IN - Couple charged with abandonment of adopted child after legally changing her age, Sept 2019

[gitana1]

In my experience it’s not easy to undo unless you have another party lined up to adopt.

I think you’re right. Except in a case where the adoptee is not a child. Then it should be relatively easy to revoke due to fraud.

In cases where the child is a minor of course they’re not going to leave the child without a parent. But the Barrett’s are claiming she’s an adult and that they adopted her through fraud. So they have clear grounds to undo the adoption.

And to sue the adoption agency.

Why haven’t they?

 

[Gussified]

(I guess the child prodigy is okay on his own in Canada. In the meantime the siblings are where?)

RSBM
If they moved to Canada in 2013 for the son to go to school, then there’s a good chance he’s graduated by now. Don’t know his age, but if still a minor, they may have moved again for his education or whatever.

 

[gitana1]

New to this thread, but not to WS.
I’ve seen a few references in this thread to the Barnett’s taking her SS checks. Haven’t seen that anywhere else. Only that they were notified that Mr Barnett was no longer beneficiary, which I took to mean the person to whom the death benefit would be paid in the event of the SS recipients death.

Is there a source that says the parents were taking her SS checks?

The term beneficiary in this context does not refer to who the death benefit would be paid to. The beneficiary of SSI is the disabled person or, if the disabled person is a child, their parent or guardian. That’s not my opinion. It’s fact.

So by the Barrett’s words it appears they were receiving her SSI checks for a time after they left her. Probably because they had been receiving them prior to the age change, as parents of a disabled minor.

 

[gitana1]

Thanks, yes, that’s what I’m referring to. I used to work in life insurance, and to me, the beneficiary is the one who gets a death benefit. So that’s how I read it.

I guess I can see why some may interpret that as he was getting her checks, but has he been charged with SS fraud? The quote doesn’t say who sent the letter. If it was from the SS administration, then wouldn’t SS have known he was getting her checks?

It just does not seem clear to me that they were taking her checks, so don’t want to see it become internet fact.

No. It’s not the same as in insurance. But I get why someone would think so for sure.

“A beneficiary is a person who receives Social Security and/or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments. Social Security and SSI are two different programs.”
Social Security Administration - Representative Payee Program

 

[gitana1]

I actually starting googling looking for what she was talking about, then I searched Facebook- I couldn’t find ANYTHING except comparisons to the movie Orphan....
She certainly begged to be seen as a martyr

She has many narcissistic qualities - I watched lots of her videos. Still....I found her video testimony believable

So did most who read her book. Except a few eagle eyed people who realized what she was saying she accomplished was impossible for one person to do within a 24 hour period. Even without sleep.

 

[Gussified]

No. It’s not the same as in insurance. But I get why someone would think so for sure.

Still, seems ambiguous at best. In any case, to my knowledge, no one has been charged with SS fraud in this case. Outside of this thread, have there been any allegations that they took her SS checks? Any other MSM made any clearer statements about her SS checks?

 

[Medstudies]

RSBM
If they moved to Canada in 2013 for the son to go to school, then there’s a good chance he’s graduated by now. Don’t know his age, but if still a minor, they may have moved again for his education or whatever.

He’s 21. (DOB on May 26, 1998) per Wikipedia.

The point: the article noted the various addresses and alternative name, she has used in just the past 2-3 months.

 

[Amonet]

RSBM

As Natalia spent her early years in a Ukrainian orphanage, presumably in a ward for children with disabilities, it is quite possible she had very little exposure even to her native language before leaving the orphanage, as the children are paid so little attention by staff and are left on their own in their cribs without stimulation or human contact much of the time. If that is the case, English may for all intents and purposes be her "first language" – at least, the first she was exposed to regularly enough to absorb the basics of verbal communication, in the time she spent in her first two adoptive homes and wherever she was in between those two adoptions. (Foster care? A US orphanage? Do we have any idea?) Therefore her pace of learning English may have been closer to that of a baby/toddler's rapid acquisition of language in the first two years (roughly; as parents know it varies child to child) than that of an older preschooler or elementary-age child beginning to learn a second language after developing his/her early communication skills in another. If Natalia is not cognitively impaired, but simply delayed due to an early childhood of profound neglect and inattention, this could be an explanation for her fluent, unaccented English by the time the Barnetts encountered her – after she left Ukraine she was exposed to a variety of people trying to communicate with her in English for many months, after years of isolation from meaningful language. She was a tabula rasa, and she sucked it up like a sponge, just like babies do.

MOO, IMO, etc. I am not a language development expert!

I'd also say that 'if' N was homeschooled in the previous placement, that could contribute to her having precocious language when she went to the (adoptive parents who allegedly 'abandoned' her, I've drawn a blank on their surname?).

I can imagine myself using similar words at age ten to twelve to the example given by K. It's only because I often related better to adults than to kids my own age and my language was more adult than peers of my own age.

Younger children are supposed to be able to pick up accents a lot quicker than adults, so losing the old language and accent would possibly suggest a younger age than an older age.

 

[Amonet]

She's clearly put on weight, that makes your face change and your *advertiser censored* grow....
I know that for a fact!

N's face has lengthened, in the way that a child's face changes from the rounder child shape into the longer adult form in the teens.

I don't think she's put on that much weight to account for the changes to the chest. She's only short, and it looks to me more like the adult filling out kind of 'weight' not 'fat' weight.

 

[Indy_ar]

t was also in 2012 that police first began asking questions, although correspondence reviewed by DailyMailTV suggests they were trying to establish whether an immigration fraud took place before the Barnetts had any involvement with Natalia.

Detective Scott Clouse of the Westfield City Police Department told them via email that he had referred the case to the FBI and ICE because he suspected there was 'false age reporting' prior to Natalia leaving Ukraine.

From the previously linked article

I think this actually fits perfectly in the timeline of events. Back in 2012, a judge changes the age of N. The police gets involved investigating possible immigration fraud issues (ICE is contacted). The investigation determines that N is in fact a minor and the Barnetts become suspects of abandonment.

 

[AgeofAquaruis]

So just wondering: Did Mr. Barnett witness any of these supposed sociopathic behaviors of Natalia? Death threats, poisoning attempts, etc? Hidden bloody menstrual evidence? He states he was called by his alarmed wife into the bathroom when she was bathing Natalia but does not state that HE actually witnessed anything concerning.

So far all I've seen is him confirming the stories his (ex) wife has told him. Maybe I missed something, I dunno.

One thing I didn't miss was the mother's FB video; I watched it all as it was happening live. The thing that stood out to me as the hinkiest was that she repeatedly claimed the only reason she was speaking out was because people online and in the media were demonizing her daughter Natalia. I haven't seen that anywhere and I've been following this closely.

She's the one who Demonized Natalia.

 

[Dawn Day]

I think Kristine’s statement about the SS and Michael having been the beneficiary establishes that they were receiving her checks. The correct term for that is Representative Payee. However, this is not necessarily fraud. As long as the funds were used for Natalia, there is no fraud. Further, although more common for minors to have a representative payee, any person receiving SS and incapable of managing their money could end up having a representative payee. The Rpayee does not have to be a guardian. Sometimes it’s even a close friend, or an institution if the beneficiary is institutionalized.
Gussified wondered if the “beneficiary” statement could mean the SS death benefit. The answer is NO. A worker does not get to assign a death benefit beneficiary.
What this whole SS shows in my opinion is Lying By Omission. Kristine wants people to think she’s this wonderful forgiving loving mother who supported Natalia but the reality is that the money being spent on rent and furnishings was Natalia’s money not the Barnett’s money

 

[Dawn Day]

I think this actually fits perfectly in the timeline of events. Back in 2012, a judge changes the age of N. The police gets involved investigating possible immigration fraud issues (ICE is contacted). The investigation determines that N is in fact a minor and the Barnetts become suspects of abandonment.

For all we know, the Barnett’s were trying to get her deported. Who knows?

 

[Medstudies]

I just keep circling back to the letter from the family friend/dad’s PCP.

The letter is dated 2016, her age change occurred in July 2012. What is point of this letter?

Has anyone seen the records provided for the initial change of age?

Were medical records from her personal physicians and tests reviewed by other medical experts?

 

[Amonet]

I just keep circling back to the letter from the family friend/dad’s PCP.

The letter is dated 2016, her age change occurred in July 2012. What is point of this letter?

Has anyone seen the records provided for the initial change of age?

Were medical records from her personal physicians and tests reviewed by other medical experts?

I think the current family who N's with tried going to court in 2016 to get the ruling about N's age overturned so that she'd legally be a minor again?

 

[Keine Engel]

I think Kristine’s statement about the SS ...
However, this is not necessarily fraud. As long as the funds were used for Natalia, there is no fraud. Further, although more common for minors to have a representative payee, any person receiving SS and incapable of managing their money could end up having a representative payee. The Rpayee does not have to be a guardian. Sometimes it’s even a close friend, or an institution if the beneficiary is institutionalized.
Gussified wondered if the “beneficiary” statement could mean the SS death benefit. The answer is NO. A worker does not get to assign a death benefit beneficiary.
What this whole SS shows in my opinion is Lying By Omission. Kristine wants people to think she’s this wonderful forgiving loving mother who supported Natalia but the reality is that the money being spent on rent and furnishings was Natalia’s money not the Barnett’s money

"Michael Barnett told officers that he and Kristine Barnett paid rent on the apartment but did not provide Natalia extra funds, The Washington Post reported."

A woman who claims she's the Ukrainian orphan's biological mom says the girl is a child

From The Washington Post article;
(dated 17th Sept)

...they moved the whole family to Canada in the summer of 2013 so that he could follow his passion, putting their Indiana home on the market.

Around that same time, the Barnetts’ adopted daughter told police, her parents rented her an apartment in downtown Lafayette, Ind., near the home of Purdue University. She knew no one there. Michael Barnett later told detectives that he and his then-wife paid the rent on the apartment but didn’t provide the girl with any other financial support.

What happened next is unclear, though an anonymous law enforcement source told WLFI that the girl’s neighbors “took her under their wing.”

..And authorities have hinted that there could be even more strange details to come.

“This is going to end up on a TV show,” an anonymous law enforcement official told WLFI on Thursday.

 

[lalalemon]

Video clips I have not seen before of Natalia while she was with the Barnett’s

Pay close attention to the one - she appears much older in it.

With so much talk of weight gain, I’m thinking of Natalia let herself gain some weight she looked much older, perhaps she carefully monitored her food intake as to not gain weight.

So these videos are all from different times?
I really don't think she looks any different in any of them, except the one where she talks to the camera as she has longer hair which is tied up.
Clearly not much bigger height wise either, if at all.

 

[AgeofAquaruis]

He’s 21. (DOB on May 26, 1998) per Wikipedia.

The point: the article noted the various addresses and alternative name, she has used in just the past 2-3 months.

How many more does she go by???????

 

[gitana1]

I'd also say that 'if' N was homeschooled in the previous placement, that could contribute to her having precocious language when she went to the (adoptive parents who allegedly 'abandoned' her, I've drawn a blank on their surname?).

I can imagine myself using similar words at age ten to twelve to the example given by K. It's only because I often related better to adults than to kids my own age and my language was more adult than peers of my own age.

Younger children are supposed to be able to pick up accents a lot quicker than adults, so losing the old language and accent would possibly suggest a younger age than an older age.

I personally know several kids who immigrated here as children. Most lose the accent within less than a year. Unless they’re teenagers or are Hispanic and moving to an area where most people speak Spanish. Then it can be harder.

It’s strange to me that anyone would think a kid wouldn’t lose her accent in two years.

 

[gitana1]

I think Kristine’s statement about the SS and Michael having been the beneficiary establishes that they were receiving her checks. The correct term for that is Representative Payee. However, this is not necessarily fraud. As long as the funds were used for Natalia, there is no fraud. Further, although more common for minors to have a representative payee, any person receiving SS and incapable of managing their money could end up having a representative payee. The Rpayee does not have to be a guardian. Sometimes it’s even a close friend, or an institution if the beneficiary is institutionalized.
Gussified wondered if the “beneficiary” statement could mean the SS death benefit. The answer is NO. A worker does not get to assign a death benefit beneficiary.
What this whole SS shows in my opinion is Lying By Omission. Kristine wants people to think she’s this wonderful forgiving loving mother who supported Natalia but the reality is that the money being spent on rent and furnishings was Natalia’s money not the Barnett’s money

Exactly. Not fraud but they act like they were doing this charitable thing by paying for an apartment for her. With Natalia’s money.