This is why we live in California and not Georgia.
A judge in Georgia removed a child from the home of his prospective adoptive mother because the mother was lesbian. (hat tip: Peter's Cross Station)
Here's the story in a nutshell:
The biological mother asked her friend to care for her daughter since she had fallen on hard times.
The prospective adoptive mother, with the biological mother's blessing, was granted legal custody of the 6 year old.
She started the adoption process and did a home study. In the home visits she did nothing hide that she was lesbian and had a partner of seven years. The agent was fine with it.
During the hearing to finalize the adoption, the judge at first had no problem till he read further and found the prospective adoptive mother was lesbian and had a partner.
The judge, on this reason alone, ordered the child taken from the home and put in the foster system if the biological mother didn't take the child in 10 days. The biological mother insisted she felt the adoptive mother should take her. When the adoptive mother moved to a more progressive county to get a fairer hearing, she sentenced the prosective adoptive mother to 10 days in jail.
The child was placed in the foster system and even after another court ruled that the child should be placed in the adoptive mother's home, after a doctor reported the daughter's "current foster placement was the worst possible scenario for Emma (the daughter's name)" and that it was in her best interest to be with the adoptive mother, the foster family REFUSED to give up the girl and the original judge told them not to.
So, because this woman was lesbian, and the judge hates GLBT people (yes, how else would you explain this?!), the judge decided to traumatize a 6 year old girl.
He also put the adoptive mother in a impossible situation.
The judges ruling was filled with catch 22s.
In his ruling he "accused Hadaway (the adoptive mother) of attempting to “subterfuge and sham” the court by applying as a single adoptive parent when she “seeks to accomplish an adoption by a de facto homosexual couple," And yet they SPECIFICALLY acknowledged the fact that they were couple in the home study AND Georgia doesn't allow same-sex couple adoption, so of course she adopted as a single parent though she openly acknowledged that she had a partner.
He also said in his ruling that basically: This child is financially unprotected in this home because the couple isn't married. Georgia doesn't allow same-sex couples to get married. Thus this child should not be in this home.
Did his irony alarm go off when he wrote that?
It is stories like this that make families like ours very reluctant to visit, much less move to, states like my home state of Virginia.
One bad experience, one bad judge and a state with draconian anti-gay laws...
and you lose your child.
We've heard too many stories like this.
Luckily, things seem to be shifting with the recent law passed in Colorado allowing same-sex parent adoption and other changes.
Still, we are reluctant to travel to some states and glad we live in this one.
Comments (10)
It makes my head ache and my stomach turn.
Would it help to know that I just had a social worker buy me lunch so that I could give her ideas on how to recruit more GLBT foster parents?
Comment #12422 on April 13, 2007 2:03 PM |
Yes, that does help!
It's heartening to know that for every story like this, there is a counterstory.
Terrance did a good post the other day on this issue. One of the things that was hopeful in that was something like a third of foster parents in DC were GLBT (it's like that in the bay area, but California is a lower percentage).
That was hopeful for two reasons:
1. it means society it changing!
2. its that many more parents available for children who need homes.
Comment #12426 on April 13, 2007 2:28 PM |
my gosh.. this makes me feel so sick to read. i'm lucky to live where i do, where this level of discrimination against GLB's is completely unthinkable.. .
Comment #12444 on April 13, 2007 6:05 PM |
Oh man, that is so disturbing. It reminds me of an article I read about an Indiana Judge removing a teen-age boy from his father's custody because the father is Wiccan. Actually both parents are Wiccan and the information somehow came to light during an unrelated hearing. The judge's reasoning was that since the boy was going to catholic school he would be confused. Luckily that got over-turned, but this is so ridiculaous that judges are going against the parents' wishes for things that aren't even harmful for them.
Comment #12452 on April 13, 2007 11:14 PM |
I just wrote a little about this as part of another topic and included a link to your blog.
Thanks for this. I've probably already said this but I want my youngest son to raise my girls if I'm unable to.
If CA changes their law, that won't happen
Comment #12475 on April 14, 2007 9:33 AM |
For some reason, that link goes to my "edit" page. How strange.
No harm; I'm sure you won't re-write my post and I'll see if I can fix it.
Comment #12476 on April 14, 2007 9:35 AM |
No worries, wouldn't rewrite if I wanted to ;)... anyway, for me (and anyone else) it just takes us to your login page, so unless we know your login...
I'll fix if i you send me the link. I don't see the post on the blog, maybe it didn't get published :/.
(btw, congrats on the blog award nomination!)
Comment #12484 on April 14, 2007 12:06 PM |
That's totally shocking ... what about the best interests of the child? He should be judged unfit to judge!
Comment #12532 on April 15, 2007 8:35 AM |
Trey, it's on Is America Burning, not granny. Or it should be.
Let me try the link again.
Comment #12822 on April 17, 2007 2:15 PM |
Here is the link to your post. Thanks!
http://isamericaburning.blogspot.com/2007/04/87000000-later-is-it-working.html
(and fixed in your original comment)
Comment #12827 on April 17, 2007 2:37 PM |