Topics

1

Articles / Guatemala?s baby brokers: how thousands of children were stolen for adoption

« on: April 27, 2024, 05:17:56 PM »

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2024/jan/04/guatemalas-baby-brokers-how-tens-of-thousands-of-children-were-stolen-for-adoption

Guatemala's baby brokers: how thousands of children were stolen for adoption

From the 1960s, baby brokers persuaded often Indigenous Mayan women to give up newborns while kidnappers 'disappeared' babies. Now, international adoption is being called out as a way of covering up war crimes
by Rachel Nolan
Thu 4 Jan 2024 05.00 GMT
Last modified on Fri 12 Jan 2024 10.17 GMT

In 2009, Dolores Preat went looking for her birth mother. A softly spoken woman with a bob haircut and glasses, Preat had been adopted as a five-year-old from Guatemala by a Belgian family in 1984. Her adoption paperwork recorded her birth mother as Rosario Colop Chim, originally from an area that had been brutalised in the civil war that ravaged Guatemala from 1960 to 1996.  Aged 32, Preat booked a plane ticket to Guatemala. She had managed to trace Colop Chim to her home in Zunil, a small town sitting in a green valley at the base of a volcano. Zunil means reed whistle in the Indigenous Mayan language K'iche', and the town's population is almost entirely Indigenous. (In Guatemala, Indigenous people make up about half the population, identified and differentiated by language, by home town, and ? especially among women by brightly coloured hand-woven clothing.)  Though Preat spoke no K'iche' and only a little Spanish, she had no trouble finding the right house. When she showed up, Colop Chim wasn't there, but her sister was. The sister was confused. Colop Chim had never given up a child for adoption, she said. But someone had kidnapped a girl from across the street in 1984, and her family had been looking for her ever since.  Preat crossed the street and met a woman nearly her age with a very familiar face: it was just like her own. The woman called her mother, who tearfully recounted the kidnapping. Testimony given for a later criminal case captured the emotion of the moment: "The family gathered, Dolores told them about the adoption, and all was confusion. Her aunts and uncles arrived, and one of them said that on seeing Dolores he felt the call of blood."

DNA tests confirmed what Preat had felt right away. The woman with the familiar face was her sister, and the woman's mother was Preat's birth mother. Rosario Colop Chim was not Preat's mother at all, but her kidnapper.  It took Preat's birth family some time to put together the full story, but eventually they realised that after stealing her neighbour's child, Colop Chim had posed as her birth mother to sign legal consent forms for the adoption. In seizing Preat, she had acted as a jaladora, or baby broker: someone who is hired by a lawyer to supply babies for the purpose of placing them in private adoptions. This process should, of course, occur with the parents' consent. In Guatemala, this was not always the case.  Preat is one of an estimated 40,000 Guatemalan international adoptees who now live in the United States, Canada and Europe. The first wave of adoptions took place from the late 1960s to the early 1980s. Sweden and Canada were popular early destinations. These were soon joined by other European countries including France, the United Kingdom, Belgium, the Netherlands and Italy.  The second wave, which began in the 1980s, sent adoptees to the US. Some Guatemalan adoptees came from orphanages, but many were placed through private adoptions. Agencies in Europe and the US contracted directly with lawyers in Guatemala to find children, match them to families and do all the paperwork without judicial oversight.  This system was expensive: total adoption costs began at the equivalent of $3,500 per child when adoption was first privatised in 1977 and shot up to $45,000 in later years. Despite the cost, private adoptions were more popular than those from orphanages because they were faster and adoptive parents could select the kinds of children they wanted rather than rely on the "supply" of usually older children in orphanages. Jaladoras often had a mandate to find the youngest children possible, or ideally contact pregnant women to sign up babies before birth.  By the mid-2000s, Guatemala had overtaken other "sender" countries, including South Korea and Russia, until it was second only to China for the number of children adopted abroad in absolute numbers, not adjusted for population. It was also the only country in the world to allow fully privatised adoptions from 1977 to 2008. At the height of the adoption boom, one in 100 children born in Guatemala was placed for adoption with a family abroad. "Some countries export bananas," one lawyer who arranged private adoptions told the Economist in 2016. "We exported babies."

Guatemala is often cited as the worst-case scenario for what can go wrong when adoptions are commercialised and children are sent from poorer countries to wealthier ones. Outright kidnappings like Preat's were rare, but other abuses were common. Some were technically legal: women pressured to give up babies or to sign documents they could not understand, or they were approached when pregnant about whether they wished to relinquish a child. There are also many documented cases of women being paid a small sum for their children which was illegal. Despite plentiful evidence as early as the 1980s of corruption and abuses within the industry, international adoption did not become illegal in Guatemala until 2008.  After Preat was kidnapped, her parents tore up the countryside, searching for their daughter in hospitals and nearby farms. They didn't report the kidnapping to the police, terrified by a note that the kidnapper had left threatening to kill them if they did so. In any case, the authorities were a source of fear more than protection in many areas of the country. In the mid-1980s, Guatemala was suffering the most violent period of its long civil war, in which an estimated 200,000 civilians more than three-quarters of whom were Indigenous Maya peoples were massacred by government forces, the army and the police. Sociologists and historians now often refer to this period as state terror rather than civil war because of the asymmetry of the violence. Hundreds of children who were stolen by government forces were placed in international adoptions. Crimes like Preat's kidnapping shared features with war crimes.  Preat brought a criminal case against Colop Chim in Guatemala, and hearings began six years after she had embarked on the search for her birth mother. Her lawyers sidestepped the statute of limitations by arguing that this was more than a simple kidnapping. Preat had been "disappeared" that most Latin American of crimes. Forced disappearance constituted an ongoing crime, the prosecution argued, because of the anguish and uncertainty that Preat's family had experienced every day since the kidnapping, and because of her own long-term mistaken understanding of her identity.  Preat's lawyer told me that this legal strategy, pioneered in Argentina, was one of the few ways to convict war criminals who were otherwise let off the hook by statutes of limitation or amnesty laws. In 2015, Colop Chim was convicted and sentenced to 15 years in prison. While her crime was not unique, the series of events leading to its punishmen Baby brokers have worked in countries as varied as Haiti, South Korea, Ethiopia and Cambodia, but they were especially common in Guatemala. In Spanish, the word jaladora has soap opera overtones. It comes from the verb jalar, to pull, as in to pull children away from birth families. Fernando Linares Beltranena prefers to use the word intermediary. These linguistic choices are important to him, as a lawyer who, for more than a decade, helped match children with adoptive families. "We worked through intermediaries who had contact with mothers who most likely would want to give up their children," he recalled.

It's true that, according to Guatemalan and international law, a birth mother must consent to relinquish her child for an adoption to go forward. But in a context of extreme economic pressure and inequality, what constituted meaningful consent from birth mothers was not at all clear.  I have spent the last decade researching the adoption industry in Guatemala from 1968 until its closure in 2008. Many records I read, of private adoptions and those through state orphanages, contained a signature from the birth mother in the form of a thumbprint indicating that she was illiterate.  Linares Beltranena received me in his law office in Guatemala City, at his ease and expansive, wearing his trademark bow tie, which set off a Charlie Chaplin moustache. He began arranging adoptions in the 1980s and eventually oversaw hundreds of cases, mostly for families in the US. He remains one of the most insistent defenders of international adoptions from Guatemala.  Because lawyers moved in wealthier circles than did the birth mothers, they subcontracted the job of finding children to women like Colop Chim, sometimes paying them $500 per child or more. One lawyer told me that her "best" jaladoras were those who had previously relinquished their own babies for adoption.  I spoke to several lawyers about private adoptions, but Linares Beltranena was the only one to say that I was welcome to look through his old files. He had never committed crimes, he said, and he had nothing to hide. The birth mothers his jaladoras found were usually poor and their pregnancies unwanted, he told me.  It was illegal for baby brokers to offer birth mothers money, but it sometimes happened. More often, though, they used other methods of persuasion. Linares Beltranena's paperwork, along with police records and Guatemalan news reports, showed that his jaladoras would approach poor, often Indigenous women who were visibly pregnant at home, at bus stops, in hospitals, in marketplaces. Baby brokers sometimes also worked as midwives, maids, nurses, obstetricians or civil registrars, or they ran nurseries or daycares. They would ask if the mother-to-be had money to raise a child, or if the child would be better off with a foreign family in a country with more opportunities. Some jaladoras carried photo albums, which they flipped through in front of pregnant women, showing them Guatemalan boys and girls in the comfortable homes of middle-class families abroad. Many of the women they approached already had young children they were struggling to feed.  Linares Beltranena's files contained photographs of the adoptive couple, often pictured in classic all-American scenes, like sitting together at a picnic table on a front deck with their barbecue grill visible behind them. One couple sent a photo of the whole family out jogging together. Interiors feature bourgeois comfort: pianos, wall-to-wall carpeting, fireplaces.  One file describes a birth mother who was caring for her five children without the help of either of the two men who were their fathers. She consented to give up her two youngest boys for adoption. A social worker noted:  "She dresses modestly, she wears discreet makeup. One perceives in her: physical and mental health. She can be considered of normal intelligence.  She states that she decided to give her children in adoption, because what she earns is not enough to buy milk for the youngest child. Since they are siblings, she thought they should remain together for ever.  She appeared very tearful, very tormented, ashamed, but she recognises that her decision will favour her children because at her side they would have endured many hardships."

When the adoption was finalised, this mother signed her consent with a fingerprint. Her file contains a full invoice, dated 1 July 1987. Lawyer fees were $3,500 per child, and expenses were $3,392.65. In the following decades, as more and more international couples looked to adopt from Guatemala, prices would almost quadruple, but the extreme poverty of birth mothers remained the same. Jaladoras provided a service that was more in demand than ever.  When international adoptions boom the way they did in Guatemala, there is often a backlash. If the backlash leads to adoptions becoming illegal in a particular country, other countries enlarge their adoption programmes to meet demand, which in the drug trade is called the balloon effect squeeze here and it expands over there. These days, now that Guatemala is closed, popular countries include Colombia, India and Haiti. International adoption is declining overall, but international surrogacy is surging in popularity raising similar questions about what constitutes meaningful consent given crushing poverty and inequality.  In Guatemala in the 90s, signs of the increasing panic over adoptions were everywhere. Graffiti reading "gringo robani?os" (Gringo child thieves) and "Yankis robani?os fuera" (Yankee child thieves get out) appeared around the capital. Truths about adoptions mixed with rumours: that children were actually taken for organ trafficking, for example, or for "baby parts". Several foreigners travelling in Guatemala were killed or maimed on suspicion of stealing children. Francisco Goldman, the Guatemalan-American journalist and author, who was living in Guatemala City at the time, put it this way to the Washington Post in 1994: "Everything about the baby parts story is true, except for gringos and baby parts." He added: "Children get stolen all the time in Guatemala. But not for their organs and not by foreigners. The Guatemalans steal them for adoptions."

Baby brokers featured centrally in these fears, and for good reason. Some outright tricked or coerced birth mothers into giving up their children. They persuaded birth mothers to sign blank documents, which could later be repurposed into consent forms faking legal relinquishment. Another ruse was to tell birth mothers that the adoption was temporary or that they would be allowed to see their children on a regular basis. Yet another was to offer to cover a child's medical expenses or the medical expenses of a sibling.  Even though international adoption has now been illegal in Guatemala for more than 15 years, fears about child snatchers persist. One woman in a tiny town in the department of Jalapa told me she had recently been the only parent to sign up her child for a programme providing free school supplies, because everyone else feared it would end with strangers taking the children out of the country. (In this case, the aid was real.) The woman turned to her young son, who was hanging around us listening, and said to him, in what I hoped was a joking tone, that he had better not go away with me or I would "turn him into soap".

There were cases of babies stolen from hospital, cases of women told by nurses moonlighting as jaladoras usually in rural areas that their children had died in childbirth. (Such cases are not unique to Guatemala: they have been reported in Israel, Chile and Spain.) Mariela SR-Coline Fanon was adopted as a baby by a Belgian family and found her birth mother in Guatemala in 2018. When they were reunited, her birth mother told her that nurses at the hospital had said she was stillborn and refused to let her see the body, claiming to have already buried it. Fanon wrote a memoir called Mother, I Am Not Dead, in which she observes: "A human being, living or dead, has no price. But demand creates supply."

The US became aware of adoption fraud as early as the 1980s. In 1996, Duke Lokka, then the chief of American Citizen Services and Immigration Sections at the US embassy in Guatemala, acknowledged in an interview that adoption lawyers routinely falsified paperwork, usually by listing the wrong name of the birth mother in order to allow another woman like Colop Chim to "relinquish" the child. To minimise fraud, the US had begun requiring birth mothers to travel to the embassy in Guatemala City to be interviewed. But power imbalances and language gaps meant that the interviews were not always reliable not least because the embassy relied on freelance interpreters, often provided by the lawyers, for conversations with Indigenous birth mothers.  Despite these known difficulties in verifying consent, adoptions to the US skyrocketed from the 90s onwards. According to the US Department of State, a total of 29,807 Guatemalan children were adopted in the United States.nnThe jaladora who allegedly worked on Fanon's adoption, Ofelia Rosal de Gamas, was an unusually high-status woman. (She has since died, but criminal investigations of her adoption ring are ongoing in Belgium.) Rosal de Gamas was the sister-in-law of one Gen ?scar Humberto Mej?a V?ctores, the dictator who ruled Guatemala from 1983 to 1986. She worked with several lawyers supplying children for private adoptions, and her name pops up like a persistent ghost in the archives and in interviews.  Many of the children Rosal de Gamas brokered were from Malacat?n, a town near the Guatemala-Mexico border. Father Juan Mar?a Boxus, a courtly Belgian priest I met in the rectory in Malacat?n, recalled Rosal de Gamas visiting frequently in the 1980s and inquiring about children on behalf of the Belgian adoption agency Hacer Puente. (The same agency organised Dolores Preat's adoption.) Father Boxus said Rosal de Gamas was "persistent", though there was no indication at the time that she was involved in crimes. Unusually for a jaladora, she would sometimes take the children to Europe herself. One adoptive mother recalled her as "tall, a little cold".

Rosal de Gamas also worked with Edmond Mulet, a well-connected lawyer who arranged adoptions for Canadian families. In 1981, Mulet signed five requests for tourist visas for babies to travel to Canada, the quickest way to get children out of the country. Doing so was illegal, since the Canadian families had no intention of returning with the babies to Guatemala. Mulet was arrested and charged with falsifying adoption paperwork. At Mulet's pre-trial hearing in Guatemala City, one of the birth mothers testified that Rosal de Gamas had approached her at a street market when she was pregnant. "We kept chatting on various occasions and she even sometimes brought me bread or tortillas as a gift," she said. "Finally she asked me if I would give him [the baby] to a person who could support him."

Another birth mother, identified at the hearing as Delia D, earned 45 quetzales ($7.50) a month working as a maid. She testified that she was desperate when she discovered she was pregnant: the father said he wouldn't recognise her child, and she was worried that her employers would throw her out. She was walking in a park in the centre of Guatemala City when a stranger approached her, asked about her pregnancy and offered to introduce her to Rosal de Gamas. When she assented, Rosal de Gamas showed her albums of photos of adopted children to convince her that her child would have a better life abroad.  Some birth mothers said they had had a chance to read the adoption documents before signing. But Delia D alleged that when she went to Mulet's office to sign relinquishment papers, he was not there, and two young women rushed her along. "I did not read [the papers] and they did not read them to me," she told the judge. "I did not find out what it was that I signed. The se?orita told me I had five minutes to sign those papers."

Mulet denied the allegations, saying that the case was a political farce aimed to tarnish his image. Despite the evidence of falsified paperwork, the charges were dropped and he was released from prison. In the years that followed, he continued to facilitate adoptions. In 1984, Mulet was investigated a second time for falsifying adoption paperwork, but the investigation did not lead to any charges. (Mulet went on to have a prominent career in politics. From 1993 to 1996, he was Guatemalan ambassador to the US; he then served various high-level roles at the United Nations, including chief of staff to secretary Ban Ki-moon. Last year, he ran for president in Guatemala, securing nearly 9% of the vote in the first round.)  On 3 March 1987, police raided a house owned by Rosal de Gamas where 16 children, aged between one month and two years old, were held. Once birth mothers were persuaded to relinquish babies and children, lawyers needed a place to house them while they finalised paperwork. Jaladoras therefore sometimes ran what were effectively temporary orphanages. Police accused Rosal de Gamas of falsifying paperwork for these 16 children with invented details about birth mothers for an adoption ring. At her home, police found adoption files as well as receipts for childcare and birth certificates. The police noted that she paid babysitters 100 quetzales a month ($40) and adoptive parents paid between $20,000 and $30,000 per adoption.  The investigation into Rosal de Gamas was widely reported in the Guatemalan media, alongside stories about fraudulent international adoption practices. Almost two decades later, in the mid-00s, such stories began to appear in the international press. The New York Times wrote: "Critics of the adoption system here privately run and uniquely streamlined say it has turned this country of 12 million people into a virtual baby farm."

Many news reports mentioned "baby hotels", where foreign families lived for as little as a week to complete adoption paperwork and receive a child. The Marriott in Guatemala City sold nappies, wet wipes and formula next to postcards in the gift shop. The Camino Real, where Canadian mothers had waited to pick up babies from Edmond Mulet, outfitted its rooms with cots.  Dolores Preat had always assumed that her adoption paperwork was in order. She had no reason to believe otherwise until she began the search for her birth mother. Other adoptees' inquiries hit a wall when it became clear that their paperwork was falsified. They were left with doubts: did their mother really want to give them up? Did a jaladora force her to do so? Did extreme poverty force her to do so? Or could they be one of the children who was forcibly disappeared during the civil war?

In 1987, in response to Ofelia Rosal de Gamas's arrest, the Guatemalan newspaper El Gr?fico published a bombshell of an article by Carlos Rafael Soto, a columnist and political analyst. Soto wrote openly about two issues usually unmentioned in the censored press at that time: army massacres and powerful people's involvement in commercialised adoptions. Soto connected murderous state terror in the highlands, which was orphaning Indigenous children at a high rate, to lawyers and members of the elite profiting from adoptions. He identified "the exploitation of orphans as a valuable by-product" of war, one "destined to enrich a few people". International adoption, Soto wrote, was a business and a way to cover up war crimes.  As in many armed conflicts, the Guatemalan civil war involved appropriating the children of those seen as the enemy and placing them with new families, inside the country and out. "Forcibly transferring children" from one group to another has been part of the UN's definition of genocide since 1948, included because it was one of the techniques the Nazis used to wipe out populations. A report in 2000 found that of the 5,000 children in Guatemala forcibly disappeared during the war, at least 500 were put up for adoption. Most were Indigenous Maya. Human rights groups caution that that number is likely much higher, owing to fear of speaking about war crimes and the remote location of some of the most affected communities.  Many rightwing Guatemalans still strenuously deny that there was a genocide at all, and the history of children disappeared during the state terror stayed mostly silent, or was silenced. But this is gradually changing. Today, the walls of downtown Guatemala City are plastered with the faces of the disappeared, with posters and murals calling for justice. These are often pulled down, plastered over with apolitical posters or covered by stencilled graffiti declaring: "There was no genocide." Then the faces of the disappeared reappear, hung again by activist groups.

One of these groups is Hijos, a Spanish-language acronym for children. Hijos was first created in Argentina by children of disappeared adults. The Guatemalan branch, which was founded in 1999, now works with adoptees who were themselves disappeared as children ? including Francophone adoptees from Canada, France and Belgium. Other adoptees, including many who have neither the cash nor the desire to travel to Guatemala, frequently gather in support groups in Europe and the US. Preat is an active member of adoptee support groups and by all accounts a calming presence, counselling other adoptees on how to search for their birth families and how to handle what they find. Anglophone groups have been slower to form, since the adoptees are younger, but there are now two based in the United States. Each has more than 900 members.  Networks of adoptee groups around the world are lobbying for more transparency from governments about the circumstances of their adoptions. Slowly, their work is having an effect. In 2022, the French government announced an internal investigation "to identify past alleged illegal practices to prevent them from happening again".

Under pressure from adoptee activists, the Netherlands froze all international adoptions in 2021. South Korea, which over the last 70 years has placed more children abroad than any other country, last year opened its first governmental investigation into its long history of international adoptions.  In 2022, in Guatemala City, volunteers with Hijos hung posters around the capital. One poster read: "5,000 disappeared children. Where are they? Set fire to the genocidal state. We want justice."

This is an edited extract from Until I Find You: Disappeared Children and Coercive Adoptions in Guatemala, published by Harvard University Press

2

Adoption - Books, Theatre and Films / Mommie Dearest

« on: April 17, 2024, 10:55:53 AM »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mommie_Dearest

Mommie Dearest is a memoir and expos? written by Christina Crawford, the adopted daughter of Academy Award winning actress Joan Crawford. Published in 1978, it attracted much controversy for its portrayal of Joan Crawford as a cruel, unbalanced, and alcoholic mother, with Crawford's other twin daughters, household staff, and family friends denouncing it as sensationalized fiction. It was turned into a 1981 film of the same title starring Faye Dunaway.

In the book, Christina alleges that Joan Crawford placed far more importance on her cinematic career than her family life, and that Joan later was an alcoholic in the 1960s. She also claims that Joan had sexual affairs with various men, whom Christina was required to call "Uncle." Christina claimed that Joan's controlling behavior continued throughout Christina's adulthood, asserting that Joan was jealous of Christina's acting career in the 1960s, to the point of taking over Christina's role in the soap opera The Secret Storm while Christina was in the hospital recovering from an operation to remove an ovarian cyst. The book culminates with Christina learning that she and her brother, Christopher, were intentionally disinherited upon the death of their mother for "reasons known to them".

3

Articles / A single mother at 16, I was forced by my parents to give up my baby for adoptio

« on: April 13, 2024, 04:43:18 PM »

https://metro.co.uk/2022/07/31/as-a-single-mother-at-16-i-was-forced-to-give-up-my-baby-for-adoption-17029778/

A single mother at 16, I was forced by my parents to give up my baby for adoption
Jill Killington Published Jul 31, 2022, 9:30am

When I found out I was pregnant at the age of 16, I was shocked.  It was 1967 and I had been in a steady relationship with my 17-year-old boyfriend for six months by that point. When I told him, he was actually excited.  Suddenly, we talked about getting married and he said how pleased he was at becoming a dad.  But three months into my pregnancy, my parents found out and put a stop to all of that. Both of our parents were firm that the baby should be adopted, so that?s when my boyfriend simply left.  My parents then involved our family doctor, who put me in touch with a Church of England social and moral welfare officer. I felt I didn?t have a say in the matter. What followed was an agonising forced adoption where my baby was taken away from me.  I was just one of an estimated 185,000 mothers who were coerced into giving up their babies throughout the 1950s, 60s and 70s. It?s why I fully support the recommendations of a recent report by the Joint Committee on Human Rights for the Government to apologise to people like me.  One of the biggest challenges of being young, single, and pregnant in 1967 was the abject shame bestowed upon me and therefore the shame transferred to myself. In most people?s opinion, I had committed the ultimate sin a fallen woman.  My social worker, family doctor, and my parents all told me it would be heartless to keep my baby with the stigma of illegitimacy forced upon him. I felt worthless, not listened to, not supported emotionally, and with no counselling or advice, nor any mention of financial support, which I now know would have been available.  My parents allowed me to stay at home until my baby?s birth but made it clear that if I wanted to keep him, I would have to leave home and fend for myself. Throughout my pregnancy, I felt very alone, very scared, and very upset.  The birth itself was a lonely experience.  The nurses showed no empathy whatsoever and I had no choice but to get through it on my own. Even before my baby was born, I had felt a strong bond with him it was as if it was me and him against the world.  Those feelings became even more intense after his birth when I got to care for him day and night for the 10 days I was in hospital. Visiting times were restricted to fathers only in the evening, and when that happened I would take my son from his crib and sit and nurse him alone.  I lavished him with love and attention. I wanted to give him all the love I could in the short 10 days we would be together.  During that time, I held out in the hope that my boyfriend would suddenly return and we would be together again with our baby. Unfortunately, that didn?t happen, and that?s when I realised that I was going to lose my son forever.  I left the hospital and had to take my son to his foster carer on Christmas Eve. It was the most terrible time for me.  I was inconsolable for many days so much so that my mother eventually contacted the foster carer to ask if I could go to see him. Kindly, she allowed this, and I could even take him for walks in his pram, which gave me huge comfort.  I was allowed to do this up until the day came when we had to travel down to London to take him to the adoption offices. Once there, a lady came into the room and asked if she could hold him, then immediately told me to kiss him goodbye.  That would be the last time I saw him for a very long time. It was devastating.  Back in the day, the law was that mothers and children should never have any further contact once the adoption was finalised, so I had to sign a legal document to that effect.  The people who should?ve been supporting me constantly told me time and time again: ?If you love your baby, you will give him up? or ?You will put all this behind you and get on with your life?.

If only people knew how impossible this was.  In the ensuing years, I was always thinking of the son I had lost wondering where he was and what he was doing. I?d try to reach out to him spiritually just by sending him thoughts every year, especially on his birthday.  Little did I know then that he was doing the same throughout all those missing years.  Then with changes in adoption law in 1975, it became possible for adopted adults over 18 to have access to their birth records and a contact register was set up. So on his 18th birthday as the only present I could give him I added my name to the register in 1985.  It felt like a eureka moment finally there was a possibility he might want to find me. Nine years later in 1994, I received a letter out of the blue asking for details of my whereabouts. It was from my son, Ian.  To say I was overjoyed would be putting it mildly, but it was also hugely emotional. In the days before email, our contact with each other was by airmail letter. This is when I learned he?d moved to Auckland after his family emigrated when he was just six years old.  We must have written dozens of letters over the next few months, until the day came when I flew out to New Zealand for us to meet for the very first time in over 26 years.  One of the first things he said to me was: ?Now I know where I get my blue eyes from?. We had a wonderful time together sharing memories and feelings. He took me to some of his favourite places in New Zealand the beautiful beaches, the forest and other landmarks that had formed part of his childhood.  When I had to fly back to the UK after two weeks of being there, it was like losing him all over again. Our reunion brought back so many emotional issues coping with loss, grief, bereavement, anger, depression, melancholy.  Since then, the relationship my son and I have has grown immeasurably in ways that we could never have dreamed of. I?ve lost count of the number of times we?ve spent together either me going to New Zealand alone and with the rest of my family, or just with my husband. He?s been over to the UK maybe half a dozen times as well.  We are definitely all one family now myself, my husband, other two children and granddaughters, as well as Ian, his wife and his two daughters.  I consider myself very fortunate to have the support of other mothers in the same situation, by virtue of peer group support meetings held regularly at the PAC-UK offices in Leeds. Just thinking about all the ?what ifs?, and how it might have been for us if we hadn?t been parted in such a cruel way can be all consuming  Thankfully, Ian has never harboured any grudges or resentment about his adoption.  The campaign for an apology from the Government has been ongoing for many years now thanks to the Movement for Adoption Apology. This is why we are all so thankful for the recent outcome of the Joint Committee for Human Rights, which was chaired by Labour MP Harriet Harman.  The Committee?s recommendation was for the Government to give a long overdue public apology on behalf of the State for the wrongs done to us. It also advocates for funding, counselling, better access to birth documents, and support for all the families who have suffered for so long.  I and many mothers like me fully endorse that recommendation.  All mothers deserve to be better supported. We shouldn?t expect babies and children to be taken from their birth families and then those families deserted and left to their own devices. It doesn?t serve the mothers or children well.  Those mothers like myself have been the forerunners. Because of our pioneering and campaigning, we have helped to force through changes to adoption policy and practice, and we will continue to do so.   We should be acknowledged for our patience and suffering. We definitely deserve an official apology, which would vindicate those of us who have been vilified for so many years.

4

Articles / 'We had our babies taken from us we didn't give them away'

« on: April 06, 2024, 11:54:05 AM »

https://news.stv.tv/scotland/year-after-nicola-sturgeons-forced-adoption-apology-time-is-running-out-for-mothers-to-find-children

'We had our babies taken from us we didn't give them away'

Jeannot Farmer urges Scottish Government to get answers for victims affected by historic forced adoption 'before it is too late.'  Women who were forced to give their babies up for adoption have made an urgent plea for help finding out what happened to their children.  Campaigners said the words in an apology made by the Scottish Government last year ?lose their worth every day? without measures to help victims of the ?ongoing injustice?.  It comes a year after former first minister Nicola Sturgeon delivered an official apology in the Scottish Parliament to those who have been affected by historic forced adoption policies.  The recognition was the first formal apology in the UK to tens of thousands of unmarried mothers ?shamed? and ?coerced? into having their babies adopted.  Group Movement for an Adoption Apology sent a letter and knitted baby bootees to over 60 MSPs urging them to back the campaign.  Jeannot Farmer warns time is running out for families.  She told STV News: ?We chose to put out a statement expressing concern that people are still passing away not knowing what happened to their children.  The pain associated with that is severe.  I know what it was like to find my son after 31 years and how every birthday was worse than the last one not knowing where he was.  I can?t imagine that being doubled. We have friends in that situation.  Living with the stigma all of those years is very difficult. But the stigma is nothing compared to the loss of your child.?

Jeannot was one of thousands of women forced to give up her baby for adoption.  At the age of 22, she gave birth to a boy while she was still a fourth year university student.  Despite having explored options with social services, she did not want to give up her son.  However, she was told while she was in hospital that her baby would be put up for adoption.  ?Sometimes I go back to the apology to remember what was said. Words like ?historic injustice? are meaningful and important. What happened was cruel,? she said.

?That day, the stigma and disgrace of giving my baby up for adoption was removed from me. Now I don?t have anyone thinking I have submitted my child for adoption voluntarily. That was done to me.  My child was not taken, not given.?

It is estimated around 60,000 women in Scotland were forced to give up their babies throughout the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s.  Hundreds of thousands of children were given up for adoption between 1949 and 1976 across the UK, at a time when unmarried mothers were often rejected by their families and ostracised by society.  Adoptions were generally handled through agencies run by the Church of England, the Roman Catholic Church and the Salvation Army.  What you?ll find is most mothers it happened to don?t really know what happened to them,? Jeannot said.

?We had this idea mothers giving babies up for adoption analysed the risks and benefits of keeping or giving them up, then came up with a rational decision. That happened to no one.  A far more common story is the mothers gave birth, were sent to another room to hold the baby for a minute, then that baby was gone and never seen again.?

The group Movement for an Adoption Apology made a number of recommendations, such as councils delivering trauma-informed counselling services; easier birth record access; reunion services and formal apologies from institutions which administered services that resulted in coerced or forced adoption.  But campaigners insist measures discussed in the Parliament on that day have ?failed to emerge?.  While work is currently underway to deliver funding for peer-support services, Jeannot said more work must be done to allow victims to access records.  The system is already in place in states across Australia, where around 250,000 are estimated to have been affected by the practice.  Jeannot said thousands risk being left with unanswered questions about their identity without the government taking action.  ?It?s incredibly urgent,? Jeannot said. ?People are dying.  People should be allowed to know the name of the person they have lost and find out if they might still be alive.  We are losing the opportunity to pass on important information to our families and pass on a legacy for their relatives.  Those questions, the hurt and the grief does not end with the passing of the father and the mother. Those ripples extend beyond.  It?s also about passing on medical information; if a mother, sister or aunt has breast cancer, there is no way to tell a daughter who was adopted to get tested for the gene.  It?s about what the children inherit too; ?why do I have that shape of my nose?? ?Why am I good at art?? People want to know these things.?

Jeannot said that it is important to remember mothers and adoptees reserve the right to refuse contact.  She added: ?People have a right to privacy, but people also have a right to information. It?s about a balance in-between those two things.  But if our children had been taken by a random stranger, no one would question our right to know who they are.  That?s what happened to our children who were taken. We didn?t give them away.?

Marking the anniversary Natalie Don, Minister for Children, Young People and Keeping the Promise said:  ?I acknowledge the immense pain and suffering that adoptees, mothers and families have endured as a result of these unjust practices. Addressing the harms caused remains a priority for this Government.  We are establishing a series of lived experience sessions on historic forced adoption, to be facilitated by the Scottish Government?s Principal Psychological Adviser.  These sessions will explore collaborative solutions and will discuss what form of support is needed to address the emotional and psychological impact of historic forced adoption for adoptees, mothers and families.  We are also exploring what more we can do to ensure people affected by historic forced adoption are able to easily access the right information and support when they need it.  This includes working with both the National Records of Scotland and Scottish Court and Tribunals Service in order to assist people with the practical aspects of accessing records, as well as signposting to further support.  We continue to fund the charity, Health in Mind, to provide specialist support through peer support groups. Monthly peer support sessions are now being held for mothers and an adoptees group will begin shortly.?

5

Articles / Roseanne Barr, 71, Poses with Daughter She Gave Up for Adoption Fans React....

« on: April 04, 2024, 11:45:51 AM »

https://news.amomama.com/424919-roseanne-barr-71-poses-with-daughter-she.html?utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR0qHmIMkjmvcJBi1bUoiU_lKu-fMeFwLMS3Ktcok9mpuJXJPWWNBbre_K8_aem_ASvfZDW9jjuF1K30a7wnjiIHD-SZK1pyOX286UyhOD6cqhZkoDZg1TWM56OvStwe1rj1yhgKMX4oSZiby9xsqRac

Roseanne Barr, 71, Poses with Daughter She Gave Up for Adoption Fans React to Their Resemblance
By Bettina Dizon
Apr 02, 2024
12:15 A.M.

Roseanne Barr recently shared a heartwarming picture with her daughter, Brandi Brown, on Instagram, where they wore matching clothing. Fans were amazed by the strong resemblance between the television star and the daughter she reunited with at 17.  Roseanne Barr's post showcased the duo in a cute coordinated outfit: Barr, cozy in a beige beanie, and her daughter, Brandi Brown, sporting a similar gray beanie. Both mother and daughter also wore statement shirts. Standing side-by-side in what seemed to be a kitchen, the two stood smiling.  The post quickly became a focal point for fans and followers, many of whom couldn't help but comment on the striking resemblance between Barr and Brown.  One fan shared, "She looks just like you. I was adopted b u t [sic] my bio mom was not interested in a reunion. Happy for you two."

Echoing this sentiment, another remarked, "I can see the resemblance."

The stream of comments continued with expressions of awe and happiness for the mother-daughter pair. "Wow, there is a huge resemblance. Love this for both of you," one wrote, while another added, "She looks just like you."

Barr captioned the post, "Oldest bb 52 yrs old reunited @ aged 17! GD is good." emphasizing her profound happiness in being with her daughter.  While Barr's post may seem like the ordinary mother and daughter picture, it holds more significance to the two given their broken past. Brown is the television personality's daughter, whom she had given up for adoption decades ago.  Years back, at the tender age of 18, Barr faced the unimaginable decision of giving up her baby girl for adoption. She was 17 when she got pregnant out of wedlock, and although she wanted to keep the baby, she could not afford to do so.  "I got on welfare and rented a room for 50 bucks a month. I turned on the water, and cockroaches came out of the spigot. Outside, there were drunks. I just couldn?t go on there, so I went away to Denver and moved into a Salvation Army home for unwed mothers," she revealed.

Despite the heartache, she decided with her daughter's future in mind, to entrust her to the Jewish Family & Children?s Service in Denver. Yet, even in that moment of separation, Barr whispered a promise of reunion to her newborn daughter, that they would be reunited when she turned 18.  Years passed, and in a twist that seems almost fated, Barr's prediction came true under the most unlikely circumstances. A tabloid's invasive search led to the revelation of Brown's identity and her connection to Barr.   Then the tabloid called her, Barr was initially upset. She had left enough information for Brown to find her at age 21 and even told her succeeding children about the adoption. With the tabloid's interference, Brown's address, school, and adoptive parents became known. Meanwhile, she did not know her mother's name.  In a moment of panic, Barr hired a private detective to reconnect with Brown before the media could exploit their story. The reunion between Barr and her daughter, born on May 16, 1971, came two days later, but only through a phone call.  Brown learned that her daughter was raised by Stanley and Gail Brown in Denver. The circumstances surrounding Brown's adoption and the eventual reunion with Barr read like a script from a movie.  "What was really weird was that Gail Brown?s mother?s best friend is my mother?s best friend," Barr revealed. Remarkably, connections existed between the Browns and Barr's family, yet no one ever made the link until Barr herself pieced it together.

The physical reunion between Barr and her daughter became a moment steeped in raw emotion and the culmination of years of separation and longing. This poignant event happened at the Westwood Marquis Hotel, while Barr, took a break from her work on "She Devil."  She and her sister, Geraldine, arrived at the hotel, only to find that Gail and Brandi were not yet back. The decision to wait over a cup of coffee would serendipitously lead them to the moment they had been awaiting.   he encounter that followed was nothing short of cinematic, with Barr and Brown instinctively running towards each other, their embrace a testament to the enduring bond that had survived the years of separation. "We embraced and wouldn?t let go of each other, hugging and crying," Barr recalled.

In 2006, Barr admitted that she had made several mistakes as a mother but spent the past years trying to make up for them. Now much older, Brown has followed in her mother's footsteps and ventured into the entertainment industry, carving out her own niche as both a production crew member and actress.  She is best recognized for her contributions to notable projects, including "Roseanne" from 1994 to 1995, "The Jackie Thomas Show" between 1992 and 1993, "The Dr. Oz Show," and "Dark Faith."  Brown's involvement in these productions showcases her diverse talents and her successful entry into the world of entertainment, much like her mom. On the other hand, Roseanne Barr has been less active on television. Still, she remains very active on Instagram in her 70s.  She previously surprised fans and the general public with a daring new style. The beloved actress and comedian revealed her latest hair transformation: a textured pixie cut, a significant departure from her previously long, gray strands.bbWith a simple yet compelling selfie captioned "Cut," Barr unveiled her new look from what seems to be her bedroom. The post quickly gained traction, drawing in a plethora of responses and praises in the comments section.  The shift to a shorter hairstyle has sparked a wave of positive feedback. Fans didn't hold back their enthusiasm, showering Barr with compliments and noting how the fresh cut appears to have given her a more youthful and vibrant look.

6

General Discussion / Work

« on: April 04, 2024, 11:09:25 AM »

A man came home from work and found his three children outside, still in their pajamas, playing in the mud, with empty food boxes and wrappers strewn all around the front yard. The door of his wife's car was open, as was the front door to the house and there was no sign of the dog.  Proceeding into the entry, he found an even bigger mess. A lamp had been knocked over, and the throw rug was wadded against one wall. In the front room the TV was loudly blaring a cartoon channel, and the family room was strewn with toys and various items of clothing. In the kitchen, dishes filled the sink, breakfast food was spilled on the counter, the fridge door was open wide, dog food was spilled on the floor, a broken glass lay under the table, and a small pile of sand was spread by the back door.  He quickly headed up the stairs, stepping over toys and more piles of clothes, looking for his wife. He was worried she might be ill, or that something serious had happened. He was met with a small trickle of water as it made its way out the bathroom door. As he peered inside he found wet towels, scummy soap and more toys strewn over the floor. Miles of toilet paper lay in a heap and toothpaste had been smeared over the mirror and walls.  As he rushed to the bedroom, he found his wife still curled up in the bed in her pajamas, reading a novel. She looked up at him, smiled, and asked how his day went. He looked at her bewildered and asked, ?What happened here today?'

She again smiled and answered, "You know every day when you come home from work and you ask me what in the world I do all day?"

"Yes," was his incredulous reply.

She answered, "Well, today I didn't do it."

7

Articles / Victims of forced adoption seek redress

« on: March 29, 2024, 06:32:01 PM »

https://www.scottishlegal.com/articles/victims-of-forced-adoption-seek-redress

Victims of forced adoption seek redress
25 Mar 2024

The victims of Scotland?s forced adoption scandal are set to launch legal action against the government.  Up to 120,000 mothers and babies were separated between the 1950s and 1970s because the women were not married. Mothers and adoptees from Forced Adoption Scotland have met with lawyers over the scandal.  Former first minister Nicola Sturgeon apologised last year for the practice, which took place in mother and baby homes run by councils, religious organisations and charities.  Campaigners say, however, that they have had almost no contact with the Scottish government since then.  Solicitor advocate Patrick McGuire, of Thompsons Solicitors, said legal teams had been working with counsel to act on behalf of the mothers and children.  Mr McGuire said: ?What happened to these women and their children has to be one of the worst human rights abuses of our time. The dreadful consequences and effects of what was done to them are overwhelmingly in evidence today, despite the length of time that has passed.  At the very least we believe they have a right to justice and compensation for the life-changing abuses imposed upon them. We believe they have a right to redress.  And we are investigating the multi-generational side effects of the drugs given to these vulnerable young women with a view to taking legal action on their behalf.?

A spokesperson for the Scottish government said: ?Medicine licensing is the responsibility of the UK government and any redress scheme on Stilbestrol would ultimately be a matter for them to consider.?

8

Articles / Baby Finley Boden 'died from abuse when he should have been one of local ....

« on: March 27, 2024, 11:19:46 AM »

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13243833/Baby-Finley-Boden-death-review-protected-children.html

Baby Finley Boden 'died from abuse when he should have been one of local authority's most protected children', review finds after 10-month-old was beaten to death by his drug addict parents 39 days after social services returned him to them

    WARNING: Contains details of child abuse which readers may find upsetting

By Matthew Lodge

Published: 09:03, 27 March 2024 | Updated: 10:01, 27 March 2024

Baby Finley Boden died 'as the result of abuse when he should have been one of the most protected children in the local authority area', a safeguarding review into his murder has said.  The 10-month-old was killed by his drug addict parents, who beat him to death during the Covid lockdown, just 39 days after social services put him back into their care.  A post-mortem would find he had suffered 71 bruises, 57 fractures and 'crushed and twisted' bones at the hands of Stephen Boden and Shannon Marsden the pair were later jailed for a minimum of 29 and 27 years, respectively.  The once 'smiley and chuckling' baby was subjected to 'unimaginable cruelty' by the sick pair, including a fractured thigh, broken pelvis, burn marks and bruises all over his tiny body before his death on Christmas Day in 2020.  A report released today by the Derby and Derbyshire Safeguarding Children Partnership found that Finley, who lived in Chesterfield with his parents, said that 'professional interventions should have protected him'.

In October 2020 a family court ruled that Marsden and Boden did not pose an 'unmanageable risk' to their son, allowing them to subject him to 'the most horrific abuse' at their home in Old Whittington, Derbyshire.  He was returned to their care on November 17 that year, despite social services raising concerns over Boden and Marsden's drug use and the state of the family home.  After returning home, Finley was subjected to a campaign of abuse and was found to have 130 separate injuries at the time of his death, as well as conditions including sepsis and pneumonia.  By the time of his death he was 'plainly dying' and could no longer sit up and play with his toys, feed himself or breathe properly, having been back in his parents' care for just 39 days.  On Wednesday, the Derby and Derbyshire Safeguarding Children Partnership published the findings of its Local Child Safeguarding Practice Review into Finley's death.  The review, which has been anonymised, said: 'In this instance, a child died as the result of abuse when he should have been one of the most protected children in the local authority area.'

The review stated that, while Finley's parents were responsible for his death, 'professional interventions should have protected him'.

It said the 'most significant professional decision' was that he should live with his parents, and concluded that 'the safeguarding environment in which that decision was made had been incrementally weakened by the decisions, actions, circumstances and events which preceded it'.

Most of what had been experienced by Finley in the final weeks of his life 'was unknown to professionals working with the family at that time', the report said.

But it added: 'The review has found, nevertheless, that safeguarding practice during that time was inadequate.'

The review made 11 recommendations in total, including that the partnership carries out 'a multi-agency audit' of recent parenting assessments to consider the quality of analysis and conclusions, involvement of partner agencies, evidence of scrutiny by managers. and, effectiveness of information-sharing and professional challenge.  Other recommendations included that the local authority should provide evidence by the end of June of improved practice in distinguishing between informal family arrangements and formal placements in which the local authority has responsibility to provide support since 2020.  The review also made recommendations on the safeguarding children partnership working with local public health commissioners of substance misuse services, and to ensure arrangements are in place 'to deliver an effective local response to domestic abuse'.  Derbyshire County Council's children's services said it accepted there had been 'missed opportunities' in the case of Finley Boden.  The council's executive director for children's services, Carol Cammiss, said: 'Finley's death was a tragedy for everyone who knew him and everyone involved in his care. We are deeply saddened by his death and our thoughts are with everyone who loved him.  Despite the significant Covid restrictions placed on our work at the time, we know there were missed opportunities for stronger practice and we apologise for that.  We did not wait for the outcome of this review we took immediate action to review and strengthen our systems and continue to monitor the way we work with babies and families.  Safeguarding children in Derbyshire is our highest priority and the council accepts the findings and recommendations of the review and takes full responsibility for its actions in this case.'

The partnership's independent chairman and scrutineer, Steve Atkinson, said: 'I offer my sincere condolences to Finley's family and apologise on behalf of the partnership for what happened.  The partnership agencies took early steps to improve systems and practices, responding quickly to an immediate review of Finley's death and the circumstances in which it took place.  In accepting in full the recommendations of this review commissioned by the Partnership, completely independently of Derbyshire and the organisations involved agencies will take the additional action necessary to further reduce the risk of a repeat of a similar incident.  The Partnership Board continues to seek evidence that these changes are fully implemented and will undertake regular reviews to ensure that they have the necessary impact to help keep vulnerable local children safe.'

Sentencing Stephen Boden and Shannon Marsden at Derby Crown Court last year, Mrs Justice Amanda Tipples told the pair: 'Neither of you have shown any remorse for what you have done.'

Following what has been a harrowing trial, a juror pointed to the sky as the sentences were passed, while another wept and others smiled.  The couple had denied murdering their son but were convicted in April 2023 after a trial at Derby Crown Court.  The pair showed no emotion and remained silent during sentencing, while family members wept in the public gallery as Mrs Justice Tipples detailed the horrific abuse they inflicted on Finley.  During the trial prosecutor Mary Prior KC said the couple subjected Finley to a 'savage and prolonged' murder that had a 'sadistic motivation'.  He endured 'vicious and repeated assaults' over three weeks at the same time both Boden and Marsden were smoking a lot of cannabis, both in their back garden and bedroom of their home.  Cannabis was even found in Finley's blood at the time he died.  A neighbour heard Finley cry once in the early hours of Christmas eve.  To avoid arousing the suspicion of neighbours, the pair worked together to hurt Finley, with one holding a hand over his mouth while the other abused the youngster.  Boden and Marsden also hid their abuse from social workers and family members.  The couple would be out of the house for hours at a time, making it difficult for social workers to drop by unexpectedly.  They even plotted to hide their tracks by pretending Finley had coronavirus, ordering him a test and playing on wider health concerns at the time to stop social workers from entering their home.  'It was an excuse that worked, because you are both persuasive and accomplished liars,' Mrs Justice Tipples told the pair of callous killers.

She said: 'You both knew that Finley was very seriously ill and dying yet you deliberately failed to seek any medical help for him and you made sure that he was not seen by anyone that could have rescued him and taken him away from your care.  He was subject to repeated abuse on multiple occasions. Once the injuries had been inflicted, Finley's daily experience was one of considerable pain, distress and suffering.  It was obvious to both of you by December 16 that Finley was very seriously injured, and he was utterly miserable.  He was no longer able to sit up and play with his toys. He was unable to feed himself.'

She added: 'By the evening of December 23 he was plainly dying. There was nothing subtle about this at all. It was plainly obvious to both of you.'

The trial heard of chilling text messages sent from the parents' joint mobile phone, including just two days before his murder which said: 'Little one f****** kept me up all night. I want to bounce him off the walls. Haha.'

The day before his murder, CCTV footage shows Finley being pushed in a buggy around Chesterfield market 'as though nothing was wrong'.  The haunting images show a seemingly happy family on a festive outing. However, in reality Finley was in horrific pain and lay there dying.  Hours later, Finley collapsed after suffering a cardiac arrest. Paramedics were called at 2.27am on Christmas Day 2020.  His parents who had described Finley as as their 'cuddly, chunky munchkin' to care workers delayed calling the ambulance.  Mrs Justice Tipples said 'they both knew he was dead when they dialled 999 on Christmas Day.'

He died of septicaemia, endocarditis and pneumonia.  The paramedic who arrived saw that Finley was 'unkempt and dirty' with 'obvious marks and wounds' around his mouth and noise.  He was rushed to hospital with Marsden but nothing could be done and he was pronounced dead at 3.45am.  Doctors noticed the marks and bruises on his body, but were told 'various lies' by Marsden.  Medical experts would find a catalogue of horrific injuries, including 46 rib fractures, 12 other bone fractures including his pelvis, both legs and both collar bones.  Overall, he had more than 150 injuries. His broken pelvis is thought to be caused by sustained 'kicking or stamping' and well as burns on his hand, one from a 'hot, flat surface' and another from 'a cigarette flame'.  The inside of his mouth was 'torn', caused by a dummy or bottle being excessively forced into his mouth.  He also had a 'spiral' break to the thigh, while a shin bone break was 'consistent with being held by the ankle and gripped and twisted'.  The injuries inflicted on him were so severe they were likened to a multi-storey fall.  All his injuries are believed to have been sustained between December 4 and 22, causing him severe pain and suffering.  By December 19, Finley was 'really, really ill' and wanted to sleep all day.  As pneumonia set into his lungs 'you could hear his chest all day rattling and wheezing,' said Mrs Justice Tipples.

Two days later, Boden cancelled an appointment with a health visitor by saying he suspected Finley had Covid and needed to get a test.  During this time, the pair continued to pick up drugs from their dealer.  By Christmas Day 2020, he was unable to eat and lay dying.  The multiple fractures meant he could not breathe properly and he contracted pneumonia in his lungs, developing into a number of infections including sepsis and endocarditis which killed him.  When police searched the property they found Finley's clothes and bedding stained with saliva, vomit, blood and faeces, along with drug paraphernalia.  Boden later claimed to a relative the family dog may have 'jumped on' Finley, causing multiple broken ribs, while allegedly blaming marks on Finley's mouth on his son hitting himself 'with a rattle'.  Following his death, Boden was heard mentioning how he would sell Finley's pram on eBay and the pair were later seen laughing together in a taxi.  It was also suggested that Finley's injuries could have been caused by rocking him too hard, and said that the pram comment was made in an attempt to 'lighten the mood'.  When visiting Finley's body in a hospital chapel of rest, Marsden allegedly said: 'His dad's battered him to death. I didn't protect him.'

After Boden and Marsden were convicted, one detective inspector said Finley's injuries were 'amongst the worst I've seen in my 27-year policing career'.

In victim impact statements from the defendants' relatives, read by the prosecutor, they said: 'He had all of his life ahead of him.  'When Finley died, part of us died as well. Our lives were ripped apart and will never be the same again.'

The family added that the death of Finley had had a 'profoundly negative' impact on them, adding 'it will always haunt us'.  'Finley will always be remembered and will always be loved,' they said.

Mrs Prior said the defendants had 'no ability' to 'provide any account as to what they did to Finley or why they did it', meaning their families would never know the reason behind Finley's murder.  Another relative said that Finley had suffered 'the most horrific abuse' and labelled his parents as 'monsters'.  They said: 'I thought they had both changed. I was obviously wrong and they only showed us what they wanted us to see.  They acted together to inflict all his injuries and then hide him away and allow him to die in such an awful way.'

They added: 'Neither of you have shown any remorse. We as a family have grieved, but you haven't needed to, as you are both responsible for his death.  We will never forget, or forgive, you both, and we will never forget Finley. While we will never forget Finley, I promise, we will forget you both.  I can only describe you both as monsters for what you have done.'

Timeline of Finley's short life and contact with social services

September 20, 2019: Marsden informs social care she is 20 weeks pregnant with Finley

October 2019: Social care begin court proceedings in relation to the unborn child

January 16, 2020: Social worker visits the couple's address, finding holes in a bedroom door

January 21, 2020: Unborn Finley is made subject of a child protection plan

February 15, 2020: Finley is born

February 18, 2020: Finley leaves hospital and is removed from the couple's care

February 25, 2020: Boden and Marsden tell social care they want Finley back

October 1, 2020: Family court directs Finley should be returned to care of his parents under an eight-week plan including unsupervised visits and overnight stays of varying durations

November 17, 2020: Finley is allowed to live permanently with his parents

November 19, 2020: New social worker visits home address

November 20, 2020: Health visitor visits the address

November 26, 2020: Health visitor tries to call Marsden but there is no answer

November 27, 2020: Social worker makes unannounced visit to the home

November 29, 2020: Boden and Marsden record video and pictures of Finley on their phone

December 23, 2020: Social worker visits the property but is unable to go inside

December 24, 2020: Finley is seen alive for the last time as he is taken out by his parents in Chesterfield

December 25, 2020: Finley is murdered

'I don't think anyone could have prepared us for it': Policeman reveals horror at Finley's injuries 

Detective Inspector Steve Shaw, of Derbyshire Constabulary, said that Finley's bones were 'crushed and twisted' during the campaign of abuse.  Discussing the case, DI Shaw said: 'The appearance of Finley [at the time of his death] was generally showing signs that he had been neglected.  Officers went to the house on Holland Road where they lived and they found squalid living conditions, filthy bedding, filthy clothing, rotting food in the kitchen, no environment to bring a child up in, and there were signs of cannabis abuse scattered around the house.  But I don't think that prepared us for the level of injury that we discovered when the post-mortem took place.  The majority of Finley's bones were fractured in some way and as the investigation progressed, the evidence from some of the experts around the levels of force that had to be used Finley's bones had to be crushed and twisted with quite some force eliminated any accidental cause of these injuries.'

Finley suffered 57 fractures to his bones including 45 rib fractures several burns and 71 bruises in the weeks prior to his death, on Christmas Day 2020.  The injuries inflicted included a broken shoulder, broken arm, broken shinbone, a thigh bone broken in four places, and a pelvis broken in two places.  He had also developed pneumonia, endocarditis inflammation of the lining of the heart and sepsis.

9

Articles / DNA tests like 23AndMe and Ancestry are laying bare the frightening extent....

« on: March 20, 2024, 02:21:54 PM »

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13214259/DNA-tests-like-23AndMe-Ancestry-laying-bare-frightening-extent-incest-including-woman-discovers-ex-lover-BROTHER.html

DNA tests like 23AndMe and Ancestry are laying bare the frightening extent of incest in the US including woman who discovers her ex-lover was her BROTHER

    Previous estimates put children born of incest at 1M, but it's really one in 7,000
    Babies born of incest are prone to birth defects, heart problems, cystic fibrosis
    READ MORE:  America's most inbred family breaks silence and shows off home

By Cassidy Morrison Senior Health Reporter For Dailymail.Com

Published: 17:36, 19 March 2024 | Updated: 21:20, 19 March 2024

DNA tests that arrive in the mail, including Ancestry DNA and 23&me, are exposing the uncomfortable extent of incest in the US.  The tests, which run for about $100, can't say explicitly whether someone is the product of incest, but the results can be taken to a third party genetic testing firm which can.  One person who found out the disturbing truth about her family history was 39-year-old Victoria Hill, who, at a high school reunion, got chatting about family trees with an ex-boyfriend with whom she was once intimate.  His family makeup was similar to hers and upon talking to her, took the same test. A text sent to her confirmed what they had feared, saying simply: 'You're my sister.'

Ms Hill says she is still traumatized to this day.  Meanwhile, Virginia native Steve Edsel, found out via AncestryDNA that his parents were first-degree relatives, either siblings or father-daughter.  He radiated anger at the thought of the origins of his conception, likely the result of sexual assault of his mother carried out by his grandfather.  The prevalence of incest in the US is far more common than previously thought, with research including common genealogy tests putting the rate at one in 7,000.  Dr Jim Wilson, from the University of Edinburgh who conducted that research, said: 'That?s way, way more than I think many people would ever imagine.?

It?s a far cry from one 1975 estimate in a psychiatric textbook, putting the rate at about one in a million.  DNA tests that arrive in the mail, including Ancestry and 23&me, can be helpful tools in determining whether someone has genetic predispositions for certain conditions.  Still, they occasionally learn the disturbing truth about their parentage.  Babies born of incest are at increased risk of suffering birth defects, developmental delays, and genetic disorders such as blindness, hearing loss, neonatal diabetes, and limb malformations.  The risks of two siblings or a parent and child having a baby are manifold. When two closely related people have sex, and the female becomes pregnant, there is an increased risk of recessive gene disorders.  This is because children receive one copy of genes from each parent, with the harmful genetic mutations known as recessive genes being overridden by dominant genes.  When related individuals get pregnant, they decrease genetic variations, and the recessive gene they have may combine to become dominant in their child, causing many types of congenital disabilities.  In cases of incestual relationships, genetic variations from two parents decrease, and recessive genes may combine to become dominant in the child, resulting in a higher risk of a range of disorders, including low IQ, cleft palate, heart conditions, cystic fibrosis, and infant death.  People born of incest may feel like they cannot reproduce for fear of giving birth to a baby with life-threatening genetic anomalies.  One such person is 64-year-old Teresa Weiler. She found out in 1985 that her father was her mother?s brother.  She said: ?It was only when I was walking the streets afterwards, in a daze, that it hit me: I could never be a mum.  There was no way I could risk having a damaged baby. I would have to give up the one thing I wanted most in the world.?

Steve, meanwhile, was born with a heart murmur that required two surgeries when he was a teen, a possible product of two sets of the same genes and mutations, though he and his wife Michelle, who has helped him on his search for the truth, can?t say for sure that his incestual origins were the cause.  Steve grew up in a foster home and was always curious about his biological family. He took his Ancestry test as part of a quest to track down his birth mom, who had given him up shortly after giving birth when she was 14, according to the Atlantic.  He also enlisted the help of CeCe Moore. Who specializes in locating people using distant DNA matches, a method that found and led to the imprisonment of the Golden State Killer.  Since working on Steve?s case, Ms Moore now knows of well over 1,000 additional cases of people born from incest.  Most of those cases were between first-degree relatives, while the rest were the product of second-degree relatives, like half-siblings, uncle-niece, and grandparent-grandchild.  Steve was able to find a support group online set up by Ms Moore for people in his situation, and members have complained of a host of issues, including autoimmune diseases, fibromyalgia, and eye problems. However, it?s difficult to pin down incest as the cause.  One support group member, Mandy, whose last name was withheld for her privacy, found out her father was her mother?s uncle. Her mother, a cruel woman, was 17 when she gave birth to Mandy, while her uncle was in his 30s.  Her mother treated her worse than her younger brothers, and Mandy now understands that to be the reason behind her mother?s cruelty. But the situation still makes her uneasy.  She said: ?When I go to the doctor and they ask me my family history, I wonder: ?How much do I need to go into it???

Typically if someone wants to test for a possible incestuous relationship, they have to upload their genetic material to a third-party service. It?s not something that AncestryDNA or 23&Me disclose to customers.  The third-party tests look for runs of homozygosity, or ROH for short. The genomes of children born of incest show an ?absence of heterozygosity,? which explains why their DNA contains big chunks that show the father?s and mother?s genetic contributions are identical because they themselves shared much of their genetic code.  DNA tests mailed out by major companies have uncovered other troubling family secrets that have thrown people?s lives into a tailspin.  Iin Connecticut, Ms Hill said she was left 'traumatized' after realizing she had unknowingly committed incest with her high school boyfriend.  She told CNN she only found out the man she had grown up thinking was her dad was not her biological father after taking the home DNA test.  Ms Hill said: 'I'll just put it out there, I was intimate with my half brother.  I was traumatized by this,' Hill added. 'Now I'm looking at pictures of people thinking, well, if he could be my sibling, anybody could be my sibling.'

In Denver, influencer and realtor Celina Quinones decided to take a DNA test in 2016. It revealed that she and her husband had a genetic match of 62 centimorgan a unit of measuring genetic linkage meaning they share ancestors eight generations back.  She said: 'I was in shock. I was a little depressed over it, to be honest. But this was after we already had three kids, and all of them were healthy.  They have 10 fingers, 10 toes, but it was just a shock.'

Incestual relationships have received increased interest and attention in recent years, in part thanks to a 2004 documentary about the deformed, inbred Whittaker family in Odd, West Virginia.  When visiting the family, DailyMail.com was welcomed by several members, including Ray, who can only communicate via barks and grunts, and who insisted on showing reporters around the property.  Currently living at the dilapidated homestead are siblings Ray, Betty, Larry and Lorene, as well as her son Timmy, all of them struggling with heartbreaking mental and physical conditions.  Ray appeared to suffer the most and excitedly communicated through noises, pointing to show items at their home in a childlike manner.  The siblings are the descendants of two sets of first cousins who got married. DailyMail.com previously revealed that the bloodline continued with a set of identical twin brothers whose children got married.  John and Henry Whittaker were born in 1897. John went on to marry his own first cousin Ada Riggs the daughter of Mary Perkins, who was the sister of John and Henry's mother Eliza.  Ada and John had nine children, including Gracie Irene Whittaker who was born in 1920. John's brother Henry married Sally Burton and they had seven children, including John Emory Whittaker, born in 1913.  Gracie and John were first cousins, but married in November 1935 and had their first child in 1937, having 15 in total.  Many members of the family have suffered from a heart attack, while two did not make it through infancy. Some of the 15 children died early of an array of illnesses, including heart attack and cancer, believed to be tied to inbreeding.

10

Articles / Determined mum waits 31 years and spends ?45,000 to have 'little miracles'

« on: March 12, 2024, 01:58:34 PM »

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/determined-mum-waits-31-years-32308872

Determined mum waits 31 years and spends ?45,000 to have 'little miracles'

Samantha Jones and husband Ian welcomed twins Rubi-Mae and Summer 19 months ago after a lifetime of waiting, as well as spending ?45,000 and four miscarriages

By Lucy Laing

16:22, 9 Mar 2024 Updated 16:27, 9 Mar 2024

It took Samantha Jones 31 years, ?45,000, four miscarriages, eight rounds of IVF and a brush with death but she finally gets to celebrate Mother?s Day with the twin girls she had at the age of 52.  All good things come to those who wait, according to Sam and her husband Ian Jones, 55. They first dated for two years when they were 19 and 21 before being reunited and falling in love all over again, 21 years later.  Sam says: ?Age is just a number. I have occasionally been mistaken for the twins? grandma, but I proudly tell everyone that I?m their mum. And I will be enjoying a walk on the beach with my girls and my mum on Mother?s Day.?

In her job as a police officer with 10 years in the riot division, and Ian?s as a firefighter, they are used to tackling difficult and dangerous situations. But these were eclipsed by the challenges they overcame in their determination to become parents.  Cuddling 19-month-old Rubi-Mae and Summer, Sam, now 53, swears every moment has been worth it. She adds: ?They bring such a lot of fun and laughter into our house.  We never gave up. I?m a very determined person in life I tried 11 times to get into the mounted section of the police and finally made it.?

Despite ending things with Ian on her 21st birthday and marrying then divorcing someone else, Sam says their hearts were forever entwined. She recalls: ?On my 21st birthday, I thought Ian was going to ask me to marry him. He pulled out a small jewellery box and I opened it, expecting to find a ring inside, but it was earrings. I thought I wasn?t enough for him, so I walked away heartbroken without ever explaining why I broke things off.?‌

More than two decades passed without contact. Then she received a message from Ian on Facebook.  Despite ending things with Ian on her 21st birthday and marrying then divorcing someone else, Sam says their hearts were forever entwined. She recalls: ?On my 21st birthday, I thought Ian was going to ask me to marry him. He pulled out a small jewellery box and I opened it, expecting to find a ring inside, but it was earrings. I thought I wasn?t enough for him, so I walked away heartbroken without ever explaining why I broke things off.?‌

More than two decades passed without contact. Then she received a message from Ian on Facebook.  She says: ?It was a feeling of incredible elation. We?d finally done it, after four failed rounds of treatment.?

Tragically, the embryo wasn?t viable and she miscarried. ?It was heartbreaking, but at the same time I?d finally fallen pregnant, so I knew it was possible,? says Sam. ?It gave us renewed hope.?

A sixth go a few months later was again successful, but Sam miscarried at seven weeks. Falling pregnant again on the seventh attempt, Covid delayed her 12 week scan to 14 weeks, but the baby had died.  ?That was our lowest point,? says Sam. ?We?d had a scan at seven weeks and the doctor said it all looked good. We got past the first three months and thought everything was OK. So, to be told we?d lost the baby was devastating. It took such a toll on us.  Going through all the treatment was exhausting, plus I was working overtime constantly, as that was the only way of funding the treatment. When I told my mum we?d lost the baby, she was heartbroken too.  She?d been through it every step of the way with us, and had started knitting for the baby. She told me perhaps it wasn?t meant to be because of my age, and started unravelling the little garments she?d knitted.?

By now, even this intrepid couple felt defeated booking a Caribbean holiday to recuperate and forget their parenting dream. Sam says: ?I?d lost a few stone and thought I?d just enjoy looking good in a bikini at 50 and put it behind me. But I couldn?t do it.?

With over-50s not encouraged to have IVF here, in January 2022, they chose a clinic in Cyprus, where doctors implanted three embryos into her womb. Two weeks later, Sam discovered she was pregnant.  ?We were over the moon, but also incredibly anxious,? she says. "The sonographer ran the scanner over my stomach at seven weeks and we saw two little heartbeats pumping away. It was incredible. I was actually pregnant with twins.?

But, until she reached 24 weeks, when the babies were deemed viable, every day was racked with worry. She says: ?I was sick up to 10 times a day, but it was totally worth it.  This is what I?d waited 31 years for. At our 11-week scan, Ruby was bouncing around so much against the walls of my womb it was like she was on a trampoline, and it gave me so much hope. We facetimed Mum ? she said she was going to start knitting again!?

Sam was admitted to the Queen Alexandra Hospital in Portsmouth in July 2022, at 29 weeks, with life-threatening pre-eclampsia. She says: ?I told Mum and Ian that if there was a choice between saving the babies or me, they needed to save the babies. Luckily they were delivered safely by C-section and I was safe too.?

Summer came first, weighing 3lb 3oz and Rubi-Mae followed, weighing 2lb 11oz on August 3, 2022. ?When we held them in our arms, it was the most incredible moment,? says Sam. ?I was a mum.?

Now the twins are happy, healthy and hitting their milestones. Sam bats away any criticism she gets as an older mum. She says: ?We have a good pension and I?m a Slimming World consultant, which means when I retire I still have an income.?

Ian says: ?Sam and I were meant for each other and it?s been worth the wait. They keep us feeling young and their grandparents dote on them.?

11

Articles / My miracle IVF baby at the age of 53: Scottish woman FINALLY becomes ....

« on: March 10, 2024, 01:37:18 PM »

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12154399/Scottish-woman-FINALLY-mother-53-25-years-trying.html

My miracle IVF baby at the age of 53: Scottish woman FINALLY becomes a mother after 25 years of trying and 21 rounds of gruelling failed fertility procedures costing almost ?100,000

    Helen Dalgish gave birth to her baby at the age of 53, after trying for 25 years

By Katie Foster For The Scottish Daily Mail

Published: 01:48, 3 June 2023 | Updated: 01:52, 3 June 2023

It's a time of life when most mothers are enjoying more time to themselves as their children get older with some having already become grandmothers.  But one Scots mother is delighted to postpone all that, having given birth to her 'miracle' baby at the age of 53 after 25 years of failed fertility procedures.  Helen Dalglish had endured 21 gruelling rounds of treatment at a cost of almost ?100,000.  Ms Dalglish, from Glasgow, underwent the successful IVF procedure that led to the birth of daughter Daisy Grace in Cyprus, where she lives with her partner.  Now 54, she has spoken of her joy at finally giving birth last year after refusing to give up on her dream.  She said: 'When you get that little miracle at the end, you forget about the 25 years.  I was looking down and the bump was getting bigger and I thought, 'Am I dreaming?' Even now, looking at her I can't believe I'm a mum. It's surreal.'

Ms Dalglish first moved to Cyprus in her 20s and originally began trying for a baby with her then husband when she was 28.  Diagnosed with 'unexplained' infertility, they underwent 20 years of privately-funded fertility treatment, including IVF, some of it in the UK.  Despite producing 'top quality' embryos, each attempt to get pregnant ended in failure.  Ms Dalglish admitted: 'Sometimes it got too much emotionally, physically and financially.  'Sometimes we stopped for a year or two. Because they said it was unexplained, we thought, 'We'll do some yoga, meditation, alternative health, because there's nothing stopping us. Maybe it'll just happen if we forget about it'.'

She added: 'Every one that fails, you're absolutely devastated. It's like a death.'

Ms Dalglish grew concerned because each time medics tried to transfer her embryos back into her womb, the procedure was unbearably painful, as though they were 'hitting a wall'.  More than a decade into her IVF journey, a different consultant said her severely tilted womb was to blame. After that, Ms Dalglish became pregnant three times but on each occasion suffered heartbreaking miscarriages.  She said: 'What kept me going was I just kept seeing this baby.'

Eventually she decided to use donor eggs instead of her own initially without success.  She then approached the Dunya IVF Fertility Centre in the city of Kyrenia. Now with another partner, she decided it was time to try again but following the death of her father in Scotland, she almost did not undergo the final procedure until her mother persuaded her to keep going.  The couple were stunned to conceive on their second attempt.  Ms Dalglish recalled: 'The two of us burst out crying and screaming. I think my dad must have had something to do with it.'

Describing her feelings after giving birth to Daisy Grace in September, she said: 'When we came home, I burst out crying. It felt like 25 years of grief trying to escape.  She seems the most placid, laid-back, happy baby. It's almost like I waited so long and now I'm being spoilt.'

Ms Dalglish's doctor Alper Eraslan said her determination would be an inspiration to others. He said: 'Even though it can be both psychologically and financially burdensome sometimes, with our support, knowledge and experience we are aiming to help women who want to have a healthy baby.  We are so happy to see women like Helen finally getting the chance to have their own children, and we will continue to do our best in helping other couples achieve this dream as well.'

12

Articles / Our nightmare by the four Hampstead mothers falsely accused of being....

« on: March 06, 2024, 12:09:00 PM »

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-13155867/nightmare-ordeal-innocent-school-gate-mums-Satanic-paedophile-ring.html?ito=mailplus-newsletter-daily&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Tuesday%2C%20March%205%2C%202024%20-%20Kate%20comeback&utm_term=MOL_MailPlus_daily_newsletter

Our nightmare by the four Hampstead mothers falsely accused of being satanic paedophiles: Middle class women who were forced to turn detective to jail their tormentors speak for the first time

By Kathryn Knight for the Daily Mail

Published: 02:17, 5 March 2024 | Updated: 07:19, 5 March 2024

There?s a photo on Anna?s phone which captures what she now knows to be the final day of normal life for her family: it shows her nine-year-old daughter making her way to school across a snowy Hampstead Heath.  ?When I looked back on that picture, I realised I had no idea then how much our lives were about to change,? Anna recalls. ?It was the last snapshot of life as we knew it.?

Because the next day February 5, 2015 Anna and her husband, along with other parents and staff at her daughter?s pretty North London primary school, found themselves caught in a nightmare.  Two young children of a fellow parent at the school in one of the wealthiest areas of London, home to celebrities including Jonathan Ross, Helena Bonham Carter and Dame Judi Dench had begun to make a series of extraordinary and horrifying allegations.  Anna was just one of the adults connected to the school accused by the brother and sister of being part of a Satanic paedophile ring that indulged in horrendous ritual abuse and murder.  So outlandish were these allegations among them that they were Devil worshippers who had sex with children, made child sacrifices and drank their blood it is hard to imagine that anyone could take them remotely seriously.  And it?s important to say here that those accused were entirely innocent. But this is the internet age, where there is a ready audience for everything.  And so, fuelled by conspiracy theorists, the lurid allegations went around the world. To say that it upended the lives of those involved is an understatement.  The names, addresses and phone numbers of the parents, school staff and pupils identified as being involved were published online, and they were inundated with death threats.  The parents were contacted by vigilantes saying they would snatch their children to take them to safety. Equally horrifyingly, paedophiles would ask about their children?s sexual preferences.  It was, Anna recalls, ?like being under siege?.

When they appealed to the police for help, they were told the harassers could not be prosecuted. Stymied, too, by internet giants doing little to shut down the relentless online content, it was left to the parents themselves to do what they could to protect their families.  Ultimately, it would take the determined and extraordinary efforts of four mothers in particular, who, working until the small hours, month in month out, meticulously gathered evidence that would lead to the prosecution of two of the most vocal online conspiracy theorists.  Now, for the first time, the mothers have told their story in a compelling Channel 4 documentary, Accused: The Hampstead Paedophile Hoax, which explores both the devastating impact of the allegations and their determined fightback.  ?For years we had to keep this dignified silence, because we were trying to build a legal case and we didn?t want to jeopardise that,? says Anna. ?Now, finally, we get to have our voice.?

A voice, yes, but not a face. Along with the other mothers who appear in the documentary, Anna is choosing to remain anonymous.  On film, their words are spoken by an actor, and they are referred to by pseudonyms. They are determined to protect the privacy of their now grown-up children.  For while the trolls who targeted them are quieter these days, they have not disappeared entirely: they are still out there, propagating their theories in dark corners of the internet.  ?They?re still there, trying to spread their poison,? as Jenny, another of the mothers, puts it.
 
The parents? bewilderment remains palpable.  ?There are many curveballs in life that you can predict, whether it?s a terminal illness diagnosis or the death of a loved one but being accused of being a satanic paedophile is not one of them,? Anna says.

A mother of one, Anna had been happily married for 18 years and running a business with her husband, when, back in February 2015, she along with some other parents of children in Year 5 at the Church of England affiliated primary they attended received an email saying allegations had been made against the school.  ?It said they had been investigated by the police and that the case was closed,? she recalls. ?It begged more questions than it answered, so I went straight onto the internet.?

Within five minutes, Anna had found footage of the two siblings one of whom, Abigail, was in her daughter?s class alleging that an organised cult was based at the school which indulged in horrors from paedophilia to baby sacrifice.  ?She mentioned our daughter by name, saying she got paid for sex in sweets and naming myself and my husband as her abusers,? Anna recalls. ?It was like walking through the looking glass.?

Abigail and her brother Joseph (as they are called in the documentary) were the offspring of a striking-looking mum called Ella Draper, a glamorous, Russian-born yoga teacher who had lived in London since the 1990s.  Separated from the father of her children, she had become involved with an older man called Abraham Christie, then 65. He, like Draper, had an interest in alternative therapies but was seen by many as a menacing presence in the playground, with parents claiming that he was intimidating.  It was under Christie and Draper?s direction that, in the summer of 2014, Abigail and Joseph had first made their bizarre allegations to the police of ?secret rooms? at the school and the adjoining church where torture and abuse unfolded.  But when police could find no evidence, they recanted, confiding that Abraham had beaten and pressured them into lying.  A bitter custody case with the children?s father ensued, with parents and teachers still, at this point, none the wiser about the fact they had been the subject of horrific allegations. That is until a woman called Sabine McNeill a virulent conspiracy theorist, since dubbed Britain?s worst online troll became aware of them.  With Draper?s blessing, in early 2015 McNeill released onto the web videos they?d made of the children making their claims, alongside personal details of 175 people allegedly involved.  It went viral.  ?We were just sitting at home watching this story explode worldwide,? says Jenny, whose only child, a boy, was also in Year 5.  ?It was massive. Global.? Anna recalls: ?I remember sitting on the floor in our bedroom thinking this isn?t going to go away. But I couldn?t even imagine what was to come.?

The fuse had been lit. Protesters began to gather at the school and the church, shouting obscenities at parents. Individual families received vicious death threats on their home phones and mobiles.  ?They would call us satantists, shout down the phone that we were f***ing and killing babies; that we were evil,? says Jenny.

Police told them to vary their routes home, and carry rape alarms, yet none of it was enough to shake the lingering menace.  Sarah, a lawyer in her 40s who also had a child in Abigail?s year, slept on her children?s bedroom floor for eight months until the family were able to move house.  ?Once our address was out there, I could not shake the thought that someone would come in and try to take them,? she says.

Jenny recalls being followed by a large group, chanting obscenities, as she picked up her son from a school cross-country race.  ?That was particularly disturbing, as this activity hadn?t been advertised, so it was clear that somehow they were tracking our movements.?

Naturally, the parents wanted to know why they?d been targeted.  ?I could not get my head around the fact that it was another mother who had made these allegations,? says Anna.

But when Sarah called to confront Ella Draper, she denied that she was responsible. Anna recalls: ?I said to her, can you please stop the bulls**t?  And she said: ?It?s not me. It?s been this blogger.??

What horrified the parents most was the potential damage to their children. It was impossible to protect them entirely from the unfolding drama, and Anna recalls her own daughter?s spiralling anxiety.  ?The fact that these lovely, nine-year-old children were the subject of such degrading content, which could potentially be there for ever,? says Jenny, ?was so violating.?

Some parents were contacted by paedophiles asking if they could hook up with their child because they ?liked sex?.  Again, the police said their hands were tied.  ?They pretty much admitted it was beyond their knowledge,? says Anna. ?There was this feeling that it would blow over, but to us it felt organised and targeted.?

?It was incredibly disappointing,? adds Sarah. ?We were quite clear that this was criminal activity. We even identified a list of up to 20 laws that were being broken. But no one would listen.?

Undeterred, the parents began to mobilise, determined to get social media giants to remove links to the children?s videos, and at the same time gather evidence against the trolls that could lead to their prosecution.  As they hit one brick wall after another, many parents fell away, leaving Anna, Jenny, Sarah and another parent, Alice, the only ones refusing to give up.  Anna admits now they were an unlikely alliance: while all had children in the same year, they were not close friends.  ?If this hadn?t have happened to us, we wouldn?t have been this tight group,? she says. ?But we now have a lifelong bond.?

It was an uphill slog, with door after door shut in their faces, from tech giants to the Information Commissioner?s Office, which deals with data protection. ?Their response was to suggest we should write to these people and ask them to stop,? says Sarah. ?Yet the police had told us not to engage.?

Only prosecution, the mothers believed, would send a message to those spreading the unfounded allegations across the web. And with the police still saying there was no case to bring, the mothers decided to build their own painstakingly compiling a dossier of evidence to bring them down.  It would take years.  ?Bear in mind that every one of us worked, as well as looking after our families,? says Anna. ?It meant sitting down come 10 o?clock at night, then working until the early hours, evidencing, evidencing, evidencing. And that was pretty much it for four years.?

?You can see from emails that I sent that I was working at 3 am, 4 am,? says Sarah. ?I wasn?t really sleeping. I lost a lot of weight.?

Jenny was forced to leave her job because of the allegations. ?Ultimately, it made me bad for business because I started to get directly targeted.  Emails were sent directly to my staff, saying, ?Did you know your boss has been accused of this?? It wasn?t that people weren?t sympathetic, but there was a feeling of being tainted by it.?

Sarah was in the process of applying for new roles when the scandal broke, and found herself rejected time and again.  ?It was all, ?You?re just what we?re looking for?, until it got to HR and suddenly they would come up with a story about why it wouldn?t work,? she recalls.

All admit their marriages came under strain.  Finally, in late 2018 more than three years after the allegations first broke there was a breakthrough.  Thanks to their assiduous gathering of tens of thousands of documents as evidence, Sabine McNeill was put on trial for stalking, harassment and breaching a restraining order.  The German-born pensioner was labelled an ?arrogant, malicious, evil and manipulative woman? by the sentencing judge, who jailed her for nine years the longest sentence ever handed down in a UK court for these offences.  Self-styled activist and blogger Rupert Wilson Quaintance, an American who had come to the UK a few months earlier, became obsessed with the case and threatened to ?kick doors down? and ?draw blood? from the parents.  He was jailed for nine months after being found guilty of putting people in fear of violence.  They were major victories, albeit bittersweet ones.  ?How do you go from being told there is ?no public interest? in bringing a case to someone being sentenced to nine years in prison?? asks Sarah. ?That tells you that this was a huge system failure.?

D raper and Christie fled the country in 2015. They?ve have been on the run ever since, believed to be in Spain.  Why they started the hoax is still a mystery. If it was part of Draper?s fight for custody against her ex-husband, it failed. After a period in care, Abigail and Joseph were reunited with their father.  Six years on from the prosecution of Sabine McNeill, the mothers have now returned to a degree of normal life.  The children who were in Year 5 back then are now 18 and embarking on adulthood relatively undamaged so their mothers hope by what happened.  ?I think we saved our kids, and I?m so grateful for that,? says Sarah. ?They were young and they couldn?t protect themselves.?

The women admit the ordeal changed them, leaving deep scars that will never fully heal.  You cannot go back to what you were, because that?s not the way life works,? says Sarah.

All agree that however bizarre and outlandish their experience may seem, no one is immune.  ?All the way along, the police said this could have happened to any parent, in any school, anywhere in the country, anywhere in the world,? says Anna.

?It just so happened that, unfortunately, it was us.?

Accused: The Hampstead Paedophile Hoax is on Channel 4 at 9pm on Monday.

13

Articles / 'We're putting our baby up for adoption she's not a good fit for the family'

« on: February 29, 2024, 01:31:29 PM »

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/were-putting-baby-up-adoption-32133469?fbclid=IwAR1q8-2GBRRyppqWvyrniR4Zr3hSD-5IPjcTkDhm8uoharK92vAGJXNIr_s#lt4ftmcvr1du1tigu

'We're putting our baby up for adoption she's not a good fit for the family'

A dad has sparked outrage after revealing he and his wife are putting their three-month-old daughter up for adoption because she's 'not a good fit' for their family

By Paige Freshwater Content Editor

14:01, 15 Feb 2024

A couple has sparked outrage after deciding to put their three-month-old baby up for adoption because she 'doesn't fit in well' with their family. The dad took to Reddit to share the shocking story, explaining that his wife, Catherine, 33, returned to work just two weeks after giving birth and their daughter, Elizabeth, is primarily cared for by her grandmother.  He said: "I go to work later than her [my wife] so I take morning duty, but she gets home earlier than I do so she takes evening duty. During the day, Elizabeth stays with my mother-in-law."

However, he noticed that Catherine was neglecting their newborn's emotional needs. "Catherine really doesn't have anything to do with her. Even if she is crying, unless it's for a real reason (like being hungry or wet), Catherine doesn't do anything to soothe her," the 35-year-old added.

"I know that babies sometimes cry for no reason and that picking Elizabeth up every time she cries could reinforce the crying, shouldn't she at least pick her up and soothe her a bit? Plus, even when she's not crying, Catherine doesn't interact with her."

Finding it hard to connect with their baby girl and longing for their old life back, the couple decided to put their three-month-old up for adoption. Before taking this step, the dad sought advice from Reddit users about the adoption process.  He asked: "I will be consulting a lawyer this week, but prefer to go in with some idea of what to expect. My wife and I wish to place our three-month-old daughter up for adoption. Are there any laws that could impact this process? Could members of our family file against our decision to adopt out? How long can we expect the entire process to take?"

Reddit users were taken aback and questioned how they came to this decision. The dad confessed that their daughter is "not a good fit for the family", and having a baby has made "taking holidays awkward for his wife".

He shared: "My wife broke the news to my mother-in-law of our decision to adopt. She reacted poorly, which is to be expected, and with a great deal of yelling. This did not endear her to my wife, who finds yelling annoying, but attempts to placate the yelling resulted in more yelling."

He continued: "In short, my mother-in-law first blamed her deceased ex-husband for my wife 'turning out like this' and then myself for our decision. I was called a number of names, and learned that my mother-in-law had disapproved of me from the start of the relationship, and otherwise trashed.  It went on to the point that Catherine eventually threatened to ensure my mother-in-law never saw our daughter again if she would not be reasonable. That quieted my mother-in-law enough for my wife to layout how the upcoming months would go."

The couple then told the mother-in-law she could adopt Elizabeth if she wanted, otherwise, she would be placed with another family. "Our daughter was going up for adoption; this was non-negotiable. My mother-in-law, having assisted in her care, could take custody if she so wished.  My sister-in-law would be a permissible alternate. Otherwise, we would pursue outside arrangements. As many predicted, my mother-in-law opted to assume custody herself and we started that process after Thanksgiving."

After hearing this, the mother-in-law took the three-month-old baby, left the house and stayed in a hotel. "Shortly thereafter, my sister-in-law called, in the end, she threatened to call the police if we attend [family gatherings]," he said.

"Communication from my mother-in-law and sister-in-law has been sparse since my mother-in-law left.  From what we know, she and Elizabeth are staying with my sister-in-law for the time being. Moving forward, we are cooperating as much as possible to ensure the transition of legal custody over Elizabeth goes smoothly.  My mother-in-law thus far refused any and all offers of financial aid, but we are prepared to [pay child support if/when the time arrives."

Some people praised him for 'saving his daughter from a lifetime of misery', while others criticised him for 'not even trying to be a parent' before giving up.  One person commented: "I don't understand why everyone is so mad. They're s****y parents and realise that. The kid is probably better off being put up for adoption."

Another said: "Therapy has not been tried by either parent. Therapy needs to be tried."

A third asked: "Now this is an odd situation. Would it be better for a pair of parents who are willing to send off their three-month-old child for whatever sociopathic reason to continue to raise said child, or should they go through with the adoption, preventing the child from being raised by a bunch of weirdos?"

14

Articles / Inside the world of the US millionaire mommy vlogger and her 'psychopathic' ....

« on: February 27, 2024, 12:11:04 PM »

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-13127333/psychopathic-millionaire-vlogger-tortured-children-concentration-camp.html

Inside the world of the US millionaire mommy vlogger and her 'psychopathic' accomplice who 'tortured' her children in 'concentration camp' home while making a fortune from parenting videos

By Barbara Mcmahon

Published: 16:58, 26 February 2024 | Updated: 11:46, 27 February 2024

The call to emergency services came just after 11am on August 30 last year. The man?s voice on the tape can be clearly heard faltering and cracking as he holds back tears.  A terrified 12-year-old boy had just turned up at his home, he said.  ?He?s got [duct] tape around his ankles and his wrists. He?s hungry, he?s thirsty. He?s very afraid. This kid has obviously been detained he?s covered in wounds,? the caller said.

?This kid? was the youngest son of his neighbour, Ruby Franke, then living in an affluent suburb of ?Mormon County? Utah, in the US.  Franke had moved to the luxurious, $5.3million (?4.2million), five-bed, six-bathroom home with a five-car garage, hot tub, swimming pool and sweeping gardens, following the break-up of her marriage the previous year.  The property was owned by her mentor and business partner Jodi Hildebrandt, a licenced mental health counsellor and life coach, and was the last word in luxury.  The pair had worked hard for their good fortune: Franke, 42, was a highly successful ?mommy? video blogger and YouTube parenting expert, whose channel, at its height, attracted 2.3million subscribers earning the family an estimated $5million (?4million) over eight years from sponsored content, YouTube adverts and clothing sales.  Hildebrandt, 54, a divorced mother of two, charged clients up to $3,000 (?2,400) a month for her services. Together, the two women ran a separate YouTube channel and podcast called ConneXions, offering parenting and lifestyle advice.  But, for all their so-called ?expertise?, terrible acts of cruelty had been going on behind the veneer of wholesome, happy family life peddled on social media, cruelty that was exposed when Franke?s emaciated and traumatised son fled to a nearby house, pleading for help.  This week Franke and Hildebrandt admitted aggravated child abuse charges and were each sentenced to up to 60 years in prison for the ?concentration camp-like setting? in which they had held the boy and his equally malnourished and frightened little sister.  A shocked court room heard how the children were regularly denied food and water, forced to do hard manual labour in bare feet, kicked and held underwater, and told they were ?possessed? and ?evil? and needed to accept punishment as an ?act of love?.  ?I?ve had many strange cases in my career in family law, but this one is right at the top,? attorney Randy Kessler, who represents Franke?s estranged husband Kevin, the father of the couple?s six children, told the Mail.

?They had a bizarre mindset that just destroyed people. It was all about breaking people down, deflating their egos, humbling them and disciplining them. It was totally destructive.?

Franke was charged with intentionally inflicting and knowingly allowing another adult to inflict serious physical injuries on her two youngest children that prosecutors described as ?torture?.  Her son was made to carry boxes of books up and down stairs and forced to do outside labour without shoes and in the summer heat, resulting in serious sunburn and blistered skin.  He was punished when he secretly consumed water, given plain food like rice and chicken while others in the house ate tasty meals, and was isolated from other people and denied all forms of entertainment such as books, TV and electronics.  After he attempted to run away, his hands and feet were regularly bound, sometimes with handcuffs, ropes or duct tape.  Franke kicked him while wearing boots, held his head underwater and placed her hands over his mouth and nose.  Franke?s younger daughter was subjected to the same treatment, isolated and forced to do physical tasks, remain outside and denied food and water. She was also told repeatedly by the two women that she was evil and possessed and needed to go through punishments in order to repent, according to the charges laid by prosecutors.  The little girl was forced to run barefoot on dirt roads for extended periods of time when she was examined by doctors her feet were covered with scabs and blisters and was forced to jump into a cactus several times.  The roots of this disturbing case go back to 2015 when Franke launched a video blog documenting her and husband Kevin?s tough love parenting style on a YouTube channel called 8 Passengers, named after her, Kevin and their six children, now aged between 21 and ten.  It was wildly popular at first, but Franke?s strict parenting style began to draw criticism. In a 2020 video, the ?mumfluencer?s? teenage son revealed he was forced to sleep on a beanbag for seven months as a punishment for playing a prank on his brother.  In another video, shot as Franke sat in her car, she detailed how she was ignoring a message from her youngest daughter?s teacher, saying the then six-year-old had forgotten her packed lunch.  ?My hope is that she will be hungry and come home and say ?that was really painful being hungry all day, and I?ll make sure to always have a lunch with me,?? Franke said.

In a video posted later the same day Franke and her husband told concerned viewers the little girl was fed as soon as she returned home from school.  Another of the 1,000-plus videos of her family that Franke posted showed the children being made to mop floors, a punishment meant to ?really bring pain? but which ?didn?t work because they enjoyed it too much?.  One of the most controversial episodes was when Franke said her two youngest children would be receiving only one gift at Christmas a card called The Gift of Truth because of their ?long patterns of selfishness and egregious behaviour?.

The card would contain a list of attributes that would help the children set boundaries and repent for their selfishness, Franke claimed.  The episodes became so alarming that 18,000 people signed a petition asking Utah?s Division of Child and Family Services to investigate. They conducted a home visit the following month but found the children physically unharmed.  In an angry video, Franke posted she was ?very aware of people online that hate me and want to cancel me, or who would like to see me burn in hell or disappear off the face of the earth.? She added: ?I?m not going anywhere.?

In 2022 the Frankes began marriage counselling with Hildebrandt it is believed Ruby Franke found her future mentor online yet decided to split up the following year.  Hildebrandt, who has a master?s degree in educational psychology, had been a licensed clinical mental health counsellor since 2003, offering life-coaching and counselling services for marriage problems and addiction.  Yet, she was no stranger to controversy herself. In 2012, she?d been put on a period of professional probation for discussing a male patient with an alleged porn addiction with leaders in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS) and Brigham Young University without her client?s permission.  Former patients described her as over-authoritative and aggressive and said that she operated her business like a multi-level marketing scheme, urging patients to recommend her to family and friends.  ?Jodi was a powerful LDS voice, and religious people in authority regularly recommended her counselling services to people in need,? says Jamie Belnap, a therapist who works in private practice in Heber City, Utah, and who followed the case closely.

?It?s hard to describe to someone who doesn?t understand the Mormon religion how significant the level of trust is for people in authority. Jodi capitalised on this. She made people believe she knew what was ?right? and what was ?wrong?.?  In her role as a mental health provider, Hildebrandt had numerous group client sessions for men and women, says Kessler.  ?With the men, she told them they were sinful, lustful and had too much ego, and that she had to break them down before they could return to their families,? he says.

?She reinforced that with the women?s groups too, pointing out their faults, and making them feel worthless and subservient, before saying she would build them back up again.?

The attorney said Hildebrandt convinced Franke and her husband last year that they should separate for a year, and Kevin left the family home.  It should be stressed that he has not faced any charges, has filed for divorce from his wife and hopes to regain custody of his four younger children who are in care.  Following the onslaught of criticism, Franke closed the 8 Passengers channel in 2022 and joined forces with Hildebrandt on ConneXions where she was listed as a ?mental fitness trainer?.  The pair also started a Facebook group called Moms of Truth and garnered 13,000 followers.  Meanwhile, neighbours were concerned that Franke?s four youngest children were often left alone at the family home in Springfield after their father moved out and Franke began to spend more time with Hildebrandt.  Eldest daughter Shari, who had cut ties with her family in 2022, told police that on one occasion her sisters and brother had been left alone for five days.  Franke began taking the two youngest children to Hildebrandt?s home until that day in August, last year, when the youngest boy decided he?d had enough.  Both women were charged with multiple counts of aggravated child abuse.  Franke has three sisters, two of whom Ellie Mecham and Bonnie Hoellein are also social media stars, documenting their families? lives, with 549,000 and 315,000 followers respectively.  After Franke and Hildebrandt?s arrest, Hoellein posted a video insisting the family had done ?as much as they could? to protect the children but they had been shut out.  ?I knew they were weird. I knew they were off. Those are the things that we kept quiet about because what was I gonna say? What was I gonna do? I was not going to come out publicly and say that I don?t like my sister. I am not my sister. I am not my sister?s mistakes.?

In the run-up to sentencing, Franke?s brother Beau Griffiths wrote a letter to the judge hearing the case, detailing his experiences with ConneXions, which he said he was roped into.  ?The program was by all definitions a cult,? he wrote. ?Ms Hildebrandt discouraged people from making their own life choices. A recurring theme was the principle of separation and isolation. I personally witnessed numerous marriage relationships separated through Ms Hildebrandt?s encouragement including, for a time, my own.  ?In Ruby?s case, I believe Ms Hildebrandt wanted Ruby?s platform and influence for her own gain.?

Franke?s parents Chad and Jennifer Griffiths also wrote to the judge in the hope of getting a lighter sentence for their daughter.  Writing from Serbia where they are on a Mormon mission, they said they noticed a shift in Ruby?s thinking in the summer of 2020 when she cut off all ties to them, her siblings and close friends.  ?She was delusional. She was so deeply brainwashed we could not recognise her,? they said.

In a bizarre pre-sentencing statement, Franke expressed her regret and remorse.  ?I was led to believe this world is an evil place filled with cops who control, hospitals that injure, government agencies that brainwash, church leaders who lie and lust, husbands who refuse to protect children and children who need [to be] abused. My choice to believe and behave this paranoia culminated into criminal activity, for which I stand before you ready to take accountability.?

Starting to cry, she addressed her children. ?To my babies, my six little chicks. I can see now that over the past four years I was in a deep undercurrent that led us to danger. I would never have led you to darkness knowingly. I was so disoriented I believed dark was light and right was wrong. I will never stop crying for hurting your tender souls.?

For her part, Hildebrandt said one of the reasons she pleaded guilty, and did not go to trial, was that she did not want the youngsters to relive the experience.  ?My hope and prayer is that they will heal and move forward to have beautiful lives. I?m willing to submit to what the state feels would be an appropriate amount of time served to make retribution as an outcome.?

Attorney Randy Kessler, for one, was unmoved by Hildebrandt?s saccharine words. ?Hearing Jodi say in court that she loved those children ? that?s psychopathic,? he commented.

Both women can expect to spend a long time behind bars but, under Utah law, they will serve no more than 30 years of their 60-year sentences.  As for the children, a long period of healing lies ahead. The oldest daughter, Shari, is now 21 and at university. She broke off all contact with her parents some time ago.  Typically, for a young woman whose childhood was documented on social media, she chose Instagram to break her silence.  ?Today has been a big day. Me and my family are so happy that justice is being served. We?ve been trying to tell the police and CPS for years about this, and so glad they finally decided to step up.?

She continued: ?Kids are safe, but there?s a long road ahead. Please keep them in your prayers and also respect their privacy.?

15

Articles / A Look at ?Respectful Adoption Language?

« on: February 25, 2024, 07:16:27 PM »

https://www.originscanada.org/adoption-practices/adoption-language/respectful-adoption-language/

A Look at ?Respectful Adoption Language?

Over the last 30 years, the adoption industry has developed terminology in order to help ?sell adoption,? even going to far as to admit that it is much like ?selling cars.? This terminology set is known as ?Positive Adoption Language? or ?Respectful Adoption Language.?

The term ?Respectful Adoption Language? is misleading, as the only parties who are respected in this terminology set are the adoptive parents and the adoption agencies.

What this language lacks is respect for people who were separated from loved ones by adoption:  mothers who grieve for their lost children; and adoptees who have lost their identities,  families, and often their culture and genealogy as well.  Their loss and experience is rendered invisible.

This lack of respect has been reinforced by employees and promoters in the adoption industry, who argued that it would be easier to promote public acceptance of adoption if one could first ?linguistically erase? mothers who lost their children to adoption.  One way that they did this was to create the term ?birth mother? to replace the original term ?natural mother.?

The terms ?birthmother? and ?birthparent? were first used by author, adoptive parent, and adoption promoter Pearl S. Buck in articles published in 1955, 1956, and 1972, to refer to the mothers of the children she had adopted or had wanted to adopt.

These terms then were promoted in the early 1970s by adoption business employee Marietta Spencer, who is the creator of ?Positive Adoption Language? or ?Respectful Adoption Language.?   She states in her 1979 article ?The Terminology of Adoption? that adoptive parents and the adoption industry should take control of adoption language:

?Social service professionals and adoptive parents should take responsibility for providing informed and sensitive leadership in the use of words. ? For professionals, the choice of vocabulary helps shape service content? (p. 451).

Spencer then clearly identifies the purpose of ?birth-terms?:   To strip natural mothers of their motherhood, their love for their children, and any recognition that they may still be related in any way to their lost children.

Adoption industry social workers Reuben Pannor, Annette Baran, and Arthur Sorosky promoted these terms as well in articles they published in 1974 through 1976.  Through these avenues, the social work profession began applying them into ?triad support groups;? and the burgeoning ?open records movement? felt that by using these terms (that suppress and deny the motherhood of natural mothers), they could perhaps enlist the support of adoptive parents and adoption agencies.  Some groups felt pressured to use ?birth terms.?  Author B.J. Lifton recalls:

? The reform movement tangled with the issue of language as early as the seventies. Lee Campbell, the founder of CUB, just reminded me that I argued for the term ?natural mother? because it was the one used in all the historical texts. It was the term I used in my memoir Twice Born, which came out in 1975.  And I still prefer it. But somehow the struggle with the agencies and adoptive parent groups narrowed down to ?birth mother? and ?biological mother.?

This new terminology set was intended to comfort the people who were adopting, as it was assumed that they wanted to be the sole parents of the child.  The original term ?natural mother? was to be eliminated by RAL as it implied that the child?s mother had not lost her mothering connection and relationship to her child.

Thus, the term ?birth mother? is intended to imply that mothers who were separated from a child by adoption *were* mothers at the time of their children?s birth but not afterwards, having a solely reproductive role in their children?s lives and history. Defining a woman this way reduces her as being nothing more than a breeder. This attitude towards unmarried mothers, as being living ?production units? or sources of babies for adoption, is also evident in the industry?s writings:

?Because there are many more married couples wanting to adopt newborn white babies than there are babies, it may almost be said that they rather than out of wedlock babies are a social problem. (Sometimes social workers in adoption agencies have facetiously suggested setting up social provisions for more ?babybreeding?)? from ?Social Work and Social Problems,? National Association of Social Workers, 1964.

?... the tendency growing out of the demand for babies is to regard unmarried mothers as breeding machines?(by people intent) upon securing babies for quick adoptions.? ? Leontine Young, ?Is Money Our Trouble?? National Conference of Social Workers, 1953.

As for the term ?birthfather,? it is a physical impossibility as men cannot give birth. Therefor, the male equivalent of ?birthmother? would have to be something just as ?ejaculation father.?  RAL proponents also suggest using ?sperm donor,? ?gene donor,? and ?biological stranger? for a father who has lost a child to adoption.

The terms birthchild,  birthson, and birthdaughter were coined to imply that the relationship of adoptees to their natural parents ended at birth, and thus the adoptee is a ?product? produced by unrelated ?breeders.?   This is intentional on the part of the industry, to ?sell? the idea that adoption is ?just like having a child of your own.?

The TRUTH is that in reunion, exiled natural parents and their lost children often find that the deep spiritual and emotional bonds between them have never been severed, despite years of separation.  Deep emotions of connection still exist, and family relationships can be restored.  Thus, the b-words are wishful thinking on the part of the industry (adoption lawyers, social workers and agencies).

As one natural mother states:

??Respectful Adoption Language? denies us any recognition that we are mothers, and by limiting our motherhood to the act of birth, it reduces us to being nothing more than breeders, valued only for performing a uterine function.  By denying that we are mothers, ?Respectful Adoption Language; denies that we are related to our children in any way, shape, or form.?

Many women who have lost children to adoption feel their loss to have been as traumatic as rape.  These mothers feel the trauma every time they hear the term ?birthmother,? as it denigrates them and other exiled mothers into being merely incubators for their children ? used and discarded after their babies were harvested from them.

In many support groups for exiled mothers and adoptees, members are beginning to become aware of the semantics of these words, and to by consensus use language that does not traumatize other members, and to not use language that was coined by the adoption industry in order to demean natural mothers or the mother/child relationship.   People separated by adoption are realizing the meanings of  the ?Respectful Adoption Language? terms created and imposed upon them by the industry, and are rejecting these labels. They are showing dignity and pride by reclaiming terms such as ?natural mother? and ?natural family? as ways of stating that the mother-child bond, their family relationship, did not end with birth, but has continued on, often despite decades of separation.
References:

    Baran, A., Pannor, R., and Sorosky, A. (November, 1974).  ?Adoptive Parents and the Sealed Records Controversy,? in Social Casework, 55, (1974), pp. 531-536.
    Baran, A., Pannor, R., and Sorosky, A. (1976).  ?Open Adoption,? in  Social Work, 21, pp. 97-100 (adapted from a paper presented in 1975)
    Buck, Pearl S.  (1955).  ?Must We Have Orphanages?? in Readers Digest, November 1955; Vol. 67, No. 403.
    Buck, Pearl S.   (1956).   ?We Can Free the Children,? in Women?s Home Companion, June 1956.
    Buck, Pearl S.  (1972).   ?I Am the Better Woman for Having My Two Black Children,? in Today?s Health, January 1972.
    Gerow, Darlene. (2002). ? Infant Adoption Is Big Business in America? (PDF)
    Lifton, B.J.  (September 12, 2006).  Personal correspondence with Origins Canada
    Pannor, R., Sorosky, A., and  Baran, A. (December, 1974).  ?Opening the Sealed Records in Adoption ? The Human Need for Continuity,? in  Jewish Community Service, 51 (1974), pp. 188-195.
    Sorosky, A., Baran, A., and Pannor, R. (January, 1974) ?The reunion of adoptees and birth relatives,? in  Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 3, pp. 195-206.
    Sorosky, A., Baran, A., and Pannor, R. (1975). ?Identity conflicts in adoptees,? in The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 45 (January 1975), pp. 18-25
    Spencer, Marietta. (1979). ?The Terminology of Adoption.? in Child Welfare Vol. 58, No. 7, pp. 451-459.