#BABYVERONICA headlines

Custody Fight Over Baby Veronica Enters New Courtroom news9.com KWTV Dusten Brown of Oklahoma has been fighting a South Carolina couple, Matt and Melanie Capobianco, for custody of Veronica. TULSA, Oklahoma -. An ongoing ... See all stories on this topic »
Adoptive parents, birth father in Veronica case again appear in ... Charleston Post Courier The adoptive parents and the birth father of 4-year-old Veronica met again today ... Matt and Melanie Capobianco of James Island and Dusten Brown of Nowata, Okla., ... The measure allowed Brown to keep Veronica as his appeal is heard in ... See all stories on this topic »

Nightlight Adoption Agency: Power Money and Corruption #BABY VERONICA

Visit Cassi’s Adoption Truth! She has taken the court transcripts from Adoptive Couple vs Baby Girl and put the facts and half truths in a timeline that really does tell the story.

Click: Veronica Rose Brown – A Father’s Fight

 

From Claudia's blog Musings of the Lame:

Unethical is LEGAL and Acceptable in AdoptionLand

First off, I NEED you to keep in mind that while we are horrified that this could happen to a father and he has to fight for the right to parent his own daughter, remember that THIS HAPPENS EVERYDAY in ADOPTIONLAND.  Everyday, an adoption agency and adoption attorneys play this game to keep biological fathers in the dark because it makes the ADOPTIONS EASIER!  And, yes, it is wrong, it is unethical but it is LEGAL because as a society we have turned away from caring about the rights of the natural families, and care only about whether or not people get the children that they so desire. It is legal because the adoption laws in this country have been influenced by the powerful adoption attorneys and agencies who make a profit from the separation of families and therefore, want to break up even more. It is legal because those who are hurt by these laws do not have the power, the money or the influence to fight these laws and when we do, people dismiss it by saying “that’s an exception, many adoptions are beautiful.”

Ethics? Not with Power, Money, and Influence in Adoption

The other thing I want you to please look at is this excellent diagram that was making it’s way around Facebook and is credited to my knowledge to Heidi Mowry. Can we think about the power, the money or the influence connected to Matt and Melanie Capobianco?

Now go right now and read Cassi’s post!!  http://www.adoption-truth.com/2013/09/veronica-rose-brown-fathers-fight_11.html

What can a tiny baby know? The Hidden Life of an Adopted Child: Understanding the Impact of Adoption

"...Adoption is a trauma that happens to a child. The child is torn away from her biological mother, placed in the arms of strangers and is left with questions, doubts, fears and anxiety with no way to verbalize, express, mourn or contextualize those feelings. ... children remember their birth and the following events, including relinquishment and adoption up to the age of three...."

Read the article here: http://adoptionvoicesmagazine.com/adoptee-view/adoptee-view-what-can-a-tiny-baby-know/#.UbyXLlHn-Ka.facebook

About the Author

Karl Stenske

Karl Stenske shares a rich and compelling story as an adoptee. Being one of the many who had a great adopted family, he never thought being adopted had a big effect on his life. But at 37, Karl began to unravel the true impact adoption did have on his life and the lives of those who loved, and tried to love him. A sought after speaker and educator, Karl offers insights into the wounds created when any child is separated from his birth mother. In The Hidden Life of an Adopted Child: Understanding the Impact of Adoption, Karl explores the traumatic experience suffered by that separation and its influence on self-esteem, value, worth, and identity.


This comment was made on another post "Adoption Depression" but it is relevant to this:

RLDavies said: September 10, 2013

This is a subject that needs to be discussed, especially in light of Margaret A. Keyes’, PhD new study conducted at the University of Minnesota, just published yesterday (9-9-2013) in Pediatrics Magazine.
The study shows that:
1) Teens who were adopted in early childhood had approximately four times the risk for attempted suicide in late adolescence compared with offspring living with their biological parents.
2) Adoptees had higher rates of externalizing behaviors, childhood disruptive disorders, negative mood, and lack of interest in school, but even after adjustment for these, the adopted teens still had an increase in risk of attempted suicide.

Many other studies have shown similar results, but for some reason, no one seems to want to talk about this issue. Even though lives are at risk.
It’s important that we shine the light on this.
For the record, I’m uncomfortable with the label, “adoption depression.” I think that’s misleading–and dangerous. I think we suffer from trauma and unrecognized grief and should be treated appropriately.

#Baby Desaray update #Nightlight

Shawnee awarded custody of infant

OKLAHOMA CITY— An Oklahoma judge has awarded custody of Desaray, a four-month old Native American girl to the Absentee Shawnee Tribe following a South Carolina couple's attempt to adopt the infant. Baby Desaray was born in May in Oklahoma. A couple in South Carolina who sought to adopt her returned with her to their home. But the infant's biological father sought custody. Because Desaray's biological mother is a tribal member, the Absentee Shawnee Tribe stepped in and the tribe was awarded custody last week. The Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 has federally mandated that Native children should be placed with other tribal members if the parent is unable. Raymond W. Godwin and Nightlight Christian Adoption Agency is also responsible for this case.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Nightlight is a corporation with Laura Godwin, its CEO/director, and Ronald Stoddart as Principal Officer for tax purposes. In 2011 alone, they grossed $2,747,914. Nightlight is licensed in Colorado, California, South Carolina and in Kentucky so far. 

Now in two lawsuits over Native American babies they attempted to place for adoption...

Raymond W. Godwin, called an unethical adoption attorney, was the original adoption attorney for Matt and Melanie Capobianco and is also involved in this dispute called #BABY DESARAY.   His wife Laura is the director of the Nightlight adoption agency that handled the Baby Veronica placement/adoption.

- http://www.adoptionbirthmothers.com/the-unethical-adoption-seizure-of-veronica-brown/

SOVEREIGNTY: #BABYVERONICA doesn't need to be adopted

Go to Amazon.com: SOMEBODY'S CHILDREN.

Veronica Update from Washington Post 

Posted on September 16, 2013 by Matthew L.M. Fletcher, Turtle Talk

 

Here (h/t How Appealing).

An excerpt:

The late justice Robert H. Jackson famously wrote of his colleagues on the high court: “We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final.”
But sometimes the court is final only in the narrow question of law before it. That question decided, it sends the case back to lower courts, where sometimes the whole process starts anew.
Such is the fate of Veronica’s case. If anything, the Supreme Court’s decision has only heightened the stakes surrounding the rights of birth parents, the legal standing of adoptive parents and the sovereignty of Native American tribes.

Latest from Tulsa World on Baby Girl Case

Posted on September 16, 2013 by Kate Fort

Here.

The [appeals court] hearing is apparently related to an order Friday from the Oklahoma Supreme Court, agreeing to let the appeals move forward while 4-year-old Veronica remains with her biological family for the time being.

OK Supreme Court docket (revealing very little) is here.

******************************

FROM TRACE

Yesterday Veronica "Ronnie" Brown turned 4.  Every day I think about this case and I realize this child doesn't need to be adopted and yet the adopters won't quit. Why won't they quit? The Capobiancos feel entitled to the baby they purchased for cold hard cash. The adoption agency NIGHTLIGHT needs to be criminally prosecuted for what they did. This case was so dangerous a public relations campaign was necessary to keep the future "adoptive parents" in focus - not Ronnie or her dad. The adopters going on TV - all public relations. Talking to Dr. Phil last fall - all propaganda. The adopters plead to get her back on CNN and NBC - all trash talk and public relations. We were being manipulated by a billion dollar adoption industry. THIS ENTIRE CASE PROVES IT!

The Bottom Line: no child needs to be adopted if their biological natural parent wants to raise them. In this case, Ronnie has a dad who fought from the moment he heard what was happening. The Supreme Court and Nightlight did not abide by a federal law written to protect Native Children. Ronnie has rights to be with her tribe and family. It's called sovereignty!

Do you know the history of the Indian Child Welfare Act? I am learning even more from this fantastic book: SOMEBODY'S CHILDREN: The Politics of Transracial and Transnational Adoption by Laura Briggs, published in 2012. I wish I'd had this book when I started my research on the Indian Adoption Projects, before I wrote my memoir. Laura and I will be on a panel discussing this Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl case on Sept. 30 at the Western New England University School of Law in Springfield, MA.

If you are interested, please email me: tracedemeyer@yahoo.com. I can send you the brochure.


We must WAKE UP and not let this adoption happen to Ronnie Brown.

Adoption Truth: Veronica Rose Brown - A Father's Fight

Adoption Truth: Veronica Rose Brown - A Father's Fight: Because yes, Matt and Melanie Capobianco and all their money, the well-paid attorneys, the adoption agency, and even Christy, herself, worked hard, did all they could to make sure Dusten had no rights to his own child. They took every advantage of the fact that he was training and preparing to fight for their rights. Used his service to our country against him to benefit their own selfish desires and used his disadvantage – the orders and regulations that kept him unable to leave base, focused on the deployment coming up – to take his child away from him, without his knowledge, while he prepared to fight for our country.

This post is fantastic - thanks Cassi!!!!

Adoption law in the U.S.: The True Villain in the Baby Veronica case

No Apologies for Being Me: Adoption law in the U.S.: The True Villain in the Baby Veronica case

Dumping adoptees? It's called The Child Exchange

Americans use the Internet to abandon children adopted from overseas

• By Megan Twohey

MOTIVATED MOM: In her time seeking children on the Internet, Nicole Eason has referred to herself as Big Momma and Momma Bear. Her term for informal custody transfers is "non-legalized adoption," and she defines the phrase to mean: "Hey, can I have your baby?" REUTERS/Samantha Sais

Part 1: When a Liberian girl proves too much for her parents, they advertise her online and give her to a couple they’ve never met. Days later, she goes missing.

KIEL, Wisconsin – Todd and Melissa Puchalla struggled for more than two years to raise Quita, the troubled teenager they'd adopted from Liberia. When they decided to give her up, they found new parents to take her in less than two days – by posting an ad on the Internet.

Nicole and Calvin Eason, an Illinois couple in their 30s, saw the ad and a picture of the smiling 16-year-old. They were eager to take Quita, even though the ad warned that she had been diagnosed with severe health and behavioral problems. In emails, Nicole Eason assured Melissa Puchalla that she could handle the girl.

"People that are around me think I am awesome with kids," Eason wrote.

A few weeks later, on Oct. 4, 2008, the Puchallas drove six hours from their Wisconsin home to Westville, Illinois. The handoff took place at the Country Aire Mobile Home Park, where the Easons lived in a trailer.

No attorneys or child welfare officials came with them. The Puchallas simply signed a notarized statement declaring these virtual strangers to be Quita's guardians. The visit lasted just a few hours. It was the first and the last time the couples would meet.

To Melissa Puchalla, the Easons "seemed wonderful." Had she vetted them more closely, she might have discovered what Reuters would learn:

• Child welfare authorities had taken away both of Nicole Eason's biological children years earlier. After a sheriff's deputy helped remove the Easons' second child, a newborn baby boy, the deputy wrote in his report that the "parents have severe psychiatric problems as well with violent tendencies."

• The Easons each had been accused by children they were babysitting of sexual abuse, police reports show. They say they did nothing wrong, and neither was charged.

• The only official document attesting to their parenting skills – one purportedly drafted by a social worker who had inspected the Easons' home – was fake, created by the Easons themselves.

On Quita's first night with the Easons, her new guardians told her to join them in their bed, Quita says today. Nicole slept naked, she says.

Within a few days, the Easons stopped responding to Melissa Puchalla's attempts to check on Quita, Puchalla says. When she called the school that Quita was supposed to attend, an administrator told Puchalla that the teenager had never shown up.

GIRL AVAILABLE: Quita Puchalla's adoptive parents used this photo to advertise her online. REUTERS/Handout

Quita wasn't at the trailer park, either. The Easons had packed up their purple Chevy truck and driven off with her, leaving behind a pile of trash, a pair of blue mattresses and two puppies chained in their yard, authorities later found.

The Puchallas had rescued Quita from an orphanage in Liberia, brought her to America and then signed her over to a couple they barely knew. Days later, they had no idea what had become of her.

When she arrived in the United States, Quita says, she "was happy … coming to a nicer place, a safer place. It didn't turn out that way," she says today. "It turned into a nightmare."

The teenager had been tossed into America's underground market for adopted children, a loose Internet network where desperate parents seek new homes for kids they regret adopting. Like Quita, now 21, these children are often the casualties of international adoptions gone sour.

READ MORE (in the series): HERE

So adopters, if we don't meet your expectations, you create a network to dump us?  No wonder so many adoptees commit suicide... Trace

UN expert urges respect for the rights of Cherokee child in custody dispute #Baby Veronica

Posted on September 10, 2013 by Matthew L.M. Fletcher TURTLETALK

Here.

GENEVA (10 September 2013) – The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, James Anaya, today called on the relevant state, federal and tribal authorities in the United States of America to take all necessary measures to ensure the wellbeing and human rights of ‘Veronica,’ an almost four year old Cherokee child at the center of a highly contentious custody dispute.
“Veronica’s human rights as a child and as member of the Cherokee Nation, an indigenous people, should be fully and adequately considered in the ongoing judicial and administrative proceedings that will determine her future upbringing,” Mr. Anaya stressed. “The individual and collective rights of all indigenous children, their families and indigenous peoples must be protected throughout the United States.”
Veronica is currently facing judicially ordered removal from her Cherokee family and community. In June of this year the US Supreme Court ruled that certain protections of the Indian Child Welfare Act did not apply to proceedings in which a non-Cherokee couple sought to adopt Veronica, given the particular circumstances of the case. The high court, however, it did not make an ultimate determination of the disposition of the adoption proceedings.
Following the Supreme Court decision, a South Carolina state court awarded custody of Veronica to the non-Cherokee couple, but it did so without a determination of whether her transfer away from her Cherokee family would be in her best interests in light of her current situation and Cherokee heritage. Although Veronica lived with the non-Cherokee couple in South Carolina for the first two years of her life, she has now resided with her father and extended indigenous family in Cherokee territory in the state of Oklahoma for nearly two years.
South Carolina authorities have attempted to force Veronica’s father to release custody of her, charging him with custodial interference for his refusal to do so. On 3 September 2013 the Oklahoma Supreme Court took up the case, granting a temporary stay of an enforcement order and allowing the father to keep Veronica pending further proceedings.
“I urge the relevant authorities, as well as all parties involved in the custody dispute, to ensure the best interests of Veronica, fully taking into account her rights to maintain her cultural identity and to maintain relations with her indigenous family and people,” said the UN Special Rapporteur.
The independent expert pointed out that these rights are guaranteed by various international instruments subscribed to or endorsed by the US, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
In his 2012 report* on the situation of indigenous peoples in the US, the Special Rapporteur noted that the removal and separation of Indian children from indigenous environments is an issue of longstanding and ongoing concern. “While past practices of removal of Indian children from their families and communities have been partially blunted by passage of the Indian Child Welfare Act in 1978, this law continues to face barriers to its implementation,” Mr. Anaya stated.
“I encourage the United States to work with indigenous peoples, state authorities and other interested parties to investigate the current state of affairs relating to the practices of foster care and adoption of indigenous children, and to develop procedures for ensuring that the rights of these children are adequately protected,” the UN Special Rapporteur said.

The UN Human Rights Council appointed S. James Anaya as Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples in March 2008. Mr. Anaya is a Regents Professor and the James J. Lenoir Professor of Human Rights Law and Policy at the University of Arizona (United States). As Special Rapporteur, he is independent from any government or organization and serves in his individual capacity. Learn more, log on to: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/IPeoples/SRIndigenousPeoples/Pages/SRIPeoplesIndex.aspx

(*) Check the Special Rapporteur’s 2012 report on the USA: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/RegularSessions/Session21/Pages/ListReports.aspx

See the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=A/RES/61/295&Lang=E

UN Human Rights Country Page – United States of America: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/ENACARegion/Pages/USIndex.aspx

For more information and media inquiries, please contact Maia Campbell (+ 41 22 917 9314 / mcampbell@ohchr.org) or write to indigenous@ohchr.org.

For media inquiries related to other UN independent experts:
Xabier Celaya, OHCHR Media Unit (+ 41 22 917 9383 / xcelaya@ohchr.org)

Baby Veronica: How Dusten Brown could prevail in battle over his daughter

[Birth Mother] First Mother Forum: Baby Veronica: How Dusten Brown could prevail in battle over his daughter

I am so grateful One Small Sacrifice and Two Worlds are mentioned in her post. Our history as American Indian Adoptees matters a great deal in the big picture of ICWA... Trace

The Daily Bastardette: Demons of Adoption 2013: nominations now open!

The Daily Bastardette: Demons of Adoption 2013: nominations now open!

Cherokee say LETS KEEP VERONICA HOME

Blow to sovereignty #BABYVERONICA

Dreveskracht Commentary on Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl

Posted on September 5, 2013 by Matthew L.M. Fletcher Turtle Talk

Here. An excerpt:

The Supreme Court’s decision in Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl is most certainly a blow to Indian sovereignty by way of an assault on core notions of Indian family and tribal identity.  Yet what is even more disturbing is how the “Baby Veronica” ruling so vividly highlights the Roberts Court’s deep investment in white supremacy, capitalism, patriarchy, heterosexism, and a coercive binary gender system.  Adoptive Couple is about far more than the rights of adoptive parents.  The decision should serve as a warning to all marginalized groups such as Indians, ethnic minorities, the lower class, or the LGBT community: If given the opportunity the High Court will construe legislation to serve its own institutionalized interests, in spite of the law’s intent.

NEWS: http://www.tulsaworld.com/article.aspx/Fallin_Brown_must_return_to_SC/20130905_11_A1_CUTLIN51761?subj=1

Kudos to Indian Country Today for the continuing coverage: this comment was superb:

John Brown wrote:

The staff at Indian Country and Suzette Brewer really deserve to be commended for their coverage of these cases. They are currently the only news source in the United States that consistently reports correct facts in these stories tells them honestly in a way that doesn't cover up the crimes that have been commited against these parents and children and how much damage it has done, not only to them but to our society. Thank you Indian Country for your commitment to journalism, which unfortunately is apparently rare these days. You deserve the Pulitzer for you coverage of these cases.

Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/09/05/okla-governor-signs-extradition-order-dusten-brown-turn-himself-151164

 

Another great op-ed: http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/HaireoftheDog/archives/2013/09/05/the-capobiancos-should-stop-fighting-for-custody-of-baby-veronica

Sadly, to see this happening (with a new arrest warrant) makes many of us sick to our stomach...Adoption has been polluted with greed and human trafficking. It is corrupt in ways we never imagined, including the current justice system...Dusten and Robin, hang in there - we are praying for you and Ronnie.... Trace

Does adopting make people high?

By Trace A. DeMeyer

I’ve been reading blogs by Christian folks who saved an orphan and plan to do it again.  Apparently using the words “Christian” and “Orphan” somehow makes this adoption business holy. “Doing God’s work,” some potential adoptive parents (PAPS) are blogging how they are so compassionate and defend it’s the Christian thing that they adopted babies - because these babies were orphans and in need and “born in another womb” decreed by God to be adopted by them.  Really.

A few PAPS were upset that no one understands how difficult it is for them as married couples to cope with infertility and no one feels sorry for them. So that makes it perfectly alright for them to go out and buy adopt that baby.  (Yup, it’s always a baby they want. They get angry if you argue with them.)  

So adopting makes them feel good. It doesn’t really matter a woman will have to sacrifice her baby for them. (Some birthmothers may also feel euphoric they gave a couple a precious baby. Maybe a few did it for cash.)  It’s a mind bender that it doesn’t enter their minds that the baby hurts and is devastated losing their mother (or father) and this wound lasts a lifetime…

There are thousands upon thousands of PAPS who want only a baby and defend their reasons why. Adoption agencies are more than happy to make their dreams come true.

I have a new theory. It’s a crazy world out there. People want to feel better so they’ll rescue someone, in this case a baby, and this “giving” back will create euphoria in their brain chemistry. I think the adoption industry has manipulated and used “adopting babies” as the wonder drug that clouds the mind from adoption reality. (They also steer clear of the adoptee perspective or Nancy Verrier’s Primal Wound in their adoption propaganda.)

So these righteous saviors of babies are on a mission to feel better about themselves. Adopting makes them high.

Read this:

Giving and Brain Chemistry

Norm at normblog quotes a piece in the New York Sun about giving:

…the surprising conclusion is that giving affects our brain chemistry. For example, people who give often report feelings of euphoria, which psychologists have referred to as the "Helper's High." They believe that charitable activity induces endorphins that produce a very mild version of the sensations people get from drugs like morphine and heroin.

Norm offers a thought experiment: if a pill reproduced exactly the same brain effects, wouldn't people still give? I agree this suggests there's more to it.

Adding to that, and reflecting on my own thought processes related to giving, I think this is a good case illustrating the interactions between levels of causes in human behavior. Proximately, I often go through with a charitable act despite fretting that it will be boring, too much trouble, too costly, or otherwise unpleasant. But upon doing it, or soon afterwards, I feel a sort of euphoria I would associate with the endorphin effect described in the NY Sun article.

I will suppose that the euphoria and the associated brain chemistry register somehow in my mind -- in behaviorist terms, an association is reinforced between the feeling and the act of giving -- and this association comes into play the next time a choice for giving arises.  But even if so, the association is barely liminal, and I don't reflect along the lines of 'I'll get a nice endorphin rush if I go through with this.' Rather, I think along the lines of 'good people do things like this, and I want to be a good person despite the short-term fuss I will have to endure' -- and I think the euphoric brain chemistry is a bonus (and should be seen as a second-order cause) that keeps acts of giving on the list of thinkable, possible alternatives. The next time I am faced with a choice to give or not to, I will have inarticulate impulses pushing for it, and these impulses will be rooted in brain chemistry.

Source: http://danceswithanxiety.blogspot.com/2007/12/giving-and-brain-chemistry.html 



I do expect some people will disagree so please leave a comment... Trace

#BabyVeronica case back in court

Baby Girl Update from Oklahoma Supreme Court

by Kate Fort, Turtle Talk
 

The Oklahoma Supreme Court granted a stay in the order to remove Baby Girl from her father and appears to have scheduled oral arguments for today at 2pm.

Link to docket here.

CBS coverage here.

Prayers are said for Veronica who turns 4 this month...Keep her safe and with Dusten... Trace

Selling Babies MUST Stop #BABYVERONICA #ADOPTION

By Trace A. DeMeyer

No matter what I read, no matter how much is discussed, in my head and heart, I believe any child who has a natural parent (in this case a father like Dusten Brown) who wants his daughter Veronica - who fights in court to raise her - then he should be her parent. He is her parent!  That should not require any court to decide - that is common sense, a no-brainer. 

A child who is raised by her natural parent will not suffer as I did as an adoptee. That is reality.

Today I can tell my story, talk about meeting my birth-dad and not cry but it took nearly 40 years to find him and as many years to heal. Being adopted is so painful. I do not want that for Veronica.

In order to change the propaganda out there, we truly need to look at adoption and its history. As it was invented many years ago, adoption was for orphans - children without parents or other relatives. Poverty and war created orphan populations.  Yet Veronica is not an orphan and I wasn't an orphan (our mothers were alive) yet our mothers sold us and placed us for adoption. 

Over the years adoption definitely changed; now it's providing babies to infertile couples and has obviously perverted the entire process: like sealing and closing adoptions to ease the adopter's minds and permanently erase the adopted child's identity and ancestry on their birth documents. 

Those changes built the international adoption industry into a billion dollar booming business it is today, corrupt with specialized lawyers and adoption agencies who legitimatize taking babies and making money. 

Billions could and should be spent on family preservation, helping mothers and fathers to keep their children, even solving infertility that only seems to be getting worse - but the adoption industry keeps people focused on saving orphans.

There are children in need. Many of them. I recall the foster care training I had in Oregon and there were thick binders full of children-in-need, ready for new homes in the USA. The prevailing attitude about the children was/is they are damaged in some way and have memories of their natural parents - some kids were affected by neglect and abuse. Those faces I cannot forget - those children who need a new family. People are not lining up to adopt those children? WHY?

Giving children a family isn't what adoption is about anymore - it's about babies - and anxious couples who demand its a baby and will pay thousands for one. They'll travel overseas for one. They'll pay anything. They'll equate a baby as safe, and they'll make the baby into their family member as if a baby doesn't grow up and ask questions: Who am I? What happened? Why was I given up? Where is my mother?

The miseducation of couples who wish to adopt a baby has permeated America thanks to adoption propaganda. Read my post THE END RESULT:  http://www.thelostdaughters.com/2013/06/the-end-result.html

Willful ignorance, bad information or insufficient education, to me none are acceptable or an excuse anymore. With the internet, there is plenty for potential adoptive parents to read, if they open their mind and take their time. Take a look at this website that offers many links and perspectives on Veronica Brown:
http://www.adoptionbirthmothers.com/the-unethical-adoption-seizure-of-veronica-brown/

There are many blogs about adoption from many different perspectives: From an adult adoptee. From a birthmother. From an adoptive parent who wanted the adoption open.  From a Texas woman who adopted from Russia and gave back the child and cautions others not to adopt overseas. From transracial adoptees like me.

I have blogged about the Indian Adoption projects and programs and this dark chapter of history for four years. I have explained how the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 was necessary to stop the wholesale removal of Indian children from their families and tribes. I found survivors of these projects. Some have shared how they found their way back to their reservations and united with their families, right here on this blog and in the anthology Two Worlds. 

Writing my memoir and this blog changed my beliefs about adoption. My priorities: we repatriate Native adoptees back to their families. We can give children-in-need new parents under new laws called legal guardianship.  We abolish adoption entirely, open all the sealed adoption files. We give birthfathers the legal rights to raise their own children.  Most of all, we MUST stop selling babies. We close adoption agencies and prosecute the traffickers.

Deal reached, details unknown about #BABYVERONICA

Mediation deal reached during unexpected hearings in Veronica dispute, but details a mystery

Comment by Renae Arbuckle on The Post and Courier news article

08/16/13 at 09:48 PM

So sad. Sad that an engaged couple's relationship ended so poorly that the woman would give away her child to total strangers rather than let the father have a chance. Sad that she, the adoption agency and the Capobianco's knew of the father's heritage as stated on the adoption papers and used deceit to illegally transfer a child from one state to another to quickly begin the adoption process in a state with a reputation of taking American Indian children.

Cherokee membership has nothing to do with blood quantum and they do not receive money for being native. The Capobianco's gambled on the father's never knowing the outcome. During the pregnancy, he and his family made several attempts to reach the birth mother with no success. She instructed the hospital to place her on a list where her or the baby's presence were unreachable - like no newspaper announcement of the birth. However, she invited total strangers to leave the state with her newborn child. Four months later, as the birth father prepared to leave the country on military duty, he is approached to sign acceptance of service papers. Our single service men and women sign many required documents including assigning custody to the other parent before leaving is standard practice. My own son had to sign similar documents along with having child support automatically sent each month electronically. This young birth father signed a similar document - he thought. When the process server tells him what he really signed, he began legal proceedings then to gain custody of his daughter.

Even the Capobianco's signed a court document a few months later acknowledging his Cherokee heritage. Even Brown's former wife is speaking favorably that he is a good father and financially supports their daughter. Not sure where you got your info, but check again.

Moving forward, the Capobianco's arrival in Tulsa this week was a big media joke. They setup a press conference the next morning in an expensive hotel with a new crew and many cameras following them all day.  Anyone can see they're trying to sway public opinion t their side, but it doing the opposite. To top things off, the "mediator" they bring is not qualified to use the title! This article doesn't mention that when he approached the Brown's living quarters, he had a camera crew with him ready to go. He is creating a documentary on the whole Baby Veronica ordeal. Although he said he had no intentions of filming the interview, why did he take a camera crew. Our Cherokee Nation Martials delivered his note to Mr Brown then escorted him off the school property.

During the same afternoon, Mr Brown offered them to visit Veronica, but they refused. Instead they filed yet one more lawsuit. Oh, and lets not forget their "friend" as announced at the press conference who is conveniently the president of her own marketing, PR, and social media firm. Now, is it Ms Munday or the Capobianco's that have created the media frenzy? None of the news is told from Mr Brown's side, only the Capobianco's. Who is trying to make Veronica the media's new toy?

I was glad to see the Brown's not bring the child to either courthouse today. They are protecting her in her own best interests. Look at the photo for this article if you don't believe me. They cannot stay in their own home because of the Capabianco's love affair with the media. Thank God for a smart Oklahoma judge who put a gag order on this case today.

Oh, according to Mr Brewster, the trumped up charge by the SC law enforcement has nothing to do with this situation. Have you read the law? How can someone steal their own child when they already have custody? It's all they can come up with.

Lastly, while the father may not fall under ICWA, the child does. The Cherokee Nation will always take care of its own and Veronica is a Cherokee Citizen. I am hopeful that the Capobianco's will realize their gamble did not pay off.  When the SC court sent the child home with her father, jurisdiction transferred to OK. What right does the SC court to finalized the adoption of a child that is not nor has been in the adoptive physical custody for half it's life?

Mr Brown has financially supported both his children, they formed a relationship, and Veronica is and has been a very happy child in OK. Leave her be. Someone should begin investigating the (Nightlight) adoption attorney and soon. He's already started an illegal adoption of another Oklahoma American Indian child from Shawnee. This time the birth grandmother and the birth father are on the same side.

http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20130816/PC16/130819561

#BabyVeronica a Victim of Colonial Domination

Baby Veronica: U.S. Doesn't Respect or Understand Native Culture

A note from Ray Cook, ICTMN Opinions Editor: The political and legal ramifications of the Baby Veronica case have, in broad strokes, done two things....

Read more

Baby Veronica Is a Victim of Colonial Domination

Click here to read part 1 by Dina Gilio-Whitaker....

Read more

For Indigenous people around the globe, far too many moms and dads had no choice, truly no choice, when their children were taken. Even uneducated Indian people are not stupid. Giving Indian babies to white families was part of a larger plan: colonization. It worked. It ultimately did change our future.

            This was quite a revelation for me, being one of the colonized....Trace

Please READ: Observations of Adopted Children: http://larahentz.wordpress.com/2013/08/17/observations-of-adopted-children/