Adoption fraud | Should third parties keep child?

Glenn Sacks' Blog Fathers & Families featured an article authored by Robert Franklin, Esq on September 24th, 2009 that caught my eye. I frequently am contacted by fathers who are concerned about their parental rights in cases where the parents have never married. Franklin wrote about a biological father who opposed adoption of his child but the Texas court named prospective adoptive parents as "managing conservators" [in Michigan's parlance, the primary physical custodial parent]. Four years later, a Texas appellate court is sending the matter back to the trial court for a re-determination whether the biological father should have custody of his child instead of third parties.

Last week, while in court on another matter, I listened to oral argument in a case involving a father whose child has already been adopted -- a father who is hoping to overturn the adoption that had been granted because the mother failed to identify him at the time of the adoption in order to destroy his ability to have custody of the child she did not want, the child for whom she had arranged a private adoption.

Thus I found the article Texas Single Dad Stops Adoption; May Get Custody of his Son very interesting. As Franklin writes, "In this case, a single father actually wins a round in family court.  It's not over yet, for reasons I don't understand, but read the court's opinion here and maybe you can figure it out."

Franklin continues

"There's a good bit to chew on in the case of In the matter of Baby Boy M., A Minor.  As its name suggests, this is an adoption case.  Like the last adoption case out of Utah that I wrote about a few weeks ago, the facts in this case tell a lot about the depths to which some mothers will descend to keep a father from his child.  Adoption agencies facilitate the mother's behavior.

"Shawn and Samantha lived together in the little Texas town of Granbury just southwest of Fort Worth.  They weren't married, but they had a daughter, Kaylee in 2003.  In late 2004, Samantha moved out of the house and within weeks was living with Darrell.  A few months later, she announced that she was pregnant and intended to place the child for adoption.  Shawn immediately told her that, if the child were his, he wanted custody and would not agree to any adoption.

"Samantha learned of a couple, Travis and Sabra Hess, who lived in Boise, Idaho, who wanted to adopt.  The Hesses were using the services of LDS (think "Latter Day Saints") Family Services."

Samantha met with the adoption agency two weeks before the baby was due to be born. At that time, when asked the identity of the baby's father, Samantha acknowledged that Shawn was the father. She claimed he was not aware of her pregnancy. She was asked to provide contact information for Shawn, but Samantha said she did not know where he was. Shawn's date of birth and social security number were provided to the caseworker. Later, Samantha asked to work with a different caseworker, claiming "a personality conflict.”

Samantha next met another LDS caseworker, and her information about the identity of the baby's father was less than forthright. Shawn was located and contacted; he informed booth LDS caseworkers that he had no intention of relinquishing his parental rights if the child were his.  When Shawn and his mother learned what hospital Samantha was in, they both talked to a social worker there and told her Shawn would request a DNA test to determine paternity and assert his rights.

Despite the fact that everyone involved in the case was well-informed that Shawn refused to give up his parental rights, no genetic testing was done to confirm or deny this. Thus, without the DNA testing, the baby was not given to Shawn, but was placed with the adoptive family and was taken to Idaho. Shawn was refused any information by all involved.

Shawn did not give up. He filed the correct forms with the Texas Paternity Registry within the 30 days allotted him.  He talked to several attorneys, contacted the FBI and even wrote a letter to the governor.

There has been a lot of water under the legal dam as a result of delays that appear to have been caused intentionally by LDS, according to Franklin. The child is now four years old. There has been no adoption, but the trial court made the Hesses the "managing conservators." Their argument at trial was that Baby M has been with them so long, it would be psychologically harmful for his custody to be transferred to Shawn.

What a tragedy this case is -- so similar to Michigan "Baby Jessica" case. In that case, the child was given up in adoption in Iowa and taken to Michigan. Once the biological father learned that the child was his, he and the mother fought to recover the baby. Although the adoptive parents had the child for more than two and a half years, the Michigan Supreme Court eventually ruled that the child, given up without the lawful consent of her biological father, had to be returned.

You may read the Texas case of In the Matter of Baby M here.Compare the results / process in that case with the Baby Jessica case In Re Clausen here.

The rest of Franklin's article Texas Single Dad Stops Adoption may be read on Glenn Sacks' Blog Fathers & Families here.

Comments

[sanwill]

People are so selfish they never look at whats best for the child all they care about is whats best for them and how they feel not how it would effect the child.

[Jeanne M Hannah]

Anthony, I believe you will have some conflict of laws issues. In other words, should the laws of Delaware or the laws of NJ apply? Usually, the applicable law is that of the state where the child resides. The longer you wait, the less likely you are to succeed in having a fraudulent adoption set aside and, of course, the more trauma for the child.

My advice? Consult with an adoption specialist in Delaware and/or New Jersey.

[Anthony Jack]

Hello my name is Anthony,
I ran across this post while doing research for my own case. I actually commented on this article on another blog but figured that I would here as well. I'm trying to help raise awareness, this happens to many men. My daughter Peyton was also put up for adoption on the day of her birth without my consent.

I was involved with my ex throughout the first six months of her pregnancy until she disappeared. She was upset with me because I did not want to raise our child as a couple. We both had substance abuse problems, but I decided to get help and am still clean to this day. When I finally learned what had happened it was to late. I made a lot of mistakes, like not registering with any putative registry. I didn't know what to do at the time.

The mother had tried to manipulate me into getting back together with her by stating that the adoption was open and that she could get Peyton back, but would only do so if we were together. I later learned from the mother's sisters that she had received $5000 for the adoption. I was extremely angry about the whole situation but continued to see the mother because she was getting pictures and I tried to get as much info as I could about what had taken place.

I eventually ended the little charade with the mother and walked away with some valuable info. I had learned the two first names of the men who adopted Peyton as well as the fact that they live in Delaware. I also had pictures of Peyton that they were in. I live in PA but discovered that the adoption agency was based in NJ. I suspect that they went to NJ because of their laws concerning gay adoption.

Armed with all of this info I was able to actually find profiles of the two men online revealing their full names, phone #, address, and even more pics of Peyton. It's obvious that they have no reason to expect that there's anything wrong with the adoption, otherwise I'm sure that all of this info wouldn't be public.

While I'm glad that Peyton appears to be well taken care of and loved, I never consented. There is no one that could possibly love of care for Peyton more than I do. I want my daughter back but I fear that if I contact them that I'll scare them off and miss my opportunity. I don't have money for a lawyer, and I desperately need some advice.

I started a blog explaining the whole situation and also write letters to Peyton there. http://www.peytons-story.com
Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Please visit my blog also. Thank you.

[sandra mcdonald]

Lisa,
The child is named Hunter and is my grandson. The couple who stole my grandson knew in the hospital that my son wanted his child and took him anyways. They are no better than kidnappers. Hunter knows his father and sister and all his Texas family. He even knows that he was taken away
He is a wonderful child that should have never been taken. Their are plenty of children that both parents don't want. Hunter would be fine if came home for good. Shawn has him for a whole month in July and he doesn't cry or beg or even ask to go back to the couple. He crys when it's time to leave. Let's just pray that this doesn't happen to your son when he gets older.

[Jeanne M Hannah]

Lisa, what you suggest -- if carried out in any similar case -- would make this possible: Suppose you were shopping in a department store and some stranger came along and took your baby. Suppose a few years went by and by some miracle, you found your baby. Under your scenario, your baby should stay with the only parents he knows.

Is that what you think would be best for YOUR baby?

Why cannot any childless couple just go out shopping then, and pick babies up out of strollers and take them home? If they are able to keep them long enough, the biological parents should not be entitled to recover them, right?

[LIsa]

Leave the child alone--he should stay with the only parents he knows. When the child is old enough he let him make a decision to get to know his B. Father. Why can't folks look out what is best for this child!