Baby stealing approved in South Carolina!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the adoption were ethical from the get go, informed consent of BOTH parents, then I would have sided with these adoptive parents. They deliberately kept the father in the dark about the adoption plans.

Do people not understand what relinquishing custody means? It doesn't mean "I forfeit my rights, but you also forfeit your rights to make further decisions and must do all the raising." It means you sign your right to make any decisions at all. You are no longer a decision-making party. I understand maybe Mr. Brown wishes he were notified about the adoption plans, but he willingly signed away his right to have any input. He made that choice. It's not about male/female, father/mother, but about just having basic common sense.

he never signed his rights away they were TERMINATED in July of THIS year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the adoption were ethical from the get go, informed consent of BOTH parents, then I would have sided with these adoptive parents. They deliberately kept the father in the dark about the adoption plans.

Do people not understand what relinquishing custody means? It doesn't mean "I forfeit my rights, but you also forfeit your rights to make further decisions and must do all the raising." It means you sign your right to make any decisions at all. You are no longer a decision-making party. I understand maybe Mr. Brown wishes he were notified about the adoption plans, but he willingly signed away his right to have any input. He made that choice. It's not about male/female, father/mother, but about just having basic common sense.

he never signed his rights away they were TERMINATED in July of THIS year.

Weren't they "terminated" after the temporary reinstatement? Are you saying the entire premise for the SCOTUS case was wrong, because Mr. Brown was Veronica's legal father all along?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Your condescending tone does not help your case, just FYI.

Adoption is for children whose family is unable or unwilling to raise them. Neither applies in this case. It really doesn't matter how "sincere" a potential adoptive couple is.

I think the term "trafficking" is pretty apt here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the adoption were ethical from the get go, informed consent of BOTH parents, then I would have sided with these adoptive parents. They deliberately kept the father in the dark about the adoption plans.

Do people not understand what relinquishing custody means? It doesn't mean "I forfeit my rights, but you also forfeit your rights to make further decisions and must do all the raising." It means you sign your right to make any decisions at all. You are no longer a decision-making party. I understand maybe Mr. Brown wishes he were notified about the adoption plans, but he willingly signed away his right to have any input. He made that choice. It's not about male/female, father/mother, but about just having basic common sense.

he never signed his rights away they were TERMINATED in July of THIS year.

Weren't they "terminated" after the temporary reinstatement? Are you saying the entire premise for the SCOTUS case was wrong, because Mr. Brown was Veronica's legal father all along?

I think you are misunderstanding the SCOTUS decision. They were not ruling on whether Brown was her "legal father" or not. They were ruling on whether the ICWA applied in this case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Your condescending tone does not help your case, just FYI.

Adoption is for children whose family is unable or unwilling to raise them. Neither applies in this case. It really doesn't matter how "sincere" a potential adoptive couple is.

I think the term "trafficking" is pretty apt here.

You really need to take a breather and reflect why you hold such deep-rooted vitriol. I'm not trying to be condescending. I agree with others and think you have something else going on. I'm sorry for what you've been through, but you need to separate your experiences, with the specifics of this case. I sincerely wish you peace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the adoption were ethical from the get go, informed consent of BOTH parents, then I would have sided with these adoptive parents. They deliberately kept the father in the dark about the adoption plans.

Do people not understand what relinquishing custody means? It doesn't mean "I forfeit my rights, but you also forfeit your rights to make further decisions and must do all the raising." It means you sign your right to make any decisions at all. You are no longer a decision-making party. I understand maybe Mr. Brown wishes he were notified about the adoption plans, but he willingly signed away his right to have any input. He made that choice. It's not about male/female, father/mother, but about just having basic common sense.

he never signed his rights away they were TERMINATED in July of THIS year.

Weren't they "terminated" after the temporary reinstatement? Are you saying the entire premise for the SCOTUS case was wrong, because Mr. Brown was Veronica's legal father all along?

I think you are misunderstanding the SCOTUS decision. They were not ruling on whether Brown was her "legal father" or not. They were ruling on whether the ICWA applied in this case.

Yes, and it was ruled that ICWA did not apply because Mr. Brown terminated his parental rights. The ruling was entirely dependent on his waiver.

[Anonymous]

Weren't they "terminated" after the temporary reinstatement? Are you saying the entire premise for the SCOTUS case was wrong, because Mr. Brown was Veronica's legal father all along?


I dont think so I think he was granted custody but until his rights were terminated in July he always had them.


My understanding of SCOTUS (again I could be wrong) Is they ruled it could not apply because he never had custody of the child nor did he live with the mother during her pregnancy.

physical custody and legal rights of a child are two differnt things.

[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:

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.

WRONG. I said that when she comes of age and realizes what her adoptive parents did, I hope she shuns her. That has little to do with how she will feel about them growing up. Stop being so dramatic.

[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:

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.

Again, I'm NOT talking about how she is raised during her childhood. I'm talking about once she becomes an adult and realizes the immoral lengths her adoptive parents went through to keep her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Your condescending tone does not help your case, just FYI.

Adoption is for children whose family is unable or unwilling to raise them. Neither applies in this case. It really doesn't matter how "sincere" a potential adoptive couple is.

I think the term "trafficking" is pretty apt here.

You really need to take a breather and reflect why you hold such deep-rooted vitriol. I'm not trying to be condescending. I agree with others and think you have something else going on. I'm sorry for what you've been through, but you need to separate your experiences, with the specifics of this case. I sincerely wish you peace.

OK, I think you don't realize that you are talking to several different people here. I don't have "something else going on" (again- :roll and I haven't "been through" anything adoption related. Just a typical person (who was raised in my bio family, not that it matters) with some critical thinking skills who is disgusted by this case. But, if you have to think you are right because everyone who disagrees with you has some kind of mental problem..... um, okay?

[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:

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.

WRONG. I said that when she comes of age and realizes what her adoptive parents did, I hope she shuns her. That has little to do with how she will feel about them growing up. Stop being so dramatic.

Please go re-read your own words. That is not what you said previously.

But to address your wavering comment, hoping for the best interest of anyone, of any human being, doesn't go out the window on your 18th birthday. Hoping and wishing for any person to shun anyone, is pretty damn demented.

[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:

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.

WRONG. I said that when she comes of age and realizes what her adoptive parents did, I hope she shuns her. That has little to do with how she will feel about them growing up. Stop being so dramatic.

Please go re-read your own words. That is not what you said previously.

But to address your wavering comment, hoping for the best interest of anyone, of any human being, doesn't go out the window on your 18th birthday. Hoping and wishing for any person to shun anyone, is pretty damn demented.

My words are bolded in this very sub-thread:

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

Key words: ends up.

Your need to be right has blinded you to reality a bit. And if you don't think Veronica will end up blaming her adoptive parents for this travesty, you're sadly mistaken. The only way around this is to let him be an active participant in her life, but based on the lawsuits pending, I doubt they have enough integrity to do that much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Your condescending tone does not help your case, just FYI.

Adoption is for children whose family is unable or unwilling to raise them. Neither applies in this case. It really doesn't matter how "sincere" a potential adoptive couple is.

I think the term "trafficking" is pretty apt here.

You really need to take a breather and reflect why you hold such deep-rooted vitriol. I'm not trying to be condescending. I agree with others and think you have something else going on. I'm sorry for what you've been through, but you need to separate your experiences, with the specifics of this case. I sincerely wish you peace.

OK, I think you don't realize that you are talking to several different people here. I don't have "something else going on" (again- :roll and I haven't "been through" anything adoption related. Just a typical person (who was raised in my bio family, not that it matters) with some critical thinking skills who is disgusted by this case. But, if you have to think you are right because everyone who disagrees with you has some kind of mental problem..... um, okay?

No, but saying that others who disagree with you just go around telling others they have mental problems, is dismissing valid critique. Which of course you're free to disagree with, but do so on basis of debate and not just because you're mad. I understand you're disgusted by this case - as am I - we just have different takes on what the right (legal and moral) outcome out to be/have been. I was also raised with my biological family, and do not have any adopted children - though I feel like I can look at this case pretty objectively, also having been raised by my single biological dad (whom I had a great relationship with). Some think the Capobiancos have acted horribly. I think similarly of Mr. Brown. We'll have to agree to disagree, and hope that Veronica has a happy, fulfilled life no matter what.

[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:

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.

WRONG. I said that when she comes of age and realizes what her adoptive parents did, I hope she shuns her. That has little to do with how she will feel about them growing up. Stop being so dramatic.

Please go re-read your own words. That is not what you said previously.

But to address your wavering comment, hoping for the best interest of anyone, of any human being, doesn't go out the window on your 18th birthday. Hoping and wishing for any person to shun anyone, is pretty damn demented.

My words are bolded in this very sub-thread:

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

Key words: ends up.

Your need to be right has blinded you to reality a bit. And if you don't think Veronica will end up blaming her adoptive parents for this travesty, you're sadly mistaken. The only way around this is to let him be an active participant in her life, but based on the lawsuits pending, I doubt they have enough integrity to do that much.

I hope I end up winning the lottery tomorrow. "End up" doesn't really mean anything, except some vague point in the future (even 60 seconds from now), so please stop skirting around your phrasing.

I agree that I hope Mr. Brown has some participatory role in her life. I hope Veronica grows up happy, well adjusted, and understanding - of the Capobiancos, and also of her dad's past transgressions.

[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:

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.

WRONG. I said that when she comes of age and realizes what her adoptive parents did, I hope she shuns her. That has little to do with how she will feel about them growing up. Stop being so dramatic.

Please go re-read your own words. That is not what you said previously.

But to address your wavering comment, hoping for the best interest of anyone, of any human being, doesn't go out the window on your 18th birthday. Hoping and wishing for any person to shun anyone, is pretty damn demented.

My words are bolded in this very sub-thread:

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

Key words: ends up.

Your need to be right has blinded you to reality a bit. And if you don't think Veronica will end up blaming her adoptive parents for this travesty, you're sadly mistaken. The only way around this is to let him be an active participant in her life, but based on the lawsuits pending, I doubt they have enough integrity to do that much.

I hope I end up winning the lottery tomorrow. "End up" doesn't really mean anything, except some vague point in the future (even 60 seconds from now), so please stop skirting around your phrasing.

I agree that I hope Mr. Brown has some participatory role in her life. I hope Veronica grows up happy, well adjusted, and understanding - of the Capobiancos, and also of her dad's past transgressions.

No, it's not vague, but it doesn't fit your narrative, but that's okay.

Your constant need to take digs at Mr. Brown speaks volumes about you.