I suppose I could bother you with another adoption related post. This one will primarily involve my daughter M. She is the one "casualty" of adoption I did not take into consideration when I had placed Z. While there was a great deal of information out there regarding adoption and siblings, it mostly covered siblings born AFTER the one surrendered. Maybe I didn't look hard enough, but it seemed that outside of a few pony and rainbow stories of all the children being involved and in contact with one another, there was little to nothing available to help a preschool aged child cope with getting excited for months to be a big sister and then have that dream smashed to the ground when she is informed that her little sister is going to live with another family.
Some family, thinking that they were helping, suggested that I just pretend little sister never existed or even tell her that there never was a baby and she imagined it. I couldn't fathom lying to her about such a thing, especially when she had spent a great many nights with her head on my stomach, talking to her little sister and poking at my tummy to get little sis to react and move. I just couldn't lie to her about this. I know family meant well, but the last time this little lie was used, the truth came out 40 yrs later and the family members involved have never been the same since (yes, adoption has played a role in my family long before I joined the ranks of birthmotherhood).
Big sister M was 3 1/2 yrs old at the time and, like any child at that age, could not fully grasp the overall complexities of the situation. I still remember the look of utter devastation on her face when I told her that I was looking for a new family to raise her little sister. "No, you can't do that!" she'd cried out loudly. "You can't give my sister away. I won't let you!" I had tried to explain that things were hard and that I was scared that I wouldn't be able to do it all on my own with both her and her little sister. I can only imagine the horrors going through her little imagination at that point. The look of fear and disgust were blatantly obvious on her face. She didn't speak to me for a few hours after that.
So little sister Z was born and placed. The years passed and, as M grew older, was more able to articulate her questions and desires over her little sister. Every year, we receive pictures of a beaming and happy Z. As infants, both Z and M could have passed for twins other than Z's dark hair. M is fair and blond, Z is fair with dark brown hair, most likely inherited from my mother. As the pictures showed her progression in age, she started to take on more and more of their father's traits. She looks a great deal like their father, my ex husband. You can see me in her eyes. Must be a maternal trait, LOL. My mom has the same eyes, I have the eyes and big sister M has the eyes.
An interesting fact about our situation: Z lives in the same city as us with her parents, B and J. I don't have an exact address, but I know they live in our city. M knows this as well. When she started school, she talked about how she couldn't wait for when she got into 3rd or 4th grade because then her little sister would be in kindergarten and they'd be in the same school. She understood the age gap well enough to know that by now, Z would be in school. Every dark hair little girl she spotted, she speculated was her little sister. Just to point out the odds of potentially running into them: a year ago last summer the children's museum in our city had changed locations and built a whole new place not far from its original location. It was HUGE. They had a grand opening of sorts that offered free fun outside. Sand pits, streams to play in and all sorts of nature inspired goodness. I almost took M down there. We love going downtown. For some reason or another, we decided not to go. A few days later, while browsing our local paper online, they featured a brief article about the grand opening and pictures. Guess who they had a picture of jumping in the sand? Little sister Z.
I tend to think the older Z gets, the higher the chances are now that her and M will run into one another. M actively seeks her whenever she is out and about anywhere. The updates and letters indicate that she is often involved in many activities that take her to some of the same facilities that M herself goes to. This most recent summer had M at the local YMCA for summer day camp. One afternoon, after picking her up, M informed me of her new playmate, a six year old girl named Z. I remember freezing completely when she told me this. I asked her what her hair color and eye color were and M stated that she had dark brown hair and pretty dark blue eyes ("like your eyes, mom.").
Oh hell.
M went on to explain that she really enjoyed playing with Z. They had a lot of common interests. I asked what Z's parents looked like and M said that it was Z's daddy who dropped her off and he had light brown hair, kind of like M's hair (sandy blond) and he looked about my age. Z's adoptive dad, B, has sandy blond hair and is only a few years older than me at the most. As I am driving, I could feel the shakes coming on. I knew the odds were there, but what kind of twist of fate was this? M really enjoyed this Z girl's company and they spent a great deal of time together. "I think it's my little sister," she stated finally, looking at me through the rear view mirror. "I won't tell her who I am, but I am pretty sure that's my Z."
I found out later that the little girl was not "her Z", but talk about a close call. M was visibly upset when it was confirmed that the girl was not her little sister. She had held on to this hope that she'd finally got to see her, to meet her and they'd become close while at the YMCA. Maybe deep down she knew it wasn't her Z, but held onto that hope (or fantasy) with an iron grip. She still holds onto that hope that they will run into each other before they become adults.
The couple that adopted Z have made it clear they do not see Z and M as siblings and most likely have not told Z that she even has a big sister. M knows this because she'd found where I kept their letters and read them one morning before I woke. I think that is why she decided against identifying herself should she ever run into Z. I could be inconsiderate and cruel and say that who cares if Z finds out who M is and it's B and J's fault for not telling Z about her family of origin, but I won't. I don't fully understand their reasoning and logic behind denying the fact that M and Z are siblings, but am willing to respect it. I will say that I can't always control what comes out of M's mouth and I certainly am not going to insist she never identify herself to Z, should they meet while still children.
I suppose the point of this particular post is to show just how adoption can effect siblings. Whether the child surrendered is the first born or second born, the aftermath of it will affect any other children the mother has. Six years have passed since Z's surrender and M has been actively looking out for her every chance she has. Every dark haired little girl with the dark blue eyes that crinkle just like her mom and grandma's do when she smiles is a potential Z. I do often question myself and wonder if maybe I didn't do a good enough in preparing M for Z's loss. I have heard from women who have told their older children that they were nothing more than surrogates and there was no biological link between them and the child in utero, wanting to spare the children the heart ache of losing a sibling. Some have said I should have done that or just simply have said that the baby was meant for another couple. Then there was the well meaning family who suggested I should just pretend the baby never existed and that M had imagined it all. Or just not talk about it and ignore her questions, after all she was "young enough to forget about the baby".
Lying accomplishes nothing. I couldn't lie to her about something like this. Even if the lies were meant well and to spare the child the heart ache, it is still lying and lies come back and bite you in the ass. The two family members mentioned earlier are great examples of this. My fifty four year old mother was about ten years old when my grandmother gave birth and surrendered a fourth born child. No one spoke of the lost daughter and my mom was told she had imagined the pregnancy and baby. There was no baby. My mom honestly believed she had imagined it all until about six or seven years ago when my grandmother finally admitted the truth after a few too many glasses of wine. My mother's memories of it all are now warped from the lies she was told growing up and though she wants to search for her little sister, she cannot remember the exact date of birth and grandma will not reveal that information. We simply know a gender and that she was possibly named Louise.
So, if there is anyone reading this who is considering placing a child and you have older children you are raising, think long and hard about how this will affect them. You can't just place and brush it under the rug, hoping they will forget. Even if your older children are quite young, they will still be affected by this. There is no way to sugar coat it. No matter how much you explain to them, they will never fully understand. And do not ever lie to them about it, no matter how good your intentions are in doing so. They deserve to know the truth.
Sunday, October 6, 2013
Friday, October 4, 2013
A Whole Post About The Blogger
I originally set up this blog a few years ago as a way to share some of my fan fiction short stories. I posted two of them and then it sat dormant for over two and a half years. By some grace of luck, I still happened to be logged in to the site, even after several complete hard drive wipes and re-installations of my programs.
So, a little about me....not sure where I should start. I'm a nerd? Biggest piece of white bread imaginable. Seriously, peeps. I have no real talents outside of writing and drawing. And even some of my writing isn't that great. But I do enjoy it. I love fan fiction. I'm obsessed with the animated band Gorillaz. Murdoc is my favorite. Most of my fan-fictions center around him. I'll blow your mind further and admit that I'm a 35 yr old divorced single mom.
Like every other mom, I embarrass the hell out of my kid. Just existing is an embarrassment to her. I dance to Eminem and look like a fool having a seizure. I sing loudly to Avenged Sevenfold and that usually ends with my daughter going off at me to knock it off because my voice hurts her ears. Such is life, I reckon.
As mentioned in a previous post, I'm also a birth mother. Little Z isn't so little anymore. She's now six years old. The only contact I really have is through pictures and updates through her adoptive parents. They're decent folks. I did go through some personal issues surrounding the adoption and pretty much was angry at everyone else but myself, but realized where the blame needed to lie and accepted that. I can't change this part of my life no matter how much I want to. Some people still seem to think I should be still some inconsolable wreck about Z's surrender. As if the passage of time and all the emotions that came with it should be irrelevant. Apparently, I'm supposed to be curled in the fetal position and awaiting death. What exactly will that accomplish? I made a mistake. A big fucking mistake. And it is my mistake. But I have another daughter that needs me. I can't allow myself to get lost in that grief again. It won't change what happened. All I can do is accept it and move forward. I say move forward and not move on. Moving on implies that I put her behind me and go on as if she never existed. It doesn't work that way. I'm sure people speculate about my emotions and feelings regarding my second born daughter, but I will admit that some days are worse than others and I have to put on a game face. I think about her often and wonder what she is doing or thinking. But I cannot let it consume me either.
Big sister M is almost ten years old. She also has some developmental delays. Emotionally and socially, she is like a child half her age. She doesn't necessarily need constant supervision, but there are quite a few things that most kids her age can do that she still struggles with or cannot do without direct supervision. She struggles to write, but successfully penned three "books" of her own, Puppy's Great Adventure. A chip off the ol' block, she is! So much like me yet so different. She's the high strung one while I'm the rather laid back one.
She also misses her little sister. She never got the chance to see her, another massive regret outside of the adoption itself. She asks about her a lot and still asks why we couldn't keep her. At this point, all I can tell her is that I made a huge mistake and thought I couldn't do it alone. She doesn't fully understand that explanation, but it's the best I can do.
So, my life pretty much revolves around raising M, being a paper pusher at work, writing Murdoc fan fiction, drawing and trying to get the word out about the atrocities of the adoption industry. I'm extremely glad that people are starting to open their eyes now, but do wish it didn't come at the cost of Dusten losing Veronica. It has opened up the eyes of many who never realized just how shady many of the practices are. I feel fortunate that in my situation, it was all me. Nobody forced me. Nobody coerced me. I wasn't backed into a financial corner with no way out. I simply had a bit too much thrown at me too quickly and panicked. Then I acted on that panic. Had I waited it out a year or so, things would have improved. Everything that led to Z's relinquishment were things that were perfectly normal given the situation at that moment. Small child having adjustment issues. Crowded house. Struggling to get back on my feet and it had only been a few short months. They all seem so petty and insignificant now, but at that time, it felt like my mind was going to crack.
I took a few month break from writing and have been struggling to get back into it. I despise loose ends. I have to finish this fan fiction series I've been working on for three years now. I sort of left it hanging and it needs to get wrapped up. Officially call it done. And I also have another fan fiction in the works as well as an original story also getting off the ground. For those of you still reading this drivel and want to read more, go over to Deviant Art and simply search my name: TheDorkzilla. Here's a sample of some of the odd crap I draw:
So, a little about me....not sure where I should start. I'm a nerd? Biggest piece of white bread imaginable. Seriously, peeps. I have no real talents outside of writing and drawing. And even some of my writing isn't that great. But I do enjoy it. I love fan fiction. I'm obsessed with the animated band Gorillaz. Murdoc is my favorite. Most of my fan-fictions center around him. I'll blow your mind further and admit that I'm a 35 yr old divorced single mom.
Like every other mom, I embarrass the hell out of my kid. Just existing is an embarrassment to her. I dance to Eminem and look like a fool having a seizure. I sing loudly to Avenged Sevenfold and that usually ends with my daughter going off at me to knock it off because my voice hurts her ears. Such is life, I reckon.
As mentioned in a previous post, I'm also a birth mother. Little Z isn't so little anymore. She's now six years old. The only contact I really have is through pictures and updates through her adoptive parents. They're decent folks. I did go through some personal issues surrounding the adoption and pretty much was angry at everyone else but myself, but realized where the blame needed to lie and accepted that. I can't change this part of my life no matter how much I want to. Some people still seem to think I should be still some inconsolable wreck about Z's surrender. As if the passage of time and all the emotions that came with it should be irrelevant. Apparently, I'm supposed to be curled in the fetal position and awaiting death. What exactly will that accomplish? I made a mistake. A big fucking mistake. And it is my mistake. But I have another daughter that needs me. I can't allow myself to get lost in that grief again. It won't change what happened. All I can do is accept it and move forward. I say move forward and not move on. Moving on implies that I put her behind me and go on as if she never existed. It doesn't work that way. I'm sure people speculate about my emotions and feelings regarding my second born daughter, but I will admit that some days are worse than others and I have to put on a game face. I think about her often and wonder what she is doing or thinking. But I cannot let it consume me either.
Big sister M is almost ten years old. She also has some developmental delays. Emotionally and socially, she is like a child half her age. She doesn't necessarily need constant supervision, but there are quite a few things that most kids her age can do that she still struggles with or cannot do without direct supervision. She struggles to write, but successfully penned three "books" of her own, Puppy's Great Adventure. A chip off the ol' block, she is! So much like me yet so different. She's the high strung one while I'm the rather laid back one.
She also misses her little sister. She never got the chance to see her, another massive regret outside of the adoption itself. She asks about her a lot and still asks why we couldn't keep her. At this point, all I can tell her is that I made a huge mistake and thought I couldn't do it alone. She doesn't fully understand that explanation, but it's the best I can do.
So, my life pretty much revolves around raising M, being a paper pusher at work, writing Murdoc fan fiction, drawing and trying to get the word out about the atrocities of the adoption industry. I'm extremely glad that people are starting to open their eyes now, but do wish it didn't come at the cost of Dusten losing Veronica. It has opened up the eyes of many who never realized just how shady many of the practices are. I feel fortunate that in my situation, it was all me. Nobody forced me. Nobody coerced me. I wasn't backed into a financial corner with no way out. I simply had a bit too much thrown at me too quickly and panicked. Then I acted on that panic. Had I waited it out a year or so, things would have improved. Everything that led to Z's relinquishment were things that were perfectly normal given the situation at that moment. Small child having adjustment issues. Crowded house. Struggling to get back on my feet and it had only been a few short months. They all seem so petty and insignificant now, but at that time, it felt like my mind was going to crack.
I took a few month break from writing and have been struggling to get back into it. I despise loose ends. I have to finish this fan fiction series I've been working on for three years now. I sort of left it hanging and it needs to get wrapped up. Officially call it done. And I also have another fan fiction in the works as well as an original story also getting off the ground. For those of you still reading this drivel and want to read more, go over to Deviant Art and simply search my name: TheDorkzilla. Here's a sample of some of the odd crap I draw:
The Hidden Meaning Behind "Pre-Birth Support"
One of the main laws many states use to circumvent an unmarried father's rights in order to place their child for adoption is the now famous "support the expectant mom" line. A man is supposed to support his pregnant girlfriend through her pregnancy and in some cases, live with her as well. One could say that common sense is that the man should pay something towards the new mother's care, but sometimes even if they do and can provide proof that they attempted to support the mother, it's not enough.
Interestingly enough, even in states that have somewhat more "progressive" laws for unwed fathers, that little ditty mentioned above is still often used if the mother wishes to surrender her child. Of course, the laws even state that if the woman cuts contact and refuses support, that is not a good enough reason to not financially support her and the father's rights are still in jeopardy. Most unmarried fathers are young and many more are unfamiliar with how the laws work. Many assume that simply coming forward, proving paternity and declaring they want the child is enough.
When you look at how the laws are worded, you realize there is a hidden meaning behind them. Another person pointed this out to me, so I cannot take credit for this revelation. But when you really read into it and realize that a man can provide receipts to show support, can show a bank account of money saved that the mother refused and prove that he had attempted to remain involved through the pregnancy and still lose his child to adoption, the laws can only mean one thing: you must be married to the mother to have any rights to a child born.
A simple piece of paper that legally ties together the relationship is really the only way a young father will have any rights to his child.
I'm sure there will be some reading this and thinking Well, if he really cared, he'd marry the girl to protect his rights and the child's rights. And many still believe that men should only have rights to a child if they're married to the mother when the child was born. Sadly, as we saw with the Terry Achane case, being married to the mother almost didn't help. It still took two years to get his daughter back after being placed for adoption by the mother, his now ex wife. And sadly, the only reason he got little Teleah back was because he was married to the mother when Teleah was born. The judge who ruled in Achane's favor made a point to emphasize on this little salient fact.
I'm divorced myself and believe marriage is an archaic institution. I most likely will never marry again. It left a bad taste in my mouth. But I also acknowledge that to many people, marriage means a great deal and is taken very seriously. And for another segment of the population, they simply want the same right to marry as everyone else and are denied that. I won't argue about marriage. We all have our individual beliefs on it. I respect that many see marriage quite differently than I do.
What I despise about marriage is the fact that it gives men more rights to their children than an unmarried man. An unmarried father can be everything you want in a man and father. He can be his children's hero. But because he doesn't have that magical piece of paper, he is at the mercy of the mother and the courts if he wants any sort of access to his children and damned near no say in how they are brought up, whether or not they'll be placed for adoption and in some instances, will be passed up by foster care should the children be removed from the mother's home. Yet an ex husband (or soon to be ex husband) can disappear for years and years. He can literally abandon his children and yet the mother has to get his permission to take the child out of country for travel, have some level of custody plan in place that gives him equal say and time. He can literally disappear for seven or eight years and can show up on the mother's doorstep demanding his weekend with the children. The mother could have been the sole breadwinner of the household before the marriage broke up. She could very well have been the only one contributing to their children and a pregnancy. The husband can be chronically unemployed and not lift a finger, but he gets equal say in the upbringing of the children. Being married to the mother alone means he is supporting her, even if he truly is not and she can prove such.
I'm about to share a little about myself here. I surrendered a child for adoption over six years ago. My second born daughter. My ex husband being the father of both her and the older daughter I am raising (who is now almost ten). We split up when I was three months pregnant with our second born. The marriage was chaos, to put it mildly. He wasn't necessarily abusive, but manipulative. He could come home after a bad day at work and by the time he was done venting about it, he could have YOU feeling like his bad day was your fault. Anywho, so we split up and I moved back with my parents. Four months after my return, I simply cracked and panicked. My soon to be ex husband had vanished and there was no support of any kind coming through for the daughter I was raising. Our older daughter, 3 1/2 yrs old at the time, was going through a lot of adjustment issues that were actually normal given the situation. We were still living with my parents and it was crowded. Everyone was on edge. I caved. I made an adoption plan for my soon to be second born.
So, my soon to be ex husband was out of the picture. He never called and never returned my calls. Emails often went unanswered. He lived across the country, so going to his house was out of the question. He wasn't paying child support for big sister M. But because we were married at the time of Z's conception and still legally married at that point, he had specific rights not afforded to an unwed father. He was served proper and given sixty days to contest (basically he had up until her birth). I didn't technically need his physical signature for consent, but he still had to be notified properly. His rights were terminated by default since he never showed up or filed any motions to contest the adoption. Had we not been married, he would have only been a brief topic of discussion between myself and the lawyer and his consent would not have been needed since there'd been no contact for several months. Hell, there wouldn't have been any money wasted in serving him.
The older daughter I am raising hasn't seen him or talked to him since she was 3 yrs old. I gave up emailing a few years ago and the last good number I had for him has long been disconnected. Yet, he can contest medical treatment, where she goes to school and, should I ever have the finances to afford such a trip, could bar her from leaving the country. I cannot even request to the school that they not release M to him should he show up out of the blue. I have to have legal documents showing he is not allowed to have her, which I cannot in good conscience do since he never actually harmed her.
Obviously, these are good rules to have because not all men are like my ex husband. I support these rules, for the most part. But it also highlights the way states discriminate against unwed fathers. A dead beat father who was married to the mother has all these rights, no matter how long he's been absent from the child's life. But an unmarried father can barely blink without being considered nothing more than a genetic donor and flesh and blood ATM for the mother.
It's time for states to level the playing field, folks. Why should a married father who does nothing have more rights to a child than an unmarried father who goes through hell and back to be a part of his child's life? That piece of paper that legally bound the couple together should not afford a man more rights to his children than any other man out there.
Interestingly enough, even in states that have somewhat more "progressive" laws for unwed fathers, that little ditty mentioned above is still often used if the mother wishes to surrender her child. Of course, the laws even state that if the woman cuts contact and refuses support, that is not a good enough reason to not financially support her and the father's rights are still in jeopardy. Most unmarried fathers are young and many more are unfamiliar with how the laws work. Many assume that simply coming forward, proving paternity and declaring they want the child is enough.
When you look at how the laws are worded, you realize there is a hidden meaning behind them. Another person pointed this out to me, so I cannot take credit for this revelation. But when you really read into it and realize that a man can provide receipts to show support, can show a bank account of money saved that the mother refused and prove that he had attempted to remain involved through the pregnancy and still lose his child to adoption, the laws can only mean one thing: you must be married to the mother to have any rights to a child born.
A simple piece of paper that legally ties together the relationship is really the only way a young father will have any rights to his child.
I'm sure there will be some reading this and thinking Well, if he really cared, he'd marry the girl to protect his rights and the child's rights. And many still believe that men should only have rights to a child if they're married to the mother when the child was born. Sadly, as we saw with the Terry Achane case, being married to the mother almost didn't help. It still took two years to get his daughter back after being placed for adoption by the mother, his now ex wife. And sadly, the only reason he got little Teleah back was because he was married to the mother when Teleah was born. The judge who ruled in Achane's favor made a point to emphasize on this little salient fact.
I'm divorced myself and believe marriage is an archaic institution. I most likely will never marry again. It left a bad taste in my mouth. But I also acknowledge that to many people, marriage means a great deal and is taken very seriously. And for another segment of the population, they simply want the same right to marry as everyone else and are denied that. I won't argue about marriage. We all have our individual beliefs on it. I respect that many see marriage quite differently than I do.
What I despise about marriage is the fact that it gives men more rights to their children than an unmarried man. An unmarried father can be everything you want in a man and father. He can be his children's hero. But because he doesn't have that magical piece of paper, he is at the mercy of the mother and the courts if he wants any sort of access to his children and damned near no say in how they are brought up, whether or not they'll be placed for adoption and in some instances, will be passed up by foster care should the children be removed from the mother's home. Yet an ex husband (or soon to be ex husband) can disappear for years and years. He can literally abandon his children and yet the mother has to get his permission to take the child out of country for travel, have some level of custody plan in place that gives him equal say and time. He can literally disappear for seven or eight years and can show up on the mother's doorstep demanding his weekend with the children. The mother could have been the sole breadwinner of the household before the marriage broke up. She could very well have been the only one contributing to their children and a pregnancy. The husband can be chronically unemployed and not lift a finger, but he gets equal say in the upbringing of the children. Being married to the mother alone means he is supporting her, even if he truly is not and she can prove such.
I'm about to share a little about myself here. I surrendered a child for adoption over six years ago. My second born daughter. My ex husband being the father of both her and the older daughter I am raising (who is now almost ten). We split up when I was three months pregnant with our second born. The marriage was chaos, to put it mildly. He wasn't necessarily abusive, but manipulative. He could come home after a bad day at work and by the time he was done venting about it, he could have YOU feeling like his bad day was your fault. Anywho, so we split up and I moved back with my parents. Four months after my return, I simply cracked and panicked. My soon to be ex husband had vanished and there was no support of any kind coming through for the daughter I was raising. Our older daughter, 3 1/2 yrs old at the time, was going through a lot of adjustment issues that were actually normal given the situation. We were still living with my parents and it was crowded. Everyone was on edge. I caved. I made an adoption plan for my soon to be second born.
So, my soon to be ex husband was out of the picture. He never called and never returned my calls. Emails often went unanswered. He lived across the country, so going to his house was out of the question. He wasn't paying child support for big sister M. But because we were married at the time of Z's conception and still legally married at that point, he had specific rights not afforded to an unwed father. He was served proper and given sixty days to contest (basically he had up until her birth). I didn't technically need his physical signature for consent, but he still had to be notified properly. His rights were terminated by default since he never showed up or filed any motions to contest the adoption. Had we not been married, he would have only been a brief topic of discussion between myself and the lawyer and his consent would not have been needed since there'd been no contact for several months. Hell, there wouldn't have been any money wasted in serving him.
The older daughter I am raising hasn't seen him or talked to him since she was 3 yrs old. I gave up emailing a few years ago and the last good number I had for him has long been disconnected. Yet, he can contest medical treatment, where she goes to school and, should I ever have the finances to afford such a trip, could bar her from leaving the country. I cannot even request to the school that they not release M to him should he show up out of the blue. I have to have legal documents showing he is not allowed to have her, which I cannot in good conscience do since he never actually harmed her.
Obviously, these are good rules to have because not all men are like my ex husband. I support these rules, for the most part. But it also highlights the way states discriminate against unwed fathers. A dead beat father who was married to the mother has all these rights, no matter how long he's been absent from the child's life. But an unmarried father can barely blink without being considered nothing more than a genetic donor and flesh and blood ATM for the mother.
It's time for states to level the playing field, folks. Why should a married father who does nothing have more rights to a child than an unmarried father who goes through hell and back to be a part of his child's life? That piece of paper that legally bound the couple together should not afford a man more rights to his children than any other man out there.
Thursday, October 3, 2013
The Kidnapping of Baby Desirai
For the small few who are following this blog, I assure you at some point I will post some fluff and maybe even introduce myself. But for now, you must tolerate the things that matter to me.
Desirai Simmons was born May of this year to a Native American mother and non-native father. Little Desirai hails from the Absentee Shawnee tribe. Shortly before her birth - two months before to be exact- her parents split up and her mother decided to cut contact with her father, Jeremy Simmons. Her mother, Crystal Tarbox, went on to marry another man shortly after. Must have been a hell of a quickie wedding since she split with Simmons when she was seven months pregnant and was married to another man by the time she gave birth a few months later. Either way, she split up with the father of her 3rd child and was married to another man by the time Desirai was born.
This case mirrors the "Baby Veronica" case in many ways. We have a young, unmarried couple who split up and an expectant mother who vanishes without a trace and refuses all contact from the father. After her quickie marriage, the couple sought help through a church and were directed to Nightlight and Ray Godwin. Yup, you heard correctly. They contacted the now infamous child trafficking "adoption" lawyer and agency in order to place little Desirai for adoption without notifying Simmons of her plans.
The couple who planned to adopt Desirai are from South Carolina. Hmmm....are we seeing a pattern here? After all, South Carolina was called the adoption mecca, if memory serves me correctly. The go-to state for quick and easy adoptions with no "birth" parent hassle. Fathers' rights are non existent. The same state that completely dismissed Veronica Brown's right to a best interest hearing. The same state that that felt her current situation at the time of her forced illegal adoption was irrelevant.
But this case gets a bit strange. The couple who were seeking to adopt little Desirai are in their 60's. They have adult children who had all moved out of the home. The move to adopt an infant almost seems like some weird, crazed empty-nester type nonsense. Not to be discriminatory with age, but I have not heard of a couple that old adopting a newborn. And last I checked, most agencies and lawyers won't consider a couple that advanced in years. But Bobby and Diane Bixler were the lucky couple chosen to take Desirai and raise her as their own.
This would have worked. I'm sure if a few things were done differently, we would probably be hearing about another epic custody battle that would span for years and years and cover two states holding a jurisdictional pissing match. What went wrong, might you ask? Well, it's well documented that the only paperwork filed was the petition for adoption in South Carolina. But Desirai was born in Oklahoma (you catching on here?). The senior citizen Bixlers left Oklahoma and took Desirai home, no longer wanting to wait it out while two lawyers bickered about who was in charge of what. Bobby Bixler had to get back to work. So they just took the baby and left.
And no Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children (ICPC) had been filed. All the legal eagles involved in trafficking Desirai out of Oklahoma couldn't seem to agree on who would file what. So Bobby and Diane Bixler, tired of waiting for all the proper forms to be finalized, just packed Desirai up and left for South Carolina.
For those unfamiliar with the ICPC, it is a very important piece of paper. It is legally mandated that this form is filled out and filed with the child's state of residence before a child can be transferred across state lines for foster care and adoptive placements. To not have one filed and still remove the child out of state is a crime. The Bixlers committed a crime. They may not have realized just how serious of a crime they had committed or possibly be aware that they committed a crime at all, but it is still a crime nonetheless.
K-I-D-N-A-P-P-I-N-G
Nightlight and Ray Godwin got themselves into some hot water. They might have been able to pull off Veronica Brown's sale to the Capobiancos, but this little mis-hap wasn't going to go unnoticed. When a South Carolina judge noticed there was no ICPC form in the initial adoption paperwork, he put a complete stop to the adoption. A lawyer in Oklahoma and the one involved in handling all the ICPC paperwork have demanded Desirai's return. Jeremy Simmons and Crystal's mother, Janet Snake, have demanded Desirai's return. Desirai, as I have said, is a member of the Absentee Shawnee tribe, so her removal out of state for adoption also violated the Indian Child Welfare Act
So, let's figure this out....nobody filed the ICPC and Desirai is a member of a federally recognized tribe, granting her certain protections under federal law. And, I might be wrong, but I do believe not having an ICPC is a violation of federal law as well. If I am wrong, please correct me. I assume it is since we're talking about transporting a child across state lines.
The judge who caught on that something was amiss demanded to know where the infant was and got numerous vague answers from the lawyers for the adoption agency. Rumors even circulated that little Desirai had been moved through at least two other families since the Bixlers. But no doubt that was done in an effort to conceal Desirai's where-abouts or to take heat off the Bixlers all together. But it was nothing more than a smoke-screen. The child's tribe had come forward, demanding custody and citing ICWA violations and were granted custody of Desirai through an Oklahoma court.
The Bixlers have yet to produce the child, hoping to hold onto her. I'm sure after seeing how the Veronica Brown case went, they are holding onto hope that if they hold on long enough, the courts will just finalize the adoption. Another set of entitled adopters who think since they paid top dollar for Desirai, they should be allowed to keep her.
The last update I have heard on this case is that the Absentee Shawnee are going to South Carolina to get their Oklahoma court order domesticated. I keep wondering what Oklahoma governor, Mary Fallin, plans to do to the Bixlers for kidnapping the little Oklahoma citizen. South Carolina courts put out charges against Dusten Brown for refusing to hand over his daughter to the Capobiancos in the fraudulent adoption. Governor Haley signed an extradition warrant for him. So what is Fallin going to do to the Bixlers? What are Oklahoma courts going to do? Where are the charges? Where is the extradition warrant?
Here's to hope that baby Desirai gets to go back home. With her family, where she belongs.
*for those wondering: the tribe got involved because of the ICWA violations. and as an unmarried father, Simmons would have been up against impossible odds if he tried challenging the South Carolina adoption alone. the lack of ICPC was a godsend in this case, no doubt about it, but I tend to think that OK and SC would have simply got one set up and brushed this under the rug had the tribe not come forward*
Desirai Simmons was born May of this year to a Native American mother and non-native father. Little Desirai hails from the Absentee Shawnee tribe. Shortly before her birth - two months before to be exact- her parents split up and her mother decided to cut contact with her father, Jeremy Simmons. Her mother, Crystal Tarbox, went on to marry another man shortly after. Must have been a hell of a quickie wedding since she split with Simmons when she was seven months pregnant and was married to another man by the time she gave birth a few months later. Either way, she split up with the father of her 3rd child and was married to another man by the time Desirai was born.
This case mirrors the "Baby Veronica" case in many ways. We have a young, unmarried couple who split up and an expectant mother who vanishes without a trace and refuses all contact from the father. After her quickie marriage, the couple sought help through a church and were directed to Nightlight and Ray Godwin. Yup, you heard correctly. They contacted the now infamous child trafficking "adoption" lawyer and agency in order to place little Desirai for adoption without notifying Simmons of her plans.
The couple who planned to adopt Desirai are from South Carolina. Hmmm....are we seeing a pattern here? After all, South Carolina was called the adoption mecca, if memory serves me correctly. The go-to state for quick and easy adoptions with no "birth" parent hassle. Fathers' rights are non existent. The same state that completely dismissed Veronica Brown's right to a best interest hearing. The same state that that felt her current situation at the time of her forced illegal adoption was irrelevant.
But this case gets a bit strange. The couple who were seeking to adopt little Desirai are in their 60's. They have adult children who had all moved out of the home. The move to adopt an infant almost seems like some weird, crazed empty-nester type nonsense. Not to be discriminatory with age, but I have not heard of a couple that old adopting a newborn. And last I checked, most agencies and lawyers won't consider a couple that advanced in years. But Bobby and Diane Bixler were the lucky couple chosen to take Desirai and raise her as their own.
This would have worked. I'm sure if a few things were done differently, we would probably be hearing about another epic custody battle that would span for years and years and cover two states holding a jurisdictional pissing match. What went wrong, might you ask? Well, it's well documented that the only paperwork filed was the petition for adoption in South Carolina. But Desirai was born in Oklahoma (you catching on here?). The senior citizen Bixlers left Oklahoma and took Desirai home, no longer wanting to wait it out while two lawyers bickered about who was in charge of what. Bobby Bixler had to get back to work. So they just took the baby and left.
And no Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children (ICPC) had been filed. All the legal eagles involved in trafficking Desirai out of Oklahoma couldn't seem to agree on who would file what. So Bobby and Diane Bixler, tired of waiting for all the proper forms to be finalized, just packed Desirai up and left for South Carolina.
For those unfamiliar with the ICPC, it is a very important piece of paper. It is legally mandated that this form is filled out and filed with the child's state of residence before a child can be transferred across state lines for foster care and adoptive placements. To not have one filed and still remove the child out of state is a crime. The Bixlers committed a crime. They may not have realized just how serious of a crime they had committed or possibly be aware that they committed a crime at all, but it is still a crime nonetheless.
K-I-D-N-A-P-P-I-N-G
Nightlight and Ray Godwin got themselves into some hot water. They might have been able to pull off Veronica Brown's sale to the Capobiancos, but this little mis-hap wasn't going to go unnoticed. When a South Carolina judge noticed there was no ICPC form in the initial adoption paperwork, he put a complete stop to the adoption. A lawyer in Oklahoma and the one involved in handling all the ICPC paperwork have demanded Desirai's return. Jeremy Simmons and Crystal's mother, Janet Snake, have demanded Desirai's return. Desirai, as I have said, is a member of the Absentee Shawnee tribe, so her removal out of state for adoption also violated the Indian Child Welfare Act
So, let's figure this out....nobody filed the ICPC and Desirai is a member of a federally recognized tribe, granting her certain protections under federal law. And, I might be wrong, but I do believe not having an ICPC is a violation of federal law as well. If I am wrong, please correct me. I assume it is since we're talking about transporting a child across state lines.
The judge who caught on that something was amiss demanded to know where the infant was and got numerous vague answers from the lawyers for the adoption agency. Rumors even circulated that little Desirai had been moved through at least two other families since the Bixlers. But no doubt that was done in an effort to conceal Desirai's where-abouts or to take heat off the Bixlers all together. But it was nothing more than a smoke-screen. The child's tribe had come forward, demanding custody and citing ICWA violations and were granted custody of Desirai through an Oklahoma court.
The Bixlers have yet to produce the child, hoping to hold onto her. I'm sure after seeing how the Veronica Brown case went, they are holding onto hope that if they hold on long enough, the courts will just finalize the adoption. Another set of entitled adopters who think since they paid top dollar for Desirai, they should be allowed to keep her.
The last update I have heard on this case is that the Absentee Shawnee are going to South Carolina to get their Oklahoma court order domesticated. I keep wondering what Oklahoma governor, Mary Fallin, plans to do to the Bixlers for kidnapping the little Oklahoma citizen. South Carolina courts put out charges against Dusten Brown for refusing to hand over his daughter to the Capobiancos in the fraudulent adoption. Governor Haley signed an extradition warrant for him. So what is Fallin going to do to the Bixlers? What are Oklahoma courts going to do? Where are the charges? Where is the extradition warrant?
Here's to hope that baby Desirai gets to go back home. With her family, where she belongs.
*for those wondering: the tribe got involved because of the ICWA violations. and as an unmarried father, Simmons would have been up against impossible odds if he tried challenging the South Carolina adoption alone. the lack of ICPC was a godsend in this case, no doubt about it, but I tend to think that OK and SC would have simply got one set up and brushed this under the rug had the tribe not come forward*
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
Why Parents Should Fear The Outcome of the Veronica Brown Case
Parents should fear the outcome of the Veronica Brown case. All parents, actually. Biological and adoptive. The end result showed a nation that money and connections can forcefully remove a child from her home and force her to live a charade of a life with complete strangers, never to see her family again. We were shown that a corrupt state that sides with child trafficking adoption agencies will just follow through with the sale and force a parent to give up his child for an adoption that was and is unnecessary. An adoption he didn't consent to and fought.
So what is next? Will more affluent couples start browsing the large families at the local market, wondering which child they might want and going through who they need to bribe, rub elbows with or just plain lie to in order to get a judge to sign off on an adoption order and allow them to just swoop in and take the child?
What will be the determining factor? They determined that Dusten Brown had no rights to his daughter due to "lack of support" pre-birth. So, will the affluent adopters use the same argument for taking a child from a poor family? Oh, you used public assistance, so you didn't support the child, therefore have no rights. Let's just pick that one right there. They look young enough to forget you even existed. An expectant mother on state medical assistance could be deemed not supporting her child pre-birth. A poor family needing medical assistance and food stamps for their children. Someone wealthier, more powerful and more connected could easily use the "didn't support the child" argument to claim those parents never had any right to raise the children and have a court forcefully adopt the child out of the family. Not even middle class adoptive families would be immune to this mass scoop of children for the connected and elite. Lose your job and get on unemployment, fall into harder times and need food stamps. All it would take is one of those things to deem you with no parental rights over your children because now you're not supporting them. And the courts and state governors would most likely support all of it. After all, poor parents shouldn't have rights if they're allowing the government to provide for them. Their children belong to the government now and the government decided to hand them off to someone more worthy of parenthood.
Of course, it would only be the cute young ones. They go for a fine price. Young and impressionable. Can't have those older ones who might actually have some memories of their deadbeat genetic donors. The elite would prefer nice little preschoolers and toddlers so they can pass them off as orphans they saved with little to no memory of where they came from. All the better if they can be deemed special needs. Gotta have those fat tax write offs and make sure nobody will dare ask why $100,000 was spent getting their hands on the child.
The state of South Carolina, governor Nikki Haley, judge Daniel Martin Jr and many others have told the nation and the world that anyone can just decide they want your kid and will use any means necessary to obtain your child. They will tarnish your reputation, lie, delude the rest of the world into thinking your child belonged with them from the beginning. And when they finally take your child from you, you'll get stuck with the legal bill.
We might as well just face the fact that we've become breeders for the elite.
So what is next? Will more affluent couples start browsing the large families at the local market, wondering which child they might want and going through who they need to bribe, rub elbows with or just plain lie to in order to get a judge to sign off on an adoption order and allow them to just swoop in and take the child?
What will be the determining factor? They determined that Dusten Brown had no rights to his daughter due to "lack of support" pre-birth. So, will the affluent adopters use the same argument for taking a child from a poor family? Oh, you used public assistance, so you didn't support the child, therefore have no rights. Let's just pick that one right there. They look young enough to forget you even existed. An expectant mother on state medical assistance could be deemed not supporting her child pre-birth. A poor family needing medical assistance and food stamps for their children. Someone wealthier, more powerful and more connected could easily use the "didn't support the child" argument to claim those parents never had any right to raise the children and have a court forcefully adopt the child out of the family. Not even middle class adoptive families would be immune to this mass scoop of children for the connected and elite. Lose your job and get on unemployment, fall into harder times and need food stamps. All it would take is one of those things to deem you with no parental rights over your children because now you're not supporting them. And the courts and state governors would most likely support all of it. After all, poor parents shouldn't have rights if they're allowing the government to provide for them. Their children belong to the government now and the government decided to hand them off to someone more worthy of parenthood.
Of course, it would only be the cute young ones. They go for a fine price. Young and impressionable. Can't have those older ones who might actually have some memories of their deadbeat genetic donors. The elite would prefer nice little preschoolers and toddlers so they can pass them off as orphans they saved with little to no memory of where they came from. All the better if they can be deemed special needs. Gotta have those fat tax write offs and make sure nobody will dare ask why $100,000 was spent getting their hands on the child.
The state of South Carolina, governor Nikki Haley, judge Daniel Martin Jr and many others have told the nation and the world that anyone can just decide they want your kid and will use any means necessary to obtain your child. They will tarnish your reputation, lie, delude the rest of the world into thinking your child belonged with them from the beginning. And when they finally take your child from you, you'll get stuck with the legal bill.
We might as well just face the fact that we've become breeders for the elite.
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
The Disappearance of Veronica Brown
It has now been eight days since Dusten Brown was forced to hand over his daughter to her kidnappers in a forced, unethical and illegal adoption. Eight oddly silent days. Other than a few photos that have surfaced of the kidnappers with their hostage, some of which showed Veronica Brown improperly secured in her booster seat, not a word has been heard. Supporters of the kidnapping have rallied to any news articles about Brown and the kidnapping of his daughter, accusing people of ignorance, of Dusten being a deadbeat, etc. Regurgitating the same bullshit they've been spewing for four years.
In the spirit of kidnapping, the hostage and her kidnappers have vanished completely. The same kidnappers who have plastered their faces all over every media outlet imaginable with their mouth piece, accomplice Jessica Munday of Trio Solutions. Glorifying in their limelight. Urging the public to see their side of the issue. Delusional kidnappers, they are. Believing themselves to be Veronica's parents the entire four year battle. Implying that Veronica's safety was being compromised in Dusten's care. Hinting at possible sex abuse. Slanderous remarks that have all now conveniently disappeared off the web. It seems that a mass purge has begun to take place in the wake of the kidnappers disappearance with their captive. It appears that they are doing the age old "CYA" to ensure their hostage never finds all the horrible things they've said about her father. And let's not forget their lawsuit, the one in which supporters and other spokespersons for the kidnappers have claimed had nothing to do with the Capobiancos and is all from South Carolina courts. Funny since Matt and Melanie Capobianco were the ones to file the lawsuit on September 9th.
So where are the kidnappers and their hostage? Why haven't they popped up on some obscure media outlet, gloating about their ill-gotten victory? Perhaps they realized the tide had shifted. People once in their favor now sided with Dusten having the right to raise his daughter. The lawsuit further instigated this massive shift. No longer seen as this wronged wanna be adoptive couple, but now as vile and selfish extortionists who want nothing more than to destroy the man who only wanted to raise his daughter. Destroy him by any means possible to ensure he can never try to fight her kidnapping.
The gloves are off, Matt and Mel. This message is for you:
Matthew and Melanie Capobianco, you have been tried in the court of public opinion and you have been found guilty of kidnapping a four year old child, child trafficking, child exploitation and violating Veronica Brown's civil rights. You are guilty of slander and defamation of character against the child's father, Dusten Brown, and obstruction due to your efforts to erase your slanderous remarks. It is in my opinion that you should be declared an enemy of this country! You and your accomplices: Jessica Munday, Trio Solutions, Christie Maldonado, Troy Dunn, South Carolina courts, both the governors of South Carolina and Oklahoma, adoption agency Nightlight and Ray Godwin. Guilty of crimes against children, child trafficking, crimes against humanity. You would be awarded no protections in this country any further if I had any say in the matter. Your names and faces will be plastered on every blog, every comment. The whole world will know who you are and what you have done. You will no longer be able to live in peace. Every time you show your faces in public, someone will know you all for what you are. Let the public proclaim loudly what you are whenever you are seen: KIDNAPPERS.
I am not instigating or condoning any act of violence against them. But let it be known that they will not have any peace until they return their hostage. They cannot hide the truth from their hostage forever. And disappearing from public view will not protect them from the whispers, the pointed fingers, the possibility that Veronica BROWN will learn the truth behind her kidnapping. That piece of paper that claims you are her parents is a fraud and is nothing more than a bill of sale, granting her a SLAVE NAME.
You cannot run. You cannot hide. The whole world is watching and aghast at your actions. The truth will come out sooner or later. And when it does, I will gladly fight to put all of you into prison.
In the spirit of kidnapping, the hostage and her kidnappers have vanished completely. The same kidnappers who have plastered their faces all over every media outlet imaginable with their mouth piece, accomplice Jessica Munday of Trio Solutions. Glorifying in their limelight. Urging the public to see their side of the issue. Delusional kidnappers, they are. Believing themselves to be Veronica's parents the entire four year battle. Implying that Veronica's safety was being compromised in Dusten's care. Hinting at possible sex abuse. Slanderous remarks that have all now conveniently disappeared off the web. It seems that a mass purge has begun to take place in the wake of the kidnappers disappearance with their captive. It appears that they are doing the age old "CYA" to ensure their hostage never finds all the horrible things they've said about her father. And let's not forget their lawsuit, the one in which supporters and other spokespersons for the kidnappers have claimed had nothing to do with the Capobiancos and is all from South Carolina courts. Funny since Matt and Melanie Capobianco were the ones to file the lawsuit on September 9th.
So where are the kidnappers and their hostage? Why haven't they popped up on some obscure media outlet, gloating about their ill-gotten victory? Perhaps they realized the tide had shifted. People once in their favor now sided with Dusten having the right to raise his daughter. The lawsuit further instigated this massive shift. No longer seen as this wronged wanna be adoptive couple, but now as vile and selfish extortionists who want nothing more than to destroy the man who only wanted to raise his daughter. Destroy him by any means possible to ensure he can never try to fight her kidnapping.
The gloves are off, Matt and Mel. This message is for you:
Matthew and Melanie Capobianco, you have been tried in the court of public opinion and you have been found guilty of kidnapping a four year old child, child trafficking, child exploitation and violating Veronica Brown's civil rights. You are guilty of slander and defamation of character against the child's father, Dusten Brown, and obstruction due to your efforts to erase your slanderous remarks. It is in my opinion that you should be declared an enemy of this country! You and your accomplices: Jessica Munday, Trio Solutions, Christie Maldonado, Troy Dunn, South Carolina courts, both the governors of South Carolina and Oklahoma, adoption agency Nightlight and Ray Godwin. Guilty of crimes against children, child trafficking, crimes against humanity. You would be awarded no protections in this country any further if I had any say in the matter. Your names and faces will be plastered on every blog, every comment. The whole world will know who you are and what you have done. You will no longer be able to live in peace. Every time you show your faces in public, someone will know you all for what you are. Let the public proclaim loudly what you are whenever you are seen: KIDNAPPERS.
I am not instigating or condoning any act of violence against them. But let it be known that they will not have any peace until they return their hostage. They cannot hide the truth from their hostage forever. And disappearing from public view will not protect them from the whispers, the pointed fingers, the possibility that Veronica BROWN will learn the truth behind her kidnapping. That piece of paper that claims you are her parents is a fraud and is nothing more than a bill of sale, granting her a SLAVE NAME.
You cannot run. You cannot hide. The whole world is watching and aghast at your actions. The truth will come out sooner or later. And when it does, I will gladly fight to put all of you into prison.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)