no. 598 – Update Later Today, I Hope

I’ve been following this story about Nebraska Children’s Society attempt to remove a baby that they aided in placing this past Fall. Soon it has been promised, there will be a ruling. I’m hoping by later today… I have no idea which way it will go, but I found the latest publication in the Norfolk Daily News the most telling as to how Nebraska Children’s Society is desperately trying to cover their asses.

Here’s a brief note from the Lincoln Journal Star: Judge Will Rule Soon Whether to Remove Baby from Adoptive Family

Omaha World-Herald: Baby’s Birth Mom, Agency Ask Court to Nullify Adoption

An adoption forum.

And finally, here are all the articles that were posted in a local paper that weren’t published anywhere else:

January 29, 2008 – Verdigre Couple Fight to Keep Baby

January 31, 2008 – Adoption Hearing Postponed

February 2, 2008 – Attorney Appointed for Infant

February 8, 2008 – Adoption Agency Responds. Note the blurb on the side about their pregnancy policy, which is addressed in the following article. NCS didn’t add that info to their website until AFTER this problem arose. Funny, the center’s administrator has no idea exactly when this was added or who added it…

February 12, 2008 – Agency: Couple Ineligible to Adopt. I also like how the agency "assumed" they told the couple that if they became pregnant, they couldn’t adopt, because that’s just what most agencies enforce, and well, duh…to the agency I guess that means all the layman couples should know that.

10 thoughts on “no. 598 – Update Later Today, I Hope”

  1. Interestingly, at first the birth mother seemed to know ahead of time about the pregnancy and was okay with it, now she isn’t. Pressure from the agency? Did they tell her that if she didn’t back them and they won that she would be unable to participate in where the child ended up?

    Something sounds off to me.

  2. When Steve and I were looking into adoption (we decided against it for a variety of reasons), we noted that there were a host of things that just didn’t feel right to us. I do, however, have to allow room for the birth mother to make choices about the family she wishes to place her baby in. Race, religion, other children…these are all tops on most birth mothers’ wish lists.

    Being a legal beagle, I do have issues with this, “I’m sure we told them,” attitude. Unless the state is willing to allow oral contracts for adoption, they better produce something in writing that shows they did, in fact, share the information and get a waiver from the couple.

  3. I felt the same way about the adoption forum. It was definitely anti-adoptive parents, but that really does seem to be a common theme among many forums lately. The birthmother’s request seems over-the-top and a bit ridiculous, and the fact that the adoption agency told her that she could make such a request is sketchy in the first place. What if this couple had gotten pregnant right after the adoption was final? Would the birthmom try to sue for breach of contract or something like that?

    Our adoption agency has a policy that you can’t be pregnant while adopting, but it’s in black and white and they have our signature on it. From what I understand, it’s a pretty common policy among agencies–but it’s not universal and they can’t prove that this couple was made aware of that policy without their signature acknowledging it!

    My heart just goes out to the poor little boy and the adoptive family.

  4. Maybe I’m just naive, but if this is such an important rule to these agencies, so important that they are willing to rip a child from the only loving parents he has known, shouldn’t this policy be on some sort of document that every family has to sign so there is proof that the family was made aware?

    This story is so sad.

  5. Michelle, I also noticed the rather negative tone coming from the adoption forum, strangely enough. I’ve noticed over the years that those who have adopted become very black and white in how they view adoption, but I guarantee that if they were still in the wings, their opinions would be less defined for fear of retribution.

  6. I didn’t read too far because my blood pressure started shooting up but I am horrified by the comments on the discussion. They are actually blaming the adoptive parents for getting pregnant? I truly can’t believe they hid her pregnancy with malicious intentions – my guess is that they truly weren’t aware of the rule and kept it quiet because of the previous losses.

  7. It still sounds like a crock of horse crap to me. If it isn’t WRITTEN in the contract, isn’t all he said/she said? Maybe they will start making potential adoptive moms pee on a stick before the hold the baby…

    Grrrrr…it makes me so friggin’ mad!

  8. I think it’s a stupid rule but I did look into adopting through NCS a few years ago and remember seeing that information on their website – because that’s the first time I had heard of such a prohibition. And every agency I checked into had the same rule. Though if it was such a big deal to the agency perhaps they should have established whether or not the woman was pregnant BEFORE they placed the child with them.

You can say it here.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s