Court Returns Adopted Boy to Birth Mom

AP News ^ | 5-21-03 | AP

[cgk]

Court Returns Adopted Boy to Birth Mom

LANSING, Mich. (AP) -- The Michigan Supreme Court reversed the adoption of a 5-year-old boy by the couple who raised him for most of his life, saying the child should be returned to his birth mother.

In a unanimous decision, the high court said Tuesday that the family judge who terminated Melissa Kucharski's parental rights lacked enough evidence. The court also said that the judge should never approved the adoption while Kucharski was fighting the termination.

"I'm excited, pretty happy, kind of anxious," Kucharski said. "I knew in my heart that if the right person heard my story, they'd know that I was done wrong."

The adoptive parents, John and Deb Wordhouse of Grand Rapids, had no comment.

Jacob was 16 months old when he was placed in the Wordhouses' foster home in 1999 after his mother acknowledged using marijuana.

In 2001, when Jacob was 3, a family judge terminated Kucharski's parental rights, citing bonding problems between mother and son.

Kucharski appealed, but the judge went ahead and approved Jacob's adoption by the Wordhouses.

The Supreme Court said the judge relied too heavily on the opinion of a therapist who had met with Kucharski and her son for an hour. The court also said the judge seemed unduly influenced by the Wordhouses' relative wealth.

The justices said they realized the impact of their decision.

"There is no ideal result," the court said. "There is no outcome that will avoid the imposition of suffering upon either the birth parent of this child or his present adoptive parents."

Lora Holewinski, a Catholic Social Services caseworker who helped place Jacob with the Wordhouses, said the decision is "just going to destroy Jacob."

"I don't think the government understands the attachment issue," Holewinski said. "I just feel so bad for Jacob and his adoptive parents."

Kucharski said she has bought a house with her fiance. The couple have an 18-month-old son and a bedroom waiting for Jacob. Kucharski said she left it undecorated so Jacob can help pick the furnishings.

"If he does remember me, it will be the best day of my life," she said. "If he doesn't, that's going to be a little harder. But I think that he's going to transition just fine."

[cgk]

Lora Holewinski, a Catholic Social Services caseworker who helped place Jacob with the Wordhouses, said the decision is "just going to destroy Jacob."

This poor little boy's life has just been turned upside down - and violently. Everything he knows to date (presumably) is over.

[egarvue]

I am an adopted kid, and the father of three children. The formative years of 0-5 are absolutely crucial in a child's development. To rip them away like this is unbelievable. I realize that the birth mother was busted for pot; we can argue the whole "war on drugs" issue another time. But stories like this make me blind with anger. The Catholic worker is right, this will destroy the child. My only prayer is that these abominations called "judges" will pay very heavily for their sins in hell someday...

[onedoug]

Seems like another case of blood trumping values. So sad....

[mvpel]

This is one of a number of reasons my wife and I are looking to adopt in Russia, rather than here in the US.

We lived in Ann Arbor when the whole "Baby Jessica" thing was happening.

[Bahbah]

I have had several friends who have had great experiences adopting in China as well. The very best of luck to you.

[madprof98]

Kucharski said she has bought a house with her fiance. The couple have an 18-month-old son . . .

I'm sure it's obvious to the judge that the 5-year-old will be best off in the sort of home beloved of judicial activists. (The "fiance" part, of course, would be a problem in the unlikely event they actually have a ring and a date.)

[Jay D. Dyson]

This is yet another reason why, if my wife and I ever see the need to adopt a child, it will be an overseas adoption. The courts in this nation are far too disposed to consider drug-using morons who pop out kids as "better parents" than good people who actually want a child!

-Jay

[Raymond Hendrix]

The state cannot be permitted to simply take kids from parents because of the opinions of a social worker. If that is allowed to continue then none of us would be safe from the state. Too bad for this boy, but the court should have acted quicker to rectify this mistake. Kids do not belong to the state.

[thathamiltonwoman]

They're taking a little boy from what is probably a nice, loving home and handing him to a stranger and her boyfriend. This is very sad for American kids who need homes. More potential parents are going to skip the potential nightmare and adopt from overseas.

[sit-rep]

bttt...

[muawiyah]

Then why did the social worker undertake to destroy the little boy's life 2 years ago in the first place?

Is there an unreported crime here that should be punished, hmmmmm?!?!?

[Ditter]

Even if a mistake was made when the child was taken from his mother originally, it *cannot be corrected* by taking the child from the only home he has ever known & giving him to strangers. This is a nightmare for him. The birth mother should suck it up & get on with her life. What a selfish *itch!

[colorado tanker]

"There is no ideal result"

Actually, there is. The child stays in his home.

The only interest that should be taken into account is the best interest of the child - the "suffering" of the adults is totally irrelevant.

[Trickyguy]

Governments are magnets for morons. Judges, social workers...all of them are brain-dead.

[mountaineer]

I just wrote a story for our local newspaper about a statewide organization for adoptive families of Guatemalan children. In doing my research, I found a lot of info at the state dept. site, here

[madprof98]

"There is no ideal result," the court said. "There is no outcome that will avoid the imposition of suffering upon either the birth parent of this child or his present adoptive parents."

Not a word about the child himself. Nothing. This is the logical result of the dehumanization of children by the judiciary under the influence of Roe v. Wade. And what of parents of other children in need of good homes? I have been reading the many posts here from people who say such a decision would discourage them from adopting a child here in the U.S. This is the saddest outcome of this very wrong decision.

My own daughter (turning 5 in a few days) came to us at about the same time in life as this little boy went to his foster/adoptive parents. We have a very open relationship with the birth mother, who signed surrenders only because the state was about to terminate her parental rights. My daughter's birth-mom also lives on-and-off with a "fiance" of sorts, with whom she has other children. My daughter knows the woman and knows the story, but I am quite sure it would destroy her to be forced to live in that household, and I think adoptive parents--especially those who have bought into the new philosophy of open adoption--need to raise as much fuss about this decision as pro-lifers do about Roe.

[Salvey]

"I knew in my heart that if the right person heard my story, they'd know that I was done wrong."

Translation: I knew, from reading the New York Times and listening to NPR, that if I could only get a Politically Correct Pinhead to review my case, then I could give the shaft to those suckers who gave my child a home while I took time out to grow up.

[Oztrich Boy]

"There is no ideal result," the court said.

Couldn't they have just chopped the kid in half?

[MeekMom]

I hate adoptions!
I was adopted, abused.
There were no social workers to check up on me a year or so later, to see if I was being abused, to see if I were even alive or dead!