Baby stealing approved in South Carolina!

[Anonymous]

She belongs with her bio-Dad. I don't see how the adoptive family can even sleep at night knowing this child is wanted by her family of origin and yet still wanting to keep her, as if she's a pet and not a human.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She belongs with her bio-Dad. I don't see how the adoptive family can even sleep at night knowing this child is wanted by her family of origin and yet still wanting to keep her, as if she's a pet and not a human.

He gives her up and now wants her back.

She's not a yoyo, but he clearly is.

So you'd be good if this child were your niece, for example, who ended up back with her father instead of living with a stable couple?

so many morons on this forum

[Anonymous]

These cases are just terrible b/c litigation takes time and the children involved in adoption/surogacy disputes don't have "time" to wait out the litigation. They are developing bonds everyday. It is terrible to see a child ripped away from the people they know as parents, but I lay the blame on the parent or party that changes his/her mind and then expects to get the child back when they have gotten THEIR life back in order.

There's only ONE time to decide if you want the child --- and that's when he/she is BORN. After that -- it's too late. The child can't wait for you to figure out what you want or for you to go to rehab or for you to get married and settle down. Too late! The child needs to know who wants them on the DAY they are BORN. To me, that's all that matters. And the child is entitled to stability from that moment on.

In the case of Baby Veronica, it is terrible that she will have to leave her current home. But, it is terrible that she was put there in the first place (with the bio dad who didn't initially want her). Despite the trauma that she will have to go through, I believe that Veronica belongs with the parents who wanted her from the moment she was born. Bio dad should not be allowed to assert his interest after he has stated his abandonment.

Very sad, but it is the right outcome and Veronica will adjust.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
There's only ONE time to decide if you want the child --- and that's when he/she is BORN. After that -- it's too late. The child can't wait for you to figure out what you want or for you to go to rehab or for you to get married and settle down. Too late! The child needs to know who wants them on the DAY they are BORN. To me, that's all that matters. And the child is entitled to stability from that moment on.

Yes, but the law disagrees with you on this in most states. As it should, if you're saying that the birth parents have to sign the adoption papers on the day of birth, with no waiting periods or circumstances for revocation of consent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These cases are just terrible b/c litigation takes time and the children involved in adoption/surogacy disputes don't have "time" to wait out the litigation. They are developing bonds everyday. It is terrible to see a child ripped away from the people they know as parents, but I lay the blame on the parent or party that changes his/her mind and then expects to get the child back when they have gotten THEIR life back in order.

There's only ONE time to decide if you want the child --- and that's when he/she is BORN. After that -- it's too late. The child can't wait for you to figure out what you want or for you to go to rehab or for you to get married and settle down. Too late! The child needs to know who wants them on the DAY they are BORN. To me, that's all that matters. And the child is entitled to stability from that moment on.

In the case of Baby Veronica, it is terrible that she will have to leave her current home. But, it is terrible that she was put there in the first place (with the bio dad who didn't initially want her). Despite the trauma that she will have to go through, I believe that Veronica belongs with the parents who wanted her from the moment she was born. Bio dad should not be allowed to assert his interest after he has stated his abandonment.

Very sad, but it is the right outcome and Veronica will adjust.

This is nuts!
So a woman who just gave birth
And can possibly be medicated
And is usually told NOT to make legal desciosns whe medicated should decide right then and there
THAT IS DOMW DUMBASS SHIZNIT RIGHT THERE!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These cases are just terrible b/c litigation takes time and the children involved in adoption/surogacy disputes don't have "time" to wait out the litigation. They are developing bonds everyday. It is terrible to see a child ripped away from the people they know as parents, but I lay the blame on the parent or party that changes his/her mind and then expects to get the child back when they have gotten THEIR life back in order.

There's only ONE time to decide if you want the child --- and that's when he/she is BORN. After that -- it's too late. The child can't wait for you to figure out what you want or for you to go to rehab or for you to get married and settle down. Too late! The child needs to know who wants them on the DAY they are BORN. To me, that's all that matters. And the child is entitled to stability from that moment on.

In the case of Baby Veronica, it is terrible that she will have to leave her current home. But, it is terrible that she was put there in the first place (with the bio dad who didn't initially want her). Despite the trauma that she will have to go through, I believe that Veronica belongs with the parents who wanted her from the moment she was born. Bio dad should not be allowed to assert his interest after he has stated his abandonment.

Very sad, but it is the right outcome and Veronica will adjust.

This is nuts!
So a woman who just gave birth
And can possibly be medicated
And is usually told NOT to make legal desciosns whe medicated should decide right then and there
THAT IS DOMW DUMBASS SHIZNIT RIGHT THERE!

Yes, because the fact that she had a baby was a complete surprise, and she didn't have time to plan what she would do after giving birth.

Oh, right - she did in fact know that she was pregnant. And she chose the Capobiancos and an open adoption so that she would be able to stay in touch with her daughter. And her asshole ex - who admitted the text message and "accidentally" signed papers four months after the baby' birth - the guy who had already abandoned her and the baby - hasn't let the mother see the baby since he got her. She doesn't even know where the baby is. But that's okay with you, right? Screw her rights - the person who tried to give the best life to her baby. Give the baby to the guy who did NOTHING to support the baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She belongs with her bio-Dad. I don't see how the adoptive family can even sleep at night knowing this child is wanted by her family of origin and yet still wanting to keep her, as if she's a pet and not a human.

Agreed. Adoption should not be about taking children from parents willing to raise their children. This entire case is a disgrace. At the very least, the biological Dad should be allowed 50/50 custody of the child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She belongs with her bio-Dad. I don't see how the adoptive family can even sleep at night knowing this child is wanted by her family of origin and yet still wanting to keep her, as if she's a pet and not a human.

Agreed. Adoption should not be about taking children from parents willing to raise their children. This entire case is a disgrace. At the very least, the biological Dad should be allowed 50/50 custody of the child.

The disgrace is that Dusten Brown used the Cherokee Nation after he decided belatedly that he wanted to be involved at all, and after he had given no indication to the mother or anyone else, for that matter, that he would support the child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She belongs with her bio-Dad. I don't see how the adoptive family can even sleep at night knowing this child is wanted by her family of origin and yet still wanting to keep her, as if she's a pet and not a human.

Agreed. Adoption should not be about taking children from parents willing to raise their children. This entire case is a disgrace. At the very least, the biological Dad should be allowed 50/50 custody of the child.

But, of course, he wasn't interested in raising his daughter when he needed to make that decision. He's not entitled to come back, months later, when she has a stable home and declare his 'rights.' His use of the IWCA was (as the Supreme Court found) not what the law was intended for. It's almost absurd that he used this law. There is nothing in the record to indicate that the adoptive parents stole this child - this child was placed with them by the biological mother who still firmly stands by her decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These cases are just terrible b/c litigation takes time and the children involved in adoption/surogacy disputes don't have "time" to wait out the litigation. They are developing bonds everyday. It is terrible to see a child ripped away from the people they know as parents, but I lay the blame on the parent or party that changes his/her mind and then expects to get the child back when they have gotten THEIR life back in order.

There's only ONE time to decide if you want the child --- and that's when he/she is BORN. After that -- it's too late. The child can't wait for you to figure out what you want or for you to go to rehab or for you to get married and settle down. Too late! The child needs to know who wants them on the DAY they are BORN. To me, that's all that matters. And the child is entitled to stability from that moment on.

In the case of Baby Veronica, it is terrible that she will have to leave her current home. But, it is terrible that she was put there in the first place (with the bio dad who didn't initially want her). Despite the trauma that she will have to go through, I believe that Veronica belongs with the parents who wanted her from the moment she was born. Bio dad should not be allowed to assert his interest after he has stated his abandonment.

Very sad, but it is the right outcome and Veronica will adjust.

This is nuts!
So a woman who just gave birth
And can possibly be medicated
And is usually told NOT to make legal desciosns whe medicated should decide right then and there
THAT IS DOMW DUMBASS SHIZNIT RIGHT THERE!

Yes, because the fact that she had a baby was a complete surprise, and she didn't have time to plan what she would do after giving birth.

Oh, right - she did in fact know that she was pregnant. And she chose the Capobiancos and an open adoption so that she would be able to stay in touch with her daughter. And her asshole ex - who admitted the text message and "accidentally" signed papers four months after the baby' birth - the guy who had already abandoned her and the baby - hasn't let the mother see the baby since he got her. She doesn't even know where the baby is. But that's okay with you, right? Screw her rights - the person who tried to give the best life to her baby. Give the baby to the guy who did NOTHING to support the baby.

Einstein I was commenting about the person suggesting that the day of birth patents must make the final decision about adoption
That is stupid and unrealistic.
As for the case, half of thes commenters are acting like cause the bio-mom gave birth she is dang second coming and is fallible and had upright intentions.
Heffa pulled similar stunts with her OTHER baby daddies.
PUHlese!
We have adopted people in our family, have folks who have worked in adoption for decades.
Let my aunt tell you how people mislead and manipulate the system
Run to different states to essentially STEAL kids.
Just because you want to adopt does not make you a saint.
Crazy peoe adopt Just like they can give birth.
When u adopt and everyone has not been fully informed
And signed on the dotted line, when bio parents want their kid back within the period to do so...
You are crazy to fight it.
These people are CRAZY baby stealers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She belongs with her bio-Dad. I don't see how the adoptive family can even sleep at night knowing this child is wanted by her family of origin and yet still wanting to keep her, as if she's a pet and not a human.

Agreed. Adoption should not be about taking children from parents willing to raise their children. This entire case is a disgrace. At the very least, the biological Dad should be allowed 50/50 custody of the child.

The disgrace is that Dusten Brown used the Cherokee Nation after he decided belatedly that he wanted to be involved at all, and after he had given no indication to the mother or anyone else, for that matter, that he would support the child.

Doesn't matter. The child was only 4 months when he realized the adoption happened. While he should've provided financial support, not doing so doesn't mean he should not have parental rights regarding his child.

I think that all biological parents should be given at least 6 months to change their minds regarding adoption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She belongs with her bio-Dad. I don't see how the adoptive family can even sleep at night knowing this child is wanted by her family of origin and yet still wanting to keep her, as if she's a pet and not a human.

Agreed. Adoption should not be about taking children from parents willing to raise their children. This entire case is a disgrace. At the very least, the biological Dad should be allowed 50/50 custody of the child.

But, of course, he wasn't interested in raising his daughter when he needed to make that decision. He's not entitled to come back, months later, when she has a stable home and declare his 'rights.' His use of the IWCA was (as the Supreme Court found) not what the law was intended for. It's almost absurd that he used this law. There is nothing in the record to indicate that the adoptive parents stole this child - this child was placed with them by the biological mother who still firmly stands by her decision.

Mothers shouldn't be the final say in adoption. Fathers should also have a say. To suggest otherwise, is highly insulting.

[Anonymous]

The biological parent should always trump the adoptive couple. How can this child be better off with thieves? I hope when she is.old enough to understand what these selfish people have done, that she will reject them and go back to her biological father who fought for her because he loves her.

[Anonymous]

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

Yes!

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately, this child will grow up knowing that her father did not want her.

Thankfully, she will know that the Capobianco's ALWAYS wanted her. I am grateful baby Veronica will soon have them again.