Comments about ‘Proposed bill would penalize adoption agencies for fraudulent representations’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Aug. 15 2012 7:58 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Clarissa
Layton, UT

I'm on the child's side in this one. No two year old should be taken away from their adopted parents. He should let it go, but work to change the current laws if he feels that they are unjust. If he really wanted the child, he should have married the mother before getting her pregnant. Divorce is extremely easy. I actually hope that they don't change the adoption laws here in Utah.

George
Bronx, NY

@ Clarissa: So if a kidnapper can hang onto the child for 2 years the parents should just give up all rights to the child, is that what you are saying? As for the marrying before getting pregnant part - should the man be able to force the woman to get rid of a child he doesn't want to support or pay for because she didn't marry him before getting pregnant?

The father shouldn't have to give up his rights because he wasn't married to the mother and/or because she successfully lied to him about the situation.

Why is the biological father the one being called upon to make sacrifices for the child "if he really loves her"? If the adoptive parents were honest and ethical, they would not have proceeded with the adoption once it was apparent the father had been lied to and wanted the child.

And are you really advocating that couples should marry, get pregnant/have a child, and then divorce? So much for your pseudo concern for the well-being of the child.

K
Mchenry, IL

No one day old should be taken away from his biological father. I'm on the child's side.

The biological mother should also have penalty. Fraud. And the agency. You can't make permanat decisions clearly like this after delivery.

Imagine if this was your son's baby.

When you adopt you need the permission of both parents to complete an adopton. The prospective parents are the cause of these messes. If they had a signed release from the dad the could have proceed with certainty.

The person who hangs on to the child longest doesn't win. The child should never have been placed in the home in the first place. The child should have been returned the minute the father realized his son had been placed after being deceived. Two years is the fault of prospective adoptive parents, wasn't final folks. They held on to the child because of them. It was not because of the child. They didn't want to not parent. The dad didn't want to not parent either.

I'm glad he didn't marry her. She lied to him. Is that the sort of person to marry?

county mom
Monroe, UT

Disturbing how a woman can have an abortion without the consent of the father, but she can not adopte the child to a loving family?

This would not be an issue if the man had made a better choice of whom to have sex with.
He had sex with a married woman, who did not want to keep the child.

What did he think the outcome would be?

Law in Utah, any child born with in a marriage is the responsibility of the Husband. If this man wins, then every divorcing man can demand paternity of the children and not have to pay child support if the child is not geneticly his. Who will support these children?
.

K
Mchenry, IL

I'm on the child's side. It is wrong to take a 2 day infant away from his father.

The only way to ensure and adoption can be completed is to involve the birth father and mother in the selection of a family and get their signatures.

It's hard to believe a person can make a irrevocable decision 25 hours after giving birth.

The child should not have been placed or allowed to remain with the couple for so long. It's their fault they held on. It was not because they cared for the child but they wanted to parent. So did the bio dad. Losing a child over fraudulent practices. Would you want your son's rights to be severed due to the fraudulent practices of agency and played out by the mom? Your grandchild. Do you want agencies to behave this way?

county mom
Monroe, UT

K, Utah law assumes that the birth Father is the husband of the birth Mother. This child is the results of an affair. The man who had sex with a married woman, should have no right to any of her children. There needs to be a protection to the children born within any marriage. What of other children born into this situation? This man is not a father he is a sperm donor, he had sex with a woman that was married. He knew she was married. He should have no right to the child.

Mz.p
American fork, UT

@ county mom, ignorance is bliss! Who exactly do you think you are passing judgement on this biological father. The mother lied = fraud. There is NO black and white moral issue here. Step outside the box for a few moments. You are supporting the state of Utah to allow fraud dictate this child's life. Utah, the state of morals and ethics allows adoption agencies and birth mothers to LIE to sell children. You have no clue as to what is best for this child or any other if you think a child's life within "marriage" is the end all be all. Reality is that this man has fought and OBVIOUSLY still fights for his son. No true to the term "sperm donor" man would do this.
Whether this boy is 2 or 18 he will did out the truth and be reunited with his father. Then, will YOU be there to explain why his "parents" built his life on lies?

Rmh
Fairfield, CT

Actually the father did NOT know the woman was married. She was already separated from her husband and getting a divorce, the marriage was over, she lied that the divorce was complete but it wasn't. Her husband is on the side of the bio dad. If you look up you can find more about this story.

NeilT
Clearfield, UT

Sounds like a complicated mess. This is why we need wise judges. Family law can be very complex. Let's hope the legislature thinks this through very carefully.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments