adoption.com

adoption.com

 
JOIN 800,000+ MEMBERS JOINJOIN Cancel
image






Adoption Forums®

Members List Photos Events Local Adoption Support Search Arcade Reviews Membership Upgrade
Welcome to the Forums. Register
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. You may have to register before you can post or search: click here to proceed. To start viewing messages, select a forum below that you would like to view or click View All of Todays Posts.
Forum Categories
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-15-2010, 03:06 AM
vernellinnj's Avatar
vernellinnj vernellinnj is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,905
Total Points: 155,400,311,998.58
Donate
Important Ruling By New Jersey Supreme Court

Decided June 1, 2010

If link does not work Google New Jersey Division Of Family Services v C.M.

https://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/op...408DYFSvCM.pdf


In summary, psycological harm due to severing a bond between a child and his/her foster parents cannot, in and of itself, serve as a reason for Terminating a Parents Rights. This will impact many cases. I understand that bonding evaluation may no longer take place.

Read for yourself as I am no lawyer and my summary is a real summary..
__________________
Single and Fabulous!
Former Fostermom (2004-2010) fostered 3 children
Fostermom to one child for 4 years; child reunited with his mom but he's still an active part of my life.
_______________________________________________
November 2010 - Submitted Application for Private Domestic Adoption
March 2011 - Homestudy approved/waiting to be matched
August 2011 - Received "the call" for a baby born the night before! Birthmom signed TPR papers 72 hours later
January 2012 - Birthdad's rights terminated
February 2012 - Finalized!

Last edited by vernellinnj : 06-15-2010 at 03:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
Adoption Confererence
Click here to visit Adoptive Parents Committee
Adoptive Parents Committee 33rd Annual Adoption Conference: Sunday, Nov. 24, 2013 St. Francis College, Brooklyn, NY 75 Workshops/50 Exhibitors/Bookstore Register Online or call (212)304-8497
Adoptive Parents Committee
(212) 304-8479  

  #2  
Old 06-15-2010, 06:26 AM
wcurry66's Avatar
wcurry66 wcurry66 is offline
mom
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,647
Total Points: 174,672.16
Donate
Wow! Such a heart breaking case for all involved. I'm not familiar with NJ law. Are there further levels of appeal?
__________________
Nov 5, 2009 - princess moves in
Jan 14, 2010 - TPR, OA signed
Aug 5, 2010 - FINALIZATION

If you want to keep your memories, you first have to live them. Bob Dylan
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-15-2010, 07:38 AM
Dickons Dickons is offline
Adoptee

Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,371
Total Points: 1,479,899.18
Donate
The link is broken so I have not read the report.

But stop and think about it for a minute...

A baby is in his/her mothers womb for 10 months...they know their mother, her smell, her voice, her touch.

A baby/child is raised by their mother and father (sometimes) and bonds to those parent(s) and based on the circumstances that the adults cause the baby is removed...the baby/child is bonded but removed.

A baby/child lives with foster parents while the parents either work their case and fix their issues or not...and I am assuming we are talking about those parents who worked their case plan and fixed their issues...

If the parents work their case and fix their issues then the child goes home - to the original bond...

So how would the foster parents bond be any more valid than the original bond? Simply because the foster parents want to adopt?

Kind regards,
Dickons
__________________
Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be. ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-15-2010, 08:05 AM
mykids1027 mykids1027 is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 431
Total Points: 47,039.51
Donate
I read the entire case and all I can say is "Wow"!
__________________
7/09 - Officially licensed
7/09 - STBAS's Siblings S & N
-
4/10 - Goal changed to tpr/adoption by us
TPR trial set for March 2011
TPR approved

Forever family - June 24, 2011
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-15-2010, 08:38 AM
Longing2bMom Longing2bMom is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 634
Total Points: 26,217.39
Donate
I have only had time to briefly skim the report, so I don't know the specifics of this case and can't answer as to whether I think this decision is fair in regards to the facts of this case, but in general, I feel that it is wrong not to consider the bonding of the child in permanency decisions.

My baby has been with me since birth. She is now nearly 6 months old. She has never even met her birth mother outside of the womb, so I am the only mother she knows. I believe even at this young age, it would be hard for her if she were to be returned to her birth mother. Even so, 6 months isn't a long time and I do agree that had her birth mother been able to really straighten out her life, she should have gotten her back. But what about a year from now? Or two? Or three? At what point does my daughter's right to permanency supersede her birth mother's right to be her mother? It's not about the foster family wanting to adopt, it's about the child's right to form bonds that won't be broken. It's not their fault that this was denied them in their birth families. It shouldn't be denied them in their long-term foster families, as well.

As I said previously, I don't know the specifics of this case, but if I read correctly in my quick skim, this child was born and placed in foster care in January 2005 and is now over 5 years old. Assuming he has been with the same foster family all this time, what a tragedy for him that he is now going to be torn away from the only family he knows. After all, I'm sure no one ever told him his life was only temporary.
__________________
My fost/adopt journey:

05/04/09 - Attended fost/adopt orientation
06/30/09 - 08/25/09 - Attended fost/adopt classes
12/04/09 - Officially licensed (finally!!)

BABY A
12/22/09 - Baby A is born!
12/23/09 - Meet Baby A in hospital - Fall INSTANTLY in love!
12/24/09 - Baby A comes home!
01/21/10 - Judges orders no reunification services for birthparents, sets TPR hearing for March 25, 2010
03/25/10 - TPR granted!
05/24/10 - Appeals period ended with NO appeals!
07/06/10 - Finalized!

BABY M
9/22/10 - Meet Baby M (6 months old)
9/25/10 - Baby M comes home!
12/10/10 - TPR granted!
12/28/10 - Appeal filed
3/2/11 - Appeals court refuses to hear appeal
4/27/11 - Finalized!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-15-2010, 04:59 PM
vernellinnj's Avatar
vernellinnj vernellinnj is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,905
Total Points: 155,400,311,998.58
Donate
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickons
The link is broken so I have not read the report.

But stop and think about it for a minute...

A baby is in his/her mothers womb for 10 months...they know their mother, her smell, her voice, her touch.

A baby/child is raised by their mother and father (sometimes) and bonds to those parent(s) and based on the circumstances that the adults cause the baby is removed...the baby/child is bonded but removed.

A baby/child lives with foster parents while the parents either work their case and fix their issues or not...and I am assuming we are talking about those parents who worked their case plan and fixed their issues...

If the parents work their case and fix their issues then the child goes home - to the original bond...

So how would the foster parents bond be any more valid than the original bond? Simply because the foster parents want to adopt?

Kind regards,
Dickons

Yeah, ok. So, what about a child who is in fostercare for 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, etc. when the parents fix their issues? Do you think a child's life stands still? What happens when the secondary bond (I use that term since you used original) is stronger? Then what?

And, who says the fosterparents "simply" want to adopt? What if the FPs never went into it thinking of adoption? Can you leave room for the thought that just maybe the child really is better off left where he/she is?

If I have learned anything it's that there is nothing simple about the fostercare process. Every case must be decided based on that case.
__________________
Single and Fabulous!
Former Fostermom (2004-2010) fostered 3 children
Fostermom to one child for 4 years; child reunited with his mom but he's still an active part of my life.
_______________________________________________
November 2010 - Submitted Application for Private Domestic Adoption
March 2011 - Homestudy approved/waiting to be matched
August 2011 - Received "the call" for a baby born the night before! Birthmom signed TPR papers 72 hours later
January 2012 - Birthdad's rights terminated
February 2012 - Finalized!

Last edited by vernellinnj : 06-15-2010 at 05:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-16-2010, 05:21 AM
wcurry66's Avatar
wcurry66 wcurry66 is offline
mom
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,647
Total Points: 174,672.16
Donate
here's anotherl ink to the case

Laws, Life, and Legal Matters - Court Cases and Legal Information at Leagle.com - All Federal and State Appeals Court Cases in One Search
__________________
Nov 5, 2009 - princess moves in
Jan 14, 2010 - TPR, OA signed
Aug 5, 2010 - FINALIZATION

If you want to keep your memories, you first have to live them. Bob Dylan
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-16-2010, 07:30 AM
Dickons Dickons is offline
Adoptee

Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,371
Total Points: 1,479,899.18
Donate
Thanks wcurry...

It is not the mother who 'took' to long. It was not an abuse or neglect case it was because the mother had two of the most severe illnesses a person can face - not just one very painful debilitating illness but two.

It was the court system that was in the wrong and took too much time and only after the court ruled TPR and no further visitation that bonding occurred between the child and the foster parents and that the original bond was still there...And they TPR'd after failing to prove 1,2, and 4 of the 4 prong test?


Kind regards,
Dickons
__________________
Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be. ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Reply With Quote

  #9  
Old 06-16-2010, 08:35 AM
mykids1027 mykids1027 is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 431
Total Points: 47,039.51
Donate
I'm not sure I read what everyone else read, but what I got was a father, who had an affair, got a girl pregnant and didn't know about it until the child was 18 months old. When he found out, he refused to take the child due to being married with children of his own and stated in court he did not want the child. Much, much later, when his wife through him out, he then decided he want the child. In the meantime, this child spent the first years of their life with the foster partents and didn't know the father.
__________________
7/09 - Officially licensed
7/09 - STBAS's Siblings S & N
-
4/10 - Goal changed to tpr/adoption by us
TPR trial set for March 2011
TPR approved

Forever family - June 24, 2011
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-16-2010, 08:49 AM
Dickons Dickons is offline
Adoptee

Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,371
Total Points: 1,479,899.18
Donate
I read the link wcurry posted which was about a mother with MS and Severe Scoliosis...

Kind regards,
Dickons
__________________
Treat a man as he is, and he will remain as he is. Treat a man as he could be, and he will become what he should be. ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-16-2010, 08:56 AM
mykids1027 mykids1027 is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 431
Total Points: 47,039.51
Donate
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickons
I read the link wcurry posted which was about a mother with MS and Severe Scoliosis...

Kind regards,
Dickons
That's a totally different case than the OP. The initials for that case are CM not DM.
__________________
7/09 - Officially licensed
7/09 - STBAS's Siblings S & N
-
4/10 - Goal changed to tpr/adoption by us
TPR trial set for March 2011
TPR approved

Forever family - June 24, 2011
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-16-2010, 09:00 AM
irelady10's Avatar
irelady10 irelady10 is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,897
Total Points: 181,363.24
Donate
I read the link wcurry gave us. Is that the case the original OP was talking about? If not, can someone post a link to that case (I tried googling it, but wasn't very successful). Thanks.
__________________
2/08
7/09: ADOPTED by me!!!!

1/10-1/10
8/10-9/10 , toddler
1/12-3/12 toddler preschooler
2/13- present:
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-16-2010, 09:10 AM
mnmomma's Avatar
mnmomma mnmomma is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 572
Total Points: 17,740.58
Donate
NJ Criminal Law- Recent Cases: NJ Division of Youth and Family Services v. C.M. (A-74-08)

This blog is about the case, but cuts off partway through. It's the only info I've found on google that doesn't require a paid subscription.
__________________
R - married 9/05
K - 15yo - step-son
E - 5yo - adopted 3/19/09
K - 3yo - adopted 3/3/11
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-16-2010, 09:28 AM
vernellinnj's Avatar
vernellinnj vernellinnj is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,905
Total Points: 155,400,311,998.58
Donate
Quote:
Originally Posted by mykids1027
I'm not sure I read what everyone else read, but what I got was a father, who had an affair, got a girl pregnant and didn't know about it until the child was 18 months old. When he found out, he refused to take the child due to being married with children of his own and stated in court he did not want the child. Much, much later, when his wife through him out, he then decided he want the child. In the meantime, this child spent the first years of their life with the foster partents and didn't know the father.

Yes, this is the case. And, in this case I believe the decision is accurate in returning the child to biodad. I think he made reasonable efforts to take care of the child once he knew about the child.

The concern I have is that this ruling is being applied to all cases as now the Supreme Court has ruled that bonds between FC and FPs can't be considered as it relates to TPR.

106 page case was there yesterday but is gone now (maybe too many people looking at it..smile).
__________________
Single and Fabulous!
Former Fostermom (2004-2010) fostered 3 children
Fostermom to one child for 4 years; child reunited with his mom but he's still an active part of my life.
_______________________________________________
November 2010 - Submitted Application for Private Domestic Adoption
March 2011 - Homestudy approved/waiting to be matched
August 2011 - Received "the call" for a baby born the night before! Birthmom signed TPR papers 72 hours later
January 2012 - Birthdad's rights terminated
February 2012 - Finalized!

Last edited by vernellinnj : 06-16-2010 at 09:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-16-2010, 09:38 AM
millie58 millie58 is online now
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,182
Total Points: 92,782.32
Donate
Bio dad does not want the child when he's married and wants child when wife throws him out?? The child should stay with the family he/she is with.
__________________
Millie

Adoptive mom to 4

L, came home 5/05; adopted 6/06
P, came home 2/06; adopted Adoption Day, 06
J, came home 5/07; adopted 1/09
B, came home 5/07; adopted 1/09

Respite to D and J
Reply With Quote
Reply

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Points Per Thread View: 1.00
Points Per Thread: 15.00
Points Per Reply: 5.00


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:44 PM.