The father was not harmed by anyone but himself - he chose the path he followed which ended him up in jail. Funny tho - we wouldn't even be talking about this if the biological mother had an abortion or miscarriage - because there would be no child. I've read too many stories where foster children were given back to their biological parents only to be abused or found dead. There are some people that should not conceive and if the child gets taken away - there is most likely a good reason.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
1. There was no presumption nor suggestion that there was a payoff made. Certainly the adopters could have been complicit without bribery. Have those people drawn out a legal battle here with the intention of using the additional time the child is with them as pressure against a possible return to the father?
2. We don't need transcripts when the articles say the judge ignored state laws.
The father was injured by the unlawful acts of the judge. Any harm he may have done to himself in the past is irrelevant. I've read far too many stories where foster or adoptive parents have been convicted of child abuse, or worse. The man has paid his debt to society and now society and the state need to find a way to
alleviate the harm he's had done to him.
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.
I am not saying that this child should never go back but dad made a mess and he really needs to clean it up and put some effort to show that he's a different person now.
