If a baby was kidnapped, should the parents get is back?

Question

If you had a baby and it was kidnapped, and the police found it some time later...weeks, months, maybe even years, Should your child be returned to you?

Say the couple that kidnapped your baby were taking really good care of your baby and loved your baby a lot, would it be in the best interest of the baby for them to keep your baby, rather than traumatize it, even though the baby was kidnapped?

Would it be different if the baby had been kidnapped by an agency and adopted by this loving couple who knew nothing about the kidnapping? If they did nothing wrong should they then be allowed to keep your baby, even though you want it back?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N58dJLzK47Y

Answer 1

Yes, no matter what happened to your baby, who kidnapped it, and when the police found him/her, if they found the baby and he/she was alive, you should get it back! it would be hard on the other family (if the baby was given to another loving couple) but it is not their baby, and its 100x harder on you! You should get it back no matter what!! Its your baby!

Answer 2

Well in the story you gave us the link to i think that that baby..Harvey? should stay with his adoptive parents as they raised him and love him very much bit i think that the father should still be able to see Harvey but i think Harvey is better off with his adoptive parent who obviously love him very much =]

Answer 3

Well obviously a child who is kidnapped should be returned!! This child wasnt kidnapped though he was placed with the consent of the birthmom. The adoption agency should have had the birthfather sign off as well prior to placement. If he wanted to parent they never should have placed the baby. How heartbreaking for all involved!

Answer 4

yes, even if u really luv this child you have to give it bak just think hu wuld u rather be sum1 who doesnt give the child back and keeps ir as there own knowing that someone out there if suffering thinking there child is dead and u knowing that he/she is alive x*x think hard and choose the right thing x*x

Answer 5

This adoption has not be finalized.  Therefore the child is NOT their child.   There is a Court Order ordering the child to be returned.

The POTENTIAL adoptive parents are hiding out and not facing up to doing the right thing. This baby should be returned to his real family, as per the Judges orders.

This father did not know that the mother had skipped States to have the child.  Therefore how could he register on a putative fathers registry if he didn't know in which state to do this?

This is NOT an isolated case

http://www.babyselling.com/

Answer 6

i know it will be hard on everyone involved but i think the biological parents should get to know the child the adoptive parents can remain in the child life especially during the transition period.if it were me child i would want to get to know him or her.

Answer 7

The child's (in the video) best interest is to return to his biological father.  He never should have been adopted in the first place since his father did not want him to be adopted.  

The adoptive parents, IMO, need to really look into their hearts and ask themselves if they really want to adopt a child who has biological family members who are willing (wanting) to parent him.

As a PAP, I would NEVER in a million years want to adopt that child, because there is not a need for adoption in this case.

Everything I have ever heard about LDS family services has me appalled.  

My mom/step dad are LDS, and I remember when I was younger, this family in their church who would foster newborns (this was in Minnesota though) and they always seemed to have at least one brand spanking new baby.  It always gave me the creeps, but I never really understood what was going on.  I think I have a clearer picture now.  They were fostering the babies until parental rights could be severed, and I wonder how many of those babies were actually truly in need of a family, and how many were kidnapped like baby Harvey.

Wow.  I get shivers just thinking about it.

Answer 8

return the baby =[

Answer 9

first of all, THAT BABY WAS NOT KIDNAPPED-  that is ridiculous- the birth mom is even fighting for the adoptive couple.  That father should have been registered- however I will say this, when we adopted our oldest child, our attorney did it completely legal, by placing ads to try and find his birth dad- and then after so long, terminated his rights.  Excuse me the baby was not kidnapped by the adoption agency either, the birth mom, if you listened to the whole story without prejudice, then you would see that the birth mom placed that child with the couple, and will fight for the couples rights, because she felt that the family was BEST FOR THE CHILD.

Those of you who are answering without listening to the video- please don't because it is not represented well, by this question.

Answer 10

Yes it makes a difference if the couple who had your baby were criminals or not.  If the parents were oblivious to how the child came to be with an adoption agency is completely different than a couple committing a crime and stealing your baby.  If the adoption was illegal through a agency then every case needs to be reviewed.  Nothing is cut and dry.  Each case is different.

In the case that you linked from youtube...I beleive that if a parent is any kind of parent then they would have been a part of the child's life from the beginning.  If he didn't care enough to be involned 5 months ago then what made him change his mind now?  You can't pick and choose when you want to be a parent.  Let the adoptive family keep the baby!

Answer 11

i really don't know what to say about this case. This is a really hard one to chose because there are two sides that dearly love a child and would be heart broken to give the child away! In the end i would have to say that the child should have to go back to the real parents that is the only right moral way!

Answer 12

yes

Answer 13

That is not the case here. The father did not establish his paternity legally, so he had no rights to this child. Sorry, but that is the law.

ETA: He didn't register in the state the child was born in, he knew the girl was pregnant, he had 9 months to register.

ETA: Hey Laurie, you are mixing up your biological fathers. Matt Tennson's baby was born and surrendered for adoption in Idaho, he did not register in Idaho.

In the O'Dea case, the baby is a girl. He also did not establish his paternity. How can you "return" a child to someone who never had the child to begin with with. And he did know the mother was in Utah, she called him and told him.

The law is the law, mothers are mothers by virtue of carrying the child and giving birth, fathers have to establish their rights, and in both these cases they did not.

Oh, and LDSFS did not participate in all the adoptions listed here. So slamming them is wrong.

ETA : To Laurie,

It says on the O'dea website that HE did know that the mother was in Utah, that she called and told him.  He just chose not to believe her. Maybe she had family in Utah? You know there is more than just one side to the story presented here.

And yes, maybe there should be a national putative father registry to prevent mothers from state jumping, however, right now there isn't. So, the law was followed and taking a child from a family that loves them and the only family they have ever know and giving them to biologically related strangers is wrong.

Answer 14

Yeah I have read a few articles on that case in the video. The Birthfather had no interest in the baby in fact he wanted the mother to abort, then the mother didn’t even hear from him in her later months of pregnancy.  He signed the father registry for the state after the deadline in fact after the baby was born.  He knew his girlfriend was pregnant if he cared about this baby he would have signed up straightaway and he would have support this poor woman during her pregnancy.

He did not though which makes me think that its his parents, grandma and grandpa wanting the baby, and them pressuring this young man to get the baby for them.  The law was followed here it’s not the adoptive parents or the baby’s fault that the birthfather signed up on the register after the time had passed. Nor is it their fault that this young man took no interest in this baby while the mother was pregnant with him.

The judge needs to up hold the law, and by the law this father would have no rights because he did not go after them asap and again he even knew his girlfriend was pregnant.  I’d be a bit more sympathetic if he had not known about the pregnancy but he did. The mother also said that it was always her who had to initiate contact with the father, before he ceased contact with her while she was in her later stages of the pregnancy.

A mother who jumps state just to keep the baby away from the father that is wrong. I don’t see that in this case. The father had no interest in the baby or supporting the mother, the mother tried to stay in contact with the father and again it was always the mother who had to initiated contact.

The adoptive parents even invited the birthfather to come visit the baby in their home. If he truly cared about his birthson then you’d think he take any opportunity to visit him.

Now if a child is truly kidnapped and the parent(s) didn’t know anything about it.  If this is caught early on the right thing to do would be to return the child, in an appropriate transition.

If we were talking years later. Then the adults need to work something out that would be the best for the child whether that is joint custody, visitations. It would not be in the best interest of a child who has lived with their family for years   to be ripped away from the only family the child has known and placed with strangers.

Answer 15

Of course that child should go back to it's parents.  That is like saying if I steel your car, and I am taking good care of it I should keep it?  Come on, that is really crazy.

Answer 16

The father should get his baby back. I do not understand why our society seems to think that father's do not matter in a child's life. The "kidnapping" was done by the birth mother who gave this baby away without the father's knowledge. Shame on her and shame on the agency that allowed this to happen. I feel for the adopting family, they are innocent in all this. My prayers are with them; however, that little boy needs to be with his dad and his mother should go to jail.

Answer 17

Well, obviously the parents should get "it" back, although I'm pretty darn sure they'd call their child "he" or "she" rather than "it".  Just guessing.

If the child was older, and the aparents didn't have anything do do with the kidnapping, maybe they could have a shared custody agreement.  They could share "it".  Maybe "it" could have a voice in the matter, if "it" is old enough.

Answer 18

These stories have happened in history, and others such as "switched" at birth stories....

Many years ago there was a story about two families with daughters--that had been switched at birth.... I forget the names but anyway, years passed and one of the girls became sick and her parents were informed that she was not Genetically related to them....

Searches and that took place--eventually the other family was found and efforts were made to do whatever (bone marrow?) to save the little girl... She died...

Her parents decided that they wanted their birth daughter now. It went to courts and was a blood bath and eventually I believe the biological family won--I am not sure because I really only listened to what the 12 year old girl had to say...

Now and then she will still speak about this.... She was horribly traumatized and ripped up... The only parents she knew were taken...

I think that in this type of case it would be good to make use of some of the testing we have for children in foster care...

Removing a child from a primary caregiver can and Often leads to Attachment Disorders...even if it is back to a bio parent..... so.... not sure I would do this to my child.

Answer 19

I had better be getting my baby back if they found out who has it!