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

[kaen]

The benefit to her is having no real responsibilities, to gain sympathy...adults tend to be extra nice to disabled children, many dote on them & coddle them. The Barnett’s goal was for her to lead as normal of an independent life as possible. Like getting a job, cooking & cleaning, shopping, laundry etc. Natalia did not want to be an adult. Being an adult is HARD. I would imagine it’s EXTRA HARD for a dwarf.

Openly trying to kill them & doing other disturbing things - her goal was to get moved to the next unsuspecting family and try again. I suspect that worked on the previous adoptive parents.

Just as we can not say what Natalia really wanted or her goals, I don't think we can say that the Barnett's goal was as pure if, in fact, this child was actually a child and not the adult they forced her to be.

Do you know the Barnett family? Do you know any family this child lived with? Do you know her? I guess I wonder how you can be so sure that everything that has been written and spoken by the Barnetts is true and that Natalia is a monster. For me, I am taking the work of LE and seeing that they would not pursue this unless there was some fire beyond the smoke blowing toward them. I can say I have some doubts but I will never demonize a child but I always tend to believe that there is good in every child waiting to be uncovered.

 

[Dawn Day]

How do?
We don’t know if Kristine just walked in the bathroom.
When I did fostercare, I typically asked children that age (5 & up) if they bathed themselves, they all said yes. I’d run the bathwater for them, lay out fresh towels. Usually by day 3 they were calling me in there for help with hair or just to sit on the toilet & keep em company.

We know because Kristine told us. She said it was their first night at home and she gave her a bath. Michael also told Inside Edition that Kristine called him into the bathroom and said “LOOK!!!”

 

[Linda7NJ]

Kristine told us what her goals were, she acted on them.

actually, if Gitana is correct, you are wrong and the Barrett’s are psychopaths.

And I am more convinced than ever that this is true.

Every. Last. Intelligent. Point. Made: By our verified attorney.

Agreed- If I’m wrong and Kristine Barnett is proved to have manufactured evidence she’s a diabolical narcissist.

 

[Medstudies]

The benefit to her is having no real responsibilities, to gain sympathy...adults tend to be extra nice to disabled children, many dote on them & coddle them. The Barnett’s goal was for her to lead as normal of an independent life as possible. Like getting a job, cooking & cleaning, shopping, laundry etc. Natalia did not want to be an adult. Being an adult is HARD. I would imagine it’s EXTRA HARD for a dwarf.

Openly trying to kill them & doing other disturbing things - her goal was to get moved to the next unsuspecting family and try again. I suspect that worked on the previous adoptive parents.

How could you possibly know what any of the goals were, for any of the involved? How do you know what Natalie wanted or didn’t want? Please site your sources. TIA

 

[Linda7NJ]

How could you possibly know what any of the goals were, for any of the involved? How do you know what Natalie wanted or didn’t want? Please site your sources. TIA

It’s was a hypothetical in response to questions- sorry I didn’t make that clear.

 

[kaen]

Or....in the Ukraine orphanage they back dated her birthdate because it’s far easier to adopt out a younger child, Natalia would know that.

According the “birth mother” they told her for thousands of dollars an American family could make her normal with surgery...

So....we have a motive to get everyone on the same page over in the Ukraine.

The Ukrainian orphanages that I have experienced have no great need to back date as it is their policy to move children at 16 out of the orphanage either to the streets or institutions if they are disabled. Natalia if she was older would have been easily placed in an institution or sent out to the streets. (The sad fact is, if Yuroslov doesn’t get adopted, he faces a tragic future. Kids in Ukraine “age out” of the orphanage at 16 years old. Most of them have no where to go except government dormitories where drugs and crime are rampant. Not Forgotten: The Orphans of Ukraine).

Children with disabilities who are moved to institutions face an equally grim future (When orphans in Ukraine reach adulthood, some are deemed "incapacitated" - a label that consigns them to a life in institutions. But many of these young people may have nothing wrong with them at all. "It is an official classification in Ukraine that critics say strips the bearer of basic human rights.Being labelled "incapacitated" means that when someone designated as such reaches the age of 18, rather than leaving residential care, they are sent to live in psychiatric institutions or old people's homes. They are even forbidden from living alone or marrying, and if they have children they too belong to the state."A life trapped in care for Ukraine orphans).

Many children were labor trafficked in the Ukraine especially in the years before and after Natalia was adopted (https://www.driadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/No-Way-Home-final..pdf). She didn't have an intellectual disability so she would be prime for labor trafficking. Families who have placed their kids in orphanages don't get a say in their life by this point.

I don't think that a major issue is backdating to get rid of kids with disabilities. I think that warehousing and trafficking (sex or labor) would be more likely.

 

[kaen]

Kristine told us what her goals were, she acted on them.


Agreed- If I’m wrong and Kristine Barnett is proved to have manufactured evidence she’s a diabolical narcissist.

I don't really care what her psychological classification is. In my book, if she manufactured evidence she is a criminal who abused a child and set her out to be vulnerable. And, if that is the case she should go to jail.

 

[squareandrabbet]

A person that cunning and manipulative and supposedly totally capable of living alone could easily live with a roantic partner and bilk people out of their savings online. At the very least you'd think she'd pick people with money to live with and not people who appear to work at fast food restaurants and praise Jesus all the time. Can you explain this?

I think you make some very compelling points, naturally.

I agree that if you were going to "scam" a family, you'd be on the lookout for another, different family with money. (Where, for example, is Natalia's self-run funding campaign? I feel pretty sure she has the skills to set one up.)

I also agree it's very implausible that Natalia tried or would have remotely succeeded in "dragging" a full size, full strength adult into an electric fence.

Likewise, it does beggar belief why the Mans would be her first choice as a permanent family, if she did not actually enjoy hanging out with a family who is in church every time the doors are open. She must, I think, find the religion comforting. As someone raised in an authoritarian religious home and expected to be in church every time the doors were open; I am not that person, and I wasn't remotely tolerable as a teen who would rather have stayed home and watched "Dallas" and "Falcon Crest" than sit through an agonizingly boring evening at youth group. The Mans would not have enjoyed having me in the household; and at least my parents, as blood relations, were likely to love me even when they didn't like me. I find it very hard to believe that Natalia is mild as milk with the Man family, if she hasn't had any type of treatment in the interim (pharmaceutical; etc.).

I also think it's kind of interesting, if it is accurate, that someone said upthread that Christine B had three sons (I think). Did the two non-genius neuro-typical bio-sons get any attention?

Basically, in my opinion the Kristine Barnett retailing of the story sounds like the movies, which may be why it seems familiar and identifiable to people.

It also, for me, unspools very predictably. The Man family's part in the story is not predictable. It does not fit into this "The Orphan" paradigm. It may, however, fit into a heartwarming family dramedy. Time will tell.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I don't really care what her psychological classification is. In my book, if she manufactured evidence she is a criminal who abused a child and set her out to be vulnerable. And, if that is the case she should go to jail.

Agreed

 

[gitana1]

The Ukrainian orphanages that I have experienced have no great need to back date as it is their policy to move children at 16 out of the orphanage either to the streets or institutions if they are disabled. Natalia if she was older would have been easily placed in an institution or sent out to the streets. (The sad fact is, if Yuroslov doesn’t get adopted, he faces a tragic future. Kids in Ukraine “age out” of the orphanage at 16 years old. Most of them have no where to go except government dormitories where drugs and crime are rampant. Not Forgotten: The Orphans of Ukraine).

Children with disabilities who are moved to institutions face an equally grim future (When orphans in Ukraine reach adulthood, some are deemed "incapacitated" - a label that consigns them to a life in institutions. But many of these young people may have nothing wrong with them at all. "It is an official classification in Ukraine that critics say strips the bearer of basic human rights.Being labelled "incapacitated" means that when someone designated as such reaches the age of 18, rather than leaving residential care, they are sent to live in psychiatric institutions or old people's homes. They are even forbidden from living alone or marrying, and if they have children they too belong to the state."A life trapped in care for Ukraine orphans).

Many children were labor trafficked in the Ukraine especially in the years before and after Natalia was adopted (https://www.driadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/No-Way-Home-final..pdf). She didn't have an intellectual disability so she would be prime for labor trafficking. Families who have placed their kids in orphanages don't get a say in their life by this point.

I don't think that a major issue is backdating to get rid of kids with disabilities. I think that warehousing and trafficking (sex or labor) would be more likely.

No but to be fair, they make money off adoptions so they'd rather adopt them out than let them age out.

But as someone cited earlier, (maybe me or someone else, I can't recall now) while foreign agencies will sometimes age back the date on birth certificates they usually only do so about a year. I mean it would be really scandalous and cause problems for whatever orphanage and/or agency got caught changing an age by a decade for a kid. They'd lose "business". Word would spread that they falsified records for an adult so they could adopt her out.

Because they couldn't control a psychopathic young adult once she came here. There would be no guarantees she would keep the secret.

 

[Dawn Day]

I know nothing about divorces- are those records public? Might be an interesting read....

Yes divorce records are public. How much is available on line, however, varies dramatically. Sometimes you see nothing on line unless it’s appealed to a higher court (appellate). Sometimes, like with Indiana, you can see the motions filed and a short summary (follow this link and click the “start searching”; I’d link you directly to their divorce record but the links expire quickly courts.IN.gov: Public Records
When records aren’t available on line, there is often a computer at the county clerks office where you can search and find all manner of court records.

 

[gitana1]

I think you make some very compelling points, naturally.

I agree that if you were going to "scam" a family, you'd be on the lookout for another, different family with money. (Where, for example, is Natalia's self-run funding campaign? I feel pretty sure she has the skills to set one up.)

I also agree it's very implausible that Natalia tried or would have remotely succeeded in "dragging" a full size, full strength adult into an electric fence.

Likewise, it does beggar belief why the Mans would be her first choice as a permanent family, if she did not actually enjoy hanging out with a family who is in church every time the doors are open. She must, I think, find the religion comforting. As someone raised in an authoritarian religious home and expected to be in church every time the doors were open; I am not that person, and I wasn't remotely tolerable as a teen who would rather have stayed home and watched "Dallas" and "Falcon Crest" than sit through an agonizingly boring evening at youth group. The Mans would not have enjoyed having me in the household; and at least my parents, as blood relations, were likely to love me even when they didn't like me. I find it very hard to believe that Natalia is mild as milk with the Man family, if she hasn't had any type of treatment in the interim (pharmaceutical; etc.).

I also think it's kind of interesting, if it is accurate, that someone said upthread that Christine B had three sons (I think). Did the two non-genius neuro-typical bio-sons get any attention?

Basically, in my opinion the Kristine Barnett retailing of the story sounds like the movies, which may be why it seems familiar and identifiable to people.

It also, for me, unspools very predictably. The Man family's part in the story is not predictable. It does not fit into this "The Orphan" paradigm. It may, however, fit into a heartwarming family dramedy. Time will tell.

Ha ha! Well written.

You know I feel sorry for this girl.

I can believe she was a be older than presented but she might not know her age. She was described by Kristine Barrett as nervous when they first met. A cunning and manipulative psychopath wouldn't be nervous at all. She would know her role. But a child who had been in an orphanage for years, sent to a land where she at first didn't understand the language, who suffered a failed adoption (no evidence of any second adoption despite claims), and was now faced with a new "forever family" would indeed be nervous.

And then if she started her menstrual cycle while with them, I can imagine this poor kid would've been terrified and didn't know what to do but hide the scary thing coming out of her. God knows what she endured in the orphanage when she was in the Ukraine. Or what she endured here during a failed adoption of after if she was in foster care for any length of time. And if she was experiencing precocious puberty which is not uncommon with international adoptees due to trauma, as I linked earlier, I can only imagine her confusion and possible shame. She would've been unlikely to be educated regarding her period at that point given her supposed age. And given her history, she would be unlikely to go to her new "parents" like another kid probably would.

I c an only imagine what she might have thought: Will they blame me for this? Will they want me to leave like the other family?

Then later, she's told she's older. She's cast out of the house by the neurotic Barrett's. She's placed in a mental health facility. "You're mother explained all about your behavior. We see you have your period. You speak very well for someone your age. We think you're older than they've said. You're a teenager. Is that true? You're a teenager? It's safe for you tell the truth."

I can imagine that a confused kid who has been cast aside so many times might simply agree with whatever questions are asked. Just to be good. Just to be accepted.

I feel for this kid. Something about this whole case is really profoundly sad to me, beyond the freakish headlines.

I hope she feels cared for and accepted now. I hope she's doing okay.

 

[Dawn Day]

Ha ha! Well written.

You know I feel sorry for this girl.

I can believe she was a be older than presented but she might not know her age. She was described by Kristine Barrett as nervous when they first met. A cunning and manipulative psychopath wouldn't be nervous at all. She would know her role. But a child who had been in an orphanage for years, sent to a land where she at first didn't understand the language, who suffered a failed adoption (no evidence of any second adoption despite claims), and was now faced with a new "forever family" would indeed be nervous.

And then if she started her menstrual cycle while with them, I can imagine this poor kid would've been terrified and didn't know what to do but hide the scary thing coming out of her. God knows what she endured in the orphanage when she was in the Ukraine. Or what she endured here during a failed adoption of after if she was in foster care for any length of time. And if she was experiencing precocious puberty which is not uncommon with international adoptees due to trauma, as I linked earlier, I can only imagine her confusion and possible shame. She would've been unlikely to be educated regarding her period at that point given her supposed age. And given her history, she would be unlikely to go to her new "parents" like another kid probably would.

I c an only imagine what she might have thought: Will they blame me for this? Will they want me to leave like the other family?

Then later, she's told she's older. She's cast out of the house by the neurotic Barrett's. She's placed in a mental health facility. "You're mother explained all about your behavior. We see you have your period. You speak very well for someone your age. We think you're older than they've said. You're a teenager. Is that true? You're a teenager? It's safe for you tell the truth."

I can imagine that a confused kid who has been cast aside so many times might simply agree with whatever questions are asked. Just to be good. Just to be accepted.

I feel for this kid. Something about this whole case is really profoundly sad to me, beyond the freakish headlines.

I hope she feels cared for and accepted now. I hope she's doing okay.

When it comes to the supposed admitting to being over 18 at the locked down psych ward, I can’t help but think it went something like this: “Do you want to get out of here? Well you can’t leave until you accept reality. We know you are over 18. You have to acknowledge this before you can be discharged. Are you over 18? Your answer will determine whether you have to stay, or can get out.”
The case of Cam Brock comes to mind. After the police had her taken to the psych hospital, she had to “accept reality” before she could get released. She had to stop pretending she was a banker and that she owned a BMW, and that President Obama was one of her followers on Twitter. After 8 days She admitted All those things. Problem was, they were all TRUE EXCLUSIVE: L.I. woman says psych ward doctors believed she was delusional for insisting Obama follows her on Twitter

 

[cherrymeg]

NB has been living with another family for years, happily it would seem and now her life is being torn apart. I think the Barnetts are liars and frauds and deserve to be prosecuted. It's a shame that Natalia and the Mann family have to deal with judgement.

 

[cherrymeg]

When it comes to the supposed admitting to being over 18 at the locked down psych ward, I can’t help but think it went something like this: “Do you want to get out of here? Well you can’t leave until you accept reality. We know you are over 18. You have to acknowledge this before you can be discharged. Are you over 18? Your answer will determine whether you have to stay, or can get out.”
The case of Cam Brock comes to mind. After the police had her taken to the psych hospital, she had to “accept reality” before she could get released. She had to stop pretending she was a banker and that she owned a BMW, and that President Obama was one of her followers on Twitter. After 8 days She admitted All those things. Problem was, they were all TRUE EXCLUSIVE: L.I. woman says psych ward doctors believed she was delusional for insisting Obama follows her on Twitter

That makes sense. If you are stuck in a mental ward you can't do much while inside. Getting out is the first goal.

 

[Meloni88]

When it comes to the supposed admitting to being over 18 at the locked down psych ward, I can’t help but think it went something like this: “Do you want to get out of here? Well you can’t leave until you accept reality. We know you are over 18. You have to acknowledge this before you can be discharged. Are you over 18? Your answer will determine whether you have to stay, or can get out.”
The case of Cam Brock comes to mind. After the police had her taken to the psych hospital, she had to “accept reality” before she could get released. She had to stop pretending she was a banker and that she owned a BMW, and that President Obama was one of her followers on Twitter. After 8 days She admitted All those things. Problem was, they were all TRUE EXCLUSIVE: L.I. woman says psych ward doctors believed she was delusional for insisting Obama follows her on Twitter

I'm wondering about this too. I'm 100% satisfied the girl was a child in 2010 btw and I think I've got a pretty good idea of why the Barnett's did what they did. The only mystery left for me is if and why Dr McLaren wrote that bizarre letter and what actually happened during this mysterious psych ward stay. I know whenever I've taken my children to hospital or urgent care they ask for my ID and they take their medical history from me. They've never asked for my kids' IDs or any proof of what I am reporting about their past illnesses. They don't cross reference. Maybe if this psychiatric facility believed Natalia to be over 18 and a headcase it was because the Barnetts insisted she was. (Dee Dee Blanchard convinced doctors - and Gypsy herself - that she was 14 when she was really 23.) Then they had her age changed based on those medical records that were just going off the parents' information.

Looking over the Barnett's divorce proceedings... Kristine filed for a mental health evaluation of Michael. I'm speculating that that's something she likes to do to her, shall we say, adversaries. I think she's the one in need of a psych eval.

 

[kaen]

No but to be fair, they make money off adoptions so they'd rather adopt them out than let them age out.

But as someone cited earlier, (maybe me or someone else, I can't recall now) while foreign agencies will sometimes age back the date on birth certificates they usually only do so about a year. I mean it would be really scandalous and cause problems for whatever orphanage and/or agency got caught changing an age by a decade for a kid. They'd lose "business". Word would spread that they falsified records for an adult so they could adopt her out.

Because they couldn't control a psychopathic young adult once she came here. There would be no guarantees she would keep the secret.

The biggest flag when there is question about falsified documents is the child doesn't get their US government paperwork completed to bring the child to the US. Then, the country/province gets flagged and adoptions stop (Vietnam twice, Cambodia, Guatemala). Yes the orphanages make some money but a lot often goes into government or corrupt individual coffers. I was in country adopting when "irregularities" were discovered. All paperwork was scrutinized more, leaving the country with the children went on hold (families in limbo as they adopted in the country but couldn't bring the child to the US). Paperwork forging is not terribly common if a country/province/orphanage wants to continue to get cash subsidization. Also, adoptive parents and agencies often continue to provide aid to an orphanage way after the child has stepped on US soil. People who have witnessed the squalor often have a soft heart for the kids left behind. Once a scandal breaks or bribes or falsified/bad paperwork begins to be talked about (in private groups, usually not out in the open) the fund dry up. Nobody want to have to talk to USCIS about a fraudulent anything--it is scary and could alter adoptions, your own adoption or the care of the children left behind.

Baby selling and fraudulent paperwork is much more common than fraudulent paperwork for older children. Most people want babies.

 

[Meloni88]

Ha ha! Well written.

You know I feel sorry for this girl.

I can believe she was a be older than presented but she might not know her age. She was described by Kristine Barrett as nervous when they first met. A cunning and manipulative psychopath wouldn't be nervous at all. She would know her role. But a child who had been in an orphanage for years, sent to a land where she at first didn't understand the language, who suffered a failed adoption (no evidence of any second adoption despite claims), and was now faced with a new "forever family" would indeed be nervous.

And then if she started her menstrual cycle while with them, I can imagine this poor kid would've been terrified and didn't know what to do but hide the scary thing coming out of her. God knows what she endured in the orphanage when she was in the Ukraine. Or what she endured here during a failed adoption of after if she was in foster care for any length of time. And if she was experiencing precocious puberty which is not uncommon with international adoptees due to trauma, as I linked earlier, I can only imagine her confusion and possible shame. She would've been unlikely to be educated regarding her period at that point given her supposed age. And given her history, she would be unlikely to go to her new "parents" like another kid probably would.

I c an only imagine what she might have thought: Will they blame me for this? Will they want me to leave like the other family?

Then later, she's told she's older. She's cast out of the house by the neurotic Barrett's. She's placed in a mental health facility. "You're mother explained all about your behavior. We see you have your period. You speak very well for someone your age. We think you're older than they've said. You're a teenager. Is that true? You're a teenager? It's safe for you tell the truth."

I can imagine that a confused kid who has been cast aside so many times might simply agree with whatever questions are asked. Just to be good. Just to be accepted.

I feel for this kid. Something about this whole case is really profoundly sad to me, beyond the freakish headlines.

I hope she feels cared for and accepted now. I hope she's doing okay.

This is one of the worst parts for me - using her early onset menstruation against her. Scary enough as is without an adult freaking out and telling you you're not who you say you are because of it. Carrie mom vibes. If they'd even done the most cursory research they would have found that precocious puberty is 15-20 times more common in internationally adopted girls. Why is no one in the media pointing this out? This supposed smoking gun evidence that the girl was so much older than claimed is very easily explained. I'd bet Dr Riggs informed her of that when she took her to him but it went in one ear and out the other. I also think they are likely massively exaggerating how much hair she had that first day. It was probably Tanner II or III at most but Kristine is dramatic AF.

 

[ioethe]

Ha ha! Well written.

You know I feel sorry for this girl.

I can believe she was a be older than presented but she might not know her age. She was described by Kristine Barrett as nervous when they first met. A cunning and manipulative psychopath wouldn't be nervous at all. She would know her role. But a child who had been in an orphanage for years, sent to a land where she at first didn't understand the language, who suffered a failed adoption (no evidence of any second adoption despite claims), and was now faced with a new "forever family" would indeed be nervous.

And then if she started her menstrual cycle while with them, I can imagine this poor kid would've been terrified and didn't know what to do but hide the scary thing coming out of her. God knows what she endured in the orphanage when she was in the Ukraine. Or what she endured here during a failed adoption of after if she was in foster care for any length of time. And if she was experiencing precocious puberty which is not uncommon with international adoptees due to trauma, as I linked earlier, I can only imagine her confusion and possible shame. She would've been unlikely to be educated regarding her period at that point given her supposed age. And given her history, she would be unlikely to go to her new "parents" like another kid probably would.

I c an only imagine what she might have thought: Will they blame me for this? Will they want me to leave like the other family?

Then later, she's told she's older. She's cast out of the house by the neurotic Barrett's. She's placed in a mental health facility. "You're mother explained all about your behavior. We see you have your period. You speak very well for someone your age. We think you're older than they've said. You're a teenager. Is that true? You're a teenager? It's safe for you tell the truth."

I can imagine that a confused kid who has been cast aside so many times might simply agree with whatever questions are asked. Just to be good. Just to be accepted.

I feel for this kid. Something about this whole case is really profoundly sad to me, beyond the freakish headlines.

I hope she feels cared for and accepted now. I hope she's doing okay.

It has just struck me - and I sincerely hope that it’s pure imagination on my part - that having her period is not the only possible reason for those areas of her clothing being bloody, or for her feeling shame and wishing to hide it.

 

[ioethe]

@Linda7NJ I would love to hear your perspective on is the following:

1. How is it that an adult Ukrainian scam artist who came here as an adult or older teen has no accent and can't speak Ukrainian?

Why would she be accent free if she came here at age 18?

2. Or do you think she's been here for years and somehow got involved with an adoption agency faking that she's a kid so she could for some reason live with a family as a child?

3. If so, wouldn't her passport show when she came or do you think she has a hidden American identity and used a different passport to go to the Ukraine and pretend to come back as an adult?

4. And why would a sophisticated adult scam artist cunning enough to fake her identity, falsify adoption records, travel back and forth to the Ukraine and fool an adoption agency need to live with random people and demand they care for her? Couldn't she bilk people for money on a crowd sourcing network or via internet sob stories? She's supposedly able-bodied and self-sufficient enough to live entirely on her own. Why would she need to be involved in an intricate plan to make people take her into their home as a child? I don't understand the purpose. Can you explain?

Is she getting adoption agency kickbacks? If so, why not just disappear after awhile after getting the funds? Why smear bodily fluids on walls and openly try to kill the family?

How does any of this make sense?

Where is her accent?
Where is her passport showing she travelled back and forth to the Ukraine years ago?
Where is evidence of the life insurance policies she took out on the Barrett's?
Her secret bank account holding kick back monies from a fake adoption?

How the heck is any of this narrative logical? It sounds like a movie.

I’d like to tag a further question into Linda’s already excellent points;

We know she had a bone scan in 2010 which said she was roughly 8. We know she had another in 2012 saying she was 11.

Are you suggesting that

a. The first bone scan was wrong
Or
b. A 19 year old’s skeleton grew in a fashion consistent with that of an 8 year old?