Reader comments
Adoption turns into nightmare
128 comments | Read story
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next >
Been there | 10:00 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
We went through the same situation 10 years ago. We had corresponding with both
birth parents and both agreed to the adoption. After the birth, our lawyer sent
out the paperwork to the birth father, when he didn't send it back we
suspected something might be wrong.
Sure enough, he filed a lawsuit against us alleging he was never told about the adoption or even pregnancy for that matter! After 4 years and thousands in legal bills, we received affirmative judgments from the District, appellate and finally Utah Supreme court. The key to the case was the birth mother coming to Utah to give birth, and informing the birth father that she was there to do so. That put the jurisdiction in Utah courts.
We found out after the fact that the birth father had found another couple to give the baby to, who had offered to cover his "expenses" of $20,000.
This experience makes us really hesitant to ever consider domestic adoption again.
Sure enough, he filed a lawsuit against us alleging he was never told about the adoption or even pregnancy for that matter! After 4 years and thousands in legal bills, we received affirmative judgments from the District, appellate and finally Utah Supreme court. The key to the case was the birth mother coming to Utah to give birth, and informing the birth father that she was there to do so. That put the jurisdiction in Utah courts.
We found out after the fact that the birth father had found another couple to give the baby to, who had offered to cover his "expenses" of $20,000.
This experience makes us really hesitant to ever consider domestic adoption again.
JB | 10:01 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Chances are it's the father's parents who are pushing him to
"reclaim" his child. From the sound of the article he knew the girl
was pregnant but chose not to be around the last few months of the pregnancy and
the now decided "Oh, that's my kid, I want him". Harvey belongs
with the two loving parents he has here in Utah. They have spent so much time,
money and heartache to get him and he deserves a life of love and family. He
won't get it from his two unmarried teenage parents. The father should have
spoken up BEFORE the kid was born! If the biological father takes the son away I
think he should have to re-pay the adoptive parents all the money they have put
in to the adoption for FALSE HOPE!
Comments continue below
Meagan787 | 10:01 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
When the prospective adoptive parents learned two weeks after they brought the
baby home that the baby's biological father wasn't aware of the
adoption, the baby should have been returned to the father with no questions
asked.
The natural father has every constitutional right to parent his child without being put on trial in order to do so. His parental rights are protected by law and unless he signs a valid consent to end them, the child is LEGALLY his. One may not agree with the law, but never the less it IS the law. It's very important to note that in order for an adoption proceeding to be both ethical and legal that both the baby's parent's rights be protected by the laws in place. This is how the child's best interests are served.
If anyone is at fault, it is the adoption agency/attorney who facilitated this mess.
The prospective adoptive family needs to give the child back, and pursue another adoption where BOTH parents willingly relinquish their parental rights.
Only then will that adoption serve everyone's best interests.
Kathy Underhill
The natural father has every constitutional right to parent his child without being put on trial in order to do so. His parental rights are protected by law and unless he signs a valid consent to end them, the child is LEGALLY his. One may not agree with the law, but never the less it IS the law. It's very important to note that in order for an adoption proceeding to be both ethical and legal that both the baby's parent's rights be protected by the laws in place. This is how the child's best interests are served.
If anyone is at fault, it is the adoption agency/attorney who facilitated this mess.
The prospective adoptive family needs to give the child back, and pursue another adoption where BOTH parents willingly relinquish their parental rights.
Only then will that adoption serve everyone's best interests.
Kathy Underhill
Cinderella | 10:03 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I was adopted and found my Birthmother who was upset to say the least, she had
been promised I would never be able to contact her.
When I contacted my Birthfather he was shocked to find out he had a 27 year old daugher he was never told about...
Fathers should have equal rights, who knows what happened in this situation, it is hard not feel sorry for all parties involved, the birth father who says he wants his son, the adoptive parents who have bonded with this child and dont want to give him up and the Child who will hear mixed messages from all sides.
Maybe we should teach these painful lessons in SEx Ed classes to young adults they should hear painful adoption stories and maybe think twice about premarital relationships and the painful conseqences..As an adoptee my experiance has taught me that the Birth Mother has all the control to determine the future of the child they are giving away..How fair is that to the Child??? Or the Birth Father for that matter, everyone's rights should be considered.. I wish them all Luck
When I contacted my Birthfather he was shocked to find out he had a 27 year old daugher he was never told about...
Fathers should have equal rights, who knows what happened in this situation, it is hard not feel sorry for all parties involved, the birth father who says he wants his son, the adoptive parents who have bonded with this child and dont want to give him up and the Child who will hear mixed messages from all sides.
Maybe we should teach these painful lessons in SEx Ed classes to young adults they should hear painful adoption stories and maybe think twice about premarital relationships and the painful conseqences..As an adoptee my experiance has taught me that the Birth Mother has all the control to determine the future of the child they are giving away..How fair is that to the Child??? Or the Birth Father for that matter, everyone's rights should be considered.. I wish them all Luck
Helen | 10:08 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Andie sums it up..
Adoptive Parent 2 | 10:17 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
We have 2 adopted children. Our first the birthfather could not be found, he had
moved and his phone was disconnected. We had to hire an attorney and put an ad
in the newspaper to try and find him. There was never a contestation of parental
right thank goodness. LDS Family services did everything they could to make sure
the law was followed. The big questions is what is the law in Idaho? Different
states have different laws as to when parental right can be contested.
Nate | 10:24 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
The Birth Father is always informed of the pregnancy. Under Utah law (I'm
unsure about Idaho) the act of procreation is how the birth father is informed
that the birth mother may be pregnant. If you're not smart enough to
realize that sex leads to babies (thats what it is for after all) then you are
not fit to be a father. If a birth father feels that a birth mother is hiding a
pregnancy and/or adoption from him he can sign a registry with the State. This
registry must be checked and proof of that check must be presented to the judge
in order for relinquishment to take place.
As the father of two adopted boys I know that open adoption works and does not entitle the birth parents to visitation rights or require them to pay child support. It is the best way to help birth mothers feel that they are placing their baby (not giving up for adoption) with a kind and loving family. Adoption is about providing a stable home for a child. It is not about greed and stupidity.
As the father of two adopted boys I know that open adoption works and does not entitle the birth parents to visitation rights or require them to pay child support. It is the best way to help birth mothers feel that they are placing their baby (not giving up for adoption) with a kind and loving family. Adoption is about providing a stable home for a child. It is not about greed and stupidity.
Kim | 10:24 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
It breaks my heart whenever I hear a story like this. I am a mother of 6
children, biological and adopted. In my experience, the birth father MUST be
given options of terminating his rights or accepting to contest the adoption
before the baby can be placed in the loving arms of an adoptive family. A harsh
word to Andie who thinks a baby is like a piece of jewelry that should just be
"turned in" or "returned" when the owner changes his mind
about the agreement either by default or by voice. You don't just cancel
your order and place another one. This is a child for goodness sake! A baby
was placed into a loving family by the birth mother who wanted and chose to give
her child a great chance at a happy, secure, and stable life with 2 parents.
The birth father, unfortunately, decided too late, that he wants to be part of
that. The adoptive parents are being responsible & loving in protecting the
child that was placed in their family to be theirs. Wouldn't you do the
same for one of your children if their future was in jeopardy? This is a
family!
Jacob | 10:27 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Whoever facilitated and arragned the adoption should be fired. I agree that
while a birth-father generally has rights, in this particular situation the best
thing would be for the child to remain with the adoptive parents.
However, this should be accomplished by the birth-father simply allowing the child to go to the adoptive parents. If the courts were to force the father to forgo his rights, that would create an unimaginably horrible precedent.
Maybe one solution would be to tell the birth-father he can have the child back, but must reimburse every dollar that has been spent on this child, from the hospital to the diapers and formula. Maybe that would give him a dose of reality and a glimpse into the reality of actually being a real father. (And then presumably he'd allow the adoption to go through).
However, this should be accomplished by the birth-father simply allowing the child to go to the adoptive parents. If the courts were to force the father to forgo his rights, that would create an unimaginably horrible precedent.
Maybe one solution would be to tell the birth-father he can have the child back, but must reimburse every dollar that has been spent on this child, from the hospital to the diapers and formula. Maybe that would give him a dose of reality and a glimpse into the reality of actually being a real father. (And then presumably he'd allow the adoption to go through).
Michael | 10:31 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Just because a women gives a child up for adoption does not mean she
doesn't want the child. In most cases, she wants what is best for the
child, which is a stable home for the child.
Joe | 10:32 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
This adoption was botched by the legal system and the adoption agency. I know
that if the adoption agency has not been able to contact the birth father they
can publish a notice in local papers (but who reads the legal notices...
especially if you don't know that a woman you had a relationship with ended
up pregnant.) I don't think that adoptions should be finalized until the
birth father (or every potential birth father) has been contacted concerning the
situation and been informed of his rights. If he has knowledge of the situation
and does not contest the adoption process within a reasonable time (6 weeks
after the birth of the child... seems reasonable.) then the process should be
able to go through to finalization.
If the birth father is not aware of the pregnancy of the woman or the birth of the child, then his only recourse should be monetary against the birth mother for failing to inform him. That's what he deserves for getting involved with a woman like this and not acting responsibly himself. Children don't need to be raised by people that had no intention of parenting relationship with eachother.
If the birth father is not aware of the pregnancy of the woman or the birth of the child, then his only recourse should be monetary against the birth mother for failing to inform him. That's what he deserves for getting involved with a woman like this and not acting responsibly himself. Children don't need to be raised by people that had no intention of parenting relationship with eachother.
ID Jazz | 10:34 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
RE: To those who thinks this father deserves the baby I have no problem as long
as he would been with this young mother all the way through the pregnancy and
payed half of all the DR. visits, Hospital bills, and all associated costs with
this pregnancy. But its not right or fair to sit on the side lines and decide
when you want to be a father. If he wants the child back at this point then he
needs to pay for half of the mothers bills as well as reimburse the adoptive
family for there expenses which would hopefully send a message to other people
out there that you do not get to sit on the sidelines and choose when you want
to be a parent.
Biology /Smiology | 10:35 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I am adopted. I had a wonderful life. I honor the choice my birth mother made,
but my MOTHER and FATHER are the ones who cared for me when I was sick, fed me,
clothed me, helped me get an education, and instilled values in me. My birth
mother (the father had perished)wanted me to have the best life possible. And I
did. I will be eternally grateful to the woman who not only gave me birth, but
also gave me a wonderful life. Too many children are being raised by children or
grandparents when they could be welcomed into a loving family. Babies are not
puppies to be passed from pillar to post.
Laurie Dunfield-Baker | 10:40 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
It's a sad commentary, indeed, when a man must sign a registry when he
sleeps with a woman in order to have the right to be considered the father of
his own flesh and blood. The double standard is amazing to me. Women who get
pregnant out of wedlock and decide to give the child up to adoption are viewed
as unselfish, loving and giving. Let that mother change her mind upon the
birth, however, and that story changes. And how dare a father decide to parent
his own child! Natural families should be considered the first place for
children who are not going to be raised by their natural parents. It is in the
best interest of the child.
Yes, there are a lot of good adoptive homes for children when adoption is needed for that child. But, there are plenty of abusive adoptive homes, as well, where parents have alcoholism and other problems. Let's not judge the father as unfit. There is no proof of that, only the supposition of some.
Yes, there are a lot of good adoptive homes for children when adoption is needed for that child. But, there are plenty of abusive adoptive homes, as well, where parents have alcoholism and other problems. Let's not judge the father as unfit. There is no proof of that, only the supposition of some.
Elizabeth W | 10:46 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I live and work in Idaho. There is no putative father registry. Putting a
legal notice in the paper is all that is required for a mother to relinquish the
baby without the father's consent. There is no way for a man to assert
paternity prior to a baby's birth and no clear system for him to do so
afterwards.
If the prospective adoptive parents learned that the father was seeking custody when the baby was 2 weeks old, the father most likely acted as promptly as the law allowed.
It is the laws of Idaho that created this problem.
Adoption exists to find families for children who need them; not to find babies for infertile couples. I feel badly for the couple who wish to adopt, but they knew it was high risk from the beginning. The baby has never been theirs.
If the prospective adoptive parents learned that the father was seeking custody when the baby was 2 weeks old, the father most likely acted as promptly as the law allowed.
It is the laws of Idaho that created this problem.
Adoption exists to find families for children who need them; not to find babies for infertile couples. I feel badly for the couple who wish to adopt, but they knew it was high risk from the beginning. The baby has never been theirs.
Krudd | 10:47 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
This bio dad is a sperm donor.
Adoption is a miracle in many's eyes. I have two adopted grandkids.
Leave this sweet family alone.
Adoption is a miracle in many's eyes. I have two adopted grandkids.
Leave this sweet family alone.
Cindy | 10:59 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Isnt it interesting that the Birthparents the adoptive parents and the adoption
Agency get to Deceide everything for the "Adoptive Child" But the
"Adoptive Child" will never have the right under Utah Law to find out
anything about His/Her
"Birth Families" Medical History, Family History and everything Non Adoptees take for granite..
If People are not responsible enough to take steps in preventing Pregnancy and they choose to place their children up for adoption, adoptees should have the right to access their Birth parents and
any information they may need or even want when they turn 18.
It shouldnt be as easy as signing a paper and never having to look back, the adoptive child will have to live with whatever circumstances everyone else picked out for them....How sad for the child in this article, Everyone obviously loves this child enough to fight for him except of course the Birth mother and how sad someday he will know that...
"Birth Families" Medical History, Family History and everything Non Adoptees take for granite..
If People are not responsible enough to take steps in preventing Pregnancy and they choose to place their children up for adoption, adoptees should have the right to access their Birth parents and
any information they may need or even want when they turn 18.
It shouldnt be as easy as signing a paper and never having to look back, the adoptive child will have to live with whatever circumstances everyone else picked out for them....How sad for the child in this article, Everyone obviously loves this child enough to fight for him except of course the Birth mother and how sad someday he will know that...
Greg | 11:14 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
If the father is required to register his interest with the state, why
can't he register his dis-interest too...? If all the decisions are left
up to the mother, (ie: adoption, abortion, keeping it) then why is the father
supposed to pay for her choice.
Take for example this: the 'father' finds out the mother is preg - he decides he doesnt want a child - if she chooses that she does, he has to pay for 18 years. If he wants the child & she doesn't he can't stop her from having an abortion.
The system is completely messed up with no easy solution. This case is sad..the adoptive family seems like good people and the child is probably better off with them.
LDS family services is way too quick to place a baby with a good LDS family without taking the proper steps. If they would have obtained the fathers signature, none of this would be happening.
Too bad...best of luck to the adoptive parents.
Take for example this: the 'father' finds out the mother is preg - he decides he doesnt want a child - if she chooses that she does, he has to pay for 18 years. If he wants the child & she doesn't he can't stop her from having an abortion.
The system is completely messed up with no easy solution. This case is sad..the adoptive family seems like good people and the child is probably better off with them.
LDS family services is way too quick to place a baby with a good LDS family without taking the proper steps. If they would have obtained the fathers signature, none of this would be happening.
Too bad...best of luck to the adoptive parents.
Jay | 11:16 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
What say ye about LDS social services? Should they be held to a standard of care
that could have prevented this devastating situation? Should they not be held
accountable to the Neilsons? I say yes - they should be held accountable.
Zacko | 11:22 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
In this case the biological father was only a sperm donor and deserves no
parental classification. Give me a break. Just because this guy was fertile does
it give him any rights?
I'd dare bet it is a slighted grandma-to-be that has pushed her son into fighting for custody.
Shame on him and anyone who is pushing him into causing such a fight. If he really cared about this child he would have acted more responsible in the first place.
Being a man and father is more than contributing a single cell to a pregnancy.
As for the Nielsons, anything less than full custoday is unacceptable.
This is another example of why "open" adoptions are a bad idea.
I'd dare bet it is a slighted grandma-to-be that has pushed her son into fighting for custody.
Shame on him and anyone who is pushing him into causing such a fight. If he really cared about this child he would have acted more responsible in the first place.
Being a man and father is more than contributing a single cell to a pregnancy.
As for the Nielsons, anything less than full custoday is unacceptable.
This is another example of why "open" adoptions are a bad idea.
Father's Rights? | 11:54 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
You people are ludicrous who think that the child should stay with the birth
father. The law as quoted by �the courts are to
blame� is extremely specific. If the birth father knew
about the child, which he did, (assuming the article is representative of the
truth, i.e. he saw her up to 2 months before she gave birth), then the birth
father does not deserve Harvey. He had his chance!! He blew it. He had the
opportunity to say, �Hey, I am dad and I want the
child!!� He didn�t do it. Therefore
forfeiture of parental rights occurred. Shame on those who think an exception
should be made including the judge!! The judge needs to wake up and remember it
is not his job to try and write exceptions to the law!! You people need to wake
up and realize that there was a forfeiture of parental rights!!! The birth
father has no leg to stand on!!!
Marissa | 11:59 a.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Thank you to "To the corts are to blame". This is the same in Utah.
When a birth mom comes in to an adoption agency she is required to put down who
the father is. The father is contacted at that point and he can make his
choices at that point. If the mother does not know there is a lot of work that
goes into identifying who he might be. I think he has 24 hours after birth to
come forward and to exert his rights to the child. If this is not done the
father can have no claim on the child. Why is this even happening?
LDS Social Services have done thousand of these adoptions before and I am sure all ts were crossed and all is were dotted. Once again the courts try to overstep the law rather than enforcing it.
LDS Social Services have done thousand of these adoptions before and I am sure all ts were crossed and all is were dotted. Once again the courts try to overstep the law rather than enforcing it.
To Peeved. | 12:00 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
My kids are all adopted, and very much wanted children of their birthparents.
But because of their circumstances, they were not able to keep the children.
Some were abused, some were drug addicted, and one - she was being
'sold' to pay for more drugs.
My children tell me daily that they are thankful that they came to our home, and we are thankful that we have been given the opportunity to raise these awesome kids. If your personal circumstances regarding adoption were negative ones, I'm sorry. On a whole, adoption is a positive experience. It has been for my family, and for other families I have met in our situation.
I thank my God everyday for the children he sent to our family, and for the birthparents' that they can get their lives moving in the right direction. I know how the Neilsons feel. I don't know how I could send any of my kids back.
My children tell me daily that they are thankful that they came to our home, and we are thankful that we have been given the opportunity to raise these awesome kids. If your personal circumstances regarding adoption were negative ones, I'm sorry. On a whole, adoption is a positive experience. It has been for my family, and for other families I have met in our situation.
I thank my God everyday for the children he sent to our family, and for the birthparents' that they can get their lives moving in the right direction. I know how the Neilsons feel. I don't know how I could send any of my kids back.
Miss Synthia Forsyth | 12:06 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
...perhaps I won't adopt...
Boo | 12:08 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
This is horrible!! I have a nephew who was adopted a year ago. If this was our
situation it would devistate us all. He is attached to the only parents he
knows, and we as a family are attached to him. I am glad to hear that they are
fighting this, that baby is with his parents, and a family that has gone through
a whole lot more then just a pregnancy and a delivery to get him. I hope they
win!!! And by the way open adoptions are the norm now and those children can
have any information about bio parents that they want.
Jeff | 12:08 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I wish the adopting couple all the best in the world and I hope they get to keep
the child.
When my wife and I considered adopting our daughter we decided to adopt from China. One of the reasons being that we would never have to worry about this type of situation happening.
When my wife and I considered adopting our daughter we decided to adopt from China. One of the reasons being that we would never have to worry about this type of situation happening.
Phil | 12:10 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I am adopted my sister is adopted. I have adopted 3 kids! My wife and I have
spent over 85,000 for adoption!! We have been burned at least once with a
failed adoption, because the woman just saw $$ signs. For all of you that can
have kids naturally I take my hat off to you. But for those of us that cant you
cant tell me that we dont sacrifice and give it our all to adopt!!! The article
said that the birth mom lost track of the father, the last couple of months of
the pregnacy. Question, is was it because she wanted to or did the father tell
her he did not want anything to do with her and the baby?!? Now all of a sudden
the father wants the baby, or better yet the story says they talked with the
birth father's mother. and she says that she would not comment until they
talk with an attorney! sounds to me like grandma wants a grandchild! so could
she be pressuring the boy to say he wants his kid now? Question, do the courts
really know what is best for the kid?1? It is a true mess!
nobody | 12:15 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
does anybody else not care? I read through most of these posting before I
realized.... I don't care. I just wasted my time.
Just a thought | 12:15 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I have read all of these comments. It is interesting that many of you are
making assumptions on the fathers behalf. That he is this role model of a
father. Many of you are claiming these adoptive parents are selfish. You read
an article and jump to conclusions. How do you know that the father is a good
guy. The article doesn't tell you much about him, only that he wants the
baby. Why now? Did he know about the baby from birth. Is it really him that
wants the baby or his parents. Before we can judge or place blame, we should
find out. Maybe the reason they are fighting so hard is because having the
baby stay with them really is the best for the baby. We don't know. We
probably won't ever know the truth unless we are one of the two parties.
Laurie Dunfield-Baker | 12:21 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Biology /Smiology wrote:
"Too many children are being raised by children or grandparents when they could be welcomed into a loving family. Babies are not puppies to be passed from pillar to post."
I'm adopted as well, but see it a little differently.
What makes anyone think that the child's own flesh and blood relatives won't be a loving family? What makes anyone think that all adoptive homes will be loving families? We cannot be biased toward adoptive families because they are adoptive families. Both types of families--adoptive and natural relative--can be good or bad environments for the child. As for age, well there are adoptive parents of all ages, so adoption agencies don't find age to be a serious issue.
Just because my natural relatives couldn't care for me doesn't mean all natural parents can't do so, and in a loving home. This man and his family apparently want to provide such a home for their own flesh and blood.
"Too many children are being raised by children or grandparents when they could be welcomed into a loving family. Babies are not puppies to be passed from pillar to post."
I'm adopted as well, but see it a little differently.
What makes anyone think that the child's own flesh and blood relatives won't be a loving family? What makes anyone think that all adoptive homes will be loving families? We cannot be biased toward adoptive families because they are adoptive families. Both types of families--adoptive and natural relative--can be good or bad environments for the child. As for age, well there are adoptive parents of all ages, so adoption agencies don't find age to be a serious issue.
Just because my natural relatives couldn't care for me doesn't mean all natural parents can't do so, and in a loving home. This man and his family apparently want to provide such a home for their own flesh and blood.
Emily | 12:31 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I agree with Zacko about the birthfather, but however completely disagree that
open adoptions are a bad idea. I myself am a birthmother to a 3 year old little
boy and we have an open relationship. Being able to see him and to know how he
is doing brings me such peace and reaffirms that I made the best decision for
him.
Laurie Dunfield-Baker | 12:36 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Cinderella wrote:
"I was adopted and found my Birthmother who was upset to say the least, she had been promised I would never be able to contact her.
Actually, because of the way adoption occurs, no law exists that can grant anonymity to a birthparent. If your birthmother was promised you couldn't contact her, then the agency lied. There is no law against freedom of association. Besides, over 90% of birthparents welcome some type of contact. Don't believe me, just check the stats. Also, a simple Google search will reveal a variety of birthparents searching, along with organizations of birthparents who show that relinquishment documents never promised anonymity, nor did they want it.
"I was adopted and found my Birthmother who was upset to say the least, she had been promised I would never be able to contact her.
Actually, because of the way adoption occurs, no law exists that can grant anonymity to a birthparent. If your birthmother was promised you couldn't contact her, then the agency lied. There is no law against freedom of association. Besides, over 90% of birthparents welcome some type of contact. Don't believe me, just check the stats. Also, a simple Google search will reveal a variety of birthparents searching, along with organizations of birthparents who show that relinquishment documents never promised anonymity, nor did they want it.
William | 12:41 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
What I'm not seeing in the father's case is what financial support has
he given to the Birth mother or to the adoptive partents for their loss? The
adopting parents have spent thousands of dollars on this adoption the mother has
likely been given support from both the adoption agency and the adopting couple.
I don't see where the father has done anything except claim blood rights.
If the father truely wants this child he needs to step up financially and prove it by paying back the adoptive parents, the adoption agency and also show the courts that he can care for this child.
If the father truely wants this child he needs to step up financially and prove it by paying back the adoptive parents, the adoption agency and also show the courts that he can care for this child.
To Cindy | 12:48 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
First: The adoption in question, if you read the article, is an "open"
adoption. The child will have contact (it is allowed and planned for) with the
birth parents as extended family. The mother loved the baby enough to give him
to someone who could take care of his needs, because she new she could not.
Second: Placing a child with a parent not ready for the colic, illness and other "blessings" a baby brings, can kill the baby when the "parent" can't take anymore crying and shakes the baby... to death. See recent news articles about 2 young "fathers".
I had a child out of wedlock a result of date rape. I was in a position where I could provide for my son and really wanted him. I was engaged. The father wanted custody because he had two buyers for my son. I had a battle with him for 8 months. Later he wanted visitation (6+ years later) and screwed it up by not being responsible. The courts permantly suspended his right to visitation. My son is now an adult who wishes his "sperm donor" had stayed out of his life.
Second: Placing a child with a parent not ready for the colic, illness and other "blessings" a baby brings, can kill the baby when the "parent" can't take anymore crying and shakes the baby... to death. See recent news articles about 2 young "fathers".
I had a child out of wedlock a result of date rape. I was in a position where I could provide for my son and really wanted him. I was engaged. The father wanted custody because he had two buyers for my son. I had a battle with him for 8 months. Later he wanted visitation (6+ years later) and screwed it up by not being responsible. The courts permantly suspended his right to visitation. My son is now an adult who wishes his "sperm donor" had stayed out of his life.
MD sick of the neglect | 1:01 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I take care of mothers and babies; I have been involved in several situations
where a father has abandoned the mother until the baby is born and then tries to
take over the custody of the infant.
I strongly believe that if he is not man enough to step up to the plate and take care of her in her time of greatest need during the pregnancy; be there for her in her pain and strife and suffering that he has severed all rights to the baby.
He is then just a SPERM DONOR. I have been up close and personal to many fathers stepping in and saying they are going to have custody of the baby and then I have, almost without exception, seen great neglect of that child. Usually the only good care given are by the grandparents.
The adoptive couple is not selfish. They have emotionally bonded to their child. Yes their child.
How would you feel if I came to your home and took your 6 month child away and said sorry he is not yours now. Never again. Just forget about him.
Do the right thing judge. Have enough courage to throw out the birth-father.
I strongly believe that if he is not man enough to step up to the plate and take care of her in her time of greatest need during the pregnancy; be there for her in her pain and strife and suffering that he has severed all rights to the baby.
He is then just a SPERM DONOR. I have been up close and personal to many fathers stepping in and saying they are going to have custody of the baby and then I have, almost without exception, seen great neglect of that child. Usually the only good care given are by the grandparents.
The adoptive couple is not selfish. They have emotionally bonded to their child. Yes their child.
How would you feel if I came to your home and took your 6 month child away and said sorry he is not yours now. Never again. Just forget about him.
Do the right thing judge. Have enough courage to throw out the birth-father.
bob | 1:05 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Elizabeth W, there IS in fact a putative father registry in Idaho.
kasey | 1:50 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
I love that everyone here has been complaining about the father, the agency, the
laws, or whomever...but even though we're all willing to write a little
comment on a news column, who would ever be willing to write a little note to
their senator or to the legislature; to write something that could actually make
a difference.
OMGosh | 2:06 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
You people are making harsh comments about a situation and people you have no
idea about.
Seems clear cut to me | 2:18 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
If what "the courts are to blame" summarized of previously precedent
setting cases from Idaho courts, why all the haranguing on both sides of the
argument?
There have to be laws or anarachy would prevail. The father blew it. He "did" have rights, which he relinquished by not claiming them while he had plenty of time to do so. Are you telling me that he couldn't tell that a girl he had dated was 7 months pregnant? The article implies he had been in contact at least until the last couple months before birth.
There have to be laws or anarachy would prevail. The father blew it. He "did" have rights, which he relinquished by not claiming them while he had plenty of time to do so. Are you telling me that he couldn't tell that a girl he had dated was 7 months pregnant? The article implies he had been in contact at least until the last couple months before birth.
Laurie Dunfield-Baker | 2:21 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Kasey wrote:
"I love that everyone here has been complaining about the father, the agency, the laws, or whomever...but even though we're all willing to write a little comment on a news column, who would ever be willing to write a little note to their senator or to the legislature; to write something that could actually make a difference"
There are those that do that, and more. :-)
"I love that everyone here has been complaining about the father, the agency, the laws, or whomever...but even though we're all willing to write a little comment on a news column, who would ever be willing to write a little note to their senator or to the legislature; to write something that could actually make a difference"
There are those that do that, and more. :-)
grizzman | 2:30 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
and one more thing, the words "MOTHER AND FATHER" are words given to
those who give love and homes and sacrafice all for the well being of there
child, and go through the pregnancy supporting the mother to be....not goin off
and persuing " THERE" life, does the word selfish come in
here.....judge, please leave the baby with those who truly love him,the family
he has now...not to a girl and boy who played house for a few night....let them
go on with there lives, grow up..and learn from there mistakes, dont make the
baby pay too.
Michelle B. | 2:46 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
The air in this article is so thick with self-righteous entitlement, I am still
trying to wave it away from my face.
let them pay | 3:10 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
why dont we let the baby go back to the birth mother and let the birth father
pay child support to see if he really wants the baby! OR if the birth father
gets the baby he should repay the adoptive parents for all food, diapers,
medicine, clothes, etc. that the baby has gone through in the last 5 months. It
sounds to me like something (read someone, his mother) has changed his mind.
Best Interest of the Child | 3:12 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Unfortunately, this happens too often because adoption is largely an unregulated
business, and very profit driven. Imo LDS Family Services as well as the Family
Court that granted custodial care to the Nielson's need to be held
responsible. Whether the natural father knew or didn't know about his child
being born is a moot point. Under the law, he had a legal right to be notified
by those in authority.
Get over it | 3:27 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
All children are to be raised by the persons who make them whether it is one or
both. Can't have kids? It's your lot in life. I had a friend in her
30s who recently commited suicide because she learned her sister was her birth
mom. Young mom's keep your child - yes you did sin by having sex outside
marriage but to give the child away is not the way to 'go away and sin no
more.' The people who want your child are the ones who are being selfish.
Considering that the LDS church is so family oriented they seem to have no
problem with tearing apart single young families. Talk about a double standard.
I'm surprised that they don't try to talk divorced people into giving
their children up for adoption when dad or even mom doesn't want to live up
to the churches expectations. I know a person who had a child outside of
marriage and had a lot of people trying to tell her to give the child up. A few
years later she married the father. Today they have 4 children and are an
eternal family.
Mike R. | 3:30 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
If the kid indeed is given to his "Father" aka Sperm Donor, it would
be an interesting follow up for five and 10 years down the road to have articles
written about the little boy's progress with the sperm donor.
My guess is by then this guy will be out of the kid's life and the kid is being raised by his Grandparents who did such a good job with the Sperm Donor who caused it all in the first place.
The Sperm Donor and the Sperm Recipient ought to be obligated to reimburse this couple for ALL expensed realated to the failed adoption.
My guess is by then this guy will be out of the kid's life and the kid is being raised by his Grandparents who did such a good job with the Sperm Donor who caused it all in the first place.
The Sperm Donor and the Sperm Recipient ought to be obligated to reimburse this couple for ALL expensed realated to the failed adoption.
lvman | 3:46 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Most of the people making extremely judgmental comments about this article must
have ESP since there are absolutely no facts presented in this article that
tells us why this father might have parental rights. Yet most of the commenters
claim he did nothing to protect his rights other than to show up late. Where
are you getting this from. The Idaho laws, like Utah's are fairly harse
against unwed fathers. If he was in state, he had to take specific actions
before the adoption becaue he is presumed to know about the pregnancy. If he
was out of state or if the mother left the state, he is allowed until the
adoption is finalized to contest the adoption. So for all you possessors of
ESP, what are the true facts here?
cricker1 | 3:49 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
Even though I've been through something similar to this in California, it
sounds like some of you are more familiar than I am with Idaho & Utah law.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but unless there is a a paternity test and both the birth mother AND birth father legally terminate their rights, until the adoption is legally finalized, there is always a chance those birth parents can come back and ask for their child, right? That's how it is in CA. Adoptive parents are told this fact and sign that they were informed. If the birth parent's rights are not legally terminated, it's risky and the adoptive parents are gambling that it will not be an issue with their adoption in the future.
All this talk about LDS Family Services botching it, etc. doesn't make sense. I'll bet the adoptive family knew this was a risky adoption before they ever accepted the child.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but unless there is a a paternity test and both the birth mother AND birth father legally terminate their rights, until the adoption is legally finalized, there is always a chance those birth parents can come back and ask for their child, right? That's how it is in CA. Adoptive parents are told this fact and sign that they were informed. If the birth parent's rights are not legally terminated, it's risky and the adoptive parents are gambling that it will not be an issue with their adoption in the future.
All this talk about LDS Family Services botching it, etc. doesn't make sense. I'll bet the adoptive family knew this was a risky adoption before they ever accepted the child.
Anonymous | 3:59 p.m. Dec. 7, 2007
For those calling the father a 'sperm donor' go back and re-read the
article. His rights were not terminated at any point, and he contested two
weeks after the adoption. Harvey was two to four weeks old at the time and the
adoption was not finalized.
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next >
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Cally Nielson holds 5 1/2-month-old Harvey at the Nielsons' home in American Fork on Thursday.
- BSA to host audiocast over Internet 5:47 p.m.
- Garbage trucks to trash teen drinking 5:47 p.m.
- Court seeks judicial candidates 5:29 p.m.
- Simple candies for the holidays 5:15 p.m.
- Latkes from frozen hash browns 5:14 p.m.
- Cakes taking a starring role 5:14 p.m.
- KSL is No. 1 5:14 p.m.
- Late local news ratings 5:14 p.m.
- Black Bean and Shrimp Salad perfect 5:14 p.m.
- Nonni's offers soft version of biscotti 5:14 p.m.
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game
- BYU says Hall incident resolved
- Max Hall: a fixture in rivalry lore
- 'Grandfamilies' a growing trend
- Witness: Mitchell wanted attention
- Mitchell called intelligent, controlling
- MWC '09 season in review
- Jazz win 6th in 7 games
- Daughter: Mitchell fed me my pet
- Jazz ready to be without Harpring
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
901 - Cougars beat Utes in overtime482
- Hall reprimanded by MWC400
- Max Hall issues apology387
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal342
- Utes won't respond to Hall272
- BYU says Hall incident resolved222
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game150
- BYU is champion of the state142
- Religion in politics is tiresome125
My husband was teaching his 6th-grade class in Salt Lake last year when...
Latest comments
The times that man is so self absorbed that they forget to serve others, give...
A very rational and intelligent evaluation of a growing problem in our...
“And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye,...
I thought that Obama said he would pull the troops out when he was running...
I like to earn some credit, I was hoping they were going to draft him in the...
MARIO YOU GOT THAT RIGHT JASMINE IS THE BEST AND CAN'T ANYONE TAKE THAT AWAY...
She also paid Joe the Plumber to come to Utah and stump for her. I guess she...
Stockton and Malone lived in a different time. These days doctors run tests...
You are exactly right about Harpring. He is a tough, dedicated warrior,...
Dick, I can't agree because the dredges are still awful without the ability...
Advertisements
This father needs to recognize that the blame lies no where but with him, for whatever reason he believes: He slept around, he failed to recognize that his girlfriend was pregnant, he didn't register, he didn't inform his parents soon enough etc., etc., etc.
Suck it up! Recognize your mistake and don't repeat it. But don't make anyone else pay! Especially not those who love your biological child enough to fight for him and give him the stable home you can't!
Express gratitude that someone stepped up to give him what you refused to!!!