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

[ioethe]

It sounds like she luckily found a nice family after being abandoned. The DuPauls acted like responsible people and maybe realized she needed more attention or help than they could provide. Adopting an older child from another country or even this country can be difficult because of their backgrounds. They might not bond or they might have behavioral issues. Financially as an adoptive parent you are responsible for your child, unless you get their age changed. You could have to pay for psychiatrists, tutors, physical therapy, it would depend on health insurance but that might be more work than a family is willing to take on.

Oh don’t get me wrong, I’m not criticising the DuPauls - they behaved in a perfectly responsible manner. It’s just a shame it didn’t work out is all.

 

[cherrymeg]

Oh don’t get me wrong, I’m not criticising the DuPauls - they behaved in a perfectly responsible manner. It’s just a shame it didn’t work out is all.

It is sad that her life seemed to be going well and now she and her family (the Mans) are being scrutinized by the media. I understand that maybe the state had to do a thorough investigation but she could have been in danger for those years had she met the wrong people. A child living as an adult is vulnerable.

 

[Meloni88]

Nicole DePaul said they didnt end up adopting her because the first family was making it "impossible'.

 

[ioethe]

Nicole DePaul said they didnt end up adopting her because the first family was making it "impossible'.

Would that be the Ciccones?

 

[Meloni88]

Would that be the Ciccones?

Yes I'm pretty certain that's who she means

 

[ioethe]

Yes I'm pretty certain that's who she means

It really doesn't make sense. MB is claiming it was an emergency and that they had practically no information on her and no time to get to know her. KB claims she never spoke to the Ciccones about why they were giving her up. Even in view of their general unreliability, there is a distinct sense that this was a rushed situation.

And yet here is a family who spent multiple weekends with her, spent Christmas with her, appear to still remember her fondly, understand her issues but were blocked from adopting her. What on Earth is going on? The Barnetts aren't rich, they can't have paid the Ciccones, so what on could possibly have prompted promoting their claims over those of the DuPauls?

 

[Meloni88]

It really doesn't make sense. MB is claiming it was an emergency and that they had practically no information on her and no time to get to know her. KB claims she never spoke to the Ciccones about why they were giving her up. Even in view of their general unreliability, there is a distinct sense that this was a rushed situation.

And yet here is a family who spent multiple weekends with her, spent Christmas with her, appear to still remember her fondly, understand her issues but were blocked from adopting her. What on Earth is going on? The Barnetts aren't rich, they can't have paid the Ciccones, so what on could possibly have prompted promoting their claims over those of the DuPauls?

I think gitana mentioned before that parents who want to give up a child are responsible for finding the new family? Maybe they get to veto or whatever. It might not have been that they didn't like the DePauls... maybe they messed them about because they were still in two minds about giving her up in 2009 and weren't decided until 2010 when the Barnetts had come into the picture. No reason to think it was an easy, painless decision for them. But yeah... I really can't imagine what the Barnetts said/did that made them seem like better candidates. I know I'm biased against her but Kristine comes off as very cold. And they have three able bodied boys, no experience with physical disabilities etc. vs the DePaul couple who have one similar aged daughter with similar condition, an adapted house, tons of knowledge about dwarfism and associated issues and just seem so nice and well adjusted.

 

[Dawn Day]

It really doesn't make sense. MB is claiming it was an emergency and that they had practically no information on her and no time to get to know her. KB claims she never spoke to the Ciccones about why they were giving her up. Even in view of their general unreliability, there is a distinct sense that this was a rushed situation.

And yet here is a family who spent multiple weekends with her, spent Christmas with her, appear to still remember her fondly, understand her issues but were blocked from adopting her. What on Earth is going on? The Barnetts aren't rich, they can't have paid the Ciccones, so what on could possibly have prompted promoting their claims over those of the DuPauls?

My guess, pure speculation, it that it’s discrimination. I think the Ciccone’s felt repulsed by this family of dwarfs. I think they felt she was better off with a “normal” family. I think this was a case of ableism. Again, just speculating.

 

[claudianunes]

To me, it says a lot that Natalia was able to connect with a child close to her age. If she was all of the things the Barnetts say she was, then I doubt she would be able or interested in even being around that girl. They look so, so, so happy on those pictures. This girl was probably really sad when Natalia stopped visiting. What a shame.

 

[Meloni88]

To me, it says a lot that Natalia was able to connect with a child close to her age. If she was all of the things the Barnetts say she was, then I doubt she would be able or interested in even being around that girl. They look so, so, so happy on those pictures. This girl was probably really sad when Natalia stopped visiting. What a shame.

Yeah and proves another one of the Bs claims false. They said she had no interest in playing with young kids, only teenagers. Sure, Jan. NG 2009

 

[Ksprincess2]

It really doesn't make sense. MB is claiming it was an emergency and that they had practically no information on her and no time to get to know her. KB claims she never spoke to the Ciccones about why they were giving her up. Even in view of their general unreliability, there is a distinct sense that this was a rushed situation.

And yet here is a family who spent multiple weekends with her, spent Christmas with her, appear to still remember her fondly, understand her issues but were blocked from adopting her. What on Earth is going on? The Barnetts aren't rich, they can't have paid the Ciccones, so what on could possibly have prompted promoting their claims over those of the DuPauls?

Not that is wasn't obvious before but the DePauls definitely made the Barnett's story of how Natalia's adoption happened totally unbelievable!

 

[Meloni88]

My guess, pure speculation, it that it’s discrimination. I think the Ciccone’s felt repulsed by this family of dwarfs. I think they felt she was better off with a “normal” family. I think this was a case of ableism. Again, just speculating.

Gosh idk. I can't fathom someone adopting a kid with dwarfism if they are repulsed by dwarfism... or not realizing the are repulsed until after signing the papers. I guess I'm naive in this regard but I can't even fathom a person being repulsed by someone just for having short arms and legs in the first place.

My thought was always that the Ciccones just were not that committed or invested in this. Perhaps pursued it for social/Christian points. And then the medical bills started coming in and they realized it was going to be a huge financial burden they were not prepared for.

 

[Dawn Day]

Gosh idk. I can't fathom someone adopting a kid with dwarfism if they are repulsed by dwarfism... or not realizing the are repulsed until after signing the papers. I guess I'm naive in this regard but I can't even fathom a person being repulsed by someone just for having short arms and legs in the first place.

My thought was always that the Ciccones just were not that committed or invested in this. Perhaps pursued it for social/Christian points. And then the medical bills started coming in and they realized it was going to be a huge financial burden they were not prepared for.

I just cannot imagine there being a good reason to reject the DePauls. They seem like really great people, great parents. To choose average height parents over parents that really “get it”. To me, it’d be like choosing hearing parents over deaf parents, if you were choosing a new family for a deaf child.

 

[gitana1]

Ok, so we know she was a child when abandoned by the Barnetts, LE undoubtedly has loads of evidence after five years of investigating; there can be no doubt to anyone with a properly functioning brain and eyes to see. I think the last stubborn holdouts are clinging to the "people with dwarfism don't age, lose teeth, or show bone growth the same way" excuse, but that is just to continue clinging to their narrative out of pride.
So where does that leave the Barnett's defense? Can they really and truly claim they were just mislead by the handful of health care workers they chose to listen to (while ignoring others that had a different opinion)? Are they just going to play dumb and try to convince the jury and judge that they really didn't know? Is that even a valid defense? I worry that they will be able to get away with this by manipulating the situation yet again. MOO.

Well they can’t. Their own actions prevent that. For some reason those psychopaths were so intent on proving she was ana duly that they got not one but two age assessments! Those age assessments are now going to come back to bite them because they negate the “we didn’t know” argument.

 

[gitana1]

I’m thinking that maybe it doesn’t even matter what they “thought”. Just like with statutory rape—-It doesn’t matter if You thought she was “older”, all that matters is her age. Perhaps same here. Because how can you prove what someone “thought”.

Just like proving intent.

 

[gitana1]

Pics given to Inside Edition by the Depauls

Well now you’ve got weirdos trying to claim that “adults can have baby teeth too!”

I mean the lengths some will go to believe this horror fantasy spun by the Barnett’s. I don’t get that lack of logic.

 

[Meloni88]

And the Barnetts saying she had adult teeth = she's an adult even though almost everyone has their adult set by age 12. But pictures showing she has baby tooth loss consistent with her 2003 birth date doesn't prove she was a child because a tiny minority of adults have baby teeth. It's pathetic. but hey you can't reason someone out of a position they weren't reasoned into to begin with.

 

[Meloni88]

Well they can’t. Their own actions prevent that. For some reason those psychopaths were so intent on proving she was ana duly that they got not one but two age assessments! Those age assessments are now going to come back to bite them because they negate the “we didn’t know” argument.

Yeah and I bet they took her to a lot more HCPs who told them there was no reason to think she wasnt a child. This was pre-Gypsy Rose Blanchard and other recent cases of parents getting false diagnoses through manipulation being arrested. they never thought those records they concealed would be discovered and their devious actions could be exposed. They were sh*tting themselves when those news stories came out I imagine.

 

[gitana1]

Yeah and I bet they took her to a lot more HCPs who told them there was no reason to think she wasnt a child. This was pre-Gypsy Rose Blanchard and other recent cases of parents getting false diagnoses through manipulation being arrested. they never thought those records they concealed would be discovered and their devious actions could be exposed. They were sh*tting themselves when those news stories came out I imagine.

I mean their actions do show a level of pathology. KB glommed onto a crazy narrative after failing to attach to the child and narcissistically insisted upon it despite multiple professionals telling her she was wrong.

I'm so glad people are coming out now to defend this kid. I'm profoundly sad for her. Can you imagine how horrible to have your body and disability dissected so publicly? She's a tough kid.

I hope the Barnetts do time and their "we are perfect parents of a genius child we magicked out of autism" veneer is sharply ripped away.

 

[gitana1]

I think LE should add slander and libel of a minor to the charges.

Well those would be civil not criminal and I do hope Natalia sues the living hell out of them and takes them for anything they have. Because this nonsensical horror fantasy about her will follow her forever and has already led to specific, serious damages - i.e. her loss of a childhood and a free education and other services as a minor with special needs, to which she was entitled.