Baby stealing approved in South Carolina!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The adsopytive mother also has a history of drinking, DUI and is on psych meds. SC would not even approve her as a foster parent, but allowed her to buy a baby. So messed up. She looks creepy and her behavior says she could care less about this childs true needs.

The dui was 20 years ago, and has been cleared from her record. There has never been any evidence that she would be unfit as a foster parent or that she's on psych meds. But even if she is/was, so what? I'd far rather she recognizes and treats her problems.

And the birth father was arrested for drug possession and attempt to distribute about 10 years ago. Granted, a long time ago, but he's obviously not perfect either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, I don't think D knew anything about ICWA ahead of time. It was just a means to get custody.

I agree with you. But it sounds like at a later point, when he learned about ICWA and learned that his girlfriend gave Veronica up for adoption, he used ICWA as an excuse to justify his absence during the pregnancy - since it's clear from Oklahoma law that fathers must be involved during pregnancy. After the fact and upon learning about ICWA, it's like DB said "see, I didn't have to do anything."

To be clear, this adoption would not have been legal under Oklahoma law. That is to say, even without ICWA if Veronica had been placed in Oklahoma then Brown would have won, because the bar for losing parental rights in Oklahoma is higher.

However, because OK law is a state law, it doesn't apply in SC. ICWA is a federal law, which is why it was used.

One thing that is not in dispute is that Brown didn't know about the adoption before the day he signed the paper, so it's extremely unlikely that he researched adoption law or used ICWA to guide his actions.

The Capobianco's on the other hand, clearly knew about the adoption before, during, and after, and took advantage of the differences in state law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dusten didn't make any attempt to see the baby in the her first four months of her life. I read his court testimony. He was fine with giving up his rights and not seeing her. He just wasn't fine once he found out about the adoption. According to Oklahoma and South Carolina rules, your rights as a father are gone at that point.

I do sympathize with D, but his inactions caused the adoption to happen. It's a sad story all around for everyone involved.

I hope Veronica is well, and I take comfort in knowing she remembers the adoptive parents. I hope D can remain in her life too.

No, according to OK law his rights as a father are there until he signs adoption papers, and adoption papers have to be signed with informed consent. The paper that Copabiancos lawyer had him sign was not an adoption paper, but one that gave sole custody to the mother. But the baby was already in SC. Once the baby in in SC the SC laws apply. He had to try and get his child back legally through the SC courts. So the OK law applies depending on where you are. The adoption in SC was not finalized because it was not legal in OK. That is why he still had a legal claim to challenge the adoption.

Whether or not he saw the kid during the first 4 months is not the issue here.

We need laws that protect the rights of new born to belong to the familes they are born into. Adoption is supposed to be voluntary, and just about every state has laws that
that adoption papers are not coerced. Just SC law says a fathers consent is not needed

This article is from Tulsa World. Doesn't cite laws, but it implies the Oklahoma laws state that the father must take an active role during pregnancy, or else rights can be lost.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/Russ_Roach_Oklahoma_adoption_law_and_Baby_Veronica/20130828_222_A15_CUTLIN21511

If I'm reading correctly, was Dustin Brown using ICWA as an excuse for not taking an active role during pregnancy? If so, what an utter douche. If not, someone please explain how Oklahoma laws reconcile with his absence.

No, you are not reading correctly. He was pushed away left, right and center by the birth mom and could not take an active role during the pregnancy. The birth mom is the "utter douche".

[Anonymous]

It's a he-said, she-said for what exactly happened during pregnancy. But after the birth, there was no attempt to reach out, see the baby, establish his rights. He was very passive and apathetic. And he was in the military and spoke to his commanding officer. He could have had free legal guidance through the military, if he had wanted.

Just curious what Oklahoma rules are for losing rights through abandonment. Never been able to find a straight answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a he-said, she-said for what exactly happened during pregnancy. But after the birth, there was no attempt to reach out, see the baby, establish his rights. He was very passive and apathetic. And he was in the military and spoke to his commanding officer. He could have had free legal guidance through the military, if he had wanted.

Just curious what Oklahoma rules are for losing rights through abandonment. Never been able to find a straight answer.

He sought out that legal guidance from the military within the first couple of days of learning about the adoption.

The reality is, that some birth parents in highly conflictual relationships decide that it's better for the child to be with one parent, than to be co-parented, if the latter means the introduction of conflict and instability in a child's life. I'm not saying that I agree with that, but that it's a choice that many parents make. I'm not saying that I agree with that decision, but it's not an uncommon one and there's a certain logic to it. Especially with a child too young to have a memory of a relationship with the noncustodial parent. Saying that because he chose to respect what he thought was the mother's wishes to parent solo, he should lose his right to parent when it turned out she wasn't willing to take on the task, is absurd.

[Anonymous]

Military attorney's will not get involved in child custody cases. They can give you legal advice in the loose sense of the term but will not interfere or file anything and you have to hire a private attorney which is very costly. My husband went to them for his custody case and he just got a list of military friendly attorneys.

[Anonymous]

Happy V is home with my friends. Matt and Mel never had any doubts about the responsibilities of parenthood, unlike Brown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dusten didn't make any attempt to see the baby in the her first four months of her life. I read his court testimony. He was fine with giving up his rights and not seeing her. He just wasn't fine once he found out about the adoption. According to Oklahoma and South Carolina rules, your rights as a father are gone at that point.

I do sympathize with D, but his inactions caused the adoption to happen. It's a sad story all around for everyone involved.

I hope Veronica is well, and I take comfort in knowing she remembers the adoptive parents. I hope D can remain in her life too.

No, according to OK law his rights as a father are there until he signs adoption papers, and adoption papers have to be signed with informed consent. The paper that Copabiancos lawyer had him sign was not an adoption paper, but one that gave sole custody to the mother. But the baby was already in SC. Once the baby in in SC the SC laws apply. He had to try and get his child back legally through the SC courts. So the OK law applies depending on where you are. The adoption in SC was not finalized because it was not legal in OK. That is why he still had a legal claim to challenge the adoption.

Whether or not he saw the kid during the first 4 months is not the issue here.

We need laws that protect the rights of new born to belong to the familes they are born into. Adoption is supposed to be voluntary, and just about every state has laws that
that adoption papers are not coerced. Just SC law says a fathers consent is not needed

This article is from Tulsa World. Doesn't cite laws, but it implies the Oklahoma laws state that the father must take an active role during pregnancy, or else rights can be lost.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/Russ_Roach_Oklahoma_adoption_law_and_Baby_Veronica/20130828_222_A15_CUTLIN21511

If I'm reading correctly, was Dustin Brown using ICWA as an excuse for not taking an active role during pregnancy? If so, what an utter douche. If not, someone please explain how Oklahoma laws reconcile with his absence.

No, you are not reading correctly. He was pushed away left, right and center by the birth mom and could not take an active role during the pregnancy. The birth mom is the "utter douche".

Actually, she got it right. Brown is a deadbeat who abandoned his kids.

[Anonymous]

Here is the truth: I am not a deadbeat dad. I did not abandon my daughter. I did not wait to "step up to the plate" until Veronica was 4 months old. I have been at the plate since I rejoiced at the news my fiancée was pregnant. I did not change my mind about how involved I wanted to be with Veronica. I have loved her and wanted her since the moment I knew she was to be my daughter.

My life was turned upside down when I was served with the adoption papers. Stupidly, I thought they were papers doing what we had texted about, giving Christy full custody while I was gone. It was literally the moment I finished signing that the server told me, "You just gave up your baby." I tried to grab the papers from his hand and he told me if I took them I would go to jail. I hired an attorney right away and gave my father power of attorney to fight for custody of Veronica while I was off at war.

Ever since that day I have been in a legal battle for the right to raise my daughter. Ever since that day I have seen horrible things written about me. I have seen how the public has come to terrible conclusions about me. I've accepted that people will do and say anything to win custody of Veronica. But what I can't accept is that the courts would allow these lies to sway their decisions. Somewhere in their rush to punish me for what they mistakenly think I've done, they stopped talking about what is best for my daughter.

[Anonymous]

I copied that from dusten's blog, keep Veronica home.

[Anonymous]

Thinking about how scared and confused and sad that sweet girl must feel makes me sick to my stomach. Praying for that sweet baby girl and the Brown family. Her adoptive parents are self centered child traffickers. I pray they do the right thing and return Veronica home with her family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thinking about how scared and confused and sad that sweet girl must feel makes me sick to my stomach. Praying for that sweet baby girl and the Brown family. Her adoptive parents are self centered child traffickers. I pray they do the right thing and return Veronica home with her family.

+1000.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is the truth: I am not a deadbeat dad. I did not abandon my daughter. I did not wait to "step up to the plate" until Veronica was 4 months old. I have been at the plate since I rejoiced at the news my fiancée was pregnant. I did not change my mind about how involved I wanted to be with Veronica. I have loved her and wanted her since the moment I knew she was to be my daughter.

My life was turned upside down when I was served with the adoption papers. Stupidly, I thought they were papers doing what we had texted about, giving Christy full custody while I was gone. It was literally the moment I finished signing that the server told me, "You just gave up your baby." I tried to grab the papers from his hand and he told me if I took them I would go to jail. I hired an attorney right away and gave my father power of attorney to fight for custody of Veronica while I was off at war.

Ever since that day I have been in a legal battle for the right to raise my daughter. Ever since that day I have seen horrible things written about me. I have seen how the public has come to terrible conclusions about me. I've accepted that people will do and say anything to win custody of Veronica. But what I can't accept is that the courts would allow these lies to sway their decisions. Somewhere in their rush to punish me for what they mistakenly think I've done, they stopped talking about what is best for my daughter.

Yes, a deadbeat dad who fought for four years for his daughter, and risked going to jail.
I wish all deadbeat dads were like that.

[Anonymous]

...and we haven't put a wooden stack thru the he said/she said of this thread because... Don't you people have your own children to care about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:...and we haven't put a wooden stack thru the he said/she said of this thread because... Don't you people have your own children to care about?

Yes. And that is why I care about this as an adoptive mom. This could happen to our so s and grand kids. Our laws make it very easy to basically steal a child and parents have few rights. This could happen to any one of us.