"Mommy, Why Does Baby G. Have to Go to Jail?"

My heart is breaking for this family and this little girl. On the other hand, having grown up with a biological father who couldn't be bothered to call or visit and willingly signed away his parental rights without any fuss at all, I do believe that being in jail shouldn't be the thing that severs a parent/child relationship. I do wish that there was a more positive interim solution. It's tragic that she will need to enter the foster care system rather than stay with the family who already loves her.

I do think it's important to be careful about framing the situation. The judge didn't necessarily think it was better for the child to be in foster care, but DID place value on the father's rights. Can you imagine if you ended up in jail for some reason (you never know) and someone wanted to terminate your parental rights as a result?

Perhaps the family can negotiate with the father for joint custody, or at least offer to keep her with them until he is able to care for her. I think that's a healthier approach than a negative media campaign.

Christy@morethanmommy
Quirky Fusion ( http://quirkyfusion.com )
( http://twitter.com/morethanmommy )

As a birth mother, I am very protective of my daughter's biological father's rights. I tried to involve him in the process as much as he was able to handle at the time... but the facilitator still did wrong by him and, in the end, by our daughter.

However, if he had fought the adoption and the end result was going to be that our daughter would have gone to foster care (he was not nor has ever been in jail, it should be noted), I wouldn't have been able to handle it. I made my decisions to match early with my daughter's adoptive family specifically so she wouldn't go to foster care. I was very specific in what I wanted for my daughter, even though I didn't quite understand the long reaching implications of those things due to a total lack of counseling by my non-agency.

But, honestly, if something of this nature had happened, I wouldn't have been able to handle it emotionally. I will also keep Gia's birth mother in my thoughts as everything she had hoped and planned for her daughter has now fallen apart.

Family Section Editor Jenna Hatfield (@FireMom ( http://twitter.com/FireMom )) blogs at Stop, Drop and Blog ( http://stopdropandblog.com ) and The Chronicles of Munchkin Land ( http://thechroniclesofmunchkinland.com ). She is a freelance writer and photographer.

Before becoming a stay-at-home mom, I used to work for a non-profit called CASA (Court Appointed Special Advocates), who advocated for the best interests of children who were court wards.

It's hard to comment without knowing all of the facts, but from my experience, I can tell you this--if a father appears at ANY point in the adoption process, child welfare is legally required to make attempts to reunify the child with the parent, unless the father is willing to relinquish his parental rights. I can also tell you that state Supreme Courts have ruled again and again that short-term jail sentences are not a reason to stop reunification efforts.

At least in the State of Oregon, what would have happened at that point was that if your friends were willing, child welfare would have attempted to certify them as foster parents, so that hopefully Baby Gia would have been able to remain with them while child welfare started making steps towards reunification with the father. The father would have about a year (varies from state to state) to show that he's working to get his act together. During this time, the child MUST be a ward of the court (i.e. in foster or relative care). If the father hasn't made progress toward reunification within a year (showing progress could be as simple as taking parenting classes), then the state would proceed to a termination of parental rights case, which is a trial that the state takes as seriously as a murder trial, and at least in Oregon, it is VERY difficult to involuntarily terminate a parent's rights.

So, I know it's hard to understand. It's heartbreaking for your friends. But in this case, from the info I've read, I don't think that the judge actually had the power to keep Baby Gia with your friends (well, he could have ruled against precedent, but the state Supreme Court likely would have reversed his ruling).

I know that in cases like this, the law is frustrating. However, it is in existence because historically in this country, parental rights have been terminated unjustly.

* La Buena Vida ( http://www.vivalabuenavida.blogspot.com ) *

@nellewrites - I appreciate your reasoned perspective on this and taking the time to read the back posts too. You're right, sometimes we do need to take these sorts of issues under consideration. This is, sadly, a little more along of the "no signs of commitment to responsible parenting." There's a few more dimensions to the story that I couldn't say ... including another child out there to whom he does not see nor pay child support to.

@Jenna - she is going to the foster care system, not into the custody of biological family members.

Thank you both for the calm and reasoned responses (and taking time to read and respond, too). Looking forward to checking out your blogs, too. :)

Are the father's parents getting custody while he is incarcerated? If so, it makes sense to me. Fathers do have rights, and ethical adoption reform involves respecting those rights. However, if the child is placed outside of the family in the five year interim, I am not okay with it.

This is one of those sticky situations that has ethical implications no matter which way the judge ruled. It sucks all around and I can only hope and pray that Baby Gia will be okay in the end.

Family Section Editor Jenna Hatfield (@FireMom ( http://twitter.com/FireMom )) blogs at Stop, Drop and Blog ( http://stopdropandblog.com ) and The Chronicles of Munchkin Land ( http://thechroniclesofmunchkinland.com ). She is a freelance writer and photographer.

I looked at your blog and traced the history some. I see the father is 21, doing five years, and used a public defender. I didn't see mention of the charges, or when his sentence began.

A court should look at the best interests of the child, weighing the rights of birth parents vs their ability to properly care.

I don't know all the facts of the case, but I wished to mention that being in prison is not an automatic reason to strip parental rights. The father is young. Maybe since he was charged and sentenced he sees life quite differently (I'm not saying these *are* how it is in this case, only that these possibilities have to be considered in the mix.) What if he wishes to be a dedicated parent?

Good people make mistakes, or have things occur in their lives that is beyond their ability to manage. Many people pay for their mistakes and emerge to build good lives.

Now if there is evidence this father will be right back to doing what got him there, if he shows no signs of commitment to responsible parenting, then I'm with you all the way. I just don't have that information set to form a proper judgement.

Stated another way... the hurt here can go in a lot of different directions, including his.

nellewrites ( http://nellewrites.wordpress.com/ )