Showing posts with label Unwed fathers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Unwed fathers. Show all posts
Sunday, May 20, 2012
Friday, May 11, 2012
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Come show your support
Tomorrow at 9 AM, please find yourself at the Matheson Courthouse Rm N42 in Salt Lake, Utah, in support of Robert Manzanares. He has a court hearing to dismiss his case in Utah and allow it to move to the Colorado court system, where he has properly been fighting for his rights to parent his biological daughter. Rob's case has seen a first in the Utah Supreme Court where they have ruled against a lower Utah district court ruling and ruled in favor of the father. His case is HUGE for Baby Jack. There is a very, very great chance he will be getting custody of his precious daughter that he never wanted to be placed for adoption.
If you have a free moment, we would love the support.
Thank you!
If you have a free moment, we would love the support.
Thank you!
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Search for child stopped cold by Utah adoption laws, father says
KSL.com
WILLIAMSPORT, Penn. — A Pennsylvania man is admittedly fighting an uphill battle to regain custody of his child — a child he was told had died at birth.
It was only when the birth mother told him the truth, Christopher Carlton learned the child had been put for adoption in Utah."My name is Christopher Carlton. I believe my child was put up for adoption against my will," Carlton told KSL News in an exclusive interview at his home in Williamsport.
A child conceived
In 2009, Carlton began dating Shalonda Brown, an old high school friend. Later that year, Brown became pregnant. But the two stopped seeing each other a few months later.
Already a father from a previous marriage, Carlton said he wanted to help raise the child.
"I bought (Shalonda) a car. I gave her money. I did what a father should do," he said.
Chirstopher Carlton said his former girlfriend, Sholanda Brown, told him that she had given birth to a boy, whom she named Jaylen. She sent him this picture, but told him the baby had respiratory problems and died.
But around the time Brown should have been giving birth, she vanished.
"Do you all know where she is?" Carlton said he asked her family when he contacted them about Brown's whereabouts. "They said, ‘We don't know.' And I said, ‘We should file a missing persons report.' The police told me I couldn't because we weren't married."Carlton said a few days passed and he received a phone call from Brown.
"I was really concerned, and I said, ‘Listen, forget pretty much what's happening with us, where are you at?'" he recalled.
Carlton said Brown only told him that she had given birth to a boy, whom she named Jaylen. She told him the baby had respiratory problems and died.
"Even if my child was alive for two days and you kept it from me, it's still unforgivable. But at least being a father, the honorable thing to do would let me give my child a proper burial." he said.
Not knowing where Brown was or where his son's body was buried, Carlton began searching.
"I called every single NICU unit on the Eastern Seaboard looking for that child," he said. "I spent a couple thousand dollars renting cars, driving."
I called every single NICU unit on the Eastern Seaboard looking for that child. I spent a couple thousand dollars renting cars, driving.
–Christopher Carlton
Carlton said privacy laws prevented him from learning anything about where his child might have been born and, subsequently buried.
In the meantime, he said he kept calling Brown for information."She got tired of me bugging her, so she went downtown and filed an emergency protection from abuse order," he said.
In court documents filed in Lycoming County, Penn., Brown claimed that Carlton had "pushed" her and threatened to "make [her] life a living hell."
However, court transcripts obtained by KSL News show the charges were dropped when Judge Dudley Anderson told Brown he would be required to put her on the witness stand where she would be forced to tell Carlton where the child was buried.
The transcripts show Brown told Judge Anderson she wanted to drop the charges. He dismissed the order without prejudice.
"If I was such a hateful person, if I tried to cause her harm, if I tried to do anything evil to her, wouldn't she still want to get on that stand?," he asked. "(Wouldn't she) still want to prosecute me so much?"
The truth
Months went by and Carlton still didn't have any answers, until one day when his phone rang.
"She called on Oct. 19. [She said,]‘I want to tell you about the baby,'" Carlton recalled. "I said, ‘Woman, you've done enough. You won't tell me where the body is. You won't tell me how my son died.'"
This time, Carlton said Brown told him she wanted to talk but in front of a grief counselor the next day.
"She looked at me pretty much crying and said flat out, ‘The baby is not dead,'" Carlton said.
Brown then told him she put the baby up for adoption.
"Before I left, I said, ‘Where did you put my child up for adoption?' And she wouldn't say anything," he said.On November 1, 2010, Carlton filed a Complaint for Custody in Lycoming County, Penn. It was during the emergency hearing on Nov. 23 that Carlton learned where his child was.
"The judge said, ‘Mr. Carlton, your child was put up for adoption at a place called the Adoption Center of Choice located in Orem, Utah,'" Carlton said.
Carlton said he found the adoption agency's phone number and called, thinking employees there would recognize the mistake.
"We made a mistake, yes," he said. "But, these people came back to me with papers and said I don't have any rights to know anything regarding that child — that means birth certificates, where the child was born, how much she weighed, nothing! I'm thinking how is this possible? She stole my child!"
Another lie discovered through the court process: Carlton's attorney discovered the child was, in fact, a girl.
"Remember that boy you were fighting for?" he recalled his attorney asking him. "'Yeah, my son?' (He said,) 'What if we told you it was a little girl?'"
The Utah court battle
On January 11, 2011, Carlton's attorney filed a Motion to Intervene in Fourth District Court in Utah.
In court documents filed by the attorney representing the Adoption Center of Choice and Shalonda Brown, Larry Jenkins argued that "an unmarried biological father's consent to the adoption is not required unless he strictly complied with requirement of the Adoption Act to timely establish parental rights."
Related:
Utah High Court's ruling could mean big changes for adoptionsA recent Utah Supreme Court ruling may be the catalyst a Colorado man needs to get his young daughter back.
Jenkins maintained that Carlton did not establish his parental rights in Utah under the schedule required. Judge Steven Hansen agreed with that argument and dismissed Carlton's case.
"The court said, ‘I've got enough information here and don't need to know anything more. You're done Mr. Carlton,'" said Wes Hutchins, Carlton's attorney.Hutchins has now filed an appeal to the Utah Supreme Court. "His constitutional rights were violated, and we're asking the Supreme Court to recognize that and overturn the incorrect decision of the trial court." he said.
When contacted, Brown refused to speak to KSL News regarding the court case.
However, the Adoption Center of Choice sent a statement through its attorney, Larry Jenkins, which read in part: "The district court carefully evaluated the facts alleged by Mr. Carlton and the claims he raised. The Adoption Center believes the district court ruled correctly and that second-guessing the district court's decision or trying the case in the media is inappropriate."
A child he may never know
"The only thing that gives me peace of mind is karma. When you do something that evil, it comes back to you. She's got to wake up every day knowing what she did," Carlton said.
Yet, he hopes karma will one day bring his daughter back.
"I'll be sitting right here in this chair and I'll get a knock at the door, and there will be some person there that I've never seen in my life," he said. "She'll say, ‘Hello, I think you are my father.'"
He said when she asks why he didn't fight for her, he'll tell her he did. But he'll tell her Utah adoption laws stopped him cold.
"I've been through the foster care system. I know what that's like," Carlton said. "But Utah has no right to manipulate and misuse the laws that were in place to protect children. You're using them for your own gain."
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Saturday, February 11, 2012
HB308
This past week has been very exciting for progress in finally changing the adoption laws in the state of Utah regarding unwed father's rights. Although, HB308 didn't ultimately fix every problem with the current law, it was a great step to show the legislative that there is major problem with the current law. On Monday, the committee over HB308 decided to put a hold on the bill until Thursday to give more time to research some questions that were brought up.
On Thursday, the courtroom was full of emotional testimony and truly showed the major flaws that are currently in the adoption laws. I will be posting videos of testimony from David Hardy, Jenny Graham, Dan Deuel, Lisa Harris, Donna Pope, and a few others.
The committee voted 5-3 that this bill needs to be put on hold until the Summer to get more of the major kinks worked out. They saw the great need for reform and wanted to get it right, not just put a bill into place that wouldn't truly solve the problem at hand.
Although, this bill was a step in the right direction it ultimately still did not take fraud out of the law. We have been working with Wes Hutchins, President of the Utah Adoption Council, as well as the sponsor of this bill Christine Watkins of Price, to suggest ways we can make this bill truly effective to protect father's rights.
Wes Hutchins, an adoptive father, and an adoption attorney, has become a strong advocate for us in helping get the laws changed. He will be on the radio on Monday, February 13th, 2012 at 9:00 AM on radio station KCPW, NPR 88.3 FM, 105.3 FM. He will be talking about the bill, adoption reform, the ruling on the Robert Manzanares Case, etc. Please tune in or call in to discuss this topic.
Thank you again for all of your support. We are making a difference!
On Thursday, the courtroom was full of emotional testimony and truly showed the major flaws that are currently in the adoption laws. I will be posting videos of testimony from David Hardy, Jenny Graham, Dan Deuel, Lisa Harris, Donna Pope, and a few others.
The committee voted 5-3 that this bill needs to be put on hold until the Summer to get more of the major kinks worked out. They saw the great need for reform and wanted to get it right, not just put a bill into place that wouldn't truly solve the problem at hand.
Although, this bill was a step in the right direction it ultimately still did not take fraud out of the law. We have been working with Wes Hutchins, President of the Utah Adoption Council, as well as the sponsor of this bill Christine Watkins of Price, to suggest ways we can make this bill truly effective to protect father's rights.
Wes Hutchins, an adoptive father, and an adoption attorney, has become a strong advocate for us in helping get the laws changed. He will be on the radio on Monday, February 13th, 2012 at 9:00 AM on radio station KCPW, NPR 88.3 FM, 105.3 FM. He will be talking about the bill, adoption reform, the ruling on the Robert Manzanares Case, etc. Please tune in or call in to discuss this topic.
Thank you again for all of your support. We are making a difference!
Sunday, January 29, 2012
This is amazing!
Utah adoption bill aims to give unwed fathers more protections
Legislation • Mothers required to give notice of intent by mail or publication.
A state lawmaker has introduced a bill aimed at preventing an unmarried woman from coming to Utah to give birth and pursue adoption without informing the biological father of her plan, a problem highlighted in a Friday Utah Supreme Court ruling involving an unmarried Colorado father.
House Bill 308, sponsored by Rep. Christine Watkins, D-Price, would require pregnant women to give notice by mail or publication to out-of-state unmarried fathers if they plan to give birth and place infants for adoption in Utah.
Watkins’ proposed bill also simplifies the process an unwed father must follow to initially protect his rights, eliminating the requirement that he initiate a court action before he can file a notice of intent to claim paternity with the state’s putative father registry. That change would apply to Utah residents as well as unwed fathers who reside elsewhere.
The bill would require a notice to be sent to the unmarried father’s last known residence or published in a newspaper where he was last known to reside that informs him of an adoption plan and what he needs to do to protect his rights. It sets a deadline of 30 days for the father to act once he receives the notice or the mother gives consent or relinquishes the baby.
An unwed father who files a paternity notice with the state registry would then have an additional 30 days to begin a court paternity action and file other declarations about his interest in assuming custody and caring for the child. If the unmarried father does not respond, his consent to the adoption would be assumed, the bill says.
“I am very sympathetic to fathers loving their children,” said Watkins, who has two brothers and four sons. “A lot of fathers don’t want to give up on their children. I thought, ‘You know, let’s give these guys a chance.’”
Utah’s current law says that once a birth mother consents to an adoption or relinquishes her child, that decision may not be revoked. Watkins’ proposed bill changes that, too. If a biological father successfully asserts his parental rights, a birth mother would have 30 days to then revoke her consent to the adoption.
Two Utah attorneys said the legislation was a “step in the right direction.”
“The state obviously needs a means to facilitate adoptions of out-of-state children but the current system is ripe for abuse,” said Joshua Peterman, an attorney for a Florida father whose effort to intervene in his daughter’s adoption is currently pending before the Utah Supreme Court.
Wes Hutchins, who is an adoption attorney and an adoptive father, consulted on Watkins’ bill. He is also president of the Utah Adoption Council but spoke independently of that organization on Friday.
He said the Utah Supreme Court’s rulingrequiring a rehearing in the case of Colorado father Robert Manzanares “lends considerable support for positive change in this area of the law,” including changes proposed by Watkins that are “designed to prevent birth mothers from forum shopping Utah just to cut bio dads out of the parenting picture.”
The justices determined Manzanares did not know and reasonably could not have known that a birth and adoption would take place in Utah, entitling him to intervene in the proceedings.
John Hedrick, Manzanares’ Colorado attorney, said given the current loophole in Utah’s adoption law, he has taken to urging unwed fathers to file in Utah any time a birth mother has the slightest tie to the state or its predominant Mormon religion, a practice he’ll continue unless the law is changed.
© 2012 The Salt Lake Tribune
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
Friday, November 11, 2011
11.11.11
As the hype of 11.11.11 was going around today, I decided to google what the significance was of 11.11. I was surprised to find out that it could be more relate able than I thought originally. Growing up, I have had the superstition to make a wish whenever the clock struck 11:11. I don't know where, why or how this behavior became about, but it has been instilled upon me for a few years. Today, my wish was of utmost importance; BRING BABY JACK HOME!!
After searching the web for the meaning or significance, I found that many websites claimed that this was a way of angels communicating. This really struck me hard. Now, I don't know if this has any true meaning behind it or not, but right now we really need an angel watching out for us, Jackson, and Jake. This has been a long and exhausting journey, and we really hope the end is in sight. We really hope that we have some unanswered prayers and SOON. We need to have our baby home for the holidays.
Everyday, Jackson gets older and older, and develops so many characteristics, talents, and quirks, and we have been RIPPED of our right to be able to see him develop. My son, has been deprived of meeting his cousin, who is only 4 months younger than he is. We have not gotten to hold, see, or kiss on our sweet little baby. We don't even know if he is healthy or not....
We believe that everything happens for a reason. We are not sure of the reason, that this catastrophic ordeal had to happen to us or to the adoptive couple, but hopefully one day SOON, all of our questions can be answered.
We not only have a journey and purpose now to get Jackson home, but we now have a desire and lifelong goal to make sure that this does not happen to ANYONE else. We have to take a stand and not let unhealthy laws, and principals dictate the outcome of children. Please help us in this uphill journey!!!! VOICE your opinion to the UTAH STATE LEGISLATORS.
To the adoptive couple, please reach out to JAKE. He needs to meet his son. A picture is worth a 1000 words!
Jack's Aunt
Heidi
After searching the web for the meaning or significance, I found that many websites claimed that this was a way of angels communicating. This really struck me hard. Now, I don't know if this has any true meaning behind it or not, but right now we really need an angel watching out for us, Jackson, and Jake. This has been a long and exhausting journey, and we really hope the end is in sight. We really hope that we have some unanswered prayers and SOON. We need to have our baby home for the holidays.
Everyday, Jackson gets older and older, and develops so many characteristics, talents, and quirks, and we have been RIPPED of our right to be able to see him develop. My son, has been deprived of meeting his cousin, who is only 4 months younger than he is. We have not gotten to hold, see, or kiss on our sweet little baby. We don't even know if he is healthy or not....
We believe that everything happens for a reason. We are not sure of the reason, that this catastrophic ordeal had to happen to us or to the adoptive couple, but hopefully one day SOON, all of our questions can be answered.
We not only have a journey and purpose now to get Jackson home, but we now have a desire and lifelong goal to make sure that this does not happen to ANYONE else. We have to take a stand and not let unhealthy laws, and principals dictate the outcome of children. Please help us in this uphill journey!!!! VOICE your opinion to the UTAH STATE LEGISLATORS.
To the adoptive couple, please reach out to JAKE. He needs to meet his son. A picture is worth a 1000 words!
Jack's Aunt
Heidi
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)