9 Year Old Begs to go Home

[PaulaSB]

Dear Lord, please protect and bless this little girl, because it is obvious the adults who are responsible for protecting and taking care of her can not! ( I'm talking about the legal processes and DCF !)

On another note I cannot believe she was moved from one state to another without the complete legal hearing processes. That is unbelievable...I personally don't care what the circumstances were, a precious child was taken from a stable loving environment and moved away from all her support to another state.

When my ex husband and I were trying to adopt we were told we would get a little 6 yr old girl. Once the foster family realized she was going to be adopted they could not bear to lose her and wanted to adopt her. We stopped the process immediately because that child was in an environment were she was loved and stable.

The adoption agency was upset but I did not hesitate to explain from my experience working with children that the child was my utmost priority not us. If it could be worked out that she could be adopted by the foster family who had had her for 4 years they had my blessings. So happens it did.
The feelings of the adults are the last thing I care about. That child needs a GAL and close monitoring.

In my opinion she should have never been uprooted without a year of visitations and planning. This is not about the foster parents or the dad and his extended family! This is about uprooting a child suddenly and dropping her in a situation where she knows no one without any preparation! It not about whether she's happy now or was happy. It's about who and where her future is secure. It's about where she can be safe and loved, no matter what comes her way. Why in Heaven if she is in a stable situation and it is true she does not want to go back would she be uprooted and sent back? She has been uprooted once....the legal system making the decisions better make sure and understand she is their responsibility.

This is my opinion and that's all I have to say.

They tried that but the Hodgins wouldn't allow it, in august 2012 they went and got a restraining order against DCS because they knew they where going to start the transition to her family, not the pair who have sold images, bracelets and tee shirts but her real family

https://ethicalchristianadoption.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/rotimeline2.jpg
this is from the restraining order. Caseworkers from the Tennessee Department of childrens services, Shelby McClurkin and Amanda Lambert contacted us and stated they are beginning the process to reunite the child with the father and have threatened to remove the child from our care and place her with another family. That was done because the Hodgins refused to allow the transition to go ahead, just like with the Baby Ella case when the fosters where told in that case the child would be transitioned to an uncle they said that the child had to be removed that day. Also the Hodgins where deemed detrimental to Sonya

http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...n-judge-rules-year-old-stay-nebraska/9182089/

Hillary Duke, a court-appointed guardian assigned to look after Sonya's interests, said the girl has been doing well in Nebraska and that it would be "detrimental" for her to return to Tennessee to live. She said Sonya doesn't want to move back but would like to visit.

Duke accused the Hodgin family of orchestrating a social media mob to sway public opinion. She suggested the judge put a restraining order on the family and their supporters to keep them from posting pictures of the girl. She said the public battle has made Sonya unsafe.

The judge didn't address that request.

DCS took McCaul's side. When asked why an agency would lobby on behalf of a felon, an agency spokesman said it was following the law.

"He doesn't have a perfect record; he's not a Boy Scout," said DCS spokesman Rob Johnson. "But he's done everything the state of Tennessee has asked of him."

After the hearing, McCaul and his attorney, Lynn Coffinberry, avoided the media and did not speak.

After their tv spot on Anderson Cooper humiliated her this was the result

http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...-birthday-passes-custody-case-drags/12854809/

Two independent observers versed in family law issues say that under the law, Sonya is where she should be: With her father. And both say the chances of her going back to her foster parents in Tennessee are slim because the rights of biological parents, absent actual abuse or neglect, are nearly impossible to take away.

While a defamation suit filed by McCaul was recently dismissed, the battle continues in court. Sonya's case is scheduled to return to a Dickson County courtroom July 30 for a discussion of her progress in Nebraska. The Hodgins are still awaiting the outcome of their petition to terminate McCaul's parental rights and to formally adopt Sonya. They're also still trying to appeal an earlier ruling by a juvenile court judge keeping Sonya in Nebraska, and last week they asked Gov. Bill Haslam to step in on their behalf, which he has not done.


https://ethicalchristianadoption.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/sonyacoming-gov-letter.jpg

 

[mostlylurking]

I have not posted in a very long time. This case has bothered me since it started. I follow the updates via Facebook. I've not joined pages there. I initially bought into the foster parent version of how horrible the bio-dad was (was emotionally triggering many things from my own childhood.) I even bought in to signing their petition. It only took me about a week to realize how horribly misleading their BS about BSH is. The system was "played by them" from day one at the expense of her bio-family and now to the detriment of this child. If they had presented themselves as foster parents to her from day one & participated in the transitional plan that DCS had been trying to implement all along, this poor girl could have had the best of both worlds and families. Now they have screwed it up for her. And I do think they are the ones who are being the most detrimental to her.

 

[PaulaSB]

They keep going on and on with the she was ripped with no transition when the Hodgins took out restraining orders to stop her being removed and refused to do the transition. Like the baby elle case where the uncle and a native american wife her aunt had visits with baby Elle they knew for months she was going but went to the press because they wanted to adopt her their reaction on being told she was being transitioned to uncle and aunt was to demand her removal within 24 hours. They are claiming that all SIH members are either family or jail birds, they gleefully imagine her future as a drug addict or prostitute. Hodgins tried to terminate her fathers rights and adopt despite her telling court this is not what she wants
http://ethicalchristianadoption.wordpress.com/
the judge who denied tpr and adoption then refused to reconsider so they are trying to get placement as pre adoptive placement. If anyone is stopping Sonya having peace it is them. They claim they got Sonya in April 2006 when they got foster parent status signing a contract that they will not try and adopt without dcs approval and yet that is exactly what they did they went to court to tpr her parents and dcs fought against it
7. The resource parent(s) will not petition to adopt, obtain guardianship, or file
for custody of a child/youth in their home unless DCS concurs with the plan
and gives written approval.

<mod snip>

 

[K_Z]

I think one of the things that is critical to understanding this horrifying and immensely sad case is understanding the course and impact of the Adoption and Safe Families Act.

An awful lot of people believe that when SH was removed from her home in January of this year, the Judge who ordered that was not substantially complying with the provisions of ASFA, that were agreed to by every state. No one knows why he did what he did-- maybe he just believes that no matter what, being "genetically related" trumps every other aspect of safety, and the child's best interests. If so, he would not be alone in his thinking, but the law says that being genetically related is not enough in circumstances such as these. I don't think that part of the case is over yet, and I expect to hear more over time about what might be done.

Can you imagine the chaos if sperm bank donors all of a sudden started invoking parental rights, and demanding that their "children" be ripped from their homes and placed in their custody? That's not too far off from what happened in this case. The only connection this career criminal had to the child is a biological one-- he never parented her, and pawned her off as an infant on a babysitter for weeks or months at a time, before she was legally fostered, then legally adopted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoption_and_Safe_Families_Act

Moreover, ASFA marked a fundamental change to child welfare thinking, shifting the emphasis towards children's health and safety concerns and away from a policy of reuniting children with their birth parents without regard to prior abusiveness.[1] As such, ASFA was considered the most sweeping change to the U.S. adoption and foster care system in some two decades.[1] One of ASFA's lead sponsors, Republican Senator John H. Chafee of Rhode Island, said, "We will not continue the current system of always putting the needs and rights of the biological parents first. ... It's time we recognize that some families simply cannot and should not be kept together."[1]

BBM. Moreover, even if the legal fostering and legal adoption were overturned, and the Hodgins again considered "foster" parents, the law requires that if a child has been in a foster care situation for 15 months, out of the preceeding 22 months, the state needed to move to terminate the bio father's parental rights and hold hearings to that effect.

In this child's case, the bio parent never made any efforts during the preceeding EIGHT YEARS the child was legally fostered, then legally parented and raised by the Hodgins, to invoke his parental rights. He never showed up at any hearings, never visited, never had a lawyer make inquiries on his behalf, never sent a letter,-- nothing. He abandoned her by every single definition that exists. And, by the way, if someone says, well, he couldn't do anything because he was in prison for so many years-- baloney. He had TONS of rights and services available to him while in prison, AND he had an attorney.

What has happened in this case is an enormous travesty of justice and law, IMO. I doubt that this child will ever really understand what happened to her to put her in her current circumstances, and rip her away from her stable, loving family. Maybe as an adult she will sue the state for what they did to her. What a nightmare-- to be ripped from the only home and family she ever knew, and "sentenced" to live with this career criminal.

I believe she will suffer the ill effects of this nightmare for the rest of her life. And if the bio dad has any decency, morals, or conscience left, he would stop making her a pawn, and help her go home. Let him start over and father another kid if he wants to be a parent. Why does he have to do this to her? It's unspeakably cruel, IMO.

 

[K_Z]

Here's a good article that focuses on a discussion of the time periods within the Adoption and Safe Families Act:

http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2060&context=ulj

Is Twenty-two Months Beyond the Best Interest of the Child? ASFA&#8217;s Guidelines for the Termination of Parental Rights

Katherine A. Hort

Abstract

This Note first discusses the legal precedents, child development theories, and policies regarding
&#8220;reasonable efforts&#8221; and parental termination that led to the enactment of ASFA. Next, it
examines Illinois&#8217;s and New York&#8217;s different responses to ASFA. It also introduces the debate over
&#8221;congregate care&#8221; as an alternative for those children who may never be returned to a parent&#8217;s care,
but whom are unlikely to be adopted. Lastly, it argues that the New York system is more workable
than the Illinois system given the complexities of the foster care system. This Note concludes
by arguing the federal government&#8217;s rigid time frame for parental termination is overly simplistic
because it makes it difficult for decision makers to account for various individual circumstances.

It's 46 pages, but a very good read to begin to understand what happened here-- what should have been done, and what was not done, IMO.

Here is some more good reading!

http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Intere...eywords=Beyond+the+Best+Interest+of+the+Child

http://www.amazon.com/Before-Intere...d_sim_b_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=0EK6EVCKP2ET60WV18SH

And the sequel:

http://www.amazon.com/Best-Interest...eywords=Beyond+the+Best+Interest+of+the+Child

The authors speak in one voice in concluding that the continuity of care - continuity of a child's relationship with his or her adult caregiver - is a universal essential to the child's well-being. To this end, they stress that minimizing intrusions by the law is paramount to safeguarding the child's growth and development. "The least detrimental alternative" - the authors overarching guideline for assuring the continuity of the psychological parent-child relationship - has been cited in more than a thousand child custody cases since 1973.

BBM

 

[PaulaSB]

He is not a sperm donor a stupid name given to any man who won't tamely let his child be taken to satisfy the selfish like the Hodgins. Really do you think ANYONE would use them as foster parents again they broke the contract they signed when they went behind dcs back when they were sorting out to return Sonya. They broke the contract over and over by plastering her face all over the media against rules. He was found NOT TO ABANDON HER in the adoption appeal. The only reason it took eight years is because they went to court over and over again. They have tried to adopt her 5 times one overturned on appeal the others a straight no. Sonya has said over and over again she wants to stay with her dad and if the former fosters had any decency morals or conscience they would listen to her say sorry and maybe in the end they might be allowed to see her again. (modsnip)

 

[tiredblondy]

He is not a sperm donor a stupid name given to any man who won't tamely let his child be taken to satisfy the selfish like the Hodgins. Really do you think ANYONE would use them as foster parents again they broke the contract they signed when they went behind dcs back when they were sorting out to return Sonya. They broke the contract over and over by plastering her face all over the media against rules. He was found NOT TO ABANDON HER in the adoption appeal. The only reason it took eight years is because they went to court over and over again. They have tried to adopt her 5 times one overturned on appeal the others a straight no. Sonya has said over and over again she wants to stay with her dad and if the former fosters had any decency morals or conscience they would listen to her say sorry and maybe in the end they might be allowed to see her again. (modsnip)

It's so hard isn't it.

When we did adopt our two children at ages 2 and 5 we had to become foster parents first. It would have broken my heart to have to give them back but we signed papers stating we would -if the parental rights were not terminated successfully and they were to go back to biological parents.

We were told over and over that nothing was permanent as we were foster parents. With the 5 yr old having been in 7 (yes seven!) foster home placements when she and her brother came to live with us, I really did not think there would have been a problem. But....we understood there were no guarantees. We chose not to talk about this being their forever home till after the adoption was close to finalization. Why break their hearts again when we could not guarantee our promises?

Finally after parental rights were terminated we got the green light to pursue adoption process. A child cannot be adopted unless parental rights are terminated. There is at least a year wait to make the adoption final once the adoption process starts.As long as he is her biological parent they can not adopt. I personally have never heard of foster parents suing to terminate a biological parents rights to their child??

Another thing, I have known several people who have been in jail for some pretty serious charges and since they've been out it's like they have a second chance in life and are good parents. I sure hope this is what happens in this case.

I will tell you what happens as the child/children become/s more secure in their setting, they will have less and less to say to the foster parents. That's what happened with our situation. They did not want to answer letters, talk on the phone etc. So the communication just faded away unless I sent updates and that became less and less.

Good grief, this sweet child is 10 years old. She is certainly old enough to tell the judge how she feels.

 

[tiredblondy]

Oh and one more thing, the publicity of all this must be so embarrassing for her! Im sure she would let people know if she was unhappy.


http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/dickson/2014/07/19/another-birthday-passes-custody-case-drags/12854809/

Gerald Papica, ombudsman with the Tennessee Commission on Children and Youth, is tasked with monitoring DCS and has been an outspoken critic when he's seen mistakes. He agreed to review Sonya's full, confidential case file and said that DCS had acted appropriately. And he said that, despite McCaul's criminal history, he agrees with Lane.
"The thing is, as foster parents, they're protecting the child, they're nurturing the child, but at the same time the foster parents are expected to release the child when the time is right," Papica said. "There was nothing against him that he mistreated this child. He has the ultimate right." ..........
( We were well aware of this when we were acting as foster parents.)

 

[jjenny]

As far as I can tell the child didn't directly tell the judge how she felt.
It was done through the lawyer who communicated with child over the phone.
Not even face to face. There was no hearing done on what is in the best interests of the child.
I am flabbergasted by these events.
Seems like the judge should have at least have had the hearing on the best interests of the child before sending a child to live with the bio dad. Bio dad has a criminal record and spend a lot of time in prison.
As for his parental rights, they would have been automatically terminated based on law because his original sentence was longer than 10 years.
But he got his sentence reduced because he had information about a murder.
That's the reason his rights were not terminated. Which hardly seems right to me.

 

[tiredblondy]

I don't know what the answer is but after hearing about the foster parents sharing the recording of her phone conversation with Anderson Cooper on tv and how it embarrassed her,I'm surprised she would say anything on the phone to anyone. I would hope DCS would provide her a private place to take the phone call with these people who are representing her.

http://wdkn.com/sonyas-reps-say-she...rents-hodgins-file-new-petition-for-adoption/
But Duke said a teacher at Sonya&#8217;s school in Nebraska asked her about a recorded phone conversation that the Hodgins allowed to be played during an interview on Anderson Cooper 360 on CNN. Duke said up to that point, there was no indication that Sonya was aware of the media and social media firestorm that has been touched off since she was returned to her biological father in January. She said Sonya reported being embarrassed because her friends were nearby and overheard the teacher question her about the program. Duke and Honeycutt reported Sonya doesn&#8217;t like that a private phone call was shared with the media and is very upset with the Hodgins and repeated her request that personal items from her room in Dickson be sent to her in Nebraska. With the Hodgins and their attorney present at Wednesday&#8217;s review, Jackson said because (lots more info in the article)

I also think her legal atty and guardian ad litem in Tenn should be sure she has the same appointed where she is and then talk to those after their monitoring. If not, I think one of them should visit her and spend time with her and I don't understand how a guardian ad litem can do their report without the visitation?

 

[K_Z]

Finally, some good news in the case of SH/ SM.

Fight over 10-year-old Sonya will stay in Tennessee

A judge in Nebraska has refused to take on the case of Sonya McCaul, a 10-year-old girl whose custody has been at issue in court for almost her entire life.

"The interests of the minor child are best addressed in Tennessee," Douglas County, Neb., District Judge Leigh Ann Retelsdorf wrote in an order issued Wednesday. The judge refused the case, citing pending litigation here and because Sonya is in the custody of the Tennessee Department of Children's Services.

The Nebraska court's decision means the legal wrangling will continue in Tennessee, and in front of a new judge. Juvenile Court Judge Andrew Jackson, who previously handled the case, did not win re-election.

The foster parents, David and Kim Hodgin, have continued to press for a hearing over whether it is in Sonya's best interest to be with her father. Keeping the case in Tennessee was a bit of good news, David Hodgin said. He said the family would go forward "hard and fast" on the case.

http://www.tennessean.com/story/new...-year-old-sonya-will-stay-tennessee/19595643/

Controversial custody case moving back to TN

A Nebraska judge has ruled that this the case needs to go back to Dickson to determine who 10-year-old Sonya will live with.

A Dickson Circuit Court judge previously ruled that Sonya was illegally sent to live with her biological father in Nebraska.

The case will come back to Tennessee with a new judge and perhaps in an entirely different court.

Judge Andy Jackson's decision to send Sonya to Nebraska with her father, John McCaul, was harshly overturned.

The Department of Children's Services still has custody of the child. DCS is still in favor of leaving Sonya with her biological father.

The Hodgins had filed for adoption and raised Sonya for eight and a half years.

"We have no reason or plans to disrupt her current placement in Nebraska, as we understand that she continues to do well," DCS said in a statement. "Mr. McCaul's constitutional rights to raise his child are protected in both states, and either state is equally suitable to evaluate the legal arguments in this case."

Well-known Nashville lawyer Bob Tuke has been following the case with great interest and believes DCS is misguided.

"I would say to DCS to get out of the statute and read it and also consider what its real job is, to look after the best interest of the child," Tuke said.

The Hodgins now hope for a best of interest hearing as soon as possible.

Read more: http://www.wsmv.com/story/27492100/controversial-custody-case-moving-back-to-tn#ixzz3LSt0mYEr

*Good video at above link; unable to embed

 

[MyBelle]

As far as I can tell the child didn't directly tell the judge how she felt.
It was done through the lawyer who communicated with child over the phone.
Not even face to face. There was no hearing done on what is in the best interests of the child.
I am flabbergasted by these events.
Seems like the judge should have at least have had the hearing on the best interests of the child before sending a child to live with the bio dad. Bio dad has a criminal record and spend a lot of time in prison.
As for his parental rights, they would have been automatically terminated based on law because his original sentence was longer than 10 years.
But he got his sentence reduced because he had information about a murder.
That's the reason his rights were not terminated. Which hardly seems right to me.

Doesn't matter that his sentence was reduced. He lived and was convicted in Nebraska. Parental rights are not terminated in Nebraska when convicted of the crimes McCaul was charged with in the first place.

This case was returned to Tennessee by Judge Retelsdorf because that state has custody of the child. Under the federal uniform custody act, custody has to be in the state where the child has lived for six months with the custodial parent. Right now, Tennessee is the "parent"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Child_Custody_Jurisdiction_And_Enforcement_Act

I think what will likely happen is that Tennessee Court will hold a best interest hearing and DCS will recommend the court return custody to the father.

I still question why the person who took the child to Tennessee and abandoned her hasn't been charged with kidnapping.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

I have not posted in a very long time. This case has bothered me since it started. I follow the updates via Facebook. I've not joined pages there. I initially bought into the foster parent version of how horrible the bio-dad was (was emotionally triggering many things from my own childhood.) I even bought in to signing their petition. It only took me about a week to realize how horribly misleading their BS about BSH is. The system was "played by them" from day one at the expense of her bio-family and now to the detriment of this child. If they had presented themselves as foster parents to her from day one & participated in the transitional plan that DCS had been trying to implement all along, this poor girl could have had the best of both worlds and families. Now they have screwed it up for her. And I do think they are the ones who are being the most detrimental to her.

I agree and I also believe the FBI needs to investigate this case and the case in Oklahoma that put Baby Veronica in a tug of war between her biological father and a couple in another state wanting to adopt her. The father finally gave up because he did not have the funds or legal resources to continue to fight. The same group of PR people and attorneys were involved in both cases.

Mothers who agree to give up their parental rights and want to put their infant up for adoption are being aided by unscrupulous attorneys who try to circumvent the other parent's rights. These are basically black market adoptions. Fathers in Utah have filed a federal lawsuit because the state's adoption laws are so lax.

"Now, a dozen unmarried biological fathers have filed a federal lawsuit against the state, arguing their children were put up for adoption in Utah without their consent and in violation of their constitutional rights."

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/...does-utah-violatetherightsofunwedfathers.html

 

[jjenny]

Doesn't matter that his sentence was reduced. He lived and was convicted in Nebraska. Parental rights are not terminated in Nebraska when convicted of the crimes McCaul was charged with in the first place.

This case was returned to Tennessee by Judge Retelsdorf because that state has custody of the child. Under the federal uniform custody act, custody has to be in the state where the child has lived for six months with the custodial parent. Right now, Tennessee is the "parent"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Child_Custody_Jurisdiction_And_Enforcement_Act

I think what will likely happen is that Tennessee Court will hold a best interest hearing and DCS will recommend the court return custody to the father.

I still question why the person who took the child to Tennessee and abandoned her hasn't been charged with kidnapping.

JMO

Father gave permission for the babysitter to take child to TN. So how exactly can it be kidnapping?

 

[Wagara]

This is a sad case to read about.

 

[MyBelle]

Father gave permission for the babysitter to take child to TN. So how exactly can it be kidnapping?

The babysitter duped the father by telling him she needed to care for a sick relative. She then abandoned the baby in Tennessee. The father did not give her permission to abandon her.

18 U.S.C. § 1201 : US Code - Section 1201: Kidnapping -
(a) Whoever unlawfully seizes, confines, inveigles, decoys, kidnaps, abducts, or carries away and holds for ransom or reward or otherwise any person, except in the case of a minor by the parent thereof, when - - See more at: http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/55/1201#sthash.uKsEDKVo.dpuf

 

[Supernovae]

The fact that the babysitter went to that kind of trouble tells you something about what she had seen of his parenting. You also need to consider the possibility that a mother who has her baby adopted without telling the biological father might have a very good reason.

 

[MyBelle]

The fact that the babysitter went to that kind of trouble tells you something about what she had seen of his parenting. You also need to consider the possibility that a mother who has her baby adopted without telling the biological father might have a very good reason.

In this case, the father had custody, not the mother. Biological fathers do have parental rights. The only reason I can think of for a mother to try to adopt a child without telling the father is $$$$$ and that is illegal.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

My question to all of those who defend this father: would you let your child be raised by him?

 

[Soulmagent]

My question to all of those who defend this father: would you let your child be raised by him?

I think he is just wanting to raise his own child ,not mine.