9 Year Old Begs to go Home

[MyBelle]

ITA. He was in prison for a large part of child's life. That he can get out of prison, and DCF can decide that the child has to go back to him, frankly, it boggles my mind.
Child is not a piece of furniture that doesn't have any feelings.
During the time bio dad is in prison this child was bonding with her adoptive family.
DCF doesn't seem to consider any of that.

The Judge decided it, not DCF. They are two completely separate branches of government so I'm not sure why your mind is boggled.

Child has rights. Parent has rights. Judge decided those rights are superior.

I think all DCF has considered is the fact the child has made it clear she doesn't want to go back to the foster family. Maybe that "bond" wasn't all that great....

During an April hearing, Jackson said Tennessee law directs that a biological parent has “superior rights” to custody unless it can be proven he or she is not a fit parent.


http://wdkn.com/foster-parents-clai...-sonyas-father-because-she-is-in-dcs-custody/

 

[Linda7NJ]

The Judge decided it, not DCF. They are two completely separate branches of government so I'm not sure why your mind is boggled.



Child has rights. Parent has rights. Judge decided those rights are superior.



I think all DCF has considered is the fact the child has made it clear she doesn't want to go back to the foster family. Maybe that "bond" wasn't all that great....



During an April hearing, Jackson said Tennessee law directs that a biological parent has “superior rights” to custody unless it can be proven he or she is not a fit parent.





http://wdkn.com/foster-parents-clai...-sonyas-father-because-she-is-in-dcs-custody/

I'm having difficulty believing this child doesn't want to go back to the only parents she ever really had.
I believe that needs to be fully explored.

Either this child has severe attachment issues or IMO she believes she's protecting them because she was told they would pay the ultimate price if she went bank.

The adoption and safe families act is pretty clear that the best interest of the child and the child's need for permanency trumps parental rights.

I believe a bonding assessment should have been conducted BEFORE anyone even considered seriously returning her to her father.

All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[newone]

The Judge decided it, not DCF. They are two completely separate branches of government so I'm not sure why your mind is boggled.

Child has rights. Parent has rights. Judge decided those rights are superior.

I think all DCF has considered is the fact the child has made it clear she doesn't want to go back to the foster family. Maybe that "bond" wasn't all that great....

During an April hearing, Jackson said Tennessee law directs that a biological parent has “superior rights” to custody unless it can be proven he or she is not a fit parent.


http://wdkn.com/foster-parents-clai...-sonyas-father-because-she-is-in-dcs-custody/

bbm

You could be right....perhaps there was an opportunity for this young lady to really tell someone confidentially and safely how she really feels....

I do have concerns though for her wellbeing.

 

[newone]

If he truly didn't want her back, he wouldn't have appealed the decision terminating his parental rights.

JMO

three motives

food stamps
medical coverage
tax break

He's in Nebraska and will even get help with rent - til his daughter is 18 according to this link

http://singlemotherguide.com/financial-help-for-single-mothers-in-nebraska/

"Nebraska Aid to Dependent Children (ADC) provides small cash assistance to low-income families with children up to 18 years of age. It is used to pay for family living expenses like rent, utilities, food, clothing, and other necessities."

Given his record he's going to have a tough time providing food and shelter but with a child he will get help that a others recently released from prison would not get.

 

[MyBelle]

I'm having difficulty believing this child doesn't want to go back to the only parents she ever really had.
I believe that needs to be fully explored.

Either this child has severe attachment issues or IMO she believes she's protecting them because she was told they would pay the ultimate price if she went bank.

The adoption and safe families act is pretty clear that the best interest of the child and the child's need for permanency trumps parental rights.

I believe a bonding assessment should have been conducted BEFORE anyone even considered seriously returning her to her father.

All IMO



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree, she may very well have severe attachment issues or might be in therapy working through it. She's been with dad for five months now.

I think if her dad screws up, they'll place her in another Nebraska foster family.

JMO

 

[Supernovae]

I'm having difficulty believing this child doesn't want to go back to the only parents she ever really had.
I believe that needs to be fully explored.

Either this child has severe attachment issues or IMO she believes she's protecting them because she was told they would pay the ultimate price if she went bank.

All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Or more prosaically, it could just be that she feels that's what the interviewer wants to hear or she doesn't want to upset her (biological) family. Many children (and particularly girls, IMO) have a natural propensity to want to please authority figures and adults in their lives. I have great difficulty believing that this whole process has served this child's wellbeing.

 

[MyBelle]

Or more prosaically, it could just be that she feels that's what the interviewer wants to hear or she doesn't want to upset her (biological) family. Many children (and particularly girls, IMO) have a natural propensity to want to please authority figures and adults in their lives. I have great difficulty believing that this whole process has served this child's wellbeing.

BBM. It hasn't served the child's well-being at all. It is absolutely ridiculous that any child's placement can be dragged out for years simply by filing court documents for continuations or reconsideration. IMO, that is an abuse of the court process and multiple parties were actively engaged in it.

 

[jjenny]

BBM. It hasn't served the child's well-being at all. It is absolutely ridiculous that any child's placement can be dragged out for years simply by filing court documents for continuations or reconsideration. IMO, that is an abuse of the court process and multiple parties were actively engaged in it.

Where were they supposed to place her? Bio dad's prison cell? The fact is, bio dad was in prison for years and couldn't raise her.

 

[jjenny]

Or more prosaically, it could just be that she feels that's what the interviewer wants to hear or she doesn't want to upset her (biological) family. Many children (and particularly girls, IMO) have a natural propensity to want to please authority figures and adults in their lives. I have great difficulty believing that this whole process has served this child's wellbeing.

She should have been asked in court where she wants to live, during her best interest hearing. She never even got a hearing.

 

[belimom]

Adoptive parents fight for custody of 9-year-old Sonya


Dickson, Tennessee (CNN) -- The last time Sonya's adoptive parents heard her voice, the girl was begging to return to the only home she'd ever known.

"What did you say, baby doll?" asks Kim Hodgin, in a recording of the phone call.

"I want to you to come and get me," responds Sonya.

She describes her biological father's home as dirty, with mold and cigarettes everywhere. The girl complains he doesn't have clean water, but says he's being nice to her.


http://images.cnn.com/2014/05/15/us/tennessee-adoption-battle/?obWgt=articlefooter&iref=obnetwork

 

[belimom]

As an adoptive parent, I could hardly watch the video. The judge really messed up here, I think.

If you want to help, please sign this petition:

https://www.change.org/petitions/create-sonya-s-law-and-bring-her-home

 

[EGirl]

Active thread here:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=243896&highlight=sonya

 

[belimom]

I just found this thread (I tried to start a new one... ).

As an adoptive parent, I'm mortified. I think the judge really messed up here. So tragic. And considering he's the same judge hearing the case again, I doubt there will be a different outcome.

 

[belimom]

The Judge decided it, not DCF. They are two completely separate branches of government so I'm not sure why your mind is boggled.

Child has rights. Parent has rights. Judge decided those rights are superior.

I think all DCF has considered is the fact the child has made it clear she doesn't want to go back to the foster family. Maybe that "bond" wasn't all that great....

During an April hearing, Jackson said Tennessee law directs that a biological parent has “superior rights” to custody unless it can be proven he or she is not a fit parent.


http://wdkn.com/foster-parents-clai...-sonyas-father-because-she-is-in-dcs-custody/

We've been through adoption. We were stuck in limbo because the bio dad didn't initially want to sign. (insert long dramatic story here) He finally did sign away his rights.

The issue at stake here is that *technically* the judge ruled that the dad's rights were terminated improperly. It was a judge's decision and he could've gone the other way if it had been a different judge. Who knows.

I would've done the same thing as the Hodgins: fought until the end for a child that I had raised and who knew no other family.

Yes, there was a technicality that caused the reversal. But should a child's adjustment and love and bonding with a family be ripped apart on a technicality? I don't think so... :no:

 

[MyBelle]

We've been through adoption. We were stuck in limbo because the bio dad didn't initially want to sign. (insert long dramatic story here) He finally did sign away his rights.

The issue at stake here is that *technically* the judge ruled that the dad's rights were terminated improperly. It was a judge's decision and he could've gone the other way if it had been a different judge. Who knows.

I would've done the same thing as the Hodgins: fought until the end for a child that I had raised and who knew no other family.

Yes, there was a technicality that caused the reversal. But should a child's adjustment and love and bonding with a family be ripped apart on a technicality? I don't think so... :no:

The "technicality" was the law. It couldn't be ignored. It was an appellate court, not a single judge, that determined his parental rights were terminated improperly by a Judge. This was not a case of abandonment by incarceration.

The child has now been with her biological family for nearly six months.
The end for the Hodgins came nearly six months ago when DCS told the Judge they do NOT want the child returned to their care. Sounds to me that DCS made their decision based more than on just a technicality.

JMO

 

[Shari_Gal]

It's also important to note that the grandmother lost custody of her own son, the child's uncle, due to admitted neglect and abandonment and recently lost custody of one of the seven grandkids due to a founded allegation of neglect.

Screenshots of social media posts by bio grandma in 2013, stating that she carried around a 22 calibre bullet in her purse in case she wants to use it to commit suicide in a pawn shop?

http://houseofveritas.weebly.com/

 

[MyBelle]

Screenshots of social media posts by bio grandma in 2013, stating that she carried around a 22 calibre bullet in her purse in case she wants to use it to commit suicide in a pawn shop?

http://houseofveritas.weebly.com/

That's quite a bizarre blog you've linked with nothing that verifies anything as being true.

JMO

 

[Shari_Gal]

That's quite a bizarre blog you've linked with nothing that verifies anything as being true.

JMO

The website HOV has been posted here before, on several pages of this thread in fact: the site's author has only posted links to actual documents, I know the article about the 2011 reunion is real since it's in news archives.

 

[belimom]

The "technicality" was the law. It couldn't be ignored. It was an appellate court, not a single judge, that determined his parental rights were terminated improperly by a Judge. This was not a case of abandonment by incarceration.

The child has now been with her biological family for nearly six months.
The end for the Hodgins came nearly six months ago when DCS told the Judge they do NOT want the child returned to their care. Sounds to me that DCS made their decision based more than on just a technicality.

JMO

I understand that is the law. But if you look at the intent of the law, it was never meant to be used in a situation like this. This is a rare and unusual circumstance.

And a child is not a box or a belonging that can be passed around based on technicalities. A child is a person whose needs and attachment to caregivers have to be taken into account.

I really do understand that he had the right to his daughter - I do. And because of his reduced sentence, that right fell through the cracks as the adoption was finalized. If Sonya had just been turned over to the Hodgins, then I think she should've been returned to him. But she had been with them already for awhile. Was it in her best interest - considering all angles - to be taken away from the only family she has known? I don't think so.

 

[MyBelle]

I understand that is the law. But if you look at the intent of the law, it was never meant to be used in a situation like this. This is a rare and unusual circumstance.

And a child is not a box or a belonging that can be passed around based on technicalities. A child is a person whose needs and attachment to caregivers have to be taken into account.

I really do understand that he had the right to his daughter - I do. And because of his reduced sentence, that right fell through the cracks as the adoption was finalized. If Sonya had just been turned over to the Hodgins, then I think she should've been returned to him. But she had been with them already for awhile. Was it in her best interest - considering all angles - to be taken away from the only family she has known? I don't think so.

This was neither a rare or unusual circumstance. Fathers have been fighting to preserve their parental rights to the point UTAH just changed it's adoption law to prevent the very thing that almost happened to John McCaul. The Tennessee appellate court acted in accordance with Tennessee law. I think the Hodgins are being disingenuous when they cite the time the child was kept from her father considering it was their manipulations of the court process and their refusal to facilitate reunification that turned what should have been months into years. Their actions were selfish rather than in the best interest of the child.

The main point in all this is that the child has been back with her father for nearly six months and there is absolutely no proof the Judge or DCS have not acted in her best interest.

JMO