Full Story HERE
Dad Files $130M Suit, Alleging His Son Was Unknowingly Put
Up for Adoption
By ADITI ROY | Good Morning America – 2 hours 40 minutes ago
An unmarried Utah father has filed a $130 million federal lawsuit against his son's biological mother, claiming she put their son up for adoption without his knowledge.In a complaint filed in U.S. District Court Friday, Jake Strickland alleges the boy's mother, Whitney Pettersson Demke "essentially kidnapped" his son shortly after birth three years ago. Strickland alleges Demke, the adoptive parents and the adoption agency conspired in an "illegal, deceit-ridden infant adoption" that deprived him of his son, according to the suit.
"My son doesn't deserve to go through this. I don't deserve to go through this. This has been very heart-wrenching for everyone involved," Strickland says on GetBabyJack.com, a website explaining his fight to gain custody of the son that he has never met.
Pettersson and LDS Family Services, which facilitated the adoption, didn't respond to ABC News' request for comment.
Strickland and Demke met in 2009 but broke up before the baby was born in December 2010, according to court documents obtained by ABC News. But Strickland contends they remained friendly and agreed to share custody. Strickland says they even decided to name the baby boy Jack.
"I helped her with as much as I could. Gave her money whenever she needed it," Strickland explains in a video posted on the website.
The baby was born Dec. 29, 2010 and was put up for adoption the next day by Pettersson, Strickland says in the suit.Pettersson, according to Strickland, didn't tell him about the adoption until one week later.
"She had my son without telling me and put him up for adoption the next day," Strickland explains in the video. Days later, Pettersson confessed that she had been planning to put Jack up for adoption from the beginning, according to Strickland. "The moment that I found out, I filed for paternity, which was already too late. I know I should have filed earlier, but I trusted her," Strickland says.
But there was still another surprise waiting for Strickland, who thought Pettersson was divorced. But, in fact, she was still married to her estranged husband, who under Utah law, was presumed the father of Jack and had the right to give custody away.
Soon after Strickland learned the adoption was completed, he filed a paternity claim. That battle is still being fought in Utah's 2nd District Court. Strickland's suit is challenging the boundaries of an unmarried father's rights in Utah."Under current Utah law, if you are the biological father, and have not filed every paper required, you could permanently lose your child," said Utah attorney Mark Wiser, who is not affiliated with this case.
Strickland continues to use the website to send messages to his son, who just turned 3 years old Sunday, and hopes to someday deliver them in person.
Showing posts with label David Hardy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label David Hardy. Show all posts
Thursday, January 2, 2014
Tuesday, December 31, 2013
Dad files $130M lawsuit after son in Utah is given up for adoption - NBC News
By Erik Ortiz, Staff Writer, NBC News
The complaint also strikes at Utah's parenting laws, accusing them of being “pro-adoption and anti-birth father.”
“It’s pulling him apart,” Hutchins told NBC News on Tuesday.
“They still think about him even though they don't have contact,” he added.
“I don’t know if it was done as an act of vindictiveness,” Hutchins said.
Despite contesting the adoption, Strickland learned in November 2011 that it was completed.
Concurrently, Strickland’s federal lawsuit is seeking $30 million for the loss of the parent-child relationship caused by the adoption and $100 million as a deterrent to ensure another dad doesn't suffer his fate.
Read Full Article
December 31, 2013, 2:06 pm
 |
Jake Strickland prepared for the birth of his son in December 2010,
showing off a stroller that was bought for the boy. |
The adoption of Jake Strickland’s son just after he was born Dec. 29, 2010, was illegal and done “through gross
misdirection and … clandestine conduct,” claims the suit filed Friday in the U.S. District Court of Utah.
Strickland alleges the mother, Whitney Pettersson,conspired with the adoptive parents, the adoption agency and attorneys to give up the boy — named “Baby Jack” in the suit — without allowing him to seek custody.
The complaint also strikes at Utah's parenting laws, accusing them of being “pro-adoption and anti-birth father.”
Attorney Wes Hutchins, speaking on behalf of Strickland, said his client just missed his son’s third birthday on Sunday — and is devastated that he can’t share important milestones in the boy’s life.
“It’s pulling him apart,” Hutchins told NBC News on Tuesday.
On his son's birthday, Strickland and his family gathered around a candle to sing “Happy Birthday” to his absent son, Hutchins said.
“They still think about him even though they don't have contact,” he added.
Strickland and Pettersson first met in 2009 as co-workers at a restaurant, according to court documents.
Strickland said Pettersson was having problems with her marriage, and she later told him she got
divorced. They began dating, and three months later, she texted him that she was pregnant.
Strickland left Utah for a temp job in Texas, but said he assured Pettersson that he wanted to be present in their child’s life, according to the lawsuit. He started a fund for the baby boy. The couple came up with a name: Jack. But Strickland didn’t register.
According to Hutchins, Pettersson warned him that if he did, she “would view it as an act of distrust” and keep his child from him.
According to Hutchins, Pettersson warned him that if he did, she “would view it as an act of distrust” and keep his child from him.
“I don’t know if it was done as an act of vindictiveness,” Hutchins said.
Pettersson couldn’t be reached for comment Tuesday, and attorneys involved in the adoption weren’t
immediately available. The adoption agency, LDS Family Services, operated by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, also didn’t respond to a request for
comment.
A nursery that was set up in 2010 for Jake
Strickland's baby, whom he named Jack.
According to the lawsuit, Strickland continued to financially support Pettersson, who also had a child from
another relationship, until her alleged lies about their son began to unravel.
The most devastating discovery, Strickland said in the lawsuit, was that Pettersson had already given up their
child for adoption.
She even got her then-husband to agree to the adoption by telling him that he would be the one saddled with child support payments if she kept the boy, according
to Hutchins.
Strickland, who now lives in Arizona, mounted a paternity claim. But his fight was complicated because he had never registered with the state for his paternal rights.
Despite contesting the adoption, Strickland learned in November 2011 that it was completed.
After a 2nd U.S. District judge shot down Strickland’s bid to gain custody, he filed an appeal to the state. His case is still under review.
Concurrently, Strickland’s federal lawsuit is seeking $30 million for the loss of the parent-child relationship caused by the adoption and $100 million as a deterrent to ensure another dad doesn't suffer his fate.
Hutchins said Utah’s laws are onerous on biological fathers who try to gain custody, noting that they must file a paternity petition, get a sworn affidavit, create a detailed child care plan and prove they were
financially invested in the pregnancy, among other requirements.
Strickland’s custody case, meanwhile, isn’t the only one gaining attention in Utah. In another high-profile petition, Colorado dad Robert Manzanares is fighting for sole custody of his daughter, whom he claims
was unfairly given up by her birth mother when the woman fled to Utah.
Utah State Sen. Todd Weiler told NBC affiliate KSL-TV that despite the increased interest in the issue, he’s not persuaded that Utah laws need to be dramatically overhauled.
“What we’re looking at in this lawsuit and a few other high-profile lawsuits are one or two bad examples out of 10,000,” Weiler said. “I don’t think it’s good policy for the state to look at one or two exceptions and
say, ‘Let’s change the laws for everyone.’”
Read Full Article
Still fighting...
Many comments in the recent articles in the Salt Lake Tribune, KSL and Desert News have stated that Jake just wants money and why did he wait 3 years to file this lawsuit? For those that are uneducated about this case, Jake has been fighting for Jackson since he found out on January 5th, 2011, that he had been placed for adoption. He is currently STILL fighting and his case will be heard hopefully in the Utah Supreme Court in early Spring. The fraud lawsuit is a separate matter. There is a 3 year statute of limitations on filing a civil fraud lawsuit against the parties and this time frame was closing in on January 5th, 2014. This is why the fraud suit was filed when it was.
Ultimately Jake wants his son back. He wants nothing more to be in his life and be able to raise him as he should rightfully so. This is not about money. This is about deception, fraud, manipulation, conspiracy, and about the unethical laws and practices that are occurring in Utah. This is for every father out there that has suffered from Utah Laws or from having their children taken from them unrightfully. This is for the pain and suffering that our family has dealt with for 3 long years. This is not a publicity stunt and Jake would take his son over money any day.
Here is the verified complaint filed for court of appeals...
Ultimately Jake wants his son back. He wants nothing more to be in his life and be able to raise him as he should rightfully so. This is not about money. This is about deception, fraud, manipulation, conspiracy, and about the unethical laws and practices that are occurring in Utah. This is for every father out there that has suffered from Utah Laws or from having their children taken from them unrightfully. This is for the pain and suffering that our family has dealt with for 3 long years. This is not a publicity stunt and Jake would take his son over money any day.
Here is the verified complaint filed for court of appeals...
Monday, December 30, 2013
Unwed father alleges racketeering in adoption lawsuit
Unwed father alleges racketeering in adoption lawsuit
SALT LAKE CITY — A West Jordan attorney and his Arizona-based client are suing for $130 million over an adoption that they say was unlawful, citing a federal act typically used to prosecute gang members and others involved in organized crime.
In the complaint filed Friday, attorney Wesley Hutchins and his client, Jake Strickland, accuse a Utah woman who had Strickland's child, LDS Family Services, an LDS Family Services employee, the child's adoptive parents and attorneys from the law firm Kirton McKonkie, who aided in the adoption, of "racketeering" and "kidnapping." They also allege that the parties are guilty of wire fraud, human trafficking and selling a child.
Hutchins admits the allegations are attention-grabbing and the suit is intended, in part, to bring attention to the rights of birth fathers. But a lawmaker familiar with the case says the lawsuit is unnecessary.
The lawsuit hinges on the story of Strickland, who claims the woman with whom he fathered a child lied to him about her plans for the child until the day before the boy was born. But Hutchins said he pointed to other cases of alleged fraud in the lawsuit as well to demonstrate that the birth mother's fraud was part of what he claims is a larger pattern found among adoption agencies and attorneys in the state.
"It's really an issue of accountability," Hutchins said. "With these fraudulent adoption schemes you find that they are fraudulent, there are co-conspirators involved — most notably adoption attorneys, adoption agencies and adoptive mothers that are engaged in an enterprise," he said. "We've cited those other cases as a necessary element to RICO (Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) to show a pattern of unlawful conduct."
Strickland fathered a child with a woman who was married but estranged from her husband. The woman said she was considering an adoption, but Strickland stated numerous times that he wanted the child and would care for it by himself if necessary, the lawsuit states.
Related Stories:
Do Utah's adoption-friendly laws make it anti-birth father? Utah's adoption-friendly laws have turned the state anti-birth father, say proponents of legislation to give fathers a stronger voice in what happens with the child.
The baby was born, unknown to Strickland, on Dec. 29, 2010. Just more than 24 hours later, the birth mother signed documents relinquishing her parental rights.
Strickland had been told by the birth mother that the baby would be delivered by C-section on Jan. 12, 2010. But on Jan. 5, 2010, the birth mother told Strickland in a cellphone conversation that she had placed the baby with an adoptive couple, according to the lawsuit.
Strickland initiated a paternity claim the following day. He had not, however, registered with Utah's putative father registry during the pregnancy.
Strickland later learned that the woman was not legally divorced from her husband, according to press reports. Under the state Judicial Code, a married woman's husband is presumed to be the father of her child.
According to the lawsuit, a social worker pressured the woman's husband to relinquish his parental rights and allow the adoption to proceed. Hutchins said she even threatened the man after he mentioned Strickland, telling him that if he didn't keep quiet he would be stuck with child support payments.
He also alleges that attorneys David Hardy and Larry Jenkins failed to inform the adoption court about a stipulation in a paternity case recognizing Strickland as the biological father and left the man in the dark about proceedings as they "rushed" the adoption. He said he and Strickland are seeking $30 million for what Strickland lost in being able to raise and enjoy his child.
Under the Utah Adoption Act, you can commit fraud, and it is not a basis to overturn an otherwise illegal adoption, you can sue for damages. … So you can't get your child back if there's a fraudulent adoption, but you can get money.
–Wesley Hutchins, attorney
The $100 million is "an amount specifically designed to serve as a deterrent to this kind of conduct," Hutchins said. "Under the Utah Adoption Act, you can commit fraud, and it is not a basis to overturn an otherwise illegal adoption, you can sue for damages. … So you can't get your child back if there's a fraudulent adoption, but you can get money."
The attorneys in the suit with Kirton McKonkie declined to comment, as did LDS Family Services. But Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, said Strickland had an attorney who told him to follow Utah law and register as the father.
Weiler said he knows of the Strickland family and is sympathetic. He has heard Strickland's mother testify at the Utah Legislature and has met with her.
"It's a tragic story, and she feels that she lost her grandchild and my heart goes out to her, but the protections there in the law were there and they weren't followed," Weiler said, emphasizing the ease of registering for paternity in the state.
"His rights would have been protected if he would have just followed the advice of his own attorney," Weiler said. "The lawsuit takes a shotgun approach against a lot of good people and a lot of good entities that are doing lot of good. … It appears to me that they're trying to blame everyone except for the responsible party."
He said he is aware of pending lawsuits alleging injustices for unwed fathers in Utah but said they don't justify a serious change in the law. He noted that he is an attorney who has personally handled more than 100 adoptions.
"I'm not convinced that a dramatic change needs to take place, because when we make a change, it affects tens of thousands of adoptions, and what we're looking at in this lawsuit and a few other high-profile lawsuits are one or two bad examples out of 10,000," he said. "I don't think it's good policy for the state to look at one or two exceptions and say, 'Let's change the laws for everyone.'"
Read more at http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=28191411#WkoV4udYlfhKFlWu.99
Utah father takes fight for son to federal court
Adoption • Lawsuit alleges conspiracy to defraud, kidnap infant at birth.
Leah Hogsten | The Salt Lake Tribune Jake Strickland of South Jordan is fighting a legal battle to gain custody of his son, born Dec. 29, 2010.
An unmarried Utah father whose son was placed for adoption at birth without his knowledge or consent has filed a $130 million federal lawsuit against the biological mother, adoption agency, adoptive parents and attorneys alleging they conspired in an “illegal deceit-ridden infant adoption” that deprived him of his son.
In a complaint filed in U.S. District Court, Jake Strickland alleges the defendants acted in a “clandestine” manner and “essentially kidnapped” his son. It alleges the defendants engaged in racketeering, human trafficking and various kinds of fraud as part of a conspiracy to deprive Strickland of his child.
Defendants named in the lawsuit include biological mother Whitney Vivian Pettersson Demke; the adoptive parents (identified only by initials); LDS Family Services; Kirton & McConkie, and attorneys Larry Jenkins and David J. Hardy, both of whom are now associated with Kirton & McConkie. Demke could not be reached for comment.
Hardy declined to comment on the lawsuit on behalf of himself, Jenkins and their law firm. Hardy also declined comment on behalf of LDS Family Services, which handled the adoption and is represented by Kirton & McConkie.
Attorney Wes Hutchins is representing Strickland in the federal lawsuit, as well as an action pending in the Utah Court of Appeals.
The lawsuit, Hutchins said, is “basically an effort to hold everyone accountable for the conspiracy to defraud Jake.”
Strickland and Demke met in 2009 and months later she announced she was pregnant. The baby was due in mid-January 2010.
Their relationship soon turned rocky, though they continued to see each other occasionally. When Strickland told Demke he planned to sign up with Utah’s putative father registry, he says she became furious and threatened to not let him see the baby.
During the course of the pregnancy, Strickland bought groceries and gave cash to cover medical bills and help support Demke and her child from another relationship. He also accompanied her to doctor’s visits and was present when an ultrasound revealed she was carrying a boy.
The two discussed baby names — they planned to name their son Jack — shared parenting plans, including Strickland’s desire to raise the boy on his own if necessary. He was eventually led to believe Demke, who had brought up adoption as an option, supported a shared parenting plan.
That winter, the two had a joint baby shower and attended a Christmas party, both hosted by Strickland’s family.
On Dec. 28, 2010, they toured the holiday lights at the LDS Church’s Temple Square in downtown Salt Lake City. The next day, Strickland exchanged text messages with Demke, but nothing seemed amiss.
In fact, she gave birth on Dec. 29 and a day later placed the baby for adoption. Strickland did not learn until Jan. 5 that Demke had already given birth and relinquished her rights to the child. There was another surprise, too: It turned out Demke was still legally married to her husband — not divorced, as she had led Strickland to believe — and under Utah law, as the child’s presumed father, he had had to sign off on the adoption despite knowing the infant was not his offspring.
On Jan. 6, Strickland launched a paternity claim and a legal battle that has met with both wins and losses. A 3rd District judge declined to dismiss Strickland’s paternity claim and asked that it be joined with the adoption proceeding underway in Utah’s 2nd District Court.
While the adoptive parents and birth mother later stipulated to Strickland’s paternity, the case was never consolidated with the adoption proceeding. Strickland learned in November 2011 that his son’s adoption had been completed. A 2nd District Judge denied Strickland’s efforts to challenge the adoption, and last January he filed a notice of appeal with the Utah Court of Appeals.
In the lawsuit, Strickland alleges Demke never intended to co-parent “Baby Jack” with him and “intentionally defrauded” him. The other parties, he alleges, assisted her in carrying out that “fraudulent scheme,” including coercing her then-estranged husband to sign a paternity relinquishment.
“Utah’s pro-adoption and anti-birth father laws, facilitated through fraud immunity, have given rise to a greater number of out-of-state birth mothers forum shopping Utah, and through their own efforts, aided by legal counsel, and in some cases by the prospective adoptive parents, they have been able to successfully place their babies for adoption through misrepresentation and fraud — keeping biological fathers in the dark throughout the process,” the complaint says.
Utah’s adoption statute, which provides immunity to birth mothers who engage in fraudulent acts, “has become an ugly sword slicing through father/child relationships … resulting in fathers being lied to, deceived, and defrauded out of their paternity rights, all in an effort to manufacture the perception of a new, and perceived ‘improved’ family relationship,” according to the complaint.
It alleges the two attorneys, agency and adoptive parents facilitated that sort of deception in the Strickland case; the attorneys also engaged in such practices in other cases involving unwed, biological fathers, the complaint alleges.
brooke@sltrib.com
Twitter: @Brooke4Trib
© Copyright 2013 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Little Cowboy.
Jack:
Every holiday our hearts break a little more and more. We yurn to know what you are doing, how you are developing and what you are embracing in your little heart and world. Halloween has come and gone and it's another holiday not spent with your real daddy and family. We feel so robbed not to get the opportunity to be with you. Your cousin Boston was a cowboy this Halloween and we know you would have loved to be his little sidekick. We know you are probably talking up a storm, and getting a sassy little attitude. We hope one day soon, we can reunite. As always praying for you and your safety.
 |
| Say Howdy to your cousin Boston! |
We love you so much Jack!
Monday, September 3, 2012
Not a coincidence.
Jackson:
We took family photos on Saturday and of course we missed you deeply. It's PAINFUL when people ask how many kids will be there. We have to say one, but we want to shout "Well, there should be two!." It's so disheartening you are not with us. We were at an amazing studio called Camera Shy and on one of their amazing walls that had chalkboard paint had Jack already wrote on the wall. It was meant to be there we know it. It was a great reminder of you. You were with us there in spirit.
Jackson, everywhere we go we are reminded of you. We will never forget you. We hope this a good indicator we can be reunited soon. Your daddy is missing you. Your cousin Boston is getting so big, so we can only imagine that you are growing like a weed as well. Eat lots of food so you can grow and be a strong boy.
:::Your Family:::
We LOVE you so so much.
Sunday, August 5, 2012
Tomorrow.
Tomorrow could be one of the best or worst days yet to come in this ongoing emotional rollercoaster. The best outcome we could hope for would to be allowed to intervene in the adoption, have opposing counsel off of the case due to witnesses in the finalization of the adoption and to allow Jake to be able to meet his son, Jackson Michael Strickland, for the first time. There will be many emotions that will take place tomorrow and we can only hope we get to fill joy in our hearts, rather than crushing as we have felt so much over the past 20 months.
"Do not fear to repeat what has already been said. Men need the truth dinned into their ears many times and from all sides. The first rumor makes them prick up their ears, the second registers, and the third enters."
--Rene Theophile Hyacinthe LaÎnnec
Court:
Tomorrow 2:00 PM
Location: Layton Courthouse
435 North Wasatch Drive
Layton, Utah
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Thinking about you
Jackson:
Our family can not stop thinking about you. We wonder about you every day and hope and pray you are being well taken care of. Every where we go there is something that reminds us of you. There are street signs with Jackson, trucks with the name Jackson on it, new little babies named Jack, little boys that are within 4 months like you and Boston everywhere. Everywhere we turn we think of you.
Jackson, you will know one day how much we love you and think about you. Jack, we wonder every day what you look like. Do you have baby blues like your daddy,? Are you a little Blondie or do you have dark brown hair? Are you a shy little boy or outgoing like your cousin? Do you like to play cars and trucks, and play outside? Hopefully, one day soon we will get answers to our questions.
August 1st is right around the corner and we can not be happier to finally be back in front of a judge to share with him OUR side of the story, and not be voiceless.
Jackson, there is so much positive change that has been happening with birth father rights everywhere. We can only hope this can help with bringing you home.
We love you Jack! See you soon.
XoXo,
Your family
Our family can not stop thinking about you. We wonder about you every day and hope and pray you are being well taken care of. Every where we go there is something that reminds us of you. There are street signs with Jackson, trucks with the name Jackson on it, new little babies named Jack, little boys that are within 4 months like you and Boston everywhere. Everywhere we turn we think of you.
Jackson, you will know one day how much we love you and think about you. Jack, we wonder every day what you look like. Do you have baby blues like your daddy,? Are you a little Blondie or do you have dark brown hair? Are you a shy little boy or outgoing like your cousin? Do you like to play cars and trucks, and play outside? Hopefully, one day soon we will get answers to our questions.
August 1st is right around the corner and we can not be happier to finally be back in front of a judge to share with him OUR side of the story, and not be voiceless.
Jackson, there is so much positive change that has been happening with birth father rights everywhere. We can only hope this can help with bringing you home.
We love you Jack! See you soon.
XoXo,
Your family
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Finally a court date
We finally have a court date! August 1st at 1:30 PM we will be meeting in Farmington 2nd District Court in front of Judge Hamilton. This court hearing will determine if we will be granted permission to intervene in the adoption proceeding. We pray that this Judge will do what is right and grant Jake a chance to be heard.
Although court is 6 weeks away we are excited to finally have a court date. We have been anxiously awaiting for this.
Please keep Jake and Jack in your prayers and pray that the prospective adoptive couple will have the strength and courage to do what it is right in their hearts and choose to give Jackson back to his loving father.
Jackson Michael Strickland, you are so loved, cared about and thought about every single day. Although, you are getting older our love for you has only gotten stronger. We wish we knew you were healthy and happy. We have been denied an opportunity to hear how you are growing, developing and enjoying life. We hope one day soon we will get to witness your personality, and get to know your quirks and characteristics. WE LOVE YOU Jackson and will never stop fighting.
Although court is 6 weeks away we are excited to finally have a court date. We have been anxiously awaiting for this.
Please keep Jake and Jack in your prayers and pray that the prospective adoptive couple will have the strength and courage to do what it is right in their hearts and choose to give Jackson back to his loving father.
Jackson Michael Strickland, you are so loved, cared about and thought about every single day. Although, you are getting older our love for you has only gotten stronger. We wish we knew you were healthy and happy. We have been denied an opportunity to hear how you are growing, developing and enjoying life. We hope one day soon we will get to witness your personality, and get to know your quirks and characteristics. WE LOVE YOU Jackson and will never stop fighting.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Utah Adoption Council President Resigns...
SALT LAKE CITY
By: Lori Prichard
— The president of the Utah Adoption Council resigned Tuesday amid controversy over claims the council is working to undermine the rights of birth fathers. Wes Hutchins was to serve another month as president of the Ut ah Adoption Council (UAC) — a group consisting of adoption agencies, adoption attorneys, families, and birth mothers and fathers. Instead, he's founded a new nonprofit organization he says will work in the best interests of all parties in adoptions. There was certainly friction in Tuesday's council meeting, as some representing adoption agencies accused Hutchins of having his own agenda. In turn, he pointed fingers at them for not acting ethically in administering adoptions. "I'm a big proponent of adoptions, but I firmly believe they need to be done legally, constitutionally and ethically." –Wes Hutchins, former UAC president "I'm an adoption attorney. I've done over 1,080 adoptions, (and) finalized six adoptions on Friday of last week alone," Hutchins said, following the meeting. "I'm a big proponent of adoptions, but I firmly believe they need to be done legally, constitutionally and ethically." Hutchins pointed to what he calls "egregious cases of fraud," namely: the case of Christopher Carlton, who was told by the birth mother that his child had died, and the case of Robert Manzanares, who was told by the birth mother she was traveling from Colorado to Utah to visit relatives when she was actually giving up their child. These cases, and many like them, provide evidence, Hutchins said, that birth mothers should be held accountable. "That's one of the changes that we need to make: that fraud is no longer accepted as a method of taking a child from one home, destroying a family, and placing (the child) in another home to create another family," he said. That opinion conflicts with others who sit on the UAC. "Wes has had a different vision of what's best for children in the state of Utah," said attorney David Hardy, also a former president of the UAC. Hardy, whose clients include adoption agencies and adoptive parents, said Hutchins isn't as focused on what's best for the child. "Wes has taken more of the approach of some of the rights of fathers. He's taken some real strong positions on fathers that are, in many ways, inconsistent with Utah code." –David Hardy, former UAC president "Wes has taken more of the approach of some of the rights of fathers," Hardy said. "He's taken some real strong positions on fathers that are, in many ways, inconsistent with Utah code." "There's been a very choreographed effort to sweep birth fathers and others under the rug," Hutchins said. And some of those birth fathers were present and vocal. "I do have a voice, and it needs to be heard," said Jake Strickland, a father currently fighting for custody of his child. "There's two sides to every story," added Bobby Nevares, a man in the same situation as Strickland, "but they didn't want to hear the father's side." Hutchins said the council didn't really want to hear his side either and accused him of having an agenda. "If you want to call that ‘an agenda,' then absolutely, call it an agenda. And that agenda is to see that we have a balanced approach in Utah to how we're doing adoptions," Hutchins said. It's clear this father's right is a hot-button issue among the council. Today's meeting was certainly tense as each side traded accusations.
By: Lori Prichard
— The president of the Utah Adoption Council resigned Tuesday amid controversy over claims the council is working to undermine the rights of birth fathers. Wes Hutchins was to serve another month as president of the Ut ah Adoption Council (UAC) — a group consisting of adoption agencies, adoption attorneys, families, and birth mothers and fathers. Instead, he's founded a new nonprofit organization he says will work in the best interests of all parties in adoptions. There was certainly friction in Tuesday's council meeting, as some representing adoption agencies accused Hutchins of having his own agenda. In turn, he pointed fingers at them for not acting ethically in administering adoptions. "I'm a big proponent of adoptions, but I firmly believe they need to be done legally, constitutionally and ethically." –Wes Hutchins, former UAC president "I'm an adoption attorney. I've done over 1,080 adoptions, (and) finalized six adoptions on Friday of last week alone," Hutchins said, following the meeting. "I'm a big proponent of adoptions, but I firmly believe they need to be done legally, constitutionally and ethically." Hutchins pointed to what he calls "egregious cases of fraud," namely: the case of Christopher Carlton, who was told by the birth mother that his child had died, and the case of Robert Manzanares, who was told by the birth mother she was traveling from Colorado to Utah to visit relatives when she was actually giving up their child. These cases, and many like them, provide evidence, Hutchins said, that birth mothers should be held accountable. "That's one of the changes that we need to make: that fraud is no longer accepted as a method of taking a child from one home, destroying a family, and placing (the child) in another home to create another family," he said. That opinion conflicts with others who sit on the UAC. "Wes has had a different vision of what's best for children in the state of Utah," said attorney David Hardy, also a former president of the UAC. Hardy, whose clients include adoption agencies and adoptive parents, said Hutchins isn't as focused on what's best for the child. "Wes has taken more of the approach of some of the rights of fathers. He's taken some real strong positions on fathers that are, in many ways, inconsistent with Utah code." –David Hardy, former UAC president "Wes has taken more of the approach of some of the rights of fathers," Hardy said. "He's taken some real strong positions on fathers that are, in many ways, inconsistent with Utah code." "There's been a very choreographed effort to sweep birth fathers and others under the rug," Hutchins said. And some of those birth fathers were present and vocal. "I do have a voice, and it needs to be heard," said Jake Strickland, a father currently fighting for custody of his child. "There's two sides to every story," added Bobby Nevares, a man in the same situation as Strickland, "but they didn't want to hear the father's side." Hutchins said the council didn't really want to hear his side either and accused him of having an agenda. "If you want to call that ‘an agenda,' then absolutely, call it an agenda. And that agenda is to see that we have a balanced approach in Utah to how we're doing adoptions," Hutchins said. It's clear this father's right is a hot-button issue among the council. Today's meeting was certainly tense as each side traded accusations.
Rift in Utah Adoption Council leads president to resign
Adoption • Other members found fault with president’s tactics.
The president of the Utah Adoption
Council resigned his post Tuesday — and launched his own competing
organization — amid claims the group ignores unethical practices of some
adoption agencies and has failed to treat birth fathers fairly.
Salt Lake attorney Wes Hutchins, whose
one-year term was set to end in July, said he could no longer support
what he described as a “systematically dysfunctional organization.”
“Too many members, but admittedly not all, do
not wish to truly comply with UAC’s professed mission [of promoting] ‘a
positive adoption experience for all involved, through education related
to quality adoption,’ ” Hutchins said in his resignation letter.
“Whether you like it or not, birth fathers are
part of that equation,” he said in his letter. “Whether you admit it or
not, many agencies continue to engage in unethical and unlawful
practices including post-placement cash bonuses paid directly to birth
moms, and coaching birth moms to lie and even defraud birth fathers
regarding the birth mother’s true intentions.”
Kevin Broderick, president-elect, will step in
early to replace Hutchins, said attorney David Hardy, past president of
the organization. The council was founded in 1981 and its 50 or so
members include adoption agency representatives, attorneys, state
officials, birth and adoptive parents, and adoptees.
“Wes has pushed for some things that he hasn’t been able to persuade others to go along with and gotten frustrated,” Hardy said.
Hardy said some members were upset about
surreptitious recordings Hutchins made of adoption agency workers, as
well as the public stance he took during the last legislative session on
a bill — opposed by the council — that would have required that birth
fathers receive notice of pending adoptions.
“Wes was out on an island on that one,” Hardy said.
While the council is concerned about any
allegations of baby selling, “his methods got in the way of the message
he would like to share,” Hardy said.
Hardy acknowledged one UAC member has proposed
an amendment to the group’s bylaws, that was in “some ways” directed at
Hutchins, that would allow it to terminate a member for “failure to act
in a civil fashion” at its meetings and public criticism of UAC, among
other things.
“UAC is designed to be an adoption education
and advocacy group and there was some feeling we could not function if
we had to spend all our time dealing with infighting,” Hardy said.
Hutchins said what the group failed to do, however, was apply best practices and ethical standards to its members.
“Agencies should be 100 percent truthful and
ethical all the time, and it should not matter if it is a ‘secret
shopper’ calling or a birth mother,” he said. “The secret shopper is a
well-known standard among business industries to check on customer
service practices and whether employees are following procedures.”
Last summer, Hutchins had his wife pose as the
sister of an expectant woman who was considering placing her baby for
adoption. She taped interviews with several Utah adoption agencies that
revealed some workers were coaching birth moms on how to keep birth
fathers out of the process, discussing post-placement cash payment, and
how laws favored them in Utah.
Hutchins repeated the exercise this spring, in
some cases using actual expectant mothers, and said he found little had
changed, with workers at some agencies promising cash and urging birth
mothers to “tell the birth father anything after you give birth ... it
might be easier to tell birth father that you were in an accident, and
the baby died.”
Hardy said UAC has had some discussion on the
allegations brought forth by Hutchins, but said “most of what he came
forward with initially” involved entry-level personnel and their
responses to hypothetical situations versus “anything actually going
on.”
But in at least one case, a birth father received some types of misinformation Hutchins claims to have recorded recently.
Christopher Carlton’s girlfriend was expecting
their child when the couple broke up at the end of 2009. According to
court documents and interviews, he continued to support her and her two
children despite the collapse of their relationship, expecting to be
involved with the baby due in June 2010. But the woman disappeared when
she was seven months pregnant, and despite his best efforts, Carlton, a
Pennsylvania resident, was unable to locate her.
In late June 2010, Carlton, an Iraq war
veteran, learned from a mutual friend that his girlfriend had given
birth. He was told the baby was a boy. Carlton frantically tried to
reach the mother on her cell phone and finally heard from her a day
later. She said the baby had respiratory problems. When he asked where
she was, the woman said she was “too far away” and hung up. He then
received three photos of the baby in text messages sent to his
telephone.
Three days later, the woman showed up at
Carlton’s door, raging that he’d killed her baby. According to court
documents, when he asked where the baby was, the woman said the infant
had died — though it is unknown whether she was coached to do so.
Carlton, who was devastated by the news, continued to press for
information about the baby and where it had been buried, which led his
former girlfriend to file a protective order against him.
But in court, a judge sided with Carlton and
told the woman he had a right to know what had happened to his child and
where it was buried. To avoid being questioned about the infant, the
woman dropped her allegations against Carlton. And four months later,
she asked him to meet her at a grief counselor’s office.
There, she dropped an even bigger bombshell.
The baby wasn’t dead. The woman had placed the infant, still identified
as a boy, for adoption. It took another court hearing and a judge’s
directive before the woman let Carlton know the baby had been placed
through the Adoption Center of Utah. At that point, just before being
deployed to Iraq, Carlton hired Hutchins. And there was another
revelation months later: the baby wasn’t a boy, it was girl.
Carlton has waged a so-far unsuccessful fight in Utah to get his child back.
“I want my child more than anything,” he said.
“I’ve walked places in this world where angels fear to tread, seen
things no human should have to see. Who are they to take my freedoms
away?”
brooke@sltrib.com
—
New advocacy group forms
Salt Lake attorney Wes Hutchins, himself
an adoptive father, argues the Utah Adoption Council has tilted too far
against birth fathers and their rights and has allowed unethical
practices to go unchecked.
With that in mind, he has launched a
new organization — the Utah Council for Ethical Adoption Practices — to
promote higher standards and better practices in Utah’s adoption
industry. The group now has its own Facebook page and is working on a
website.
© 2012 The Salt Lake Tribune
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Missing you...
Jack:
My sweet boy, I have been thinking a lot about you lately. I have definitely not forgotten about you. Easter was on Sunday and as with every holiday my heart ached as I long for you. A huge chunk of my heart is missing and it's waiting for you to fill that void. Jack, I think about you all day everyday and just hope you are well taken care of. I have asked to see you from a far, a picture, a health update anything to settle my heavy heart, and my request was denied. Jack, I know one day I will get to share my love with you. As time goes on, my love only gets stronger for you, not weaker. I hope we get a court date within the next week to intervene in the adoption. I hope that this will all come to an end real soon. I just want you here in my arms, where you are suppose to be.
Jackson, I love you with all my heart. I will never stop fighting.
XoXo,
Daddy Jake
My sweet boy, I have been thinking a lot about you lately. I have definitely not forgotten about you. Easter was on Sunday and as with every holiday my heart ached as I long for you. A huge chunk of my heart is missing and it's waiting for you to fill that void. Jack, I think about you all day everyday and just hope you are well taken care of. I have asked to see you from a far, a picture, a health update anything to settle my heavy heart, and my request was denied. Jack, I know one day I will get to share my love with you. As time goes on, my love only gets stronger for you, not weaker. I hope we get a court date within the next week to intervene in the adoption. I hope that this will all come to an end real soon. I just want you here in my arms, where you are suppose to be.
Jackson, I love you with all my heart. I will never stop fighting.
XoXo,
Daddy Jake
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Anderson Cooper Clips
Check out andersoncooper.com to see more about Jake's Journey on the Anderson Cooper show. It is amazing!
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Adoption: Trauma that lasts a lifetime
Running head: ADOPTION PSYCHOLOGY
Adoption: Trauma that Last a Life Time
Vicki M. Rummig
They just cannot understand. The perfect child Mr. & Mrs. Smith adopted 15 years ago is now skipping school, talking back, experimenting with drugs, and is involved in a sexual relationship with her 20-year-old drug addicted boyfriend. Until a year ago she always had good grades and enjoyed spending time with her parents; she was the ideal child. They have sought treatment from a family therapist. Nevertheless, they just cannot seem to get through to her. There have been no new stressors in the household. What could be the problem?
For many years adoption has been viewed as a perfect arrangement for all involved. What has not been taken into account are the emotional effects adoption has on all members involved, most specifically, for the purpose of this paper, the adoptee. These effects, or issues, can be managed as long as they are recognized and acknowledged. Adoptees’ psychological issues need to be addressed by mental health professionals in order to recognize and effectively treat symptoms of low self-esteem, lack of trust, and dissociation.
The adoptees’ trauma begins the moment she is separated from her birth mother. Some psychologists believe that an infant is not able to differentiate her mother until at least two months of age. At the same time they believe that the infant does not know she is her own entity (Kaplan, 1978). What do mental health professionals believe the infant thinks for these first two months? They will suggest that she is in some type of limbo, that she does not have the capacity to think or know until two months of age. Yet, she somehow knows to cry when she is uncomfortable and how to ingest her food. Psychologists will call this instinct, but we should also look at the possibility of the newborn instinctively knowing who her mother is. After all, they were connected for 40 weeks.
Since an infant does not see herself as a separate entity, we must believe that she sees herself as part of the person she was physically attached and bonded to for 40 weeks (Verrier, 1993, chap. 2). When separated from the one thing to which she has connected, the infant will feel she has lost part of herself.
When the adoptee is separated from her birth mother, she undergoes extensive trauma. She will not remember this trauma, but it will stay in her subconscious as she lived it (Verrier, 1993). An event from a person’s infancy can and will stay with them through life. An example of the subconscious effect of an early experience would be Marc. Marc was in an orphanage for the first year of his life. Because of the lack of human touch, he would rock himself in his crib. Marc is now 42 years old and still rocks himself whenever he is watching television, listening to music, or sitting on a park bench. He does not remember rocking himself as an infant, but this practice has stayed with him through his subconscious his entire life.
The adoptee will always carry this issue of abandonment with her wherever she goes. It is no different from when a husband leaves a wife. She may remarry to a wonderful man, but will always wonder if her new husband is also going to leave her. She must work through the abandonment issue to regain trust. The abandonment issue has to be acknowledged, before it can be resolved.
Even if the “primal wound” as described above was not a factor in the adoptees’ emotional well being, the knowledge of abandonment will always be there. She may have been told she was “chosen” by the adoptive parents but it will not be long until she figures out she was abandoned by the first set of parents. Julie P. responded to a question on the Adoptees Internet Mailing List (an Internet support group that consists of approximately 1000 members) about the feeling of being adopted, “No, I am not depressed, miserable, angry, or negative...but I have always felt second best. Sure I was told that I was the (chosen) one, but first I was rejected.” Regardless of the circumstances, it will always feel like abandonment to her.
The adoptee is given very little information about her relinquishment. She is expected to leave the past behind and concentrate of her present and future. Out of respect for the adoptive parents, she will often not ask questions or talk about her adoption if it is an uncomfortable subject in her home. She will wonder about her relinquishment and her birth mother. To attempt to fill in the gaps she will create fantasies of acceptable scenarios of the circumstances of her conception, birth and relinquishment, that she can emotionally handle.
As a small child, she will not understand how a mother could give her up, or abandon her. Adoptees may feel they must have been a bad baby or that the birth mother was an uncaring person. Other thoughts will occur, such as she was stolen from the birth mother, either by public authorities or her adoptive parents. Often children will fluctuate in their thoughts and fantasies depending on their perception of the adoptive parents at any given time. (Lifton, 1988 &1994; Verrier, 1993; Brodzinsky, Schechter & Henig, 1992; Reitz & Watson, 1992; Adopting Resources, 1995) She will generally outgrow believing her fantasies and begin to see them as just that, but a part of her will always wonder.
The “chosen” child story also has negative affects on a child for other reasons. The child may feel that she has to be perfect to live up to her “chosen” status. Her role model adoptees include Superman and Jesus. This is a hard image for the average child to live up to. She may either become the compliant “perfect” child or she may act out and misbehave to test the commitment of the adoptive parents. Either way, often times she is not being herself, but rather acting a part. This acting can be very emotionally draining and confusing, and may last until the early adult years and beyond. When the adoptee can not live up to her perfect “chosen” status, it will contribute to the feeling of low self-esteem. This will be further exacerbated if the adoptive parents are not aware of the issue and their actions reinforce the adoptees beliefs, i.e., sending her away for residential treatment or openly wishing her to be more like themselves.
The adoptee is also aware of many ghosts that follow her through life. These ghosts include the person she would have been had she not been adopted, the ghost of the birth mother and birth father, and the ghost of the adoptive family’s child that would have been (Lifton, 1994, chap. 6). She may find herself trying to connect to her ghosts through her actions. Either being her image of her birth family, living her life according to her fantasy birth family, or acting as her vision of the adoptive parent’s natural child.
When the adolescent adoptee acts out it may be her way of trying to connect with the image she has of her birth mother or may be that she does not feel worthy of the adoptive parents love. Adolescence is a confusing time for any child, but the adoptee has many more identity issues to deal with. She may also be testing the commitment of the adoptive parents, seeing if they will send her away for being bad.
As the adoptee begins to become aware of her adoptee status she will notice the differences she has from her peers and other family members. I noticed in my family that I did not have the nose or ears of any of my adoptive family. This is normal for an adoptee and can make her feel left out or misplaced in her family. A particularly tough time for the adoptee is when first learning about genetics in school. The first lesson in heredity and genetics usually is regarding eye color. If the adoptees’ own eyes do not fall into the proper genetic pattern she is left with a distinct feeling of not belonging. There are many instances in growing up when she is again faced with the knowledge that she is different; when asked about family history by a doctor, when asked if she has a sister because the inquirer knows someone who looks just like her, when asked about ethnic background, in regular day to day conversations.
Physical differences are not the only ones that are noticed. A difference in personality or talents may further misplace the adoptee from her family. In talking with other adoptees, I have described this feeling as “feeling like my adoptive family is in a big circle but I am on the outside looking in.”
With the adoptee not having a role model who resembles her physically or psychologically, it is more difficult to define where her life shall lead. She may come from a biologically artistic family, but adopted into a scientific family. She may not only feel the need to follow in her adoptive family’s footsteps, attending similar colleges, choosing similar careers, but she did not have the artistic role model to show her that way of life. This further complicates the identity formation of the adoptee. “One’s identity begins with the genes and family history...” (Reitz & Watson, 1992, p. 134)
Adoptees also lack the ability to see their physical characteristics as they will present themselves in the future. A natural born daughter would be able to tell how big she is going to be, if she will have a tendency to be overweight, or if she is going to go grey early in life, but the adoptee is denied this genetic role model and will not know these things until she reaches that stage in life herself. This adds to the curiosity of wanting to know their genetic background.
The adoptee will feel even more dissociated when conversations regarding other family members or peers births are brought up. She is missing the story of her birth parents meeting, her conception, her birth, and in some instances, some time after her birth. On the Adoptees Internet Mailing List one member described this feeling as the “floating cosmic blip.” It is often commented that the adoptee feels hatched not born or that they are some type of space alien. Non-adoptees take their own life story for granted, but the adoptee is acutely aware that theirs is missing. So now, not only does the adoptee feel dissociated from her adoptive family, but also from her peers, for she is different.
Adoptees are faced with a feeling of loss and grief that they are not allowed, by society, to actively mourn. “With adoption, the child experiences a loss (like divorce or death) of an unknown person, and doesn’t know why.” (Adopting Resources, 1995) She is aware that family members are lost to her, but is expected to not mourn the loss of this family member she has never known. She will often be chastised when asking questions of her birth family from her adoptive family.
Not all of these issues affect adoptees to the same extent. Some may spend a lifetime dwelling on it, others may not even appear to notice. This would be true of any group of people that lived through trauma, such as Vietnam War Veterans. It should be noted that adoptees are over represented in residential treatment centers.
In recent years there have been more works written on the subject. In 1978 Sorosky, Baran, and Pannor wrote the Adoption Triangle. This was one of the first written books that spoke specifically of the psychological issues of adoption. In one reference book written for psychologist by Reitz and Watson (1992) it was noted:
In the early 1960s Dr. Marshall Schechter, child psychiatrist, was challenged by social workers when he first made the observation that there were a disproportionate number of adoptees in his clinic ( as cited in Lifton, 1988, p. 44). He later teamed up with Brodzinsky to research the psychology of adoption and to write various books (1990, 1992) on the subject.
There are many books written by members of the triad (refers to the three sides in adoption; adoptive parents, birth parents, and adoptees) that are geared toward their triad peers. (Lifton, 1988 and 1994; Verrier, 1993). These are an excellent resource for triad members to begin to explore the issues of adoption. Although they are not written with psychologists in mind, they would be a good first step for mental health professionals to begin to also understand adoption.
In researching basic child psychology books, if adoption is mentioned, it is in the following context: “It should be obvious that neither I or anybody else knows enough about the psychology of adoption to offer any firm advice.” (Church, 1973)
Although there are both more studies and writings on the subject, mental health professionals remain ignorant of adoptees’ issues. Thomas Danner, PhD, a local family counselor, discussed some of his educational experiences and views on adoptees issues (personal communication, May 17, 1996). He stated he had not given the adoptees issues any prior thought. When presented with some of the repercussions of adoption, he was in agreement that these things could play into the emotional well being of the adoptee. He was open in disclosing that he had little knowledge of adoption issues and was willing to accept the ideas this paper has to present.
Betty Jean Lifton, PhD, Adoption Counselor/Author and adoptee, also commented on the subject (personal communication, May 20, 1996). When asked what lead to her studying adoption issues. Her reply was: ‘Are you an adoptee...then you know.’ This illustrates how most of the research done on adoption issues has been raised by someone who has been touched by adoption. It is easy to understand how someone who has not lived it, would not give the subject much thought. Mental health professionals need to be made to give the subject some thought or they will be doing a disservice to their adopted patients.
The first step to communicating the psychological effects of adoption to mental health professionals is to educate the public in general. There have been more recent books, movies, and such on adoption but they fail to acknowledge the special issues. Through accurate media representation, the general population can receive information needed to better understand the adopted person. In turn, the mental health professionals can begin to study the subject and explore alternate treatments for their adopted patients.
College and university professors need to begin teaching the special issues and treatments unique to adoption, just has they teach unique approaches to dealing with sexual abuse, divorce of parents, Attention Deficit Disorder, and the many other problems youth are faced with today. The subject must also be included in the college text books or the students must utilize the reference books written on adoption (Reitz & Watson, 1992; Brodzinsky & Schechter, 1990).
Adoptive parents must also be aware of these special issues so they can find a counselor who is trained to deal with them. Too often, counselors of adopted children are not aware that special issues exist and they attempt to treat the least disturbing problem and thus they fail to get to the core issue of adoption. Parents who called me have taken their child--usually an adolescent adopted at birth--from therapist to therapist, without ever having come upon one who is knowledgeable about adoption. The child now has become what Kirschner calls a “secondhand patient.” Therapists who do not see adoption as a core issue cannot reach the child. The Adoptee remains isolated and continues to act out... (Lifton, 1988, p. 273)
After realizing all the different issues adoption holds for their daughter, Mr. and Mrs. Smith received a referral for an adoption specialist in their area. They are now attending family counseling and making some progress toward their daughter’s recovery through open communication and understanding of the trauma she still experiences.
Works Referenced
Adopting Resources (1995) Common clinical issures [sic] among adoptees. [Online]. Available: World Wide Web, http://www.adopting.org/commmonis.html.
Brodzinsky, D. M., & Schechter, M. D. (1990). The Psychology of Adoption NY:Oxford University Press, Inc.
Brodzinsky, D. M., Schechter, M. D., & Henig, R. M. (1992) Being adopted: The lifelong search for self. NY:Doubleday.
Church, J. (1973) Understanding your child from birth to three. NY: Random House.
Kaplan, L. J., (1978) Oneness and separateness: From infant to individual. NY: Simon & Schuster.
Lifton, B. J., (1988). Lost and Found: The adoption experience. (2nd ed.). NY: Harper and Row Publishers, Inc.
Lifton, B. J., (1994) Journey of the adopted self: A quest for wholeness. NY: Basic Books/HarpersCollins Publishers, Inc.
Reitz, M. & Watson, K., (1992) Adoption and the family system. NY: Guildford Publications.
Sorosky, A. D., Baran, A., & Pannor, R., (1978) The adoption triangle. NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday
Verrier, N. N. , (1993). The Primal Wound: Understanding the adopted child. Baltimore, MD: Gateway Press, Inc.
For many years adoption has been viewed as a perfect arrangement for all involved. What has not been taken into account are the emotional effects adoption has on all members involved, most specifically, for the purpose of this paper, the adoptee. These effects, or issues, can be managed as long as they are recognized and acknowledged. Adoptees’ psychological issues need to be addressed by mental health professionals in order to recognize and effectively treat symptoms of low self-esteem, lack of trust, and dissociation.
The adoptees’ trauma begins the moment she is separated from her birth mother. Some psychologists believe that an infant is not able to differentiate her mother until at least two months of age. At the same time they believe that the infant does not know she is her own entity (Kaplan, 1978). What do mental health professionals believe the infant thinks for these first two months? They will suggest that she is in some type of limbo, that she does not have the capacity to think or know until two months of age. Yet, she somehow knows to cry when she is uncomfortable and how to ingest her food. Psychologists will call this instinct, but we should also look at the possibility of the newborn instinctively knowing who her mother is. After all, they were connected for 40 weeks.
Since an infant does not see herself as a separate entity, we must believe that she sees herself as part of the person she was physically attached and bonded to for 40 weeks (Verrier, 1993, chap. 2). When separated from the one thing to which she has connected, the infant will feel she has lost part of herself.
Many doctors and psychologists now understand that bonding doesn’t begin at birth, but is a continuum of physiological, psychological, and spiritual events which begin in utero and continue throughout the postnatal bonding period. When this natural evolution is interrupted by a postnatal separation from the biological mother, the resultant experience of abandonment and loss is indelibly imprinted upon the unconscious minds of these children, causing that which I call the “primal wound.” (Verrier, 1993, p. 1)
When the adoptee is separated from her birth mother, she undergoes extensive trauma. She will not remember this trauma, but it will stay in her subconscious as she lived it (Verrier, 1993). An event from a person’s infancy can and will stay with them through life. An example of the subconscious effect of an early experience would be Marc. Marc was in an orphanage for the first year of his life. Because of the lack of human touch, he would rock himself in his crib. Marc is now 42 years old and still rocks himself whenever he is watching television, listening to music, or sitting on a park bench. He does not remember rocking himself as an infant, but this practice has stayed with him through his subconscious his entire life.
The adoptee will always carry this issue of abandonment with her wherever she goes. It is no different from when a husband leaves a wife. She may remarry to a wonderful man, but will always wonder if her new husband is also going to leave her. She must work through the abandonment issue to regain trust. The abandonment issue has to be acknowledged, before it can be resolved.
Even if the “primal wound” as described above was not a factor in the adoptees’ emotional well being, the knowledge of abandonment will always be there. She may have been told she was “chosen” by the adoptive parents but it will not be long until she figures out she was abandoned by the first set of parents. Julie P. responded to a question on the Adoptees Internet Mailing List (an Internet support group that consists of approximately 1000 members) about the feeling of being adopted, “No, I am not depressed, miserable, angry, or negative...but I have always felt second best. Sure I was told that I was the (chosen) one, but first I was rejected.” Regardless of the circumstances, it will always feel like abandonment to her.
The adoptee is given very little information about her relinquishment. She is expected to leave the past behind and concentrate of her present and future. Out of respect for the adoptive parents, she will often not ask questions or talk about her adoption if it is an uncomfortable subject in her home. She will wonder about her relinquishment and her birth mother. To attempt to fill in the gaps she will create fantasies of acceptable scenarios of the circumstances of her conception, birth and relinquishment, that she can emotionally handle.
As a small child, she will not understand how a mother could give her up, or abandon her. Adoptees may feel they must have been a bad baby or that the birth mother was an uncaring person. Other thoughts will occur, such as she was stolen from the birth mother, either by public authorities or her adoptive parents. Often children will fluctuate in their thoughts and fantasies depending on their perception of the adoptive parents at any given time. (Lifton, 1988 &1994; Verrier, 1993; Brodzinsky, Schechter & Henig, 1992; Reitz & Watson, 1992; Adopting Resources, 1995) She will generally outgrow believing her fantasies and begin to see them as just that, but a part of her will always wonder.
The “chosen” child story also has negative affects on a child for other reasons. The child may feel that she has to be perfect to live up to her “chosen” status. Her role model adoptees include Superman and Jesus. This is a hard image for the average child to live up to. She may either become the compliant “perfect” child or she may act out and misbehave to test the commitment of the adoptive parents. Either way, often times she is not being herself, but rather acting a part. This acting can be very emotionally draining and confusing, and may last until the early adult years and beyond. When the adoptee can not live up to her perfect “chosen” status, it will contribute to the feeling of low self-esteem. This will be further exacerbated if the adoptive parents are not aware of the issue and their actions reinforce the adoptees beliefs, i.e., sending her away for residential treatment or openly wishing her to be more like themselves.
The adoptee is also aware of many ghosts that follow her through life. These ghosts include the person she would have been had she not been adopted, the ghost of the birth mother and birth father, and the ghost of the adoptive family’s child that would have been (Lifton, 1994, chap. 6). She may find herself trying to connect to her ghosts through her actions. Either being her image of her birth family, living her life according to her fantasy birth family, or acting as her vision of the adoptive parent’s natural child.
When the adolescent adoptee acts out it may be her way of trying to connect with the image she has of her birth mother or may be that she does not feel worthy of the adoptive parents love. Adolescence is a confusing time for any child, but the adoptee has many more identity issues to deal with. She may also be testing the commitment of the adoptive parents, seeing if they will send her away for being bad.
A great many of these young people are in serious trouble with the law and are drug addicted. The girls show an added history of nymphomania and out-of- wedlock pregnancy, almost as if they were acting out the role of the “whore” mother. In fact, both sexes are experimenting with a series of identities that seem to be related to their fantasies about the biological parents. (Lifton, 1988, p. 45)
As the adoptee begins to become aware of her adoptee status she will notice the differences she has from her peers and other family members. I noticed in my family that I did not have the nose or ears of any of my adoptive family. This is normal for an adoptee and can make her feel left out or misplaced in her family. A particularly tough time for the adoptee is when first learning about genetics in school. The first lesson in heredity and genetics usually is regarding eye color. If the adoptees’ own eyes do not fall into the proper genetic pattern she is left with a distinct feeling of not belonging. There are many instances in growing up when she is again faced with the knowledge that she is different; when asked about family history by a doctor, when asked if she has a sister because the inquirer knows someone who looks just like her, when asked about ethnic background, in regular day to day conversations.
Physical differences are not the only ones that are noticed. A difference in personality or talents may further misplace the adoptee from her family. In talking with other adoptees, I have described this feeling as “feeling like my adoptive family is in a big circle but I am on the outside looking in.”
With the adoptee not having a role model who resembles her physically or psychologically, it is more difficult to define where her life shall lead. She may come from a biologically artistic family, but adopted into a scientific family. She may not only feel the need to follow in her adoptive family’s footsteps, attending similar colleges, choosing similar careers, but she did not have the artistic role model to show her that way of life. This further complicates the identity formation of the adoptee. “One’s identity begins with the genes and family history...” (Reitz & Watson, 1992, p. 134)
Adoptees also lack the ability to see their physical characteristics as they will present themselves in the future. A natural born daughter would be able to tell how big she is going to be, if she will have a tendency to be overweight, or if she is going to go grey early in life, but the adoptee is denied this genetic role model and will not know these things until she reaches that stage in life herself. This adds to the curiosity of wanting to know their genetic background.
Rachel says that families are a hall of mirrors, “Everyone but adoptees can look in and see themselves reflected. I didn’t know what it was like to be me. I felt like someone who looks into a mirror and sees no reflection. I felt lonely, not connected to anything, floating, like a ghost.” (Lifton, 1994, p. 68)
The adoptee will feel even more dissociated when conversations regarding other family members or peers births are brought up. She is missing the story of her birth parents meeting, her conception, her birth, and in some instances, some time after her birth. On the Adoptees Internet Mailing List one member described this feeling as the “floating cosmic blip.” It is often commented that the adoptee feels hatched not born or that they are some type of space alien. Non-adoptees take their own life story for granted, but the adoptee is acutely aware that theirs is missing. So now, not only does the adoptee feel dissociated from her adoptive family, but also from her peers, for she is different.
Adoptees are faced with a feeling of loss and grief that they are not allowed, by society, to actively mourn. “With adoption, the child experiences a loss (like divorce or death) of an unknown person, and doesn’t know why.” (Adopting Resources, 1995) She is aware that family members are lost to her, but is expected to not mourn the loss of this family member she has never known. She will often be chastised when asking questions of her birth family from her adoptive family.
Not all of these issues affect adoptees to the same extent. Some may spend a lifetime dwelling on it, others may not even appear to notice. This would be true of any group of people that lived through trauma, such as Vietnam War Veterans. It should be noted that adoptees are over represented in residential treatment centers.
The number of Adoptees in the adolescent and young-adult clinics and residential treatment centers is strikingly high. Doctors from the Yale Psychiatric Institute and other hospitals that take very sick adolescents have told me they are discovering that from one-quarter to one-third of the patients are adopted. (Lifton, 1988, p.45)
In recent years there have been more works written on the subject. In 1978 Sorosky, Baran, and Pannor wrote the Adoption Triangle. This was one of the first written books that spoke specifically of the psychological issues of adoption. In one reference book written for psychologist by Reitz and Watson (1992) it was noted:
Despite the proliferation in recent decades of the literature on both family therapy and adoption, there has been little focus on the treatment of families involved in adoption. We offer our approach both as one sample of the current state of the practice art and as a way to generate hypotheses. Little, definitive, formal research findings are available, we have cited them; we believe, however, that findings from practice are valid field research. The clinician’s skills in observing recurrent themes and patterns resemble those of the formal researcher who looks for patterns in statistical data. Both clinicians and researchers must then interpret their findings. (preface)
In the early 1960s Dr. Marshall Schechter, child psychiatrist, was challenged by social workers when he first made the observation that there were a disproportionate number of adoptees in his clinic ( as cited in Lifton, 1988, p. 44). He later teamed up with Brodzinsky to research the psychology of adoption and to write various books (1990, 1992) on the subject.
There are many books written by members of the triad (refers to the three sides in adoption; adoptive parents, birth parents, and adoptees) that are geared toward their triad peers. (Lifton, 1988 and 1994; Verrier, 1993). These are an excellent resource for triad members to begin to explore the issues of adoption. Although they are not written with psychologists in mind, they would be a good first step for mental health professionals to begin to also understand adoption.
In researching basic child psychology books, if adoption is mentioned, it is in the following context: “It should be obvious that neither I or anybody else knows enough about the psychology of adoption to offer any firm advice.” (Church, 1973)
Although there are both more studies and writings on the subject, mental health professionals remain ignorant of adoptees’ issues. Thomas Danner, PhD, a local family counselor, discussed some of his educational experiences and views on adoptees issues (personal communication, May 17, 1996). He stated he had not given the adoptees issues any prior thought. When presented with some of the repercussions of adoption, he was in agreement that these things could play into the emotional well being of the adoptee. He was open in disclosing that he had little knowledge of adoption issues and was willing to accept the ideas this paper has to present.
Betty Jean Lifton, PhD, Adoption Counselor/Author and adoptee, also commented on the subject (personal communication, May 20, 1996). When asked what lead to her studying adoption issues. Her reply was: ‘Are you an adoptee...then you know.’ This illustrates how most of the research done on adoption issues has been raised by someone who has been touched by adoption. It is easy to understand how someone who has not lived it, would not give the subject much thought. Mental health professionals need to be made to give the subject some thought or they will be doing a disservice to their adopted patients.
The first step to communicating the psychological effects of adoption to mental health professionals is to educate the public in general. There have been more recent books, movies, and such on adoption but they fail to acknowledge the special issues. Through accurate media representation, the general population can receive information needed to better understand the adopted person. In turn, the mental health professionals can begin to study the subject and explore alternate treatments for their adopted patients.
College and university professors need to begin teaching the special issues and treatments unique to adoption, just has they teach unique approaches to dealing with sexual abuse, divorce of parents, Attention Deficit Disorder, and the many other problems youth are faced with today. The subject must also be included in the college text books or the students must utilize the reference books written on adoption (Reitz & Watson, 1992; Brodzinsky & Schechter, 1990).
Adoptive parents must also be aware of these special issues so they can find a counselor who is trained to deal with them. Too often, counselors of adopted children are not aware that special issues exist and they attempt to treat the least disturbing problem and thus they fail to get to the core issue of adoption. Parents who called me have taken their child--usually an adolescent adopted at birth--from therapist to therapist, without ever having come upon one who is knowledgeable about adoption. The child now has become what Kirschner calls a “secondhand patient.” Therapists who do not see adoption as a core issue cannot reach the child. The Adoptee remains isolated and continues to act out... (Lifton, 1988, p. 273)
After realizing all the different issues adoption holds for their daughter, Mr. and Mrs. Smith received a referral for an adoption specialist in their area. They are now attending family counseling and making some progress toward their daughter’s recovery through open communication and understanding of the trauma she still experiences.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
A step in the right direction
Unwed fathers get help figuring out what to do in adoption fight
Adoption • Registry form and instructions made more accessible.
For an unwed father who wants to know what to do to protect his parental rights in a Utah adoption proceeding, the process just got easier.
The state Department of Health on Tuesday made the paternity proceeding form and instructions on how to file with Utah’s putative father registry available on the website of the Office of Vital Records and Statistics, which maintains the registry.
Department Director David Patton said the change and other reforms were prompted by a recent Salt Lake Tribune series highlighting the difficulty unwed fathers and attorneys — especially those from out-of-state — had finding information about the registry.
The paternity proceeding form now can be found under the “court orders” link on the Vital Records home page, although the information still doesn’t show up when searching the state website for key terms such as “putative father” or “paternity proceeding.”
There are plans to add information about how to file with the registry to the website’s “frequently asked questions” listing. The form also will now be available at county health departments throughout Utah — a measure required by state law the department hadn’t followed.
“Frankly, I had not been aware of this issue very much and so the article helped us to review the statute, which I think was our primary concern,” Patton said. “We want to be in compliance with the statute.”
The online access makes sense, he said.
Since 1975, Utah has required unwed fathers to file with the state in order to receive notice of an adoption proceeding for a biological newborn child. That requirement was strengthened in 1995, when sweeping revisions were made requiring unwed fathers to initiate a paternity action in court and file a “notice of commencement of paternity proceeding” with Vital Records.
But scores of unwed fathers, many of whom live in other states, allege Utah intentionally makes it difficult figure out how to protect their rights when they object to an adoption.
Patton said Tuesday it was his goal to make the form available to anyone who wants it.
“There is no reason to restrict that access,” he said. “If we can make it available as many places as feasible, that’s not a problem.”
The move received cautious support from two lawyers who have been involved in putative father issues.
“The purpose of the putative father registry is to identify putative fathers who are interested in assuming the responsibilities of being a parent in a meaningful and timely way,” said David McConkie, now children’s services manager at LDS Family Services. “The state’s decision to put the registry online will help putative fathers accomplish this and will make adoptive placements more secure.”
Daniel Drage, a lawyer who has represented out-of-state fathers in custody fights, called it a “step in the right direction” but also expressed concern.
“These fathers still need to understand that just filing with the registry is not the only step,” Drage said. “Some dads may think it is all they need to do. I hope it is not a bit of a pitfall.”
Janice Houston, director of Vital Records, said the instruction letter included with the form hopefully alerts fathers they also need to file a paternity action in court. And the form itself asks for the paternity filing case number.
Houston said the form hasn’t been available online previously because her office’s web page is “very minimal and basic at best” and hasn’t “had the resources devoted to it to put a whole lot of information up there beyond the bare minimum.”
The office quit providing forms to county health department offices, Houston said, because local offices aren’t involved in adoptions and just forward the forms to the state office.
“When the form was there, it wasn’t being utilized,” she added.
Both Patton and Houston also said Tuesday the form has been available through the courts to print out and give to putative fathers. But a court clerk manager and 3rd District Court administrator both said they were unaware of the forms.
“We don’t have a form,” said Julie Rigby, team manager of the 3rd District Court’s Probate Department, which handles adoption filings. “We would just refer them to the health department. We don’t have anything and never had and wish we did, but we don’t.”
Houston, who became state registrar in March 2010, said it is her policy to give paternity commencement filings “precedence over everything else in the office.” “When one of these comes in, it’s a drop everything else and put it in,” she said. “It doesn’t sit in a pile and wait.”
The Utah Supreme Court is currently considering a case in which a Florida father alleges the state’s four-day work week and a tardy filing of his registration by a Vital Records clerk caused him to lose the right to intervene in his daughter’s adoption.
brooke@sltrib.com
—
Putative father registry form goes online
O To access the online paternity proceeding form, which can be filled out online and then printed, go to: http://1.usa.gov/wGm4w0
© 2012 The Salt Lake Tribune
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Happy Birthday Jackson
Jackson,
Happy Birthday! It has been one long year. We have missed so many milestones with you such as your birth, your first bath, your first cry, your first word, you starting to crawl, and maybe even walk. Our hearts are heavy that we have not been able to see you, know if you are ok, are happy or even healthy. More than anything we hope that you are safe, and ok. We miss you and think about you every single day. We hope to meet you soon, but in the meantime we will keep fighting for you and for all the other voiceless children out there.
We have created a video for you from your family, and that includes a balloon release we did in honor of your first birthday. We wish more than anything that we would be able to celebrate it with you, but it doesn't look like that is going to happen. We will continue to do a balloon release every year you are not with us.
Love,
Your Family
Happy Birthday! It has been one long year. We have missed so many milestones with you such as your birth, your first bath, your first cry, your first word, you starting to crawl, and maybe even walk. Our hearts are heavy that we have not been able to see you, know if you are ok, are happy or even healthy. More than anything we hope that you are safe, and ok. We miss you and think about you every single day. We hope to meet you soon, but in the meantime we will keep fighting for you and for all the other voiceless children out there.
We have created a video for you from your family, and that includes a balloon release we did in honor of your first birthday. We wish more than anything that we would be able to celebrate it with you, but it doesn't look like that is going to happen. We will continue to do a balloon release every year you are not with us.
Happy Birthday Jackson!
May all your dreams come true.
Love,
Your Family
Monday, December 26, 2011
Day 3 of Salt Lake Tribune Adoption Stories: Jake Strickland: Baby Jackson Michael Strickland
Adoption • Law says fraud by mother doesn’t excuse a father’s failure to protect himself.
Leah Hogsten | The Salt Lake Tribune Jake Strickland of South Jordan stands in what was to be his son's nursery, designed by his mother Jennifer Graham. He is waging a legal battle to get custody of his son, born Dec. 29, 2010 and placed for adoption a day later.
As they toured the holiday lights at Temple Square last December, Jake Strickland and Whitney Pettersson looked like just another happy, expectant couple.
Their baby was due in less than two weeks, and although not married or even in a relationship any longer, they’d decided to raise the child together. Or so Strickland thought.
A year later, Strickland is embroiled in a desperate, and so far unsuccessful, legal battle to gain custody of his child, born just a day after that visit to Temple Square and swiftly placed with adoptive parents. Strickland is among dozens of men who’ve waged similar fights in Utah, which arguably has the nation’s strictest laws governing unwed father’s rights.
Among several miscalculations on Strickland’s part, he admits this may have been the biggest one: He trusted Pettersson.
Read other parts of this series:
Dec. 25: Stopping an adoption: In Utah, fathers rarely win • http://bit.ly/uT51Tc
Dec. 26: Utah adoption law: model for nation or unjust burden? • http://bit.ly/vFuYQ8
The two met in 2009 at a South Jordan restaurant where they both worked. Pettersson openly discussed her rocky marriage and then announced she had divorced, said Strickland, 24. They began dating last January. Three months later, Pettersson sent Strickland a text message: “I’m pregnant.”
Pettersson, who also has a daughter, was distraught, Strickland said, but he reassured her they’d figure it out together.
Two weeks later, Strickland left for a temporary job in Texas, where he hoped to make enough money to pay off debt and build up a baby fund. During the months he was away, Pettersson twice tried to end the relationship, expressing doubt he’d stick around. Strickland says he constantly reassured her of his intention to be a dad. Meanwhile, she built ties with his family, attending a baby shower and a birthday party.
But the pair’s relationship had run its course by August, when Strickland returned to Utah. Even so, the two continued to meet for lunch several times a week. It was at one of those meetings that Strickland pressed Pettersson about where she stood on adoption and mentioned he might sign with Utah’s putative father registry.
Pettersson became furious and threatened to not let him see his baby, he said, and “told me straight up I didn’t need to and it would be a waste of money, and I stupidly believed her.”
Strickland was reluctant to spend nearly $3,500 to hire an attorney to handle filings when there was a baby on the way. So he did nothing legally to protect his parental rights.
Attorney David J. Hardy, who represents Pettersson, declined a request seeking comment for this story. But in remarks not specifically about the Strickland case, attorney David M. McConkie explained Utah’s law puts the onus on fathers to protect their own rights. In fact, Utah law says fraud on the mother’s part does not excuse a father’s failure to protect himself, said McConkie, who helped draft the law.
“Don’t expect the mother to be the one that’s looking after your interests, to protect your interests, because you’ve got to know that mother may not have the same interests that you do,” said McConkie, who formerly worked with Hardy but now is a manager at LDS Family Services. “You don’t have a legal relationship here. You proceed at your risk.”
As summer wore on, Strickland said he bought groceries and gave cash to Pettersson, who wasn’t working. He accompanied Pettersson to doctor’s visits, although he nearly always stayed in the waiting room with her daughter. The one exception: August 30, the day an ultrasound revealed the baby’s gender: It was a boy.
Strickland felt reassured adoption was out as their discussions turned to baby names and how they’d share parenting.
In October, he gave Pettersson a cashier’s check for nearly $1,000 to cover medical bills. But Strickland said Pettersson put him off when he attempted to accompany her to the last round of doctor visits, claiming she’d already gone or an appointment had been canceled.
In mid-December, Strickland and Pettersson attended a family Christmas party together, then a baby shower Strickland’s older brother hosted for him. A photo taken afterward shows Strickland and Pettersson cuddling on a couch. They went to a movie on Dec. 27. On Dec. 28, after touring Temple Square, Strickland took Pettersson to meet his grandmother and some cousins. Early the next afternoon, Dec. 29, the two exchanged text messages and Strickland asked how Pettersson was feeling.
“Good,” she texted back, using a smiley face emoticon for emphasis. And then she wrote that having sex might help make the baby come sooner.
“LOL, well, that was blunt,” Strickland wrote back.
“Yeah, well, I kept dropping hints every time we hang out, but you are so dumb to them so I thought I would just say it,” she responded, using a smiley face again.
“No I heard you, but I don’t think that would turn out well in the end,” Strickland wrote, apologizing.
His next text message was sent at 2:18 p.m. that afternoon.
“What are you up to?” he asked.
Pettersson didn’t respond. Hours later, she gave birth.
She signed relinquishment papers at 9:45 p.m. on Dec. 30, according to a court filing. Pettersson listed the time of the baby’s birth as 9:18 p.m. on Dec. 29; she’d gone over Utah’s 24-hour waiting period by 27 minutes.
In the same document, Pettersson affirmed the child was born within a marriage. Contrary to what Strickland said she’d told him, Pettersson and her husband had separated but never divorced. And under Utah law, a married woman’s husband is presumed to be the father of her child, regardless of whether that’s factual.
“What the law does is it recognizes marriage as a sacred institution, and the law says if a child is born within a marriage, we don’t care who the father of the child is biologically because we are not going to take a child that was born in a marriage and make the child illegitimate except under extreme circumstances,” McConkie said.
When a married woman pursues adoption, her husband must sign relinquishment papers, too, though he can check an option denying paternity. That’s what Kyle Rathjen, Pettersson’s then-estranged husband, chose to do.
“I asked what would happen if I didn’t sign and the caseworker said I’d be responsible for the child, for Whitney’s medical bills,” Rathjen said. When he objected to the way Strickland was being misled, a caseworker told him to “stay out of it,” said Rathjen, now divorced from Pettersson. “I wasn’t supposed to tell him anything.”
But Rathjen’s conscious bothered him and he sent Strickland copies of the signed papers. Pettersson claimed they’d been forged and, once again, Strickland believed her.
In the days after the baby’s birth, the charade was still on. In text messages Strickland sent to Pettersson between Dec. 30 and Jan. 5, 2011, he continued to ask how she was feeling and about her doctor’s visits. He got the same response each time.
“Good no change,” she wrote on Jan. 3.
“Good still all set for the 12th at 7:30 a.m. right? I can’t wait any more!” replied Strickland, who’d been told the baby would be delivered by C-section on that day.
“Yep,” Pettersson replied.
Finally, on the evening of Jan. 5, Pettersson sent Strickland a text saying she needed to talk to him.
Strickland said Pettersson began that phone call by saying she had some news and he wasn’t going to like it. She informed Strickland she’d given birth on Dec. 29 and placed the baby with an adoptive couple a day later. Strickland said he was so shocked he sank to the floor.
The next day, Strickland initiated a paternity claim.
During a hearing in May, Cory Wall, Strickland’s attorney, laid out Pettersson’s numerous deceptions. Hardy argued Strickland failed to protect his rights under Utah law and, because the child was born to a married mother, lacked standing to bring a paternity action. He also disputed Strickland’s assertion that Pettersson assured him they would parent together.
“Such assertions, however, have no bearing on this matter,” Hardy wrote. “Based on the cited statute, petitioner is presumed to know that Ms. Pettersson might place the child for adoption despite earlier intentions to the contrary.”
But 3rd District Judge Terry Christiansen refused to dismiss Strickland’s petition, calling the situation a “very troubling case.”
“Assuming the text messages are accurate, there is a deliberate attempt by Ms. Pettersson to deceive Mr. Strickland as it relates to the birth of this child,” the judge said. “There were obvious fraud and misrepresentations occurring.”
But, after noting Utah’s strict requirements, the judge said, “No matter what I do, I’m either sanctioning a fraud toward Mr. Strickland or I’m depriving adoptive parents of a child I’m sure they’ve grown to love and appreciate.”
Because the adoptive parents had initiated an adoption proceeding in 2nd District Court, Christiansen asked attorneys — in May and again at a later hearing — to consolidate the cases and figure out which judge should hear them. He put the paternity action on hold.
But nothing happened, and Strickland said he’s unsure why. Strickland admitted in early November he was wearing down. His life was on hold “until I know if I’m going to get my son back,” he said. “I know my chances of winning are slim to none, if they exist at all. They are getting what they want, running me out of money, emotionally.”
On Thanksgiving Day, Strickland and his family learned the adoption had been completed, leaving them bewildered, devastated and contemplating their next move.
“These are small children who are going to grow up to be adults and ask, ‘Why wasn’t I kept with my dad who loved me?’” said Jenny Graham, Strickland’s mother. “Jake is the one who has to look at him in 18 years and say, ‘I wanted you more than anything.’ We’re taking from and destroying one family to create another.”
brooke@sltrib.com
—
Editor’s note
This is the third of four stories examining adoption in the context of unmarried fathers’ rights under Utah law.
—
Taking it public
Each of these fathers has created websites to publicize their cases and raise awareness about Utah’s putative father laws, which you can find here:
Jake Strickland • www.getbabyjackback.com
Cody O’Dea • www.babyselling.com
Robert Manzanares • www.illegaladoption.com
© 2011 The Salt Lake Tribune
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)