The A-Team

Free Web Hosting Provider - Web Hosting - E-commerce - High Speed Internet - Free Web Page

A very great deal has been made in the press of the Baby Jessica case and the Baby Richard cases. Katie Couric of the NBC Today show was reduced to tears over the plight of Baby Jessica and her "heartless" biological father who "ripped the child away from the only parents she had known." And we had the Baby Richard case in Chicago. Same emotionally manipulative deal.

What is either outright concealed from the public and lawmakers or cleverly buried under tons of rhetoric is the factual chronology of the cases. That is in each of the cases the biological fathers took action within 30 days of the birth of their children, as soon as they learned that they WERE fathers! Even though the birth fathers sought legal relief in the states where they lived and the children were born, the prospective adoptive parents refused to obey the decisions of those courts and sought to frustrate the orders of the courts by running to the courts of another state. IN the Baby Jessica case, when Iowa granted the birth father his rights, the prospective adoptive parents ran to the courts in Michigan and shopped for a "friendly judge." And they found one who would disobey Michigan's law and Federal law and act outside the legal norms. His verdicts were finally overturned after YEARS of litigation by the Michigan Supreme Court.

More recently there has been the "Baby Sam or Baby Matthew" case between Florida and Alabama. With an "activist" organization from Michigan pulling the legal strategy strings. It is Baby Jessica all over with a "friendly judge" who is defying the law. What is even more unique in this case is some of the factual history. In this case the father took legal steps BEFORE the birth of the child. But in addition, one of the two adoption agencies involved had actually flown the mother to Colorado to have the child there so the father couldn't interfere with the adoption. The second adoption agency filed to terminate the parental rights of the father in a different county in Florida TWO DAYS AFTER they had received copies from the mother of the father's suit to seek his rights to his child. In their pleadings EVEN THOUGH that HAD in their possession copies of the suit, the lawyers for the adoption agency told the Judge in the other county That they had made a "diligent search for the father and he was unknown." Of course they knew they were lying to the judge. But with a $35,000 plus expenses fee riding on it, they didn't seem to care much.

The adoption industry is one that generates tens of BILLIONS of dollars a year! And it has forged an interesting political force between themselves, some social workers, extremist feminists, and organizations comprised of people desperate to adopt a child. These combined forces are pushing to have new adoption laws put into place, including the "Uniform Adoption Act" which among other things removes the "waiting period" in adoptions to provide for protections for young parents pressured to surrender their parental rights. And among other proposals by a strident feminist lawyer from the University of Chicago is the requirement that "men" register with the police after having sex with a woman agreeing to accept "ALL" legal responsibilities (civil as well as criminal) for the sex act. The proposed act ELIMINATES notice requirements to putative fathers! The proposed act can be read to re-instate the Illinois law prior to "Stanley vs. Illinois" what PRESUMED ALL un-wed fathers as "UNFIT" and barred any action for parental rights.

One major television network is finishing a documentary on the abuses and greedy agenda of the adoption industry that may air sometime before the end of 1998. The piece fairly well documents why private adoptions in America should be outlawed.

In the Florida/Alabama case currently being litigated, the legal team for the prospective adoptive parents have made public statements of their intent to use this case (and child) to create new law in the mold they wish to. That being denying unwed dads any legal rights. Among other things they say that the dad should only have rights if he is living with the mother at the time of the child's birth. That if he is not, it is "DISPOSITIVE PROOF" that he "abandoned" the mother and baby. Or about any "allegations" of abuse by the mother would also trigger a termination of his rights. They have announced that even if they lose the case in Alabama they will appeal this through the Federal court system insuring that the issue be kept in litigation for years. The probability of them prevailing once in the Federal Court system is negligible. However the press agent for that side has been making the argument for the past two years that the child will be too harmed by removal "from the only parents the child has ever known." This is a coldly calculated and callous attitude. Just as the Nation was subjected to the carefully stages SCENE in the Baby Jessica, case, so here in this and several other similar cases across America is the press and the people being slickly manipulated with untruths and propaganda techniques to further a cynical agenda.

Because of the actions in the Baby Sam/Mathew case there is a bill before the Florida legislature that would ban private adoptions.

If you are a father in such a situation, we can refer you to people leading the fight against this tyranny. If you are a mom being pressured to give up your baby against your will, we can find help for you. There are specialists available to help. But understand, the strategy of these people is to protract litigation and to go "forum shopping" to keep the child for a long period of time so they can allege "harm" if the child were to be removed from them and to USE the media to facilitate this. We see this as a rather despicable strategy. But understand how a young couple DESPERATE for a baby could ignore their conscience.

Here is what the "Hear My Voice" group puts out as its version of the Baby Sam/Baby Matthew Case. Note that they fail to mention the efforts to have the mother deliver the baby in Colorado, or the failed attempt at legal slight of hand by taking the case for termination of the father's rights to another county and not giving him notice even though the adoption agency lawyers had a COPY of his petition from the first county with them in court as they "SWORE" under oath that they had made a "diligent search" for the birth father and that he was unknown. In other words, when they tried to terminate the father's rights, they lied to try to do so.

As was fully expected, the Alabama court, in the best fashion of "home cooking" terminated the father's rights in the Baby Sam case and approved the adoption by the Alabama couple, despite this being prohibited by Alabama law. The judge merely adopted the new law proposed by the Alabama couple's lawyers. We can forget that this was completely contrary to Alabama written law and case law. The judge just hammered the father, finding him guilty of all sorts of things and ordering him to pay for everything. The judge in essence overruled the Florida trial court, the Florida Court of Appeals and the Florida Supreme Court setting himself up as an appellate review court for Florida's actions.

To say the least Judge Lisenby was arrogant in his tone and demeanor. The process in this case is commonly what is know in law as "home cooking!" Needless to say, the father, Christopher Vietri is penniless. But an appeal has been filed. We anticipate a reversal eventually. But to the forces behind this case that are represented by groups like Hear My Voice, the delays and protraction IS the object. Their objective is to make ALL such cases a living hell on children. To litigate and litigate and litigate and refuse to return the children. In this they have the financial support of a multi-billion dollar adoption racket in America. And when speaking of fitness to adopt, we can't help but wonder, when these prospective adoptive parents KNOW that they WILL lose eventually, and this will make the child's life a ruin, how they can claim to have a greater love for the child. In this case this child was stolen from his father.

More voices need to be raised opposing this whole political deal. Which has at its core hatred of fathers and a cynical attitude toward children as commodities to be BOUGHT AND SOLD! A VERY profitable business.

Here are some other links on the changing sand of adoption law in America, including the proposed Uniform Adoption Act and some of the opposition to it.