Anonymous wrote:Just finished watching the first two episodes of "Natalia Speaks". I was floored. The first season was heartbreaking but, I think this second season will clear up a lot of things. The thing that stuck with me is "she was reading an article in Cosmopolitan magazine at 6 years old. What 6 year old can do that"? Um, me. I could do that. It wasn't Cosmo but, at 6 years old, I could easily read any article in just about any publication. I was reading and writing at 4 and by 6, chapter books, articles, whatever, was not a problem. Being able to read a seemingly "advanced" written work is not evidence that a person is an adult. And this Michael Barnett is a nut case. I don't want to spoil it for anyone that hasn't started watching season 2 but the guys a straight up lunatic. Can't wait for the next 4 episodes to drop tonight and tomorrow night.

The reading thing is also weird considering aren’t the Barnetts involved in a lot of autism groups? Hyperlexia is not uncommon amongst autistic children. My son is 5 and autistic and could definitely read a cosmo article. My younger sister (not autistic but perhaps with similar brain structure) was also reading at 4 and could do the same at 6.

Well its obvious who is making bank off of Natalia, she went from being neglected to being used.

Anonymous wrote:


It's clear that this poor child, with multiple disabilities, has been terrible abused by her adoptive parents.

I hope she sues the producers of this show, her adoptive parents, and is able to partially heal over time.

That's not how it works. Children cannot sue their parents for abuse.

Anonymous wrote:Did they talk about the people who went and investigated in Ukraine and found her mother and did DNA tests and looked at hospital records and birth certificates and family pictures when her mother was pregnant etc?

I am pretty sure they concluded she was a child and given al the factors, including her mothers age at birth she couldn’t be very old even if the birth certificate was altered for adoption.

Everything about this documentary seems very biased towards the parents who after getting one judge to issue a new birth certificate without much proof, were then able to use that birth certificate to support their case everywhere else.

I am not really interested in watching it if it the parents propaganda piece. They have made a lot of money off her already.

+1

Came here to say the same thing. The found her birth mother who according to the parent’s timeline would have had to be 10 when she gave birth. I personally don’t think she was 6 at adoption but probably closer to 11 or 12.

It's clear that this poor child, with multiple disabilities, has been terrible abused by her adoptive parents.

I hope she sues the producers of this show, her adoptive parents, and is able to partially heal over time.

Just finished watching the first two episodes of "Natalia Speaks". I was floored. The first season was heartbreaking but, I think this second season will clear up a lot of things. The thing that stuck with me is "she was reading an article in Cosmopolitan magazine at 6 years old. What 6 year old can do that"? Um, me. I could do that. It wasn't Cosmo but, at 6 years old, I could easily read any article in just about any publication. I was reading and writing at 4 and by 6, chapter books, articles, whatever, was not a problem. Being able to read a seemingly "advanced" written work is not evidence that a person is an adult. And this Michael Barnett is a nut case. I don't want to spoil it for anyone that hasn't started watching season 2 but the guys a straight up lunatic. Can't wait for the next 4 episodes to drop tonight and tomorrow night.

Anonymous wrote:It’s obvious she has several mental disorders. No one has proof of what she was subjected to prior to being adopted. The adopted families weren’t not equipped to care for a child with severe mental illness. They assumed she was an adult because they couldn’t comprehend a child acting in this manner. They obviously had no understanding of mental health issues outside of Autism.

I'm not sure how reliable the parents were as witnesses.

I just keep thinking of leaving my 9 year old alone in an apartment. Such a sad childhood, and no wonder she was acting out with the abuse.

https://www.investigationdiscovery.com/show/the-curious-case-of-natalia-grace-investigation-discovery-atve-us
The first season is free with ads here ^

I didn’t watch when it aired but my cousin was talking about it last week so I checked it out. What a sad situation.

It’s obvious she has several mental disorders. No one has proof of what she was subjected to prior to being adopted. The adopted families weren’t not equipped to care for a child with severe mental illness. They assumed she was an adult because they couldn’t comprehend a child acting in this manner. They obviously had no understanding of mental health issues outside of Autism.

Update to the series starts on 1/1:

https://apple.news/AuS-VbjriThqR1K9Eg_ijbQ

Neonatal malnutrition, child sexual abuse, and genetic disabilities can all contribute to precocious puberty. Having said that, there doesn't seem to be any medical testimony that she had pubic hair or her period. It seems that we are just supposed to take the word of her parents on that. The same parents who are clearly lying at multiple points in the video, including Dad who can't remember what lies he's already told so he contradicts himself over and over. "I was 40 feet away and saw . . . " and then "I didn't see anything, I was so far away I didn't arrive till the ambulance had left" or "We chose Lafayette because it was such an idyllic place" and then "My wife chose it because it was full of white trash."

Hypersexualized behavior is very common in kids with histories of child sexual abuse, and child sexual abuse is rampant in orphanages.

The kids I know with dwarfism, albeit a different type, often look older because their features don't have the same proportions we expect in a child. Although it also seems like they just caught her from a weird angle, because there are plenty of pictures of her where she looks like a child.

Kids know how old they are because we tell them. I don't know my age because I remember being born. I know my age because my mother told me. So, the fact that she repeated the lie she had been told that she was 22 to her neighbors means nothing.

The evidence from Ukraine is very strong. Genetic tests confirm the parent/child relationship. Hospital records confirm the birth. On the other hand, it seems like the judge made the decision to re-age her was based on what the parents told him, and the weird ideas that girls don't reach their full height until 18, that dwarfism doesn't change how a child grows, and that precocious puberty doesn't impact when a child stops growing. All three of those things are wrong, so even if she had stopped growing, and we don't even know that she did we just know her lying parents say she had, it doesn't point to her being 22.

I feel so bad for her. And yes, she might have been very difficult to parent. She was a very traumatized child, with complicated medical and social history. But she was still a child whose best interest needed to be taken into account.

Anonymous wrote:Did I miss why no medical tests done to determine her age? We can date bones of dead people from 2000 years ago. We can’t use the same xray technology to scan a living person to get a better age range?

She wasn’t 6 when she was adopted. But I don’t think she was 20 either.

Yes, yes you did miss that. A doctor was prepared to testify that her growth plates had not closed and she was obviously a child.

People with these kinds of disabilities often have hormonal patterns that do not fit the pattern of typical people. At this point there is a ton of evidence that she was a young child, and NO evidence that she was an adult other than pubic hair and the abusive mom saying she found blood in her underwear. The sexual stuff is really common with kids who have been sexually abused.

I feel so sorry that the most personal aspects of this abused, disabled orphan child’s medical history and life were sensationalized for an over the top “documentary.” Totally sick. I don’t understand how any of this is legal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the pictures of Natalia with a girl the same age and with the same condition were really a compelling way to show Natalia was not the age stated. Natalia looked like a giant compared to her. Also what about all the nurses/orderlies in the mental hospital detailing all the crude sexual behavior she was exhibiting and they too thought she was much older than 6 years old. I’m not saying she was 22 but I def think she was more towards a teenager than a 1st grader.

Kids with the same genetic disorder can have markedly different presentations. My daughter weighed 39 pounds when she was 10. Another kid with the same disorder weighed 149. Were they faking their ages? No. Growth rates and puberty are completely different for each kid. One kid with a genetic disorder is exactly that. One kid.

I am sure about what you are saying about your specific disorder is true. But, that doesn't ring true for every genetic disorder. She had a form of dwarfism and that specifically tends to trend the same across people.

Started watching this. Having trouble even following it.

Anonymous wrote:Did I miss why no medical tests done to determine her age? We can date bones of dead people from 2000 years ago. We can’t use the same xray technology to scan a living person to get a better age range?

She wasn’t 6 when she was adopted. But I don’t think she was 20 either.

They had an orthopedist preparing to testify at the father's trial that xray evidence showed she was a child at the time she was dumped in LaFayette. He said "xrays don't lie, I can't testify that she was an adult." But the mother's law kept badgering and cutting him off.