Adoption is the Trick: Where's the Treat?

Courtesy of FauxClaud - Thanks!

Update on Artyom Saveliev: Attempt to Exclude Media Postpones Hearing

Things just got more complicated in WACAP v  Hansen, (see entry directly below.)  Bedford  (TN) County Circuit Court Judge Lee Russell called a postponement in the hearing scheduled for yesterday, after Torry Hansen's lawyer, Sandra Smith, filed a last minute motion to exclude the press and public from the hearing.  Smith argued that proceedings and filings in juvenile court are confidential. While this is true, the current case is filed in circuit court and not under seal.

I can't find the motion online, but Shelbyville Times-Gazette reporter John Carney quoted Smith's argument:

The mere fact that the matter may be newsworthy should not override the parties', including those of the minor child, right to confidentiality.

Of course this is laughable.  Torry Hansen and her mother Nancy are concerned about Artyom Saveliev's "confidentiality" after their antics plastered his story and picture around the world, turning the boy into an international incident that nearly shutdown cross-country adoption between Russia and the US? Concerned about somebody's confidentiality for sure, but not his.

WACAP;s Nashville attorney Larry Crain said it best:

It is indeed ironic that the same parent who recklessly abandoned her child  by placing him on a one-way flight to Moscow would not be concerned about protecting the same child's praviacy?

Crain said that the adoption records filed in the case should remain under seal, quite a different matter  from conducing closed-door hearings in circuit court which are open to the public and media..

Yestereday's hearing has been re-scheduled for November 21  At that time, the court will take up the question of open court proceedings with media representatives being allowed to argue their case before Judge Russell. Larry Crane says if the court approves Hansen's challenge, media outlets will probably file their own challenge.

Judge Russell is also expected to rule on whether Artyom can be added as a plailntiff to the WACAP suit.
.
WACAP is requesting child support from Hansen, arguing that putting the boy on a plane to Moscow  is not a "legitimtae way to annul an  adoption.."  Hansen,  the agency contends, is still the legal parent,  and  liable for child support payments to WACAP.  Russian courts have also reportedly requested child support from Hansen.

It's a Small World
In 1996, WACAP attorney Larry Crane represented the American Center for Law and Justice in its  unsuccessful suit to overturn Tennessee's semi-open records law., Doe v Sundquist.  He is a partner in Brentwood Law Offices,  and serves as ACLJ's Senior Legal Council.  There is no indicaiton  that ACLJ is involved in this case.

This entry is cross posted from my Russian blog, Nikto Ne Zabyt - Nichto Ne Zabyto.

Artyom Savelyev Update: World Associaiton of Children and Parents v Torry Hansen gets trial date in January, hearing today

I need to do some backtracking on the Artyom Savelyev/Justin Hansen case  The 8-year old Russian abandoned by his adopter mother,  is still in care somewhere in Moscow. Here's what happening stateside.

The lawsuit filed by World Association of Children and Parents, the adoption agency that placed Artyom with his forever mother Torry Hansen, has been scheduled  to be heard  in Bedford County (TN) Circuit Court court on January 3, 2012, a year and a half after it was filed.   Two motions  will be heard later today, though,, one to dismiss; the other to amend the petition. The case is under seal and there are no other details.

Sheriff Boyce during press conference

The WAPAC suit was filed in May 2010,  a month after Artyom was COD'd back to the Russian Ministry  of Education,  via American Airlines, when Torry Hansen and her mother Nancy decided the boy wasn't a good fit.  WACAP filed asking to be appointed temporary guardian out of frustration because no one  in Tennessee, the boy's "home state," was investigating claims that the Hansens had abandoned and endangered him there.  Bedford County Sheriff Randall Boyce argued that there was no evidence to indicate that the boy had been abandoned in his jurisdiction so no charges could be filed; thus dropping the criminal investigation and tossing the case back to the Russian civil courts.. 

While the WACP case waited to be heard, a Russian court ordered the Hansens to pay the Russian government  about $2500 a month in child support. saying that  Torrie Hansen, incredibly was now denying she had had intended to terminate her parental rights when she sent Artyom packing!

Earlier,  in January,  the English language Moscow Times (paid subscription to access archives) ) reported--picked  up by the Shelbyville Times Gazette-- that Russian children's ombudsman Pavel Astakhov tweeted that Torry Hansen, under the threat of child support, was now claiming that she sent Artyom back to Russia by himself because  "he asked to see his (biological) mother and she let him go. " Astakhov said  that Hansen's court testimony was "cynic slyness" that aimed to avoid making child support payments.

How the note accompanying  Artyom to Moscow--and the Hansen's delivery instructions to Russian tour guide Artur Lookyanov,  the real hero of this whole sordid affair--could be construed as anything other than a desire to terminate parental rights  is something that only the Hansen's lawyers can explain. (The family s now on its third attorney).

It gets more headachey  with the National  Council for Adoption jumping in on it. .Since court documents are under seal, I'm going to let Brian Mosely,  reporter for the Shelbyville Times-Gazette, who has diligently worked to untangle the Hansen mess from the beginning, take it from there (with some repetition of what I wrote above): . 

Russians want support

A motion was filed last week by the World Association for Children and Parents (WACAP), the National Council for Adoption (NCFA) and adoptive parent Jennifer Terhune, requesting for more time to respond to the motion to dismiss that was filed at the end of 2010 by Henegar. (at that time the Hansen's lawyer)

Terhune is a resident of Wilson County that WACAP is asking to be appointed the guardian of the boy since she has already adopted three children from China and Korea. Attorneys representing the adoption agencies are currently engaged in a jury trial in Chattanooga and have requested until Jan. 28 to respond to the motion and set a date for oral arguments on pending matters.

Henegar argued in her dismissal motion that Tennessee does not have jurisdiction to order child support because it is not the boy's "home state," the termination of parental rights proceeding precludes the court from exercising exclusive jurisdiction, that the court should decline jurisdiction because it is not the appropriate forum and that even if the state did have jurisdiction, it could not award child support.

Last May, WACAP filed a petition requesting that Bedford County's Circuit Court appoint the agency as a temporary guardian for the boy. The matter was moved to juvenile court in August after an agreed order was signed by both parties. But in October, WACAP, NCFA and Terhune filed a second amended petition that asked the court to determine child support due from the Hansens. 

Henegar wrote that NCFA has alleged it had been in contact with Russian authorities and intended to provide evidence "regarding the amount necessary for Justin's care and maintenance in Russia." NCFA has also alleged that the Russians had appointed it as the "liaison" with the court. Henegar claims. 

"In actuality, NCFA has repeatedly engaged in ex parte communications with the Judge of the Moscow City Court to persuade the Court to postpone its proceedings to terminate Respondent's (the Hansen's) parental rights due to the fact that Respondent will not have to pay child support in Tennessee once her rights are terminated and will not be held criminally liable," Henegar wrote. 

On Dec. 13, 2010, the Municipality of Intra-municipal Formation in Moscow refined their claim, asking that Hansen pay for the support of the child. Henegar pointed out that Tennessee state law defines the "home state" as where a child lived with a parent for at least six months, claiming that the boy lived with the Hansen's in Bedford County from Oct. 7, 2009, to April 6, 2010 -- less than six months. She also states that the Moscow court has accepted jurisdiction over the proceeding since the boy has been in that country's jurisdiction for more than six months immediately preceding the filing of the petition to revoke the adoption and to seek child support.

Artyom's case is further complicated by the confusing status of his citizenship, with both countries claiming him for themselves.  As far as I know, this hasn't been clarified.

Early reports indicated a married couple described as English-speaking Russian diplomats who had reared two orphans, had been appointed his guardian and that he would not be sent to an orphanage.  Several later reports indicate he is indeed in an orphanage, though government authorizes deny it.

******

I have written extensively on this case.  Please go to the right sidebar on my Russian blog, Nikto ne Zabyt blog and click on the link. This entry is cross-posted there.

Theoconia: My Other (Adoption-Related at times) Blog

Reproductive libery in Ohio is currently under attack by well-funded national and local organizations and individuals.  They've had a lot of bills in the legislatlure this year, including Janet Folger Porter and Jack Willke's Heartbeat bill , which would virtually outlaw abortion in Ohio.  Leggies  goobbled up even if it is unconstitutional. and will hit the courts the day it's signed.  IF is the operative world.  I'll write more about the bill at a later date.

For the non-initiated, Folger Porter and Willke are the chief reason original birth certificates remain sealed in Ohio, another topic I'll be writing about..

We also have Dr. Patrick Johnston organizing the attempt to get a Personhood Amendment on the November 2012 ballot. .

 While not exactly about adoption, the usual suspects beyond Folger Porter and Willke,  are involved in these schemes, but not particularly together. Wingnuts don't always get along with each other.  In fact, the Heartbeat bill has split Ohio Right to Life (more on that later, too).

As some of you know I have several blogs. One of them, Theoconia: a Central Ohio Theocon Report, is not related directly to adoption, though sometimes it  is. I've been away from Theocnia for awhile, but I'm back  blggoing and covering my regular  theocrat beat with the Columbus Free Press.   My  recent Ohio Right to Life entry was cross-posted here from Theoconia and also appears in the FP.

I have no desire to turn The  Daily Bastardette into a repro forum, but if you'd like to see what's happening in Ohio with our Christian Domionists, please go over to Theoconia and take a look.  You may also find it helpful if you've got these people working the legislature in your state ,too. Don't depend on MSM for accurate coverage.  They don't get  it.

This afternoon I put up a new Theoconia blog::  Rick Santorum Has Problems with Contraception; What Theocrats think about birth conrol.  Since it's not directly adoption related, I'm keeping it on Theoconia for now, but if you're so moved , please check it out.  You can also check on Theoconia's status in my leflt sidebar under "My Other Blogs. And, comments always encouraged.

<

Twitter Fail - Why is this considered "convenient?"

OK.  I give up.  Twitter has defeated me.

After repeated attempts for months to access the Daily Bastardette Twitter account  I've thrown up the white flag.

First I don't exist.  Then I do, but my password doesn't.  Sometimes my Twitter email account for Bastardette doesn't exist. Sometimes I don't exist, but then I'm adopted.

I'm keeping Twitter since I get hits from it, I've been forced to open a new account. I can't delete the old account because it won't let me in.  For those so inclined please go to the left Twitter thingamajig and subscribe. I can also be found under marleygreiner in the Twitter directory.  I wanted to use "Daily Bastardette" but Twitter wouldn't let me.  Figures.

Now if I can just figure out how to add the new Google "share this" icon. It went up automatically on one of my blogs, but not the rest.

How Did We Ever Survive Without Positive Adoption Language Diddlers?

Someone posted this on the Facebook Adoption News and Events page: 10 Keys to Using Positive Adoption Language   The original positive adoption language spiel was bad enough, but Rachel Wallace Reid, Certified Montessori Teacher and Parent Educator, author of this piece of drivel, has raised the ante to a whole new level of prissy absurdity. Perhaps she read too much Ionesco in college.

Take  Rule Key #1:

The adoptive parents are the "real" parents.  The real parents are the grown-ups who will take care of the child every day and for the rest of their lives.  When referring to who gave birth to the child, simply say birth parents or birth woman.  A biological father is not referred to as the real father, but the biological one.

Birth woman?   It makes me think of Big Foot in a dress dropping babyees in the woods  I am  birth woman, hear me roar!

And biological father?. Why not Birth Man?   We wager that the Birth Man population is greatly undercounted, and if a proper census were taken, would far outweigh that of Birth Woman who just happens to be a handy recipient of Birth Man's love. It only takes him a few seconds to accomplish his task;  it takes her nine months not counting the aftershocks.

Boy Howdy  though!  I'm really attracted to the idea that "real parents" take care of their children for the "rest of their lives."  If you're not getting support, sue!

Then there's Rule  Key #4:

Adoption is an event that happened in a child’s life when the child joined his or her family. Using positive adoption language, notice use of verb tense. The child “was” adopted that the event is past tense and already happened. To say that a child “is” adopted implies the process is still ongoing. This is not true. We would simply say, “George was adopted.” 

That is,.unless your birth certificate is sealed and you have to grovel before a judge to get it--or worse, grovel before an entire state legislature full of (depending on their excuse d'jour)  right-to-lifers and phony civil libertarians to get what's yours. They've got theirs.

That is,  unless you can't get a driver's licence, Social Security check or passport  because your chain of identity is broken by a fictional state- forged birth certificate that some bureaucrat red flags..

That is, unless you were adopted in Columbia and you get picked up by ICE and are deported because  your forever parents didn't get around to making you a US citizen.

That is, unless  your aparents die and your're listed in the obit as their "adopted daughter Ginny and adopted son, Jerome."

Then it's Ground Hog Day.



How about Rule Key # 8:

Using positive adoption language, we would never refer to a child as "adopted" just as we would never say an IVF baby, a failed contraception baby, or a c-section baby.  

We wouldn't?

I'm always hesitant to ascribe bad motives to the positive adoption language folks.  I know some of them, and they are pleasant earnest people who mean well.  I'm sure Ms Wallace Reid means well.  But positive adoption language  is like putting that dress on Bigfoot.  These are the same people who get upset over Anne of Green Gables.

The truth is that adopted people are different and will always be different. In 44, (soon to be 43) states we can't even get our own birth certificates.That's something to be really upset about; not  whether  we "is" or "was" adopted.   Let's face it. Adoption is not a normal way to make a family.  If it were, adoption  wouldn't be masked by family and state-created lies and dependent on big money transfers.

Positive adoption language is created to obscure the truth about adoption and its politics; thus, negating the adoption experience for the bastard and his parents, and more importantly,  for the PC languager herself.  Conversely, and perhaps subconsciously, it allows the language diddler to deflect the narrative to herself and enable her to create a new one, more fit for her emotional  and maternal needs. (I say "her" because men usually have more important things to diddle at)

Positive  language hides the genuine life-long adoption/adoptee  process, terming  it a "one-time experience."  Positive Language  hides the players with awkward phrases. Birth Woman (which. I can't imagine anyone but Ms Wallace Reid using), strips bastards and their mothers of dignity and humanity.Biological father," a PC phrase for the preferred Sperm Donor, ignores the fact that, despite my earlier comments,  many men have been driven out of the picture by predatory adoption agents and lawyers, and to be honest, by some women and their families who want to hide children from fathers for whatever reason.

Positive Languigers are at heart anti-adoption, not the type of anti-adoption harbored by women who have been exploited and screwed over, by the adoption industry but by women (and it's usually women) who have benefited from that same industry.  Positive language enables them hide their personal doubts about their status of adoptive parent. . They are trying to neatly cover up adoption, hoping to turn it into Ms. Wallace Reid's irrelevant c-section. A sort of blank slate for adopters.

Of course, language is important, but it must convey truth. or at least attempt to.  Denying that adoption is nothing more than a trivial one-time event as well as the other rules  keys to positive  adoption language posited by Ms Wallace Reid and other language wonks are an insult to those of us who live adoption. Has Ms Wallace Reid even spoken to an adult bastard?

Proper Channels: The Rodney Atkins Reunion and Language

National Council for Adoption celebrity spokesperson country singer Rodney  Atkins ,has revealed that he was reunited with his natural mother in 2008.

The wire picked up the story and it's all over the map now.  Just one story, though, so there's no exclusive interviews, no deep insight into Atkins decision to search.  And, thankfully no primal wounding.  It appears that despite Rodney being a family secret until the reunion, the reunion has gone very well.

Oh dear!  Do I hear a shoe pounding on heaven's floor again?

Atkins reunion story is nice, normal, and inoffensive except for one sentence:

So in August of 2008, Atkins went through the proper channels and reunited with his birth mother in Nashville.

Proper channels?  It's an odd choice of words. Maybe that was the reporter's choice of words.  Maybe Atkins, the NCFA spokesperson, chose them, stressing that he is a well-behaved adoptee, not some Christmas Day intruder or porch pisser.

However...

I've never seen that term used in any reunion story. Ever. And I've been reading them for decades.

Proper channels.  The whole thing sets wrong with me, especially since Atkins was born in Knoxville, Tennessee, and his information may have been available to him for the asking, no thanks to NCFA's legal opposition to Tennessee's semi-records access law (and here for a complete rundown), and a lot of money, red tape and waiting as recounted by blogger Amanda Transue Woolston's My Identity was a State Secret.  I say "maybe" because according to the wire story, Atkins' mother became pregnant from a "traumatic first date."   Now, we all know what  that means, and as far as the Tennessee record release law goes, any mention of rape or incest in the state-held  adoption file keeps the record sealed.

Proper channels. The words have glaring political implications.  Proper channels infers that Class Bastard, unlike the Not Adopted population,  has no legal right to their own birth record and personal information.  It implies that searching for first parents is illegal; that  adoptees bribe Vital Stats workers, obtain documents illegally, stalk and chase down their first parents, and otherwise sneak around to ruin the lives of "frightened"  and "helpless" strangers to fill some ungrateful  "curiosity." NCFA's founding president Bill  Pierce not only liked to regularly call out the ungrateful bastard meme, but blamed adoptive parent who supported adoptee rights for indulging their spoiled bastard brats who should probably just be just sent off to a Bahamian bootcamp for some lessons in life.


If  this were the old days, Dr. Pierce would have given Rodney Atkins the boot and replaced him with Mr. Burns. NuNCFA, however, enjoying a mellow that puts it.almost to the left of the American Adoption Congress (only  NCFA does what is says it will) can no doubt use the Atkins reunion as the "right way" to do things. Of course, the "right way" is what all but a infinitesimal number of bastards do every day. including this poor bastard, reported by  Triona Guidry (73adoptee),Tennessee Adoptee  Threatened for Asserting her Rights

Proper channels would never be in the vocabulary if our  records were simply unsealed like everyone elses and let people work out their own decisions and relationships.
 .

Attention Ohio AdoptionLand: Ohio Birthparent Group Invites you to Attend its First Anniversary Event

The Ohio Birthparent Group is celebrating its first anniversary next month. To celebrate, on Sunday, November 13, the group is holding a special one-day event: Living Adoption: Life-Long Issues in the Birthparent Experience here in Columbus.  The morning session is for parents only; the afternoon session, and educational workshop is open to professionals and the public,  Both  sessions are free, but CEI credits are $20.00 (pre-registration).

Brenda Romanchik is guest speaker and facilitator.  Brenda is one of the first persons I met in online AdoptionLand nearly 20 years ago (yikes!).  I'll be there and I hope my Ohio readers can join us.

OPG is not affiliated with any religion and is not sponsored by any adoption agency or facilitator.

Here's more information:

LOCATION:  

Camp Mary Orton

7925 N. High St.

Columbus, OH 43235

In recognition of our First Anniversary, Ohio Birthparent Group invites you to a special National Adoption Month event exploring the experiences of women and men who have placed children for adoption in the U.S.

Living Adoption: Life-Long Issues in the Birthparent Experience with guest facilitator Brenda Romanchik, LMSW, ACSW, CTS

Sunday, November 13th, 2011

9:00am-12:30pm
Birthparent Support Meeting (For Birthparents Only)

2:00pm-4:00pm
Educational Workshop for Professionals and Community Members (Open to the Public) / Social Work CEU available.

For flyers, program information and registration, visit their webpage.

The regisatration page is here.

ABOUT THE SPONSOR

Ohio Birthparent Group is a non-profit organization committed to supporting the life-long needs of birthparents through peer support, advocacy and community education. Founded in 2010 by birthparents themselves, Ohio Birthparent Group was created to address the historic lack of services and significant barriers to social recognition faced by women and men who place children for adoption.

Questions? Email Kate Livingston at ohiobirthparents@gmail.com

Long Awaited Trial of Brian Dykstra to Start October 24

;

Cross posted from Nikto Ne Zabyt--Nichto Ne Zabyto

 According to the Iowa City Press-Citizen and the Daily Iowan, the trial of Brian Dykstra, accused of the August 2006 beating death of his adopted Russian son  Isaac Jonathan Dykstra (birth name unknown) will start October 24.

A pretrial was held on Thursday to discuss "specifics of how technological issues would be dealt with, especially in reference to the handling of redacted footage,which caused a mistrial in the Charles Thompson homicide trial in September."  (unrelated to the Dykstra case)

 Dykstra, apparently still in  South Carolina, where he lives with his wife, an assistant professor of Spanish  at Clemson University, listened in on the hearing by speaker phone

 Earlier this  year prosecutors and defense said they intended to call eleven doctors and 39 witnesses to testify.

 The trial is expected to last about eight days.

To read more about the case,  including In Memoriam  (Summary of all cases) and Summary of Killers and Sentences,  go to Nikto and click on Isaac's name in the  "Labels"sidebar at the right..

Ohio Right to Life: Informed Consent v Informed Consent--It's All Situational

On September 27, the Ohio Senate passed HB 63, an Ohio Right Right to Life (ORTL) bill to "tighten" up the procedures by which unmarried women in Ohio under the age of 18 can get an abortion without parental notification and consent. The passage of HB 63 is another tool to hack away at abortion access in the state. The bill, however, gives us the opportunity to expose the duplicitous nature of ORTL's fraudulent concerns about "informed consent" "parental involvement" and "best interests" of teen women.. Dubious at best, these bytes spewed out to the public are nullified by ORTL's sponsorship, support, and promotion of Ohio's "safe haven law," which encourages women-- and targets teens especially-- to hide pregnancies, give birth unattended, and to turn over their newborns anonymously to the state with no counseling, no parental involvement, and no health care, all under their "pro-life" banner.

JUDICIAL BYPASS
Under Ohio law, an unmarried woman under the age of 18 cannot get an abortion without parental consent. She can, however, loophole out of by utilizing the judicial bypass procedure which permits her to go to juvenile court and request the state's consent for her abortion outside of the family structure. This legal procedure requires judges to inquire about the minor's understanding of the "possible physical and emotional complications of abortion and how she would respond to such complications." That is, judges are forced to consider, for the most part, a laundry list of ORTL and Friends myths about abortion. The teen's responses determine her mental and emotional "maturity" to undergo the procedure. Oddly, a young woman ruled too ‘emotionally immature" to have an abortion is considered mature enough to carry a pregnancy to term, give birth, and presumably rear a child--unless she decides to place it for adoption, or dump the newborn anonymously at a no-questions-asked state-facilitated "safe haven" drop-off point--neither of which requires consent of the teen's parents or a judicial bypass to accomplish.

There are no good figures on how many judicial bypass requests have been made in Ohio since the law went into effect in 1985. In 2003, however, the Akron Beacon Journal, under a public information request to selected county juvenile courts, was able to identify 515 requests made between 2000 and late 2003. Out of those, 73 were denied. Unfortunately, the Beacon Journal article is no longer online so I'm forced to use the biased secondary source Life.com. for these figures and other information regarding the survey..

Since the survey was reported, the number of successful loopholes has been a bug up the nose of our local anti-aborts, and over the last few months ORTL has been working on passage of HB 63 to tighten them up. (Earlier bills were unsuccessful.) HB 63 passed the House in March, and last week, a slightly different version passed the Senate. After the concurrence hearing, it's all over but the signing.

 HB 63 was sponsored and supported by Speaker of the House William Batchelder and a gaggle of House and Senate Republicans. Many of them oppose obc access. Two of them are Rep.Matt Hoffman and Bob Mecklenborg who rolled their eyes and cracked jokes to each other during, and walked out during 2008 testimony  (and here and here) before the House Health Committee in support of the original HB 7 records access/adoption and foster care reform bill. Mecklenborg was recently forced to resign from his House seat after he was arrested in Indiana drunk and pumped up with Viagra in the company of a stripper (who he described as "an old family friend").

 The Senate analysis of the bill indicates that HB 63 does the following: (my bold)

• Requires the court, in a hearing to permit a pregnant minor to consent to an abortion or by which a court may give judicial consent to an abortion, to specifically inquire about the minor's understanding of the possible physical and emotional complications of abortion and how the minor would respond if the minor experienced those complications after the abortion. 

•  Requires the court, in a hearing of the type described in the previous dot point, to specifically inquire about the extent to which anyone has instructed the minor on how to answer questions and on what testimony to give at the hearing.

•  Requires the court, in a hearing of the type described in the second preceding dot point, to make its findings regarding whether or not the minor is sufficiently mature and well enough informed to decide intelligently whether to have an abortion and whether or not the abortion is in the best interests of the minor by clear and convincing evidence

.“Rubber stamping” and an alleged lack of "informed consent” is ORTL’s putative complaint. Last February, ORTL lobbyist Stephanie Krider, testifying before the House Health and Aging Committee claimed that the current judicial bypass procedure is nothing but blatant government contempt for parental involvement in a teenager's decision to seek an abortion. To underscore her point, Krider claimed, presenting no evidence, that underage women going to court are being over-prepped by lawyers, Planned Parenthood, and even "older men" (aka seducer adult males fearful of statuary rape or rape charges) ) on how to respond to judges' queries and manipulate the decision to the petitioner’s favor.  (Krider failed to mention that communication between client and attorney is privileged, suggesting that the implications may be farther reaching than just abortion. "consent.")  Since bypass hearings are closed to the public, she complained. parents are denied the right to legal representation and to cross examine the teen or present opposing testimony. She says that judges tend to ask routine scripted questions, but then hints of an organized high school underground that informs teenagers of "new" questions a specific judge has asked recently.

IN THEIR OWN WORDS
 Here are some quotes direct from the keyboard of ORTL and its legislative cronies bemoaning the deficiency of parental input and informed consent in the judicial bypass procedure:. (My bold):

•  The fact that so many judges automatically conclude that it is in the minor's "best interest" to have an abortion without notifying her parents shows that they have no concept of how physically and emotionally harmful an abortion can be to a young woman...Parents kept in the dark about their daughter's abortion may underestimate the importance of signs of physical and emotional problems until it’s too late. Mark Lally, ORTL legislative counsel, LifeNews.com, November 11, 2003. 

•  Ohioans know that parental consent laws save lives...We are trying very hard to preserve parents' ability to help their daughters when they are confronted with the challenges of teenage pregnancy. A recent study proved that responsible parental consent laws reduce the minor abortion rate by 18.7 percent. Mike Gondiakis, Executive Director of ORTL, Ohio Right to Life Press Release,  March 16, 2011. 

• A minor's decision to terminate a pregnancy can have immeasurable consequences. It is critical that we do everything possible to allow for meaningful parental input. HB 63 sponsor Ron Young, Life News.com, March 16, 2011. 

•  The pro-life legislation will protect minors and their unborn children by strengthening parental involvement and consent laws. Mike Gondiakis, Executive Director, ORTL Press Release, June 22, 2011. 

•  This pro-life legislation will protect minors and their unborn children by closing loopholes and raising the bar to protect parents' ability to care for their children."... "HB 63 strengthens parents; ability to care for their children and prevents lawyers and others from taking mom and dad's place when the child needs them most."   Mike Gondiakis, Executive Director, ORTL Press Release, September 27, 2011. 

All of this rhetoric about informed consent and strengthening, family communication, parental involvement and rights (real or otherwise) in the untimely pregnancies of teen daughters would normally be talk I'd not be writing about here. It's all old ho-hum. Everybody knows that ORTL’s real problem is that somebody somewhere is having an abortion.

Ohio Right to Life and its friends in the General Assembly, however, are on legislative record as opposing informed consent, family communication, and parental involvement in the unplanned pregnancies of their teen daughters when it fits the organization's political agenda.

With its support and promotion of the state's  "Desertion of Child Under 72 Hours Old Act" (DCA)  popularly known as the "safe haven" law" that lets women of any age legally abandon their newborn children anonymously with no questions asked, ORTL guts its demand for informed consent and parental involvement in critical child-bearing decisions that can affect their daughters’ and their grandchildren's physical and mental health permanently, and in the process, collapses on its self-defined moral high ground.

THE OHIO RIGHT TO LIFE EXCEPTION
 Ohio's "safe haven" law, is the ultimate loophole. It doesn't require a lawyer. It doesn't require parental notification or consent. It doesn't require a judicial bypass hearing. It doesn't require counseling, "informed consent". or even a  flyer listing alternatives to legalized dumping. It doesn't require  surrender documents and other tedious paperwork.  It doesn't even require that the "parent" be identified by name, show an ID, or prove legal custody. It only requires the desire of someone to get rid of a baby after it's born.with no fuss, muss, and untidy questions .

Ohio law permits any woman (or man) of any age to anonymously "relinquish" a newborn at designated state-approved drop-off points such as ERs, fire stations and police stations. (Despite the hype, "safe haven" infants aren't being "relinquished" for adoption, though adoption may be the outcome. Infants are, instead, being thrown into the juvenile court and CPS to founder for at least a year. until their legal status is clarified.) Some states' laws are broader and include drop-offs at staffed churches, dentist offices, health departments--and "any responsible person" (no definition of "responsible person” given). In a few states such as Florida, "safe haven" agents are barred legally from asking newly delivered mothers if they need medical assistance. Legally complicated and sometimes expensive mechanisms are in place for parents or kin to retrieve the child.

 Passed in late 1999, HB 660, Ohio's original "safe haven" law, was enacted during a wave of moral panic in response to a falsely perceived nationwide epidemic of newborn discard and neonaticide fueled by mainstream media that focused on rare and sensational incidents. such as the infamous 1998 "Prom Mom" case. Initially, the law legalized the anonymous dumping of babies up to three days of age. In 2008, under SB 304, the General Assembly expanded the age frame to children up to 30 days old, though as in 1999, there was no evidence that infant discard was a problem in Ohio.

 HB 660 was a creature of the legislature with some support from public child welfare agencies. Law enforcement, also supported the measure even though hearing witnesses admitted they had no memory of discard incidents in their jurisdictions. .The bill received no support from child welfare and adoption ethicists, adoptee rights/adoption reform groups or for the most part, private adoption agencies,.

Opponents raised serious ethical and legal questions, pointing out that legalized baby dumping is irreconcilable to best practice in child welfare and adoption; a heave-ho to over 100 years of evolving  practice and a slap in the face of everyone who has ever surrendered a child "the right way."

 Moreover, "safe haven" laws did nothing to decrease infant abandonment. On the contrary, they gave infant abandonment the state's seal of approval, which in turn encouraged women who would have otherwise sought counseling and alternatives to abandonment to now make "non-bureaucratic surrenders” that lacked the legal protections for mother and child under traditional child welfare law. They were also concerned that the law, with the promise that "nobody would ever have to know you had this child" would encourage young women to forgo pre- and post natal care, putting the welfare and lives of themselves and their babies at risk.

 Reform groups particularly objected to lack of informed consent and parental involvement, anonymous "relinquishment,” secret birth and adoption, and the erasure of the other parent (usually fathers) and the biological family.. Adoption agencies were especially critical of hidden, unattended pregnancies and birth, lack of informed consent, and lack of fathers’ consent, all of which in business terms, put their own incomes at risk.

In 1999, I attended three of the four  House Children and Family Services Committee hearings for HB 660 and testified against the bill at the second hearing. So-called "pro-life" proponents made no objection to the lack of informed consent and parental input.or the inherent danger of unattended pregnancy and birth. They acted like  magic babies would suddenly appear on a pink fluffy cloud, clean and healthy as ...well... who knows.  One woman from Akron whose church was eager to adopt "every abandoned baby in the state" testified  that  medical conditions and psychological problems caused by secret pregnancy, delivery, and anonymous abandonment were unimportant. "The baby will just  be glad to be alive.  If it has problems, it will just have to live with it."

Neither the Church Lady nor the committee as a whole cared just what those problems might be. Children born with no pre-natal care are subject to numerous disabilities including cerebral palsy, mental retardation and delay, blindness, low birth weight, diabetes and hyperlidemia, short life spans.and...death. Women who receive no pre- or post-natal care and give birth unattended are subject to life-threatening pregnancy-related disabilities including infection, premature birth, breech birth, placenta previa/accreta (which can require a C-Section), preeclampsia, hypermesis, gravidarum,  post-partum depression or psychosis, and... death.. Very young women are at especially high risk.

House sponsor and bill author Rep Cheryl Wmikler, who also chaired the House committee meetings,  made the improbable claim  during one hearing that 14-year old girls, a few moments after giving birth alone over a toilet or in a bathtub, would just hop on a bus or catch a ride with "an older friend in college" (!) and drop off the baby before anyone knew what had happened. Bleeding out was not an option..

 "Safe haven" was seen simply as another way to "save babies." and consequences be damned! Winkler, in fact, closed each hearing with a tearful "Thank you for saving the babies." (see Carol Sanger's excellent Infant Safe Haven Laws: Legislating in the Culture of Life, Columbia Law Review  104:4 :4 May 2006 on the connection in the greater political culture between "safe haven" laws and abortion.). Ironically, when the bill passed the House, the two dissenting votes came from the most conservative anti-abortion members in the chamber: Rep Jim Jordan (now a Congressman) and Rep. Ron Young, both believing that the law "cheapened life." Jordan, during hearings, objected on many of the same grounds as did adoption reformers and adoptee rights activists. Cincinnati Republican Doug White opposed in the Senate..

 HB 660 passed into law, dreaded rubber stamp in hand.

LEGISLATORS ON THE RECORD
Ohio Right to Life's legislative support for HB 660 is no longer online. For more than a decade, though, it has supported baby dumping and advocated  the use of "safe havens" by posting information about the program on its website.  Various ORTL state affiliates link back to it. It's webpage does not mention medical complications and psychological problems for mother and child.Other state anti-abortion organizations signed on, too:   Americans United for Life, The Catholic Conference of Ohio, Democrats for Life in Ohio, Ohio Christian Alliance, Priests for Life, and the Life Issues Institute.)

 ORTL's support for SB 304, the 2008 expansion law, however, is easy to find.. ORTL testified in support of SB 304, but it's testimony is not online.  In a December 9, 2008, press release, though,  distributed to anti-abortion organizations and media throughout the country, and reprinted in ORTL state affiliate newsletters, ORTL Director, Mike Gondiakis praised the expansion. "We believe that extending the time frame when a parent can use the Safe Haven law will help protect babies." (

Large numbers of ORTL PAC recommendations for the 2008 session put their names on SB 304 and another time expansion measure, HB 485. The second bill which would have increased the age eligibility from three to six days, was left to die in committee in the wake of SB 304. (See sidebar below for names)

Ironically, by supporting the extension of the dump age to 30 days, ORTL and its legislative buddies, appear downright anti-family, suggesting that parents should be able to test-drive their children before deciding to keep them. (This is not a far-fetched. In California,  proponents of several unsuccessful attempts to expand that state’s “safe haven” time frame, citing post-partum depression, C-section recoveries, and new-parent sleep deprivation, argued that parents need time to decide they are up to the task, and they should be able to "send the baby back" if they came up short. In a moment of clarity California Right to Life Advocates and the California Right to Life Committee opposed the expansion for moving the intent of “safe haven" from "child saving" to "child welfare.")

 Not satisfied with simply having baby dumping on the books, sponsors of both expansion bills included provisions for the state to educate "at risk populations" on how to abandon newborns without going to jail. HB 485 specifically required some sort of high school curriculum unit  be developed "pertaining to the desertion of a child less than one hundred and forty-four hours after birth by parents with no intent to return for the child." In affect, "safe haven" proponents and ORTL were eager to teach teenagers how to avoid parental detection of pregnancy and birth. So far, we have not see any baby abandonment curriculum coming out of the state, though several states, including California, Illinois and Florida  (video about how to- abandon your baby taught in the Catholic school system.)

THE SCAM
In the bizarro world of Ohio Right to Life, parental involvement  in teen pregnancies when "saving fetuses" is involved, is essential to the maintenance of “traditional family values” Involvement is eliminated in the name of “traditional family values” when it comes to the safety and welfare of young pregnant women, just delivered mothers, and just born babies as long as the babies are scheduled to be dumped on an ER counter.

Under the banner of informed consent, Ohio Right to Life insists on scaring -warning pregnant women with  a laundry list of what it claims are the harmful affects of abortion,   At the same time it  ignores the harmful affects of  secret pregnancy on the fetus,  the harmful affects of unattended secret birth on baby and mother, and the harmful affects of child abandonment. on both. Moreover, it does not address the legal ramifications of "safe haven." which are beyond the scope of this piece, but include protracted legal proceedings including  closed court hearings, the the filing of a deserted child complaint, and expensive DNA testing if reunification is desired.

Current informed consent procedures in Ohio include a menu of  best practice and ORTL-friendly  warnings, but "safe haven" procedures require none. Ever.  Mental retardation?.  Fine!  Premature? Fine! Breech birth?  Fine.  Preeclampsia?  Fine. Excessive bleeding?  Fine! Post Partum Depression?  Fine.   You'd think this would worry ORTL and its Statehouse point men, but it doesn't.   It it did, it wouldn't be pimping  baby abandonment.

______________________________

______________________________

SIDEBAR

OHIO RIGHT TO LIFE PAC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2008 AND 2010 ELECTIONS WHO SUPPORT INFORMED CONSENT FOR ABORTION BUT NOT FOR "SAFE HAVEN"

Also see The Company They Keep below

____________________

SB 304:   Over half of the sponsors of SB 304 received ORTL PAC recommendations or preferred candidates the 2008 election.


Senate:  8 out of 21 sponsors:  Sponsor: Cates, Co-sponsors:  Wagoner, Seitz, Faber, Grendell, Neihaus, Wilson. Austria (already in office, but running for Congress with ORTRL recommendation).

House: 30 out of 68 sponsors: Co-sponsors:  Goodwin, Sears, Uecker, Wachtmann, Huffman, *Mecklenborg, Jones, B Williams, Adams, Bacon, Batchelder, #Brinkman, Blessing, Bolon, Bubp, Coley, Combs, Dodd,  Dreihaus, Gardner, Garrison,  Hite, Hottinger, Hughes, Mandel,  ##Nero, Oelslanger, Schlichter, Stewart and Zehringer. 

____________________

HB 485: 

Almost 44% of HB 485 were ORTL PAC recommended for the 2008 election.

House:  12 out of 28 sponsors :   Sponsor:  DeGeeter  (Co-sponsors):  Watchmann, Garrison, Driehaus,. #Brinkman, McGregor, Combs, Dodd, Bolon, BWilliams, Gardener, and Domenick. 

Senate:  Bill died in House committee

____________________.

# Brinkman, a veteran of ORTL point man was term limited out; thus he was not running for re-election.

##Nero was a ORTL  "preferred candidate.

____________________

HB 63: 33 of 72 sponsors of the bill were ORTL recommendations.

House: 41 out of 49 sponsors:  J Adams, Thompson, Huffman, Hayes, Roegner, Henne, Brenner, Maag, Boose, Blessing, Wachtmann, Gardner, Grossman, Hackett, *Martin, Kozlowski, Dovilla, Derickson, Stautberg, Hottinger, Hall ,Goodwin, Blair, Combs, McKenney, Bubp, Uecker, Burke, Balderson, Amstutz, Beck, R. Adams, McClain, Rosenberger, Johnson, *Mecklenborg, Schuring, Sears, Carey, Coley, Gonzales, Young, Batchelder.

Senate:  14 out of 23 sponsors:  Although no Senate members are listed on the bill,  the following names of ORTL PAC recommendations  were added on September 27: Bacon, Coley, Lehner, Balderson, Jones, Hughes, Wilson, Faber, Jordan, Seitz, Hite, Burke, Oeslager, Wagoner, Neihaus.

  ____________________

HB 304 and HB 63 combined: 

18  recommended candidates sponsored SB 304 against parental involvement and informed consent for baby dumping and sponsored HB 63 for parental involvement and informed consent: for abortion:

House:   Goodwin, Sears, Ueucker, Hoffman, Wachtman, *Mecklenborg, J Adams, Batchelder, Blessing, Coley Bubp, Gardener, Hottinger.

Senate:  Wagoner, Seitz, Faber, Neihaus, Wiilson

Kurt Schuring is probably the only institutional memory of the1999-2008 baby dump campaign left at the Statehouse. He was an original sponsor in the House, and a sponsor of the expansion in the Senate. In 2008 I reminded him that in 1999 Cheryl Winkler, author of the original law, had adamantly opposed an extension of the timefame calling anything beyond three days "premeditated abandonment." He acted like I'd just told him Kim Kardasian had written the Declaration of Independence, though the information came directly from the lips of Winkler's legislative aide to my ear. Schuring was also a sponsor of the HB63 judicial bypass changes and is a some-times ORTL PAC candidate. Rep. Ron Young, who opposed the original "safe haven bill" was also a sponsor of HB 63.

*THE COMPANY THEY KEEP

Jared Martin:  In  January 2010 Rep.Jarrd Martin and five other men were kicked out a Beavercreek hotel .for fighting.during a bachelor party.  Two months later, in March, he  was found drunk, slumped over the steering wheel of Ohio House Speaker Bill Batchelder's Chevy Suburban in an overnight downtown parking garage.  Then, on. July 27, 2011, Martin was arrested at a traffic stop near Beavercreek and charged with drunk driving and child endangering  At that point, Speaker Batchelder asked Martin to "consider" resigning his seat. Martin refused, saying he doesn't have a drinking problem and then mumbled somethng about "stupid rumors."

Robert Mecklenborg: In April, Rep. Bob Mecklenborg was arrested in Indiana drunk and pumped up with Viagara while in the company of a stripper.  Later he neglected to mention his arrest when applying for his new drivers's license. . House Speaker Bill Batchelder requested Mecklenborg's resignation.  Although the resignation announced  in mid-July, it did not take effect until August 2. 

Sen. Kris Jordan (and here): In July and August 2011,  Sen. Kris Jordan was investigated by the Delaware County Sheriff''s Department after his wife, Melissa, the Delaware County Recorder,  made several calls to the 911 center asking for assistance and then cancelling. She reported that he was drunk and had a gun. (Both have CCW permits).  Later he claimed the Sheriff's office was conspiring to destroy his political career. No charges were filed.  

______________________________

_____________________________

The "Shape" of Adoption: What's a Meta For?

Earlier today on FB, Hanne Andersen linked a 2009 Motherhood Deleted post, The Myth of the Triad. In  that entry, blogger Robin Westbrook (one of favorite bloggers, btw),  linked to one of my first pieces on the triad myth--a copy of my presentation at the oxymoronical  2006 Ethics in Adoption Conference in Arlington, Virginia where adoptees and moms suffered through bastard moments and shut-up Q & A sessions.

Re-reading my short presentation got me thinking about  the pretty shapes-of -adoption deformers like to toss about at hearings while they're being polite obedient children asking for a cookie.

ADOPTION:  CIRCLE, TRIANGLE, PENTAGON, CONSTELLATION
What next?  Decagon?

So I did a Google search on geometric figures to see if there is anything that actually fits adoption and the complicated and secret relationships it invents.

I like Adoption Trapezoid, with its scary implications, but it's just a four-sided  "triangle."

The Cone of Shame is tempting.

Personally, I favor  the Metatron's Cube model,  but  it's something only adoption nerds can enjoy, and impractical and irrelevant to politicians and frumpy bureaucrats who hold the key to the locked cabinets. WARNING:  :  For internal use only!

This  leaves only one symbol 

The cross.  (I know!)

But think about it.  A big horizontal plank with two little planks nailed to either side to make the big plank look good. It's also handy for deformers to crawl up on when they  inadvertently speak out of turn or exhibit slight ingratitude when an authority figure takes a few minutes away from counting her boodle or yabbering in  his prayer closet, to give them an audience.  Of course, when suitably repentant our summer soldiers can crawl back down, cleansed of identity bewilderment and youthful sexcapades,. happy  to have had a place to heal their primal wounds.

The cross has the added benefit of camouflaging  our activity, since we all know that God--the christian god that is-- invented adoption, but sometimes gets distracted by the Republican Party and puts baybees in the wrong tummies.  Thank God's helpers, the Adoption Industry for tidying up that mess!

If you're unhappy with the cross (and I understand why!) there's always the garbage can.

Can = State

Lid = Adoption Industry

Tossed, chewed, undigestible, and rotten. = The Rest of Us

Thanks: Hanne, Robin

Bastardette is Back!

I  have not blogged for the last two months or so due to an extremely stressful situation in my life which has made sustained concentration virtually impossible. I'm not going to discuss it here, but things have improved (I think) and hopefully I will be able to put together a coherent sentence from here on out, and get back to business.

This month, I'm dedicating some of my posts to Ohio Right to Life.

I've adopted (sorry!) the new Blooger interface. You can see obvious differences now,  (still having some problems) but I plan to make some more when I have the time.

Demons of Adoption Awards 2011! Vote!

(NOTE:  I switched to the new Blooger interface and I'm not sure how well my links are showing up on the screen.  Can a few people let me know if they can see them well.  It may just be the computer I'm working on.I'm also having trouble with spacing.)

It's that time of year again!

Voting for the 5th Annual Demons of Adoption Awards is at hand.   Pound Pup offers us a fine selection to chose from this year, and as usual, what's a girl to do?  So many choices; so few votes! .  Nominations have been expanded  this year into separate categories:  The Industry; The Regulators, and my favorite,  The Mouthpieces.

My hometown industry  favorite is Adoption by Gentle Care whose been begging for  the award for years. They're the ones who handled the notorious Baby Grayson placement. ( I'm mean!  I'd planned to nominate Grayson's PAPs, but came up a day short and a dollar late.)

This years nominees are:

The Industry
A Act of Love Adoption Agency:  for purposefully finding ways to curcumvent fathers consent (and me:; not to mention bad grammar)


Adoption by Gentle Care:   for keeping a young boy (Thad Wyrembek aka Grayson Vaughn) from his biological father

Lifetime Adoption:  for predating on vulnerable pregnant women

Adoptions by Shepherd Care:  for coercive domestic adoptions out of Florida Celebrate Adoption:  for their association with Guatemalan kidnapping cases

Susan Lucara: for her involvement in Guatemalan kidnapping cases

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:  for running one of the largest baby peddling rings in the world



The Regulators
The Department of State:   for it's prolonged silence in the on-going Guatemala adoption kidnapping caases

Senator Mary Landreu:  for ignoring all ethics regarding adoption and promoting the business interest of  the adoption industry in Congress

The State of Utah:  for their draconian adoption laws, especially with regard to fathers rights

Florida Department of Children & Families:  for their lack of monitoring in the Nubia and Victor Barahona case, and for allowing some of the most unethical agencies to set up shop in the State of Florida.

The Mouthpieces
Both Ends Burning: ; for their reckless approach to expand the business of adoption

Adam Pertma: for claiming to be a critic of the adoption system, while at the same time promoting the interest of the adoption industry

adoption.com:  for censoring all valid criticism towards the adoption industry

Dr. Jane Aronson: for fiercely promoting adoption while being entirely blind towards unethical practices

Elizabaeth Bartholet: for recklessly promoting inter-country adoption even in the face of child trafficking and adoption fraud.

****** 

Please go over to the Demons of Adoption 2011 ballot, and click on appropriate links to read more about the nominees.

Then VOTE!

 Former Winners: 

National Council for Adoption

;Juno Bethany Christian Services

;Joint Council on International Children's Services.

The election closes October 31.