Getting unadopted?
rkbose
permitted to nullify their own adoption if they so choose.
This is not like Kim giving up being adopted, where she decided to keep
her existing parents but just relinquished the status. This would mean
giving back the parents (or keeping them as fosters) and getting your
first parents back.
I'd be interested in a poll: Do people like the idea, and why; or not,
and why not?
Rupa
Kathy
>From: rkbose rkb...@pacific.net.sg
>Date: 8/14/01 9:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <3B79FDC9...@pacific.net.sg>
Since I'm not adopted, I cannot really say.
I guess it would be like me saying that at age 50 I'd rather be adopted so I'll
give up my bio family where the seeds have already been planted and nearly
harvested... Impossible to do, and besides that I'm not that adoptable..;)
>Rupa
Ron Morgan
"rkbose" <rkb...@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message
news:3B79FDC9...@pacific.net.sg...
> Di has proposed an interesting idea: that an adult adoptee should be
> permitted to nullify their own adoption if they so choose.
>
> This is not like Kim giving up being adopted, where she decided to keep
> her existing parents but just relinquished the status. This would mean
> giving back the parents (or keeping them as fosters) and getting your
> first parents back.
And what if the first parents don't want them back... Do they have any say
in this proposed process?
Ron
Dian
A free man could make that choice, Rupa. Think of how much easier it
would have been if all adoptees could unadopt themselves, get hold of
their OBC
as a non-adopted person, and if they then wish, readopt themselves
back to their aparants, making it their choice at last. Now that is a
person with human rights.
Di
Di
Dian
> "rkbose" <rkb...@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message
> news:3B79FDC9...@pacific.net.sg...
> > Di has proposed an interesting idea: that an adult adoptee should be
> > permitted to nullify their own adoption if they so choose.
> >
> > This is not like Kim giving up being adopted, where she decided to keep
> > her existing parents but just relinquished the status. This would mean
> > giving back the parents (or keeping them as fosters) and getting your
> > first parents back.
>
> And what if the first parents don't want them back... Do they have any say
> in this proposed process?
>
> Ron
>
It wouldn't require reclaiming the relationship with them,
necessarily, Ron. So their opinion would not matter. It should be the
adult adoptees choice whether he wants to place his own family line
back on his ancestral tree. It would only work if it was his choice
alone.
Di
The All-Powerful All-Knowing One
>Message-id: <3B79FDC9...@pacific.net.sg>
Sure, why not? To each his own.
Ghoulagirl
Giving birth is an act of nature; adopting is an act of nurture.
The All-Powerful All-Knowing One
>From: pat...@dial1.net (Dian)
>Date: Wed, Aug 15, 2001 7:15 AM
>Message-id: <f93539ac.01081...@posting.google.com>
I don't need my OBC or to unadopt myself in order to know where I belong, Di.
Not all adopted people are as stupid as you seem to believe - heck, I doubt
MOST adopted people are as stupid as you believe.
DeannaBefore
I wouldn't be interested. I like my parents, so of course I am biased, but
as an adult - if I wanted rid of my parents, I doubt I'd want different ones
in return.
Deanna
J
writes:
It's an interesting idea, but why limit it to unadoption? Let's extend it to
unbirthed, as well. I've known any number of people who would have been happy
to sever all legal ties with their families. Some, for example, might not like
the idea that their parents/siblings might profit by an untimely death. Others
might just find it enormously satisfying, the ultimate public renunciation.
J.
"We all say so, so it must be true."
The Bandar-log (monkey tribe), Rudyard Kipling's "Jungle Book"
Boomer
"Dian" <pat...@dial1.net> wrote in message
news:f93539ac.01081...@posting.google.com...
What's the difference in this instance Di between adopted or bio? No child
asks to be born. No child has a choice of parent in infancy. You may as well
apply this to all parent/child relationships regardless of adoption status.
Lynn
>
>
> Di
>
>
> Di
That Damn Boo Kid
For myself -- no. I have no reason, and being adopted is part of my personal
history.
For everyone else -- sure, why not? Given that the adoptee generally could not
consent to the adoption at the time it took place, I see no reason why any
individual should continue to be bound by a legal proceeding they didn't
consent to.
Knifchick
Con te patiro
su navi per mari
che io lo so
no, no, non esistono piu
con te io li vivro
PLAYROY1
permitted to nullify their own adoption if they so choose.
ROY: I think they should for sure. I also think that the aparents should then
be allowed to sue them for however many years of financial support. If the
aparents were never thought of as parents and the adoptee were to nullify the
relationship, then the adoptee should have to pay back the funds that were
meant for the aparent's children. I'm sure who ever they were presently
thinking of as their parents would be happy to financially support them and to
make up for all the years they were not able to. I know I would.
PLAYROY1
asks to be born. No child has a choice of parent in infancy. You may as well
apply this to all parent/child relationships regardless of adoption status.
Lyn >>
ROY: Finally a voice of intelligence...
PLAYROY1
not
consent to the adoption at the time it took place, I see no reason why any
individual should continue to be bound by a legal proceeding they didn't
consent to >>
ROY: Hmmm, you know I never consented to my mother birthing me either. I
guess I'm just as entitled to not be bound by the legal proceeding that I
didn't consent to either. What right did that woman, my mother have to create
me anyway? And unlike all adoptees, she didn't even want to have me. Neither
she nor I wanted in this contract. Geeze. I think I'll call her up (she's 86
now) tell her to get her walker over to the phone and give her the good news.
Dian
> >Subject: Re: Getting unadopted?
> >From: pat...@dial1.net (Dian)
> >Date: Wed, Aug 15, 2001 7:15 AM
> >Message-id: <f93539ac.01081...@posting.google.com>
> >
> >rkbose <rkb...@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message
> news:<3B79FDC9...@pacific.net.sg>...
> >> Di has proposed an interesting idea: that an adult adoptee should be
> >> permitted to nullify their own adoption if they so choose.
> >>
> >> This is not like Kim giving up being adopted, where she decided to keep
> >> her existing parents but just relinquished the status. This would mean
> >> giving back the parents (or keeping them as fosters) and getting your
> >> first parents back.
> >>
> >> I'd be interested in a poll: Do people like the idea, and why; or not,
> >> and why not?
> >>
> >> Rupa
> >
> >A free man could make that choice, Rupa. Think of how much easier it
> >would have been if all adoptees could unadopt themselves, get hold of
> >their OBC
> >as a non-adopted person, and if they then wish, readopt themselves
> >back to their aparants, making it their choice at last. Now that is a
> >person with human rights.
>
> I don't need my OBC or to unadopt myself in order to know where I belong, Di.
And that's your choice.
> Not all adopted people are as stupid as you seem to believe - heck, I doubt
> MOST adopted people are as stupid as you believe.
>
> Ghoulagirl
>
I beg to differ there. I'm the one suggesting they should have
choices. Whereas it's you who assumes they all think the way you do.
You might want to try and look past the length of your own nose
sometime, before you attempt to speak on everyone's behalf.
Di
Heather
biological parents that those parents should be able to sue to get back
money also? What about when a child disowns their parents? Hey why stop
there? There are tons of children that disappoint their parents....should
the parent be able to take them to court and "recover their financial
losses?.....where do you draw the line Roy?
Heather
rkbose
> It's an interesting idea, but why limit it to unadoption? Let's extend it to
> unbirthed, as well. I've known any number of people who would have been happy
> to sever all legal ties with their families. Some, for example, might not like
> the idea that their parents/siblings might profit by an untimely death. Others
> might just find it enormously satisfying, the ultimate public renunciation.
>
> J.
>
Well, I know parents have the right to disown their grown offspring. Do
adults have a symmetrical right to disown their parents?
And does 'disowning' apply to property rights only, or to anything else?
Rupa
Boomer
"PLAYROY1" <play...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010816021536...@mb-ch.aol.com...
I was being sarcastic, I think I need more practise.
Lynn
Boomer
No, I wouldn't be interested in being able to nullify my adoption, but then
I'm happy with my lot in life.
Lynn
DeannaBefore
"Dian" <pat...@dial1.net> wrote to Kim
news:f93539ac.01081...@posting.google.com...
> ghoul...@aol.com.net (The All-Powerful All-Knowing One) wrote in message
news:<20010815080538...@mb-fi.aol.com>...
>
> > Not all adopted people are as stupid as you seem to believe - heck, I
doubt
> > MOST adopted people are as stupid as you believe.
> >
> > Ghoulagirl
> >
> I beg to differ there.
Oh, good. Most of us are as stupid as you believe, then?
> I'm the one suggesting they should have
> choices. Whereas it's you who assumes they all think the way you do.
The hell she does.
> You might want to try and look past the length of your own nose
> sometime, before you attempt to speak on everyone's behalf.
ROFL. You first.
Deanna
rkbose
>
> So does that mean that when a "biological" child decides to divorce their
> biological parents that those parents should be able to sue to get back
> money also? What about when a child disowns their parents? Hey why stop
> there? There are tons of children that disappoint their parents....should
> the parent be able to take them to court and "recover their financial
> losses?.....where do you draw the line Roy?
> Heather
Actually, we haven't established if bio-offspring actually can divorce
their parents. J? Elizabeth?
Rupa
RobyF
From: rkbose rkb...@pacific.net.sg
Date: Thu, Aug 16, 2001 3:27 AM
Message-id: <3B7B75F7...@pacific.net.sg>
J wrote:
Rupa
>>
This sounds like the practice of Roman Catholics getting a marriage annulled so
they can marry again in the church. What does that do to the status of children
of the first marriage?
Roberta
mom to Juliette, 5, adopted 2/4/98 from China
J
<h.ko...@home.com> writes:
>> ROY: I think they should for sure. I also think that the aparents should
>then
>> be allowed to sue them for however many years of financial support. If the
>> aparents were never thought of as parents and the adoptee were to nullify
>the
>> relationship, then the adoptee should have to pay back the funds that were
>> meant for the aparent's children. I'm sure who ever they were presently
>> thinking of as their parents would be happy to financially support them
>and to
>> make up for all the years they were not able to. I know I would.
One of the drawbacks of not reading Roy's posts directly is that I risk missing
these intimate moments of self-disclosure.
LilMtnCbn
>From: play...@aol.com (PLAYROY1)
>Date: 8/16/01 12:12 AM Mountain Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20010816021205...@mb-ch.aol.com>
Those ungrateful bastards!
Kathy
>From: jmh...@aol.commisery (J )
>Date: 8/16/01 6:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20010816092426...@nso-ck.aol.com>
>
>In article <2ZJe7.86485$sM.23...@news2.rdc1.ab.home.com>, "Heather"
><h.ko...@home.com> writes:
>
>>> ROY: I think they should for sure. I also think that the aparents should
>>then
>>> be allowed to sue them for however many years of financial support. If the
>>> aparents were never thought of as parents and the adoptee were to nullify
>>the
>>> relationship, then the adoptee should have to pay back the funds that were
>>> meant for the aparent's children. I'm sure who ever they were presently
>>> thinking of as their parents would be happy to financially support them
>>and to
>>> make up for all the years they were not able to. I know I would.
>
>
>One of the drawbacks of not reading Roy's posts directly is that I risk
>missing
>these intimate moments of self-disclosure.
Lol. So true.
I wonder if he'll ever get it that adding more pain onto misery isn't a
solution when one claims to love their child unconditionally.
>J.
Lainie Petersen
FWIW,
I have a difficult time with the notion that one can "undo" one's adoptive
parents. If the adoption was legal, I can't see how it can simply be "undone"
at the whim of the adoptee. Certainly, if the adoption was somehow fraudulent
or illegal, I can see having the adoption "annuled", but I would think that
this would require clear evidence that there was something legally wrong with
the adoption from the start.
I think that adult adoptees ought to have the same right as everyone to choose
to be "adopted" by someone else, but I disagree with the idea that they should
be able to have their own adoptions annulled except when they can prove that
it was illegal.
Lainie
PLAYROY1
biological parents that those parents should be able to sue to get back
money also?
ROY: If they deny their parents and look for new ones, why not? Wasn't the
investment the parents made for their children? If the child no longer
considers themselves the child, then the financial support should be recovered
so the parents can still provide for their children.
Lainie Petersen
Also, recently I read of two separate cases (not involving adoption) where
parents/kids found themselves forced by the courts to provide for their
parents/adult offspring.
In one case a man who had sexually abused his kids was sent to a mental hospital
for treatment. His adult children (victims of the abuse) were then sent a bill to
cover his expenses. Apparently their state can and does force adult children to
pay for their parents expenses.
In a similar case, a man who was bi-polar sued to force his parents to support
him. He won, and they have to pay him 3500 a month plus additional expenses.
I don't see anything wrong with people going to court to try and annul their
responsiblities to each other (especially in cases where abuse as occured), but I
just can't justify annuling perfectly legal adoptions on a whim.
Lainie
Elizabeth
>Actually, we haven't established if bio-offspring actually can divorce
>their parents. J? Elizabeth?
>
>Rupa
There are no special legal obligations flowing from adult children to their
parents (bio or adopted), so there's no point to a "divorce," AFAIK. The
answer would be no. Minor children can seek emancipation from their bio
parents and some have done so.
Elizabeth
The All-Powerful All-Knowing One
>Message-id: <f93539ac.01081...@posting.google.com>
>
>ghoul...@aol.com.net (The All-Powerful All-Knowing One) wrote in message
>news:<20010815080538...@mb-fi.aol.com>...
snip
>> I don't need my OBC or to unadopt myself in order to know where I belong,
>Di.
>
>And that's your choice.
Gosh, thanks for recognizing that, Di. I feel so much better about it now.
>> Not all adopted people are as stupid as you seem to believe - heck, I
>doubt
>> MOST adopted people are as stupid as you believe.
>I beg to differ there.
Really? So you DO feel adopted people are stupid? How, um, unsurprising.
I'm the one suggesting they should have
>choices.
Did I say they shouldn't?
>Whereas it's you who assumes they all think the way you do.
Not at all. Some adopted people have a deep need to have a copy of their
OBCs, and some adopted people may want to disown their adoptive parents and
return to their birthfamilies. Just because I don't share those feelings
doesn't mean that I don't realize that others feel differently.
I know that's a tough concept for you to grasp, Di - that while you might
have certain feelings regarding adoption or whatever, there are others who feel
differently.
>You might want to try and look past the length of your own nose
>sometime, before you attempt to speak on everyone's behalf.
Oh the irony!
Ghoulagirl
The All-Powerful All-Knowing One
>From: "DeannaBefore" mcle...@spammenotsprint.ca
>Date: Thu, Aug 16, 2001 3:55 AM
>Message-id: <4_Ke7.2573$j_2....@newscontent-01.sprint.ca>
>
>
>"Dian" <pat...@dial1.net> wrote to Kim
>news:f93539ac.01081...@posting.google.com...
>> ghoul...@aol.com.net (The All-Powerful All-Knowing One) wrote in message
>news:<20010815080538...@mb-fi.aol.com>...
>
>>
>> > Not all adopted people are as stupid as you seem to believe - heck,
>I
>doubt
>> > MOST adopted people are as stupid as you believe.
>> >
>> > Ghoulagirl
>> >
>> I beg to differ there.
>
>Oh, good. Most of us are as stupid as you believe, then?
I've long suspected that she feels that way, but it's nice to see she's
finally gone on record with it. You know, I may have a new quote for my sig!
Palms2pines
I remember a made-for-TV movie about the true story of a young boy who had
bounced around foster care almost his entire life. Eventually, one of his
foster families loved him and wanted to adopt him, but his mother would not
voluntarily terminate her perental rights. He went to court and successfully
"divorced" himself from her so that he was legally free for adoption. Doesn't
anyone else recall this movie? The boy's name was "Gregory". I remember the
foster/adoptive dad was played by Richard McCrennan (sp??). Perhaps the legal
term for what the boy did was "emancipate" himself. I am not sure. They called
it "divorce" in the movie. I also see stories of wealthy, old people adopting
grown employees, etc. Would these grown people have to obtain the terminations
of their bio parents' parental rights to be legally free for such an adoption?
P2P
Elizabeth
>I remember a made-for-TV movie about the true story of a young boy who had
>bounced around foster care almost his entire life. Eventually, one of his
>foster families loved him and wanted to adopt him, but his mother would not
>voluntarily terminate her perental rights. He went to court and successfully
>"divorced" himself from her so that he was legally free for adoption. Doesn't
>anyone else recall this movie? The boy's name was "Gregory"
Yes, it happened in Florida, IIRC.
> I remember the
>foster/adoptive dad was played by Richard McCrennan (sp??). Perhaps the legal
>term for what the boy did was "emancipate" himself. I am not sure. They
>called
>it "divorce" in the movie.
I think someone in the media called it "divorce" and the rest of the media went
with it.
>>I also see stories of wealthy, old people adopting
>grown employees, etc. Would these grown people have to obtain the
>terminations
>of their bio parents' parental rights to be legally free for such an
>adoption?
No.
Elizabeth
The All-Powerful All-Knowing One
>From: palms...@aol.comh8spam (Palms2pines)
>Date: Thu, Aug 16, 2001 3:13 PM
>Message-id: <20010816151306...@mb-fp.aol.com>
>
>>>Actually, we haven't established if bio-offspring actually can divorce
>>>their parents. J? Elizabeth?
>>>
>>>Rupa
>>
>>There are no special legal obligations flowing from adult children to their
>>parents (bio or adopted), so there's no point to a "divorce," AFAIK.
>The
>>answer would be no. Minor children can seek emancipation from their bio
>>parents and some have done so.
>>
>>Elizabeth
>
>
>I remember a made-for-TV movie about the true story of a young boy who had
>bounced around foster care almost his entire life. Eventually, one of his
>foster families loved him and wanted to adopt him, but his mother would
>not
>voluntarily terminate her perental rights. He went to court and successfully
>"divorced" himself from her so that he was legally free for adoption. Doesn't
>anyone else recall this movie? The boy's name was "Gregory". I remember
>the
>foster/adoptive dad was played by Richard McCrennan (sp??). Perhaps the
>legal
>term for what the boy did was "emancipate" himself. I am not sure. They
>called
>it "divorce" in the movie.
Well, if it was ON TELEVISION, then it MUST be true! Just ask Di.
Ghoulagirl
"Not all adopted people are as stupid as you seem to believe - heck, I doubt
MOST adopted people are as stupid as you believe." - Me, 8/16/01
"I beg to differ there. " - Di Welfare's reply, 8/16/01
Elizabeth
>From: ghoul...@aol.com.net (The All-Powerful All-Knowing One)
>Date: 8/16/01 12:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20010816155908...@mb-fo.aol.com>
Tagging on to Kim's reply because I forgot to say this earlier. The legal term
for what happened in the case that P2P mentioned was simply a TPR of the
biological mother's rights. BTW, the boy's right to petition for a TPR on his
own behalf was overturned on appeal because of his age. The TPR was upheld
only because his guardian ad litem and the paps (all adults, of course) had
also petitioned for TPR. The boy's bio father had consented.
This case didn't make any new law, IIRC. And it doesn't really relate to what
*adults* can or can't do legally.
Elizabeth
NancyWeb
divorce
>their parents. J? Elizabeth?
I seem to remember a case in Florida a few years back where a boy divorced his
parents. I don't remember the outcome, though.