Holy crap, folks...this one's a doozy...
- Thread starter RJ 17
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Exactly. I like to keep things simplistic. One step at a time and all that.FernandoV said:
Anyway, people are still commenting on this? Last I checked, somebody mentioned that the kid didn't have any sort of citizenship so she's going home regardless of what anybody here has to say about it.
This makes the story interesting: There's that old story about South American women trying to get their babies into the US by any means possible, right? This girl's story is a fascinating reversal as the SA mother wants her kid back from the States. Here's hoping that kid doesn't get kidnapped again; once is enough for anybody.
I know. I'd like to live in a world where everyone has control of their own lives and can make their own choices without stepping on the rights of others. Hell, I'd settle for a world where everyone has access to ice-cream. But you can't cross idealism with reality. Not all of the time anyway and never when it really matters. *le sigh*FernandoV said:
The ones wronged in all of this was the kid and the original mother.
The mother has been robbed of her child and would only have her situation made right only if fully reunited with her rightful child
As for the kid both families can be capable of providing and making life happy for the kid and the country of origin is irrelevant. The U.S. would have no right to say that "our country is better for her, so she's staying here"
I have to agree with that page one post that if U.S. kid ended up in some other country after a kidnapping the U.S. would've busted the door down of the place if they didn't cooperate fully.
The mother has been robbed of her child and would only have her situation made right only if fully reunited with her rightful child
As for the kid both families can be capable of providing and making life happy for the kid and the country of origin is irrelevant. The U.S. would have no right to say that "our country is better for her, so she's staying here"
I have to agree with that page one post that if U.S. kid ended up in some other country after a kidnapping the U.S. would've busted the door down of the place if they didn't cooperate fully.
Imagine this. You have a child. You love your child, and raise her for two years. Your precious child is then kidnapped. You spend years looking for that kid through all legal means, but it seems that hope is lost.
However, after four years, they find your kid. But they say that because she's already in a happy family, you can't have your her back. You have to accept that your child, torn from your home, has to be raised by complete strangers in another country.
This is what the mother is going through. She deserves her child back. It's not a question of what the child wants. As the biological mother, she has the right to choose how to raise her child. The only exception would be if she's unfit to raise a child (ie: put the kid up for adoption, or was abusive, or can't support a child).
Yeah, it'll be upsetting for the kid. But would you want two complete strangers in another country to raise your child? I wouldn't.
And yes. It sucks for the adoptive parents. She was their daughter. But ultimately, she was only there because of human trafficking.
And as for the arguement about the kid not being able to recognize her true parent, and the trauma of leaving her "home" behind... That kid will get older. And eventually, the parents will have to tell the kid that she was adopted. And the parents will have to explain that she had been kidnapped from her home, and when her real mother tried to take her back, her adoptive parents used the power of law to turn the mother away.
IMO, I would think that would screw a kid up a lot more.
And for the people saying the parents were in on the kidnapping... Seriously? There's a ton of kids up for adoption across the whole country. The only reason why you would knowingly adopt a kidnapped child is if you planned to abuse the child. If they find evidence of abuse, lock em away. But until then, I find this highly unlikely.
However, after four years, they find your kid. But they say that because she's already in a happy family, you can't have your her back. You have to accept that your child, torn from your home, has to be raised by complete strangers in another country.
This is what the mother is going through. She deserves her child back. It's not a question of what the child wants. As the biological mother, she has the right to choose how to raise her child. The only exception would be if she's unfit to raise a child (ie: put the kid up for adoption, or was abusive, or can't support a child).
Yeah, it'll be upsetting for the kid. But would you want two complete strangers in another country to raise your child? I wouldn't.
And yes. It sucks for the adoptive parents. She was their daughter. But ultimately, she was only there because of human trafficking.
And as for the arguement about the kid not being able to recognize her true parent, and the trauma of leaving her "home" behind... That kid will get older. And eventually, the parents will have to tell the kid that she was adopted. And the parents will have to explain that she had been kidnapped from her home, and when her real mother tried to take her back, her adoptive parents used the power of law to turn the mother away.
IMO, I would think that would screw a kid up a lot more.
And for the people saying the parents were in on the kidnapping... Seriously? There's a ton of kids up for adoption across the whole country. The only reason why you would knowingly adopt a kidnapped child is if you planned to abuse the child. If they find evidence of abuse, lock em away. But until then, I find this highly unlikely.
"Couldn't properly articulate in a sentence what family is"? You don't spend much time around children, do you?Raven said:
The problem is that the adoptive parents have just as much of a claim on the child as the biological mother does. They've raised the girl for five years as one of their own, fully expecting that they had adopted her within the full scope of the law. She is a part of their family. The girl has already established familial bonds with the adopted parents that she was too young to do with her biological mother.
Poor kid. Not only is there a custody battle with a mother she likely does not even remember, but - if she is returned to her biological mom - she will have to learn to speak Spanish (Guatemala's national language)! Remember, this isn't just from one state to another, this is from the United States to the middle of Central America!
As much as I feel for the biological mother, I'm kind of leaning toward the adopted family on this one.
Let the child decide, if she cannot, then allow the adoptive parents look after her.
She isn't old enough to even remember her biological mum, not that it even matters, your parents are the people who raised you, and have your custody, not the people who supplied your genetic code.
She isn't old enough to even remember her biological mum, not that it even matters, your parents are the people who raised you, and have your custody, not the people who supplied your genetic code.
Well...it's not really even that you're explaining a realistic perspective on the situation, you're just taking a point of view and sticking with it...I'm not saying that this situation needs to be sorted out fairly, I'm just saying it's not simple at all. It involved a lot of variables that you cannot be aware of because you are not involved; you are just observing information that gets watered down to you from the actual source.Vern5 said:
Ok first off she should be 8 or 9 she was taken when she was 2 spent a year with the adoption agency 2+1= 3 raised by the American family for 5 years 5+3=8 these are estimates so maybe she was picked up when she was like 2 year 8 months... so maybe she is 9. Here is the problem I she she is about to be taken out of what 1st or 2nd grade she probably doesn't know how to speak Spanish just guessing from how much i learned in taking 8 years of Spanish in a Texas school. It isn't about what is best for the parents or what should legally happen.It is about what is best for the child. So let me get all of this straight we want to take her from the only parents she has ever known, take her to a place where they speak a language she probably doesn't know, and take her away from her friends. The best solution is if in exchange for letting the American parents legally adopt her they pay 1-2 times a year for the biological parents to come visit, and they have permission to see her at anytime they decide to come (not paid for) also she has to learn Spanish.
There should be a "weaning period" onto her biological mother. She should spend more and more time with her until she is comfortable enough to transfer.
Back to her mother. Imagine this situation in reverse. A 2 year old from Missouri is kidnapped and found five years later in Guatemala. Half of the people in this thread who said "leave her where she is" would flip the hell out if the girl were left in Guatemala instead of brought home after having been kidnapped.
Morally speaking, there is absolutely no reason the mother should be forced to give up her child just because it took her five years to locate her after she was kidnapped. Unless the mother decides to give her daughter up for adoption now, there is simply no moral alternative, in my mind, to reuniting her with her daughter.
Morally speaking, there is absolutely no reason the mother should be forced to give up her child just because it took her five years to locate her after she was kidnapped. Unless the mother decides to give her daughter up for adoption now, there is simply no moral alternative, in my mind, to reuniting her with her daughter.
I'm surprised to see so many people have immediately gone for the "defo give her back to her mum" route. I guess that's the fun or moral dilemmas; different beliefs and opinions.
A child will go through most of it's development in its first 10 years. Their behaviours, personality, language and connections will have mostly developed. When a child is moved around in those formative years, they often face more challenges: their behaviour becomes more disruptive, they may find it harder to connect with people, and they don't do as well in school. Much as it would be great for the girl to go back to her biological mother, doing so would cause a lot of psychological harm. Family isn't about biology; it's about who helps you grow up and who love you and cheesy stuff like that.
The child is too young to decide who to stay with (although in divorce cases I guess that ask if the child has a preference). I assume the outcome will be that the child does go back to her biological mother; the kid's adoption is bogus, the mother can't be given the access she deserves if the child stays in America, and the mother did nothing wrong. Although this is the likely outcome, I can't say it's the best one for the child involved.
Peace out.
A child will go through most of it's development in its first 10 years. Their behaviours, personality, language and connections will have mostly developed. When a child is moved around in those formative years, they often face more challenges: their behaviour becomes more disruptive, they may find it harder to connect with people, and they don't do as well in school. Much as it would be great for the girl to go back to her biological mother, doing so would cause a lot of psychological harm. Family isn't about biology; it's about who helps you grow up and who love you and cheesy stuff like that.
The child is too young to decide who to stay with (although in divorce cases I guess that ask if the child has a preference). I assume the outcome will be that the child does go back to her biological mother; the kid's adoption is bogus, the mother can't be given the access she deserves if the child stays in America, and the mother did nothing wrong. Although this is the likely outcome, I can't say it's the best one for the child involved.
Peace out.
.... her parents allowed their child to be in such a situation where she was kidnapped.
I think that's a default to the adoptive parents.
Plus, which is safer/more stable?
Guatemala? Or Missouri?
I think that's a default to the adoptive parents.
Plus, which is safer/more stable?
Guatemala? Or Missouri?