I'm doing an article about the Tennesse girl that has been the center of a custody battle between her biological and foster parents for six years. She'll be turning 8 next week and will also be returned to her biologicla parents. I just wanted people's opinion on who do you think morally, not legally, should have custody of her.
Here's an article about it
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/AmericanFamily/story?id=2818818&page=1
Also please specify if you're a parent or not.
2007-01-24 06:38:31 · 12 answers · asked by christigmc 5 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
That is sad. I am a parent and I don't think it is in the best interest of the child.
I could not imagine raising a child as my own for 8 years, and because someone "changed their minds" can actually get custody of a child they left because they couldn't be proper parents. They gave up the child for adoption, so they gave up their rights as parents. I am so tired of people who give up their kids for adoption, than change their minds well afterwards. They are being selfish. The child has been living with a healthy family all this time, why remove the child and create more chaos for an 8 year old. It is not fair. And that racist mess, that is a crappy excuse. This is not a case of racism, but a case of who should be the parents. The He family is obviously not thinking of the child's best interest. This is all the more reason to keep the child with the Tennessee family.
2007-01-24 06:48:52 · answer #1 · answered by Ms. Chick 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The Baker's were "foster parents" according to the article. There was no "legal" agreement and this country is based on laws. Poverty can cause people to do rash or necessary things. We used to have orphanages for kids like this. Now its been relegated to "foster care." The Baker's were aware of what they were doing. It's sad because they came to love the child. The biological parents have an emotional bond and strong feelings about the whole ordeal. Why can't they agree to something more amicable for the sake of the child who only knows the Baker Family? Why does there need to be such animosity? Why can't they just all get along and do what is best for the child. The child is of another race...and will eventually recognize the who and why of this situation If I were advising them...I'd be looking at an amicable joint custody thing...for the child's benefit.
2007-01-30 05:16:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What a horrible mess this story is. Those poor people and child. Someone messed up, and should get into trouble. Social worker? Sounds like the parents were supposed to be able to get her back and have visitations. I don't know why this didn't happen. I don't know here. Tough decision. I feel for all involved. I just hope however it works out, that the child is happy. One of the sets of parents won't be of course. This really sucks. What a mess. What are your feelings on this? I'm a parent. four kids.
2007-01-31 16:08:17 · answer #3 · answered by Rosalind S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As a foster parent, I have always practiced that the safety and well being of a child was always the most important objective. And the reunification of the bio family was next in line for the child. Anna Mae will always feel a little confused about her early years and know the foster family loves her very much. Anna Mae's foster parents should be very happy for her and happily give her up to her family. On the other hand her bio family should consider Anna Mae's love for the other family who has raised her.The families should put their personal feeling aside and learn to get along for Anna Mae's well being. Ive fostered 49 children and have known that each child put in my home was temporary and my job was to keep them safe and show them unconditional love. I hope Anna Mae gets to have two families that love her.
2007-01-29 13:11:47 · answer #4 · answered by ezrider 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a very sad case indeed. I couldn't imagine giving up my child. Of course, these people were upfront and honest about their situation and was informed that their child would be cared for until they were able to get back on their feet. Foster parents are informed from the very start that these children rarely ever become adopted by the foster parents. Those foster parents were wrong for trying to keep that child from her parents. She deserves to know her culture and her family. I think the court was right in giving the child back to her parents. Just because a parent isn't rich, doesn't mean they aren't a good parent. Thank you.
2007-01-24 07:03:56 · answer #5 · answered by cookie 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think she should know her real parents. Especially considering the difference in culture and race. I'd want to know about where I came from if I was in the child's position.
However, her parents are strangers to her right now. I think they should have regular visitiation with Annie Mae and give the child a chance to get to know her biological parents. In divorces children 12 years and older are able to choose who they want to live with...maybe she could spend 4 years getting familiar with her biological parents and then when she turns 12...let her decide what sort of arrangement would be best.
The foster parents are her stability right now and I am sure she loves them very much. It wouldn't be in the child's best interest to uproot her and place her in a totally unfamiliar enviroment.
2007-01-24 06:54:29 · answer #6 · answered by tiffany 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Sorry, the biologicial parents gave her up. The child is used to her foster parents. The biological parents trying to get back is ruining the child's life and are being selfish.
People need to be more responsible for the decisions they make.
2007-01-24 07:06:57 · answer #7 · answered by Arthur M 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It is a hard decision for everyone. Yes she has lived with the foster parents for six years. I believe that they should not cut them out completely, but they should give Annie Mae a chance to get to know her biological parents and vice versa. Granted she needs to know her biological family and her heritage, are the foster parents going to teach her about those? Will she forget about them and all they have taught her? Maybe/maybe not. I disagree with making her a ward of the court - how fair is that to her?
2007-01-24 06:50:03 · answer #8 · answered by Feline05 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
that is an truly unhappy difficulty. From my expertise the fostercare difficulty become meant to be non everlasting.The foster mothers and fathers became emotionally connected and at the same time as the organic and organic mothers and fathers sought to be reunited with their daughter a criminal tug of conflict ensued.i imagine the biggest loser in this difficulty is the little woman. i do not recognize what the problem become that the beginning mothers and fathers felt that fostercare become their in user-friendly words decision they ought to have loved their daughter a lot to wish to make certain she might want to be properly cared for at the same time as they couldn't provide it.what number of human beings do no longer search for this help at the same time as they obviously must have widely used they could no longer competently provide for his or her children. The forster mothers and fathers have probable saved this criminal tug of conflict occurring for tooo lengthy. it would want to were extra effective for the more youthful woman to be slowly reunited consisting of her mothers and fathers 6 years in the past.How unhappy that this difficulty has dragged on so long. Her mothers and fathers have lost all those years with their daughter turning out to be up which they are going to not in any respect get decrease back.The foster mothers and fathers were in reality the non everlasting caregivers.the article did not aspect out in the adventure that they petitioned to legally undertake her.i imagine that as puzzling because it will be that the more youthful woman should be reunited consisting of her organic and organic mothers and fathers.This transition might want to were so a lot extra reachable if it were settled 6 years in the past.All activities knew from the starting up that the problem become in user-friendly words non everlasting. If the fosterparents felt they were getting too emotionally connected they ought to have requested to be removed from the more youthful women care.perchance the both households can make preparations so the more youthful woman can keep in contact with the foster mothers and fathers.the in user-friendly words those who benefitted in this difficulty dragging on for 6 years were the legal specialists.
2016-12-03 00:09:37 · answer #9 · answered by huehn 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who does she want to live with? That is the answer to your question.
2007-01-25 07:01:07 · answer #10 · answered by wisegirl1204 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋