Trafficking Native Children: The Seamy Underbelly of U.S. Adoption Industry - ICTMN.com:
Jeremy Simmons was heartbroken, baffled and confused. He had been living with his girlfriend, Crystal Tarbox, in Mannford, Oklahoma, when she became pregnant in August, 2012. But in March of this year, he says she moved out when she was seven months pregnant. Without a trace, she was gone.
Saturday, August 31, 2013
Happy 8th Birthday Isabella-D.O.B. 8/31/05 We Love and Miss You!
Happy Birthday to our sweet little Granddaughter Bella
I wish I could say time is flying by, but without you in our lives, it isn't.
It's been a long, hard, eight years without you, our precious Granddaughter.
Not a day goes by that we don't think about you, speak about you, worry about you.
We pray you are being treated like the special little girl you are. The precious little girl stolen
from your REAL Family. Stolen, because money means more than anything else to the people
who took you from us. They will never admit they lied in order to take you, nor will they ever
admit you were stolen illegally and adopted illegally. They were all in on the scam to take you
from your REAL Family. The Family who made sure you were born healthy, only to have you sold
by the State.
You must be starting to realize you don't look anything like your two Spanish sister's, nor the people you call Mommy and Daddy, nor the people you've been told are your Grandparents. I wonder if these people will ever tell you, you were adopted and they aren't your REAL Family. I hope by this time you are asking many questions, though I doubt they will ever tell you the truth. After all, they did work with DCYF to steal you in the first place.
You have many new cousins and other's who long to meet you and some day they will. Not a day goes by that we don't talk about you and share your pictures. For now, that's ALL we have, but hopefully one day soon you'll be home with us where you belong.
We were hoping you would be home with us to celebrate your eighth Birthday. If this State's Judicial system wasn't so corrupt, you would have been. For that matter, you wouldn't have been stolen in the first place. We will Never stop fighting for your return and pray you are being well taken care of.
Your ENTIRE REAL FAMILY wishes you a Happy Birthday and wish they could tell you in person. Some day they will.
Love Always, Your ENTIRE REAL FAMILY!
XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO
I wish I could say time is flying by, but without you in our lives, it isn't.
It's been a long, hard, eight years without you, our precious Granddaughter.
Not a day goes by that we don't think about you, speak about you, worry about you.
We pray you are being treated like the special little girl you are. The precious little girl stolen
from your REAL Family. Stolen, because money means more than anything else to the people
who took you from us. They will never admit they lied in order to take you, nor will they ever
admit you were stolen illegally and adopted illegally. They were all in on the scam to take you
from your REAL Family. The Family who made sure you were born healthy, only to have you sold
by the State.
You must be starting to realize you don't look anything like your two Spanish sister's, nor the people you call Mommy and Daddy, nor the people you've been told are your Grandparents. I wonder if these people will ever tell you, you were adopted and they aren't your REAL Family. I hope by this time you are asking many questions, though I doubt they will ever tell you the truth. After all, they did work with DCYF to steal you in the first place.
You have many new cousins and other's who long to meet you and some day they will. Not a day goes by that we don't talk about you and share your pictures. For now, that's ALL we have, but hopefully one day soon you'll be home with us where you belong.
We were hoping you would be home with us to celebrate your eighth Birthday. If this State's Judicial system wasn't so corrupt, you would have been. For that matter, you wouldn't have been stolen in the first place. We will Never stop fighting for your return and pray you are being well taken care of.
Your ENTIRE REAL FAMILY wishes you a Happy Birthday and wish they could tell you in person. Some day they will.
Love Always, Your ENTIRE REAL FAMILY!
XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO
Dusten Brown asks Oklahoma Supreme Court to block judge's order in Baby Veronica case
Dusten Brown asks Oklahoma Supreme Court to block judge's order in Baby Veronica case | Tulsa World:
NOWATA - Three armed men - a Cherokee marshal, a Nowata County sheriff's deputy and a Nowata police officer - guarded the courtroom door Friday morning.
NOWATA - Three armed men - a Cherokee marshal, a Nowata County sheriff's deputy and a Nowata police officer - guarded the courtroom door Friday morning.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Mother Turns to Social Media to Find Daughter Given Up for Adoption 36 Years Ago
Mother Turns to Social Media to Find Daughter Given Up for Adoption 36 Years Ago | NBC 6 South Florida:
After becoming pregnant at 16, Silvia Aguiar's daughter was given up for adoption while she was in foster care.
Woman Seeks Daughter Given Up for Adoption...
Man pleads guilty, regains custody of daughter
Man pleads guilty, regains custody of daughter | The Lethbridge Herald – myLH.ca:
A single father who drunkenly left his toddler to drift onto a city street has regained custody of his daughter.
A single father who drunkenly left his toddler to drift onto a city street has regained custody of his daughter.
Hawkes Bay couple face abuse charges for CYF foster children
Hawkes Bay couple face abuse charges for CYF foster children | Hawkes Bay News:
A woman who cared for CYF foster children in Hawke's Bay is accused of beating them with a hearth brush, a wooden spoon, and a rolling pin on several occasions over 10 years. The woman's husband faces one representative charge of wilful ill-treatment and two charges of injuring one of the children with intent between 2004 and 2007.
A woman who cared for CYF foster children in Hawke's Bay is accused of beating them with a hearth brush, a wooden spoon, and a rolling pin on several occasions over 10 years. The woman's husband faces one representative charge of wilful ill-treatment and two charges of injuring one of the children with intent between 2004 and 2007.
Children’s risk-of-harm report ‘not followed’
www.cowracommunitynews.com:
MORE than 20,000 reports of children at risk of serious harm were closed because there weren’t enough caseworkers to check up on them, the State Opposition claims.
Opposition Leader John Robertson says the government’s internal data reveals 20,400 reports of children at risk of serious harm in 2011-12 weren’t followed up because of “competing priorities”.
The Non-Existent Sibling in U.S. Family Law
The Non-Existent Sibling in U.S. Family Law | Avidan Milevsky:
"Hardly a week goes by that I'm not presented with a proposed parenting plan that separates siblings"
- Judge Anne Kass
Schools put genius child in special ed, tell mom he can't learn. Now he's free, and he's on track to win a Nobel Prize
Schools put genius child in special ed, tell mom he can't learn. Now he's free, and he's on track to win a Nobel Prize:
THEY SAID HE WOULD NEVER LEARN, NOW HE’LL TEACH THEM A THING OR TWO…
A genius boy whose IQ is higher than Albert Einstein is on his way to possibly winning a Nobel Prize after being set free of special education programs in public schools. His mother made the decision to take him out of the programs, even after having doctors diagnose him with ADD and say that her sonJacob Barnett would never even learn to tie his shoes.
South Carolina sheriff sends deputies to Oklahoma in Baby Veronica case
South Carolina sheriff sends deputies to Oklahoma in Baby Veronica case | Tulsa World:
CHARLESTON, S.C. - Charleston County Sheriff Al Cannon confirmed today that he has sent two deputies with a State Law Enforcement Division agent to Oklahoma in connection with the contentious custody case concerning the 3-year-old child known as Baby Veronica.
CHARLESTON, S.C. - Charleston County Sheriff Al Cannon confirmed today that he has sent two deputies with a State Law Enforcement Division agent to Oklahoma in connection with the contentious custody case concerning the 3-year-old child known as Baby Veronica.
The Adopted Son of Former President Ronald Reagan is an Idiot and Needs To Shut Up!!!
Legally Kidnapped: The Adopted Son of Former President Ronald Reagan is an Idiot and Needs To Shut Up!!!:
Thank You LK!
Michael Reagan: How I Overcame Child Abuse
Every 10 seconds in the United States, a call is made about a child being abused, but the laws "always seem to be helping the adults," — a trend Michael Reagan hopes to change.
Note: Michael Reagan is failing to realize that quite often best way to help abused or neglected kids is to help the parents to become better parents. If, for example, a child is "abused or neglected" and that "abuse or neglect" is misunderstood poverty or stress that is due to the parents inability to make enough to pay for adequate food, housing, daycare, what have you, than it is much cheaper in the long run to help the parent provide adequate food, housing or daycare than it is to remove the kid and throw them into foster care or a children's shelter. It's also better for the child.
It is really sad Mr Reagan is able to use his adopted fathers fame and notoriety as a springboard to launch his campaign against real parents who are having a hard time, as I do believe that Former President Reagan had a much kinder heart than that, and was a much wiser man who would have at least listened to both sides instead of jumping on the bandwagon of the System Sucks as their national spokesperson simply because he didn't get enough love and attention while growing up.
This is sadly just another case of the blind leading the blind and preaching misinformation which rallies the stupid to avoid doing the right thing. It's also people like this who make our fight harder as these are the people that the System Sucks (those who profit from CPS) hide behind as they capture the spotlight while others run their little scam in the shadows.
LK: http://legallykidnapped.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-adopted-son-of-former-president.html#ixzz2dOG8PdtM
Thank You LK!
Michael Reagan: How I Overcame Child Abuse
Every 10 seconds in the United States, a call is made about a child being abused, but the laws "always seem to be helping the adults," — a trend Michael Reagan hopes to change.
Note: Michael Reagan is failing to realize that quite often best way to help abused or neglected kids is to help the parents to become better parents. If, for example, a child is "abused or neglected" and that "abuse or neglect" is misunderstood poverty or stress that is due to the parents inability to make enough to pay for adequate food, housing, daycare, what have you, than it is much cheaper in the long run to help the parent provide adequate food, housing or daycare than it is to remove the kid and throw them into foster care or a children's shelter. It's also better for the child.
It is really sad Mr Reagan is able to use his adopted fathers fame and notoriety as a springboard to launch his campaign against real parents who are having a hard time, as I do believe that Former President Reagan had a much kinder heart than that, and was a much wiser man who would have at least listened to both sides instead of jumping on the bandwagon of the System Sucks as their national spokesperson simply because he didn't get enough love and attention while growing up.
This is sadly just another case of the blind leading the blind and preaching misinformation which rallies the stupid to avoid doing the right thing. It's also people like this who make our fight harder as these are the people that the System Sucks (those who profit from CPS) hide behind as they capture the spotlight while others run their little scam in the shadows.
LK: http://legallykidnapped.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-adopted-son-of-former-president.html#ixzz2dOG8PdtM
Speak Up guest Dr Sue Cornbluth on Parental Alienation
Dr. Sue Cornbluth Talks about Parental alienation and how far reaching this form of Child Abuse is with Host Kevin Avard on Speak up.
What do you do if you are a victim of Parental Alienation. where do you turn? www.drsueandyou.com are state agencies putting children at risk? Do the courts have the children's best interest in mind or are the family courts violating parents and children's constitutional rights? Do Foster care, Court appointed psychologist , Guardian ad Litem , Social workers , DCYF, have a financial interest in keeping good parents involved equally with their children or do these industries bleed families who are breaking apart of all their resources pitting one parent against the other for fiduciary gain? I know these questions are some what inflammatory to some degree . However the claim that these agencies suppress parents constitutional rights via the Family courts are not just claims of NH citizens. The Center for Redress of Grievances LLC is hearing more and more that these are not just nation wide problems they are global in nature and the Parental Alienation Syndrome is in many cases caused by the Social Services industry. In effect those who claim to be working for the children at "risk" are indeed the very ones who put children at risk by alienating them from one good parent to favor over the other.
What do you do if you are a victim of Parental Alienation. where do you turn? www.drsueandyou.com are state agencies putting children at risk? Do the courts have the children's best interest in mind or are the family courts violating parents and children's constitutional rights? Do Foster care, Court appointed psychologist , Guardian ad Litem , Social workers , DCYF, have a financial interest in keeping good parents involved equally with their children or do these industries bleed families who are breaking apart of all their resources pitting one parent against the other for fiduciary gain? I know these questions are some what inflammatory to some degree . However the claim that these agencies suppress parents constitutional rights via the Family courts are not just claims of NH citizens. The Center for Redress of Grievances LLC is hearing more and more that these are not just nation wide problems they are global in nature and the Parental Alienation Syndrome is in many cases caused by the Social Services industry. In effect those who claim to be working for the children at "risk" are indeed the very ones who put children at risk by alienating them from one good parent to favor over the other.
Even after court ruling, couple still awaits adopted daughter
Even after court ruling, couple still awaits adopted daughter:
Weeks after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in their favor, Matt and Melanier Capobianco of South Carolina are still awaiting legal custody of their adopted child.
Note: They need to just go home and think of Veronica for once.
Weeks after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in their favor, Matt and Melanier Capobianco of South Carolina are still awaiting legal custody of their adopted child.
Note: They need to just go home and think of Veronica for once.
Visitation supervisor charged in Waterville fleeing mom case
Visitation supervisor charged in Waterville fleeing mom case | The Portland Press Herald / Maine Sunday Telegram:
WATERVILLE — A court-appointed child visitation supervisor has been summoned and charged with two counts of endangering the life of a child in the case of a Fairfield woman who fled to South Carolina with her two children earlier this month.
WATERVILLE — A court-appointed child visitation supervisor has been summoned and charged with two counts of endangering the life of a child in the case of a Fairfield woman who fled to South Carolina with her two children earlier this month.
LA County facing fines for operating unlicensed foster care shelter, missing deadlines
LA County facing fines for operating unlicensed foster care shelter, missing deadlines | 89.3 KPCC:
Gesenia Macias is a social worker with the Department of Children and Family Services. She works the night shift, which investigates reports of child abuse after 5 p.m., when other offices close for the night.
Gesenia Macias is a social worker with the Department of Children and Family Services. She works the night shift, which investigates reports of child abuse after 5 p.m., when other offices close for the night.
Vermont caseworker indicted for unlawful sexual contact with Bangor girl
Vermont caseworker indicted for unlawful sexual contact with Bangor girl — Bangor — Bangor Daily News — BDN Maine:
BANGOR, Maine — A caseworker from the Vermont Department for Children and Families was indicted Wednesday by a Penobscot County grand jury on one count of unlawful sexual contact, a Class B crime.
BANGOR, Maine — A caseworker from the Vermont Department for Children and Families was indicted Wednesday by a Penobscot County grand jury on one count of unlawful sexual contact, a Class B crime.
For Some Kids, Summer Camp Includes Seeing Dad In Prison : The Two-Way
For Some Kids, Summer Camp Includes Seeing Dad In Prison : The Two-Way : NPR:
The idea of taking a child to prison for a week may bring to mind visions of "Scared Straight" programs. But the Father to Child Summer Camp Behind Bars does just that — and the goal is to let kids bond with their fathers, who might be incarcerated far from their families.
The idea of taking a child to prison for a week may bring to mind visions of "Scared Straight" programs. But the Father to Child Summer Camp Behind Bars does just that — and the goal is to let kids bond with their fathers, who might be incarcerated far from their families.
Relatives claim LA County's child welfare system responsible for 'wrongful death' of Gabriel Fernandez
Relatives claim LA County's child welfare system responsible for 'wrongful death' of Gabriel Fernandez | 89.3 KPCC:
Relatives of Gabriel Fernandez – the 8-year-old Palmdale boy who allegedly died at the hands of his mother and her boyfriend – have filed a claim against the county, blaming it for the "wrongful death" of the child, according to documents.
Relatives of Gabriel Fernandez – the 8-year-old Palmdale boy who allegedly died at the hands of his mother and her boyfriend – have filed a claim against the county, blaming it for the "wrongful death" of the child, according to documents.
Live Oak foster parent faces more accusations in lewd acts case
Live Oak foster parent faces more accusations in lewd acts case - Santa Cruz Sentinel:
SANTA CRUZ -- A 51-year-old former Live Oak foster parent and former Girl Scout troop leader has been accused of lewd acts with six children, according to prosecutors.
SANTA CRUZ -- A 51-year-old former Live Oak foster parent and former Girl Scout troop leader has been accused of lewd acts with six children, according to prosecutors.
State falling short of protecting children
WV MetroNews – State falling short of protecting children:
A new report by the West Virginia Legislative Auditor includes this disturbing finding concerning child abuse and neglect:
A new report by the West Virginia Legislative Auditor includes this disturbing finding concerning child abuse and neglect:
Children want greater say in Family Court cases
Children want greater say in Family Court cases - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation):
Children in court cases involving family disputes are in danger of going unheard because they are rarely given the chance to speak to judges directly, new research shows.
A survey of 44 Family Court judges showed only six had ever met with children face-to-face to hear their views.
Vt. DCF caseworker indicted for alleged child sex crime
Vt. DCF caseworker indicted for alleged child sex crime - WCAX.COM Local Vermont News, Weather and Sports-:
BANGOR, Maine -
BANGOR, Maine -
A Vermont Department of Children and Families caseworker has been indicted by Maine authorities for an alleged sex crime against a child.
Adoptive mother of starved girl takes stand in own trial
Adoptive mother of starved girl takes stand in own trial | KING5.com Seattle:
A Sedro Woolley mother took the stand Wednesday, describing the day young Hana Williams died.
A Sedro Woolley mother took the stand Wednesday, describing the day young Hana Williams died.
Lawsuit charging that Texas provides shoddy care for foster children can advance, judge rules
Lawsuit charging that Texas provides shoddy care for foster children can advance, judge rules | Dallasnews.com - News for Dallas, Texas - The Dallas Morning News:
AUSTIN — A class-action lawsuit accusing the state of poorly supervising foster children will proceed, a federal judge ruled this week, giving a green light for child-welfare advocates to press their case.
AUSTIN — A class-action lawsuit accusing the state of poorly supervising foster children will proceed, a federal judge ruled this week, giving a green light for child-welfare advocates to press their case.
Monday, August 26, 2013
A Cherokee County court has been asked to suspend visits between Veronica and her adoptive parents
A Cherokee County court has been asked to suspend visits between Veronica and her adoptive parents | Tulsa World:
Confirming that her adoptive parents are being allowed to see Baby Veronica, a Cherokee County court has been asked to suspend their visits until further hearings can be held.
Confirming that her adoptive parents are being allowed to see Baby Veronica, a Cherokee County court has been asked to suspend their visits until further hearings can be held.
After Supreme Court Ruling, States Act on Juvenile Sentences
Life in prison sentences for juveniles were struck down by Supreme Court, stumping states on how to adjust laws on violent crimes for young offenders - Stateline:
In 1980, Henry Hill was convicted of murdering a man in a Saginaw, Mich., park and sentenced to life in prison without parole, the mandatory sentence for the crime. He was 16 years old and functionally illiterate.
In 1980, Henry Hill was convicted of murdering a man in a Saginaw, Mich., park and sentenced to life in prison without parole, the mandatory sentence for the crime. He was 16 years old and functionally illiterate.
State falling short of protecting children
WV MetroNews – State falling short of protecting children:
A new report by the West Virginia Legislative Auditor includes this disturbing finding concerning child abuse and neglect:
A new report by the West Virginia Legislative Auditor includes this disturbing finding concerning child abuse and neglect:
Houston pastor accused of having sex with Foster daughter
Houston pastor accused of having sexual relationship with 14-year-old girl, one of his foster children | abc13.com:
HOUSTON (KTRK) -- A Houston pastor is facing felony charges after he allegedly had a sexual relationship with one of his foster children.
HOUSTON (KTRK) -- A Houston pastor is facing felony charges after he allegedly had a sexual relationship with one of his foster children.
LA County told to find foster care for children
LA County told to find foster care for children - AP State News - The Sacramento Bee:
LOS ANGELES -- California officials are threatening to fine Los Angeles County as it struggles with a critical shortage of foster care that has packed children into holding rooms.
LOS ANGELES -- California officials are threatening to fine Los Angeles County as it struggles with a critical shortage of foster care that has packed children into holding rooms.
Mom wants public access to Connecticut DCF abuse records
Mom wants public access to Connecticut DCF abuse records:
After her 23-month-old son was dehydrated by his babysitter until he died in 2008, Sara Hicks knew she didn’t want revenge.
Over the years, Hicks grew to learn all she wanted was justice.
Nigeria: Court Remands Woman for Allegedly Running Unlawful Orphanage
allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Court Remands Woman for Allegedly Running Unlawful Orphanage:
An Ikeja Chief Magistrates' Court on Friday remanded 55-year-old Rose Nwachukwu in police custody for allegedly running an unlawful orphanage.
An Ikeja Chief Magistrates' Court on Friday remanded 55-year-old Rose Nwachukwu in police custody for allegedly running an unlawful orphanage.
L.A. County foster care shortage reaches crisis level
L.A. County foster care shortage reaches crisis level - latimes.com:
A surge in demand for foster homes in L.A. County sends more children to chaotic holding rooms; the state is threatening fines.
One nation under therapy with medicine and treatment for all
The Marietta Daily Journal:
The following information might get you riled up. I’m hoping so.
In May of this year, advice columnist John Rosemond received a letter from the Kentucky attorney general. The letter informed Rosemond that one of his columns in the Lexington Herald-Leader violated state law.
The following information might get you riled up. I’m hoping so.
In May of this year, advice columnist John Rosemond received a letter from the Kentucky attorney general. The letter informed Rosemond that one of his columns in the Lexington Herald-Leader violated state law.
Only 15% of newborns entrusted to foster homes over welfare facilities
Only 15% of newborns entrusted to foster homes over welfare facilities - The Japan Daily Press:
The Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare set a policy on 2011 that newborn infants should be entrusted to foster homes instead of child welfare centres. However, a survey concerning newborn infants born in the 2012 fiscal revealed that only 15 percent have been under the care of foster homes. Those sent to child welfare centres cover more than 80 percent of the fiscal year’s newborn babies.
The Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare set a policy on 2011 that newborn infants should be entrusted to foster homes instead of child welfare centres. However, a survey concerning newborn infants born in the 2012 fiscal revealed that only 15 percent have been under the care of foster homes. Those sent to child welfare centres cover more than 80 percent of the fiscal year’s newborn babies.
Foster child falls out of second-story window on his second day with new foster parents
Foster child falls out of second-story window on his second day with new foster parents - NY Daily News:
The Foster Strangers are relieved because they aren't being charged. If it were the Biological family, it would be a whole different story.
His foster parents are not expected to be charged.
“He just got here yesterday — it takes time to adjust,” said foster dad Vera, 53. “They said he’s going to be okay and didn’t break anything. Thank God. We are relieved.”
The Foster Strangers are relieved because they aren't being charged. If it were the Biological family, it would be a whole different story.
Abused foster teen who hung hImself “wanted to be white”
Abused foster teen who hung hImself “wanted to be white” | The Voice Online:
SEXUALLY-ABUSED as a child and shunned by the education system, a teenage foster boy was driven to take his own life.
SEXUALLY-ABUSED as a child and shunned by the education system, a teenage foster boy was driven to take his own life.
Ending tragedies in foster care system requires independent oversight
Ending tragedies in foster care system requires independent... | www.statesman.com:
The various legal, financial and social problems orbiting the foster home in which Alexandria Hill was placed should have been a bright red flag that it is was not suitable, stable or safe for any child needing shelter — much less a toddler.
The various legal, financial and social problems orbiting the foster home in which Alexandria Hill was placed should have been a bright red flag that it is was not suitable, stable or safe for any child needing shelter — much less a toddler.
Adopted Son Threatens To Kill Foster Mother Then Beats Her Unconscious
Adopted Son Threatens To Kill Foster Mother Then Beats Her Unconscious - Sky Tyne and Wear:
A father-of-six who told his adoptive mother he was about to kill her before knocking her out in a vicious assault has been jailed for 10 years.
A father-of-six who told his adoptive mother he was about to kill her before knocking her out in a vicious assault has been jailed for 10 years.
Saturday, August 24, 2013
Minnesota court overturns Mom's conviction, sends message of hope
Minnesota court overturns Mom's conviction, sends message of hope | Washington Times Communities:
WASHINGTON, August 23, 2013 — Caroline Rice’s criminal trial on three felony counts of deprivation of parental rights followed several years of malicious prosecution in the family courts before Judge Richard C. Perkins, the same judge who presided over her criminal trial. This week, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled in Caroline’s favor when it overturned her convictions on the grounds that Judge Perkins and prosecutors conspired at trial to deprive Caroline of her civil rights and access to due process.
WASHINGTON, August 23, 2013 — Caroline Rice’s criminal trial on three felony counts of deprivation of parental rights followed several years of malicious prosecution in the family courts before Judge Richard C. Perkins, the same judge who presided over her criminal trial. This week, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled in Caroline’s favor when it overturned her convictions on the grounds that Judge Perkins and prosecutors conspired at trial to deprive Caroline of her civil rights and access to due process.
Flu shot now required for state health care workers
Flu shot now required for state health care workers :: WRAL.com:
State officials said Friday they are implementing a new policy that requires mandatory flu vaccinations for 10,000 employees and volunteers who work in state-run health care facilities across North Carolina.
Why not Nationwide?
State officials said Friday they are implementing a new policy that requires mandatory flu vaccinations for 10,000 employees and volunteers who work in state-run health care facilities across North Carolina.
Why not Nationwide?
How Child ‘Protective’ Services Can Get You Shot & Take Your Kid
How Child ‘Protective’ Services Can Get You Shot & Take Your Kid | American Free Press:
Family of father killed during “legal” kidnapping of two-year-old son won’t let case die -
A tragic incident where a father was needlessly killed by police officers, who were trying to take his son to place him in foster care, has received new attention thanks to friends of the family and the man’s mother, who have refused to let the case die.
Family of father killed during “legal” kidnapping of two-year-old son won’t let case die -
A tragic incident where a father was needlessly killed by police officers, who were trying to take his son to place him in foster care, has received new attention thanks to friends of the family and the man’s mother, who have refused to let the case die.
Social worker used false and misleading information to take Barnstaple child into care
Social worker used false and misleading information to take Barnstaple child into care | This is North Devon:
A SOCIAL worker from North Devon used false and misleading information to take a child from Barnstaple into care, according to a Social Services report.
A SOCIAL worker from North Devon used false and misleading information to take a child from Barnstaple into care, according to a Social Services report.
Larry and Carri Williams trial: Foster mother Sheila Jackson reveals Immanuel was terrified and starving
Larry and Carri Williams trial: Foster mother Sheila Jackson reveals Immanuel was terrified and starving | Mail Online:
Sheila Jackson told the court Immanuel, 12, was emaciated, scared and always hungry
Ethiopian boy came to live with her in 2011 after arrest of Larry and Carri Williams
Couple are accused of leaving adopted daughter, Hana, 13, to die from hypothermia and starvation in the backyard in May 2011
Immanuel testified he and Hana were beaten with sticks, hosed down, forced to eat frozen food and locked in closets as punishment
Adopted son arrested for killing foster parents
Adopted son arrested for killing foster parents - Indian Express:
Jagraon police on Thursday arrested 23-year-old Palwinder Singh for the cold-blooded murder of his foster parents Avtar Singh and Veerpal Kaur.
Jagraon police on Thursday arrested 23-year-old Palwinder Singh for the cold-blooded murder of his foster parents Avtar Singh and Veerpal Kaur.
Audit: W.Va. fails to address child abuse quickly
Audit: W.Va. fails to address child abuse quickly - SFGate:
CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) — The agency charged with protecting West Virginia's children from abuse and neglect suffers from high staff turnover, consistently fails to do timely investigations and appears unwilling to fix its many shortcomings, according to a legislative audit.
CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) — The agency charged with protecting West Virginia's children from abuse and neglect suffers from high staff turnover, consistently fails to do timely investigations and appears unwilling to fix its many shortcomings, according to a legislative audit.
Clovis Man Sentenced to 16 Years in Prison For Using a Taser on Foster Children
Clovis Man Sentenced to 16 Years in Prison For Using a Taser on Foster Children - Myhighplains.com - Powered by KAMR NBC4 and KCIT FOX14:
CLOVIS -- Michael Vargas, 40, was sentenced to 16 years in the New Mexico Department of Corrections.
On June 11, Vargas was found guilty of 24 counts of child abuse, all third degree felonies.
Government bans adoptions-Ghana
Government bans adoptions | General News 2013-08-21:
The government has placed a temporary ban on adoption in the country in order to allow time for investigations and reform of current adoption procedures.
The government has placed a temporary ban on adoption in the country in order to allow time for investigations and reform of current adoption procedures.
Foster mother not told about child's health problems
Foster mother not told about child's health problems - Edmonton - CBC News:
Fatality inquiry examined death of 13-month-old Hobbema girl in March 2009
A 13-month-old foster child who died of pneumonia four years ago had a lengthy history of asthma and respiratory problems that were never shared with her foster mother, a fatality inquiry has found.Immigration law ‘is keeping father of four from his family in Britain’
Immigration law ‘is keeping father of four from his family in Britain’ - London - News - London Evening Standard:
A married father of four has yet to see his baby daughter in the flesh because of a new immigration rule that he says is tearing his family apart.
A married father of four has yet to see his baby daughter in the flesh because of a new immigration rule that he says is tearing his family apart.
Clovis man convicted of abusing foster children
Clovis man convicted of abusing foster children - Clovis News Journal:
A Clovis man convicted in June of abusing his foster children with a stun gun was sentenced Wednesday to 16 years in prison, according to District Attorney Matt Chandler.
A Clovis man convicted in June of abusing his foster children with a stun gun was sentenced Wednesday to 16 years in prison, according to District Attorney Matt Chandler.
Family Law Advisory Commission Review of Proposed Rules for Guardians ad litem
Family Law Advisory Commission Review of Proposed Rules for Guardians ad litem – And Justice For All - BDN Maine Blogs:
The following letter was sent out this morning to the Hon Leigh Saufley directly with copies going to the Governor and members of the Judiciary Committee. While the Hon Leigh Saufley asked for commentary from the committee that is working on reforming the Guardian ad litem complaint process – MeGALalert, and the consumers of the Divorce Industry do have a say in what happens with any reform. This maybe even more so when considering that the Family Law Advisory Commission had not one consumer.
The following letter was sent out this morning to the Hon Leigh Saufley directly with copies going to the Governor and members of the Judiciary Committee. While the Hon Leigh Saufley asked for commentary from the committee that is working on reforming the Guardian ad litem complaint process – MeGALalert, and the consumers of the Divorce Industry do have a say in what happens with any reform. This maybe even more so when considering that the Family Law Advisory Commission had not one consumer.
Teen moms: Foster youth more likely to have children and need help
Teen moms: Foster youth more likely to have children and need help - San Jose Mercury News:
Teenage girls in foster care are 2.5 times more likely to become pregnant by age 19 than those not in foster care. By age 21, a full 50 percent of foster youth will have given birth to at least one child, a rate more than double the same-age population. We have been successful in reducing the number of teen pregnancies in California, but we have not been able to reduce the number of teen pregnancies among foster youth.
Teenage girls in foster care are 2.5 times more likely to become pregnant by age 19 than those not in foster care. By age 21, a full 50 percent of foster youth will have given birth to at least one child, a rate more than double the same-age population. We have been successful in reducing the number of teen pregnancies in California, but we have not been able to reduce the number of teen pregnancies among foster youth.
‘That Was A Nightmare’: One North Carolina Boy’s Foster Care Story
‘That Was A Nightmare’: One North Carolina Boy’s Foster Care Story — Children's Rights:
Jed Maddalon entered foster care after he was found chained to a bed. While he now has a loving family, Jed’s journey through North Carolina’s child welfare system was harrowing. WCNC Charlotte featured his story and it begins with Jed almost dying:
Jed Maddalon entered foster care after he was found chained to a bed. While he now has a loving family, Jed’s journey through North Carolina’s child welfare system was harrowing. WCNC Charlotte featured his story and it begins with Jed almost dying:
Media is desperate to censor horrific hate crime torture murder of twelve year old Texas boy
Media is desperate to censor horrific hate crime torture murder of twelve year old Texas boy:
The trial is underway right now for Mona Yevette Nelson. She is a black woman who allegedly kidnapped a white child and tortured him to death with a blowtorch in Houston. There has never been any serious media coverage of this case.
Read More:
The trial is underway right now for Mona Yevette Nelson. She is a black woman who allegedly kidnapped a white child and tortured him to death with a blowtorch in Houston. There has never been any serious media coverage of this case.
Read More:
Friday, August 23, 2013
Child Protective Services: Your Worst Nightmare
Child Protective Services: Your Worst Nightmare | American Clarion:
Most people would agree that there are unfortunately times when children must be protected from neglectful or dangerous parents. As a former law enforcement official, I know this better than most.
Most people would agree that there are unfortunately times when children must be protected from neglectful or dangerous parents. As a former law enforcement official, I know this better than most.
Thursday, August 22, 2013
NH Single Audit of Fed. DHHS Financial Assistance Programs-6/30/12
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
SINGLE AUDIT OF FEDERAL FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2012
Scroll through and see just how many times DHHS was non-compliant with the Federal Government.
The Audit includes, but is not limited to Foster care, Adoption Services, Title IV-E funding, Child Support, plus much more.
Enjoy!
SINGLE AUDIT OF FEDERAL FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2012
Scroll through and see just how many times DHHS was non-compliant with the Federal Government.
The Audit includes, but is not limited to Foster care, Adoption Services, Title IV-E funding, Child Support, plus much more.
Enjoy!
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Phyllis Gilmore: Foster-care link unfounded
Phyllis Gilmore: Foster-care link unfounded | Wichita Eagle:
The Kansas Department for Children and Families lives by its mission: to protect children, promote healthy families and encourage personal responsibility. Our goal is to keep children in their homes when it is safe to do so. We also want to see Kansans working so they can support themselves and their families.
The Kansas Department for Children and Families lives by its mission: to protect children, promote healthy families and encourage personal responsibility. Our goal is to keep children in their homes when it is safe to do so. We also want to see Kansans working so they can support themselves and their families.
Shaken Baby Syndrome often caused by vaccines, not parents
Shaken Baby Syndrome often caused by vaccines, not parents:
(NaturalNews) It is increasingly common for parents of children with one or more of the triad of symptoms associated with so-called "Shaken Baby Syndrome" (SBS) to be automatically accused of committing child abuse. But often missing from this causal equation is any investigation into the vaccinations that children diagnosed with SBS received prior to developing this very serious condition, a condition that copious scientific research has shown can, indeed, be caused by vaccines.
(NaturalNews) It is increasingly common for parents of children with one or more of the triad of symptoms associated with so-called "Shaken Baby Syndrome" (SBS) to be automatically accused of committing child abuse. But often missing from this causal equation is any investigation into the vaccinations that children diagnosed with SBS received prior to developing this very serious condition, a condition that copious scientific research has shown can, indeed, be caused by vaccines.
Two-Dozen Foster Homes To Be Inspected After Toddler’s Death
Two-Dozen Foster Homes To Be Inspected After Toddler’s Death:
AUSTIN (August 20, 2013) -- Almost two dozen area foster homes will be randomly inspected this week by Child Protective Services caseworkers after a Rockdale foster mom was indicted on a capital murder charge in the death of a 2-year-old child in her care.
AUSTIN (August 20, 2013) -- Almost two dozen area foster homes will be randomly inspected this week by Child Protective Services caseworkers after a Rockdale foster mom was indicted on a capital murder charge in the death of a 2-year-old child in her care.
20 Children in DCF Care Die Since April
20 Children in DCF Care Die | Health News Florida:
Twenty children who had come into contact with the Department of Children and Families have died since April 11 -- four times as many as had previously been named, the Miami Herald reports. One was Jewel Re’nee Howard, a 3-year-old who had told her father of abuse inflicted by her mother’s boyfriend, who had a history of arrests and charges. DCF failed to act, which cost Jewel her life.
Twenty children who had come into contact with the Department of Children and Families have died since April 11 -- four times as many as had previously been named, the Miami Herald reports. One was Jewel Re’nee Howard, a 3-year-old who had told her father of abuse inflicted by her mother’s boyfriend, who had a history of arrests and charges. DCF failed to act, which cost Jewel her life.
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Expert Says Cherokee Courts May Have Final Say In 'Baby Veronica
Expert Says Cherokee Courts May Have Final Say In 'Baby Veronica - NewsOn6.com - Tulsa, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports - KOTV.com |:
TULSA, Oklahoma -
TULSA, Oklahoma -
The custody battle over little Veronica Brown has played out in many different courts over the past four years.
Adoptions, parental rights loophole puts families in flux
Adoptions, parental rights loophole puts families in flux - Spokesman.com - March 20, 2011:
A Tri-Cities couple’s adopted sons may be taken away, and a Spokane woman’s daughter was adopted while she fought to keep the girl.
A Tri-Cities couple’s adopted sons may be taken away, and a Spokane woman’s daughter was adopted while she fought to keep the girl.
Indiana Supreme Court Nullifies Adoption 8/16/2013
Indiana Supreme Court Nullifies Adoption 8/16/2013
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT
Mark L. Callaway
Rensselaer, Indiana
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEES
Charles P. Rice
South Bend, Indiana
ATTORNEYS FOR THE STATE OF INDIANA
Gregory F. Zoeller
Attorney General of Indiana
Frances Barrow
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
ATTORNEYS FOR AMICUS CURIAE CHILD
ADVOCATES, INC.
Barry A. Chambers
Carey Haley Wong
Indianapolis, Indiana
_____________________________________________________________________________
In the
Indiana Supreme Court
_________________________________
No. 37S03-1303-AD-159
IN RE THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION OF MINOR CHILDREN: C.B.M. AND C.R.M.
C.A.B.
Appellant/Natural Mother,
V.
J.D.M. AND K.L.M.
Appellees/Adoptive Parents.
_________________________________
Appeal from the Jasper Superior Court, No. 37D01-0805-AD-3
The Honorable James R. Ahler, Judge
_________________________________
On Petition to Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 37A03-1204-AD-149
_________________________________
August 16, 2013
Rush, Justice.
The foster parents of C.B.M. and C.R.M. adopted them while their natural mother’s
termination of parental rights (TPR) appeal was still pending. Our statutes specifically allow those 2
competing processes to overlap. But choosing to do so creates the devastating possibility of
jeopardizing a finalized adoption if the underlying TPR judgment is later reversed on appeal.
That is exactly what happened here, and we cannot unscramble that egg.1
Either the adoptive family prevails in violation of the natural mother’s constitutional rights, or the natural mother
prevails at the risk of pulling the children away from the only family they know. But the natural
mother’s rights, both as a parent and as a litigant with an absolute right to an appeal, are constitutionally protected. We cannot cut corners on those rights, despite our concerns for the children’s
undoubtedly vital interest in a speedy and permanent placement.
We therefore conclude that the trial court should have set aside the adoption, because the
prior TPR “judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated”—making the
adoption voidable under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B)(7). And since a dilemma like this ill-serves the
interests of everyone involved, we also offer guidance for mitigating the harsh result in this case,
and in any future cases of this type.
Facts and Procedural History
C.A.B. is the natural mother of fraternal twins C.B.M. and C.R.M. (“Twins”), born in
June 2004. Paternity has never been established, and their father’s identity is not known. In
January 2006, the Twins were determined to be children in need of services (CHINS) and
removed from Natural Mother’s home. TPR proceedings began against Natural Mother in July
2007, and TPR was granted in January 2008 over the strong objections of the Twins’ guardian ad
litem. Natural Mother promptly appealed the TPR judgment.
In early summer 2008, the Twins’ foster parents J.D.M. and K.L.M. (“Adoptive Parents”2
)
petitioned to adopt them. DCS gave its consent to the adoption, which was granted about ten weeks
later. None of the parties to the adoption notified Natural Mother of the proceedings, because
1
See generally Kate M. Heideman, Comment, Avoiding the Need to “Unscramble the Egg:” A Proposal for the Automatic Stay of Subsequent Adoption Proceedings When Parents Appeal a Judgment Terminating Their Parental
Rights, 24 St. Louis U. Pub. L. Rev. 445 (2005) (discussing Illinois, Michigan, and Missouri cases involving TPRs
being reversed on appeal after an adoption had already been granted, and proposing that TPR judgments should be
automatically stayed pending appeal to avoid such dilemmas).
2
In July 2012, while this case was pending before the Court of Appeals, that Court received notice that J.D.M., the
adoptive father, was killed in a traffic accident in May 2011. Like the Court of Appeals, we will continue to refer to
the Adoptive Parents in the plural, for the sake of consistency with prior proceedings.
notice is not required to a parent whose rights have been terminated. Ind. Code § 31-19-2.5-4(4).
Nor did Mother make any effort to file a stay of the trial court’s TPR judgment; and DCS made
no effort to notify the Court of Appeals that the adoption was pending or that it had consented to
the adoption. Mother’s TPR appeal was still pending at the time the adoption was finalized.
Just two months later, in September 2008, the Court of Appeals reversed the TPR judgment
against Natural Mother. The court held that in view of recent positive changes in Natural Mother’s
life, DCS had failed to carry its burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that the
conditions leading to the Twins’ removal would not be remedied and that continuing the parentchild relationship would threaten the Twins’ well-being. Moore v. Jasper Cnty. Dep’t of Child
Servs., 894 N.E.2d 218, 228-29 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). Based on that decision, Natural Mother petitioned the adoption court in January 2009 to set aside the adoption decree. The Adoptive Parents
promptly objected.
Ultimately, Natural Mother’s petition to set aside the adoption was not resolved until three
years later. In July 2009, she moved for summary judgment, arguing that because she was never
notified of the adoption, the adoption decree was void for lack of personal jurisdiction; and that the
statutes allowing the adoption to proceed during her TPR appeal unconstitutionally deprived her of
Due Process. The trial court heard the motion in August 2010, and denied the motion in December
2011. Its ruling agreed with the Adoptive Parents that Natural Mother’s constitutional rights were
not violated, and that her remedy was to seek a stay of the TPR judgment pending appeal under
Indiana Trial Rule 62, which she did not do. The trial court therefore refused to declare the statutes
unconstitutional, denied the petition to set aside the adoption, and denied summary judgment.
Natural Mother’s motion to correct error was also denied, and she appealed.
The Court of Appeals reversed, though it divided on the reasons for doing so. The majority
concluded that even though Natural Mother was not entitled by statute to notice of the adoption
because her rights had been terminated, DCS nevertheless acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” by
failing to provide such notice, and by consenting to the adoption without having done so. In re
Adoption of C.B.M. and C.R.M., 979 N.E.2d 174, 185 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). Judge Vaidik
separately concurred, believing the issue was better resolved by construing the adoption statutes to
require final appellate resolution of TPR cases before dispensing with notice to or consent of the
natural parents. Id., 979 N.E.2d at 186. We granted transfer, 984 N.E.2d 221 (Ind. 2013) (table),
thereby vacating the Court of Appeals opinion. Ind. Appellate Rule 58(A).
We now reach the same result as the Court of Appeals, but for a different reason—that
because the adoption was based on the TPR judgment, Natural Mother became entitled to set
aside the adoption under Trial Rule 60(B)(7) when she prevailed in her TPR appeal.
Standard of Review
Relief from judgment under Trial Rule 60 is an equitable remedy within the trial court’s
discretion. Outback Steakhouse of Fla., Inc. v. Markley, 856 N.E.2d 65, 72 (Ind. 2006).
Accordingly, we generally review a trial court’s Rule 60 ruling only for abuse of discretion. Id. But
when “the trial court rules on a paper record without conducting an evidentiary hearing,” as happened here, we are “in as good a position as the trial court . . . to determine the force and effect of
the evidence.” GKN Co. v. Magness, 744 N.E.2d 397, 401 (Ind. 2001) (quoting Farner v.
Farner, 480 N.E.2d 251, 257 (Ind. Ct. App.1985)). Under those circumstances, our review is de
novo. See id. (applying de novo review to a motion to dismiss, where trial court resolved disputed
facts from a paper record). See also Williams v. Tharp, 934 N.E.2d 1203, 1215 (Ind. Ct. App.
2010), trans. denied (reviewing de novo denial of relief under T.R. 60(B)(8) when decision was
made on a paper record).
Analysis
The parties’ dispute centers around two basic issues. First, they disagree about whether the
adoption mooted Natural Mother’s TPR appeal because of her failure to seek a stay of the TPR
judgment pending appeal. Second, they dispute whether letting the Twins be adopted without
Natural Mother’s notice or consent violated her Due Process rights—which determines whether
the adoption was void or merely voidable, and therefore whether Natural Mother was required to
plead and prove a “meritorious defense” to set aside the adoption under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B).
We agree with Natural Mother that her right to set aside the adoption did not depend on
staying the TPR. But while the parties’ Trial Rule 60(B) arguments take aim at sub-paragraphs (6)
and (8), we find the bullseye in between: Under sub-paragraph (7), the adoption was only voidable,
but for a reason that does not require Natural Mother to show a meritorious defense (and does not
require us to address the constitutional question her “voidness” argument implicates).
I. Undue Delay in Cases Involving Children’s Rights.
Before addressing the parties’ issues, we pause to address an issue they have not raised—
the three-year delay in resolving Natural Mother’s petition to set aside the adoption at the trial
level. We are gravely troubled by that lengthy delay. Time is of the essence in matters involving
children, as the Twins illustrate particularly vividly. They became CHINS at age 1½, their parentchild relationship with Natural Mother was severed at age 4½, and their adoption was challenged
at age 5½. They are now age 10, with this dispute still unresolved.
In our Appellate Rules, we have strictly limited the parties’ ability to seek extensions of
time in cases involving children’s rights, and have required ourselves to give them priority consideration. Ind. Appellate Rules 21(A), 35(C)–(D). We applaud the Court of Appeals for its promptness in resolving the previous level of this appeal—and express our firm expectation that parties
and courts will do likewise at the trial level, even without being expressly compelled to do so by a
comparable Trial Rule.
II. Staying TPR Judgments Pending Appeal.
At the outset, the Adoptive Parents and Attorney General argue that Natural Mother’s
TPR appeal was rendered moot when the adoption was granted—and that if she wished to
preserve her rights, she should have asked the TPR court to stay its judgment pending her appeal.
Without such a request, they reason, the Twins’ need for a speedy and permanent placement trumps
Natural Mother’s rights. In view of the two separate constitutional rights that are implicated by
this argument, we cannot agree.
Foremost, despite Natural Mother’s struggles, her parental rights are precious and protected
by our Federal and State constitutions. Our Supreme Court has “recognized on numerous occasions
that the relationship between parent and child is constitutionally protected,” Quilloin v. Walcott,
434 U.S. 246, 255 (1978), and that “[t]he fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care,
custody, and management of their child does not evaporate simply because they have not been
model parents or have lost temporary custody of their child to the State.” Santosky v. Kramer, 455
U.S. 745, 753 (1982). Accordingly, “the interest of a parent in the companionship, care, custody,
and management of his or her children comes to this Court with a momentum for respect lacking
when appeal is made to liberties which derive merely from shifting economic arrangements.”
Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645, 651 (1972) (internal quotation and substitution omitted).
Even apart from the importance of Natural Mother’s substantive parental rights, Indiana is
particularly solicitous of the right to appeal. Article 7, Section 6 of the Indiana Constitution guarantees “in all cases”—including TPR—“an absolute right to one appeal.” But her appellate right
would mean little if it could be short-circuited by an adoption judgment being issued before her
appeal is complete. It would offend her rights as both a mother and an appellate litigant to let her
parent-child relationship with the Twins become contingent upon a race to the courthouse,
hinging on whether the adoption could be finalized before the TPR appeal was complete.3
The Adoptive Parents and Attorney General say it was Natural Mother’s sole responsibility
to avoid such a “race” by seeking a stay of the TPR judgment pending her appeal. But Court of
Appeals precedent suggests otherwise. In Cunningham v. Hiles, 182 Ind. App. 811, 395 N.E.2d
851, 853 (1979), modified on reh’g, 402 N.E.2d 17 (Ind. Ct. App. 1980), the trial court had refused
to enjoin construction of a music store on a residential lot, but the Court of Appeals reversed. The
store owner then sought rehearing, arguing the appeal was moot because he had built the store in
reliance on the trial court’s judgment while the appeal was pending—the first time the Court of
Appeals had been made aware of that important fact. 402 N.E.2d at 20. The Court’s opinion on
rehearing made clear that “the parties should have informed this Court of the fact that the music
store had been constructed,” suggesting that the “duty to place such matters before this Court by
proper petitions, motions, or challenges by verified pleadings” is shared. 402 N.E.2d at 20 (emphasis added; internal citations, quotations, and substitutions omitted). In so holding, the Court
rejected the store owner’s claim that the fault lay entirely with the appellants for failing “to seek
an appeal bond or otherwise stay enforcement of the denial of the injunction pending the outcome
of their appeal,” id. at 21 n.4. In sum, despite prevailing at trial, the owner “built the music store at
his own peril” while the appeal was pending. Id.
We see this case in a similar light. Natural Mother certainly could have sought a stay of the
TPR in hopes of avoiding the dilemma this case presents. Yet DCS was also a party to that
3 We acknowledge the Attorney General’s citation to In re Tekela, 780 N.E.2d 304, 309 (Ill. 2002), which held that a
TPR appeal does become moot when the children are adopted. But we have found no other case that reaches such a
conclusion. Moreover, Illinois has abrogated Tekela by a rule blocking adoptions while a TPR appeal is pending. Ill.
Sup. Ct. R. 305(e). A similar statute has avoided these consequences in Michigan as well, In re JK, 661 N.W.2d 216,
224 (Mich. 2003)—and Missouri has established a common-law rule that it is always an abuse of discretion to grant an
adoption while a TPR appeal is pending, State ex rel. T.W. v. Ohmer, 133 S.W.3d 41, 43 (Mo. 2004). We agree with
Tekela’s recognition of a compelling interest in speedy placement and permanency for the children, but we will not
advance that policy goal at a natural parent’s constitutional expense.
appeal—and unlike Natural Mother, DCS also participated in the adoption, through the power to
consent (or not) to the Twins’ adoption while the TPR appeal was pending. If anything, then,
DCS was in a better position than Natural Mother to make the Court of Appeals aware of “postjudgment events which may affect the outcome of a pending appeal,” id. at 20, such as its intent
to consent to the adoption. DCS had every right to rely on the trial court’s TPR judgment and consent to the adoption while the appeal was still pending, I.C. § 31-19-11-6—but as in Cunningham,
such bold reliance came at its own (and thus, the Twins’) peril. 402 N.E.2d at 21 n.4.
Accordingly, we decline to hold that Natural Mother was required to file a stay in order to
preserve a meaningful appellate remedy for her parental rights, and proceed to the merits of her
petition to set aside the adoption.
III.Setting Aside Adoptions When the Prior TPR Is Reversed.
Reversal of the TPR judgment is significant because consent is ordinarily a vital part of an
adoption. “[A] trial court deciding an adoption petition must find that ‘proper consent, if consent is
necessary, to the adoption has been given.’” In re Adoption of N.W.R., 971 N.E.2d 110, 113 (Ind.
Ct. App. 2012) (quoting I.C. § 31-19-11-1(a)(7)). In most cases, that entails notifying the natural
parents of the adoption, I.C. § 31-19-2.5-3(a)(1), and obtaining their written consent to it, I.C.
§ 31-19-9-1(a)(1)–(2). When consent is required, a defect in consent will render the adoption
decree invalid, and require the adoption to be reversed and remanded. See N.W.R., 971 N.E.2d at
117 (DCS’s consent was required because child was ward of the State; trial court abused its
discretion in granting adoption after DCS had sought to withdraw its consent).
But even though notice and consent are generally required, there are two classes of
exceptions. One category permits adoption without the natural parent’s consent, if the court finds
that the parent has abandoned, deserted, or failed to support or communicate with the child, I.C.
§ 31-19-9-8(a)(1)–(2); or that the parent is legally incompetent or unfit, I.C. § 31-19-9-8(a)(9),
(11). In these cases, the natural parent is still entitled to notice, I.C. § 31-19-4.5-2, so they can
appear and defend against the allegations.
In the other category, though, the natural parent is not even entitled to notice. I.C. § 31-
19-2.5-4. Generally, this category is based on a prior judicial finding of parental misconduct—
for example, Natural Mother’s TPR judgment, I.C. § 31-19-9-8(a)(8); or conviction and incarceration for certain crimes against the child or the child’s other parent or sibling. I.C. §§ 31-19-9-9, -10.
In these cases, notice is deemed unnecessary because the parent had opportunity to contest the allegation in a prior proceeding—in essence, treating the prior decision as conclusive of the issue.
But what happens when that “conclusive” prior decision is reversed? Even though finality
of judgments is a vital policy, it is not absolute, and sometimes yields to broader interests of
justice. Trial Rule 60(B) contemplates such situations, providing in relevant part:
On motion and upon such terms as are just the court may relieve a party . . . from a
judgment . . . for the following reasons: * * *
(6) the judgment is void;
(7) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment
upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer
equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or
(8) any reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment, other than those
reasons set forth in sub-paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4).
. . . . A movant filing a motion for reasons (1), (2), (3), (4), and (8) must allege a
meritorious claim or defense.
(Emphasis added.) The parties dispute whether the adoption is void under sub-paragraph (6), or
merely voidable under sub-paragraph (8), with the latter provision requiring Natural Mother to
show a “meritorious defense” to the adoption before she could have it set aside. But we find the
answer in the provision in between—that the adoption was merely voidable, but for a reason
specifically contemplated by sub-paragraph (7), which requires no meritorious defense.
Under the second clause of Trial Rule 60(B)(7), a judgment may be set aside when “a prior
judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated.” That provision “applies
only to related judgments where the second judgment is based upon the first judgment, and the first
has been reversed or otherwise vacated.” Dempsey v. Belanger, 959 N.E.2d 861, 868 (Ind. Ct. App.
2011), trans. denied (quoting 22A Stephen E. Arthur, Indiana Practice: Civil Trial Practice § 37.14
(2d ed. 2007)). Put another way, it applies only when the first judgment “has claim or issue preclusion effects on the second,” or provides “a necessary element of the [subsequent] decision.” See
Kaler v. Bala (In re Racing Servs., Inc.), 571 F.3d 729, 732 (8th Cir. 2009) (quoting 12 James Wm.
Moore et al., Moore’s Federal Practice § 60.46[1] (3d Ed. 2009) and Lubben v. Selective Serv.
Sys. Local Bd. No. 27, 453 F.2d 645, 650 (1st Cir. 1972)) (all construing Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(B)(5)’s
similar provision).
Here, the adoption “is based upon” the TPR judgment in the sense Dempsey and Kaler
contemplate. If not for the preclusive effect of the prior TPR judgment, the Twins’ adoption
would have required notice to Natural Mother, I.C. § 31-19-2.5-3(a)(1). Then, if she refused to
consent, the adoption would have required proof of an additional element—abandonment, unfitness, or one of the other statutory grounds for dispensing with consent, I.C. § 31-19-9-8(a).
Because the TPR let the Adoptive Parents finalize the adoption without either obtaining Natural
Mother’s consent or proving it was unnecessary, we conclude that the adoption was “based on”
the prior TPR judgment. Accordingly, Natural Mother became entitled to relief from the adoption
when the TPR was “reversed or otherwise vacated” on appeal.
And since Natural Mother’s petition is within 60(B)(7)’s specific provisions, she need not
show a “meritorious defense” as sub-paragraph (8) would require. Sub-paragraphs (5) through
(7) of Trial Rule 60(B) are expressly exempted from that requirement—seemingly recognizing
that those circumstances inherently jeopardize confidence in the integrity of the judicial process,
even if the outcome was unaffected. Adoptive Parents’ reliance on the 60(B)(8) “catch-all,” and its
meritorious defense requirement, is therefore misplaced; Trial Rule 60(B)(7)’s more specific provision is controlling. Rumfelt v. Himes, 438 N.E.2d 980, 983–84 (Ind. 1982) (“[A]s with statutes,
a specific rule controls over a general one on the same subject matter.”).4
We therefore conclude that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to set aside the
Twins’ adoption. We understand the trial court’s concern for a speedy, permanent placement for the
Twins. But a fit parent’s rights are fundamental and constitutionally protected, In re Visitation of
M.L.B., 983 N.E.2d 583, 586 (Ind. 2013) (citing Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 64 (2000)), and
even a matter as important as the Twins’ best interests does not necessarily override that right. Id.
Since the only judicial determination that Natural Mother is unfit to retain her parental rights has
4 Resting our conclusion on Trial Rule 60(B)(7) also lets us avoid the constitutional question inherent in Natural
Mother’s 60(B)(6) argument that the adoption is void on Due Process grounds. We “traditionally foreswear deciding a
constitutional question unless no non-constitutional grounds present themselves for resolving the case under consideration.” Citizens Nat. Bank of Evansville v. Foster, 668 N.E.2d 1236, 1241 (Ind. 1996).
been overturned on appeal, letting the adoption stand would be an overreach of State power into
family integrity. The adoption must be set aside.
IV.Avoiding a Repeat of This Situation.
We are all too aware of the harsh effects this decision may have on the Twins, and future
children who may find themselves similarly situated through no fault of their own. We therefore
offer guidance for mitigating those harsh effects in this case, and potentially avoiding them
completely in future cases.
Foremost, this case illustrates the wisdom of doing more than “just the bare minimum.” Due
Process notice requirements are just that—a bare minimum that parties always may, and sometimes
ought to, exceed. While the Adoptive Parents were not required to serve notice on Natural Mother,
I.C. § 31-19-2.5-4(2)(F), doing so voluntarily may well have saved the adoption from reversal. If
Natural Mother had been served, the Adoptive Parents could then have requested a contested adoption hearing for litigating an alternative basis for dispensing with consent under Indiana Code
section 31-19-9-8(a). Natural Mother would then have been offered a “day in court” independent
of the TPR, giving this Court an alternative basis to affirm the adoption—because either she would
have appeared and been heard, or else failed to appear and been properly defaulted. We emphasize
that such notice is not required, and adoptive parents have the statutory right to rely solely on a
trial-level TPR judgment and seek adoption pending the TPR appeal. We merely caution that such
reliance comes at the adoptive parents’ peril. See Cunningham, 402 N.E.2d at 21 n.4.
Second, some of the uncertainty for the Twins could have been avoided if DCS had left the
underlying CHINS case open until Mother’s TPR appeal was complete. As this case shows, children may have a particularly great “need of services” when a TPR judgment is reversed on appeal.
By then, they will have been removed from the parents’ home for a substantial time, and will be
bonding into a new home—especially when, as here, the foster parents plan to adopt. And the
natural parent, even if not unfit, may also be in need of services before the children could appropriately return to their original home. Yet without a CHINS case, there is no ready means to
provide the support all the parties here will require while reexamining the Twins’ status in light of
the TPR reversal. (Indiana Code section 31-9-2-13 could authorize the Adoptive Parents to seek
temporary custody of the Twins while the adoption is pending—which may very well be beneficial
to the Twins, but falls far short of the services a CHINS case would permit.) We strongly suggest
that in the future, DCS’s best practice would be to leave underlying CHINS cases open until any
related TPR appeal is complete.5
Finally, we reiterate that granting an adoption pending TPR appeal is a discretionary decision of the trial court. Our Legislature has authorized the practice, and there are surely cases in
which it will be entirely appropriate to expedite the adoption. Yet it is only permitted, not required.
In view of the potentially devastating consequences of having an adoption invalidated by a TPR
appeal, we encourage courts to exercise that authority with an abundance of caution. Speedy permanency for children is vitally important. But balanced against the risk that materialized in this
case, a few months’ additional delay in granting an adoption may often be preferable.
Conclusion
There are no winners in some cases, and this is one of them. Ruling in favor of the Adoptive Parents would violate the Natural Mother’s constitutional rights, while the opposite ruling
would risk pulling the Twins away from the family they have lived with for most of their lives,
and the only stable family they have ever known. But despite the Twins’ need for permanency,
natural parents’ consent is a vital condition precedent to most adoptions—and we must take a
narrow view of the exceptions to that principle, out of due regard for the limitations of judicial
power into family life, even for very imperfect families. Thus, when the TPR judgment in this
case was reversed, we must conclude that the no-consent adoption that followed on its heels
became voidable under Trial Rule 60(B)(7). The trial court therefore abused its discretion in
failing to set aside the adoption.
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s judgment, and remand with instructions to vacate
the adoption decree within seven days of this Court’s opinion being certified, to reset the
adoption petition for a contested hearing, and to promptly serve notice and summons of that
hearing on Natural Mother. Pending that hearing, the trial court could exercise its authority to
entertain motions regarding temporary custody of the Twins under Indiana Code section 31-19-
2-13, until final judgment is entered.
Dickson, C.J., and Rucker, David, and Massa, JJ., concur.
5 We express no opinion about whether DCS may be entitled to reopen the CHINS case under these circumstances.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT
Mark L. Callaway
Rensselaer, Indiana
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEES
Charles P. Rice
South Bend, Indiana
ATTORNEYS FOR THE STATE OF INDIANA
Gregory F. Zoeller
Attorney General of Indiana
Frances Barrow
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
ATTORNEYS FOR AMICUS CURIAE CHILD
ADVOCATES, INC.
Barry A. Chambers
Carey Haley Wong
Indianapolis, Indiana
_____________________________________________________________________________
In the
Indiana Supreme Court
_________________________________
No. 37S03-1303-AD-159
IN RE THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION OF MINOR CHILDREN: C.B.M. AND C.R.M.
C.A.B.
Appellant/Natural Mother,
V.
J.D.M. AND K.L.M.
Appellees/Adoptive Parents.
_________________________________
Appeal from the Jasper Superior Court, No. 37D01-0805-AD-3
The Honorable James R. Ahler, Judge
_________________________________
On Petition to Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 37A03-1204-AD-149
_________________________________
August 16, 2013
Rush, Justice.
The foster parents of C.B.M. and C.R.M. adopted them while their natural mother’s
termination of parental rights (TPR) appeal was still pending. Our statutes specifically allow those 2
competing processes to overlap. But choosing to do so creates the devastating possibility of
jeopardizing a finalized adoption if the underlying TPR judgment is later reversed on appeal.
That is exactly what happened here, and we cannot unscramble that egg.1
Either the adoptive family prevails in violation of the natural mother’s constitutional rights, or the natural mother
prevails at the risk of pulling the children away from the only family they know. But the natural
mother’s rights, both as a parent and as a litigant with an absolute right to an appeal, are constitutionally protected. We cannot cut corners on those rights, despite our concerns for the children’s
undoubtedly vital interest in a speedy and permanent placement.
We therefore conclude that the trial court should have set aside the adoption, because the
prior TPR “judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated”—making the
adoption voidable under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B)(7). And since a dilemma like this ill-serves the
interests of everyone involved, we also offer guidance for mitigating the harsh result in this case,
and in any future cases of this type.
Facts and Procedural History
C.A.B. is the natural mother of fraternal twins C.B.M. and C.R.M. (“Twins”), born in
June 2004. Paternity has never been established, and their father’s identity is not known. In
January 2006, the Twins were determined to be children in need of services (CHINS) and
removed from Natural Mother’s home. TPR proceedings began against Natural Mother in July
2007, and TPR was granted in January 2008 over the strong objections of the Twins’ guardian ad
litem. Natural Mother promptly appealed the TPR judgment.
In early summer 2008, the Twins’ foster parents J.D.M. and K.L.M. (“Adoptive Parents”2
)
petitioned to adopt them. DCS gave its consent to the adoption, which was granted about ten weeks
later. None of the parties to the adoption notified Natural Mother of the proceedings, because
1
See generally Kate M. Heideman, Comment, Avoiding the Need to “Unscramble the Egg:” A Proposal for the Automatic Stay of Subsequent Adoption Proceedings When Parents Appeal a Judgment Terminating Their Parental
Rights, 24 St. Louis U. Pub. L. Rev. 445 (2005) (discussing Illinois, Michigan, and Missouri cases involving TPRs
being reversed on appeal after an adoption had already been granted, and proposing that TPR judgments should be
automatically stayed pending appeal to avoid such dilemmas).
2
In July 2012, while this case was pending before the Court of Appeals, that Court received notice that J.D.M., the
adoptive father, was killed in a traffic accident in May 2011. Like the Court of Appeals, we will continue to refer to
the Adoptive Parents in the plural, for the sake of consistency with prior proceedings.
notice is not required to a parent whose rights have been terminated. Ind. Code § 31-19-2.5-4(4).
Nor did Mother make any effort to file a stay of the trial court’s TPR judgment; and DCS made
no effort to notify the Court of Appeals that the adoption was pending or that it had consented to
the adoption. Mother’s TPR appeal was still pending at the time the adoption was finalized.
Just two months later, in September 2008, the Court of Appeals reversed the TPR judgment
against Natural Mother. The court held that in view of recent positive changes in Natural Mother’s
life, DCS had failed to carry its burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that the
conditions leading to the Twins’ removal would not be remedied and that continuing the parentchild relationship would threaten the Twins’ well-being. Moore v. Jasper Cnty. Dep’t of Child
Servs., 894 N.E.2d 218, 228-29 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). Based on that decision, Natural Mother petitioned the adoption court in January 2009 to set aside the adoption decree. The Adoptive Parents
promptly objected.
Ultimately, Natural Mother’s petition to set aside the adoption was not resolved until three
years later. In July 2009, she moved for summary judgment, arguing that because she was never
notified of the adoption, the adoption decree was void for lack of personal jurisdiction; and that the
statutes allowing the adoption to proceed during her TPR appeal unconstitutionally deprived her of
Due Process. The trial court heard the motion in August 2010, and denied the motion in December
2011. Its ruling agreed with the Adoptive Parents that Natural Mother’s constitutional rights were
not violated, and that her remedy was to seek a stay of the TPR judgment pending appeal under
Indiana Trial Rule 62, which she did not do. The trial court therefore refused to declare the statutes
unconstitutional, denied the petition to set aside the adoption, and denied summary judgment.
Natural Mother’s motion to correct error was also denied, and she appealed.
The Court of Appeals reversed, though it divided on the reasons for doing so. The majority
concluded that even though Natural Mother was not entitled by statute to notice of the adoption
because her rights had been terminated, DCS nevertheless acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” by
failing to provide such notice, and by consenting to the adoption without having done so. In re
Adoption of C.B.M. and C.R.M., 979 N.E.2d 174, 185 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). Judge Vaidik
separately concurred, believing the issue was better resolved by construing the adoption statutes to
require final appellate resolution of TPR cases before dispensing with notice to or consent of the
natural parents. Id., 979 N.E.2d at 186. We granted transfer, 984 N.E.2d 221 (Ind. 2013) (table),
thereby vacating the Court of Appeals opinion. Ind. Appellate Rule 58(A).
We now reach the same result as the Court of Appeals, but for a different reason—that
because the adoption was based on the TPR judgment, Natural Mother became entitled to set
aside the adoption under Trial Rule 60(B)(7) when she prevailed in her TPR appeal.
Standard of Review
Relief from judgment under Trial Rule 60 is an equitable remedy within the trial court’s
discretion. Outback Steakhouse of Fla., Inc. v. Markley, 856 N.E.2d 65, 72 (Ind. 2006).
Accordingly, we generally review a trial court’s Rule 60 ruling only for abuse of discretion. Id. But
when “the trial court rules on a paper record without conducting an evidentiary hearing,” as happened here, we are “in as good a position as the trial court . . . to determine the force and effect of
the evidence.” GKN Co. v. Magness, 744 N.E.2d 397, 401 (Ind. 2001) (quoting Farner v.
Farner, 480 N.E.2d 251, 257 (Ind. Ct. App.1985)). Under those circumstances, our review is de
novo. See id. (applying de novo review to a motion to dismiss, where trial court resolved disputed
facts from a paper record). See also Williams v. Tharp, 934 N.E.2d 1203, 1215 (Ind. Ct. App.
2010), trans. denied (reviewing de novo denial of relief under T.R. 60(B)(8) when decision was
made on a paper record).
Analysis
The parties’ dispute centers around two basic issues. First, they disagree about whether the
adoption mooted Natural Mother’s TPR appeal because of her failure to seek a stay of the TPR
judgment pending appeal. Second, they dispute whether letting the Twins be adopted without
Natural Mother’s notice or consent violated her Due Process rights—which determines whether
the adoption was void or merely voidable, and therefore whether Natural Mother was required to
plead and prove a “meritorious defense” to set aside the adoption under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B).
We agree with Natural Mother that her right to set aside the adoption did not depend on
staying the TPR. But while the parties’ Trial Rule 60(B) arguments take aim at sub-paragraphs (6)
and (8), we find the bullseye in between: Under sub-paragraph (7), the adoption was only voidable,
but for a reason that does not require Natural Mother to show a meritorious defense (and does not
require us to address the constitutional question her “voidness” argument implicates).
I. Undue Delay in Cases Involving Children’s Rights.
Before addressing the parties’ issues, we pause to address an issue they have not raised—
the three-year delay in resolving Natural Mother’s petition to set aside the adoption at the trial
level. We are gravely troubled by that lengthy delay. Time is of the essence in matters involving
children, as the Twins illustrate particularly vividly. They became CHINS at age 1½, their parentchild relationship with Natural Mother was severed at age 4½, and their adoption was challenged
at age 5½. They are now age 10, with this dispute still unresolved.
In our Appellate Rules, we have strictly limited the parties’ ability to seek extensions of
time in cases involving children’s rights, and have required ourselves to give them priority consideration. Ind. Appellate Rules 21(A), 35(C)–(D). We applaud the Court of Appeals for its promptness in resolving the previous level of this appeal—and express our firm expectation that parties
and courts will do likewise at the trial level, even without being expressly compelled to do so by a
comparable Trial Rule.
II. Staying TPR Judgments Pending Appeal.
At the outset, the Adoptive Parents and Attorney General argue that Natural Mother’s
TPR appeal was rendered moot when the adoption was granted—and that if she wished to
preserve her rights, she should have asked the TPR court to stay its judgment pending her appeal.
Without such a request, they reason, the Twins’ need for a speedy and permanent placement trumps
Natural Mother’s rights. In view of the two separate constitutional rights that are implicated by
this argument, we cannot agree.
Foremost, despite Natural Mother’s struggles, her parental rights are precious and protected
by our Federal and State constitutions. Our Supreme Court has “recognized on numerous occasions
that the relationship between parent and child is constitutionally protected,” Quilloin v. Walcott,
434 U.S. 246, 255 (1978), and that “[t]he fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care,
custody, and management of their child does not evaporate simply because they have not been
model parents or have lost temporary custody of their child to the State.” Santosky v. Kramer, 455
U.S. 745, 753 (1982). Accordingly, “the interest of a parent in the companionship, care, custody,
and management of his or her children comes to this Court with a momentum for respect lacking
when appeal is made to liberties which derive merely from shifting economic arrangements.”
Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645, 651 (1972) (internal quotation and substitution omitted).
Even apart from the importance of Natural Mother’s substantive parental rights, Indiana is
particularly solicitous of the right to appeal. Article 7, Section 6 of the Indiana Constitution guarantees “in all cases”—including TPR—“an absolute right to one appeal.” But her appellate right
would mean little if it could be short-circuited by an adoption judgment being issued before her
appeal is complete. It would offend her rights as both a mother and an appellate litigant to let her
parent-child relationship with the Twins become contingent upon a race to the courthouse,
hinging on whether the adoption could be finalized before the TPR appeal was complete.3
The Adoptive Parents and Attorney General say it was Natural Mother’s sole responsibility
to avoid such a “race” by seeking a stay of the TPR judgment pending her appeal. But Court of
Appeals precedent suggests otherwise. In Cunningham v. Hiles, 182 Ind. App. 811, 395 N.E.2d
851, 853 (1979), modified on reh’g, 402 N.E.2d 17 (Ind. Ct. App. 1980), the trial court had refused
to enjoin construction of a music store on a residential lot, but the Court of Appeals reversed. The
store owner then sought rehearing, arguing the appeal was moot because he had built the store in
reliance on the trial court’s judgment while the appeal was pending—the first time the Court of
Appeals had been made aware of that important fact. 402 N.E.2d at 20. The Court’s opinion on
rehearing made clear that “the parties should have informed this Court of the fact that the music
store had been constructed,” suggesting that the “duty to place such matters before this Court by
proper petitions, motions, or challenges by verified pleadings” is shared. 402 N.E.2d at 20 (emphasis added; internal citations, quotations, and substitutions omitted). In so holding, the Court
rejected the store owner’s claim that the fault lay entirely with the appellants for failing “to seek
an appeal bond or otherwise stay enforcement of the denial of the injunction pending the outcome
of their appeal,” id. at 21 n.4. In sum, despite prevailing at trial, the owner “built the music store at
his own peril” while the appeal was pending. Id.
We see this case in a similar light. Natural Mother certainly could have sought a stay of the
TPR in hopes of avoiding the dilemma this case presents. Yet DCS was also a party to that
3 We acknowledge the Attorney General’s citation to In re Tekela, 780 N.E.2d 304, 309 (Ill. 2002), which held that a
TPR appeal does become moot when the children are adopted. But we have found no other case that reaches such a
conclusion. Moreover, Illinois has abrogated Tekela by a rule blocking adoptions while a TPR appeal is pending. Ill.
Sup. Ct. R. 305(e). A similar statute has avoided these consequences in Michigan as well, In re JK, 661 N.W.2d 216,
224 (Mich. 2003)—and Missouri has established a common-law rule that it is always an abuse of discretion to grant an
adoption while a TPR appeal is pending, State ex rel. T.W. v. Ohmer, 133 S.W.3d 41, 43 (Mo. 2004). We agree with
Tekela’s recognition of a compelling interest in speedy placement and permanency for the children, but we will not
advance that policy goal at a natural parent’s constitutional expense.
appeal—and unlike Natural Mother, DCS also participated in the adoption, through the power to
consent (or not) to the Twins’ adoption while the TPR appeal was pending. If anything, then,
DCS was in a better position than Natural Mother to make the Court of Appeals aware of “postjudgment events which may affect the outcome of a pending appeal,” id. at 20, such as its intent
to consent to the adoption. DCS had every right to rely on the trial court’s TPR judgment and consent to the adoption while the appeal was still pending, I.C. § 31-19-11-6—but as in Cunningham,
such bold reliance came at its own (and thus, the Twins’) peril. 402 N.E.2d at 21 n.4.
Accordingly, we decline to hold that Natural Mother was required to file a stay in order to
preserve a meaningful appellate remedy for her parental rights, and proceed to the merits of her
petition to set aside the adoption.
III.Setting Aside Adoptions When the Prior TPR Is Reversed.
Reversal of the TPR judgment is significant because consent is ordinarily a vital part of an
adoption. “[A] trial court deciding an adoption petition must find that ‘proper consent, if consent is
necessary, to the adoption has been given.’” In re Adoption of N.W.R., 971 N.E.2d 110, 113 (Ind.
Ct. App. 2012) (quoting I.C. § 31-19-11-1(a)(7)). In most cases, that entails notifying the natural
parents of the adoption, I.C. § 31-19-2.5-3(a)(1), and obtaining their written consent to it, I.C.
§ 31-19-9-1(a)(1)–(2). When consent is required, a defect in consent will render the adoption
decree invalid, and require the adoption to be reversed and remanded. See N.W.R., 971 N.E.2d at
117 (DCS’s consent was required because child was ward of the State; trial court abused its
discretion in granting adoption after DCS had sought to withdraw its consent).
But even though notice and consent are generally required, there are two classes of
exceptions. One category permits adoption without the natural parent’s consent, if the court finds
that the parent has abandoned, deserted, or failed to support or communicate with the child, I.C.
§ 31-19-9-8(a)(1)–(2); or that the parent is legally incompetent or unfit, I.C. § 31-19-9-8(a)(9),
(11). In these cases, the natural parent is still entitled to notice, I.C. § 31-19-4.5-2, so they can
appear and defend against the allegations.
In the other category, though, the natural parent is not even entitled to notice. I.C. § 31-
19-2.5-4. Generally, this category is based on a prior judicial finding of parental misconduct—
for example, Natural Mother’s TPR judgment, I.C. § 31-19-9-8(a)(8); or conviction and incarceration for certain crimes against the child or the child’s other parent or sibling. I.C. §§ 31-19-9-9, -10.
In these cases, notice is deemed unnecessary because the parent had opportunity to contest the allegation in a prior proceeding—in essence, treating the prior decision as conclusive of the issue.
But what happens when that “conclusive” prior decision is reversed? Even though finality
of judgments is a vital policy, it is not absolute, and sometimes yields to broader interests of
justice. Trial Rule 60(B) contemplates such situations, providing in relevant part:
On motion and upon such terms as are just the court may relieve a party . . . from a
judgment . . . for the following reasons: * * *
(6) the judgment is void;
(7) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment
upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer
equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or
(8) any reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment, other than those
reasons set forth in sub-paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4).
. . . . A movant filing a motion for reasons (1), (2), (3), (4), and (8) must allege a
meritorious claim or defense.
(Emphasis added.) The parties dispute whether the adoption is void under sub-paragraph (6), or
merely voidable under sub-paragraph (8), with the latter provision requiring Natural Mother to
show a “meritorious defense” to the adoption before she could have it set aside. But we find the
answer in the provision in between—that the adoption was merely voidable, but for a reason
specifically contemplated by sub-paragraph (7), which requires no meritorious defense.
Under the second clause of Trial Rule 60(B)(7), a judgment may be set aside when “a prior
judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated.” That provision “applies
only to related judgments where the second judgment is based upon the first judgment, and the first
has been reversed or otherwise vacated.” Dempsey v. Belanger, 959 N.E.2d 861, 868 (Ind. Ct. App.
2011), trans. denied (quoting 22A Stephen E. Arthur, Indiana Practice: Civil Trial Practice § 37.14
(2d ed. 2007)). Put another way, it applies only when the first judgment “has claim or issue preclusion effects on the second,” or provides “a necessary element of the [subsequent] decision.” See
Kaler v. Bala (In re Racing Servs., Inc.), 571 F.3d 729, 732 (8th Cir. 2009) (quoting 12 James Wm.
Moore et al., Moore’s Federal Practice § 60.46[1] (3d Ed. 2009) and Lubben v. Selective Serv.
Sys. Local Bd. No. 27, 453 F.2d 645, 650 (1st Cir. 1972)) (all construing Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(B)(5)’s
similar provision).
Here, the adoption “is based upon” the TPR judgment in the sense Dempsey and Kaler
contemplate. If not for the preclusive effect of the prior TPR judgment, the Twins’ adoption
would have required notice to Natural Mother, I.C. § 31-19-2.5-3(a)(1). Then, if she refused to
consent, the adoption would have required proof of an additional element—abandonment, unfitness, or one of the other statutory grounds for dispensing with consent, I.C. § 31-19-9-8(a).
Because the TPR let the Adoptive Parents finalize the adoption without either obtaining Natural
Mother’s consent or proving it was unnecessary, we conclude that the adoption was “based on”
the prior TPR judgment. Accordingly, Natural Mother became entitled to relief from the adoption
when the TPR was “reversed or otherwise vacated” on appeal.
And since Natural Mother’s petition is within 60(B)(7)’s specific provisions, she need not
show a “meritorious defense” as sub-paragraph (8) would require. Sub-paragraphs (5) through
(7) of Trial Rule 60(B) are expressly exempted from that requirement—seemingly recognizing
that those circumstances inherently jeopardize confidence in the integrity of the judicial process,
even if the outcome was unaffected. Adoptive Parents’ reliance on the 60(B)(8) “catch-all,” and its
meritorious defense requirement, is therefore misplaced; Trial Rule 60(B)(7)’s more specific provision is controlling. Rumfelt v. Himes, 438 N.E.2d 980, 983–84 (Ind. 1982) (“[A]s with statutes,
a specific rule controls over a general one on the same subject matter.”).4
We therefore conclude that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to set aside the
Twins’ adoption. We understand the trial court’s concern for a speedy, permanent placement for the
Twins. But a fit parent’s rights are fundamental and constitutionally protected, In re Visitation of
M.L.B., 983 N.E.2d 583, 586 (Ind. 2013) (citing Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 64 (2000)), and
even a matter as important as the Twins’ best interests does not necessarily override that right. Id.
Since the only judicial determination that Natural Mother is unfit to retain her parental rights has
4 Resting our conclusion on Trial Rule 60(B)(7) also lets us avoid the constitutional question inherent in Natural
Mother’s 60(B)(6) argument that the adoption is void on Due Process grounds. We “traditionally foreswear deciding a
constitutional question unless no non-constitutional grounds present themselves for resolving the case under consideration.” Citizens Nat. Bank of Evansville v. Foster, 668 N.E.2d 1236, 1241 (Ind. 1996).
been overturned on appeal, letting the adoption stand would be an overreach of State power into
family integrity. The adoption must be set aside.
IV.Avoiding a Repeat of This Situation.
We are all too aware of the harsh effects this decision may have on the Twins, and future
children who may find themselves similarly situated through no fault of their own. We therefore
offer guidance for mitigating those harsh effects in this case, and potentially avoiding them
completely in future cases.
Foremost, this case illustrates the wisdom of doing more than “just the bare minimum.” Due
Process notice requirements are just that—a bare minimum that parties always may, and sometimes
ought to, exceed. While the Adoptive Parents were not required to serve notice on Natural Mother,
I.C. § 31-19-2.5-4(2)(F), doing so voluntarily may well have saved the adoption from reversal. If
Natural Mother had been served, the Adoptive Parents could then have requested a contested adoption hearing for litigating an alternative basis for dispensing with consent under Indiana Code
section 31-19-9-8(a). Natural Mother would then have been offered a “day in court” independent
of the TPR, giving this Court an alternative basis to affirm the adoption—because either she would
have appeared and been heard, or else failed to appear and been properly defaulted. We emphasize
that such notice is not required, and adoptive parents have the statutory right to rely solely on a
trial-level TPR judgment and seek adoption pending the TPR appeal. We merely caution that such
reliance comes at the adoptive parents’ peril. See Cunningham, 402 N.E.2d at 21 n.4.
Second, some of the uncertainty for the Twins could have been avoided if DCS had left the
underlying CHINS case open until Mother’s TPR appeal was complete. As this case shows, children may have a particularly great “need of services” when a TPR judgment is reversed on appeal.
By then, they will have been removed from the parents’ home for a substantial time, and will be
bonding into a new home—especially when, as here, the foster parents plan to adopt. And the
natural parent, even if not unfit, may also be in need of services before the children could appropriately return to their original home. Yet without a CHINS case, there is no ready means to
provide the support all the parties here will require while reexamining the Twins’ status in light of
the TPR reversal. (Indiana Code section 31-9-2-13 could authorize the Adoptive Parents to seek
temporary custody of the Twins while the adoption is pending—which may very well be beneficial
to the Twins, but falls far short of the services a CHINS case would permit.) We strongly suggest
that in the future, DCS’s best practice would be to leave underlying CHINS cases open until any
related TPR appeal is complete.5
Finally, we reiterate that granting an adoption pending TPR appeal is a discretionary decision of the trial court. Our Legislature has authorized the practice, and there are surely cases in
which it will be entirely appropriate to expedite the adoption. Yet it is only permitted, not required.
In view of the potentially devastating consequences of having an adoption invalidated by a TPR
appeal, we encourage courts to exercise that authority with an abundance of caution. Speedy permanency for children is vitally important. But balanced against the risk that materialized in this
case, a few months’ additional delay in granting an adoption may often be preferable.
Conclusion
There are no winners in some cases, and this is one of them. Ruling in favor of the Adoptive Parents would violate the Natural Mother’s constitutional rights, while the opposite ruling
would risk pulling the Twins away from the family they have lived with for most of their lives,
and the only stable family they have ever known. But despite the Twins’ need for permanency,
natural parents’ consent is a vital condition precedent to most adoptions—and we must take a
narrow view of the exceptions to that principle, out of due regard for the limitations of judicial
power into family life, even for very imperfect families. Thus, when the TPR judgment in this
case was reversed, we must conclude that the no-consent adoption that followed on its heels
became voidable under Trial Rule 60(B)(7). The trial court therefore abused its discretion in
failing to set aside the adoption.
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s judgment, and remand with instructions to vacate
the adoption decree within seven days of this Court’s opinion being certified, to reset the
adoption petition for a contested hearing, and to promptly serve notice and summons of that
hearing on Natural Mother. Pending that hearing, the trial court could exercise its authority to
entertain motions regarding temporary custody of the Twins under Indiana Code section 31-19-
2-13, until final judgment is entered.
Dickson, C.J., and Rucker, David, and Massa, JJ., concur.
5 We express no opinion about whether DCS may be entitled to reopen the CHINS case under these circumstances.
Monday, August 19, 2013
Toddler’s death raises questions about how Texas contractor screens, trains foster parents
Toddler’s death raises questions about how Texas contractor screens, trains foster parents | Dallasnews.com - News for Dallas, Texas - The Dallas Morning News:
AUSTIN — A toddler’s gruesome death last month in a Central Texas foster home has raised questions about the screening and training of foster parents by a private child-placing agency, especially in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
AUSTIN — A toddler’s gruesome death last month in a Central Texas foster home has raised questions about the screening and training of foster parents by a private child-placing agency, especially in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
NH Gov. Slippery Slope
DMVC Productions = Results : NH Gov. Slippery Slope:
NH RSA 329-B -3 - Mental Health Board...
This board now includes the HEINOUS AND LETHAL
SUSAN VONDERHEIDE, of Nashua, NH
NOMINATED BY - Maggie Hassan, Governor of NH (d) on 7/10/13 without public notice because...
(coincidentally the same day the Supreme Court denied the Plaintiff's appeal against Vonderheide but before it is appealed to a higher court.)
The Executive Council & Governor CONFIRMED HER on 4/24/13
Read More:
"A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself." Livy
NH RSA 329-B -3 - Mental Health Board...
This board now includes the HEINOUS AND LETHAL
SUSAN VONDERHEIDE, of Nashua, NH
NOMINATED BY - Maggie Hassan, Governor of NH (d) on 7/10/13 without public notice because...
(coincidentally the same day the Supreme Court denied the Plaintiff's appeal against Vonderheide but before it is appealed to a higher court.)
The Executive Council & Governor CONFIRMED HER on 4/24/13
Read More: