CURRENT ADOPTION NEWS UNDERGROUND

Here is an update from Camira Bailey.

First off, I just wanted to thank everyone that’s been showing their support, signing petitions, and posting bulletins. I really appreciate it! It’s helped me stay focused and hopeful. I also want to give a special Thank You to the O’Dea Family. I wanted to give everyone an update on what’s happening. I contacted the ICPC office in Oregon today and they said a petition for adoption has not been filed yet. Apparently my notice to revoke consent has stopped them from being able to file. Since they can’t file and because I filed a petition in Hawaii, jurisdiction in Hawaii has been established and can not be changed, so that’s a relief. I was worried for a while that I’d have to end up flying out to Oregon to play on their playground. Definitely not something that would have been beneficial to me. I finally got a hold of Decklan’s father. He was shocked and quite upset (not that I blame him.)We just retained an attorney for him and he is sending letters to LDS in Hawaii, Oregon, and Utah headquarters. His attorney is working with mine so he can file his petition in conjunction with mine. We figured that if our hearings are joined, LDS will have to argue two things at once and hopefully that will give us an edge. My attorney says with all this, we have a pretty good chance, so I’m hopeful.

There are also a couple of petitions that we need to pay attention to:

http://www.petitiononline.com/bbdh/petition.html
http://www.petitiononline.com/chngeadp/petition.html

If the folks that have this child are reading the blogs, I am this child fourty two years down the road. I know that my father wanted to raise me. The difference for me is that my adoptive parents did not know this situation. I can tell you this much. I am your worst nightmare. I am angry and pissed that you denied me my natural parents who very much wanted me. I condemn folks like you to hell on a regular basis. Shame on you for denying this mother and father the right to raise this baby boy. You have the opportunity to do something right. You have the chance to tell the adoption agency, LDS Social Services to go screw themselves. They have a long history of doing this to natural parents. Adoptees do find. Adoptee access is occurring all over the states. This child will find out your participation in this adoption. Do what is right now.

Onto other news in the adoption world, Stephanie Bennett came up again. In a recent decision, a judge questioned why minor parents are allowed to make decisions without their parents. Its only in adoption that minors can sign adoption contracts without the consent of their parents. In abortion, the minor must get consent from her parents in a majority if not all states. The same should apply in adoption.

Judge asks why teen girls are allowed to give up babies without parents’ consent
By Rick Armon Beacon Journal
Published on Thursday, Feb 28, 2008
A state appeals court judge has expressed concern that teenage mothers are allowed to give up children for adoption in Ohio without their parents being consulted.
In a decision released Wednesday in a local adoption case, 9th District Court of Appeals Judge Donna J. Carr said it’s troubling that minors are restricted from entering into other legal contracts, but not adoptions.
”We allow 16-year-olds, and those even younger, to independently decide to permanently terminate the relationship of parent and child without the advice of their own parent or perhaps the counsel of a guardian ad litem or attorney,” she wrote in a three-page addendum to the court’s decision.
Only Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Guam and Puerto Rico require the consent of the minor’s parents in an adoption, according to the Child Welfare Information Gateway, a service of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The local adoption case involves a Canton teen who has accused A Child’s Waiting, a private agency in Copley Township, of urging her to run away from home so her parents wouldn’t interfere.
Stephanie Bennett has been fighting to regain custody of her daughter, Evelyn, since 2006, saying she regretted her initial decision. Evelyn was only a few months old at the time.
The agency has denied Bennett’s claims and has fought to keep from having to return the child.

On Wednesday, the court rejected Bennett’s appeal of a Summit County Juvenile Court judge’s ruling that determined that the Probate Court, not Juvenile Court, had jurisdiction in the matter. Probate Court has yet to rule on the final adoption.
Because Bennett surrendered the child to a private agency, the mother lost the protection of a juvenile court review given to other parents giving up their children to a public agency, Carr noted.
”In this case, there are allegations that the minor mother’s act of signing the permanent surrender agreement was not a voluntary act, but was done under duress,” Carr wrote. ”The added layer of safeguards included in a review by the juvenile court might have best and most efficiently served the interests of both this minor mother and her child.”
A Child’s Waiting has said an attorney consulted with Bennett before she made her decision to give up the child.
State investigators also have concluded that there was no evidence that Bennett was asked to run away. But the agency was cited for several procedural and paperwork violations related to the adoption.
The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services announced last May that it was reviewing the agency’s state license because of the Bennett case and a history of similar violations. The license expired last September and remains under review, said Dennis Evans, a department spokesman.
The agency is permitted to continue operating during the review process.
Bennett’s attorney, Jennifer Lowry, said she had not read the appeals court decision and could not comment.
A telephone message seeking comment was left with an attorney representing A Child’s Waiting.
The agency was founded in 2000 and has handled about 1,400 adoptions since then, according to the agency’s Web site.

Rick Armon can be reached at 330-996-3569 or rarmon@thebeaconjournal.com.

A state appeals court judge has expressed concern that teenage mothers are allowed to give up children for adoption in Ohio without their parents being consulted.
In a decision released Wednesday in a local adoption case, 9th District Court of Appeals Judge Donna J. Carr said it’s troubling that minors are restricted from entering into other legal contracts, but not adoptions.
”We allow 16-year-olds, and those even younger, to independently decide to permanently terminate the relationship of parent and child without the advice of their own parent or perhaps the counsel of a guardian ad litem or attorney,” she wrote in a three-page addendum to the court’s decision.
Only Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Guam and Puerto Rico require the consent of the minor’s parents in an adoption, according to the Child Welfare Information Gateway, a service of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The local adoption case involves a Canton teen who has accused A Child’s Waiting, a private agency in Copley Township, of urging her to run away from home so her parents wouldn’t interfere.
Stephanie Bennett has been fighting to regain custody of her daughter, Evelyn, since 2006, saying she regretted her initial decision. Evelyn was only a few months old at the time.
The agency has denied Bennett’s claims and has fought to keep from having to return the child.

On Wednesday, the court rejected Bennett’s appeal of a Summit County Juvenile Court judge’s ruling that determined that the Probate Court, not Juvenile Court, had jurisdiction in the matter. Probate Court has yet to rule on the final adoption.
Because Bennett surrendered the child to a private agency, the mother lost the protection of a juvenile court review given to other parents giving up their children to a public agency, Carr noted.
”In this case, there are allegations that the minor mother’s act of signing the permanent surrender agreement was not a voluntary act, but was done under duress,” Carr wrote. ”The added layer of safeguards included in a review by the juvenile court might have best and most efficiently served the interests of both this minor mother and her child.”
A Child’s Waiting has said an attorney consulted with Bennett before she made her decision to give up the child.
State investigators also have concluded that there was no evidence that Bennett was asked to run away. But the agency was cited for several procedural and paperwork violations related to the adoption.
The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services announced last May that it was reviewing the agency’s state license because of the Bennett case and a history of similar violations. The license expired last September and remains under review, said Dennis Evans, a department spokesman.
The agency is permitted to continue operating during the review process.

Bennett’s attorney, Jennifer Lowry, said she had not read the appeals court decision and could not comment.
A telephone message seeking comment was left with an attorney representing A Child’s Waiting.
The agency was founded in 2000 and has handled about 1,400 adoptions since then, according to the agency’s Web site.

Keep in mind this agency specializes in disruptions. They also seek to gain additional funds by placing these children up for adoption again and again. This usually results in a child that is so damaged that they have to be sent to a special ranch where they usually age out.

In International Adoptions in Colorado, the adoption agencies are being scrutinized. There have been several closures of adoption agencies. One agency in particular, the Claar Foundation, has been known to close down and reopen under another name. Leaving behind upset and angry adoptive parents. These adoptive parents have been cheated out of both money and a child. It is getting to a point in our country where all of these agencies both domestic and international need serious examination and investigation. The only folks that can do this is the FBI and the Justice Department. I know that I am demanding it. I have been demanding it for years now.

In many states, there are movements pushing legislation on allowing adoptee access to their own OBCs. The Catholic Charities recently requested that natural parents send in their viewpoints on this issue.

Many many years ago, a document was discovered where Catholic Charities did not come out against adoptee access. You can find the document here.

This document is dated as being received as counsel to the Governor of New York on April 22, 1935. It was written on April 18, 1935. The Governor at the time was Lehman. He had adopted three Georgia Tann babes. It was under his influence that this happened. It really makes you wonder if Catholic Charities joined the ranks of Georgia Tann in illegal adoptions.

Interesting isn’t it that they believed in adoptee access as well as natural parent access? They also believed in family preservation. Georgia Tann sure did a number on them.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: