Bring Veronica home

if birthfather rights were properly protected universally across the united states instead of varying by state the child's father wouldn't have had to "play the indian card" as some people have callously called it. (Which by the way is very offensive to Native and First Nation citizens because the tribes of this country are nations in their own right and have a vested interest in protecting their future, and the children are the future of these tribes). Adopting a tribal eligible child is just like adopting internationally....you have to get the permission of the nation you are adopting from, just like you have to get permission from the tribe....which is likely why the mother incorrectly spelled the birthfather's name and gave an incorrect birthdate to the Cherokee Nation when she initially tried to have her attorney clear the tribe.....I mean get real, you don't know your former finance's birthdate....highly doubtful. BTW people keep mentioning how she is only x% Cherokee and what about her Hispanic heritage (which she is 50% allegedly). well, this story is circulating on a number of Hispanic boards and from what I can tell (granted my Spanish is rusty) the consensus is she should stay with her biofather, which doesn't surprise me since I work closely with our local migrant population and the focus on biofamily integrity is very high and they rarely seek adoption for any of their children. This whole case makes me angry for a number of reasons: 1) adoption law was completely mishandled via ignoring ICWA, if the industry can not follow its own laws than how does that reflect on the validity of all of the rest of our adoptive families? 2) This situation has made a mockery of termination and consent to adopt....these are not matters that are handled by text or should even be handled by process servers...for heaven's sakes these are children not car repossessions.....all terminations of parental rights should occur in a court of law and be explained to both parties by an impartial judge so that what is at stake and being surrendered is VERY clear and understood by both parents 3) An appropriate revocation period should be given from the signing of termination...and 2 weeks is not appropriate IMHO, 30-60 days seems much more appropriate 4) there is argument (and laws in some states) that father's should have to support the birthmother's during the pregnancy in order to retain paternal rights....this is complete BS...this father offered marriage and in return the relationship was broke off....to me that is a red flag that "hey maybe this kid isn't mine".....what is she had 6 or 8 potential birthfather's supporting her during the pregnancy just so they could all retain their potential paternal rights 5) adoption should be about finding homes for children that do not have safe parents who are willing and able to parent them.....not findng babies for childless couples.....this child has a safe and willing parent that stepped up early in her life (just 4 mos old, and couldn't be there when she was born because the birthmom restricted access at the hospital, and that is legally documented in the south Carolina transcripts so not something that is hearsay)....so this is not a child that needed a family...just a family that desperately wanted a child....that is not what adoption should be about. there are a few other points that irritate me but those are def the top five. I feel so strongly about this as an adoptive parent that I hope the Cherokee Nation fights to retain jurisdiction (as the rightly should have had since her birth and the mother's termination of rights) and I will be one of those adoptive parents circling the safe house awaiting the National Guard (of which the birthfather is an active soldier) to come for her removal if this comes to a Cherokee Nation versus State of South Carolina stand off.