AR - Rep. Harris rehomed his adopted daughter to man who sexually abused her

[MyBelle]

There are those of us who are trying. So far, the response is mute.

The mute response just raises more questions. The feds need to be involved in this one because it is more than obvious the State of Arkansas isn't willing to police itself and require accountability. Why would the head of a government agency steamroll an adoption of three little girls into the home of a legislator and then refuse to take them back? They need to follow the money....

JMO

 

[kaen]

But, I think it has also been fed by a couple of other factors. One is the growth of international adoptions and a lack of oversight. Some families go this route to get kids that they believe are whiter and less likely to have behavioral/medical issues. In some cases other countries have played into this, and in other cases dubious agencies have provided connections. Another wrinkle to the international adoption field has been "quivering" families, like the Duggars, whose religious beliefs lead them to a belief that more is better in terms of children and that they are to raise up armies for the Lord. Many such families have gone to countries with lax adoption regulation, returning home with multiple adoptees.

In all of these cases (as well as the Harrises who apparently pushed their way through to adoption of some kids with serious histories of abuse) families are ill-prepared and poorly supported. Many who came in with the notion that love, or discipline would magically make all the hurts go away, have been sadly disappointed and quickly overwhelmed. Some children have been disciplined to death.

As an adoptive parent, I am fully willing to concede that the authorities are clumsy at best when it comes to placements, determinations, preparations and ongoing support. But, they are the best we have, and we need to work at shoring up their legal authority and resources.

Absolutely agree 1000%. I am most concerned that one of the biggest issues centers on multiple children adopted at one time by families that have not had the training and support to handle the children. These poor children adopted by the Harris family have been with their bio mom, the first foster family, the Harris family, the pedophile family, and, now, another foster family. One way to ensure that these kids never have a chance is to have this kind of profile.

I hate that there are adoptive families who see the parenting commitment to a child as transaction of an item/merchandise that can be returned if unhappy. And.....since these are the cases that come to light,many people think that this is accepted in the adoption world. I am often offended when news articles mention that the "adoptive child" did x or y as we never read that a "bio child" or the "c-section child" did x. Once a child is adopted, they are the same as a bio child and we don't need to highlight how they came into the family.

I am really hating the Harris parents right now. I am really sad for those girls. Most of all, I am so sad that there are community members and abused kids who have been counseled by this man and his wife. Their thinking is just whack.

 

[Margo/Mom]

The mute response just raises more questions. The feds need to be involved in this one because it is more than obvious the State of Arkansas isn't willing to police itself and require accountability. Why would the head of a government agency steamroll an adoption of three little girls into the home of a legislator and then refuse to take them back? They need to follow the money....

JMO

Apparently the feds have already take a lead (according to the Reuters article) in the form of a compact by which all 50 states agree not to allow adoption across state lines without the involvement of appropriate personnel in both the originating and receiving states. It falls down at the state level, where some states have followed through with enabling legislation, others have not, and basically not enough people in positions of responsibility are even aware of this.

 

[kaen]

For abandoning troubled children into the questionable care of others, both Harrises should investigated for child neglect – and that investigation should not be done by DHS. No agency is capable of policing itself.

If Justin and Marsha Harris neglected and abandoned their adopted daughters, they should be listed in the Child Maltreatment Central Registry, which lists people who have been found to have committed child abuse and/or child neglect. I’ve represented parents who have been listed in the registry and had their other children removed from their custody for less.

Listing them in that registry would disqualify them from operating a daycare or preschool. No more state funds would go to support that patently religious institution run by a state legislator, something that is entirely unconstitutional to begin with. Another problem solved.

Furthermore, Justin and Marsha Harris must be forthcoming with proof that they forwarded the adoption subsidy to the girls’ actual caretakers. The subsidy is taxpayer money intended to get treatment and assistance for children whose natural parents have already abused and/or neglected them to the point of getting their parental rights terminated. If someone other than their caretakers was getting the government assistance intended to address these children’s emotional, physical, developmental, and medical needs, that’s fraud.​

link

This would be the right thing. They should not be able to adopt again.

I think Justin Harris stated that they attended and paid of doctor's appointments as well as giving the monies to the pedophile and his wife. If true, were they trying to make sure that any records still kept them as the parents of record? If so, they were deceiving the doctors and the state and, possibly, their insurance company. I hope the sunlight really illuminates things for public in this case.

 

[kaen]

Apparently the feds have already take a lead (according to the Reuters article) in the form of a compact by which all 50 states agree not to allow adoption across state lines without the involvement of appropriate personnel in both the originating and receiving states. It falls down at the state level, where some states have followed through with enabling legislation, others have not, and basically not enough people in positions of responsibility are even aware of this.

The interstate compact is something that would not apply here but it is in effect for adoptions across state lines. Yes, there is difference between states. It really just needs to be a law---is that so complicated? Why would states object? Rehoming must be looked at across states or federally. We need safeguards for children of adoption sans political BS.

 

[Margo/Mom]

BBM. I'm not going to pretend ignorance is the reason this case happened. A legislator who has also adopted children is well aware of the process of adoption. It wasn't "clumsily" handled nor did it have anything to do with lack of resources. It was intentionally mishandled and children have been harmed.

JMO

I don't deny Harris's pushiness and use of influence in being able to adopt in the first place (over the best advice of front line workers familiar with the case). I do however think that he believed his own hype that he could "handle" anything that might come along--being a good Christian and well-educated and all. But, the fact is that this did lead to a reality for him that bore out everyone's worst fears, such as, moving a sexually abused child into a home where she presented out of birth order and in the presence of male siblings--coupled with all of the "normal" issues surrounding adoption, led to a high-stress explosion. And the guy had either burned all his bridges, his ego wouldn't allow him to look for help, or he was looking out for his political image so that he went looking for other solutions.

But the fact that there WAS another possibility legally available, I would suggest is not due to legislative or bureaucratic dysfunction or shenanigans, but rather that a perfect storm of possibilities and realities has brought about a phenomenon that nobody saw coming. The whole rehoming circus is much larger than Rep Harris, although prior to this particular instance, it has not achieved the notice that is needed.

Maybe now it will.

And BTW--I fully agree that Harris should resign and be investigated.

 

[MyBelle]

I don't deny Harris's pushiness and use of influence in being able to adopt in the first place (over the best advice of front line workers familiar with the case). I do however think that he believed his own hype that he could "handle" anything that might come along--being a good Christian and well-educated and all. But, the fact is that this did lead to a reality for him that bore out everyone's worst fears, such as, moving a sexually abused child into a home where she presented out of birth order and in the presence of male siblings--coupled with all of the "normal" issues surrounding adoption, led to a high-stress explosion. And the guy had either burned all his bridges, his ego wouldn't allow him to look for help, or he was looking out for his political image so that he went looking for other solutions.

But the fact that there WAS another possibility legally available, I would suggest is not due to legislative or bureaucratic dysfunction or shenanigans, but rather that a perfect storm of possibilities and realities has brought about a phenomenon that nobody saw coming. The whole rehoming circus is much larger than Rep Harris, although prior to this particular instance, it has not achieved the notice that is needed.

Maybe now it will.

And BTW--I fully agree that Harris should resign and be investigated.

Nothing in this case has anything to do with being a good Christian.

JMO

 

[Margo/Mom]

Absolutely agree 1000%. I am most concerned that one of the biggest issues centers on multiple children adopted at one time by families that have not had the training and support to handle the children. These poor children adopted by the Harris family have been with their bio mom, the first foster family, the Harris family, the pedophile family, and, now, another foster family. One way to ensure that these kids never have a chance is to have this kind of profile.

I hate that there are adoptive families who see the parenting commitment to a child as transaction of an item/merchandise that can be returned if unhappy. And.....since these are the cases that come to light,many people think that this is accepted in the adoption world. I am often offended when news articles mention that the "adoptive child" did x or y as we never read that a "bio child" or the "c-section child" did x. Once a child is adopted, they are the same as a bio child and we don't need to highlight how they came into the family.

I am really hating the Harris parents right now. I am really sad for those girls. Most of all, I am so sad that there are community members and abused kids who have been counseled by this man and his wife. Their thinking is just whack.

I do think that one of the barriers to firming up adoption regulation is the number of people who think that the government cannot do anything right. In recent years there have been trends in the direction of more "open adoption," "private adoption," and the like. There are many well-meaning folks who like to cast Childrens' Services (or even foster parents) in the role of the devil--particularly since they are the folks who have to make really tough decisions about removals, placements and so forth. And truthfully, speaking as an adoptive parent, they can appear at times to be unnecessarily jaded. Frankly, I have experienced several home-studies and some were better than others. One conclusion is that while there should be some training prior to placement, there also needs to be an emphasis on follow-up after placement--when people are actually confronted with realities. Some agencies do this better than others.

I have known enough real-life stories of "veteran parents" and the things that they have experienced to disagree with a blanket judgment about people thinking that they can just return a child that they don't like. Maybe some. But I have also known kids who truly sapped all available resources within the family--and sometimes this is a quick escalation. We need to explore the best ways to support these families--whether their kids were born in the USA or elsewhere.

 

[Margo/Mom]

Nothing in this case has anything to do with being a good Christian.

JMO

Ummmm, yes. But I do think that is how Harris sees himself.

 

[Charlie09]

Nothing in this case has anything to do with being a good Christian.

JMO

I'm just replying to your post, not necessarily to anything specific in your post -


I know of two situations where RAD was a factor, one still while fostering but in the process of adopting - and one after the adoption was complete.

The fostering family got out of it - it was a horrible situation, I hope she went to a family with just females in it.

The other family has had nothing but trauma, they did have to re-home the daughter, at great expense (which they willingly paid) for a while. Eventually she came home, they tried everything to help her...some situations are so far out of anyone's control. I wish I understood how sexual abuse at a young age can completely seem to re-wire a brain, but that's what appears to have happened. She's grown now, and still very messy in relationships and life in general - even though they tried to give her every tool to equip her for life in general. I have to be honest, our church did nothing to help the family or the child - sometimes pastors are fallible and can't see the manipulation going on. I can only imagine if both sides were trying to be manipulative to a pastor.

I question the previous foster family's version that they didn't see violence, or the potential for it. I think this is possibly a chance at getting back at the Harris' (not that it isn't deserved!)

I think the Harris' were way out of line and had no idea what was truly in store. I think the pedophile did what they do, saw some one damaged and vulnerable and should have to pay more than 40 years for what he did.

I blame the system that seems to have seen there were issues, and possible problems and turned a blind eye for too long.

My concern is for families that get in over their heads with some of the disorders that are out there. Problems that love and a blended family are unable to just "fix". There has to be resources that the average family can afford, and while I don't condone "returning kids" I also don't think a whole family should be ripped apart through sometimes deceitful or at best, incomplete foster information.

This is such an ugly ugly situation - and the girls are the ones who have to suffer.

 

[Margo/Mom]

The interstate compact is something that would not apply here but it is in effect for adoptions across state lines. Yes, there is difference between states. It really just needs to be a law---is that so complicated? Why would states object? Rehoming must be looked at across states or federally. We need safeguards for children of adoption sans political BS.

There may be some Constitutional issues with federal intervention. It's one thing when it crosses state lines, but otherwise, if it is not specifically named in the Constitution, it falls to the states. The feds can maintain certain controls within programs that receive federal funding--but international adoptions do not. And the majority of rehoming cases are international adoptions.

 

[Margo/Mom]

I question the previous foster family's version that they didn't see violence, or the potential for it. I think this is possibly a chance at getting back at the Harris' (not that it isn't deserved!)

I think the Harris' were way out of line and had no idea what was truly in store. I think the pedophile did what they do, saw some one damaged and vulnerable and should have to pay more than 40 years for what he did.

I am willing to give the first foster family the benefit of the doubt. Harris says that they didn't experience certain behaviors until the adoption was finalized--when the older daughter appeared to grow very angry and resentful. In fact, this is a pretty common trigger. Not only does it mean that this is now a "forever family" (and the only other "forever family" she has known hurt her), but it also means that she never gets to go back--her bio family isn't going to get fixed and welcome her back. That is some really big-time stuff.

But, there are other variables as well. I am not certain where the older sister was at various times, but if the three girls were together, and the oldest got to be the turn-out kid, then removing her from the situation really provides some space for the next kid to take the stage, so to speak. Then there is the reality of the three sons. We don't know what other children might have been present in the foster home to serve as triggers. Perhaps none. Another possible variable might have to do with when the abuse actually started again. If she was going to the family-owned child care center, it is likely that the pedo had access and her new behavior was in response to this.

But, you are absolutely right--kids who are abused at a very early age are developmentally impacted. I recall someone explaining once that when abuse occurs prior to age one, the child grows up understanding that the world is a hostile place--and that they must protect themselves. When abuse happens from year one onwards they grow up believing that the world is an OK place, but that they are all wrong.

 

[K_Z]

I find it quite interesting how "quiet" things are today, on a Monday after a furious week of scandal reporting, new bills introduced on re-homing, and mea culpa interviews.. Smack dab in the middle of the AR legislative session. Hmmmmm.........Much, much too quiet, IMO.

Waiting for the other shoe to drop....... it won't be long, IMO. Something's up. This is not over yet, IMO.

 

[Miss Muffet]

I'm shocked, I didn't know that you could just rehome an adopted child, like no big deal.

I hope with this story coming to light that it brings about change in legislation that protects adopted children from having this happen.

It horrifies me to think of how many little children may have been rehomed with monsters,

While it's appalling to rehome a child, I don't think there is a legal difference between an adopted child and a biological child. Both can be rehome. After adoption, they are just as much your children legally as biological children. Since parents can rehome their biological children, there wouldn't be a legal reason preventing them from rehoming adopted children----aside from still collecting benefits if they adopted from the states instead of privately or overseas.

Sometime people do rehome children. They send them to live with grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, friends, etc.. LE only holds the parents accountable for this decision if something ends up happening to the children. If the parents sign over legal guardianship, which isn't a huge hurdle in the court system like adoption, the parents aren't considered liable for what happens after that because legally the new guardian is responsible for taking care of the child.

 

[MyBelle]

There may be some Constitutional issues with federal intervention. It's one thing when it crosses state lines, but otherwise, if it is not specifically named in the Constitution, it falls to the states. The feds can maintain certain controls within programs that receive federal funding--but international adoptions do not. And the majority of rehoming cases are international adoptions.

There are no constitutional issues preventing federal intervention. In fact, the interstate compact fixes responsibility to the state for adoptive and foster children that fall within their state jurisdiction.

Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC)

The ICPC is a contract among member states and U.S. territories authorizing them to work together to ensure that children who are placed across state lines for foster care or adoption receive adequate protection and support services. The ICPC establishes procedures for the placement of children and fixes responsibility for agencies and individuals involved in placing children. To participate in the ICPC, a state must enact into law the provisions of the ICPC.

http://www.childsworld.ca.gov/pg1316.htm

 

[MyBelle]

While it's appalling to rehome a child, I don't think there is a legal difference between an adopted child and a biological child. Both can be rehome. After adoption, they are just as much your children legally as biological children. Since parents can rehome their biological children, there wouldn't be a legal reason preventing them from rehoming adopted children----aside from still collecting benefits if they adopted from the states instead of privately or overseas.

Sometime people do rehome children. They send them to live with grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, friends, etc.. LE only holds the parents accountable for this decision if something ends up happening to the children. If the parents sign over legal guardianship, which isn't a huge hurdle in the court system like adoption, the parents aren't considered liable for what happens after that because legally the new guardian is responsible for taking care of the child.

I question the legality of re-homing any child with a stranger. Doing so could emotionally traumatize a child or worse. The child in this case was raped. Not for a minute do I believe Harris had good intentions when he steamrolled the adoption of these little girls and he then gave them away within months to a guy he had fired.

What Is Human Trafficking?
Human trafficking is a serious federal crime with penalties of up to imprisonment for life. Federal law defines "severe forms of trafficking in persons” as: "(A) sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age; or (B) the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery." [U.S.C. §7102(8)]
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oese/oshs/factsheet.html

 

[shadowraiths]

Attorney Jennifer Wells told THV11 by phone Monday Division of Children and Family Services Director Cecile Blucker was aware of the rehoming but didn't report it to authorities. Blucker denied our requests for an interview as the department does not comment on specific adoption cases.​

link

 

[MyBelle]

I find it quite interesting how "quiet" things are today, on a Monday after a furious week of scandal reporting, new bills introduced on re-homing, and mea culpa interviews.. Smack dab in the middle of the AR legislative session. Hmmmmm.........Much, much too quiet, IMO.

Waiting for the other shoe to drop....... it won't be long, IMO. Something's up. This is not over yet, IMO.

Please don't hold your breath waiting. Arkansas has a history of governors refusing to do the right thing. In 1957, my grandmother had federal troops parked in front of her house in Little Rock. She feared there was about to be a war over Faubus' refusal to enact desegregation. This is a state that is governed with an attitude that the rules don't apply to them.

JMO

 

[MyBelle]

Attorney Jennifer Wells told THV11 by phone Monday Division of Children and Family Services Director Cecile Blucker was aware of the rehoming but didn't report it to authorities. Blucker denied our requests for an interview as the department does not comment on specific adoption cases.​

link

Thanks. Blucker should be prosecuted for child abuse. The steamrolling of the adoption and then doing nothing as they were disrupted yet again and also separated from the older sibling is inexcusable. The emotional toll on these children has to be huge.

JMO

 

[Lulu14]

Once a child is adopted, they are the same as a bio child and we don't need to highlight how they came into the family.

That's a nice theory, but it isn't how the world works.

Sometimes parents have a hard time bonding with their biological babies, despite the instinctual love and the mix of "bonding" hormones going through their bodies.

To think you start loving a child the moment you signed some papers is highly unrealistic, imo. Sometimes, you never do develop that relationship. I believe many bio parents love their children, but don't like them. But adopted children don't even have that luxury.