Holy crap, folks...this one's a doozy...

[Dastardly]

We are given the information that she left the country in late 2008, so what do you mean by 'even if we assume'? I quoted it directly.

And it can't be dismissed? Well it makes more sense to dismiss it than to claim she knows no Spanish. Your bias here is obvious.

As is yours. That's actually how there's any discussion at all. Let's not pretend everyone here is entirely dispassionate, otherwise they wouldn't be weighing in on the matter at all. However, you have a serious misconceptions about my "bias."

I'm not 100% willing to trust documentation about her whereabouts during the period of her kidnapping. Because, you know, kidnappers. But my point is that it's immaterial. She wasn't in a healthy home environment, so we can't just assume she was undergoing shining verbal development. Between the ages of 3 and 4 somewhere, she headed of to the US. Since then, she's been in a presumably English-speaking home. Her "native language," as far as her brain is concerned, is clearly English.

 

[Maze1125]

it's the biological parent, there is no arguing for the adoptive family, that women was her biological parent who had here torn away from her, it would hurt the adoptive family a hell of a lot less than it would hurt the real mother

That's just crap.
Adoptive parents are just as attached to their children as biological parents. Statistically more-so in fact, as every single adoptive parent wanted a child, but no where near every biological parent does.

ok let's put it this way, your child was kidnapped and you are devestated, then a few years later it turns about she has been adopted and you are not allowed to have custody and that the adoptive parents get to keep her, that would destroy you

Okay let's put it this way, you adopt a child and raise them as your own for years, then it turns out they were a kidnap victim and they get taken away and given back to the biological parents who don't even know the child any more, and you have no idea if your child is going to be raised properly or not, that would destroy you.

besides surely the biological parent has more right, i mean legally speaking, i don't know much about these laws, but it isn't like she put her up for adoption then changed her mind, wouldn't the law be on her side anyway?

Quite possibly, but that doesn't make it right.

 

[Eamar]

That's just crap.
Adoptive parents are just as attached to their children as biological parents. Statistically more-so in fact, as every single adoptive parent wanted a child, but no where near every biological parent does.

This biological parent patently does want her child. She hasn't stopped looking for her kid for five years. You talk about inflicting the pain of kidnap on a family for a second time- don't you think that's exactly what's going to happen to the biological family if she's not returned?

ok let's put it this way, your child was kidnapped and you are devestated, then a few years later it turns about she has been adopted and you are not allowed to have custody and that the adoptive parents get to keep her, that would destroy you
besides surely the biological parent has more right, i mean legally speaking, i don't know much about these laws, but it isn't like she put her up for adoption then changed her mind, wouldn't the law be on her side anyway?

Add in to the equation the fact that the adoption was fraudulent, all of the kid's documents are false and yet the authorities are STILL saying you can't have your child back.

 

[lacktheknack]

Fuck...

I don't know the answer to that one, but it definitely involves several tons of bricks coming down on various people and organisations involved.

Correct. I'll get stacking bricks.

 

[Dastardly]

In 2003, but it wasn't put into effect until April 1st, 2008.

So, which is it? Do we go by the letter of the law, or can we play around in the grey area? If it "went into effect in 2008," there's your date. If I sign a lease on an apartment, effective on the first of next month, I can't start cramming my stuff in there today and demanding things like I'm a tenant.

However, here is the kicker, the US government put out a warning to stay far away from any and all guatemalan adoptions. Any prospective adoptive family would know this, more so an actual reputable organization. The fact the family didn't know is a shocker. It goes to show they rushed into an adoption without researching it and blindly threw away their money. The adoptive parents are looking incredibly shady right now, especially since they hired a PR firm.

But here's where you lose me. You want too badly for this to be "hero vs. villain." All of a sudden the family is "shady?" Wishful thinking. There are tons of families that go for foreign adoptions because of the red tape and expense involved in US adoptions, and the likelihood of American parents being able to find people and complicate things later on. These people missed a warning label, and you want to crucify them.

And hiring a PR firm isn't some sign of guilt. It's a sign that these people are unfamiliar with the spotlight, and don't want to screw this up. So, likely under a lawyer's advice, they hired someone who specializes in that. But it's like you're saying anyone who hires a lawyer is guilty...

 

[Nuke_em_05]

How about... they just work it out for themselves?

If it came down to it "legally", the child's citizenship and adoption are illegitimate, so her biological mother would "win", but I would hope she's not short-sighted enough to ignore how just up and ripping the child from her current life and family could damage her.

If she decides to do that, it's her "right", but hopefully they can come up with something that works best for everyone.

That's the problem with these types of situations, there is no single "victim". They all are victims of this. The mother who lost her child, the parents who might lose their adoptive child, and the child who is stuck between them. Yes, it is unfair that the biological mother lost her child; but it would also be unfair to the adoptive parents to break up their family, and it is unfair to the child whose whole world just got flipped around on them.

What is "fair" and what is "right" are moot points here. What is "best" for everyone is what is important, and it will end up being "unfair" to some degree for everyone.

 

[Maze1125]

That's just crap.
Adoptive parents are just as attached to their children as biological parents. Statistically more-so in fact, as every single adoptive parent wanted a child, but no where near every biological parent does.

This biological parent patently does want her child. She hasn't stopped looking for her kid for five years. You talk about inflicting the pain of kidnap on a family for a second time- don't you think that's exactly what's going to happen to the biological family if she's not returned?

No, it's not.
They lost their child 5 years ago, they've already learnt coping mechanisms. Sure, things might well be better if the biological mother got her back, but if she doesn't, she's not going to feel anywhere near as bad as the adoptive parents, because she's already been through that bit, the adoptive parents haven't.

She's not losing a child that she's been raising for years, she's losing hope of getting that child back. The adoptive parents would lose both.

 

[Smithburg]

Give her back to the parent. But you'd need to do that right, that would mess with a kids head. Give the kid some help make sure they know whats going on. Maybe let them see the other parents (although that might not be a good idea, it kinda depends on the child) Give the kid some benefits rather than just plopping them back at the original mothers.

 

[Maze1125]

How about... they just work it out for themselves?

If came down to it "legally", the child's citizenship is illegitimate, so her biological mother would "win", but I would hope she's not short-sighted enough to ignore how just up and ripping the child from her current life and family could damage her.

If she decides to do that, it's her "right", but hopefully they can come up with something that works best for everyone.

That's the problem with these types of situations, there is no single "victim". They all are victims of this. The mother who lost her child, the parents who might lose their adoptive child, and the child who is stuck between them. Yes, it is unfair that the biological mother lost her child; but it would also be unfair to the adoptive parents to break up their family, and it is unfair to the child that the whole world just got flipped around on them.

What is "fair" and what is "right" are moot points here. What is "best" for everyone is what is important, and it will end up being "unfair" to some degree for everyone.

This is the most sensible post I've seen in this thread. I agree pretty much entirely.

 

[Innegativeion]

This biological parent patently does want her child. She hasn't stopped looking for her kid for five years. You talk about inflicting the pain of kidnap on a family for a second time- don't you think that's exactly what's going to happen to the biological family if she's not returned?

ok let's put it this way, your child was kidnapped and you are devestated, then a few years later it turns about she has been adopted and you are not allowed to have custody and that the adoptive parents get to keep her, that would destroy you

Personally, I would be just happy to know the kid's alive. But then, I've never had a child.

From my perspective exclusively, I would not expect to get her back if it's been years, especially if the adoptive parents have fed her, housed her, been her acting parents considerably longer than I have.

I would be vehement about at least being a part of the child's life in some way, but I wouldn't try to take her from a family that loves her.

 

[Eamar]

No, it's not.
They lost their child 5 years ago, they've already learnt coping mechanisms. Sure, things might well be better if the biological mother got her back, but if she doesn't, she's not going to feel anywhere near as bad as the adoptive parents, because she's already been through that bit, the adoptive parents haven't.

She's not losing a child that she's been raising for years, she's losing hope of getting that child back. The adoptive parents would lose both.

I agree any solution is going to cause someone a significant amount of pain, and there's nothing that can be done about that.

I'm also not meaning to imply that they in any way "deserve" to be hurt, but... the adoptive parents bought a child from traffickers. Not knowingly, granted, but that's the truth at the end of the day. Surely the adoption of a human being is something that should merit enough research to avoid this sort of thing?

 

[Maze1125]

No, it's not.
They lost their child 5 years ago, they've already learnt coping mechanisms. Sure, things might well be better if the biological mother got her back, but if she doesn't, she's not going to feel anywhere near as bad as the adoptive parents, because she's already been through that bit, the adoptive parents haven't.

She's not losing a child that she's been raising for years, she's losing hope of getting that child back. The adoptive parents would lose both.

I agree any solution is going to cause someone a significant amount of pain, and there's nothing that can be done about that.

I'm also not meaning to imply that they in any way "deserve" to be hurt, but... the adoptive parents bought a child from traffickers. Not knowingly, granted, but that's the truth at the end of the day. Surely the adoption of a human being is something that should merit enough research to avoid this sort of thing?

So they made a mistake. Why does that mean they should lose their child.

I can tell you someone else who made a mistake, the biological mother. Because human traffickers don't prey on the children of perfectly vigilant parents.

People make mistakes, neither set of parents deserve to have a child taken from them, but the past can't be changed. Making the same mistake twice doesn't make up for the first one.

 

[Eamar]

So they made a mistake. Why does that mean they should lose their child.

I can tell you someone else who made a mistake, the biological mother. Because human traffickers don't prey on the children of perfectly vigilant parents.

People make mistakes, neither set of parents deserve to have a child taken from them, but the past can't be changed. Making the same mistake twice doesn't make up for the first one.

So kidnap is the fault of the parents? Fantastic.

I'd argue that turning your back for a few moments while opening the door (which is apparently what happened) is in no way comparable to rushing into adopting a child without checking the legitimacy of what you're doing. But this isn't a competition, and neither set of parents is evil or anything.

So they made a mistake. Why does that mean they should lose their child.

Shouldn't that apply to the biological mother too?

It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. No solution is going to be "right," and I for one am glad I don't have to make the actual call.

 

[Maze1125]

Shouldn't that apply to the biological mother too?

Yes, it should, but she's already lost her child. Giving the child back doesn't just suddenly fix the pain that's been suffered.

Give the child back and both sides suffer the loss of a child. Leave things as they are, and only one side does.

 

[Raven's Nest]

Its really not hard to put yourself in everyone's shoes here. Obviously the mum will want her daughter back. The kid is only 7 years old, she probably couldn't properly articulate in a sentence what family is yet let alone choose for herself who to live with.. Yeah it might sting for the adoptive parents but their feelings should come second to the mother and daughter.

When you're 7 years old you're not freaking brain dead.. Jeez I mean the child's probably grown to love her adoptive parents. Taking her away from the ones she loves and saying "shut up, you don't know what a family is because you're too young" is possibly the most arrogant thing I could ever hear anyone say..

I didn't say she wouldn't know what a family is. I'm saying that her feelings about family life and biological maternity and how a move will affect her over the rest of her life are not going to be as complex now than they will be in the 10 or so years it'll take for her to grow up and realise all of a sudden she is at the center of a court case which potentially has globally important legal implications but more important than that she'll have to come to terms with being a person who was abducted from her true family home as a child and (i'm going to go with sold) into a life in another country whilst her real parents pleaded, begged, argued and campaigned for over a decade to have her returned. Whether she remembers the original event or not, this kind of shit is going to seriously mess with her head by the time she reaches an age where she will oh so much more crap to deal with...

It is probably better for a youngster to come to terms with something like this at her age than it is to suddenly be confronted with it at later life when she fully understands the implications of it later on. Yes it might be painful for a bit but seriously wake up. The world is a painful place and you can't shelter everyone from how shitty it can be. Just ask the girl's real parents for god's sake. This kid will grow up one day and either way be forced to come to terms with what has happened... Better that she doesn't properly understand it is what I say... For the same reason that you don't sit down explain to your 7 year old kid about death, crack addictions and sexual exploitation.

Has anybody even stopped to think the poor girl might end up being grateful for being returned to her real and loving parents?

 

[Lt._nefarious]

The adopted parents... They brought her up and etc. so she belongs with them...

 

[samaugsch]

Its really not hard to put yourself in everyone's shoes here. Obviously the mum will want her daughter back. The kid is only 7 years old, she probably couldn't properly articulate in a sentence what family is yet let alone choose for herself who to live with.. Yeah it might sting for the adoptive parents but their feelings should come second to the mother and daughter.

When you're 7 years old you're not freaking brain dead.. Jeez I mean the child's probably grown to love her adoptive parents. Taking her away from the ones she loves and saying "shut up, you don't know what a family is because you're too young" is possibly the most arrogant thing I could ever hear anyone say..

I didn't say she wouldn't know what a family is. I'm saying that her feelings about family life and biological maternity and how a move will affect her over the rest of her life are not going to be as complex now than they will be in the 10 or so years it'll take for her to grow up and realise all of a sudden she is at the center of a court case which potentially has globally important legal implications but more important than that she'll have to come to terms with being a person who was abducted from her true family home as a child and (i'm going to go with sold) into a life in another country whilst her real parents pleaded, begged, argued and campaigned for over a decade to have her returned. Whether she remembers the original event or not, this kind of shit is going to seriously mess with her head by the time she reaches an age where she will oh so much more crap to deal with...

It is probably better for a youngster to come to terms with something like this at her age than it is to suddenly be confronted with it at later life when she fully understands the implications of it later on. Yes it might be painful for a bit but seriously wake up. The world is a painful place and you can't shelter everyone from how shitty it can be. Just ask the girl's real parents for god's sake. This kid will grow up one day and either way be forced to come to terms with what has happened... Better that she doesn't properly understand it is what I say... For the same reason that you don't sit down explain to your 7 year old kid about death, crack addictions and sexual exploitation.

Has anybody even stopped to think the poor girl might end up being grateful for being returned to her real and loving parents?

Possibly. Then again, she may refuse to acknowledge them as her real parents since she has no memory of them.

 

[DugMachine]

Dammit I'm tired of seeing "Of course the Biological mother should get the kid back, its hers!" Just because it's a child we're dealing with doesn't mean we shouldn't consider what they want. I'm willing to bet money that the kid wants to stay with the adoptive parents and that's the way it should be.