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.
And that's how it should be. Similar to the Baby Teleah case, if the Copabianco's were aware that the father did not relinquish his parental rights (and are we seriously talking about a text message as if it's in any way legally binding), they had no business engaging in the adoption. Furthermore, the way they have acted over the course of this case sheds a bad light on all adoptive parents and shows that they are not fit to parent, not do they have the best interest of the child at heart.
Take the Native American equation out of this (because honestly, it was a lawyer's ploy to keep it in there at all) and the child still belongs with her father. Case closed. It's unfortunate that the system has gotten in the way for the worst for this child.
I'm not sure I understand this post. You aren't seriously contending that it was a "ploy" on the part of the adoptive parents to bring up the ICWA are you? That's about the dumbest thing any lawyer representing adoptive parents could have done.
Some of us just don't accept the notion that an unwed biological father who has not at the time of an adoption, established something resembling a family relationship with a child should have parental rights. I appreciate that other people do not believe as I do. Its why each state should be free to make its own laws with respect to the obligations an unwed biological father must meet to have parental rights.
The "rights" of a biological father in this situation are not the "catch all" or the "end all" when it comes to adoption law. Other people have rights too. The birth mother has rights. The child has rights to be placed in a secure home The public ought to have rights to see that children in such a situation are raised in solid homes and will require a minimum of public assistance to get through childhood.
Unlike the poster whom you are responding too, I am grateful I live in a state with a strong putative father statute.
I don't understand the motivation is behind "strong putative father" statutes. Here's why:
It is probably the sad truth that many unwed fathers have little interest in their offspring and would make no attempt to assert parental rights or interfere with adoptions. Giving them a nationally standardized time-frame after birth to prove paternity & present a plan for the custody of their child, should they want to assert it, seems to be something that few would take advantage of if they are mainly deadbeats as is the feeling many seem to hold.
More important I totally disagree with separate state statutes. Given our mobility as a nation and the national reach of for-profit adoption agencies; a national minimum standard for the ethical treatment of all parties involved is the only reasonable situation. To belabour the point, because I strongly believe in it -- if there was one putative father standard nation-wide, there would be no excuse for ignorance on the part of a birth father and no cover for deceptive practices on the part of potentially unethical parties.
These well-publicized cases are in the minority. Most of them come to pass because there is deception on the part of one party or the other, advantage taken of differing standards, and ignorance or purposeful abuse of differing standards on the part of agencies and parties involved. If there were well-publicized federal standards most of them would not get to the point were different sets of parents are fighting over a child.
Again, the cases where an unmarried father fights for sole financial support and custody of his offspring are few and far between. Why not err on the side of those few who sincerely want to take on this responsibility by making it, not so much strenuous[which is OK by me], but very difficult for other parties to make his path unclear, easy to obscure, and to practice deception?
Again - if deadbeat dads are truly the norm, then who does it harm to have clear and universal standards for unwed fathers, and mothers, and agencies, on notification, standards, etc?
In this particular case, if the mother, when she cut off communication with the father who wanted to marry her, and made adoption plans[which included financial benefits from the PAP's] was required to properly notify the father[resume communication which he & his family pursued at that time]- when she began her adoption plans B4 the birth of the child - these people, all of them, would have been saved a lot of heartache. Despite innuendos to the contrary, the father appears to have provided a decent home for his child, and there is no reason to believe that he wouldn't have done so given proper legal notification B4 her birth.
At least now that SCOTUS has cleared up some key provisions of ICWA, other families won't have to go through what these did. And, it's good that the South Carolina courts didn't drag this out any longer.
At least now that SCOTUS has cleared up some key provisions of ICWA, other families won't have to go through what these did. And, it's good that the South Carolina courts didn't drag this out any longer.
People get really wrapped up in an individual case some times and don't see the forest for the trees.
This decision makes it possible for a Native American mother who is not living in a household with an unmarried birth father to place her child for adoption. That may not seem like much. However, despite original good intentions by the people who wrote the ICWA this was not something she had a right to do. The law created a situation that was downright paternalistic and treated Indian people like they were unable to make important decisions for themselves or run their own affairs.
The Op Ed piece in the Washington Post makes it clear that the birth mother felt she was being bullied and pushed around by an Indian tribe she didn't even want to belong too. Her individual rights should prevail in a situation where the birth father clearly abandoned the child.
Im glad that the decision has been made and all parties - most of all Baby Veronica - can move on w/ their lives. While I understand these things take time, it was just too bad it took so long that the situation was in limbo and Im glad the natural father's recent move to adopt her didn't make a difference in the end.
I'm sure little Veronica is going to be so happy about this, especially when she gets old enough to understand it all. Not only was she ripped away from the first family, in a very foolish was by both parties, she's now being ripped away from this family too just to be re-placed with people she likely doesn't remember. On top of that she will grow up knowing that her dad wanted to raise her but was prevented from it. I have yet to meet a single person who doesn't want to be with their biological family as long as they're fit and I doubt that Veronica will be any different.
What a travesty. Nobody here is really putting Veronica's best interest first including the court. They are clearly putting the adoptive family first. Wouldn't it be nice to see everyone acting like unselfish adults and come up with a shared custody arrangement for Veronica's sake?
Obviously it's a complex issue and we all have our opinions but I feel bc she was given up for adoption, adopted legally and raised and nurtured by her adoptive family for 2 years, she have stayed w/ them. Understandably her bio father has regrets and to an extent, I feel for him but the time for decisions was before her birth, not after. I mostly feel sorry for the little girl, it's not going to be easy for her in the coming months but her adoptive parents love her and hopefully the transition will go smoothly, maybe if it's not too confusing, her bio father can still be a part of her life w/ occ. visits (which he didnt allow the a. parents after he got custody) - but that would be up to her a. parents and professionals involved w/ the case.
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.
