[Anaguma]

Unbelievable.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/25/politics/s...index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoptive_Co..._Baby_Girl

Fathers cannot prevent the adoption of their children when conducted by the mother, even when they have special federal laws directed to preventing the removal of kids of their race from their biological parents. Even when the state supreme court is compelled to toss their state family court laws away in view of the special federal laws for this particular case.

If this guy can't win, then nobody can.

America is fucked.

[BortimusPrime]

I love how the court bases it's decision on "best interest of the child"...just like how back in the 19th century they took Indian children away from their parents and put them in boarding schools to White Man's Burden them into being civilized.

In the best interest of the children of course.

[lurker]

This isn't a blow to fathers rights. It's a blow to specific portions of ICWA that happened to apply to one father. Most of his issues surrounding keeping the child stemmed from the fact that he broke off his relationship with the mother shortly after she got pregnant, told her he didn't want to have anything to do with raising or supporting the kid, and then signed off on the adoption papers before attempting to rescind his approval.

ICWA was designed to prevent Native American children from being forcibly removed from their families, not to allow parents who had manifested their disinterest in parenting a loophole when they changed their minds.

[Anaguma]

(06-26-2013 12:00 AM)lurker Wrote:  

This isn't a blow to fathers rights. It's a blow to specific portions of ICWA that happened to apply to one father. Most of his issues surrounding keeping the child stemmed from the fact that he broke off his relationship with the mother shortly after she got pregnant, told her he didn't want to have anything to do with raising or supporting the kid, and then signed off on the adoption papers before attempting to rescind his approval.

ICWA was designed to prevent Native American children from being forcibly removed from their families, not to allow parents who had manifested their disinterest in parenting a loophole when they changed their minds.

Not quite, when you look at the fact pattern: http://www.judicial.state.sc.us/opinions.../27148.pdf

In any case, he thought he was surrendering custody to the mother, not consenting to adoption.