Abortion Debate Forum - In a Position to Choose
medical questions | health forums

In a Position to Choose

New Topic  Reply  Ask A Doctor - Offline
Medical Questions-> Health Forums -> Abortion Debate -> In a Position to Choose
Author Message
diamondsz

Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Oct 2005
Posts: 3333
Location: , Candyland-Canada
Thanks: 98
Thanked:159
In a Position to Choose
Posted: 02-13-07 18:08pm

What if someone wanted to carry a child full-term and then give it up for adoption, what if they knew who the father was but didnt want him to have any say in the adoption? Would it still be considered acceptable?
Did you find this post useful?
|
Tylanas

Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0

Posted: 02-13-07 22:10pm

If the father is a horrible person then yes.

If the father is a wonderful man and the woman is the one being a b*tch about the whole thing, trying to keep the child from him out of revenge, then I think he has full rights to it after it is born.
Did you find this post useful?
|
diamondsz

Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 07 Oct 2005
Posts: 3333
Location: , Candyland-Canada
Thanks: 98
Thanked:159

Posted: 02-14-07 01:41am

eiri wrote:
if the father is a horrible person then yes.


If the father is a wonderful man and the woman is the one being a b*tch about the whole thing, trying to keep the child from him out of revenge, then I think he has full rights to it after it is born.


what if she wants nothing to do with the child and is put in a position where she has to pay support is that right? The reason im asking is so many people debate abortion when the same issues exist with adoption.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Tylanas

Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0

Posted: 02-14-07 03:09am

diamondsz wrote:
eiri wrote:
if the father is a horrible person then yes.


If the father is a wonderful man and the woman is the one being a b*tch about the whole thing, trying to keep the child from him out of revenge, then I think he has full rights to it after it is born.


what if she wants nothing to do with the child and is put in a position where she has to pay support is that right? The reason im asking is so many people debate abortion when the same issues exist with adoption.


if she wants nothing to do with it then she gives it up for adoption. If a father wants to stop that, then he must be the one to take the child, and if he doesn't, then it goes up for adoption anyway, and he gets arrested for child endangerment.


I have no problem with women giving up children for adoption, I have no problem with the man having first rights as long as he's not a horrible person. However, if he is horrible and she doesn't want it, but she's not going to abort, then obviously, neither parent wants it or is capable of caring for it, so it should go to adoption.


I don't think a woman should ever be put in a situation where she is forced to care for a child she didn't want.

My question is still this:

why wouldn't the mother want the father to have a choice in the adoption? Why can't he be the one to get the baby?

I think that he should have a psychological evaluation as all adoptive parents do, but besides that, he's got full rights, as much as the woman, to her newborn, unwanted baby. More in fact, since she doesn't want the baby.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Birch

Supporter
Joined: 07 Nov 2005
Posts: 4159
Location: Bliss,
Thanks: 159
Thanked:16

Posted: 02-14-07 13:27pm

You might be interested in reading this article I originally posted in another thread:

http://news.Enqui rer.Com/apps/pbcs.Dll/article?Aid=/2007012 8/news01/701280321/1056/col02

the case generated headlines - big, bold, front-page headlines: young father fights to save his son from being given up for adoption by heartless mother.

The spotlight shone on glenn spraggs in january 2006 when he held himself up as a model father and stopped his girlfriend, sharicka watson, from putting their son up for adoption.

Spraggs said then that if watson didn't want thomas, he'd fight for the boy. He'd take the baby himself.


That never happened.

Spraggs blocked the adoption, but he never followed through on his promises.

Instead, thomas was taken away from the adoptive family that wanted him and spraggs dropped his custody bid. That forced thomas back into watson's care.

Twelve months after the headlines, spraggs provides no child support for 13-month-old thomas or his 2-year-old daughter, taylor, watson said.

His only contact comes when spraggs baby-sits the children four hours a week.

Alone, watson struggles to raise two children, work and get an education.

The 23-year-old winton terrace woman says she loves her children, but when she looks at them she can't help but think, "what if?"

"what if" the adoption had gone through?"

"what if" thomas lived with two parents instead of a poor single mother?

"what if" she had only a daughter to support, a prospect that to her seems much easier than caring for two toddlers.

"if thomas had stayed with his adoptive family, he would have benefited a lot more, as well as my daughter," watson said. "we would be able to do the same things he would be doing with his new parents."

spraggs, 25, could not be reached for comment. Watson doesn't have his current telephone number. A message left at his job was not returned.

His lawyer, ken lawson, said spraggs dropped the matter, thinking he would get back together with watson.

"glenn did not want to pursue the case," lawson said. "he didn't want to maintain the adversarial relationship, and that's obviously his choice."

lawson said he has had no contact with spraggs since last spring.

Watson worried that she couldn't support two children when she got pregnant with thomas in march 2005.

As things stood then, spraggs wasn't always around for her or taylor, but he resisted talk of adoption, she said.

"i gave him a time limit, a month to show that he was going to be responsible and show that he was going to come and help me with taylor so I would know he would be there when I delivered," watson said.

Watson said she gave spraggs repeated chances, something he never admitted when trying to get custody of his son last year.

Thomas was born dec. 2, 2005. The days ticked by with no help from spraggs, watson said.

Watson dialed adoption link and arranged for a dayton couple to adopt thomas.

"since he acted like he didn't care and he wasn't going to be there, I had to do what was best for taylor and thomas," watson said.

Watson knew she made the right decision when she handed thomas to the couple less than two weeks after his birth, but that didn't make it any easier. "i cried like I never cried before," she said.

Spraggs was angry when he stopped over and found thomas gone, she said.

He was so upset he hired lawson. In january 2006, he sought custody of the boy in hamilton county juvenile court.

Agency takes back boy

with the case winding through the court system, adoption link took thomas away from his new parents and dropped him off at watson's place of employment.

Hamilton county common pleas judge thomas lipps named watson the baby's legal parent. He said spraggs had no legal claim to thomas because he didn't sign the birth certificate and never married watson.

Spraggs could take a dna test and prove paternity if he wanted custody.

Lipps temporarily placed thomas with watson's father, aaron rosemond.

Rosemond took spraggs' side, saying spraggs had the right to care for his grandson, and supported his custody bid.

A dna test proved spraggs was thomas' father, but lawson didn't show up for an april 4 hearing on the matter.

Then, when lawson and spraggs failed to show up for the next hearing in may, the case was dismissed. Custody reverted to watson.

"i don't think it was anything about him actually wanting custody; it was him not wanting me to place thomas," watson said.

At first, watson said, she cried a lot.

"now, it's like I can't even cry anymore," she said. "it's pretty much a done deal, it is what it is.

"crying over it is just a waste of time," she said. "all I can do is better myself and try to help my kids."

no money from dad

spraggs pays no child support.

Watson called the hamilton county department of job and family services, which handles child-support cases. The agency, she said, was slow and unhelpful.

Jeff startzman, the agency's assistant director over child support, said a hearing was set for last may 31.

Watson's child-support request was dismissed when watson and spraggs didn't show up.

Watson had to re-file the request, starting the process from the beginning, startzman said.

Child support for both children will be considered during a hearing scheduled for march 27.

Watson is frustrated. Court dates were set within days when it came to thomas' adoption. Now that it comes to supporting him, the process takes months.

"i went through all of this over somebody supposedly wanting custody, and then when he doesn't help and I need some help with the financial stuff, I can't get that," she said.

Watson said she earns less than $300 a week in her part-time job at a discount store.

Job options are limited, she said. She dropped out of high school, but got her ged in july.

In september, watson started at national college in bond hill, where she goes three nights a week and is working toward an associate's degree.

She gets good grades, but until she has a degree, good grades don't translate into a paycheck.

Watson relies on her mother and sister to baby-sit.

Just recently, watson said, spraggs started baby-sitting on thursday nights, a four-hour responsibility.

At night before she falls asleep, watson said, she thinks about why she tried so hard to make a relationship work with somebody who wasn't willing to make a commitment.

"i tried so hard to make a relationship with somebody who wasn't willing to do it, who is not willing to be there and be responsible and held accountable," she said.

She knows her choices affect her children.

"now, i'm raising them without a good role model," she said.

"(they have) somebody who isn't doing what he needs to do and people who think that that's ok," watson said. "glenn is living around a lot of people who think that what he does - the little that he does - is good enough.

"they think I should be jumping up and down, clicking my heels together, saying 'thank god I have a baby's daddy as good as he is'," watson said.

"because some of them don't do as much for their kids as he does, and that's sad, because he doesn't do much."

looking back, watson said, things would be very different if thomas had been adopted.

"thomas would be doing better, my daughter would be doing a lot better," she said. "i would be in a different place financially and emotionally. We'd all be in different places instead of going though all of that."

thomas turned 1 year old last month. He had no gifts, no party, not even a cake.

"i didn't have any money," watson said.

"i try not to think about that."
Did you find this post useful?
|
Tylanas

Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 12984
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0

Posted: 02-14-07 13:46pm

birch wrote:
you might be interested in reading this article I originally posted in another thread:

http://news.Enqui rer.Com/apps/pbcs.Dll/article?Aid=/2007012 8/news01/701280321/1056/col02

[ big long article ]


hope you don't mind that I cut out the article, since I think everyone has already read it. Now, this is a classic case of what I just said. The mother should not have been made to be a caregiver to the child after birth; it should have gone to the father immediately, or a holding caregiver until he arrived. Since he did not take the child, then he should have been arrested for child endangerment, and the child should then have been taken to an adoption agency. The mother would not have to care for that baby. She could recover, and go off home, knowing the child was either safely with the father, or safely with a foster parent.
Did you find this post useful?
|
jenn_smithson

Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 15 Nov 2004
Posts: 808
Location: Texas

Posted: 02-14-07 15:05pm

In this case, the best advice that I could try to give to a pregnant woman seeking an adoption (and unsure of what her partner will do) is to put a fake name down on the birth certificate. Henry higgins. Joe smith. Etc. Then, she can give the child up for adoption because you obviously can't find someone who's fake and if the real father wants to take custody, he can challenge the paternity issue in court. If he challenges the paternity issue, the child stays in foster care until it is resolved. This way the woman does not get stuck in a situation she tried like hell to opt out of in the first place.
Did you find this post useful?
|
Related Topics
This Forum This Category All Forums
Jump to:  
New Topic   Reply



We comply with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health
information:
verify here.