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

[Meloni88]

But wow, thanks for solving that mystery of where this "she was alone for three years" nonsense claim i see all over the place came from. (Do journalists not do corrections anymore?)

 

[jjenny]

This is a whole ball of crazy. Court changed her age to an adult and then refused to change it back. So other family (or families) who wanted to take guardianship couldn't get it done because she was legally turned int an adult.
"The most egregious part of it is that this child was turned into an adult without any representation, without any due process safeguards being instituted by that court," Michael Troemel, who was representing the family who tried to take guardianship of Natalia, told the Journal and Courier."
A lawyer for the Ukrainian orphan accused of being an adult posing as a child says her ex-mom is wrong about her age

 

[gitana1]

Not sure why Dupauls haven't adopted her? She certainly looked a lot younger back then. She's aged over the years. If she is 30 now, she would be an adult even back then and clearly she didn't look like an adult at all. I don't understand how Barnetts managed to legally change her age and by such a large number of years.

It’s crazy. They wanted to and tried to adopt her but said the first family made it “impossible”. I’m guessing something dramatic happened to them because in Youtube comments the DuPaul’s said they had her in 2008 which was the year she got here.

As far as how they were able to change her age by so many years in retrospect it seems insane for a judge to do that with the thin non-evidence it looks like they presented. And on an “emergency” basis, which was probably due to them claiming she needed immediate adult psych treatment.

Why didn’t the court appoint someone independent to represent the child/dependent adult in such a serious matter?

But they had this creepy doctor as well as an LSCW writing letters and I guess that and the inability to imagine they would do something nefarious to the kid they adopted, enabled the court to issue its decision. It does seem crazy in retrospect. But we have the benefit of hindsight.

 

[gitana1]

I guess you couldn't really tell from inheritance pattern which form of dwarfism she really has, because even with a dominant inheritance, both parents could be of normal statue but child could still have dwarfism because of spontaneous mutations in a gene that would only appear in a child.
But if that woman really is her mother, then N. was really abandoned to live by herself at the age of 9. She had to have been highly intelligent and resourceful to survive by herself despite her physical disabilities.

It sort of looks like people got to her quickly. She’s been with the Mans for five years at least. I don’t believe she was caring for herself all that time.

They also alternately claim they got her into an apartment supervised by someone (I think for adults with disabilities) and that the mental hospital released her into a halfway house, in 2012. So she may have been somewhat supervised until 2013 when they left to Canada. But at that point I think the Mans or others came and took her quickly.

 

[gitana1]

Yes, but there appears to have been several years in between when she was on her own.

No. She was in some sort of halfway house or supervised apartment apparently starting at some point in 2012. She was abandoned totally in July 2013 and the Mans have had her since 2013. It is unknown how long she was alone but it appears it wasn’t long.

 

[gitana1]

And then because her legal age was changed to that of an adult, she couldn't even go to school-I believe she still can't because legally she is 30 now.

That’s right. And people here have pointed out that was purposeful because disabled adults can get an education through public school up to age 22!

 

[jjenny]

It sounds like since court more than doubled her age (almost tripled) in 2012, there were multiple guardianship hearings (if the reporting is correct) and yet court refused to change her age back to a child. Even though she had bone scans done consistent with her being a child. The mind boggles. Did the judge even look at her in 2012? Did she look like a 22 year old? And why all the refusals to change it back? She is with a family but they can't be her legal guardians because she is supposedly a 30 year old woman now. I hope DA gets DNA from the woman who says she is a bio mom to confirm the child's age once and for all.

 

[gitana1]

The Barnetts left for Canada in July 2013, Natalia was living with Antwon and Cynthia in August 2013. Unless they actually abandoned her before July she was not on her own for very long, she definitely was not living alone for years.

Oh yeah. That’s right. August. So only weeks.

 

[gitana1]

This article says Mans took her in 3 years later.
"She took local adult education classes and socialized in a halfway house until the Mans family took her in three years later."
The Ukrainian orphan accused of being an adult hung out at a drug recovery house and took adult education classes after her adopted parents moved to Canada

It’s wrong.

 

[gitana1]

But wow, thanks for solving that mystery of where this "she was alone for three years" nonsense claim i see all over the place came from. (Do journalists not do corrections anymore?)

Not Business Insider. It’s basically yahoo.

 

[gitana1]

It sounds like since court more than doubled her age (almost tripled) in 2012, there were multiple guardianship hearings (if the reporting is correct) and yet court refused to change her age back to a child. Even though she had bone scans done consistent with her being a child. The mind boggles. Did the judge even look at her in 2012? Did she look like a 22 year old? And why all the refusals to change it back? She is with a family but they can't be her legal guardians because she is supposedly a 30 year old woman now. I hope DA gets DNA from the woman who says she is a bio mom to confirm the child's age once and for all.

The court deciding the guardianship wouldn’t be determining her age or changing it back. That would have to go back to the court that granted the age change. All the guardianship court could do is determine whether to grant a guardianship of a minor child to the Mans for N.

It seems possible that perhaps they were able to consider the issue of whether N was a minor because you don’t grant guardianship of a minor child over an adult. But they would not officially change or determine her age. Also it would ultimately be unlikely if not impossible for that court to say, “We are granting this guardianship because we believe she’s a child however another court determined her age to be that of an adult.” They’d probably make a recommendation that N go back to the original court and has it out there.

Chances are they simply stated “We can’t issue this guardianship because another court already determined this person is an adult.”

Of course the Barnetts turned that into “Two courts RULED she was an adult!”

 

[jjenny]

The court deciding the guardianship wouldn’t be determining her age or changing it back. That would have to go back to the court that granted the age change. All the guardianship court could do is determine whether to grant a guardianship of a minor child to the Mans for N.

It seems possible that perhaps they were able to consider the issue of whether N was a minor because you don’t grant guardianship of a minor child over an adult. But they would not officially change or determine her age. Also it would ultimately be unlikely if not impossible for that court to say, “We are granting this guardianship because we believe she’s a child however another court determined her age to be that of an adult.” They’d probably make a recommendation that N go back to the original court and has it out there.

Chances are they simply stated “We can’t issue this guardianship because another court already determined this person is an adult.”

Of course the Barnetts turned that into “Two courts RULED she was an adult!”

The lawyer says they tried to get the decision reversed in the original court that ruled N. was an adult. But he lost the case. So court made a ruling that N. was an adult and refused to change it back.
"Troemel lost the case there, so the girl is still legally 30."
Attorney who represented Michael and Kristine Barnett’s daughter disputes parents age claim

 

[Linda7NJ]

With the classic dyad of being paired with a Borderline Personality Disordered husband. That man is a drama queen IMO.
(I have a loved one with BPD. With proper treatment and motivation, a person with BPD can lead as normal a life as anyone. Unfortunately, men suffering from this disorder are likely to remain undiagnosed and untreated as it is overlooked and thought to be mainly a female disorder)

That man set off my gaydar

 

[Linda7NJ]

But the doctor who wrote on their behalf is a doctor. Not a layman. She had a specific diagnosis and a family with dwarfism would understand the differences.

Agreed. I was asking my family doctor questions about it last week. She had no flipping idea! I admired her honesty. Every question I asked was met with a few hard blinks and a “ Gee, I don’t really know”

 

[Linda7NJ]

It all makes me profoundly sad for her again. The diagnosis described a “delightful five year old”. The IEP described a child who worked hard in her PT sessions but experienced pain.

What they did to this little girl is horrific. And she’s been through so much change and rejection.

I gotta admit, reading that, gutted me and brought tears to my eyes

 

[Linda7NJ]

The DuPaul daughter says in you tube comment that they had N in 2008. So it appears the first family didn’t have her long.

Didn’t I read somewhere the first family had given up trying to have biological children, adopted Natalia then conceived?

 

[Linda7NJ]

I wonder if it was even the Ciccones in the other room at the Florida adoption agency then. I mean they were from New Hampshire right and the DePauls were in upstate NY. Why did they have to pick her up in FL?

THANK YOU!

I'm left baffled by Kristine’s version of how Natalia was offered to them and the offer came with a countdown clock

 

[Linda7NJ]

It’s crazy. They wanted to and tried to adopt her but said the first family made it “impossible”. I’m guessing something dramatic happened to them because in Youtube comments the DuPaul’s said they had her in 2008 which was the year she got here.

As far as how they were able to change her age by so many years in retrospect it seems insane for a judge to do that with the thin non-evidence it looks like they presented. And on an “emergency” basis, which was probably due to them claiming she needed immediate adult psych treatment.

Why didn’t the court appoint someone independent to represent the child/dependent adult in such a serious matter?

But they had this creepy doctor as well as an LSCW writing letters and I guess that and the inability to imagine they would do something nefarious to the kid they adopted, enabled the court to issue its decision. It does seem crazy in retrospect. But we have the benefit of hindsight.

I know up until now I was giving the judge way way way more credit than I should have.
I thought SURELY the Barnett’s had a boat load of evidence to substantiate their claims to convince a JUDGE, it just wasn’t presented to us!
Kristine during an early tv interview had a binder & folders full of ....what I thought was actual evidence.

 

[mickey2942]

I know up until now I was giving the judge way way way more credit than I should have.
I thought SURELY the Barnett’s had a boat load of evidence to substantiate their claims to convince a JUDGE, it just wasn’t presented to us!
Kristine during an early tv interview had a binder & folders full of ....what I thought was actual evidence.

I have seen amended birth certificates from judges, they basically write in a document that the medical records show that the child's chronological age was incorrect on the certificate of adoption. And the new birth certificate reflects the correct birth date based on medical documentation.

The judge doesn't make the determination, just affirms the documentation presented by medical records.

Of course, the amended birth records I have seen are within 2 or 3 years. Nothing like this situation.

 

[Errrr]

And I hope she can sue him for everything. He had a duty of care and he didnt just fail her he absolutely screwed her and caused real, longlasting harm.

If she did, he might declare her 16 again so she can’t!