This “adoption” is not lawful and not valid. The errors and
illegalities, not to mention conflicts of interest and politics,
have driven this case from the start. There is no justice
here until my children come back home to me.
The court only allowed me to visit with my children on alternate weekends, even though I was fit and had superior parental rights. Custody should have been returned to me immediately, as required by my constitutional right to parent. What purpose was served by separating me from my children? Whose interests were given consideration? Not those of my family.
The best interests of my children were never even considered. A full evidentiary hearing on this matter was never held. The judge presiding over the case never met my children, never investigated the fitness of those who refuse to return my children to me, yet in his final order of adoption he wrote, that this destruction of my family was in the “best interests of the children”. This is patently ridiculous.
This was a planned pregnancy. I stated that I always wanted to be a mother. It was clear that I was suffering from postpartum depression and illness and needed more support to recover from pregnancy and delivery and to care for two premature infants. Yet, instead of providing access to the services as mandated by their professional licenses, Mr. Shorstein, attorney, and Ms. Stevens, social worker, saw this as opportunity to exploit me and my children for profit. Social workers are required to offer services and counseling to mothers considering adoption. Kathleen Stevens admitted she did not offer me any help beyond adoption.
5 Q Ma'am, please tell me, please, what social- 6 tell us, please, what social service agency you placed 7 Allison in contact with to try to accomplish that goal.
8 A I didn't.
Why are the court records sealed? The identities of all parties are well known to the public. This case needs oversight and review. It is time to unseal the records. Yet, the respondents in this case continue to request the sealing of courtrooms and records.
The original contract has been seriously violated and breached. I have been denied visitation with my children for over a year. This is a breach of the open adoption agreement upon which the consent was contingent. No judge has been willing to take on this disaster and do the right thing. To do so would imply other judges ruled in error. It's easier to affirm the status quo, but that is injustice.
Numerous conflicts of interest existed among the judge, the adoption attorney, Michael Shorstein, the social worker, Kathleen Stevens,and others in the Jacksonville, Florida community who influenced this case. It is suspected that the outcome of this case was determined before the all the evidence was even heard. I do not think that I ever had a chance to overcome the powerful force of this network which was committed to protecting their self-interests - the lucrative biz of child trafficking.
This case is unquestionably wrong - legally, ethically and morally. It is that simple. One can only wonder about the integrity of our judiciary who is covering these illegalities in court after court.
Clearly, you can see that those around me never had the best interests of my children or myself in their minds.
Everyone benefited from the adoption except my family, my twins and I. The attorneys and social worker made money, John kept his childcare service, the Needhams got two precious children, and I was left with nothing. The Open Adoption Agreement was not enforceable as stated, yet my consent was contingent upon it - which is illegal.
This proceeding is wrong from the beginning and custody should never have been awarded to anyone. They are my children and my dream. I love them so much. The devastation is incalculable, and our losses are likely irrecoverable. I pray someone will do the right thing and return my children to me.
My health problems were temporary, but
my desire to be a mother had existed for a lifetime.
ADOPTION? CHILD TRAFFICKING? Human trafficking refers to the recruitment, transport, sale, or purchase of individuals through force, fraud or other coercive means for the purpose of economic exploitation. [source]
_______________ LETTERS & COMPLAINTS
_______________
Damage done by separation is irrevocable. The toll on emotional health creates "special needs children." There is no such thing as a "healthy baby" if separated from his or her mother. J Rist _______________
No Duress?
The call says it all!
Although it is true that a parent's rights are important, so are the child's rights. As our supreme court said in Padgett v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 577 So.2d 565, 570 (Fla.1991), a child also has a fundamental liberty interest in being free from physical and emotional violence, and being
given away to strangers is a pretty emotionally violent act. It might not be such a bad thing if the courts of this state let parents know that children are not just property to which parents have rights, but persons to whom they owe a sacred trust.
(641 So.2d 84)
