Baby stealing approved in South Carolina!

[Anonymous]

Adoptive parents like to ignore what the studies show. In a case like this, the child is better off with the biological father.
I had the same opinion in that case in VA when the non bio mother tried to get custody of her daughter (same sex moms). As crazy as the bio mother might have been, she is the better one to raise the child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The adoptive parents, even though the court ruled in favor of the father, kept the child for 2 yrs before turning her over. And now they say the father is obstructing the court system. It was fine when the Capobiancos were doing the obstructing.

For some of you condemning the father, you might want to read up on the FULL story before condemning him. He was with the mother, asked her to marry him when they found out she was pregnant, tried to support her and SHE refused to let him, would not tell him when the baby was born, and set up the adoption behind his back. The Capobiancos took the baby when she was 3 days old to South Carolina, filed for the adoption there, all the time knowing that the father wanted to keep the baby. He was served the papers less than a week from deployment to Iraq, which the birth mother knew about. She gave the Capobiancos his name, and misspelled in on purpose, so to give the adoptive parents more time to push through the adoption. The Capobiancos never had his permission, and took to the media to paint the father as a dead beat dad. The birth mother is the one who started this mess, and the Capobiancos kept the mess going.

Once more, and as I have said before, it is YOU who needs to read the actual record. You are reading the biodad's spin after-the-fact.

There is nothing in the court records about her refusing to let him support the mom. He knew when the baby was due. He made no effort to contact the biomom. It was, as I recall, 11 days before his deployment, not less than a week. The Capobiancos did not know the biodad wanted the baby, ]as he did not in fact attempt any contact with the baby throughout most of the pregnancy and the first four months of her life. He signed away initially and then changed his mind.

Stop rewriting history. Just stop. The longer you do this, the more unhinged you seem. You don't like the facts in front of you, so you try to change the facts. It's stupid.

Exactly how was he supposed to "contact the baby throughout the pregnancy"?
Babies have cells phones inutero nowadays?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Adoptive parents like to ignore what the studies show. In a case like this, the child is better off with the biological father.
I had the same opinion in that case in VA when the non bio mother tried to get custody of her daughter (same sex moms). As crazy as the bio mother might have been, she is the better one to raise the child.

What studies? I just Googled "studies about kids of adoptive parents" and got all kinds of hits that adopting parents are equal to or BETTER than bio-parents. That's been my experience. My bio-parents were horrific.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Adoptive parents like to ignore what the studies show. In a case like this, the child is better off with the biological father.
I had the same opinion in that case in VA when the non bio mother tried to get custody of her daughter (same sex moms). As crazy as the bio mother might have been, she is the better one to raise the child.

That is a very different situation. In that case, where two parents have raised a child since birth, the custody should be shared. This situation is a pure adoption and child should be with her father.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She belongs with her bio-Dad. I don't see how the adoptive family can even sleep at night knowing this child is wanted by her family of origin and yet still wanting to keep her, as if she's a pet and not a human.

Agreed. Adoption should not be about taking children from parents willing to raise their children. This entire case is a disgrace. At the very least, the biological Dad should be allowed 50/50 custody of the child.

But, of course, he wasn't interested in raising his daughter when he needed to make that decision. He's not entitled to come back, months later, when she has a stable home and declare his 'rights.' His use of the IWCA was (as the Supreme Court found) not what the law was intended for. It's almost absurd that he used this law. There is nothing in the record to indicate that the adoptive parents stole this child - this child was placed with them by the biological mother who still firmly stands by her decision.

Mothers shouldn't be the final say in adoption. Fathers should also have a say. To suggest otherwise, is highly insulting.

Wow. But here, the mother has NO say. Gestational mother's rights trump the sperm donor's. And that is all he was through 9 months of pregnancy and 4 months of his dd's life. Stop rewriting the story to make him somehow the victim. Go back and read the court records. You would be shocked, apparently, as you think he was deceived. Nope - you are advocating for a man who said, you can raise the baby by yourself with no financial, physical or emotional support from me, as I drop off the face of the earth after impregnating you. I will never call about the baby, or show any interest in seeing her. I will never send you a single dime to support her. I am happy to let you raise the child as a single mother, but God forbid you try to put the child's interests first and let someone else adopt her. Wow. You have chosen to back a prince of a man.

Feelings can change after a baby is born. Perhaps he didn't want a baby. It's very easy to deny and pretend it's not happening when the Mom is pregnant and honestly, he didn't really "owe" her any sort of support then. He may have been feeling bitter and he took him awhile to come around. That does not give these adoptive parents the right to steal his child now that he is willing to be a father and has been for the past 1.5 years. To take the child away now is incredibly cruel. She's 3 and will remember and cry for her Dad.

Some of you are so focused on sticking it to this "deadbeat" Dad that you are forgetting there is a CHILD involved who has formed bonds with her Dad and will miss him terribly when she is taken away. My daughter is 4.5 and I can imagine her crying every night for me if she were suddenly ripped away.

If I were this Dad, I'd make a run for it...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adoption is a great option for kids who need a home. Adoption is not a fine option for infertile people to obtain a baby at any cost...especially one who has a family already that is cpable and willing to raise them.

Exactly, adoption is a wonderful solution to tragic circumstances, but when it causes the tragic situations, such as in this case where the adoption lead to a child being taken from a biological parent who was willing and able to parent, it stops being a wonderful thing.

Kind of how it's wonderful when a widow or widower finds a new spouse, but killing someone's spouse so you can marry them is not cool.

You are 100% wrong when you assert that "the adoption lead to a child being taken from a biological parent who was will and able to parent." He initially refused to parent in any way, shape or form, and also initially gave up his rights. He changed his mind. Stop pretending that it was always his intention to be involved.

You are ignoring the inconvenient truth that it is in the best interests of a child to be with his or her family of origin. I know that people simply don't want to believe that-- love is all you need, right? Sorry, the research does not agree with you.

As has been pointed out, if a child has parents who are unwilling or unable to parent, then adoption can be a wonderful option for the CHILD. Everyone seems to think this is such an injustice for the Capobiancos, and all the media coverage seems to surround how terrible this all is for THEM. Excuse me, but what is in the best interest of this little girl? It is to remain with her family of origin. Regardless of whether the father "changed his mind". The fact is that he contacted an attorney 5 days after signing the papers, realizing that he made a mistake. This is well within the time frame of "changing one's mind" in adoption in almost every state in the nation, except.. you guessed it... South Carolina, where fathers have almost no rights.

The South Carolina court shouldn't even have jurisdiction. The child was born in Oklahoma.

If folks are not outraged by how absolutely fucked up the adoption laws are in this country, then you are not paying attention.

And you are conveniently ignoring the fact that the biological mother had arranged an open adoption and had access to the child. How is that not in the best interests of the child? And the sperm donor took the child away from three loving adults and refused to even allow them to know where the child was. How is that in the best interest of the child?

5 days - 5 days and 13 MONTHS. How convenient to ignore the true timeline there.

The child was 4 months old, not 13 months old. You are really stretching here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adoptive parents like to ignore what the studies show. In a case like this, the child is better off with the biological father.
I had the same opinion in that case in VA when the non bio mother tried to get custody of her daughter (same sex moms). As crazy as the bio mother might have been, she is the better one to raise the child.

What studies? I just Googled "studies about kids of adoptive parents" and got all kinds of hits that adopting parents are equal to or BETTER than bio-parents. That's been my experience. My bio-parents were horrific.

I'm sorry you had horrific bio-parents. That's not the case here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The dad asked the mother to marry him after he found out she was pregnant. She refused. She made an adoption plan and did not inform him of it at all. She knew that his Native American affiliation would cause an issue with the adoption, so she gave the wrong name and birthdate (seems intentionally) of the father to the tribal authorities. There was no record of his affiliation as a result, so the baby was able to be moved from Oklahoma to South Carolina. Corrupt attorneys were involved it seems, as they bypassed a federal law intended to protect Native kids and prevent this type of scenario. Birthmother also hid the birth from him and was on a no contact list at the hospital, making it impossible for him to even track her down. Then the adoption was kept from him until 4 months later when he was about to be deployed to Iraq. Dad signed the papers thinking it was to give custody over to the mother, the second he realized that he signed a consent to the adoption he tried to retieve the papers from the process server...when unable to do so, he contacted an attorney immediately. He has fought to get his kid since she was 4 months old. The adoptive parents used the legal system to keep the kid away for 27 months. I'm sure it was traumatic for the kid to leave the pre-doptive home as a 2 year old. It will be even more traumatic to leave her father now at almost age 4. This was a contested adoption from the beginning, the Capobianco's should have given the child back as an infant and saved all parties involved alot of heartache. The birthmother seems to have a vendetta against the father and used this kid as a pawn to hurt him. She also got over 10,000 from the adoptive parents and they paid for her attorney (conflict of interest?). Just because this dad may not be as wealthy, or educated as the adoptive couple, he should not have to loose his kid. He made a mistake, especially during the pregnancy, but it seems more like it was a messy relationship between the birth parent's. He loves the child, and wants her and is providing for her. He is not unfit and the kid is not in need of a family. She is now attatched to him and her extended family. When she grows up I am sure she will be resentful, now matter how much money and priviledge the adoptive family will raise her with. She was denied her real family, her roots and no money can buy her that. She will be forever scarred by this.

Adoption should be about finding parents for a child who needs a home. Not finding a child for greedy, selfish people who will stop at nothing to get their hands on someone else's children.

The greedy and selfish people in this story are the biological parents. Nobody forced them to put their kid up for adoption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The dad asked the mother to marry him after he found out she was pregnant. She refused. She made an adoption plan and did not inform him of it at all. She knew that his Native American affiliation would cause an issue with the adoption, so she gave the wrong name and birthdate (seems intentionally) of the father to the tribal authorities. There was no record of his affiliation as a result, so the baby was able to be moved from Oklahoma to South Carolina. Corrupt attorneys were involved it seems, as they bypassed a federal law intended to protect Native kids and prevent this type of scenario. Birthmother also hid the birth from him and was on a no contact list at the hospital, making it impossible for him to even track her down. Then the adoption was kept from him until 4 months later when he was about to be deployed to Iraq. Dad signed the papers thinking it was to give custody over to the mother, the second he realized that he signed a consent to the adoption he tried to retieve the papers from the process server...when unable to do so, he contacted an attorney immediately. He has fought to get his kid since she was 4 months old. The adoptive parents used the legal system to keep the kid away for 27 months. I'm sure it was traumatic for the kid to leave the pre-doptive home as a 2 year old. It will be even more traumatic to leave her father now at almost age 4. This was a contested adoption from the beginning, the Capobianco's should have given the child back as an infant and saved all parties involved alot of heartache. The birthmother seems to have a vendetta against the father and used this kid as a pawn to hurt him. She also got over 10,000 from the adoptive parents and they paid for her attorney (conflict of interest?). Just because this dad may not be as wealthy, or educated as the adoptive couple, he should not have to loose his kid. He made a mistake, especially during the pregnancy, but it seems more like it was a messy relationship between the birth parent's. He loves the child, and wants her and is providing for her. He is not unfit and the kid is not in need of a family. She is now attatched to him and her extended family. When she grows up I am sure she will be resentful, now matter how much money and priviledge the adoptive family will raise her with. She was denied her real family, her roots and no money can buy her that. She will be forever scarred by this.

Adoption should be about finding parents for a child who needs a home. Not finding a child for greedy, selfish people who will stop at nothing to get their hands on someone else's children.

The greedy and selfish people in this story are the biological parents. Nobody forced them to put their kid up for adoption.

Actually, the father was forced. That's kind of the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adoption is a great option for kids who need a home. Adoption is not a fine option for infertile people to obtain a baby at any cost...especially one who has a family already that is cpable and willing to raise them.

Exactly, adoption is a wonderful solution to tragic circumstances, but when it causes the tragic situations, such as in this case where the adoption lead to a child being taken from a biological parent who was willing and able to parent, it stops being a wonderful thing.

Kind of how it's wonderful when a widow or widower finds a new spouse, but killing someone's spouse so you can marry them is not cool.

You are 100% wrong when you assert that "the adoption lead to a child being taken from a biological parent who was will and able to parent." He initially refused to parent in any way, shape or form, and also initially gave up his rights. He changed his mind. Stop pretending that it was always his intention to be involved.

You are ignoring the inconvenient truth that it is in the best interests of a child to be with his or her family of origin. I know that people simply don't want to believe that-- love is all you need, right? Sorry, the research does not agree with you.

As has been pointed out, if a child has parents who are unwilling or unable to parent, then adoption can be a wonderful option for the CHILD. Everyone seems to think this is such an injustice for the Capobiancos, and all the media coverage seems to surround how terrible this all is for THEM. Excuse me, but what is in the best interest of this little girl? It is to remain with her family of origin. Regardless of whether the father "changed his mind". The fact is that he contacted an attorney 5 days after signing the papers, realizing that he made a mistake. This is well within the time frame of "changing one's mind" in adoption in almost every state in the nation, except.. you guessed it... South Carolina, where fathers have almost no rights.

The South Carolina court shouldn't even have jurisdiction. The child was born in Oklahoma.

If folks are not outraged by how absolutely fucked up the adoption laws are in this country, then you are not paying attention.

And you are conveniently ignoring the fact that the biological mother had arranged an open adoption and had access to the child. How is that not in the best interests of the child? And the sperm donor took the child away from three loving adults and refused to even allow them to know where the child was. How is that in the best interest of the child?

5 days - 5 days and 13 MONTHS. How convenient to ignore the true timeline there.

The child was 4 months old, not 13 months old. You are really stretching here.

Nope. The child was 4 months, but the mother was pregnant for the usual length of time. He knew her due date. Once he said he didn't want to be involved, he utterly failed to contact her again. He never got in touch to see how she was, how his gestating baby was - no contact. It was only after he had signed the papers that he decided to fight for custody. Once again, he had more than a year to actually say he wanted to parent, and instead he said emphatically that he did NOT want to parent.

[Anonymous]

I think there is a troll on this thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adoption is a great option for kids who need a home. Adoption is not a fine option for infertile people to obtain a baby at any cost...especially one who has a family already that is cpable and willing to raise them.

Exactly, adoption is a wonderful solution to tragic circumstances, but when it causes the tragic situations, such as in this case where the adoption lead to a child being taken from a biological parent who was willing and able to parent, it stops being a wonderful thing.

Kind of how it's wonderful when a widow or widower finds a new spouse, but killing someone's spouse so you can marry them is not cool.

You are 100% wrong when you assert that "the adoption lead to a child being taken from a biological parent who was will and able to parent." He initially refused to parent in any way, shape or form, and also initially gave up his rights. He changed his mind. Stop pretending that it was always his intention to be involved.

You are ignoring the inconvenient truth that it is in the best interests of a child to be with his or her family of origin. I know that people simply don't want to believe that-- love is all you need, right? Sorry, the research does not agree with you.

As has been pointed out, if a child has parents who are unwilling or unable to parent, then adoption can be a wonderful option for the CHILD. Everyone seems to think this is such an injustice for the Capobiancos, and all the media coverage seems to surround how terrible this all is for THEM. Excuse me, but what is in the best interest of this little girl? It is to remain with her family of origin. Regardless of whether the father "changed his mind". The fact is that he contacted an attorney 5 days after signing the papers, realizing that he made a mistake. This is well within the time frame of "changing one's mind" in adoption in almost every state in the nation, except.. you guessed it... South Carolina, where fathers have almost no rights.

The South Carolina court shouldn't even have jurisdiction. The child was born in Oklahoma.

If folks are not outraged by how absolutely fucked up the adoption laws are in this country, then you are not paying attention.

And you are conveniently ignoring the fact that the biological mother had arranged an open adoption and had access to the child. How is that not in the best interests of the child? And the sperm donor took the child away from three loving adults and refused to even allow them to know where the child was. How is that in the best interest of the child?

5 days - 5 days and 13 MONTHS. How convenient to ignore the true timeline there.

The child was 4 months old, not 13 months old. You are really stretching here.

Nope. The child was 4 months, but the mother was pregnant for the usual length of time. He knew her due date. Once he said he didn't want to be involved, he utterly failed to contact her again. He never got in touch to see how she was, how his gestating baby was - no contact. It was only after he had signed the papers that he decided to fight for custody. Once again, he had more than a year to actually say he wanted to parent, and instead he said emphatically that he did NOT want to parent.

There is a reason why birth mothers don't sign away consent until AFTER the baby is born. While his behavior was pretty shitty during her pregnancy, it has no relevance to his actions after the baby's birth. Your obsession with denying a biological parent the right to raise their child is unsettling.

[Anonymous]

This will open all kinds of doors for people to take kids from perfectly capable and willing BIOLOGICAL parent's and sell them to the highest bidder. How will that adotive mother look into her kids eyes and tell her how she essentially stole her from her real dad. Denied her of her roots and extended family. This is not the way adoption should be. Any sane, unentitled and uselfish pre-adoptive parent/s would have returned the child at 4 months when the dad contested. Actually, they would never have engaged in the unethical and corrupt practices in the very beginning, that kept the bio dad out of the loop, and given misinformation to the tribal authorities. This enabled them to get the kid to SC where they all knew the laws were not going to be in bio dads favor. Manipulation at it's finest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This will open all kinds of doors for people to take kids from perfectly capable and willing BIOLOGICAL parent's and sell them to the highest bidder. How will that adotive mother look into her kids eyes and tell her how she essentially stole her from her real dad. Denied her of her roots and extended family. This is not the way adoption should be. Any sane, unentitled and uselfish pre-adoptive parent/s would have returned the child at 4 months when the dad contested. Actually, they would never have engaged in the unethical and corrupt practices in the very beginning, that kept the bio dad out of the loop, and given misinformation to the tribal authorities. This enabled them to get the kid to SC where they all knew the laws were not going to be in bio dads favor. Manipulation at it's finest.

Rewriting history still, I see. Carry on.

Facts are so annoying when they don't support you, so I understand your need to "embellish" the truth.

[Anonymous]

There is a nutter butter on this thread
I don't even know why I keep opening it...
kinda like watching a train wreck or someone lose their DAMN mind inch by crazy inch