Posted on 05/16/2014 10:18:00 PM PDT by CorporateStepsister
"The biological family of a little girl taken from her foster parents and returned to her jailbird father have branded her adoptive mom and dad, ‘selfish’ for fighting to get her back and vowed never to give her up again.
Sonya, aged nine, had been in the care of Kim and David Hodgin, from Dickson, Tennessee for more than seven years, but she was recently handed over to ex-con John McCaul in Omaha, Nebraska.
The Hodgin family have released a heart-breaking phone conversation, revealing Sonya’s desperate pleas, begging to be reunited with them."
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
The poor child.
I agree with you completely; however the courts have veered far left since the 60s, even OJ Simpson got custody of his kids away from their grandparents in spite of being convicted in civil court of wrongful death (killing their mother), after the travesty of his criminal trial.
Many judges also have a double standard -- a divorcing husband has "needs", so it's ok if he sleeps with another woman he's not married to in front of his kids, even before the divorce is final; but if a woman dates, she can lose custody, even if she was not the adulterer. Thank you, "no-fault" divorce, which has done nothing but remove all justice from marriage-breaking. There is no universal standard, and results are all over the map when it comes to custody, or any other part of divorce.
It is ironic, given that one of the rallying cries of the feminist movement was "biology is NOT destiny" when the feminists wanted fathers to take a more active role so they could go to work outside the home -- but now the courts favor any kind of nasty biological parent over any upstanding adoptive parent. Biology seems to trump every other consideration. Disgraceful.
It was not flawed, did you read the article at all? It was because he was sentenced to more than 10 years then that was changed. Not the adoption that was flawed.
Although of course I agree with the rest of what you say.
Statistically, the worst category of child abusers is mommy's boyfriend.
the child did not belong to the foster parents. Stupid to think a child that is not legally free “belongs” to you.
That's because our evil socialist government has elevated single parenthood over married family. Marriage was the glue that held Western society together for its first 1,950 years.
“but now the courts favor any kind of nasty biological parent over any upstanding adoptive parent”
It’s important that it be that way... Overall, there is no substitute for the natural parent. Even if they pick their nose and eat peanut butter out of the jar.
She was adopted in 2006.
Or Mommy, if Mommy decides she wants a new life minus the spud.
“That’s because our evil socialist government has elevated single parenthood over married family. Marriage was the glue that held Western society together for its first 1,950 years.”
That’s not the reason. Unconditional love does not exist outside of the love of a parent for a child.
I disagree completely. But it depends on the situation; and family situations are complex, so there are no easy, one-size-fits-all answers, as you are trying to lay down here.
Why are people so dazzled by the good intentions and labels of government programs and departments and so blind to the actual results which are usually just the opposite of the stated intentions?
I'll offer one answer. Because the government heralds and trumpets every new program and expansion of power with a lot of pomp and circumstance. The public is dazzled. But months or years later, when the public has forgotten all about it, the government quietly hides the actual causes of its disastrous failures and goes into another round of dazzling the public and saying it doesn't have enough money to accomplish all these wonderful things. Around and around we go.
Government is the only entity that asks of a raise when it fails.
I don't think you understood the point of my post, which had to do with the danger of other partners after a divorce. Statistics analyze facts.
Of persons who live with children, the ones who commit the greatest numbers of abuses against children are the unmarried boyfriends of mothers. That does not mean they all do it. It means a greater percentage of them abuse children than do the unmarried girlfriends of the biological father, the non-biological married spouses of a biological parent, or the biological parents of either sex.
(The stats I researched did not track abuse by gay parents, because that is still a statistically small number, and because gay marriage is still not legal everywhere.)
In your life, maybe; but not all lives. You seem unable to allow any ideas that are not absolutely black and white, so there's no use trying to reason with you. Have a blessed evening.
“In your life, maybe; but not all lives. You seem unable to allow any ideas that are not absolutely black and white, so there’s no use trying to reason with you.”
Perhaps I should have included love between man God. That’s it though. Spouses don’t love unconditionally (although they take a vow to). Unconditionally, BTW, means no mater WHAT they do... You don’t love your spouse that way, and your kids don’t love you that way. But you most likely love your kids that way.
Get my point? It’s just the way it is...
You’re right; this is why I’m against no-fault divorce. I am just sick of hearing stories about kids getting targeted and thing is, I think people should stop thinking of going after what they THINK they want.
Thanks for making my point.
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.