Baby stealing approved in South Carolina!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This.

From his actions and statements, it's clear the bio father has been more interested in selfish pride and control, than selfless interest of the girl. It might be difficult for the girl to transition back to the Capobianco's (or it may not be difficult at all), but she should have never been given to her deadbeat biological father in the first place after he basically abdicated the girl.

I think you mean abduct.

And usually decisions like these are supposed to be made based on what's in the best interest of the child, not on which parents you like better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This.

From his actions and statements, it's clear the bio father has been more interested in selfish pride and control, than selfless interest of the girl. It might be difficult for the girl to transition back to the Capobianco's (or it may not be difficult at all), but she should have never been given to her deadbeat biological father in the first place after he basically abdicated the girl.

I think you mean abduct.

And usually decisions like these are supposed to be made based on what's in the best interest of the child, not on which parents you like better.

No, abdicated - he signed away his rights, made statements that he didn't want to be involved, and gave up his daughter.

[Anonymous]

I don't think you can abdicate a person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think you can abdicate a person.

You most certainly can. Though it requires some effort (like signing away your responsibility, as the deadbeat dad did in this case)

[Anonymous]

Yes this is about fathers rights. In Oklahoma a child cannot be placed for adoption without fathers permission, in South Carolina it is very difficult for a father to contest adoption. The adoption lawer knew this and knew of the fathers heritage. So he misspelt her name and said baby is hispanic. Once you are in South Carolina it is another matter.
I wonder if Oklahoma will recognize the adoption, after all, this arrangement is not legal in Oklahoma.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


So, do you think that Native Americans rapists should have rights to their offspring? Cause you seem to think that the 1/256 percentage of Cherokee blood this guy had trumps the fact that he gave up his rights to the child. Can Indian tribes always petition to control those adoptions?

Dusten Brown abused the system because he changed his mind.

membership to the Cherokee nation does not depend on how pure blooded you are. It about the Dawron rolls.
They are independent and have rights
Dusten has not raped anyone.
The girl and her lawer knew he did not agree to it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


So, do you think that Native Americans rapists should have rights to their offspring? Cause you seem to think that the 1/256 percentage of Cherokee blood this guy had trumps the fact that he gave up his rights to the child. Can Indian tribes always petition to control those adoptions?


The girl and her lawer knew he did not agree to it

Again, you are rewriting history as born out in the public record. Stop doing that. Adding your emotional interpretation to actual facts just muddies the waters and makes you much less credible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


So, do you think that Native Americans rapists should have rights to their offspring? Cause you seem to think that the 1/256 percentage of Cherokee blood this guy had trumps the fact that he gave up his rights to the child. Can Indian tribes always petition to control those adoptions?

Dusten Brown abused the system because he changed his mind.

membership to the Cherokee nation does not depend on how pure blooded you are. It about the Dawron rolls.
They are independent and have rights
Dusten has not raped anyone.
The girl and her lawer knew he did not agree to it

Membership does not, but this kind of adoption is hardly what the ICWA was designed to prevent. But what is the logical conclusion? Sure, Dusten didn't rape the mom, but I never said he did. But by your reasoning, it seems that you think any member of the Cherokee nation who rapes and impregnates a woman has rights to that child? Because that is what you say when you say that the ICWA trumps every other law.

[Anonymous]

If the father asked the mother to marry him, it does not seem like his initial intentions were to abandon either her or the child. She refused, and their relationship deteriorated thereafter. Mom secretly made an adoption plan and kept dad out of the loop. She and the adoptive parties, lawyers, etc...ignored the law by providing false info on the dad, in order to abduct the kid out of the state to a state where they knew he would have less standing.

Seems like the mom and dad were at odds, and things were said in anger via text, about support and rights...mysteriously moms phone dissapeared and dads text was allegedly taken out of context.

I think if he had known of moms intentions to adopt baby out, he would have stepped up to the plate sooner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the father asked the mother to marry him, it does not seem like his initial intentions were to abandon either her or the child. She refused, and their relationship deteriorated thereafter. Mom secretly made an adoption plan and kept dad out of the loop. She and the adoptive parties, lawyers, etc...ignored the law by providing false info on the dad, in order to abduct the kid out of the state to a state where they knew he would have less standing.

Seems like the mom and dad were at odds, and things were said in anger via text, about support and rights...mysteriously moms phone dissapeared and dads text was allegedly taken out of context.

I think if he had known of moms intentions to adopt baby out, he would have stepped up to the plate sooner.

I'm sorry, but the whole "asked the mom to marry him" thing sounds incredibly manipulative, and like he was really disinterested in his child. Maybe to you it makes the bio dad look "good" but to me it makes him look so, so, so much worse. Sleazy. Manipulative. Controlling.

The bio mom's plan is irrelevant - the dad signed over all decision making to her. He made that choice himself. He unconditionally chose to decide "you make all the decisions. I'm out."

As for the phone disappearing - that has zero relevance. Cell phone companies can easily get text records, context be damned.

[Anonymous]

The only solution is to ban out of state adoptions to South Carolina. It just creates a legal black market for babies. Either a father has rights or not, and a state is sovereign in making its own adoption laws.
I will be very surprised if the kid actually ends up in South Carolina

[Anonymous]

If the bio parents were residents of Ok, and the baby was born in OK, the adoption should have been filed in OK. But the adoptive parents, bio mom and lawyer knew OK would not allow it if dad contested and/or as a Native American he or his relatives wanted to make a claim for custody of the child. That is why they gave wrong info on the dad. He could not be found as a tribal member that way. Mom was also on a no report list when she gave birth, making her basically anonymous at the hospital. Interestingly, she did this with her other 2 children as well in order to exclede their fathers, though she is raising those kids. As far as support, once the kid was born, the father would have had to pay being a member of the military. The father gave custody to the mother (or thought he was), he still would have had to pay child support as a non-custodial parent. He never agreed to terminate his rights.

[Anonymous]

Adoption laws should be Federal laws that are uniform across the board, and respect the rights equally of both birth mothers and fathers. Nothing should be allowed to be signed until after a child is born, and adoptions should not be finalized without both parent's consent. There should be little to no money exchanged. Indigent birth moms can easily get on WIC and medicaid that would cover their expenses. There should be regulated attorneys fees, with a capped limit on how much they can make to facilllitate/complete an adoption. What goes on now is human trafficking. Kids should also be kept with bio family members where at all possible, even if they are less affluent or educated. Intensive pre-birth counseling should be mandated to ensure the bio parents know what they are getting into and adoptive couples should know that any adoption can disrupt until such adoption is finalized. Thsi would avoid much heartache for all parties involved and protect children from being sold, stolen, and marketed for people who want a child.

[Anonymous]

Dusten Brown abused the system because he changed his mind.

membership to the Cherokee nation does not depend on how pure blooded you are. It about the Dawron rolls.
They are independent and have rights
Dusten has not raped anyone.
The girl and her lawer knew he did not agree to it

Is it the Cherokee who booted out black members of the tribe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Dusten Brown abused the system because he changed his mind.

membership to the Cherokee nation does not depend on how pure blooded you are. It about the Dawron rolls.
They are independent and have rights
Dusten has not raped anyone.
The girl and her lawer knew he did not agree to it

Is it the Cherokee who booted out black members of the tribe?

Yes it is. So what? That is not relevant to either tribal sovereignty or the Indian Child Welfare Act.