Hot on HuffPost Parents:
Linda Bloom LCSW and Charlie Bloom MSW: Overwhelmed Parents: A…
Allison Tate: What I Would Like to Tell My Son's 5th Grade Teacher Now
Three-Way Custody Battle for 'Baby Vanessa' Postponed Again
Filed under: Adoption, In The News
The heartbreaking custody battle for 2-year-old "Vanessa" between the adoptive mom who has cared for her since birth, the tot's biological father and the girl's grandmother has been put on hold until spring, the Dayton Daily News reports.
The toddler has been at the center of a bitter guardianship tug of war between adoptive mother Stacy Doss, of Orange County, Calif., the birth father, Benjamin Mills, of Dayton, Ohio and the biological father's mother, Rena Jordan of Middletown, Ohio, according to the newspaper.
But the hearing, previously scheduled to resume Dec. 6, has been postponed until March 7, 2011, to allow more time for motions and counter motions to be heard, the Daily News reports.
"It's in the child's best interests for everyone to have their day in court for each of these motions," Montgomery County Legal Director Greg Scott tells the newspaper.
Vanessa was born June 13, 2008, to a mother who claimed ignorance of the birth father, according to the Orange County Register. But three weeks later, Mills, 39, claiming to be Vanessa's father, filed for paternity. Doss had filed adoption papers by that time, but the paternity claim put the adoption on hold.
By November 2008, DNA tests confirmed that Mills was Vanessa's father. Doss and Mills have been in a legal battle ever since, the Register reports. Last July, Jordan, Mills' mother, who has had legal custody of two of his three children since 2008, stepped in to say she would raise Vanessa, the Daily News reports.
Doss tells the Daily News she's relieved she'll be able to enjoy the holidays with Vanessa without the stress of the hearing, but she's frustrated with yet another delay.
"Critics say adoptive parents bring this on themselves because they use the courts to drag the process out, while the child just gets older and older and it's harder for them if there is going to be surrender," she tells the newspaper. "These critics have no idea what the courts put you through. Adoptive parents have no say as to the time frame -- the courts have all the control."
Doss's fight to keep Vanessa has made national headlines and raises questions about the best interests of a child and the rights of a biological parent, according to the Register.
A divorced public relations consultant, Doss has drained her life savings and has sent her home into foreclosure twice paying for the fight to keep her child. She is relying on fundraisers to pay for ongoing legal fees, the Register reports.
According to a statement in the Dayton newspaper from Mills' attorney, Elizabeth Gorman with Legal Aid of Western Ohio Inc., Mills did not request the delay.
"The delay is unfortunate because it further prolongs Mr. Mills' and his family's separation from his daughter Vanessa," the statement reads.
Cristy Oakes, Jordan's attorney, tells the Daily News her client and the child's extended biological family also are disappointed.
"The sooner we can get some visitation between child and family the better," Oakes says. "She is being denied the right to see her grandmother and her two siblings. The family is saddened they won't ... see her over the holidays."
When the custody hearing resumes, Montgomery County Juvenile Court Judge Nick Kuntz is expected to rule on Mills' parental rights; if he upholds them, a custody trial would most likely ensue between Mills and Doss.
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
Recently Asked
TheTalkies:RelatedVideos
-
Joint Custody Granted In Jackson Family Feud
Michael Jackson's mother and her grandson T.J. have been given joint custody of the late singer's three children. It appears that the family feud has been resolved, at least for now. Both Katherine and her 34-year-old grandson will both have a say in the children's medical care, their schooling and other parental-type decision making,
-
Mom Arrested For Letting Young Son Get Tattoo
A Georgia mother was taken into police custody after local authorities learned that she allowed her 10-year-old son to get a permanent tattoo. Police say it's illegal for anyone younger than 18 to get inked, even with their parent's consent. (Jan. 19)
-
8 Kids Taken From Foster Care Found OK in Pa.
Eight children taken from a New York child welfare agency by their mother last week have been found in Pennsylvania, authorities say, and their parents are in custody. (Sept. 27)
-
Isabel Celis' Father Barred From Seeing His Sons
ABC News reports the boys are in their mothers custody and Isabel's parents have split.
SitesWeLove
- Site Map
- |
- Staff
- |
- Terms of Service
- |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Trademarks
- |
- Advertise With Us
- |
- About Our Ads
- |
- AOL Downloads
- |
- Contact Us
- |
© Copyright 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Aol Family
ReaderComments (Page 1 of 1)
12-08-2010 @ 3:15PM
DropZoneMom said...The "father" has 2 kids who are already in his mother's care, yet he wants custody of this baby? And since his mother is the idiot who raised him to be a breeder with NO thought or concern (other than his wingy), she's obviously too stupid to parent, too.
If either of them cared a bit about the baby, they'd leave her with the adoptive mother. STUPID PEOPLE SHOULDN'T (be allowed to) BREED.
Reply
12-10-2010 @ 5:28PM
SpiritedBohemian said...I have to agree. Some people just collect kids, they don't really think about the child, that is because these people are children emotionally. I know of a mother that had 8 children, grandma has raised the first 3, she has the next 3, and dad is raising the last 2 babies with his parents. Oh, yes, she is now pregnant with #9 as she has a new boyfriend.
Leave this poor baby with the woman she know as mother, she can get to know her siblings through the years.
An adopted child doesn't grow in the mother's belly, the child grows in the mother's heart!
Reply
12-12-2010 @ 8:57PM
stacy said...There is no way that child should leave that adoptive mother. She had her since birth. This father is a deadbeat dad. He doesn't even raise his other two children. I could see if he's single parent and his mother helps out because he has to work and stuff. But no, the father obviously isn't fit. He doesn't even have legal custody of them. What does that tell you? Even the birth mother claimed ignorance from him. You can see this is true. I'm sure his mother is pressuring him to fight with her. I understand she wants to hold her family together because they are blood. But, honestly the best decision is for this child is to stay with the adoptive mother.
Reply
12-14-2010 @ 9:37PM
Caitlin said...Stacy - The birth-mother "claiming ignorance of the father" means that she doesn't know who the father is, such as with rape, a one-night-stand, or too many sexual partners to remember them all. As an adopted child myself, I would be infuriated to learn that my birth-father, whom my birth-mother also "claimed ignorance of," was denied the opportunity to be a part of my life if he had so desired. There could be many possible reasons why the first two children are living with their grandmother. If you don't have the facts, you should not pass judgment on the situation. The paternal birth-family should, at the least, have the right to visit this child. Even more importantly, the child has the right to know her father.
In a perfect world, all parties would stop being so d*mn selfish and agree to allow this child to have a mother AND father, which, in this case, is possible.
Reply
12-15-2010 @ 12:18AM
Allie said...Caitlin, as a fellow adoptee, I have to disagree with you. My birthmother finally revealed as she was dying the name of my birthfather, and enough information (that was backed up with paperwork) to show that while he "wanted" to be a part of my life, he was nothing more than a controlling, manipulative womanizer who used the women in his life for financial gain and ego gratification. I'm grateful she placed me for adoption and even when he threatened her, she stood her ground (and kept a gun handy, because he was just that dangerous when he didn't get his way). Sometimes, Mother (or BirthMother) knows BEST (especially where BirthFather is concerned).
2-05-2011 @ 8:10PM
Tina said...I agree with you, Caitlin. I'm not adopted, but I did grow up with my grandmother. I was fortunate not to be torn from my entire family, just because my parents screwed up! I have personally met Rena Jordan (I became interested in this case because I am a law student and we began following it as a class). She is interested solely in ensuring her grandchild is not separated from what appears to be a loving, giving, devoted extended family. Her son is no saint and she doesn't appear to have any delusions about that fact, but I have to say - having read everything I can get my hands on regarding this case, Rena appears to be the only one whose agenda is not distorted by greed, vengeance, fear or guilt, etc - this is only my opinion, and only as a layperson. Hers is of love. I am so beyond unimpressed with the children's services agency that allowed this mess to get started. Rena should have been given temporary custody immediately when the adoption didn't go through and Children's Services was joined as a party to the case 3 years ago. A relative is ALWAYS supposed to be considered over a stranger / foster parent, regardless of their training - because, as you said, families deserve to stay together! Rena got custody of the other two girls (who share the same mother & father) as the baby in dispute because CSB advocated for her to become the 'relative care-giver" when both parents got into trouble and they were removed from the home. It's such a shame, but the truth is CSB will probably never be held accountable either. They are State and County agencies, run by the Prosecutor's office who is opposing the father and his family.
1-25-2011 @ 2:04PM
Cindy said...A strong reason for sterilization. This man does not have the right to continue to bring children he is not willing to responsibly father into this world
Reply
4-13-2011 @ 2:39PM
Tina said...Cindy, that is a pretty aggressive statement. I find it difficult to understand why you feel so confident that this guy is a monster, who ought to be stripped of his God(dess) - given and Constitutionally - protected right to procreation. I have only met him once and only in the court room so I have no educated opinion as to his character, but I believe in the almost exclusively American concept of liberty at all cost. I also believe in analyzing data, critically and with an open mind, to first obtain a clear, logical perspective before making a judgment of that magnitude about another human being. I teach my children to be as unbiased as possible because I don't want the residual karma that raising a new generation full of hatred and ignorance would propound upon my soul. He may be the monster that Doss and the media make him out to be - but he may not! We do not know these people. We are fed increments of information, by the powers that be who have an awful lot to hide themselves. I ask only that everyone try not to adjudicate this child's entire family on the internet! That is the job of the court system, not the general public, but if we must form an opinion (which it is human nature to do) it is crucial not to just digest everything one sees and hears in the media as gospel. There are always at least three sides to every story..his, hers and the truth!
2-01-2011 @ 1:08PM
cyndi said...I live in Dayton and from what I understand, his mother has custody because he's been in and out of jail. I wonder if the courts are just biding their time until he screws up and ends up in jail again and there is no longer an issue.
Reply
2-05-2011 @ 7:48PM
Tina said...I see alot of talk about the criminal history of the father and how the birth mother "claimed ignorance" of his identity. The truth is, if one follows the legal proceedings and not merely the media (which no one can deny has been slanted in Doss's favor - she IS a PR Pro!!) that there was a great deal of cover-up on the part of the Children's Svcs agency here in Montgomery Co. The two girls in Rena Jordan's care currently share the same two blood parents as little Vanessa. Andrea Conley (Birth Mother) knew good and well who her daughter's father was when she denied it on the adoption paperwork. CSB was negligent in their due diligence requirements - and yes, Stacy Doss got screwed but she knew something fishy was going on. Why else would she hide in a hotel while Mills was looking for his daughter? CSB dropped the ball when they forced the issue and let that baby leave the state when they had plenty of warning that the birth father had come forward within hours of her birth! It's terrible that that poor little girl has been denied her sisters and grandmother. Doss took her under false pretenses. How is adoption fraud in this child's best interest? The lack of integrity the adoptive mother had displayed in creating the media frenzy surrounding the trial is, in and of itself, a sign of her selfishness. Being a parent is not about what she wants. It is about the child's best interest...lying to an innocent child and refusing her contact with her family; smearing her poor little tear-stained face all over TV and the internet - none of that is in Vanessa's best interest. Rena Jordan is clearly an appropriate guardian and, were this fiasco not ongoing, a family member would get first refusal for legal custody in a case where ALL of the parents (or wannabe parents as it were) are not capable of being appropriate for the child's sake! The fact that Vanessa has bonded with Stacey Doss is unfortunate since it was accomplished solely by fraudulent circumstances. The birth mother was nicely compensated for her role in giving the baby up to Doss, who wanted a baby so badly that she didn't care how she got one! That's the sickest part of all of this mess. Regardless of what you wanna say about Benjamin Mills, the true liability rests upon a child welfare system that failed - not to mention a greedy, drug-addicted "mother" who effectively sold that poor child to a woman who has apparently lost all sense of decorum in her desperate efforts to "own" her. Mills' history only came into this as a tool. He probably cannot raise her himself, true, but Rena Jordan is the only party involved who didn't do anything wrong to acquire rights to her custody. She should be the one who raises that child.
Reply