Baby stealing approved in South Carolina!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He abdicated his parental rights to make any decisions at all, whatsoever. He signed off. Deployment is irrelevant. Signing away parental rights is not conditional - he signed off totally and completely.

Well you (or a different pp) has said this before. But, it's really not. Being in the military really does change a lot of things. Being deployed really does change A LOT of things. And, if the adoption had taken place in OK, he still would have had 30 days to change his mind. That doesn't seem to fall neatly into your calculus.

I have never known anyone in the military to abdicate parental rights before deployment. In fact, you want to do the opposite, to make sure you have a plan in place, in case of worst case scenario. The excuses made for Mr. Brown are simply ridiculous. Nobody is responsible for his decisions or regret but himself. To blame anyone else is just further refusing any personal responsibility.

Question for you: Do you honestly believe that legal standing trumps morality?

No, I believe in looking at things at a case by case perspective. In this case, I believe that the right decision was made legally, and morally. If Dusten Brown actually owned up to his decisions instead of making constant excuses and deflecting his own responsibility, I might think different. But to me, that doesn't reflect well on him in the specifics of this case.

What are your thoughts on the deceptions of the birth mother and adoptive parents?

Even if he had shirked his responsibilities for 4 months, that is not a reasonable amount of time to forever condemn him.

"Deceptions?" So if the biological mother wanted to resume custody, how would you feel? She is the girls mother after all, and biology, morality, yadda yadda yadda...

As I mentioned, I hope the Capobianco family will allow Veronica and Mr. Brown to have contact and spend some time together, but it seems like he's still denying culpability in his own decisions. I don't think that speaks well of him, and believe the right decision was made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But if the father had wanted the child, why didn't he keep her at the start? He relinquished her and the baby was up for adoption. It just happened to be the Capobiancos. If I had adopted her and loved her from birth to age 2, you bet I would fight for her with my last breath.

Then you would be a selfish prick who deserves the pain that will inevitably come when this child reaches adulthood and learns that she was kept from her willing biological family.

You are not entitled to someone else's child. Damn, when did legality trump morality with some of you people?! (And even the legal issue is suspect in this case)

I wonder how some of you would feel if the biological mother suddenly wanted to take care of the little girl. Would you be as forgiving, for biology's sake?

Of course they would. Many see fathers as superfluous. It's amazing to me how some women think that being pro-woman must equal being anti-men. Sad indeed.

Considering the slandering and personal bashing of the biological mom, I highly doubt the same people would favor returning Veronica to her, if the mother changed her mind. I'm not anti men, but I don't think you can relinquish responsibility for your child, and then later decide that was a mistake, and expect to have things carry on like there's no problem. I do believe Mr. Brown loves his daughter, and that he now wants her. But you just cannot change your mind when it comes to a child. I hope the Capobiancos will include him and allow him to see and visit with Veronica, but I do believe the right decision was made. Biology doesn't make you a good or better parent - whether you're male or female, biological mother or biological father.

While biology may not make you a better parent, it is the moral thing to do. Folks are getting caught up in the legality of this issue. I do believe that parents have a right to realize they made a mistake. The infant was 4 months old when he started this battle. That is not an unreasonable amount of time to realize his error.

Why is "biology" the moral thing to do, if being a good/better parent is not dependent on it? Yes, parents make mistakes, but signing away your child is not like forgetting to make an appointment. I feel for Dusten Brown, but you can't just choose "ok, now I'm ready" when it comes to caring and being responsible for your child. You have to be fully in it from the get-go.

No, you don't. Plenty of Moms feel a disconnect with their newborns for whatever reason. That doesn't invalidate how they come to love their children and become good Moms.

There's a major difference between feeling an emotional disconnect, and legally abdicating total responsibility.

No, there isn't. But you pretend it is because it's the mother in question.

Yes, there absolutely is. I don't care who the mother is, or who the parent is. When you sign away your rights, you sign away your rights. It's not exactly complicated. It's not terminal or conditional - it's full and permanent.

Signing away rights to the other biological parent of your child (to be raised) is much different than signing them away for your child to be raised by strangers. YMMV, but I'm not surprised.

It's not really that different. Because you waive your right to make any decisions whatsoever, no matter the decision, no matter the outcome. Again, waiving parental rights isn't "conditional," and certainly not in this case. He signed away his rights, and to let the biological mom make all the decisions, including the decision to give the child up for adoption.

Actually, YES IT IS. In almost every state in the union, biological parents have a certain time frame in which they can change their mind and call off the adoption. This is true even in South Carolina- if you are a mother. However, SC affords biological fathers almost no rights whatsoever. The SC courts terminated his rights. Why do they need to terminate his rights if he "waived his parental rights"? He obtained counsel 2 days after signing those papers. You're saying that once you sign the paper, that's it, game over? When that's not the case ANYWHERE ELSE?

This is not in the least bit effed up to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He abdicated his parental rights to make any decisions at all, whatsoever. He signed off. Deployment is irrelevant. Signing away parental rights is not conditional - he signed off totally and completely.

Well you (or a different pp) has said this before. But, it's really not. Being in the military really does change a lot of things. Being deployed really does change A LOT of things. And, if the adoption had taken place in OK, he still would have had 30 days to change his mind. That doesn't seem to fall neatly into your calculus.

I have never known anyone in the military to abdicate parental rights before deployment. In fact, you want to do the opposite, to make sure you have a plan in place, in case of worst case scenario. The excuses made for Mr. Brown are simply ridiculous. Nobody is responsible for his decisions or regret but himself. To blame anyone else is just further refusing any personal responsibility.

Question for you: Do you honestly believe that legal standing trumps morality?

No, I believe in looking at things at a case by case perspective. In this case, I believe that the right decision was made legally, and morally. If Dusten Brown actually owned up to his decisions instead of making constant excuses and deflecting his own responsibility, I might think different. But to me, that doesn't reflect well on him in the specifics of this case.

Legally the right decision may have been right, but that is still up for debate.

Morally there is no doubt in my mind that the decision was wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But if the father had wanted the child, why didn't he keep her at the start? He relinquished her and the baby was up for adoption. It just happened to be the Capobiancos. If I had adopted her and loved her from birth to age 2, you bet I would fight for her with my last breath.

Then you would be a selfish prick who deserves the pain that will inevitably come when this child reaches adulthood and learns that she was kept from her willing biological family.

You are not entitled to someone else's child. Damn, when did legality trump morality with some of you people?! (And even the legal issue is suspect in this case)

I wonder how some of you would feel if the biological mother suddenly wanted to take care of the little girl. Would you be as forgiving, for biology's sake?

Of course they would. Many see fathers as superfluous. It's amazing to me how some women think that being pro-woman must equal being anti-men. Sad indeed.

Considering the slandering and personal bashing of the biological mom, I highly doubt the same people would favor returning Veronica to her, if the mother changed her mind. I'm not anti men, but I don't think you can relinquish responsibility for your child, and then later decide that was a mistake, and expect to have things carry on like there's no problem. I do believe Mr. Brown loves his daughter, and that he now wants her. But you just cannot change your mind when it comes to a child. I hope the Capobiancos will include him and allow him to see and visit with Veronica, but I do believe the right decision was made. Biology doesn't make you a good or better parent - whether you're male or female, biological mother or biological father.

While biology may not make you a better parent, it is the moral thing to do. Folks are getting caught up in the legality of this issue. I do believe that parents have a right to realize they made a mistake. The infant was 4 months old when he started this battle. That is not an unreasonable amount of time to realize his error.

Why is "biology" the moral thing to do, if being a good/better parent is not dependent on it? Yes, parents make mistakes, but signing away your child is not like forgetting to make an appointment. I feel for Dusten Brown, but you can't just choose "ok, now I'm ready" when it comes to caring and being responsible for your child. You have to be fully in it from the get-go.

No, you don't. Plenty of Moms feel a disconnect with their newborns for whatever reason. That doesn't invalidate how they come to love their children and become good Moms.

There's a major difference between feeling an emotional disconnect, and legally abdicating total responsibility.

No, there isn't. But you pretend it is because it's the mother in question.

Yes, there absolutely is. I don't care who the mother is, or who the parent is. When you sign away your rights, you sign away your rights. It's not exactly complicated. It's not terminal or conditional - it's full and permanent.

Signing away rights to the other biological parent of your child (to be raised) is much different than signing them away for your child to be raised by strangers. YMMV, but I'm not surprised.

It's not really that different. Because you waive your right to make any decisions whatsoever, no matter the decision, no matter the outcome. Again, waiving parental rights isn't "conditional," and certainly not in this case. He signed away his rights, and to let the biological mom make all the decisions, including the decision to give the child up for adoption.

Actually, YES IT IS. In almost every state in the union, biological parents have a certain time frame in which they can change their mind and call off the adoption. This is true even in South Carolina- if you are a mother. However, SC affords biological fathers almost no rights whatsoever. The SC courts terminated his rights. Why do they need to terminate his rights if he "waived his parental rights"? He obtained counsel 2 days after signing those papers. You're saying that once you sign the paper, that's it, game over? When that's not the case ANYWHERE ELSE?

This is not in the least bit effed up to you?

Do you have a citation for the "termination" allegation? It seems to contradict everything in the SCOTUS ruling. Yes, I do believe that when you sign papers, then it's pretty much game over. That's kind of the whole point of signing papers in the first place. What's effed up to me, is relinquishing your parental rights and then changing your mind. I don't doubt that Mr. Brown's remorse is very real, but he doesn't have anyone to blame but himself. The fact that he continually denies his own poor choices and blames it on "manipulation" doesn't help his cause. As far as bilogical mothers vs biological fathers - having been raised by a single father myself, I'm very sympathetic to dads. But to say that bio mothers and bio fathers deserve the same leeway is a bit asinine, given the massive, gigantic flux of hormones that surround pregnancy and childbirth. You just can't compare the vastly different positions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He abdicated his parental rights to make any decisions at all, whatsoever. He signed off. Deployment is irrelevant. Signing away parental rights is not conditional - he signed off totally and completely.

Well you (or a different pp) has said this before. But, it's really not. Being in the military really does change a lot of things. Being deployed really does change A LOT of things. And, if the adoption had taken place in OK, he still would have had 30 days to change his mind. That doesn't seem to fall neatly into your calculus.

I have never known anyone in the military to abdicate parental rights before deployment. In fact, you want to do the opposite, to make sure you have a plan in place, in case of worst case scenario. The excuses made for Mr. Brown are simply ridiculous. Nobody is responsible for his decisions or regret but himself. To blame anyone else is just further refusing any personal responsibility.

Question for you: Do you honestly believe that legal standing trumps morality?

No, I believe in looking at things at a case by case perspective. In this case, I believe that the right decision was made legally, and morally. If Dusten Brown actually owned up to his decisions instead of making constant excuses and deflecting his own responsibility, I might think different. But to me, that doesn't reflect well on him in the specifics of this case.

What are your thoughts on the deceptions of the birth mother and adoptive parents?

Even if he had shirked his responsibilities for 4 months, that is not a reasonable amount of time to forever condemn him.

"Deceptions?" So if the biological mother wanted to resume custody, how would you feel? She is the girls mother after all, and biology, morality, yadda yadda yadda...

As I mentioned, I hope the Capobianco family will allow Veronica and Mr. Brown to have contact and spend some time together, but it seems like he's still denying culpability in his own decisions. I don't think that speaks well of him, and believe the right decision was made.

You have failed to address any of the deceptions (which are pretty well known to this case and easily searchable). That tells me you're pretty biased.

I'd wager that MOST adopted children are curious about the biological parents and often have questions about why they were given up. I can't imagine how this child will feel to know that this happened and that her opportunity to be raised by her biological father was essentially stolen from her.

The pain of that separation (and her possible hatred) will likely hurt FAR more than if the adopted family had let this go now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He abdicated his parental rights to make any decisions at all, whatsoever. He signed off. Deployment is irrelevant. Signing away parental rights is not conditional - he signed off totally and completely.

Well you (or a different pp) has said this before. But, it's really not. Being in the military really does change a lot of things. Being deployed really does change A LOT of things. And, if the adoption had taken place in OK, he still would have had 30 days to change his mind. That doesn't seem to fall neatly into your calculus.

I have never known anyone in the military to abdicate parental rights before deployment. In fact, you want to do the opposite, to make sure you have a plan in place, in case of worst case scenario. The excuses made for Mr. Brown are simply ridiculous. Nobody is responsible for his decisions or regret but himself. To blame anyone else is just further refusing any personal responsibility.

Question for you: Do you honestly believe that legal standing trumps morality?

No, I believe in looking at things at a case by case perspective. In this case, I believe that the right decision was made legally, and morally. If Dusten Brown actually owned up to his decisions instead of making constant excuses and deflecting his own responsibility, I might think different. But to me, that doesn't reflect well on him in the specifics of this case.

What are your thoughts on the deceptions of the birth mother and adoptive parents?

Even if he had shirked his responsibilities for 4 months, that is not a reasonable amount of time to forever condemn him.

"Deceptions?" So if the biological mother wanted to resume custody, how would you feel? She is the girls mother after all, and biology, morality, yadda yadda yadda...

As I mentioned, I hope the Capobianco family will allow Veronica and Mr. Brown to have contact and spend some time together, but it seems like he's still denying culpability in his own decisions. I don't think that speaks well of him, and believe the right decision was made.

You have failed to address any of the deceptions (which are pretty well known to this case and easily searchable). That tells me you're pretty biased.

I'd wager that MOST adopted children are curious about the biological parents and often have questions about why they were given up. I can't imagine how this child will feel to know that this happened and that her opportunity to be raised by her biological father was essentially stolen from her.

The pain of that separation (and her possible hatred) will likely hurt FAR more than if the adopted family had let this go now.

Are you going to continue evading the question about if you'd support the mother, if she wanted custody today? Your refusal to repeatedly, honestly answer this question is evidence that you are thinking with your bias, and not with consistency.

The real unfortunate thing about you, is that you appear to be rooting for Veronica to hate her parents and get hurt by her parents. You seem to be hoping that's the case, instead of really hoping for the best for her, regardless of who has custody. That's really shameful and telling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He abdicated his parental rights to make any decisions at all, whatsoever. He signed off. Deployment is irrelevant. Signing away parental rights is not conditional - he signed off totally and completely.

Well you (or a different pp) has said this before. But, it's really not. Being in the military really does change a lot of things. Being deployed really does change A LOT of things. And, if the adoption had taken place in OK, he still would have had 30 days to change his mind. That doesn't seem to fall neatly into your calculus.

I have never known anyone in the military to abdicate parental rights before deployment. In fact, you want to do the opposite, to make sure you have a plan in place, in case of worst case scenario. The excuses made for Mr. Brown are simply ridiculous. Nobody is responsible for his decisions or regret but himself. To blame anyone else is just further refusing any personal responsibility.

Question for you: Do you honestly believe that legal standing trumps morality?

No, I believe in looking at things at a case by case perspective. In this case, I believe that the right decision was made legally, and morally. If Dusten Brown actually owned up to his decisions instead of making constant excuses and deflecting his own responsibility, I might think different. But to me, that doesn't reflect well on him in the specifics of this case.

What are your thoughts on the deceptions of the birth mother and adoptive parents?

Even if he had shirked his responsibilities for 4 months, that is not a reasonable amount of time to forever condemn him.

"Deceptions?" So if the biological mother wanted to resume custody, how would you feel? She is the girls mother after all, and biology, morality, yadda yadda yadda...

As I mentioned, I hope the Capobianco family will allow Veronica and Mr. Brown to have contact and spend some time together, but it seems like he's still denying culpability in his own decisions. I don't think that speaks well of him, and believe the right decision was made.

You have failed to address any of the deceptions (which are pretty well known to this case and easily searchable). That tells me you're pretty biased.

I'd wager that MOST adopted children are curious about the biological parents and often have questions about why they were given up. I can't imagine how this child will feel to know that this happened and that her opportunity to be raised by her biological father was essentially stolen from her.

The pain of that separation (and her possible hatred) will likely hurt FAR more than if the adopted family had let this go now.

Are you going to continue evading the question about if you'd support the mother, if she wanted custody today? Your refusal to repeatedly, honestly answer this question is evidence that you are thinking with your bias, and not with consistency.

The real unfortunate thing about you, is that you appear to be rooting for Veronica to hate her parents and get hurt by her parents. You seem to be hoping that's the case, instead of really hoping for the best for her, regardless of who has custody. That's really shameful and telling.

I must have missed where you asked me this question. Yes, I'd support the mother (if the same set of circumstances applied).

And yes, I do hope that Veronica ends up shunning her adoptive parents for the heartless, entitled pricks that they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He abdicated his parental rights to make any decisions at all, whatsoever. He signed off. Deployment is irrelevant. Signing away parental rights is not conditional - he signed off totally and completely.

Well you (or a different pp) has said this before. But, it's really not. Being in the military really does change a lot of things. Being deployed really does change A LOT of things. And, if the adoption had taken place in OK, he still would have had 30 days to change his mind. That doesn't seem to fall neatly into your calculus.

I have never known anyone in the military to abdicate parental rights before deployment. In fact, you want to do the opposite, to make sure you have a plan in place, in case of worst case scenario. The excuses made for Mr. Brown are simply ridiculous. Nobody is responsible for his decisions or regret but himself. To blame anyone else is just further refusing any personal responsibility.

Question for you: Do you honestly believe that legal standing trumps morality?

No, I believe in looking at things at a case by case perspective. In this case, I believe that the right decision was made legally, and morally. If Dusten Brown actually owned up to his decisions instead of making constant excuses and deflecting his own responsibility, I might think different. But to me, that doesn't reflect well on him in the specifics of this case.

What are your thoughts on the deceptions of the birth mother and adoptive parents?

Even if he had shirked his responsibilities for 4 months, that is not a reasonable amount of time to forever condemn him.

"Deceptions?" So if the biological mother wanted to resume custody, how would you feel? She is the girls mother after all, and biology, morality, yadda yadda yadda...

As I mentioned, I hope the Capobianco family will allow Veronica and Mr. Brown to have contact and spend some time together, but it seems like he's still denying culpability in his own decisions. I don't think that speaks well of him, and believe the right decision was made.

You have failed to address any of the deceptions (which are pretty well known to this case and easily searchable). That tells me you're pretty biased.

I'd wager that MOST adopted children are curious about the biological parents and often have questions about why they were given up. I can't imagine how this child will feel to know that this happened and that her opportunity to be raised by her biological father was essentially stolen from her.

The pain of that separation (and her possible hatred) will likely hurt FAR more than if the adopted family had let this go now.

Are you going to continue evading the question about if you'd support the mother, if she wanted custody today? Your refusal to repeatedly, honestly answer this question is evidence that you are thinking with your bias, and not with consistency.

The real unfortunate thing about you, is that you appear to be rooting for Veronica to hate her parents and get hurt by her parents. You seem to be hoping that's the case, instead of really hoping for the best for her, regardless of who has custody. That's really shameful and telling.

I must have missed where you asked me this question. Yes, I'd support the mother (if the same set of circumstances applied).

And yes, I do hope that Veronica ends up shunning her adoptive parents for the heartless, entitled pricks that they are.

I believe that, unfortunately, if the same circumstances applied and it was the mother, rather than the father, this would have never gone to court. And even if it did, I believe the courts would have ruled differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He abdicated his parental rights to make any decisions at all, whatsoever. He signed off. Deployment is irrelevant. Signing away parental rights is not conditional - he signed off totally and completely.

Well you (or a different pp) has said this before. But, it's really not. Being in the military really does change a lot of things. Being deployed really does change A LOT of things. And, if the adoption had taken place in OK, he still would have had 30 days to change his mind. That doesn't seem to fall neatly into your calculus.

I have never known anyone in the military to abdicate parental rights before deployment. In fact, you want to do the opposite, to make sure you have a plan in place, in case of worst case scenario. The excuses made for Mr. Brown are simply ridiculous. Nobody is responsible for his decisions or regret but himself. To blame anyone else is just further refusing any personal responsibility.

Question for you: Do you honestly believe that legal standing trumps morality?

No, I believe in looking at things at a case by case perspective. In this case, I believe that the right decision was made legally, and morally. If Dusten Brown actually owned up to his decisions instead of making constant excuses and deflecting his own responsibility, I might think different. But to me, that doesn't reflect well on him in the specifics of this case.

What are your thoughts on the deceptions of the birth mother and adoptive parents?

Even if he had shirked his responsibilities for 4 months, that is not a reasonable amount of time to forever condemn him.

"Deceptions?" So if the biological mother wanted to resume custody, how would you feel? She is the girls mother after all, and biology, morality, yadda yadda yadda...

As I mentioned, I hope the Capobianco family will allow Veronica and Mr. Brown to have contact and spend some time together, but it seems like he's still denying culpability in his own decisions. I don't think that speaks well of him, and believe the right decision was made.

You have failed to address any of the deceptions (which are pretty well known to this case and easily searchable). That tells me you're pretty biased.

I'd wager that MOST adopted children are curious about the biological parents and often have questions about why they were given up. I can't imagine how this child will feel to know that this happened and that her opportunity to be raised by her biological father was essentially stolen from her.

The pain of that separation (and her possible hatred) will likely hurt FAR more than if the adopted family had let this go now.

Are you going to continue evading the question about if you'd support the mother, if she wanted custody today? Your refusal to repeatedly, honestly answer this question is evidence that you are thinking with your bias, and not with consistency.

The real unfortunate thing about you, is that you appear to be rooting for Veronica to hate her parents and get hurt by her parents. You seem to be hoping that's the case, instead of really hoping for the best for her, regardless of who has custody. That's really shameful and telling.

I must have missed where you asked me this question. Yes, I'd support the mother (if the same set of circumstances applied).

And yes, I do hope that Veronica ends up shunning her adoptive parents for the heartless, entitled pricks that they are.

That's really sickening. It tells me everything that I need to know about how people like you don't give a shit about Veronica's best interests. Their vested interest is simply to hate. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He abdicated his parental rights to make any decisions at all, whatsoever. He signed off. Deployment is irrelevant. Signing away parental rights is not conditional - he signed off totally and completely.

Well you (or a different pp) has said this before. But, it's really not. Being in the military really does change a lot of things. Being deployed really does change A LOT of things. And, if the adoption had taken place in OK, he still would have had 30 days to change his mind. That doesn't seem to fall neatly into your calculus.

I have never known anyone in the military to abdicate parental rights before deployment. In fact, you want to do the opposite, to make sure you have a plan in place, in case of worst case scenario. The excuses made for Mr. Brown are simply ridiculous. Nobody is responsible for his decisions or regret but himself. To blame anyone else is just further refusing any personal responsibility.

Question for you: Do you honestly believe that legal standing trumps morality?

No, I believe in looking at things at a case by case perspective. In this case, I believe that the right decision was made legally, and morally. If Dusten Brown actually owned up to his decisions instead of making constant excuses and deflecting his own responsibility, I might think different. But to me, that doesn't reflect well on him in the specifics of this case.

What are your thoughts on the deceptions of the birth mother and adoptive parents?

Even if he had shirked his responsibilities for 4 months, that is not a reasonable amount of time to forever condemn him.

"Deceptions?" So if the biological mother wanted to resume custody, how would you feel? She is the girls mother after all, and biology, morality, yadda yadda yadda...

As I mentioned, I hope the Capobianco family will allow Veronica and Mr. Brown to have contact and spend some time together, but it seems like he's still denying culpability in his own decisions. I don't think that speaks well of him, and believe the right decision was made.

You have failed to address any of the deceptions (which are pretty well known to this case and easily searchable). That tells me you're pretty biased.

I'd wager that MOST adopted children are curious about the biological parents and often have questions about why they were given up. I can't imagine how this child will feel to know that this happened and that her opportunity to be raised by her biological father was essentially stolen from her.

The pain of that separation (and her possible hatred) will likely hurt FAR more than if the adopted family had let this go now.

Are you going to continue evading the question about if you'd support the mother, if she wanted custody today? Your refusal to repeatedly, honestly answer this question is evidence that you are thinking with your bias, and not with consistency.

The real unfortunate thing about you, is that you appear to be rooting for Veronica to hate her parents and get hurt by her parents. You seem to be hoping that's the case, instead of really hoping for the best for her, regardless of who has custody. That's really shameful and telling.

I must have missed where you asked me this question. Yes, I'd support the mother (if the same set of circumstances applied).

And yes, I do hope that Veronica ends up shunning her adoptive parents for the heartless, entitled pricks that they are.

That's really sickening. It tells me everything that I need to know about how people like you don't give a shit about Veronica's best interests. Their vested interest is simply to hate. Nothing more, nothing less.

Not the PP you are quoting, but how is being raised by an adoptive family in "Veronica's best interests"? Because they are white and wealthy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He abdicated his parental rights to make any decisions at all, whatsoever. He signed off. Deployment is irrelevant. Signing away parental rights is not conditional - he signed off totally and completely.

Well you (or a different pp) has said this before. But, it's really not. Being in the military really does change a lot of things. Being deployed really does change A LOT of things. And, if the adoption had taken place in OK, he still would have had 30 days to change his mind. That doesn't seem to fall neatly into your calculus.

I have never known anyone in the military to abdicate parental rights before deployment. In fact, you want to do the opposite, to make sure you have a plan in place, in case of worst case scenario. The excuses made for Mr. Brown are simply ridiculous. Nobody is responsible for his decisions or regret but himself. To blame anyone else is just further refusing any personal responsibility.

Question for you: Do you honestly believe that legal standing trumps morality?

No, I believe in looking at things at a case by case perspective. In this case, I believe that the right decision was made legally, and morally. If Dusten Brown actually owned up to his decisions instead of making constant excuses and deflecting his own responsibility, I might think different. But to me, that doesn't reflect well on him in the specifics of this case.

What are your thoughts on the deceptions of the birth mother and adoptive parents?

Even if he had shirked his responsibilities for 4 months, that is not a reasonable amount of time to forever condemn him.

"Deceptions?" So if the biological mother wanted to resume custody, how would you feel? She is the girls mother after all, and biology, morality, yadda yadda yadda...

As I mentioned, I hope the Capobianco family will allow Veronica and Mr. Brown to have contact and spend some time together, but it seems like he's still denying culpability in his own decisions. I don't think that speaks well of him, and believe the right decision was made.

You have failed to address any of the deceptions (which are pretty well known to this case and easily searchable). That tells me you're pretty biased.

I'd wager that MOST adopted children are curious about the biological parents and often have questions about why they were given up. I can't imagine how this child will feel to know that this happened and that her opportunity to be raised by her biological father was essentially stolen from her.

The pain of that separation (and her possible hatred) will likely hurt FAR more than if the adopted family had let this go now.

Are you going to continue evading the question about if you'd support the mother, if she wanted custody today? Your refusal to repeatedly, honestly answer this question is evidence that you are thinking with your bias, and not with consistency.

The real unfortunate thing about you, is that you appear to be rooting for Veronica to hate her parents and get hurt by her parents. You seem to be hoping that's the case, instead of really hoping for the best for her, regardless of who has custody. That's really shameful and telling.

I must have missed where you asked me this question. Yes, I'd support the mother (if the same set of circumstances applied).

And yes, I do hope that Veronica ends up shunning her adoptive parents for the heartless, entitled pricks that they are.

That's really sickening. It tells me everything that I need to know about how people like you don't give a shit about Veronica's best interests. Their vested interest is simply to hate. Nothing more, nothing less.

Actually, it's a result of my care for Veronica's best interests that I believe she should shun her adoptive parents. Adoption was NOT meant to be used in this way and this travesty of a case does a disservice to the honest people out there looking to adopt. Adoption was never about taking children away from their willing and financially capable biological parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He abdicated his parental rights to make any decisions at all, whatsoever. He signed off. Deployment is irrelevant. Signing away parental rights is not conditional - he signed off totally and completely.

Well you (or a different pp) has said this before. But, it's really not. Being in the military really does change a lot of things. Being deployed really does change A LOT of things. And, if the adoption had taken place in OK, he still would have had 30 days to change his mind. That doesn't seem to fall neatly into your calculus.

I have never known anyone in the military to abdicate parental rights before deployment. In fact, you want to do the opposite, to make sure you have a plan in place, in case of worst case scenario. The excuses made for Mr. Brown are simply ridiculous. Nobody is responsible for his decisions or regret but himself. To blame anyone else is just further refusing any personal responsibility.

Question for you: Do you honestly believe that legal standing trumps morality?

No, I believe in looking at things at a case by case perspective. In this case, I believe that the right decision was made legally, and morally. If Dusten Brown actually owned up to his decisions instead of making constant excuses and deflecting his own responsibility, I might think different. But to me, that doesn't reflect well on him in the specifics of this case.

What are your thoughts on the deceptions of the birth mother and adoptive parents?

Even if he had shirked his responsibilities for 4 months, that is not a reasonable amount of time to forever condemn him.

"Deceptions?" So if the biological mother wanted to resume custody, how would you feel? She is the girls mother after all, and biology, morality, yadda yadda yadda...

As I mentioned, I hope the Capobianco family will allow Veronica and Mr. Brown to have contact and spend some time together, but it seems like he's still denying culpability in his own decisions. I don't think that speaks well of him, and believe the right decision was made.

You have failed to address any of the deceptions (which are pretty well known to this case and easily searchable). That tells me you're pretty biased.

I'd wager that MOST adopted children are curious about the biological parents and often have questions about why they were given up. I can't imagine how this child will feel to know that this happened and that her opportunity to be raised by her biological father was essentially stolen from her.

The pain of that separation (and her possible hatred) will likely hurt FAR more than if the adopted family had let this go now.

Are you going to continue evading the question about if you'd support the mother, if she wanted custody today? Your refusal to repeatedly, honestly answer this question is evidence that you are thinking with your bias, and not with consistency.

The real unfortunate thing about you, is that you appear to be rooting for Veronica to hate her parents and get hurt by her parents. You seem to be hoping that's the case, instead of really hoping for the best for her, regardless of who has custody. That's really shameful and telling.

I must have missed where you asked me this question. Yes, I'd support the mother (if the same set of circumstances applied).

And yes, I do hope that Veronica ends up shunning her adoptive parents for the heartless, entitled pricks that they are.

That's really sickening. It tells me everything that I need to know about how people like you don't give a shit about Veronica's best interests. Their vested interest is simply to hate. Nothing more, nothing less.

Not the PP you are quoting, but how is being raised by an adoptive family in "Veronica's best interests"? Because they are white and wealthy?

No, but hoping she doesn't grow up hating, shunning her parents is in Veronica's best interest. Hoping that Veronica grows up happy and with love is in her best interest. PP admitted that they'd rather see Veronica grow up with hate than happiness. That's royally fucked up. That's royally not hoping for Veronica to grow up having her best interests at heart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He abdicated his parental rights to make any decisions at all, whatsoever. He signed off. Deployment is irrelevant. Signing away parental rights is not conditional - he signed off totally and completely.

Well you (or a different pp) has said this before. But, it's really not. Being in the military really does change a lot of things. Being deployed really does change A LOT of things. And, if the adoption had taken place in OK, he still would have had 30 days to change his mind. That doesn't seem to fall neatly into your calculus.

I have never known anyone in the military to abdicate parental rights before deployment. In fact, you want to do the opposite, to make sure you have a plan in place, in case of worst case scenario. The excuses made for Mr. Brown are simply ridiculous. Nobody is responsible for his decisions or regret but himself. To blame anyone else is just further refusing any personal responsibility.

Question for you: Do you honestly believe that legal standing trumps morality?

No, I believe in looking at things at a case by case perspective. In this case, I believe that the right decision was made legally, and morally. If Dusten Brown actually owned up to his decisions instead of making constant excuses and deflecting his own responsibility, I might think different. But to me, that doesn't reflect well on him in the specifics of this case.

What are your thoughts on the deceptions of the birth mother and adoptive parents?

Even if he had shirked his responsibilities for 4 months, that is not a reasonable amount of time to forever condemn him.

"Deceptions?" So if the biological mother wanted to resume custody, how would you feel? She is the girls mother after all, and biology, morality, yadda yadda yadda...

As I mentioned, I hope the Capobianco family will allow Veronica and Mr. Brown to have contact and spend some time together, but it seems like he's still denying culpability in his own decisions. I don't think that speaks well of him, and believe the right decision was made.

You have failed to address any of the deceptions (which are pretty well known to this case and easily searchable). That tells me you're pretty biased.

I'd wager that MOST adopted children are curious about the biological parents and often have questions about why they were given up. I can't imagine how this child will feel to know that this happened and that her opportunity to be raised by her biological father was essentially stolen from her.

The pain of that separation (and her possible hatred) will likely hurt FAR more than if the adopted family had let this go now.

Are you going to continue evading the question about if you'd support the mother, if she wanted custody today? Your refusal to repeatedly, honestly answer this question is evidence that you are thinking with your bias, and not with consistency.

The real unfortunate thing about you, is that you appear to be rooting for Veronica to hate her parents and get hurt by her parents. You seem to be hoping that's the case, instead of really hoping for the best for her, regardless of who has custody. That's really shameful and telling.

I must have missed where you asked me this question. Yes, I'd support the mother (if the same set of circumstances applied).

And yes, I do hope that Veronica ends up shunning her adoptive parents for the heartless, entitled pricks that they are.

That's really sickening. It tells me everything that I need to know about how people like you don't give a shit about Veronica's best interests. Their vested interest is simply to hate. Nothing more, nothing less.

Actually, it's a result of my care for Veronica's best interests that I believe she should shun her adoptive parents. Adoption was NOT meant to be used in this way and this travesty of a case does a disservice to the honest people out there looking to adopt. Adoption was never about taking children away from their willing and financially capable biological parents.

Sorry, you can try and play your mental gymnastics, but if you really hoped for Veronica's interest, you'd hope she grows up with love and happiness for her family. You have some serious resentment going on, and I think it's getting in the way of you being objective about what's most important. Maybe you don't agree with the outcome, but admitting that you hope a child grows up shunning her parents is fucked up. Simply fucked up.

[Anonymous]

Purchasing a trafficked child doesn't make you a parent, adoptive or otherwise. However, I can understand why they continued fighting to keep her, considering how much money they invested in purchasing her.

I think it really highlights the need for adoption reform. When children are worth tens of thousands of dollars, trafficking and corruption is going to become a problem. Children's best interests are going to take a back seat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Purchasing a trafficked child doesn't make you a parent, adoptive or otherwise. However, I can understand why they continued fighting to keep her, considering how much money they invested in purchasing her.

I think it really highlights the need for adoption reform. When children are worth tens of thousands of dollars, trafficking and corruption is going to become a problem. Children's best interests are going to take a back seat.

Your cynicism is really sad. I have no doubt that child trafficking is a real issue, but not in this case. Just because someone has financial resources, it doesn't negate the sincerity of their love and care. I feed bad for you. It must be terribly dark to go through life with such hate and vitriol.