B
Bruzilla
Guest
We've had a little social drama going on down here in the Bold New City of the South, and now I see it's spreading to the Today show up in NYC, so I thought I would post the details and see what you'all thought.
A woman gets pregnant, and never bothers to tell the father who is her ex-boyfriend. She doesn't like the father anymore, and isn't happy about how they broke up, so she decides she doesn't want the baby. Enter now the woman's friend, and older woman who has a daughter and son-in-law who would like to adopt the child. According to court records, the mother of the child tells the adoptive parents that they can adopt her son provided the adoption can get approved. If they can't get the adoption approved, she wants the kid back. An interesting condition that will have an impact later.
Two years later, the adoptive parents finally get around to getting the adoption formalized, and in the course of the process the father is finally notified that he's a father. He immediately says "no way" to the adoption, and starts challenging the adoption and seeks custody since the mother obviously didn't want the child. The mother of the child immediately jumps into the picture and says she wants custody, and that she should have custody because of the agreement about the adoption she had with the adoptive parents.
Now, after a year of legal wrangling, we have a three year old boy who has been raised by adoptive parents, who is now having to go live with his birth mother up north, and the adoptive parents have been all over the news raising hell about it. The media is camped outside of their home, and they go out all the time and give interviews, they videotaped their telling the kid that he has to leave (which appeared on the Today show and is about as tacky a piece of video as you'll ever see), and everyone is playing up the plight of the kid and the adoptive parents.
But up until now, not one media story has dealt with the birth father! He's the other victim in this story, yet the only time he's mentioned is as a oh-by-the-way when they talk about why the adoption was challenged. When he goes on the Today show tommorrow will be the first time anyone in Jacksonville has heard his story. This was a case of a vindictive mother trying to get back at a boyfriend. She knew that the father would be notified of the adoption, and would likely challenge it, and that's why she stipulated that if the adoption failed she would get the kid back. The only way the adoption could fail would be if the father opposed and sought custody, and she wanted to make sure he didn't get the kid. She didn't want the kid, she just wanted to make sure the father didn't get him.
What bothers me is this birth mother is a piece of garbage, yet the judge in the case insists on sending the kid to her. The media is obsessed with highlighting the suffering of the adoptive parents. And the father - the true parent in all of this, is completely left out.
A woman gets pregnant, and never bothers to tell the father who is her ex-boyfriend. She doesn't like the father anymore, and isn't happy about how they broke up, so she decides she doesn't want the baby. Enter now the woman's friend, and older woman who has a daughter and son-in-law who would like to adopt the child. According to court records, the mother of the child tells the adoptive parents that they can adopt her son provided the adoption can get approved. If they can't get the adoption approved, she wants the kid back. An interesting condition that will have an impact later.
Two years later, the adoptive parents finally get around to getting the adoption formalized, and in the course of the process the father is finally notified that he's a father. He immediately says "no way" to the adoption, and starts challenging the adoption and seeks custody since the mother obviously didn't want the child. The mother of the child immediately jumps into the picture and says she wants custody, and that she should have custody because of the agreement about the adoption she had with the adoptive parents.
Now, after a year of legal wrangling, we have a three year old boy who has been raised by adoptive parents, who is now having to go live with his birth mother up north, and the adoptive parents have been all over the news raising hell about it. The media is camped outside of their home, and they go out all the time and give interviews, they videotaped their telling the kid that he has to leave (which appeared on the Today show and is about as tacky a piece of video as you'll ever see), and everyone is playing up the plight of the kid and the adoptive parents.
But up until now, not one media story has dealt with the birth father! He's the other victim in this story, yet the only time he's mentioned is as a oh-by-the-way when they talk about why the adoption was challenged. When he goes on the Today show tommorrow will be the first time anyone in Jacksonville has heard his story. This was a case of a vindictive mother trying to get back at a boyfriend. She knew that the father would be notified of the adoption, and would likely challenge it, and that's why she stipulated that if the adoption failed she would get the kid back. The only way the adoption could fail would be if the father opposed and sought custody, and she wanted to make sure he didn't get the kid. She didn't want the kid, she just wanted to make sure the father didn't get him.
What bothers me is this birth mother is a piece of garbage, yet the judge in the case insists on sending the kid to her. The media is obsessed with highlighting the suffering of the adoptive parents. And the father - the true parent in all of this, is completely left out.
Just on the information provided, I think the child should stay with the adoptive family, since the mother sounds like a POS. If the father has 'issues' perhaps visitation can be arranged. 
But to rip him out of his how is so "Elian Gonzales".
