Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Baby Veronica: Now the media bias for the Capobiancos begins

Lorraine
I thought there was nothing more to say about the Baby Veronica case but then I happened to come upon Susan Estrich today on Yahoo that totally makes me sick--written as it is from the Capobianco playbook. I'll have to quote a bit here to give you the tenor of this:
"Why should the rights of the tribe trump the rights of the adoptive parents?
"What gives the tribe ownership of a child whose father has given up his parental rights and whose mother has decided that adoption is in her best interests?
"Why should the rights of the tribe force a woman to raise a child she may not be capable of raising — in which case, no one in the tribe could complain — rather than allowing the child to be placed with a loving family?

"Children are not chattels.
"The adoptive parents were in the delivery room when their daughter was born. The real father — the adoptive father — cut the umbilical cord.
"Of course it's heart wrenching. But the reason this is so painful is because this child never should have been taken from her adoptive parents. She was ripped away — not from the tribe, but from the only parents she ever knew.
If this is what is allowed under the Indian Child Welfare Act, which was passed in 1978, then it is time that law was changed."
Yesterday I was reflective, and feeling sad about the fact that a father had to give up his child to adoption because a couple found an illegal way to get a child out of Oklahoma. Today, after reading Susan Estrich's column, I just feel outrage.

This is the comment I left there (but I can't find it):
"Susan Estrich's column is another typical column from the adoption-land where all babies would be given up because there is an infertile childless couple who wants a baby. Her column is filled with half-truths and outright incorrect statements. Dusten Brown thought he was giving the mother of the child custody while he was in Iraq; not that he would be free from child support which would never be the case. The Capobiancos knew right from the getgo there was a problem with the possible adoption but pushed ahead anyway. This is a clear case of child-buying; and yes, there is a problem with Justice Roberts getting two Irish children who may have been born in a South American country--because Irish law forbids their children being adopted out of country; instead it appears that he flew the pregnant women to another country so they could be born there.  

"I used to have respect for you, but this column destroyed any credibility you might have. You really need to do more homework rather than just jump on the adoption bandwagon. Or maybe you happen to covet someone else's baby yourself?"
ROBERTS HAS BEEN EXCORIATED--DAMN STRAIGHT!
She does go after people who write "articles attacking the courts for supposedly taking the child away from her father. Chief Justice Roberts, in particular, has been excoriated because he is the father of two adopted children...." Well, as we have noted, there is a lot more to it than that, and I'd say she has been reading about his questionable adoption of two blond kids right here at First Mother Forum. 

According to Indian Country, the Capobiancos--or the state of South Carolina--are suing Brown for some of their court costs, seeking seeking fines, attorneys' fees and expenses totaling approximately a half million dollars. Costs outlined in the contempt action include fines of up to $32,000 a day, in addition to the Capobiancos' living expenses while in Oklahoma.
 
Another thing that has been sticking in my craw from Estrich's column: "The adoptive parents were in the delivery room when their daughter was born. The real father — the adoptive father — cut the umbilical cord."

That sends shivers down my spine for the fact that the adoptive parent literally cuts the cord is so coercing emotionally that only the strongest are  likely ever to be able to push back from that symbol of lose of a child. In this case, we do not have a woman who seemingly had any compunction or sorrow over giving up her child; other reports have informed us that Christy Maldonado's two other children are being raised by their father's mother, their paternal grandmother. But that this is what open adoption has become--the adoptive parents there during the labor and birth, watching as handmaidens straight from science fiction produce a viable, living product for others. This is one of the most sickening and terrible aspects of open adoption today. This act alone can only benefit the adoptive parents and has been designed to make the mother feel guilty if she does not give her baby to these nice people who are otherwise childless. In this case, it also appears that filthy lucre was involved, as the Capobiancos were reported to have helped her out financially and she suddenly appeared with a new SUV.

THE SYMBOLIC GESTURE OF CUTTING THE CORD 
Back to Estrich's column. The next sentence implies that because Matt Capobianco cut the cord, he became the "real father," a father whose genes Veronica will never carry, whom she will never look like or act like. He became the "real" father despite the fact that the adoption itself was not carried out, strictly speaking, legally--even before we get to the Indian Child Welfare Act. South Carolina law that states unequivocally that a child must be “present within this State at the time the petition for adoption is filed, irrespective of place of birth.” The original adoption was filed in South Carolina on Sept. 18, 2009, three days after Veronica was born. Yet she was still in Oklahoma with the Capobiancos, and remained there “about seven days," according to the records. One source also notes that the adoption process didn’t follow other legal norms, in that Veronica was removed from Oklahoma without her father’s consent or knowledge. But none of that mattered, and Veronica has gone to her different life not with her family of origin.

The last piece of news is that Gov. Fallin of Oklahoma is looking for ways to avoid extraditing Brown, her office said yesterday. Extraditing him to South Carolina, that is, where he is facing a felony charge of custodial interference for not giving up Veronica in early August, after a South Carolina court took legal custody away from him, after the Supreme Court decision gutting the ICWA. Gov. Fallin may be trying to protect Brown--to little, too late--but the Charleston County, S.C., sheriff suggested that the criminal case would continue, and Brown could face up to five years in prison if convicted.

All suggestions that the Capobiancos were able to work out some agreement allowing Brown time to see his daughter appear to be false. When Brown tried to negotiate visitation with some summer vacation time and other days, the Capobiancos apparently agreed, and then reneged. There was one offer of 10 hours a month in South Carolina, with supervision, but that included no enforcement by any court officer. Let us not forget that South Carolina is a thousand miles away from Oklahoma. Given all this, it is ever more clear that the Capobiancos look upon the girl as their "possession" and want her to grow up not knowing her true family or father. As Suzette Brewer of Indian Country noted: "In South Carolina, Veronica will be the only child on both sides of her adoptive parents' families. The Capobiancos, both of whom are in their mid-40s, have no other extended family nearby, save for a stepmother who was divorced from Melanie's father before he passed away."

Meanwhile, the number of "likes" on their Save Veronica Rose page continues to rise, and yes, we do see pictures of the very cute little girl smiling. I just can't imagine how she is going to sort this out in the long run, or how the ping-pong the courts have played with her will affect her emotionally. How is she ever going to trust that someone stays in her life? Beats me.

IN ADOPTION, MONEY TALKS. ALWAYS HAS, ALWAYS WILL. 
A father wants to raise his daughter, his daughter is obviously doing fine being raised by him, but a grasping couple are allowed to get away with this illegal adoption--illegal because even proper procedure was not followed in the very first instance. Some people have questioned why the girl's biological mother, Christy Maldonado, would not let Brown raise their daughter. I think the answer lies in the fact that the Capobiancos were allowed to "help her out" financially, which is a euphemism for buying a baby. As I said yesterday, this comes as close to a legal baby-selling as I have ever seen.

What is heartless is that column's like Estrich's have no compassion at all for the individual who will be raised with genetic strangers, with whom the likelihood of sharing traits and sensibilities is no greater than chance. I'm not making that up; social scientists who look at these things have concluded thus. Writes Carol Tavris: "...when children resemble their parents and grandparents temperamentally, it is because they share certain genes with these relatives, not experiences."

Because the Capobiancos "won," a little girl loses.--lorraine

PS: My comment disappeared but left up is one calling Brown an "epic douche." Go figure. 

COLUMN UPDATED ON 9/26/13

Someone else posted my comment without my name.
__________________________
OFFENSIVE ESTRICH COLUMN
Baby Veronica

OTHER SOURCES
Capobiancos Sue Dusten Brown for Nearly Half a Million in Fees
Cherokee Nation Mourns as Veronica Is Returned to Adoptive Family

FROM FMF
Reflections on Veronica Brown and being raised in a family different from your own 
Why passions run hot in the Veronica Brown story  
Dusten Brown continues to fight for his daughter; the Capobiancos dig in deeper  
Adoptive father John Roberts: Not impartial in the Baby Veronica case

44 comments :

  1. So far my comments there remain:
    ) Dusten did not sign away his rights- he signed a service paper the week before deploying to Iraq-the paper which he thought gave his ex-fiancé full custody while he was out of the country. As soon as he was told by the process server what it was- he tried to get it back-wasn't allowed. He retained legal councel and pushed for a stay of adoption immediately.
    2) the birthmother knew he wouldn't sign and told the agency so- also that he was enrolled Cherokee. (HE was and is an active member- his ex-fiancé knew this) They requested confirm from the Cherokee Nation by using wrong spelling of his name and wrong DOB. Cherokee said they could not confirm with info provided. Nothing else was done in due diligence to follow this federal law ICWA. They filed the interstate compact transfer with wrong information- had they filed it indicating Cherokee blood- the child would have never have left the state because the CN would have intervened to approve the adoption.
    3) they filed the adoption notice in SC when she was 3 days old- the filing requires the child to be physically in the state of SC for it to be legally filed- she & the Capobianco's were still in OK.


    Dusten tried to offer support- his parents even tried to give gifts to the mom but the mother refused any contact- even told the hospital to not inform ANYONE that she was there and the baby was born. All of this is because she was hiding from Dusten-whom she knew would want to parent. She was already in arrears for child support for her first two children and did not want to pay support to Dusten too. She may have thought she was doing the best for her child- but you can't just forget that it takes a father and mother to create a child. Dusten's rights and Veronica's were not upheld.

    Also look at Nightlight Christian Adoption agency and Mr Godwin- there is another child who was just ordered back to Absentee Shawnee Nation because they pulled the same illegal nonsense-didn't file the interstate compact at all! These are just the tip of the iceberg. Why don't you use your byline for something really valuable? Look to make adoption laws national- so that there aren't cases that last four years in the courts. Make laws clear and concise- and humane. Requiring upfront signatures from both mothers and fathers. Take the money out of adoption and many agencies will give up trying to traffic children from one state to the other. Adoption is a multibillion dollar industry...it should be a social service about finding homes for children in need- not about giving a child to a family that wants one.

    ReplyDelete
  2. As far as I know now, Dusten can still be extradited to South Carolina, and if convicted for felony interference he could face up to five years in prison. With a felony conviction he will not be able to get any visitation and he would lose his military career and his pension. I don't see any reason why Matt and Melanie C would drop the charges. I'm sure they would be glad to have DB out of their hair for 5 years, and Ronnie would then be 9 y.o.

    I truly fear for Ronnie. She is living with people who are doing everything they can to destroy her family. But 4 years old is a tricky age. She is completely dependent on the Cs for her very survival and will be for a long time to come. She is old enough to have some memories of her bio-paternal family, but I can't agree that it will be a slam dunk that when she learns what the Cs did to her family she will go rushing back to OK. The effect of being adopted is more complicated than that.


    We all have Governor Fallin to thank. If she had only left things alone vis-à-vis the SC extradition order, things may have worked out differently. She is now trying to backpedal and get SC to drop the extradition order but I don't know how much power she has to make that happen.

    I became so upset when I realized how much devastation the Cs can still cause to Ronnie's real family that I had a complete breakdown and couldn't stop crying. I couldn't even function. The Crapos have already taken Dusten's daughter, damaged his father's health and now they seem willing to destroy his career and finances. I would never trust people like this with any child.

    And all of this because of a completely unethical and illegal adoption.

    It boggles the mind that anyone supports the Crapos. I do have to say that I read a couple of articles today (one at liberal HuffPo)and the comments were overwhelmingly in favor of Dusten.

    I also want to send a shout out to Mrs. Robin Brown. You are an incredible lady. You have stuck by your husband and given him such support and you have loved little Ronnie with all your heart. And you're quite beautiful, too.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have seen the pictures of smiling Veronica, too, with her adopters. But let's not forget, the Crapos have a PR firm orchestrating the whole thing. We will only see what they show us and I don't believe we will be getting the whole picture. The purpose of Public Relations is not to give facts, but to manipulate public opinion in your favor.

    The Crapos do seem to love the limelight. And it wouldn't surprise me in the least if they keep Ronnie in the public eye. They will probably make her the poster child for adoption without her consent. I always did admire the adoptive parents of Carly (Catelynn and Tyler's daughter from Teen Mom) for making the decision to give Carly her privacy. That shows love and respect for a child.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lorraine I fear that the vast majority of society finds that the rights of a prospective adoptive couple who take care of a baby, especially since birth, trump the rights of the "defective" birth family whose actions caused this baby to end up in adoption. They see no compromise to the child's rights, throngs of Capobianco followers and society at large see Veronica as now getting a "better" life. How do we fight this? Can we even fight this? I admire yours and Jane's zeal in pursuing, for decades now, your convictions about making policy changes in this area.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yes, baby buying in all its glory. Its called adoption. Always has been like that all about the haves and have nots.
    In this case its Dusten that is the haves and the adopters are the have nots so ironic.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oddly enough, someone else has posted my comment (Joan) without my name. And it is there. Joan messaged me via FB; feel free to go there up vote it up.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Jay Iyer wrote:"trump the rights of the "defective" birth family whose actions caused this baby to end up in adoption."

    Boy, have you hit the nail on the head. That's exactly it. I know my a-mother felt like she had to be the Mama Bear protecting me because I was, after all, born to people who would give me away. I don't know if my APs thought they were so superior, but more that my NPs lives must be in a terrible state of disarray if they felt they had to give me away (or that they just plain didn't want me). And my APs wanted to be the ones to make me safe and secure (it didn't exactly turn out that way, but that's another story).

    My APs had a Plan B and they planned to use if either of my NPs tried to get me back. When my a-mother first told me about this, she thought I would feel so loved. But actually the first (unspoken) thought that came into my head was "that's kidnapping."

    I'm glad you brought this up, Jay. I have thought about this concept a lot but was having trouble formulating it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. How this whole case has played out is sickening. Vile. The way so many people blindly follow the lies being spouted by the SVR (Steal Veronica Rose) side is truly sickening and concerning. They are like sheep, blindly following a sheep dog and they don't seem to care if that dog takes them over a cliff. They will happily go.

    Part of that is because it is easier to take their side. To face the actual truth, the reality of what has happened, is so much harder and uglier and some people would prefer to hang onto lies than see reality. It is hard to have the courage to stand up and speak out against injustice and wrong - the Kony 2012 campaign comes to mind and the backlash Invisble Children received in their quest. But people will choose the easy path - society will take the yellow (as in cowardly) road every time. And so it is in this case.

    The Capobiancos are systematically trying to destroy Dusten's life and are going after him for everything they can get and still the SVR side refuse to accept it. To believe in them is to believe in tidy packages. To not be uncomfortable about the massive human rights abuses that have occurred here. To stand with Dusten is to research the truth, to learn the reality and to see that this is more common than anyone realised and people are too cowardly and too shallow for that and so the Steal Veronica page grows in its numbers of cowards and those who love to cling to lies. There is no honour, no integrity or dignity in what has been done by the Capobianco's and their supporters. Their ugliness is putrid and I hope slowly their actions breakthrough some of those stone hearts and people will see the truth of what they have done.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am sickened by the adoptees who somehow make this into a my-adoptive-family-is-awesome argument.... That's not what this is about.

    It's about a child who was not in need of a home.

    I am gobsmacked by the fact that people cannot get their minds to embrace this fact: Veronica did not need adoptive parents. She had a father who was able and willing to raise her.

    Is this really so difficult to understand?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You hit the nail on the head!

      Delete
  10. I'm wondering if anything can be done to help Dusten and his family, including Veronica, at this point. Does Dusten even know that people like those here at this blog are supporting him? At this time, he and his wife need all the emotional and perhaps financial support they can get. Wouldn't it be nice to somehow figure out how to start a savings fund for Veronica so that once she's older she won't have to rely on the Crapos for $$$!!! I would gladly contribute. Someone should write a book and donate the proceeds to the family.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This thing has legs -big ugly ones:

    http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/capobiancos-sue-dusten-brown-legal-fees-other-expe/nZ7Nb/

    "KRMG has confirmed with Brown's lawyers that court action is underway to recover possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars from Brown.
    Lori Alvino McGill, an attorney for Matt and Melanie Capobianco, says the Capobiancos are not directly suing Brown.
    McGill says the South Carolina courts are pursuing Brown to recover legal fees and other expenses for the Capobiancos."

    ReplyDelete
  12. So many people are woefully misinformed as to the facts surrounding this case. Of course, that is a direct result of the campaign of misinformation that has been waged by the Capobiancos.

    Here is a link to a debate involving some of those misinformed people, many of whom should know better.

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014601700

    ReplyDelete
  13. Nightlife Christian adoptions which aranged Veronica's adoption is a sleazy outfit. It apparently works with an equally sleazy attorney to take Indian babies from Oklahoma to South Carolina for adoption.

    Nightlife is clearly in adoption for the money, not the kids. It is featured in the story about re-homing. It placed an emotionally disturbed 12 year old Russian girl with American parents and then turned its back when the parents needed help.

    ReplyDelete
  14. HDW wrote:"It's about a child who was not in need of a home."

    And it's also about people who broke several laws in two different states, falsified information on legal documents and lied to get a child whose father had never relinquished her for adoption.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Susan Estrich, whom Uncle Wiki defines (in part) as a "feminist advocate and Fox News commentator"!?! One of the things she's best known for is her status as a rape survivor, about which she has spoken and written extensively. So yeah, G-d bless the sexually assaulted, but have no mercy when a court "rapes" a loving family, and allows a couple with cash to carry away a small girl as its trophy.

    I have been just sick about the pillaging of the Brown family for days. Thanks to FMF for keeping me up to date on this vile story.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Jay asked how we can fight the public perception favoring adoptive parents. We can fight this and reform adoption laws the same way other groups--gays, racial minorities, marijuana users-- have changed public opinion and laws. Form a coalition and raise money.

    Not easy though.

    The adoption reform community is not organized and doesn't have the numbers. At this point it's even hard to get people involved with legislation to unseal original birth certificates.

    Meanwhile the adoption industry has lots of money, members, and slick PR campaigns.

    In Oregon, we've been able to put together a coalition of first parents, adoptees, adoptive parents, and progressive members of the adoption industry. I think we may get some reform legislation passed in the 2015 session of the legislature. But Oregon is only a small state.

    The first step to make change at the national level is to get like-minded people together, agree on goals, develop strategies, and start raising money. I'm happy to talk to anybody who's interested. Just email me at forumfirstmother@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  17. Why do people keep assuming that ICWA would force a parent to keep a child they don't want? ICWA merely gives the tribe jurisdiction and, depending on the scenario, a tribe can and will decide to place a child outside of their particular nation.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Why aren't the Feds out looking for Baby Desirai? Why isn't there an Amber Alert? She left Oklahoma with no paperwork at all. Isn't that an out and out kidnapping?

    I think this adoption agency/attorney have been so successful with these shotgun adoptions that they've become more brazen. This has to be stopped.

    "SVR (Steal Veronica Rose)", Priceless!

    ReplyDelete
  19. @ HDW who wrote "I am sickened by the adoptees who somehow make this into a my-adoptive-family-is-awesome argument.... That's not what this is about.

    I understand how you feel. Truly I do as it does not validate the pain of adoptees that do not feel this way, or the pain that their natural families may feel.

    For me I wish my relinquished daughter was one of those happy adopted people. I wish she would gush about how great her adoptive family is. It would have been a sharp knife to my heart to know she has a relationship with her adoptive mother that I can not hold a candle to. But so much better then the stabbing butter knife in my heart that keeps stabbing away. When I know that I relinquished my daughter, albeit under coercion, yet she did not bond with her adoptive parents. She is out there without feeling a bond with either family. It is as if I exiled her to a life of never belonging.

    I think one of the saddest things is that we do not offer help and support to adopted people who are not adults. They only get the help their adoptive parents give them, which may be biased in favor of preserving the image of the happy adoptive family. I can only imagine what a young adopted person feels if they are conflicted and tune in to Dr. Phil who says "the adoptive parents are the real heroes". Must be so confusing.....

    ReplyDelete
  20. This is what Dusten has to live with: He was willing to proceed with the adoption IF he was given visitation rights and, most likely, parental rights. For someone who is fighting for their child ( without paying for attorney fees) he was willing to do that AGAIN! Duck his responsibilities!

    So, is Dusten really a man fighting to keep his child or a control freak?

    ReplyDelete
  21. POST UPDATE, 9/26/13
    Another thing that has been sticking in my craw from Estrich's column: "The adoptive parents were in the delivery room when their daughter was born. The real father — the adoptive father — cut the umbilical cord."

    That sends shivers down my spine for the fact that the adoptive parent literally cuts the cord is so coercing emotionally that only the strongest are likely ever to be able to push back from that symbol of lose of a child. In this case, we do not have a woman who seemingly had any compunction or sorrow over giving up her child; other reports have informed us that Christy Maldonado's two other children are being raised by their father's mother, their paternal grandmother. But that this is what open adoption has become--the adoptive parents there during the labor and birth, watching as handmaidens straight from science fiction produce a viable, living product for others. This is one of the most sickening and terrible aspects of open adoption today. This act alone can only benefit the adoptive parents and has been designed to make the mother feel guilty if she does not give her baby to these nice people who are otherwise childless. In this case, it also appears that filthy lucre was involved, as the Capobiancos were reported to have helped her out financially and she suddenly appeared with a new SUV.

    THE SYMBOLIC GESTURE OF CUTTING THE CORD
    Back to Estrich's column. The next sentence implies that because Matt Capobianco cut the cord, he became the "real father," a father whose genes Veronica will never carry, whom she will never look like or act like. He became the "real" father despite the fact that the adoption itself was not carried out, strictly speaking, legally--even before we get to the Indian Child Welfare Act. South Carolina law that states unequivocally that a child must be “present within this State at the time the petition for adoption is filed, irrespective of place of birth.” The original adoption was filed in South Carolina on Sept. 18, 2009, three days after Veronica was born. Yet she was still in Oklahoma with the Capobiancos, and remained there “about seven days," according to the records. One source also notes that the adoption process didn’t follow other legal norms, in that Veronica was removed from Oklahoma without her father’s consent or knowledge. But none of that mattered, and Veronica has gone to her different life not with her family of origin.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I find it funny that you fail to mention the birth mother so often. She's the real villain in this equation. As we speak, she's trying to take down ICWA. I'm Cherokee (albeit Eastern Band), and I have nothing but contempt for the Capobiancos, but I have even more vitriol for Melanie Maldonado. It was her testimony that helped take Veronica from Dusten and the tribe, and her ignorance and selfishness and just plain psychoness that is attempting to take down ICWA. Same for the Baby Desirai case. The birth mother is at fault, almost more so than the wannabe adoptive couple. You're missing the mark by trying to forget their involvement in these types of paternal rights cases.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Sela:

    I have nothing but contempt for Christy Maldonado and we have written about her at previous posts. But what she did was over a long time ago; that the Capobiancos could not see that a child had a father who wanted to raise her and acted as if he were the devil turned the focus of the story to them. At any point, they could have said: This is a child who does not need a home; she has a loving father who has been taking care of her for two years, let's walk away and....

    It's well known that Maldonado perjured herself in court, as Musings of the Lame, another blog by a first mother, has covered that.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous above at 10:34: Your comment makes no sense.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Robin, I feel that your adoptive parents' stance towards your natural family is all too common. As you say, it usually is not an outright feeling of superiority over the natural family but more a feeling that the natural family was "messed up" for their child to end up in adoption and, therefore, the child needs to be protected by the adoptive parents. Hence the term, "Save Veronica," no doubt.

    This type of thinking is very, very hard to change. I'd say more than 90% of my friends and family feel that my former foster daughter Nina got shortchanged when she went back to her mother. Only one friend told me just the other day that she now feels good about where Nina is at. And this in spite of us telling everyone we are happy with how things turned out! Still, five years later, they pray Nina will come back to us. As I said, if our friends and family won't even support what we, Nina's "prospective adoptive parents" are saying about Nina being in a good place with her natural family, it is easy to see why almost 15,000 people feel it was right to "Save Veronica."

    HDW: it's a simple question, isn't it? It floors me too that thousands don't see why a child with a fit biological parent who wants to raise her nonetheless must relinquish her.

    lucrezaborgia: Good point about ICWA. In fact, in the Holyfield case decided years ago by the Supreme Court, although the tribe was declared to rightfully be able to determine where the twin Native Indian babies were placed (and, therefore, won against the prospective adoptive parents), the tribe then went on to decide that placing with the prospective adoptive couple (just the mother, by then the father had died) was in the best interests of the children.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Just reading through the comments and especially disgusted by cutting the cord making one the real father.

    Oh no, that makes all my kids have different doctor fathers, and I don't even remember if they were all male! Dads did not do that back in the day, my husband was there but would have fainted if they had him do any cord cutting.

    ReplyDelete
  27. New Wikipedia instertion regarding Roberts's adoption of two children:

    Adoption records

    While investigating Roberts' life, the New York Times was accused of attempting to unseal records detailing the 2000 adoption by Roberts and his wife of two infants born in Ireland[6] via a Latin American country.[7] The Times denied any attempts to unseal legal records and stated that "[o]ur reporters made initial inquiries about the adoptions" and "[t]hey did so with great care, understanding the sensitivity of the issue."

    The Times was condemned by the National Council for Adoption, "NCFA denounces, in the strongest possible terms, the shocking decision of the New York Times to investigate the adoption records of Justice John Roberts' two young children. The adoption community is outraged that, for obviously political reasons, the Times has targeted the very private circumstances, motivations, and processes by which the Roberts became parents."[8]

    The reasons for the adoption happening in the unnamed Latin American country remain unclear, though it was noted that the Irish 1991 Adoption Act only allows adoption of children born in Ireland by people resident in Ireland.[9]

    ReplyDelete
  28. Thank you for this blog. My own kinship adopted daughter was calling her foster parents mom and dad within two weeks. For her it was survival, a need to fit in. They saw it as a sign of how well she bonded to them. No doubt little Ronnie Brown is giving the C 's false positive clues about how well she is settling in..but thosr feelings for her dad her real one ( dna) will be there always.

    ReplyDelete
  29. @Improper Adoptee,

    I wasn't able to leave a comment at your blog because of the way it's set up, so I'm leaving it here.

    Just wanted to say "thanks" for the shout out. Your first paragraph had me laughing for the first time in days. It was a nice respite from the sleepless nights, buckets of tears, and screaming, "Why?"

    I know it's childish to call them the Crapos, but if the shoe fits....

    ReplyDelete
  30. To Adoptionvictimswithavoice,

    Thanks but that was not quite what I meant.

    My adoptive family was fine. We were definitely dysfunctional, but we loved one another.

    I am sickened by the fact that some adoptees do not seem to understand that this child did not need to be adopted. Instead, they turn the whole case into a debate on the merits of adoption and the merits of their adoptive parents.

    First of all, the "goodness" and "merits" of adoption have nothing to do with this case. Secondly, they assume, wrongly in many cases, that those of us adoptees who are in the pro-Brown camp must be bitter or ungrateful toward our adoptive parents.

    When I see that some fellow adoptees cannot wrap their minds around the fact that this child already had a parent who was willing and capable of raising her, I realize what a steep, steep climb we have ahead of ourselves.




    ReplyDelete
  31. Everyone,

    Whether you are attending a rally tomorrow, Friday, September 27th, or not, let's all wear PINK to show our support for Veronica.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anon at 10:34: I too didn't understand your comment. I see you are disagreeing on some level, which is totally fine, but your premise is not clear to me.

    Anon at 3:59: I totally get what you are saying about children doing what they need to do and saying what they need to say to survive. One of my friends adopted a little girl, Selma, from foster care. Selma was neglected by her biological parents since birth. She was then placed in a foster home which, unfortunately, was just as neglectful and left her to fend for herself. By the time Selma was taken out of her foster home and placed with my friend, she was 18 months old. The minute my friend went to meet her, Selma ran up, gave her a hug and said, "Mommy, Mommy." My friend, being naive to adoption and also deeply religious, thought this was a sign that Selma was meant to be her daughter. My friend and her husband did adopt Selma, but she is detached from them and does not respond very well to their loving family unit. She is now 9 years old. Clearly her willingness to so quickly call my friend "Mommy" was a survival mechanism - she does what she needs to do to get some form of acceptance. My friend will never stop loving Selma and is doing whatever she can to form a bond, but it is so hard to love a child and not have that love be returned.

    I have no doubt Veronica will follow her survival instincts too - if the "Save Veronica" cult thinks those smiles on Veronica's face indicate instant acceptance of the Capobiancos as her parents, they are ignorant.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Great post. I upvoted your comment at Yahoo. Wanted to tweet Susan Estrich, but couldn't find her on there. Instead found both Lori Alvino McGill (Crapo's lawyer) and Jessica Munday (Crapo's PR) tweeting Thanks to Susan for "getting it"! Disgusting. I tweeted the lawyer because really both of them (her and Susan) should now Indian Federal Law a little bit better. I guess they skipped that class in law school. Not important enough, so now they are entirely baffled by Tribe's assertions of sovereignty, or worse, they wish to finish Termination of First Nations entirely.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Harlen Lee TrainorOctober 4, 2013 at 1:22 PM

    I saw this comment on a recent article about how right wing Christian evangelicals are behind the Capobiancos and anti-ICWA campaign. It's enlighteneing.

    he article did not mention that Johnston Moore of Home Forever is another evangelical and along with Elizabeth Sharon Morris a founder of the Coalition for the Protection of Indian Children and Families. The CPICF was started in 2012 to campaign for greater access of Indian children through white adoptions. Another founding member is one of the adoptive parents, Melanie Duncan Capobianco. CPICF actually has the audacity to actually use a quote from the great Nez Perce leader Chief Joseph to support their anti-Indian cause.

    The Christian Alliance for Indian Child Welfare with Elizabeth Sharon Morris as head also includes Troy “the Locator” Dunn who appeared with Johnston Moore on Dr. Phil in 2012 bashing ICWA. Little did Dr Phil know he was manipulated by these Christian Right groups. I hear Troy has booked more appearances on radio and Dr Phil to continue this right-wing campaign. Jessica Munday of Trio Solutions in SC is also a member of CPICF and friend of Melanie Duncan. She and her crew including employee Brad Caricofe have been actively campaigning against the bio father and ICWA.

    ReplyDelete
  35. "The adoptive parents were in the delivery room when their daughter was born. The real father — the adoptive father — cut the umbilical cord."

    For me, this quote summarises the complete denial of reality that lies at the warped heart of adoption.

    Where what is false is stated as true, and what is true is named false.

    It's like a strange social madness.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Interesting blog post about the Capobiancos buying Likes for their "Save Veronica" Facebook page. http://adoptivecouplevsbabygirl.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/the-house-that-bought-likes-built/

    ReplyDelete
  37. Thanks Heidi, I just read that blog and was amazed...that you could "buy" likes and their high number of "likes" came from....Istanbul. Now we know nothing about them is true.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Little did I know that Bonnie Cleaveland, a psychologist in Charleston SC, campaigns on behalf of the Capobiancos. But she is a vocal supporter of the Coalition for the Protection of Indian Children and Families. The CPICF was started in 2012 to campaign for greater access of Indian children through white adoptions. Jessica Munday of Trio Solutions in Mt Pleasant SC is also a member as is Melanie Duncan Capobianco. As an anti-treaty rights group cloaked as a children's welfare organization, CPIFC attempts to diminish or destroy tribal sovereignty.

    The CPICF's intention is not for the welfare of Baby Veronica but for the furtherance of its anti-treaty agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Jessica Munday = Cruella di Vil, the villain from Walt Disney's 101 Dalmations. But Munday doesn't steal puppies; she steals Indian children.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Here's a post from Jessica Munday the Capobianco spokesperson from Trio Solutions from a FB page regarding the Capobianco suit of $1 million + against Dusten and Veronica Brown and the Cherokee Nation:

    "Veronica is doing wonderfully and the attorneys have every right to sue the Cherokee Nation. Come on Tara. You know that Brown isn't going to have to pay a dime. She is home where she should be and her teen years will be far from ****. The fact of the matter is that Veronica's birth father should have never taken her in the first place. The US Supreme Court confirmed our belief that this was wrong. More than 30 attorneys DONATED their time for nearly two years (think about that and let is sink in for a moment). This was and always has been about a birth mother that was abandoned, chose life for her child and gave her a better life than she could provide and a set of parents that did what any parents would do to reunite with their daughter. As a mother and woman, you should be appalled. A state court erroneously allowed her birth father to rip her from her family and keep her isolated from them and her birth mother for more than 20 months. This adoption occurred solely because he unequivocally rejected his parental rights. Perhaps you are unaware that he testified that he was more than happy to relinquish his parental rights so long as Veronica’s birth mother assumed full responsibility for Veronica. In other words, he made it clear that Veronica was not his problem, at least when it came to parental responsibilities. The blatant lawlessness by the birth father and his Tribe created an enormously dangerous situation for an innocent child whom the birth father and Tribe sequestered on tribal lands away from her only parents. Thankfully, with support from many incredible people, intelligent and dedicated people, we were able to bring Veronica back home where she belongs."

    ReplyDelete
  41. Sophie R--what's the actual BF page. I can't believe this dismissal.

    Anybody want to bring up the wonderful Dred Scott decision? I bet lots of attorneys--maybe even 30!donated their time too, anything to keep blacks down and unequal. Let that sink in for a few moments.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Sophie,
    The attorneys who represented the Cocobianco's had a strong financial interest in the case even though they were not being paid by the Cocobianocs's.

    Raymond Godwin runs an adoption business and I suspect the others do as well or represent adoption agencies. A bad precedent can shoot holes through their businesses. It makes people more reluctant to adopt and makes the law less favorable to prospective adoptive parents.

    It would be nice to think they did the work out of the goodness of their hearts but it's much more likely it was self-preservation. Eviscerating the Indian Child Welfare Law was very beneficial for those trolling for babies.

    ReplyDelete

BOTH JANE AND LORRAINE WILL BE AWAY FROM COMPUTERS FOR EXTENDED PERIODS IN EARLY AUGUST. PLEASE BE PATIENT.

We welcome comments from all, and appreciate letting us know how you relate to adoption when you leave your first comment.


COMMENTS ARE MODERATED. Our blog, our decision whether to publish or not. We are trying to find a way to end the endless anonymous comments, which drive many of us crazy. Pick a name! Any name. Choose the NAME/URL selection. You do not need a URL. Your name does not have to be your name IRL though we appreciate those who do, and we understand due to the sensitive nature of our subject, many will prefer to use a nom de plume. Okay with us, but the endless Anons are tiresome for everyone. If you post as "anonymous" you run the risk of not being posted.

We try to be timely but we do have other lives.

For those coming here from Networked Blogs on Facebook, if it does not allow you to make a comment, click the "x" on the gray "Networked Blogs" tool bar to exit out of that frame and it should then let you comment.