Baby stealing approved in South Carolina!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do we really need to call this kidnapping? It's pretty sensationalist.

This was a legal adoption, subsequently challenged in court.

No there was actually never an adoption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This kid was esssentially kidnapped.

Yes. The child was kidnapped from the Capobiancos. Glad the child will be reunited with them - she should have never been taken in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The biological father in this case knowingly abandoned his child prior to and after the birth. You may want to do some reading to better familiarize yourself with this case. You can start with the original South Carolina Supreme Court decision, which contains the following:

It is undisputed that Mother and Father did not live together prior to the baby's birth and that Father did not support Mother financially for pregnancy related expenses, even though he had the ability to provide some degree of financial assistance to Mother.
---
Father was aware of Mother's expected due date, but made no attempt to contact or support Mother directly in the months following Baby Girl's birth.9
---
Before her first prenatal doctor's appointment, Mother asked Father for financial assistance. Although he acknowledged paternity from the outset, Father refused to help financially unless he and Mother were married. At trial, Father was asked, "But she had to marry you before you felt you'd be responsible as a father?" He answered, "Correct."
---
Father explained, "Being four hours away I was able to come home on the weekends, but I didn't make the right amount of money, you know, to be sufficient enough for me to come home, you know, whenever I wanted to." The record reveals Father's annual salary was $20,227 in 2009 and $23,697 in 2010. Because of Father's military service, he was not required to pay income taxes when in active service. Additionally, his housing and food expenses were covered by the military, and Father admitted virtually all of his salary was disposable income. The only recurring expenses Father mentioned were $20-25 per week for cigarettes and going to bars "drinking with [his military] buddies, joking and having a good time."

A real class act...she will be much better off with her adoptive parents in the home she should never have been removed from.

He sounds like a scumbag, more interested in being in control than caring for hid biological daughter's wellbeing.

[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.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Racism also prevails in the US! If the bio dad were pure white and wealthy, he would never be loosing his kid.

Bullshit.

Eh, I kinda agree with pp before you.

Nope. The only reason he ever had a shot at getting his kid back (after relinquishing his rights by text) was because of his heritage.

You know that you can't relinquish your parental rights via a text message, right?

You know that he was aggressively uninterested in being the child's father until after the adoption began, right? No financial support, no visitation. Sounds like a peach of an involved, loving parent.

[Anonymous]

The dad sounds like a controlling ass hole. This child will be MUCH better off with the adoptive family. She has a better chance at getting an education and becoming a contributing member of society with them than she has with the dad. The dad sounds like a piece of work who through a fit when the mother didn't obey him.

[Anonymous]

Maybe all kids from non-wealthy, "non-white", families should be better off being adopted by rich whites who can send them to big 3 type schools. How dare poor people pro-create! Especially Native Americans. And of course dads should never have a say in having their kids given away to strangers.

[Anonymous]

These adoptive parents should be ashamed, but I should not be surprised. It becomes more and more obvious to me that they feel entitled to having a baby/child with no regards for the wishes of the biological parents. I couldn't imagine wanting a baby so bad that I would take it away from their *willing* biological parents. It's abhorrent.

Karma is a bitch. This child will grow up and eventually resent the hell out of the adoptive parents for separating her from a father interested in raising her.

[Anonymous]

There is corruption all around this case. The attorney for the birth mother, was paid for by the adoptive parents and this same attorney is also a personal freind of Justice Roberts (majority). Roberts also "adopted" kids and bypassed laws in Ireland (birth mother's origons) by transporting the birth moms to south america for the births. Adoption is a billion dollar industry. An industry full of corruption. $$ can buy you anything. even kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe all kids from non-wealthy, "non-white", families should be better off being adopted by rich whites who can send them to big 3 type schools. How dare poor people pro-create! Especially Native Americans. And of course dads should never have a say in having their kids given away to strangers.

If he had wanted a say, he should have been involved in the pregnancy and birth. He abandoned this child, and then changed his mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe all kids from non-wealthy, "non-white", families should be better off being adopted by rich whites who can send them to big 3 type schools. How dare poor people pro-create! Especially Native Americans. And of course dads should never have a say in having their kids given away to strangers.

If he had wanted a say, he should have been involved in the pregnancy and birth. He abandoned this child, and then changed his mind.

Birth mothers change their mind all the time...they decide they want to parent at the last minute and then are praised for choosing to parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe all kids from non-wealthy, "non-white", families should be better off being adopted by rich whites who can send them to big 3 type schools. How dare poor people pro-create! Especially Native Americans. And of course dads should never have a say in having their kids given away to strangers.

If he had wanted a say, he should have been involved in the pregnancy and birth. He abandoned this child, and then changed his mind.

Birth mothers change their mind all the time...they decide they want to parent at the last minute and then are praised for choosing to parent.

He changed his mind FOUR MONTHS later - and after initially signing the documents, claiming that the stress of his coming deployment distracted him from their true meaning? Y'all are crazy.

[Anonymous]

I don't see how you can call this baby stealing. Have you actually read the story? Its one of those heart breaking stories, where any fairly intelligent person could see both sides. The adoptive family thought they had a legal adoption. They loved the child as their own. They believe they are looking out for the best interests of the child.

Then, suddenly, the father comes back into the picture claiming he didn't know about the adoption. If he was lied to, you can see why he thinks he should get the baby back. He to can claim he loves the baby. He claims it is important for the baby to be raised in their culture. He too believes he is thinking in best interest of the child.

There is no good answer. Both sides feel the baby is theirs. Can anyone here really say they wouldn't fight for their child?

To say racism is involved is kind of liking turning the story on its head. The only reason the father was able to get the baby back in the first place was a law that was put in place to protect his race, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

To say racism is involved is kind of liking turning the story on its head. The only reason the father was able to get the baby back in the first place was a law that was put in place to protect his race, right?

Well, no.

Why is there an Indian Child Welfare Act? Because of the long, horrible, and still on-going racist history of taking Indian children away from their families and tribes. See, for example, here: http://www.npr.org/2011/10/25/141662357/incentives-and-cultural-bias-fuel-foster-system

Does society assume that affluent white parents will do a better job bringing up the children of poor people than the poor people themselves? Yes. Why? Partly because of racism. See the Indian Child Welfare Act, above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't see how you can call this baby stealing. Have you actually read the story? Its one of those heart breaking stories, where any fairly intelligent person could see both sides. The adoptive family thought they had a legal adoption. They loved the child as their own. They believe they are looking out for the best interests of the child.

Then, suddenly, the father comes back into the picture claiming he didn't know about the adoption. If he was lied to, you can see why he thinks he should get the baby back. He to can claim he loves the baby. He claims it is important for the baby to be raised in their culture. He too believes he is thinking in best interest of the child.

There is no good answer. Both sides feel the baby is theirs. Can anyone here really say they wouldn't fight for their child?

To say racism is involved is kind of liking turning the story on its head. The only reason the father was able to get the baby back in the first place was a law that was put in place to protect his race, right?

Correct. He had nothing to stand on other than his heritage.