This story is such a sad one.

I can't imagine what the adoptive family is going through right now, and I can't even imagine what is going on for the 2 yr old. I know kids are resilient, but even still.. I don't think that justifies taking away a child from the only parents she has ever known. Even the way the "hand off" took place is just awful -- the adoptive family begged and pleaded for a 3 day transition for Veronica to get to know her biological Father, etc. before being taken away from them.. but the Bio refused.. and instead, she had a 30 minute "transition" phase in a Psychologist's office before being put in a truck with strangers. :(

It's very unfortunate, as Veronica's Biological Mom signed off for the adoption, and the bio Father signed a waiver saying he did not contest the adoption. There's so many articles out there on this right now, I hope some of you can read them and form your own opinion.

http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2012/jan/04/birth-mom-explains-adoption-decision/ (Here's a link to an article/interview with the birth Mom, explaining the consent of adoption a bit more)


http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story/SC-couple-fights-for-custody-of-adopted-child-now/TT5tBwRciEiODxz0T5tHMQ.cspx

A South Carolina couple is fighting to get their adopted daughter back in their custody after she was placed with her birth father, an Oklahoman, over the weekend.

Matt and Melanie Capobianco said goodbye to their two and half year-old daughter Veronica on Saturday. “We're kind of reeling from it, and reliving having to hand her over in our minds constantly is painful,” the couple said.

While pregnant, Veronica's birth mother selected the couple and signed off on the adoption.

“We were there for the delivery, in the delivery room and Matt cut the umbilical cord, and she's been with us ever since except for the last four days,” Melanie told FOX23 Wednesday.

Veronica was removed from the Capobianco's home after her birth father, who is Cherokee, contested the adoption. The custody battle has been on-going since early 2010. The couple says when they first learned they would adopt Veronica; no mention was made of her Indian heritage.

“We were told that she was not an Indian child and so we didn't think it was going to make a difference,” Melanie said.

That was not the case. The Indian Child Welfare Act, passed in 1978, is a federal law that helps ensure Indian children stay with their birth parents or in other Indian homes whenever possible. That is the basis of the custody petition filed on behalf of Veronica’s birth father, who is represented by the Cherokee Nation.

“This isn't in her best interest. We're her family. This is her home,” Matt told FOX23.

“We understand the purpose of the Indian Child Welfare Act, but we feel that the ICWA is being abused, you know, we don't think this is what it was meant for,” the couple said.

Tulsa attorney June Stanley, who has handled many Indian adoptions, but is not involved in this case, says tribes will fight very hard to keep children from being placed in non-tribal homes.

“When a nation gives up its rights to its children its risking losing its culture, its ability to pass on language,” Stanley said.

She says if attorneys and perspective parents don't investigate if a child has tribal blood or linage, they could wind up in a similar situation.

“Is it common for people who don't practice in Indian law to unintentionally end up in a mess because they didn't know the law was out there? Absolutely.”

Now the Capobianco’s are using social media and the internet, http://www.saveveronica.com/, to try and get Veronica back.

“It's not about us. It's not about them. It's about our daughter and the best thing for her.”

Chrissi Ross Nimmo, the Assistant Attorney General who represented the Cherokee Nation in this case, gave FOX23 this statement:

“As a matter of law and policy, the Cherokee Nation’s attorney general’s office generally does not comment on juvenile cases due to their sensitive nature and confidential information. In an effort to quell the undue outside attention to this sensitive affair, the Cherokee Nation attorney general’s office filed a motion for a gag order in this case Wednesday afternoon, along with a motion to release the judge’s final order to the public. I ask that all parties involved in the matter respect the confidential nature of these juvenile court proceedings. The Cherokee Nation has 115 Indian Child Welfare employees and nine assistant attorneys general who work tirelessly to fight for the rights of Cherokee children and their parents, not only within our 14-county jurisdiction, but in tribal, state and federal courts across the nation. The Indian Child Welfare Act was written to help keep Native American children with their families whenever possible – a concept embraced wholeheartedly by the Cherokee Nation.”

Just wanted to update this --

They received over 20k signatures and turned them in to local government today.
The Supreme Court of SC has accepted their case and will likely expedite it, since it involves a child.

Share this with your friends and family, and share it on Facebook.

Can the birth mother attempt to retain some form of custody? It doesn't seem likely that the adoptive parents will ever regain custody after that ruling, but if the birth mother could regain full or partial custody, that could be a way to keep the child in all of their lives. But I don't know enough about the legal system to know if that is even possible.

Birth mothers cannot get legal rights back, and the child would be given to another adoptive family, or be put into a foster home if something happened to the legal adoptive family. At least that's how it is in Michigan.

I'm not sure how it works.. It seems awful to me that the birth Father can sign forms saying he does not contest the adoption and then can come back and regain custody of the child, but the Mother can't. Seems like a really crappy situation to be in huh? :(

This is so sad and should never have happened. The mother should have been truthful about the father of her child (unless she too didn't know, but thats doubtful) and it would have saved all of this heartache. To say that the child is worse off being with her birth father is not necessarily true either... yes it's an awful thing to put a child through and must be terrible for the adoptive parents, but there's nothing to suggest that the child won't adjust (who remembers being 2?) and go on to live a happy life.. if anything, in my eyes, there needs to be more investigation into these things during the adoption process.. it says the father signed a waiver, but they should have investigated his background and made him sign a waiver not to claim custody on grounds of the Cherokee law too.. I'm sure a lot of parents regret putting a child up for adoption and wish they could take it back.. the law stops them from being able to do so for the good of the child.. so in my eyes it is the law that has failed here. I'm only thankful that it happened now at the age of 2 and not further down the line..

From what I know (and have read, etc) the Father never registered with the Cherokee nation and has a very VERY low % of Cherokee blood. He registered ONLY with the Cherokee Nation to gain their assistance to get this little girl back. I don't think he really cares too much about this little girl, based on his actions recently and how the "hand off" went - he was very insensitive to the little girl's needs right now.

And she may not remember being two years old, but who's to say how this will emotionally effect her? At two, you're very much attached to your parents -- which would be the adoptive couple that has raised her for the last 2 years.

In my eyes, the law has failed here also.. and the ICWA has been abused :( This was not what the law was intended for.

That's the lovely thing about child related laws...they (almost) always favor the moronic parent..

I agree with Lady Laz.. The birth mother should have said something..

And its pretty shitty that the "bio father" registured with the tribe only to get child back. I feel so bad for that little girl :(

I get the law and I agree with it, but it does seem that the birth father just doesn't seem to care about the little girl's feelings. Did any of the articles state WHY he was battling for custody? B/c if he doesn't consider her feelings, that to me doesn't feel very loving. I would understand the "I want my child back" mentality if he seemed to care; it's heartbreaking to see a child cry. I'm not rly sure why he'd want her back if he doesn't rly care for her....

@Love&heartsNik --

I don't think he's really even spoken to the media, at all. =\ The Cherokee Nation has actually gotten a gag order and the couple is having issues now speaking out against this, but friends/family and supporters are allowed to speak out all they want/need to.

I'm not really sure why he wanted her back.. and you'd think at this point, he'd want to keep her best interest at heart. Even the Guardian ad Lidem (sp*) recommended to the courts that it would be in the child's best interest to stay with her adoptive parents. The courts ignored her recommendation, which alone is a tragedy. I think the other thing that really gives me the impression he does NOT have her best interest at heart, is that the adoptive parents offered a 3-day transition period, where he could get to know the little girl and the little girl could get to know him, etc. before he took her away from them. He refused, and instead opted for a "30 minute" transition period, before driving away with her. There's no way that little girl was familiar enough with him/his family in 30 minutes to feel comfortable leaving with them. I know kids are resilient and adjust to changing environments quickly, and that's all I can hope is that this little girl is adjusting to this massive change :(

Very sad story!
The "father" is probably broke, and registering with the Cherokee Nation, I believe will get him benefits and I would assume with a child they are greater.
That is my theory.

@Jessi - yep =\ The Cherokee Nation is pretty loaded, they're building their 3rd casino right now. Total failure on the government that managed this case - they really dropped the ball.

When I read it, thats what I immediately thought. I knew this guy who got money from being Native American ( not sure which tribe) and being diabled. He made more than me and my husband.. sadly he drank all his money away every month.

This is so heartbreaking. If he had a sudden 'change of heart' and wanted to play daddy, than I'm sure the adoptive parents would have allowed him to be part of Veronica's life (since they allowed the birth mother to be involved), but clearly he has some other motive if he couldn't even put the child's well being first. I can't imagine how they felt watching him drive away with their daughter. I feel like I would have snapped and shot the asshole in the face first. I hate it when laws that are barely relevant triumph over common sense. Is this man even active in Cherokee culture in any way? If not, than I don't see how ICWA even applies. A small percentage of Cherokee blood should not be enough to take a child away from a loving family for the sake of 'preserving culture'. So asinine.

@Let It Be - I believe he is under 2% Cherokee and I believe the little girl is more African American than she is Cherokee. I can't remember the stats on her heritage exactly, but completely agree with you. This guy is about the same % of Indian as I am and Veronica is about the same % as both of my kids -- and we are WHITE.. not Indian. =\

This is so heartbreaking. If he had a sudden 'change of heart' and wanted to play daddy
[url=http://www.saferunescapegold.com/]cheap Runescape Gold[/url]

The Cherokee nation wouldn't have let him register if he was such low percentage, at least not legally. They're VERY strict about who can get a white card and you often have to have documentation explaining your heritage. You have to be at LEAST an eighth Indian before you can get any kind of benefits for being a Native, and the bio mother would not have been able to give the girl up for adoption to someone outside the tribe, as per the ICWA. Something here definitely doesn't add up.

As for the bio mother, adoption laws are different in different states. In Michigan, a mother has six months to change her mind, even after signing. Well, it was this way for my mother's friend who adopted a little girl from here several years ago. Within 6 months, she had to give the girl back, and she immediately decided to adopt from Texas, where the law is 48 hours and a decision is made.

It's a shame if he really did this to get some sort of benefit out of having her. Is there a link stating he didn't contest the adoption? Because on the article here, it says he did.