I have written countless letters to officials and professionals that could have impact on this case. Sadly, few have responded wtih much assistance. This is not of great surprise as the government officials in FL have many mutual interests or relationships. One of the greatest is State Attorney Harry Shorstein is the uncle of the adoption attorney representing the respondants in this case. The trial judge worked for Harry Shorstein as well. The conflicts of interest in my case would alone invalidate the proceeding. Requests for a new judge/trial were denied by the original trial judge.

Not surprisingly, the letters sent by myself or on my behalf from supporters in 2006, were met with threats of legal action. The letters were sent confidentially to specific people involved in the case, including the ICPC office who was not notified of my immediate revocation or the incomplete paperwork, the social worker who conducted the home study, and some officials who regulate these type cases. Since the home study coordinator forwarded the letter to Garfinkel, and spoke out in support of the Needhams to the press in 2007, it could be concluded that the home study may be suspect. It is obvious now that my fears of the children not having adequate resources is true. I had the resources to send them to college and provide for anything they needed. There is no justification for this custody ordeal.

[This page is under construction. Check back soon to see a complete list.]

COMPLAINTS TO LICENSING BOARDS & OFFICIALS

KATHLEEN STEVENS, SOCIAL WORKER
CC: Board of Clinical Social Work; NASW Florida Chapter; Department of Health Investigative Services Unit; Gov. Charlie Crist
Date: July 2007
Filing: Complaint for unethical conduct and numerous violations of the social worker code.
Response: Immediate investigation still in progress

MICHAEL D. SOLLOWAY, MD
PSYCHIATRIST, BAPTIST HEALTH SYSTEMS
CC: Department of Health Investigative Services Unit; Gov. Charlie Crist
Date: April 12, 2007
Filing: Formal complaint against psychiatrist Michael Solloway of Jacksonville, Florida. On  January 12, 2006, Dr.  Solloway interviewed me in preparation for a court proceeding involving my children.   This evaluation was requested by Attorney David Garfinkel of Jacksonville, Florida. He was provided with “voluminous records” according to his sworn testimony. However, he did not in fact review these records and offered flagrantly biased and erroneous expert testimony that directly caused a loss in my case, and in the unnecessary loss of custody of my children.

MORE COMPLAINTS IN PROCESS – CHECK BACK SOON FOR AN UPDATE

_________________________________________________________________________

LETTERS

Office of the United States Attorney (Paul I. Perez, FL.)

DATE: Sept 15, 2006
... very complex legal case involving a couple residing in North Carolina who illegally transported two minors from Florida into the state of North Carolina over one year ago. They violated numerous FL and NC state statutes in doing so, including the Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children.

A Florida trial court recently ignored all of these egregious violations in its judgment, and the verdict is now stayed pending an appeal... The specific reason I am writing to you is in regards to a home study and custody case... Legally, the adoption has not been completed or finalized as the mother rescinded her approval of the transfer of legal custody of the twins within the seven-day window provided for under the terms of North Carolina statutory law... This prolonged separation is a foremost concern... being deprived of her most fundamental right to parent her children. The Needhams are interfering with her custodial rights and withholding the children illegally... Needhams are in continuing violation of the terms of the Interstate Compact of the Placement of Children (ICPC). As you know, the ICPC is a statutory law in all 50 state government jurisdictions and is a binding contract between state government jurisdictions... required ICPC paperwork was never completed nor submitted to the states... had no intent to give up her children, but was coerced into doing so at an extremely vulnerable time... [Background Summary] Needhams have no legal basis for having custody of the children, but the Florida trial court refuses to recognize or enforce compliance with the ICPC statutes and, by extension, North Carolina state laws.The court also has not penalized the adoption facilitators for their obvious violation of numerous statutes, which opens the door for this to recur unimpeded...assist the mother in correcting this grievous judicial error by simply enforcing the terms of the ICPC statutes and the seven-day revocation period for North Carolina.

_________________________________________________________________________

US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: US ATTORNEY OFFICE
(WARREN ZIMMERMAN, FL)

DATE: April 14, 2008

I sent you a CD of all the court records regarding my case hoping that your office would be able to open an investigation.  I have not heard anything yet.  What are your thoughts regarding this effort?
 
Would another branch of the DOJ be better suited to this?  Perhaps a unit that specializes in racqueteering and criminal activity?  The corruption, the fixing of trial verdicts, the doctoring of important documents is criminal.  Of course, there are never any charges filed since Harry Shorstein is the State Attorney.  I need help.  I cannot do this myself.
 
Who in the DOJ can help me?  Please let me know.  This is absolutely, critically important.  As you know this is an egregious case and cannot stand.
 
Please refer me to the correct DOJ or FBI office.  

Also, do you know an attorney who can help me bring this case to US federal court based on the violation of due process and constitution rights?  Shouldn't the DOJ be willing to sue the State of Florida for the violation of federal laws and there are many violations.  I saw the case where your office sued the University of Southern Florida regarding an athletic program and Title XX compliance.  Shorstein and company moved children across state lines in violation of the Interstate Compact for the Placement of Children and without a court order.  I need help.  The State of Florida continues to flagrantly violate federal law such as the UCCJEA and International Parental Kidnapping Act.  I have learned a great deal about family law.  These federal laws are important and yet the federal government is allowing the states, especially Florida, to disregard these requirements and destroy families.

Please let me know what assistance you can provide.  An response to this e-mail would be greatly appreciated.

RESPONSE: "I wish I had better news, but I fear that I have run out of ideas. WAZ"

DATE: June 20, 2007
When we last communicated with you late last year, you were interested in reviewing the brief for the appeal. We also contacted Mr. Blakely as you suggested, but he was unable/unwilling to take on the case... concerned about the extreme impartiality of the trial judgment. It ignored major issues and laws in violation, gave over-reaching statements of protection for the opposing counsel, considered numerous notary errors and backdated papers insignificant, and even went beyond the request of determining the validity of the consent and terminated all contact and rights... If [we] had prevailed, Open Adoption Agreements would have been determined to be fraudulent - a huge financial loss to the adoption attorneys.

Further, Mr. Shorstein and basically all involved (if you review the transcripts) would lose their respective licenses for their misdeeds. This would mean disbarment and a loss of practice for Shorstein & possibly Kelly. I'm sure their network pulled together to ensure Allison lost to preserve their 'bait and switch' tactic of open adoptions. This was verified in that the Needhams (couple with the children) have NOT paid their legal counsel while Allison has spent over $750k, the ICPC paperwork expired and was never even verified as completed, and to our knowledge, no home study evaluations have been done since this began. The initial one expired and the Needham's circumstances have changed dramatically...

Following the appeal filing, visitation was again ordered by the court, but decreased to 48 hrs every 3 weeks. The couple with the twins did not fully comply, and continually filed motions... to terminate visitation... was told... lack of visitation and single status, would likely mean a loss of custody at the appellate level. After 16 months of litigation, returning... children each visit to the Needhams - a traumatic event, being stood up for visitation with no make-up visit, etc., ... felt ... never going to win and panicked... took the kids to Canada for a week with the intention of staying for a few months while the appeal finished. Hoping that 'possession' would remain 9/10th's of the law and she would regain custody. Instead, the Needhams called the authorities and they sent the FBI on a massive manhunt for Allison, even knowing the kids were not in danger... traveled... with legal passports for all three of them... incarcerated awaiting trial for nearly 6 months... just want to go home... and be their mom as... always planned.

...concerned that the fact that the appellate court has so far refused to given an opinion even on violations of law in this case, that the influence of those involved may extend beyond the trial court. The FBI was notified of this and some 'interviews' have taken place according to sources in FL. But, we are not sure if there is adequate attention to this.

We have found another woman from 9 years ago who's papers were forward dated and signed while she was still in the hospital. Same court reporter or notary, who testified on Shorstein's behalf at trial. So that evidence was not allowed. The promise of an open adoption for this mom was quickly found to be false...

... please let me know your thoughts and if there is anyone that can assist in investigating this matter further.

RESPONSE: "Given this rather alarming and tragic series of events, my ability to offer help is severely liimited.  But I will think about it, and if I have anything useful to pass along, I will do so..." 

DATE: Oct. 2006

"... The validity of this case is well-documented and based on several issues including violation of ICPC statutes, fraud, and duress. As I mentioned, the ICPC paperwork was not completed... Undisputed evidence was also produced during trial that confirmed Ms. Quets was under extreme duress when the ICPC papers were signed, thus making them legally invalid. Yet, these have been affirmed by the court as evidenced by the outcome of the trial.

Multiple medical experts accepted by the court, and other witnesses with NO financial or other incentives at stake, all validated the testimony of Ms. Quets, yet all were deemed less credible than those presented by the respondents, or were ignored. The one “medical expert” called by the respondents was a psychologist that examined Ms. Quets five months after the signing. He opined that there was no evidence that Ms. Quets was incompetent to enter into contracts at any time during the process of consenting to the adoption. This was in direct opposition to the doctor who saw Ms. Quets within days of the signing. It would be impossible, not to mention unprofessional, to make this assumption without having assessed Ms. Quets at that time...

... It is completely illogical that a mother would sacrifice and plan for 20 years to have children; endure risky, expensive, and painful fertility treatments; an extremely difficult pregnancy (she nearly died twice), only to turn around a few weeks later and voluntarily offer the twins up for adoption. She was obviously not competent or of sound mind to enter into a contract of such importance.

... Since she revoked consent immediately, the State of North Carolina is legally bound to deny the placement of these twins in the state and return the children to their mother. This course of action is mandated by the North Carolina statues and the ICPC articles, according to the attorneys. Further, our counsel suggests the adoption papers should have been filed in NC, which was not done due to the seven day revocation period allowed, as was stated by the Needhams during trial...

It is egregious that the Needhams, residents of North Carolina, are willfully and purposely attempting to circumvent the laws of their home state. Please intervene and take the actions necessary to enforce the laws of North Carolina and return these children to their mother. The mother and I would be enormously grateful for any assistance to rectify this horrendous situation. The future of these children is at stake here..."

RESPONSE: Oct 11, 2006 - preliminary research by Lauren Baylor

_________________________________________________________________________

NC GOVERNOR MICHAEL EASLEY

DATE: Oct. 8, 2006
"...At the time I first wrote to you, I also confidentially shared some of my concerns in writing with the North Carolina ICPC coordinators... The ICPC staff in NC curtly told me not to contact them again. Within a week, I received a letter from the Needham's attorney, David Garfinkel of Jacksonville, FL.  Mr. Garfinkel threatened to file charges... This concerns me as I thought my letters would be kept confidential by members of the Social Services community... She followed the law and revoked in the time specified, yet has paid several hundred thousand dollars defending her legal revocation, and is still being denied the right to custody.

Recently, we briefly spoke with an attorney in NC, ----, who reviewed a few of the case documents and was appalled at the egregious nature of this ruling, as well as the conduct of those involved.  We have been warned that since the judge has sole discretion on the stay and visitation, reversing these as an act of retribution could occur at any time.

Due to the extensive fraud and duress documented during trial, he has a great deal at stake in this matter including his law practice. Further, his clients, the Needhams, are in obvious violation of the ICPC statutes which were completely ignored by the trail judge’s ruling...

The mother’s parental rights have not been terminated and she is the legal parent, therefore the mother should have custody of her children.  Since the mother revoked consent immediately, the State of North Carolina is legally bound to deny the placement of these twins in the state and return the children to their mother.  This course of action is mandated by the North Carolina statues and the ICPC articles, as has been stated by the attorneys.

_________________________________________________________________________

NC DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Berta Hammerstein, Esther T. High, Linda Wrightson, Gail Moore, Amelia Lance

DATE: Sept. 18, 2006
[Summary of case] "Legally, the adoption has not been completed or finalized as the mother rescinded her approval of the transfer of legal custody of the twins within the seven-day window provided for under the terms of North Carolina statutory law. She cited numerous instances of documented fraud and duress used to obtain her consent for adoption, something she only briefly considered during the height of her debility and illness.

This separation is a foremost concern to the mother since she is being deprived of her right to parent her children. Further, the children are losing valuable bonding time with their mother during a vital time period of child development that is irrecoverable.

However, as of this date, the Needhams, legal residents of North Carolina, have failed to return the twins to the custodial care of their mother. With this failure, the Needhams are in continuing violation of the terms of the Interstate Compact of the Placement of Children (ICPC). As you know, the ICPC is a statutory law in all 50 states and is a binding contract between state government jurisdictions. According to the ICPC, state adoption statutes for both the sending and receiving states must be strictly complied with before an adoption is approved. In this case, numerous statutes were ignored for both FL and NC were ignored by the trial court.

If you check your case file, you will find that there is no evidence that the requirements of the ICPC were met. No evidence of ICPC compliance was produced at the trial. Therefore, it is very likely that required ICPC paperwork was never completed nor submitted to the states. Thus, the Needhams, and by extension, the states of Florida and North Carolina, are not in compliance with the terms of the interstate contractual provisions of the ICPC.

Since there has been a lengthy period of time since the Needhams moved the children to NC and the mother’s parental rights have not been terminated, any ICPC documents on file have expired, and should be considered legally null and void. [CONCERNS over placement and validity]

It is my understanding that until the adoption is finalized, the home study requires updates periodically. While I am unclear as to the normal time intervals at which these children are to be assessed in their current living situation after preliminary placement, I would like to note the children have been under the custodial care of the Needhams for over a year. To my knowledge, no follow-up has been done."

DATE: October 2006
Letter to Department of Social Services regarding concerns over Tyler's weight loss and anxiety, as well as other signs of failing to thrive.

RESPONSE: No action taken

_________________________________________________________________________

HONORABLE DONALD R. MORAN, JR. (FL SUPREME COURT)

DATE: Dec. 2, 2007
“The Governor of the State of Florida, Charlie Crist, and the Regional Director for the Department of Children and Families, suggested that I write to you…

I am requesting that you review the complete record of my case.  The case was tried in the Fourth Judicial  Circuit in the family law division, case no: 16-2005-DR-006640-FMXXMA.    Many legal professionals have reviewed the entire record and all have come to the same conclusion – that the evidence does not support the ruling.  The words used to describe the conduct of Michael Shorstein, Brian Kelly, and Kathleen Stevens, and the ruling entered by the Honorable E. McRae Mathis, have been described as outrageous, obscene, shocking, and egregious.

The impact of the ruling was to destroy my family by removing my children from me.  My character and reputation was slandered and maligned…"

RESPONSE: None

_________________________________________________________________________

FLORIDA SUPREME COURT JUSTICES; GOVERNOR CHARLIE CRIST; LT. GOVERNOR JEFF KOTTKAMP; BILL MCCOLLUM, ATTORNEY GENERAL; HON. SARAH PARKER, CHIEF JUSTICE, NC SUPREME COURT

Date: September 26,  2007
“This is the strategy of adoption attorneys, get custody awarded to the prospective adoptive couple at the start, then prolong proceedings as long as possible so the court will not remove the child from the family he/she has now bonded with. This is legalized kidnapping and is actively being affirmed by state courts who, in the Quets case, ignored intentional and numerous document errors, violation of federal (ICPC, UCCJEA) and state laws, and unethical conduct by officers of the court, as well as failed to honor the constitutional rights of the Quets family. Although the court ruled against Ms. Quets, Judge Mathis failed to give any reason that the court is compelled to sever all ties. Ms. Quets was required to undergo numerous psychological testing before trial, and was found to be well-functioning with the highest rating on integrity. Severing ties was baseless and undeserved...

Please require the appellate court to issue an opinion and the trial court to deny the adoption petition in an effort to protect these children and allow them to reunite with their mother, Allison Quets, before the damage is irrecoverable.”

RESPONSES:

FL DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY & CHILDREN SERVICES (ROBERT A. BUTTERWORTH; TAFFY COMPAIN)

DATE: July 16, 2007
“I pray you will read this letter and assist me in some way. There are serious concerns over the welfare of my children and the way they have been placed illegally in North Carolina. So far, the social services departments I have contacted in NC regarding the well-being of my twins, have taken no action to protect them.”

RESPONSE: None

DATE: Sept 13, 2007
"There are serious concerns over the welfare of my children and the way they have been placed illegally in North Carolina. So far, the social services departments I have contacted in NC regarding the well-being of my twins, have taken no action to protect them."

_________________________________________________________________________

FLORIDA GOVERNOR CHARLIE CRIST; LT. GOVERNOR JEFF KOTTKAMP; HONORABLE BILL MCCOLLUM, ATTORNEY GENERAL

Date: Sep 12, 2007
"I am following up on an urgent letter I sent to you in early July. As of yet, there has been no response from your office. I have attached a copy for your reference. You may recall that a letter was also sent to you on my behalf in 2006 when you were in the Attorney General’s Office. Concerns about my case were also sent to numerous officials, such as the DA, Social Services Director, US Attorney, USDOJ, and ICPC Coordinators. Nearly all replied with standard responses that essentially suggested I talk with someone else or stated they had no ability to assist me in any way."

RESPONSE: Sept. 20 "The Florida Constitution limits the Governor’s intervention in matters that should be resolved through the court system.  Custody rulings are under the jurisdiction of the judicial system."

DATE: July 6, 2007
"A special investigation of illegal adoption practices conducted by the Department of Justice must be immediately initiated... In the State of Florida, aggressive and predatory adoption attorneys and agencies are illegally coercing and deceiving thousands of women into relinquishing newborn infants. These entities profit immensely from trafficking in children.

Being second in the US for number of adoptions, Florida is rapidly becoming known as a “black market” for babies. These despicable acts of corruption and fraud permeate the practice of adoption, the legislature and the judiciary.

The legislature, at the direction of the adoption attorneys, has modified the Florida statues such that mothers, fathers, and children are stripped of their constitutional rights. Circuit Court Judges, and possibly even appellate court judges, are aligned with adoption attorneys.

For instance, Jeanne Tate of Tampa sits on the Judicial Nominating Commission for judges; Patricia Strowbridge of Orlando is married to Circuit Court Judge Waddles; and Michael Shorstein, nephew to State Attorney Harry Shorstein, was a member of the Judicial Nominating Commission that nominated Circuit Court Judge E. M.  Mathis for office. Now Rep. Mark Mahon, awarded for sponsoring unconstitutional adoption statutes, has been appointed judge in Duval County. He also represented adoption Attorneys Shorstein & Kelly during my civil trial....

The constitutional right of mothers and fathers to parent their children must be vigorously guarded. Further, the rights of children must be fiercely protected and families preserved. FL courts routinely disregard these rights, destroying thousands of families.

I can describe many deplorable and deceitful behaviors by attorneys Tate, Strowbridge and Shorstein, along with their staff of notaries, counselors, and social workers. From backdated notary stamps and false witness signatures, to hours of literal brainwashing and aggressive intimidation tactics, they have only one goal and nothing impedes that. Evidence shows their unethical conduct has been ongoing for at least a decade, and for many generations in the adoption industry. A thorough investigation will reveal organized and illegal practices designed to destroy families for the purposes of profit. This unregulated, not-for-profit industry requires governmental control and oversight. As of now, there is no accountability.

On a sincere and personal note, I have been refused custody of my precious twins, Tyler Lee and Holly Ann, for nearly two years. They have given no reason other than their profit that I should not be allowed to parent my children. The unjustifiable damage to my family is no longer recoverable. Please, as a compassionate man and as “The People’s Governor,” reunite my family and bring my precious children home to their mother. An online petition requesting the return of my twins may be found via a link from www.allisonquets.com. It has been electronically signed by over 1700 individuals since January.

DATE: July 7, 2007
"It is with extreme concern and urgency that I write regarding your recent appointment of Mark Mahon to the 4th Circuit Court. You may be aware of the very tragic Allison Quets case which originated in the 4th Judicial Court, and is now in the 1st DCA. This case has brought shame and ultimately will make a mockery of the FL judiciary due to the obvious bias toward the adoption industry.

Mr. Mahon represented and defended adoption attorney Michael Shorstein who coerced Quets into signing the consent. Mr. Shorstein is a key member of both the adoption community and Jacksonville. His extremely unethical and unprofessional behavior was clearly evident during trial but ignored by his close associate, the trial judge (E M Mathis). As with the case of Evan Scott, the Hon. Mathis gave custody to Shorstein’s client, severing the natural family, and in the Quets case as well – ignoring clear violations of law. Shorstein even told Quets that he picks the judges for his cases. Beyond the judgment, motions for attorney fees and visitation are heavily weighted toward the adoptive family, greatly damaging the natural parent bond and the chance of reuniting.

_________________________________________________________________________

FL LEGISLATORS

DATE: Aug 5, 2007

"It is with extreme concern and urgency that I write regarding the state of the FL judiciary and the Allison Quets case. You may be aware of the Quets case which originated in the 4th Judicial Court and is now pending in the 1st DCA. It is a tragic example of what happens when unethical practices are overlooked or condoned by government officials, other attorneys and their fellow judges. Attorneys across the US reviewing the Quets case describe it as tragic, egregious, and shocking.

The bias and blatant disregard for state statutes, along with rulings inconsistent with the evidence in these cases force me to write this letter. I respectfully request that you immediately investigate the close partnerships among former Rep. Mark Mahon (recently appointed judge), Judge E. McRae Mathis, Michael Shorstein and other prominent members of the American Academy of Adoption Attorneys (AAAA) and the FL Adoption Council, specifically Patricia Strowbridge and Jeanne Tate. Please also demand a review of their adoption records so you can see first-hand how the social workers, notaries, and support staff all work together to coerce consents. They refuse to accept no and even come to the hospital when a mother gives birth, hoping to persuade her to change her mind. In the Quets case, adoption counselors called her repeatedly for weeks after she gave birth. She avoided their calls but they continued.

These attorneys construct laws that are fundamentally unfair, and unquestionably protective of the attorneys and adoptive parents, not the natural parents; this directly violates the Florida State Statutes and rulings made by the higher courts in Florida. Attorneys involved in litigating improperly obtained adoption consents state Florida’s adoption laws are “a joke.” This will no doubt reflect very poorly on the legislators in Florida and the judiciary over time, especially as the Quets case continues to be covered by the media.

It is very concerning that Michael Shorstein, who is a key member of the adoption industry in Florida, appears to have significant influence on the judges. In both the case of minor Evan (Scott) White and the Quets twins, the Hon. E. McRae Mathis gave custody to Shorstein’s client, severing the natural family and ignoring statutory violations, such as the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children. Mathis also ignored the duress placed on Quets and the fraudulant promise of compliance with an unenforceable open adoption agreement. These acts invalidate the consent, but Quets still does not have her children after two years.

Nothing was ever even discussed in the Quets case to determine the best interests of the children as mandated by state statute. Required follow-up home studies were not performed, and minimal evaluation of the Needhams was completed...

In 2006, extensive evaluations of Quets found her to be a well-functioning and capable adult. ... She had planned for years to have children and nearly died twice from complications.

There was absolutely no “compelling” reason that the children should have been permanently removed from the care of Quets, especially considering her unquestionable interest in parenting them. Yet, the Needhams were given custody by court order, and Quets only received limited visitation which was contested repeatedly by the Needhams at great cost to Quets. This could all have been avoided given the safeguards above and enforcement by the court of the statutes in Chapter 63.

Further, the rights of the children have been ignored by the courts. No one will be able to explain to these children why they were removed from the mother they loved and had bonded with...

Additionally, I ask that you please evaluate the adoption statutes in FL and the upcoming revisions in light of the natural mother. You are allowed a grace period to change your mind on just about anything, except placing a newborn child for adoption. Considering the gravity of this decision, and the enormous pressures and vulnerability associated with early motherhood, it is fundamentally unfair to eliminate any option for revocation. The Quets case is a prime example of how unjust these laws are. They are being strictly construed in a manner most favorable to the adoption attorneys who wrote them.

It is obvious that in the state of Florida, the rights of parents are routinely disregarded – and everyone turns a blind eye to this. When the truth is revealed either through the Quets case or others, there will be many questions about the integrity of Florida’s government, and the constitutionality of state adoption laws. Given your position, I expect this would be of great concern to you.

As with many adoption cases, the judgment, as well as the motions for attorney fees and visitation, are heavily weighted toward the adoptive family, greatly damaging the natural parent bond and the probability of reuniting. Of course, this is understandable since it is only after completion of an adoption that attorneys are paid. However, this also violates the parent’s constitutional rights.

Incompetent individuals are not held liable for contracts they sign according to basic contract law, and contingent contracts are prohibited. Again, Quets is being denied this protection.

Quets is just one of many women promised unenforceable open adoption contracts each year, and one of the few able to fight it past the trial court. Most are crushed before or during trial. This has to stop immediately. Because all records related to adoptions are sealed, we cannot determine the number of cases that are unjustly ruled upon in favor of the adoptive parents...

In Quets’ case, even her civil suit was sealed, prohibiting the scandalous details from being revealed. The public would be shocked to know the truth; the facts in this case do not in any way support the need for terminating her parental rights. One day, her story will be heard and there will be outrage and sanctions or disbarment of those involved.

The trial transcripts demonstrate how every person involved in facilitating the adoption committed perjury and violated either their professional guidelines or the standards for their license, if not both. Shorstein would face disbarment and sanctions for his conduct and violation of the ICPC statutes. Notaries would lose their license, and the social worker would at least be suspended. She even pled the 5th because of her notary acts.

Allowing this form of legalized kidnapping must stop now. Families are being destroyed by the laws of Florida and biased legal professionals. Unethical adoptions cost our society greatly with the increases in prison population and mental health care recipients. You can never recompense the devastation these families experience..."

_________________________________________________________________________

HONORABLE JIM WOODALL, NC DISTRICT ATTORNEY

Date: September 15, 2006
"The specific reason I am writing to you is in regards to a home study and custody case involving the children of the aforementioned mother,,, This prolonged separation is a foremost concern to the mother since she is being deprived of her most fundamental right to parent her children. The Needhams are interfering with her custodial rights and withholding the children illegally from their mother. Further, the children are losing valuable bonding time with their mother during a vital time period of child development that is irrecoverable. Attention to this matter is urgent to ensure the best interests of the twins...

Further, with this failure, the Needhams are in continuing violation of the terms of the Interstate Compact of the Placement of Children (ICPC)... There is no evidence that the requirements of the ICPC were met and no evidence of ICPC compliance was produced during trial. Therefore, it is very likely that required ICPC paperwork was never completed nor submitted to the states... Since there has been a lengthy period of time since the Needhams moved the children to NC and the mother’s parental rights have not been terminated, any ICPC documents in the file are expired, and should be considered legally null and void...

Despite their non-compliance with the ICPC and state statutes, the Needhams  are pursuing reimbursement of their legal expenses from the mother... The mother revoked within the time frame provided by North Carolina statutes which must be complied with according to the ICPC statutes. Thus the Needhams have no legal basis for having custody of the children, but the Florida trial court refuses to recognize or enforce compliance with the ICPC statutes and, by extension, North Carolina state laws...

The court also has not penalized the adoption facilitators for their obvious violation of numerous statutes, which opens the door for this to recur unimpeded."

Response: Phone call to say cannot act until after appeal

_________________________________________________________________________

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION (FL, NC)

"The adoption industry has concealed its numerous violations of civil and constitutional rights for generations. Voluminous information is available documenting the coercion and fraud. Accountability is virtually non-existent in this 1.3 billion dollar, non-profit industry. In the case of Allison Quets, winning her case in court means the use of the bait and switch tactic, namely Open Adoption, will now be considered fraudulent. For this reason, Ms. Quets has been fighting a very vicious fight first with the adoption facilitators in Florida, and now with the adoption industry as a whole, including the America Association of Adoption Attorneys (AAAA).

Few mothers have the resources to take on a trial to effectively prevent finalization of an adoption, much less take it to the appeals court. While the prospective adoptive parents have spent few if any dollars and owe over $200,000 in legal fees, Ms. Quets has exhausted nearly a half a million dollars in her legal fight and refuses to give up. She is fueled in part by her concerns over the care of the twins by the Needhams, but primarily because she loves these twins deeply and has always wanted to be their parent.

However, it seems that she is being treated worse and worse as the appellate case nears completion. There is no doubt they intend to crush her so she gives up, runs out of funds to defend her case, terminate all visitation, and keep her incarcerated so the judge will decide to leave the children with the prospective adoptive parents. They have filed countless motions to prolong the trial and appeal, along with motions to end her visitation and freeze her assets. The industry is now working together to ensure she loses or they will lose millions and possibly face criminal charges for their unethical and illegal practices.

This case will no doubt set a precedence for hundreds of thousands of women all over the country. It will likely give many women the option to either file a class action law suit against the adoption professionals, or give them the case law needed to overturn a fraudulent adoption consent. Research finds most mothers feel coerced into signing. Few women actually receive a fair trial and the ICPC laws are applied at the will of the judge, even though they are the law throughout the US. The inconsistency of compliance with the adoption statute intent and the associated laws has denied thousands of women their constitutional right to parent their own children.

*** MORE COMING ***