9 Year Old Begs to go Home

After being taken from the only family she's known for most of her life, she is sent to live with her father, a man with a long criminal and domestic violence history, and according to her former parents, lives in squalor and begs to come home. http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/15/us/tennessee-adoption-battle/index.html#comment-1388457848

This is so wrong, so effd up.
My God she will run away or commit suicide.

My heart aches for this child.

If people had listened to ME as a kid, I would never have been sent back home time after time to the situation in which I was abused, neglected and molested.

WHY would they do this???? Why is the well-being of a child STILL less important than 'procedure' and paperwork??? It's just insane.

TN Court of Appeals Brief

http://tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2009/sjm_112309.pdf

Sonya case hearing Friday; Dickson family: court erred


http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...ng-friday-dickson-family-court-erred/9116573/


The only thing that was not done properly was the reintroduction to her father. jmo

Elley Mae said:

Sonya case hearing Friday; Dickson family: court erred


http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...ng-friday-dickson-family-court-erred/9116573/


The only thing that was not done properly was the reintroduction to her father. jmo

Click to expand...

I am not understanding why she wasn't turned over to the bio dad's mom.

During the course of Father’s legal troubles, the saga of S.J.M.’s custody continued. In November 2005, DCS requested Nebraska to do a home study of Father’s mother, P.M., as to her home’s suitability as a placement for S.J.M. P.M.’s home was approved in August 2006.

popsicle said:

I am not understanding why she wasn't turned over to the bio dad's mom.

During the course of Father’s legal troubles, the saga of S.J.M.’s custody continued. In November 2005, DCS requested Nebraska to do a home study of Father’s mother, P.M., as to her home’s suitability as a placement for S.J.M. P.M.’s home was approved in August 2006.

Click to expand...

According to the appellate brief, her home was approved after a home study but that doesn't mean she was. According to the adoptive parents, the grandmother was not ultimately approved by DCS.

Elley Mae said:

Sonya case hearing Friday; Dickson family: court erred


http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...ng-friday-dickson-family-court-erred/9116573/


The only thing that was not done properly was the reintroduction to her father. jmo

Click to expand...

That's incorrect. The court was supposed to hold a best interest hearing and did not. The appeals court ordered the child returned to DCS custody. Not to the father. A study should've then been conducted and a hearing held to determine the best interest of the child.

After hearing, the court could've determined that it was in the best interests to return to the father or to stay with the adoptive parents as foster parents or a different option altogether.

Here is a website chronicling the bio dad's life of crime: http://houseofveritas.weebly.com/blog/category/john-mccaul

There are multiple links.

It just seems so many times to not be about the women or children- it often appears to be such a patriarchal machine driven by mysogynists. Not always, by any means, but a lot, IMOO.

gitana1 said:

That's incorrect. The court was supposed to hold a best interest hearing and did not. The appeals court ordered the child returned to DCS custody. Not to the father. A study should've then been conducted and a hearing held to determine the best interest of the child.

After hearing, the court could've determined that it was in the best interests to return to the father or to stay with the adoptive parents as foster parents or a different option altogether.

Click to expand...

Ok Yea the court thing. That is the judges fault not the fathers. jmo His record of traffic violations is nothing. But if it is then all children should be removed from homes that have parents that have traffic violations. She still belongs with her father, the courts screwed up. jmo

IMO, the courts are treating this child like a piece of property (determining ownership rights), not as a human being. This child needs her own lawyer.

Kip said:

IMO, the courts are treating this child like a piece of property (determining ownership rights), not as a human being. This child needs her own lawyer.

Click to expand...

the child should have a CASA

http://www.casaforchildren.org/site/c.mtJSJ7MPIsE/b.5301295/k.BE9A/Home.htm


the advocate can support the child through the court hearings etc

newone said:

the child should have a CASA

http://www.casaforchildren.org/site/c.mtJSJ7MPIsE/b.5301295/k.BE9A/Home.htm


the advocate can support the child through the court hearings etc

Click to expand...

I was JUST about to post that. This child needs a CASA volunteer.

Elley Mae said:

Ok Yea the court thing. That is the judges fault not the fathers. jmo His record of traffic violations is nothing. But if it is then all children should be removed from homes that have parents that have traffic violations. She still belongs with her father, the courts screwed up. jmo

Click to expand...

I remember reading about this case months ago and it is a real mess because of the actions of a baby sitter. It is complicated by the fact that legally, Nebraska was the home state of the child. It was her baby sitter, not either parent, who took her to Tennessee. The baby sitter later decided she could not care for her and "gave" her to the Tennessee couple to care for rather than returning her to her family in Nebraska. Her father and his family have been trying to get her returned ever since.

iirc, a few years ago, the child's paternal grandmother, with a very low income, took in many children belonging to her nephew after he decided he couldn't raise any of them after their mother died. He dropped them off at a hospital and went on his way.


JMO

Elley Mae said:

Ok Yea the court thing. That is the judges fault not the fathers. jmo His record of traffic violations is nothing. But if it is then all children should be removed from homes that have parents that have traffic violations. She still belongs with her father, the courts screwed up. jmo

Click to expand...

Holy cannoli. Traffic violations? This guy has an extremely extensive criminal history including multiple violent felonies. He has spent most of his life since the age of 13, incarcerated. Please take a look at the link above. He has also had two domestic violence restraining orders against him.

newone said:

the child should have a CASA

http://www.casaforchildren.org/site/c.mtJSJ7MPIsE/b.5301295/k.BE9A/Home.htm


the advocate can support the child through the court hearings etc

Click to expand...

She did have a GAL and an attorney. Neither had ever met her before the one hearing date that resulted in her going back to the father. They did not know the color of her hair when asked, according to the adoptive parents.

Kip said:

IMO, the courts are treating this child like a piece of property (determining ownership rights), not as a human being. This child needs her own lawyer.

Click to expand...

the lower court erred in terminating the father's parental rights. Unfortunately, courts do make mistakes and this results.

JMO

I hope the adoptive parents keep fighting for her. Sonya's life depends on it.

MyBelle said:

I remember reading about this case months ago and it is a real mess because of the actions of a baby sitter. It is complicated by the fact that legally, Nebraska was the home state of the child. It was her baby sitter, not either parent, who took her to Tennessee. The baby sitter later decided she could not care for her and "gave" her to the Tennessee couple to care for rather than returning her to her family in Nebraska. Her father and his family have been trying to get her returned ever since.

iirc, a few years ago, the child's paternal grandmother, with a very low income, took in many children belonging to her nephew after he decided he couldn't raise any of them after their mother died. He dropped them off at a hospital and went on his way.


JMO

Click to expand...

This is pretty much all true. Except the dad knew exactly where she was and couldn't be bothered to fight for her too hard. He sent some friends down to collect the baby and that's when the babysitter or her family called DCS, worried about returning the child to the dad due to his history of violence.

DCS had a hearing and the dad was notified. He failed to appear at all. That's when the child was placed in DCS custody.

After that, he failed continued to fail to participate in the DCS hearings that resulted in the termination of his parental rights. Probably because he was in prison for several years due to his "traffic violations" (sorry for the sarcasm. The dad's side has been disseminating misinformation which bothers me quite a bit*). But he never tried to send a lawyer to represent him, nothing.

The termination of his parental rights and the adoption were overturned due to a technicality. Apparently, under Tennessee law, parental rights can be terminated if the child is under 8 and the parent is sentenced to a prison term of 10 years. He was sentenced to 15 years. However, he had his sentence reduced to 7.5 after giving info on a murder her knew about.

In any event, the court found that no one had ever cited the Tennessee law allowing termination of parental rights due to a 10 year sentence, so the law should not have been applied. That's why the adoption and termination of parental rights were reversed.

* I can't say that the adoptive parents have totally clean hands either. I'm still researching this case.

gxm said:

I hope the adoptive parents keep fighting for her. Sonya's life depends on it.

Click to expand...

They are not her adoptive parents. Giving her false hope that she'll return to them isn't helping the child.

JMO