Jackson:
We are still waiting to hear about a court date with the Utah Supreme Court. We haven't given up on you and are still fighting. We will never forget about you even if we are quiet on this blog. We don't ever stop thinking,worrying, or loving you
We were hoping and praying that there was going to be a miracle we were going to be reunited, but it seems that is not going to happen.
Jackson, we can't believe that 2 and 1/2 years of your life have come and gone, and we don't know a thing about you. We hope that one day soon, that will change and we get to be involved with your childhood, with your milestones and in your life. We hope with the many changes happening in the courts daily that we can finally have justice prevail, and have you reunited with your dad, where you belong.
We love you with all of our heart and will always have a special place for you.
XoXo,
Your 1st Family
Showing posts with label adoption fraud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label adoption fraud. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
Sunday, January 6, 2013
Dear Readers.
Dear readers,
This is Jackson’s grandma. I would like to personally thank each and every one of you for your support and love that you have continued to show us over the last two years. We have had so many emotions, blessings and heartaches that we would not have been able to get through without the continued support of family and friends.
I would like to write today in response to one comment recently posted on the blog under the post “Stealing from the married ones too” regarding an article in the Salt Lake Tribune written by Brooke Adams. First I, we would like to say we do not normally respond to negative comments because everyone has the right to their own opinion and we have learned a great deal about all sides of adoption. Emotions are high from each angle. We respect that.
Though this comment made a statement at the end which is totally untrue. Jake has not acted in any way “creepy” towards the birth mother or adoptive parents. In fact Jake has from the beginning taken the high road, and tried to ensure that the names of the adoptive couple are not revealed. He has not spoken with Whitney since the night that she told him that she had given Jackson up. We have seen Whitney in court twice, while supporting Kyle(Whitney's ex husband) in a court hearing which involved two counts of child neglect that had been reported to DCFS. But, none of our family spoke to Whitney.
As far as reaching out to the adoptive couple, I placed two calls in April 2011, to the paternal grandparents requesting that the couple and Jake meet to share their sides of the story. I did this because I know them, and had babysat for them as a teenager; one of the children I tended was the adoptive father. We had a very respectful conversation for over an hour, I requested that they please discuss it with the adoptive couple and call me back in a week. When we spoke the second time they had been instructed by their attorney, Larry Jenkins, to only go through their counsel and the courts when dealing with Jake. I left all of our contact information and we hung up on very cordial terms.
In fact my father, Jake’s grandfather, is still very good friends with adoptive grandparents and they see each other often.
In November 2011, I again was the one who wrote letters to the adoptive couple, grandparents, adoption agencies and attorneys. This was not because Jake was not will or was not wanting to reach out. I did it because I felt that as a mother, grandmother and concerned citizen it was my duty to do so. Each of these letters are posted on the blog, in December 2011. When we posted these letters Jake made sure that the names were redacted of all the adoptive family.
This blog is set up for Jackson to be used as a journal and space to express emotions and spread Jack's story. We hand out fliers everywhere we go, and have logos on our cars to get the word out about Jake and Jack’s story. Again this is to help inform others of the abuse that is and has been happening in Utah adoptions as well as to help us deal with missing Jackson.
To imply that Jake has acted inappropriate towards the birth mother or the adoptive couple is just simply not true. Jake has continued to fight in court for his right to parent his only child, he will continue to do so through the Utah Supreme Court. We will also continue to work to change the laws in Utah to protect all parties in adoption, not just birth fathers.
Jake was with Whitney throughout her pregnancy, he did more than just financially support her. They were together at family gatherings, Jack’s baby shower, Christmas events, and even at the lights the night before Jack was born. Relationships are to be built on trust. Jake believed Whitney and even asked her around the middle of December if she was thinking of adoption – to which she responded “of course not, I can’t believe you would even ask me”. Whitney’s only threat that Jake saw that was real at this time was that she would hold true to her word that if he did file on the paternity registry, if he did Whitney would receive notice, he would never see his son. That is what Jake was told over and over by Whitney. That threat of not seeing his son was real if he filed. Jake watched how Whitney acted with Emery and her ex- husband. Jake did not find out she was still married until the end of January 2011. Several others that know Whitney also believed that she was divorced. Call it what you would like, fraud, deceit, manipulation but to ensure that Whitney was able to get what she wanted that is what she did.
For a child who is in need of a loving home because their birth parent(s) cannot provide one for them for different reasons,then adoption is a blessing. Most adoptive couples are trying to adopt because they cannot have their own biological children. One way or another there has to be some type of loss for an adoptive child, sometimes it is for the adoptive parents as well. Adoption has a lot of pain behind the veil of bliss that all would like to believe it is.
To place a child into an adoptive situation when they have a loving father and family who has ALWAYS wanted, and can care for them is wrong. Many adoptive children long for those who look like them, have their same genetic traits and talents. It is not right to make the adoptive couple in fraudulent adoptions justify why they got to take the child home when their parents wanted them and did not place them for adoption.
Also, in fraudulent adoptions many things are left out such as medical information. When both parents consent some agencies provide medical information, LDS family services is one agency that does. But, because the social worker and Whitney did not want Jake involved, Jack has been denied his medical information.
Since we again know where Jack is, we have continued to reach out, we are willing to provide all information for Jack. The adoptive couple’s attorney again has been the stumbling block. But, all the adoptive couple has to do is to ask, even through their parents to Jake’s grandfather. We have no other way to provide it.
Utah is a breeding ground for corruption because the laws have made fraudulent actions legal in adoption. The truth is that these laws are only words on paper. They will never change the fact that Jack is Jake’s son and part of our family. Whether Jack comes home now, or is not able to connect with Jake until he is an adult we will be here for him. Jack does not have to choose a family when he is an adult. There is room for everyone, it is better to have more people in your life that love you.
We have NOT nor will we ever wish any ill will towards the adoptive couple. We would never want Jack to be hurt or feel torn, but he has the right to the TRUTH and his FAMILY.
Dear adoptive parents of Jack, please love this little one with all of your heart. Enjoy his every waking moment that he is in your care. Take time to see the world through his baby blue eyes (I hope he got his daddy’s eyes). Please don’t restrain his need for adventure, let him be curious and make mistakes to learn from. If he takes after his daddy, you will love his outgoing funny personality, his true love for people, his wonderfully kind heart and trusting nature.
Most of all treasure Jack as Jake does and love him enough to let him know his family.
Sincerely,
Jack's Grandma
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
The news...
Sorry to keep you all waiting in anticipation of the news from Judge Hamilton. On Saturday, we received the devastating news that our motion to intervene in the adoption was DENIED. Judge Hamilton solely could not rule in Jake's favor due to not filing timely according to Utah Law, even though he stated that the birth mother, Whitney Pettersson Rathjen Demke, defrauded Jake intentionally out of his child. The judge did not even address the constitutionality issues or due process. Our attorney feels that he didn't even want to address this and let the Supreme Court rule on this.
Jake is needing time to think through the next step in this emotional journey. Prayers, thoughts, and positive vibes sent his way would be greatly appreciated.
Hopefully, we will have more news on the what is to come next in the coming week. We will never give up on Jackson and will never stop fighting to get the laws changed here in Utah. More and more we keep seeing father's being denied the rights to parent their children. WHY??? Why would we deny a willing, and capable father the right to parent, when so many children grow up without a father figure or role model in their life and strive to have one.
We will never back down until the law is fair for ALL parties involved in adoption. All meaning, birth mother, birth father, adoptive parents and most importantly the CHILD. We need to seriously consider as society what message we are sending to our future generation of children who are placed for adoption illegally, unethical and based on fraudulently practices.
What will the adoptive couple say to Jackson when he asks why he has dark hair and not light hair like his parents? Will they lie to him and not tell him he is adoptive? Or will they only tell him bits and pieces about his adoption? Surely, they can't answer the truth, that he is with them due to them winning in court based on fraud, lies and dishonesty.
We will have Jackson in our lives one way or another. It's only a matter of time. We hope and pray everyday that Jackson is loved, cared for and is a healthy vibrant child. If only we knew for certain.....
Jake is needing time to think through the next step in this emotional journey. Prayers, thoughts, and positive vibes sent his way would be greatly appreciated.
Hopefully, we will have more news on the what is to come next in the coming week. We will never give up on Jackson and will never stop fighting to get the laws changed here in Utah. More and more we keep seeing father's being denied the rights to parent their children. WHY??? Why would we deny a willing, and capable father the right to parent, when so many children grow up without a father figure or role model in their life and strive to have one.
We will never back down until the law is fair for ALL parties involved in adoption. All meaning, birth mother, birth father, adoptive parents and most importantly the CHILD. We need to seriously consider as society what message we are sending to our future generation of children who are placed for adoption illegally, unethical and based on fraudulently practices.
What will the adoptive couple say to Jackson when he asks why he has dark hair and not light hair like his parents? Will they lie to him and not tell him he is adoptive? Or will they only tell him bits and pieces about his adoption? Surely, they can't answer the truth, that he is with them due to them winning in court based on fraud, lies and dishonesty.
We will have Jackson in our lives one way or another. It's only a matter of time. We hope and pray everyday that Jackson is loved, cared for and is a healthy vibrant child. If only we knew for certain.....
JACKSON MICHAEL STRICKLAND
we love you and will never give up!!!
Friday, August 17, 2012
Proposed bill would penalize adoption agencies for fraudulent representations
SALT LAKE CITY — As state lawmakers consider possible
amendments to the state adoption laws, one Utah man could learn as early
as Thursday whether he can intervene in the adoption of his now
2-year-old son.
The adoption occurred without his knowledge or consent, despite his repeated representations to the birth mother of his intentions to co-parent the child, said attorney Wes Hutchins.
On Wednesday, the Utah Legislature's Health and Human Services Committee, saw photographs of the man and an obviously pregnant woman who was carrying the man's child, Hutchins said.
The woman is depicted in photographs touring Temple Square with the biological father and his family on Dec. 29, 2009. The following day, the baby was born, unbeknownst to the biological father, Jake Strickland. Just over 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, Hutchins said.
On Jan. 5, 2010, however, the woman told Strickland in a cell phone conversation that she had placed the baby with an adoptive couple, he said.
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.
Strickland and his family have been engaged in a legal fight over the adoption for more than two years. Second District Court Judge David Hamilton could rule on the case as early as Thursday, said Strickland's mother, Jenny Graham.
Hutchins, a family law attorney now representing Strickland, told the legislative committee that many pregnant young women from other states come to Utah to place their babies for adoption because Utah law has weak protections for biological fathers.
Hutchins told lawmakers that some agencies even "coach" birth mothers what to tell biological fathers who inquire about the child's birth or their rights.
Among western states, few have as many paternal rights cases that go up to appellate courts, which suggest problems with Utah's laws, he said.
Rep. Dan McCay, R-Riverton, who is also an attorney, said it could also be construed that Utah's higher courts are more amenable to hearing such cases.
To that end, Rep. Christine Watkins, D-Price, has developed a legislative proposal to further regulate the activities of adoption agencies.
A draft discussed by state lawmakers Wednesday contemplates sanctions for adoption agencies or employees of such agencies who make fraudulent representations in connection with adoptions.
Agency licenses could be suspended, even revoked, according to the proposal. The proposal also includes a provision in which a party that challenges a fraudulent representation in connection with an adoption and prevails, can be awarded attorney fees and costs.
Under the proposed legislation, notice of an adoption must be provided to an unmarried biological father of a child six months old or younger.
McCay said that portion of the draft legislation raised concerns because adoptive parents need to know that an adoption, when finalized, is final.
"I think there is some value to the finality and getting the kid out of the middle of a fight," McCay said.
Hutchins, who told lawmakers that he has worked in family law for two decades, agreed that parents need that assurance.
He said he believes the attorney fees provision of the draft legislation would persuade any party against making false representations that could disrupt a placement.
Watkins asked the committee to take time to study the proposal and allow her to make further refinements before the interim committee takes any action.
The adoption occurred without his knowledge or consent, despite his repeated representations to the birth mother of his intentions to co-parent the child, said attorney Wes Hutchins.
On Wednesday, the Utah Legislature's Health and Human Services Committee, saw photographs of the man and an obviously pregnant woman who was carrying the man's child, Hutchins said.
The woman is depicted in photographs touring Temple Square with the biological father and his family on Dec. 29, 2009. The following day, the baby was born, unbeknownst to the biological father, Jake Strickland. Just over 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, Hutchins said.
On Jan. 5, 2010, however, the woman told Strickland in a cell phone conversation that she had placed the baby with an adoptive couple, he said.
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.
Strickland and his family have been engaged in a legal fight over the adoption for more than two years. Second District Court Judge David Hamilton could rule on the case as early as Thursday, said Strickland's mother, Jenny Graham.
Hutchins, a family law attorney now representing Strickland, told the legislative committee that many pregnant young women from other states come to Utah to place their babies for adoption because Utah law has weak protections for biological fathers.
Hutchins told lawmakers that some agencies even "coach" birth mothers what to tell biological fathers who inquire about the child's birth or their rights.
Among western states, few have as many paternal rights cases that go up to appellate courts, which suggest problems with Utah's laws, he said.
Rep. Dan McCay, R-Riverton, who is also an attorney, said it could also be construed that Utah's higher courts are more amenable to hearing such cases.
To that end, Rep. Christine Watkins, D-Price, has developed a legislative proposal to further regulate the activities of adoption agencies.
A draft discussed by state lawmakers Wednesday contemplates sanctions for adoption agencies or employees of such agencies who make fraudulent representations in connection with adoptions.
Agency licenses could be suspended, even revoked, according to the proposal. The proposal also includes a provision in which a party that challenges a fraudulent representation in connection with an adoption and prevails, can be awarded attorney fees and costs.
Under the proposed legislation, notice of an adoption must be provided to an unmarried biological father of a child six months old or younger.
McCay said that portion of the draft legislation raised concerns because adoptive parents need to know that an adoption, when finalized, is final.
"I think there is some value to the finality and getting the kid out of the middle of a fight," McCay said.
Hutchins, who told lawmakers that he has worked in family law for two decades, agreed that parents need that assurance.
He said he believes the attorney fees provision of the draft legislation would persuade any party against making false representations that could disrupt a placement.
Watkins asked the committee to take time to study the proposal and allow her to make further refinements before the interim committee takes any action.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
10 days or less...
**Update**
Thank you so much for the many thoughts, prayers, comments and concerns. Court went very well. Judge Hamilton really let Wes our attorney share our side of the story and explain how so many things were not dealt with properly. He brought up that Jake's constitutional rights were violated, he touched on the enormous amount of fraud by Whitney, LDS Family Services, and opposing counsel David Hardy and Larry Jenkins, as well as Jake's due process to rightfully be heard was not given. Court lasted 3 hours and we thought the Judge would be ruling on allowing us to intervene that day, but after hearing argument, he said he was in a conundrum and need to take it under advisement. The Judge said he would have a ruling within 10 days of his decision. He will be ruling on 3 things: 1. Motion to Intervene in the Adoption 2. Motion to Disqualify Opposing Counsel, due to them being a witness to the finalization of the adoption 3. Motion for limited discovery.
Obviously, we need to intervene for this to be a victory for Jake and Jackson. After that is determined, we have filed a motion for the adoption decree to be set aside, so we can move to an evidentiary hearing to present our case.
We had so much family support there it was wonderful. Thank you again to all of our blog followers, Facebook fans, and all of you who have shown interest in our case. This will be HUGE if we can win in the district court and not have to be the ones appealing to the Supreme Court.
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
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
Friday, August 3, 2012
See ya soon...
Jackson, 4 days until your daddy's voice will be heard.
We hope you and your daddy can meet for the first time shortly.
We love you and see you soon!
Friday, May 11, 2012
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Utah Council for Ethical Adoption Practices
Introducing...
UCEAP
(Utah Council for Ethical Adoption Practices)
a non-profit organization who's mission statement is
"To promote and enforce ethical and positive
adoption
standards and practices among all those involved
with adoption
in Utah."
President/Founder: Wes Hutchins
For those interested in ethical adoption practices please go to this facebook group for updates while our website is being developed.
Change will occur!
Friday, April 20, 2012
The wheels are turning...
Congratulations to John Wyatt, in his Virgina Supreme Court ruling, to pursue damages against A Act of Love, Larry Jenkins, Laraine Moon, and the adoptive (stolen) parents of Baby Emma.
Every father fighting and winning is just one step forward for Baby Jack. This is great news and we can't wait to hear what happens with Robert Manzanares this upcoming week in his custody battle.
Things keep happening for the good, and they won't stop until justice is served for all father's out there. This wouldn't be possible without all of the media attention, social media, and the viewers and readers like you that keep spreading the word about the atrocity that is occuring in Utah with adoption.
Keep spreading the word about Baby Jack and all the other birthfathers and together we can make a difference.
We are still waiting for a court date. We have submitted a few new motions that need to have a response in the next week, which will probably be followed by an extension, but it's a GREAT step in our case. We can't wait to share.
Every father fighting and winning is just one step forward for Baby Jack. This is great news and we can't wait to hear what happens with Robert Manzanares this upcoming week in his custody battle.
Things keep happening for the good, and they won't stop until justice is served for all father's out there. This wouldn't be possible without all of the media attention, social media, and the viewers and readers like you that keep spreading the word about the atrocity that is occuring in Utah with adoption.
Keep spreading the word about Baby Jack and all the other birthfathers and together we can make a difference.
We are still waiting for a court date. We have submitted a few new motions that need to have a response in the next week, which will probably be followed by an extension, but it's a GREAT step in our case. We can't wait to share.
Monday, April 2, 2012
Powerful!
"If you shut up truth and bury it underground, it will but grow, and gather to itself such explosive power that the day it bursts through it will blow up everything in its way."
Emile Zola
French Novelist, Critic, Activist
1840-1902
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."
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Still Fighting
Dear Jackson:
It's been almost 14 long and unbearable months since you have been gone. We think about you every single day. We wish we knew what you looked like, how you were developing, what milestones you have hit and be able to squeeze you with love whenever our hearts desire. Our hearts ache that you can not be here with us and are not able to play with your cousin Boston. Every day when we look at him, we just wonder if you look like him with big baby blue eyes, a head full of dark brown hair and chubby cheeks. Jackson, everyday is a struggle not having you in our home, and we are longing for the day that we get to see your sweet face.
Jackson, we are fighting so hard to bring you back home! We have a great new attorney Wes Hutchins, who has done so much for our case in the past two weeks. We just filed a motion to intervene in the adoption that had been finalized fraudulently behind the judge's orders up in 2nd District. This gives us some hope, that we will get to meet you before you are 18. Wes brought up many valid arguments and points such as your daddy's constitutional rights have been cut off to parent, fraud, fraud and more fraud, and the parental kidnapping act. There has been a small victory for another father fighting for his child who was living in Colorado at the time. Robert Manzanare's case was overturned in the Utah Supreme Court. If we have to go that far we have a VERY VERY great chance at having our case overturned.
Jackson, I hope you realize what a special special boy you are, and how many people truly love you. You have had such an impact on thousands of people. You are helping to get the laws changed in the state of Utah as well as helping other father's out there be able to raise their children. Although, your family is sacrificing right now, we know eventually who you will be with.
We love you so much Jackson and we hope we have a court date soon!
Love,
Your family
It's been almost 14 long and unbearable months since you have been gone. We think about you every single day. We wish we knew what you looked like, how you were developing, what milestones you have hit and be able to squeeze you with love whenever our hearts desire. Our hearts ache that you can not be here with us and are not able to play with your cousin Boston. Every day when we look at him, we just wonder if you look like him with big baby blue eyes, a head full of dark brown hair and chubby cheeks. Jackson, everyday is a struggle not having you in our home, and we are longing for the day that we get to see your sweet face.
Jackson, we are fighting so hard to bring you back home! We have a great new attorney Wes Hutchins, who has done so much for our case in the past two weeks. We just filed a motion to intervene in the adoption that had been finalized fraudulently behind the judge's orders up in 2nd District. This gives us some hope, that we will get to meet you before you are 18. Wes brought up many valid arguments and points such as your daddy's constitutional rights have been cut off to parent, fraud, fraud and more fraud, and the parental kidnapping act. There has been a small victory for another father fighting for his child who was living in Colorado at the time. Robert Manzanare's case was overturned in the Utah Supreme Court. If we have to go that far we have a VERY VERY great chance at having our case overturned.
Jackson, I hope you realize what a special special boy you are, and how many people truly love you. You have had such an impact on thousands of people. You are helping to get the laws changed in the state of Utah as well as helping other father's out there be able to raise their children. Although, your family is sacrificing right now, we know eventually who you will be with.
We love you so much Jackson and we hope we have a court date soon!
Love,
Your family
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.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Letter three: David Hardy
November 15, 2011
Dear Mr. Hardy,
I would like to start by saying that a copy of this letter and the certified mailing receipt has been retained in the binders that we have to share with Jackson when he is older. Next I would like to state that Jake nor his attorney have any knowledge that I am writing to you, I am only doing so to share my feelings and comments as a mother, grandmother and woman. What you decide to do with this letter and information is completely up to you. I will wait until December 1st to share with Jake’s attorney the fact that I have sent these letters, so if you would like/need to contact him prior to that time that would be fine. I have also included copies of the letters which I have mailed to J and J, all of the LDS Family Service Agencies in Utah, (J’s parents) and a letter which I will give to Jackson someday.
Mr. Hardy I understand that this is not normal protocol, and that I probably should not be writing to opposing counsel. Though, I am not a party of this lawsuit, I am merely a concerned mother, grandmother and citizen of Utah. I understand as well that you are doing your “job” as the legal counsel for LDS Family Services in this action. But, I also know that you would not be working for this particular law firm if it contradicted your morals and beliefs. This firm not only represents the adoption agency but the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and the morals and values for which the church stands.
The laws in Utah regarding adoption are from my understanding written to protect the child, adoption families and birth mothers. Utah has some if not the most favorable laws in the Nation for adoptive couples who are trying to adopt. Adoption is a wonderful and great blessing for those who are not able to have children, and a very important part of a civilized society. You only need to know of the heart ache in third world counties or review history to understand that there is a great need for adoption to protect innocent children.
But when a child is taken from a birth parent without consent, or through fraudulent actions it is no longer adoption, it is wrong. To allow for fraud in the laws which deal with adoption, creates and allows for deception and questionable actions to be taken.
Dave, if I may I would like to address you first as a man, father, and citizen before your role as an attorney.
You have met Jake and I; you have listened to our “side” of the issues, seen the pictures, read the text messages, emails, affidavits, letters, and reviewed the money orders and various other items that we have. You know of the pain we have been going through, you were able to see it first hand on Jake’s and my face and hear it in our voices. The courtrooms have been filled every time with Jake’s loving and supportive family and friends. You have walked by and heard the pain and concern in their conversations for Jake and Jackson. You even agreed, when asked, when Jackson is told and shown all this information, what should Jake do when asked if he wanted to give Jackson up – lie and tell Jackson that he did not want him? Your response was, of course not, no.
As a father you know the joy and blessing of having children, you understand the excitement of the anticipation to hold and see your new born baby. Waiting, planning and preparing for them throughout the pregnancy. Going to doctor appointments, finding out the sex of the child and picking out a name, buying and preparing the nursery, and having baby showers given by excited family and friends. Jake did all of these same things, he and Whitney planned and prepared for Jackson, there was nothing different in any of these actions taken by Jake than were taken by yourself.
Marriage does not change the feelings a father has for his child, there may be different arrangements made and to consider, but the love is the same. These same arrangements and actions are taken when a married couple with children divorce. Love for your child does not depend on whether or not you are married, divorced, single, or widowed. Jake’s love for Jackson is that of a father, strong true, and unconditional, it has not and will not ever change.
As a family man you understand the grateful feelings when you look around at your family this Thanksgiving. You know all of those feelings of gratitude and blessing as a father. Please now consider Jake, who is also a father but denied his son because of fraud, lies and deception, there will be an empty spot at his table and heart. Can you imagine how you would feel if you one of your children were taken from you because of the lies, misrepresentation, and fraudulent actions of another? And then to have the reaction of the State and laws be supportive of those actions?
Please consider, J and J the prospective adoptive couple who have Jackson, a child that they had longed for and now have because Whitney lied. They are grateful today but worry about tomorrow, will he be taken home to Jake or not. And if Jackson is not returned to Jake now, what about when Jackson is told the truth, how will they explain it. Their Thanksgiving table is full but their hearts are heavy with worry. Is this right? Is this what they were seeking when they came to LDS Family Services to adopt, I do not believe so.
Heavenly Father does not work through lies and deception, nor does Heavenly Father bless the outcome from those actions. To give Jackson to J and J and ask them to create their family on a foundation of fraud and deception is not right, fair or just. Such a foundation will not stand strong, though that is the foundation which you and the laws are asking them to build their family on. Why, would anyone do this to them, Jackson and Jake. It is not morally or ethically right.
Jake is a good, strong, hard working, loving and kind man. Jake has the ability to raise Jackson and is not any different than J and J. Jake is a 24 year old man, employed, financially, physically and mentally stable. Jake has never had any issues legally, he has attended college and will be returning soon to complete his degree. Jake has extended family and friends who support and love him, of whom you are very aware.
J and J are 30 years old, employed, I would assume financially, physically and mentally stable. I also know J’s extended family and they are kind and supportive as well. So please tell me what makes J and J better parents than Jake, why would Jackson be better with them than Jake, his biological father who loves and wants him?
Lies, fraud and deception on the part of Whitney are the only reasons that Jackson is with J and J and not Jake. So I am confused, is it only because they are married and Utah law states that fraud is ok? And if that is it, are we as citizens of a civilized society and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Days Saints to support that which our Heavenly Father does not – fraud, misrepresentations and lies. I for one do not feel that I am the judge of my fellow man, but I also do not support and condone the immoral and fraudulent actions of someone else.
Jake was blessed with his son from Heavenly Father, but Jackson was taken from Jake through the lies and deception of another. What type of society are we to stand by and not right this wrong? What does it say of us as citizens of Utah to support adoption laws which allow for fraud and deception? Why would there ever be a law which allowed for fraud, lies and deception especially one that deals with adoption, children and families.
Mr. Hardy as an attorney I understand that you have the job to uphold the law and protect the interest of your client. The last part of this law section which states “Custody determinations shall be based on the best interest of the child, in accordance with the provisions of section ”.
Please don’t forget that J and J are also your clients, through LDS Family services, and if you do not return Jackson to Jake, you will be supporting the fraudulent foundation for them to build their family on. If that happens let me ask you, will you be there for J and J when Jackson asks about his birth father and why he was adopted? Will you be there if and when Jackson is contacted by Emery or Boston his sister and cousin and told the truth, will you be able to explain this to any of them? Or will you and LDS Family services leave that to J and J to handle?
I am not acting out of meanness or spitefulness. I simply need a voice for my frustration and anger for the present laws of our state. And please realize these questions will one day be asked.
The biggest question is will you be able to answer Jackson when he asks you “why”, when you knew that he was taken from his loving father and family because his mother lied, why he was not able to go home. Will you merely state because you were doing your job, the laws stated that it was ok for your mother to lie and deceive your father. And until Jackson is able to ask you himself, I am asking you Why?
Why, don’t you inform your clients LDS Family Services that this case is unique and through your investigation it has come to light the truth of Whitney’s actions, her lies and deception. Therefore the most appropriate and correct action to take is to return Jackson to his father/mother and proceed to place a child who was given up for adoption by both parents with J and J.
Though I am asking that you return Jackson to his father, I understand that Whitney relinquished Jackson to LDS Family Service. But, in light of Whitney’s deception and lies it would be in Jackson’s best interest he be placed with Jake until custody can be resolved through the courts. Though if it is necessary to return Jackson to Whitney with Jake’s knowledge, then Jake can take the appropriate actions to resolve custody.
Why don’t we correct this tragic and inappropriate mistake before the wounds are beyond repair for Jackson, Jake, J and J and their extended families. Jackson is only 10 ½ months old he will be able to adjust and continue to grow and develop in a loving home with Jake, and his family. J and J will be able to be placed with a child to start their family on a solid firm foundation of truth and honesty. This is in the best interest of the child which should be our number one concern.
Mr. Hardy you do have the power to correct this injustice, and stop the motion of devastation set in place by Whitney’s lies and deceit. LDS Family Services will adhere to the strong advice of their counsel, and Jackson can and should be returned home to Jake. Mr. Jenkins of Wood and Crapo the attorney for J and J should also be made aware of the fraud and misrepresentations of Whitney and the actions of LDS Family Services to ensure that Jake was not advised of Jackson being placed for adoption without his consent. Though the law states lying, deception and fraudulent actions are allowed in Utah adoptions as you clearly stated in defense of this case on September 27th in front of Commissioner Tack. Mr. Jenkins will have to continue with an adoption which would be condoning J, J and Jackson (Benjamin) to a family life that started on lies, deception and fraud. A family that is sentenced to pain and heartache, which they did not cause.
I do not believe in my heart that you are the type of man who sets aside your morals and ethics when you are doing your “job”, again if you were you would or should not be an attorney who represents the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Our family, values, honesty and integrity are the most important ways to define each of us in this life and are the only things which we can take to the next. This is why I am asking you directly to do what is right and bring Jackson home. Do not deny him his loving father and family, Jackson is Jake’s only child, he is a blessing from our Heavenly Father, Jackson was taken from Jake through lies and deception, and it simply is not right.
I am asking you as an attorney to use your position of power to ensure justice for Jackson, Jake, J and J.
I am asking you as a father to understand the unconditional love which Jake has for his son, and do not deny him or Jackson the right to be together as a family. Bring Jackson home.
Last I am asking you as a man, and a citizen of the United States of America not to stand for this act of deception to be one that denies Jake his protected constitutional right to be a parent. Also to protect Jackson an innocent victim of this fraud and deception, Jackson has the right to know his father and family. He was never given up or not wanted. Bring Jackson home.
I understand you can and will do with this information what you see fit. Know that I will do the same, and that I will be sharing this letter with Jackson someday so that he will someday understand what actions I took to correct this wrong and to bring him home. Whether that is, as it rightfully should be today, or if we have to wait for 18 years, Jackson will be told the truth about everything.
Respectfully,
Jennifer Graham
Jackson’s Grandma
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)