Advertisements
Advertisements
So far so good, but has potential to go south.
[url]http://forums.adoption.com/general-adoptive-parent-support/364952-open-adoption-close-aparents-returning-child-bparents.html[/url]
yeah....when the first mom showed up on the thread, i wondered how long it will be before it heads south (not BECAUSE of the mom, just bc people seemed to be pretty worked up and i feel like an attack on her is most likely imminent.) i'll keep watching, too.
Advertisements
Did anyone catch Leigh's reported post. She feels manni is being rude. Over all it doesn't seem to me to have blown up yet.
I did see it and look (and saw I was not the only mod on there, along with lots of other people) but so far it seems like even manni is not being too bad, especially for her, LOL. I have to leave for children's choir, but I will check on it again when I get home, it's really getting a lot of traffic, so will be tough to keep up with, and really could blow at any time.
I looked and didn't feel Manni's post was that bad either.
I am popping on and off and watching as I can.
overall...i've been very surprised by what i see as respectful disagreement. i'll keep watching too.
Advertisements
I've closed the thread for now until I can discuss with Brandy tomorrow during business hours. Since the woman suing the aparents is now posting on that thread, I'm not sure if we want to allow an ongoing legal case to be discussed here. Plus I want to make sure we research to make sure she is who she says she is. (best we can validate that anyway)
So until tomorroah...:)
I can't lie - I took manni's line about women that seperate siblings not being good Mothers pretty hard....
I guess because I see placing Cupcake and having subsequent children (which I plan to do!) as seperating siblings....and none of us like to be told that we're bad people or bad Mothers.
But, as I admitted in the thread, I'm pretty emotionally tied up with this for some reason....
Christine - ((HUGS))
Remember who is saying it...kwim? Not that it doesn't hurt, just that the source is well...an idiot.
Advertisements
Brandy and I have discussed a bit but have more to do. A few points of consideration...
If it were a thread of the two parties directly involved "duking it out" on our site, we would not allow it. Our site is not to be used for that purpose.
What we do need to be careful of is that it doesn't turn into a "board war" which is something we also do not allow. A site vs. site thing. I haven't looked at Carla's site in depth though so don't know if she has an open forum discussion on there, etc.
However, it's also a big topic in the adoption community, it's a topic that can be used for OA education and really many facets of adoption.
She's very public about it in many places, apparently with the support of her legal team, so it's not up to us to "police" anything.
The cons for me personally are the time it will involve moderating and the mess it will end up being. However, that's a part of being involved in a forum discussion and moderating. Ugh.;) Right now though, it's not really breaking any of our TOS or forum rules.
Will keep you posted...
i didn't see anything like that either on her site. the big thing i cringed over was when she said things about the ap's like specifically about the mental stability of the amom. but...like you said, it is not my job to police the legalities of her postings. i personally would be afraid the negatives i said about the other party in public would harm my case, but that's just me.
Well *I* certainly wouldn't be using a public forum if involved in a legal case. Anything and everything on the web being so public, there's bound to be something I'd say that would come back and bite me in the butt.
But we aren't going to police that for her and I'm amazed her attorneys are letting her say so much everywhere.
Advertisements
crick
But we aren't going to police that for her and I'm amazed her attorneys are letting her say so much everywhere.
i thought i read she was representing herself. ????
She has, at various times said that she has attorneys that she is 'consulting' with about her case and that she is representing herself because she is out of money.
Either way, everything she is doing is not going to impress the judge, imo.