South Carolina Supreme Court Rules to Keep Baby Veronica With Biological Father

[yeats]

Comments

[rex_dart]

Great news. I kind of can't believe this didn't turn out horribly.

The Christian Alliance for Indian Child Welfare

I have never seen a more ridiculous combination of words.

[magus_69]

Seriously. That's beyond tonedeaf, given the history.

[chaya]

ifkr?

[art_house_queen]

Came here just to say that.

[tabaqui]

GOOD. I hope she has a happy and fulfilled life with her father and family.

[darlahood]

You think taking a toddler away from the only parents and living environment she's ever known is GOOD?

I think it's emotional abuse.

[tabaqui]

Bully for you.

[flyghosh]

I was wondering that same thing, and so I brought it up to the husband, who's a public interest attorney who works a lot with family courts (and is therefore somewhat familiar with these laws and what drives them).

Apparently, those kinds of state laws are there to speed along the adoption process (i.e. get rid of otherwise onerous administrative hurdles in the process). They may inadvertently help rape victims who choose to bring a pregnancy to term, but apparently, that's not why these laws are on the books in the first place. Yeah, I lost a little faith in humanity at that one. :/

[bestdaywelived]

I think it might be, although I doubt it, because the US does not give a flying fuck about rape victims.

[metatrix]

no, I think it's so that a woman can put her baby up for adoption pretty much as soon as it's born. If that law wasn't in place, then the father could basically block the mother from putting the baby up for adoption, without actually asserting his parental rights and taking custody of the child, thereby putting the mother in a horrible limbo (i.e. basically sticking her with the kid).

It's basically a 'shit or get off the pot' law for the father.

[jimmyblue]

I'm happy about this ruling, but I feel bad for the adoptive parents. I can't imagine what it's like to finally get a child and then have it taken away from you.

[danceprincess20]

While I don't think it's super common, I don't think it's very uncommon either. My old neighbors had been trying to adopt, were given a newborn and after a while (I can't remember if it was weeks or months but it was a decent chunk of time, enough for them to get attached obviously, I was pretty young myself when all this went down), then one of the parents changed their minds (this has something to do with state law) and they had to give the baby back.

While I totally understand that that is the way the law works, it was also really rough on the adoptive parents. They stopped the adoption process for quite a few years because they were so scared it would happen again.

[hourglasscreate]

Yeah, I know someone with a story like that too. I think it's more common than people realize.

[callmepatsy]

I think those laws were made to keep biological mothers (particularly young ones) from being pressured into placing their babies for adoption when they've just given birth....to give them a chance to change their minds when they've thought about it and aren't totally drained and possibly on drugs (if they went that route in childbirth.)

How long it is varies by states, some states it's 3 days, some it's months.

Not saying it doesn't suck for the adoptive parents who have hoped for/planned for/loved the baby, it really does, but I was given to understand that's why the law exists.

[girly123]

While I'm really happy that this happened for political and cultural reasons, I'm kind of curious about why the father thought he'd be unfit to parent his daughter, and why he feels that he's now capable of doing so.