Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

TN: Single Dad Stops Adoption; To Get Custody of Daughter
Fathers & Families, Inc. ^ | May 13, 2010 | Robert Franklin, Esq.

Posted on 05/13/2010 12:26:33 PM PDT by fathers1

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last
To: AuH2ORepublican
The judge should have ruled that the child should stay with his adoptive parents......My youngest daughter is a bit over 1 and 1/2 years old and I’d flee the country rather than give her up if they found out that there was a mix-up at the hospital or something.

How is that different for the biological father? It would be OK for him to live out his life knowing that his child was taken from him?

21 posted on 05/13/2010 12:56:47 PM PDT by txroadkill (I bet if they voted Republican the wall would've been built years ago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: fathers1

Preventing this outcome is simple. Don’t sleep with lying whores.

What is really perverse is that pro-abortion advocates will say an abortion would have prevented heart ache of all parties involved.

What a perverse, wicked, evil generation we live in.


22 posted on 05/13/2010 12:57:27 PM PDT by Truth is a Weapon (Truth, it hurts soooo good!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

They have known about the biological father for the last 1 1/2 years. If they loved the child, they would have done the right thing.

If I steal your baby, sell it to muslims, and they raise him or her for 2 years, would it be OK for them to keep the baby? You know, since it is the only parent the baby knew?

Of course not.


23 posted on 05/13/2010 12:58:02 PM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: cjshapi

Why?

the NON-adoptive parents were attempting to obtain title via a lie.

They are total strangers to this child. There is no need or reason to include them.

The child has a father and the father stepped up and was counted when it mattered.


24 posted on 05/13/2010 12:58:31 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

Ridiculous example, but I got your point.


25 posted on 05/13/2010 1:00:40 PM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Onelifetogive

The child must have been born in early 2009. Therefore, I think the child is young enough to not suffer too much from the dislocation from her adoptive parents.

If the child was 3 or 4 I would say the opposite.


26 posted on 05/13/2010 1:00:51 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

I have seen too many slimy lawyers who say delay is your ally to adoptive parents. It is like the kid who kills his parents and then asks for mercy because he/she is an orphan.

I am always surprised how many pro-life people are more than willing to impose a paternal abortion via court order.


27 posted on 05/13/2010 1:00:54 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Onelifetogive

If it was me and I was advising the father, I would recommend that he include the almost adoptive parents in the child’s life because I believe that that would be in the best interests of the child but the father has a right to know and raise his child.


28 posted on 05/13/2010 1:01:30 PM PDT by tiki (True Christians will not deliberately slander or misrepresent others or their beliefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

If the child was 17 and 264 days, the answer must not change.


29 posted on 05/13/2010 1:02:05 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Onelifetogive

“Prosecute the mother for her fraud, but do not harm the child by removing it from who it considers to be its parents.”

And what of the rights of the father? When exactly did he surrender those?


30 posted on 05/13/2010 1:02:06 PM PDT by Grunthor (Over YOUR dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca
The adoptive parents were selfish and unreasonable to not return the child to her father years ago.

Maybe, but we don't really know much about the dad and whether he is a responsible adult. I can see a situation where the adoptive parents thought both biological parents were nuts and thought they were doing what was best for the baby.

Also, as a dad who ended up with custody of an 18 month son 27 years ago, I can safely say the process should never ever be about the parents. My rights were the last thing I cared about.

31 posted on 05/13/2010 1:03:21 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: fathers1

It is also unfortunate that the father, through blatant disregard for anything but a quick lay, knocked up this dishonest and calculating whore.


32 posted on 05/13/2010 1:06:09 PM PDT by EricT. (Can we start hanging them yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fathers1

Is the father employed and fit to parent the child? Can he provide a stable, loving home?(I couldn’t figure that out from the article)


33 posted on 05/13/2010 1:08:14 PM PDT by pnz1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Onelifetogive

Goodness has nothing to do with this. The biological father wants his child. That child is his. It’s extremely difficult for the adoptive parents, agreed, and for the child too.


34 posted on 05/13/2010 1:09:30 PM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

I know he had enough chutzpah to fight this from the start, family to back him, and money to pay lawyers.

That’s pretty much all I need to know.


35 posted on 05/13/2010 1:10:30 PM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: pnz1

He probably paid $100K to lawyers for a trial and appeal.

His parents and sister backed him up.

Probably pretty damn stable.


36 posted on 05/13/2010 1:11:39 PM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Jewbacca

Following the link and reading further, looks like the father has moved in with another woman and they also have a child now. It says they “plan to get married when they have the money for a formal wedding”..


37 posted on 05/13/2010 1:19:01 PM PDT by pnz1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: pnz1

So he shouldn’t have his child because he’s shacking up?

If that was the stanard, 1/2 of the children in this country would be taken from their homes.


38 posted on 05/13/2010 1:21:30 PM PDT by Jewbacca (The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: fathers1

As a vetern of multiple adoptions, including one which resulted in a baby taken from us and returned to an unstable birthmother, I can attest adoption law (and many of the folks involved in the process) are a disaster. No shock to see Bethany in the middle of this.


39 posted on 05/13/2010 1:21:46 PM PDT by Daus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: worst-case scenario

Actually, that’s not accurate. Until the mid to late 20th century, unmarried fathers had no rights.


40 posted on 05/13/2010 1:22:47 PM PDT by mockingbyrd (Remember in November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson