As you might recall, Allison Quets was jailed for "kidnapping" her twin girls and fleeing to Canada with them
I am in receipt of the following request:
I am working with Allison Quets on her case - despite backdated docs, perjury, and numerous violations of the law by opposing counsel, she lost. The court went so far as to block her appeal to the Supreme Court of FL. Every attorney that reviews the papers is shocked and outraged. No matter how wrong they are, how egregious their behavior, the courts look the other way. The truth is sealed. I'm sure none of this surprises you considering the subject of your book. Allison was on Dr. Phil back in April....
We are desperate to find a way to get her children back. It's been 2 long years and a million dollars - the adoption industry wants badly to win and if they do, this is the last time someone will likely make it this far - at least for some time. It's sickening. Wish we could get more adoption advocacy groups to rally around her. She had fought hard and is being told it's over and she has lost. We are telling her attorneys no and to try again. I think they feel we are nuts but we are really determined to overcome this corruption.
Details of Allison's ordeal is at: allisonquets.com/
And: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allison_Lee_Quets
42 comments:
Has it ever been established if her eggs were used to create these children or if it was donor eggs? That was not clear at the time this case first appeared in the media.
Excellent question. They were donor eggs.
Does it matter if it was her eggs or not? No, they were not. But who cares she loves her children and she carried them both and almost died...It is time to realize that they are her children and they always will be....
If they were donor eggs, I'd say that she and the adoptive mother are on a level playing field. Those poor children are not related to either of them, but to some anonymous egg and sperm donors. I'd not get involved in this.
Does that really matter? Does it? She was treated horribly. They set out to make an example out of her. That is what they did. You are right Mirah. I won't quit until she has her children back. I won't quit until Shorstein, Stowbridge and Tate are SHUT DOWN and IN JAIL.
Strange. Suddenly in this case, genetic history does not matter. It is how she FEELS about these children she ordered designer-made. She cannot give these children any family history whatsoever, the things adoptee and donor children want to know, medical,family traits, who they look like, inherited strengths and weakness and ancestors. She is not related to them at all. She has nothing to offer them that an adoptive mother cannot offer.
That this agency is rotten is a whole other subject and should be pursued with other cases they have screwed up that are less ambiguous than this one.
im wondering, how many of these "other cases" do you think would have the strength or the resources that the allison quets case obviously has? and yes, genetic history does matter. many people who choose any of the more "scientific" methods available to become pregnant this day and age are just as "ignorant" about the societal effects of "designer" children as the general public is about adoption. i dare say this: everything allison quets has done to fight for these children tells me that she is highly likely to find the genetic parents of the twins, if these children even HINTED they wanted or needed to know. she appears to be the kind of mother who would sacrifice anything and everything to ensure their happiness.
This is generating a heated and I think, important debate.
I had material to add to the discussion, and thus reposted the subject at: Who is a Mother? Aug 23, 2007
http://familypreservation.blogspot.com/2007/08/who-is-mother.html
The genetics of the twins is important, and Quets has said it is. As someone else stated, most of society is ignorant to the impact of donor conception, and I suspect Quets was at the time but is no longer.
As for the Denise Needham and Allison Quets being on a level playing field: absolutely not. Needham did not conceive, carry, nearly die, and bond with the babies in utero. Denise Needham does not carry the children's dna in her body as Allison Quets does through microchimerism. Denise Needham's body did not support the expression of the children's innate dna, Allison Quets did that. Absolutely not an equal playing field when speaking of donor conception, which is for sure a form of adoption, and infant adoption.
Quets has nothing to offer them? She has love and self sacrifice and all the things a good mother has to offer. And you know, some adoptive parents do that too.
And perhaps this is the best opportunity that will present itself in a long time to offer this discussion to the public and educate and raise awareness. I would bet Quets will become a great advocate of what you believe in "Anonymous August 19, 2007."
OK, so you would say that someone who goes through the pain and investment of IVF, then pregnancy and a surgical delivery has contributed as much to children as someone who did nothing but bring some money and pay an attorney to process papers so they can claim them as their own. HMMM - I can't imagine any mother would agree with that.
You must not have been pregnant - or read how much bonding a child does with his/her mother during a 9 month pregnancy. There is a bond that goes beyond even that. The DNA of the children imprint in the mother's brain during pregnancy, and their DNA remains in her body for decades - it's detectable in blood tests. That is quite a shallow view of what the mother-child connection really is.
It's not that Allison wanted to give her kids up, she was pursued by the Needhams who wanted to do an adoption. She didn't seek them out. She asked them for help - not adoption - and while they said they would help, they did not. If they truly cared for the twins and felt the bond she did, they would be concerned for the twin's future well-being. It is known that children are healthiest and develop best when they are with their natural parents, unless there is abuse or neglect. Allison cared well for these children but after months of sleep deprivation, who could think clearly under pressure. There is a host of information about the severe impact of sleeplessness and lack of nutrition. Let's give her a break here.
Don't judge her signing the consent until you go through a pregnancy with life-threatening complications, then a surgical delivery and more complications. After birth, she was sleep-deprived and losing weight from being too busy to eat. Let's get real. All she needed was someone to set up nanny services - obviously she had the money to pay for it. She called for help but people are so busy, they just did not follow through or were too far away. Given a few more weeks with help, and she would have been doing much better. She definitely would not be in the middle of this ordeal...
Besides, what kind of people would keep a new mother in an attorney's office on a Saturday for 11 hours without meals? Doesn't sound like loving, nurturing souls that I would feel thrilled about caring for my children. Just because they are a couple and she is single is moot - the divorce rate is so high, who knows if the Needhams will even be married in 5 years. At least Allison had the means to care for them - is highly educated - and was very stable financially. She had the money to put them through college already saved and the Needhams can't afford the tuition for the child in college now.
You tell me how you can justify taking these kids from her. She was not just some machine making a baby. She was a woman who purposefully chose donor eggs, not to make a 'designer' baby, but because she was in her 40's and wanted her child(ren) to have the best chance at normal health. Perhaps she had genetic issues in her family she did not want to pass down. Who knows all of her reasons. Is that justification for taking her children and saying they really weren't hers? That is ludicrous. I looked online for info on the Needhams and found that Denise Needham is a genetic counselor - I'm sure she knew how careful Allison was in choosing the donors. She wanted what to her was likely designer children. Besides, why don't the Needhams just do IVF. Denise has had one baby and is not too old to have another. Why don't they just do it themselves. Surely all the pain and money lost to this needless legal fight could have been used for a better purpose and everyone could have gotten on with their lives and been much happier, especially the twins.
She loves those children and told the Needhams so on that infamous Saturday and that she would die for them. In fact, she nearly did twice to give them life - that is sacrificial love. I doubt a lot of women would have continued such a miserable pregnancy. Despite knowing all that, the Needhams offered no real help and went on vacation - never checking to see if Allison and the twins were ok. If they cared so much for Allison and the twins as they said they did, and wanted to have a family-like relationship, why would they not see her as being overwhelmed and temporarily ill? If they stepped in to help, she would have recovered and they would not have the twins. Simple as that. She had to get to the point of collapse before she would break down and cave to the pressure to sign. Don't forget that Allison was caring for a relative of the Needhams for many months, even after the twins were born. No one expressed concern then about her ability to be a fit custodian. They did not save these babies, they took them from a loving and vulnerable new mother.
I just don't see how you can say she is not their mother because she used donors. Are you now going to say that any mother that uses donors for whatever reason, medical or personal, is not truly a mother? Or will you only say that if she has difficulty caring for them, even if temporary? The Needhams did nothing to contribute to those children being alive, Allison did. End of story. You can't get more natural than giving birth after 37 weeks of pregnancy. Let's get past our narrow mindsets and realize that medical technology makes this possible and it's not our place to judge these women for their choices. They simply want to be mothers and by giving birth to their child, they are first and foremost, the natural mother.
I just want to clarify... her twins are a boy and girl twin, not girl twins. Holly and Tyler.
Um..to the person who said the Needhams sought Allison out...WRONG! Allison sought out the Needhams and other families as well.
She also only wanted to put Tyler up for adoption at first because she only wanted a girl. What does this say...well read the history...it's out there. She knew what she was doing.
That is not true about Allison seeking out the Needhams. Allison sought information about guardianship when she almost died. Her friend, the one related to the Needhams, brought the Needhams into the situation, and then they pressured her themselves. As for the "one twin" thing...where online do you get that? Where it is actually a reputable source and not someone out to say anything possible about Quets that could make her look bad?
Quets did not conceive in order to place her children. That's ridiculous. Makes zero sense to do IVF and then relinquish and then spend a million dollars trying to regain custody. Come on!
Is it possible that after she became ill and weak she deiced she couldn't handle two babies, and thought about just keeping one???
She never wanted to separate the twins. She just wanted help with one while she cared for the other one - during her recovery. Having twins is way more than twice the work of a single baby. Add to that having nearly died and you get a person who should not make any huge decisions until well.
I agree with the other poster - who does IVF (so painful and expensive!) and then VOLUNTARILY gives them up?! Insane thought - she was in her 40's and planned for them. It was not an unplanned, one-night stand! Gimme a break!
Conception is a very private matter. By law, mothers have a right to privacy. Allison's children are here, and debating if they deserve to be here or be with Allison is wrong. This was not information disclosed by Allison to the press. Actually, Allison shared the info on the donors confidentially with Denise because Denise is a genetic counselor and had a failed IVF cycle. It was the Needhams who put the donor information out to the public in order to try to discredit Allison as the twin's mother.
My question is why don’t the Needhams use donors if needed to have a baby by IVF? Maybe it’s the pain and money involved – as Allison knows well. Perhaps they are unwilling to sacrifice – it’s easier and faster to prey on a vulnerable, sick mother who has already invested in the process.
As far as making a designer baby, don't people conceive children with those they find to have attractive qualities? It's because Allison chose donors with such care that the Needhams want these children so badly. These children were not unplanned or the product of a mother doing drugs - Allison had healthcare and was healthy prior to pregnancy.
Donors are not necessarily people out to make money. Rather, they are often are those close to someone who is infertile and want to help others. There are 1000’s of totally voluntary egg donors – obviously there is a need or at least a demand for donors. Don’t recall seeing any stories on women being coerced into donating eggs in such a way that violates their constitutional rights. Allison did not coerce or defraud anyone have the twins.
People may keep the info private, but many IVF couples use donors – it’s not rare and not our place to pass judgement on thems. The bottom line - conception is private. The Needhams have damaged these children by putting out such personal details in the public. This is information that Allison should be sharing privately with Holly and Tyler, information they can share as they desire, not info to disparage their mother. It certainly isn’t a reason to debate if the children are Allison’s.
So do we say a woman with ovarian cancer should be denied children when there are donor eggs available? Where do you draw the line? Is it wrong to get an egg from a sister when you can't produce them? As long as it is voluntary, leave it alone - it's private.
Society has encouraged women to delay a family; consequently, the prime childbearing years are spent in a career. Later, they are told their eggs are too old or high risk. Are we going to blame and prejudice against these women for following these cultural changes? Let's look at Joan Lunden and Nancy Grace having children late in life - no one is really criticizing them for their choice, debating if they are actually natural mothers, nor are they putting out there the intimate details. The courts see Allison as the twins' natural mother - she gave birth to them for G's sake! Why are we wasting time even debating this?
It's attitudes like yours, being judgmental without compassion, that isolates these women and contributes to postpartum depression - they feel like less of a mom. They don't want to be ridiculed and treated differently by those who disapprove.
This is a free society where we are to pursue our dreams. Having a family is a dream of many. At least these women are not ripping babies from their natural mother's arms!
What is your mission statement here at FP? Is this part of it? How much have you read on the ethics of this? How many people have you talked to that have been through this? I think you need to review more research on this before you make a judgment call. Something to think about.
Shortly after Allison was arrested for international kidnapping, which she remains jailed for I believe, Nancy Grace did a show about this. One of the attorneys on that show had a cope of some documents form the appeal or from the long court case in Florida. The FACT that she only wanted to have one child adopted is presented in that paperwork. I remember that night well, because I was in such shock. I am sure there are transcripts that show this from the Nancy Grace Show.
Bottom line, Allison made an informed decision to place those children up for adoption. The courts have time and again said the process was legal. She kidnapped those twins, taking complete advantage of a situation where she was allowed visitation. She broke the law and she has spent this long in jail because the federal government sees her as a flight risk and a risk to continue the stalking of the Needhams as she was doing before.
If there is more information, like maybe she has been released, or some appeal has been made in her favor, then the news has not shown it, nor has her own site. In fact one blog recently mentioned she had recieved more bad news about this situation.
She made this decision...decisions!
Has anyone here ever been so sick that they even condsidered placing their children up for adoption when they had the finicial means to have a nanny or other care in the home. If Allison had a million dollars to spend on regaining custody, that would have paid a nanny a nice salery and benefits for quite a while!
Anything is possible with hyperemesis, I suppose. But I've honestly been following the case since December when it came on the news (I had HG 3 times), and I've never read anything about separating the twins, except in comment sections like a blog or other discussion setting.
Perhaps it was suggested to her by the Needhams or the attorneys or someone? Could that be where the idea comes from?
I seriously doubt (as a mother) that Quets would support separating the twins; that's inhumane to separate twins.
Oh, one more quick thing. Everyone I know with twins is shocked at first then feels she hit the lottery with two babies in one pregnancy...and I mean everybody from my Mom's generation to my children's generation. Can't say that's any sort of proof of Quets feeling that way, of course, but it does make a case for assuming she does.
One might also argue that someone doing IVF needs to consider the possibilities of having even more than two! There's the physical strain on someone 40 years old, as well as the strain of raising multiples alone...and yet more and more women of about 35-40 and older do it without a whole lot forethought about the consequences to them and the children they are creating who, at best, will half their genetics unknown to them...because they have a biological URGE, and they now want a child like someone decides they are ready to buy a house at a certain point in their life.
I think that's the main reason some in the adoption movement have trouble getting behind Allison. Mothers who relinquish children for adoption generally do so after becoming pregnant UNEXPECTEDLY. Their motherhood was UNINTENDED.
None of us intentionally planned to become pregnant, and none of us chose a method that denied our children half their genetic backgound to begin with.
I am reminded of Mr. Stern, the father of baby M. He and his wife hired a "surrogate" to carry a child becaus ehis wife had mild MS that might be made worse by pregnancy and she didn;t want to risk it. When asked why they didn;t simply adopt an orphan or child who really needed a home, Mr. Stern said that he was Jewish and wnated a child that had at least half his genes to carry on his line. However, he was married to Elizabeth Stern, a non-Jew, and he hired MaryBeth Whitehead, a non-Jew to carry his child. So while he wanted a baby that was "his" (or half his) as opposed to fulfilling his and his wife's desire to parent through other more altruistic means, he used his faith as an ingenuous excuse.
MaryBeth ran off with her child - not unlike Allison did - and refused to hand the baby over. The baby was taken from her and after a long court battle, the case was resolved with MaryBeth maintaining visitation of the daughter, Sarah, she carried in her womb but was unrelated to her.
That might be a solution Allison pursues. It seems the best solution for the children.
It doesn't seem fair to vilify Quets for getting sick. Twins is something to think about with IVF, yes, and I would guess she was very happy to have two children on the way. But to say she is some how less worthy of support because she intended her pregnancy and was coerced while ill to relinquish. That just isn't a fair thing to say.
Is she different from women who were young and had unintended pregnancies? Yes, she is. Is she less worthy of motherhood and support because of it? That logic doesn't make sense to me. It seems that it could then be argued that all firstmothers make bad decisions becoming pregnant and don't deserve support...unintended pregnancy does not make someone less of a mother nor does illness.
RBaker:
It is YOU who is being judgmental, stereotyping and disparaging when you say:
"These children were not unplanned or the product of a mother doing drugs"
And, I am afraid you have made that comment in the wrong place. Mother who lovingly sacrifice or are coerced into relinquishing children for adoption are NOT whores, or drug addicts! We are caring, loving women who didn't intend to get pregnant but who wanted our children, nonetheless. Please read my previous comment here.
As for where do we draw the line. It is quite clear to me: With money and anonymity. You asked if it is wrong for someone to donate eggs to her sister? NO! because it is not a business deal, they are not being SOLD and their genetics is known.
They call its sperm and egg "donation" when it is a multi-billion dollar business - just like adoption - that SELLS the material of life, while people are dying for need of organs and those cannot be sold ...as if infertility (or age, etc) is a more serious need than needing eyes or a heart!
There are many ways to become a parent that do not require money and anonymity.
Those of us you call "drug addicts" didn't SELL our children! Others bought them and paid good money and still others profited as middle men, and we were left with just empty arms and hearts. Do not make the mistake of generalizing mothers who relinquish as whores or drug addicts again, please.
It is the children who are taken from abusive, some drug-addicted, parents - that make up some of the population of orphans that those committed to parenting in an altruistic manner could adopt but choose instead to create what have been called "designer babies" for THAT reason! They choose to maintain half their genes or select genetic eggs and sperm like they are buying a car. They are "designed" to meet the needs of those creating them with little or no thought to their future living with unknown genetics.
"Allison made an informed decision to place those children up for adoption."
I would not necessarily agree with that. It is clear she was ill and emotionally drained.
Nothing about this case is black and white, IMO. It is very complicated and in some ways she was victimized by the same pressures of the adoption industry that affect all mother who lose children to adoption.
"Has anyone here ever been so sick that they even condsidered placing their children up for adoption when they had the finicial means to have a nanny or other care in the home. If Allison had a million dollars to spend on regaining custody, that would have paid a nanny a nice salery and benefits for quite a while! "
Actually, yes, I have been. When you can't even dial a phone number or problem solve basic things due to sleep deprivation and malnutrition and metabolic disorders...well, yes, I have. Fortunately, I didn't have people working against my child; they supported and helped me and I am raising my son.
Oh sheesh, the Nancy Grace Show. There's a great resource. Were these court documents or attorney-leaked documents? Can't an attorney type anything he wants on letter head and say Quets wanted that?
And how on eart were ANY documents on Nancy Grace? The case was sealed.
Pretty sure one of the anonymous posters knows the Needhams as stating Nancy Grace's leak is FACT is funny and shows they knew it was there. I SAW that show and don't recall singling out the babies and separating.
Beth
I followed this case closely in December and January when it was all over the news. I saw Allison's sister all over the news, in every venue of media available, then Allison goes on Dr. Phil. I never saw the Needhams at all. I think they were trying to keep a low profile for the sake of the children. To this day I don't think they have ver been interviewed by the media. I could be mistaken though, but I have not seen or read anything from them except "No Comment".
I have also wondered why Allison's sister did not step in and help. She said she knew all the problems Allison was having. She certainly stepped into the limelight of the media when Allison took the twins to Canada against the law. Why didn't Allison ask her to adopt the kids or whatever....
I've not seen the Needhams either, I don't think. And the sister...ya, not any source of support, eh? Seems to me based on what I have seen of the case and the sisters that Quets did a good thing not naming her guardian of the twins...too bad Quets called the wrong attorneys.
These attorneys...I googled adoption and Allison Quets and got lots of links and this blog showed up http://wordpress.com/tag/missing-children-statistics/feed/ It lists lots of cases of Florida adoption cases and problems. Why so many?
I really do hope Family Preservation and OriginsUSA both decide to actively support Allison Quets. The sheer magnitude of her case would bring tremendous attention to adoption reform. Tonight I ran four google searches:
"Catherine Ristow" = 37 hits
"Jonelle Fulton" = 64 hits (some don't appear to be about Jonelle here)
"Evan Scott" adoption = 866 hits
and
"Allison Quets" = 12,100 hits
Quets's case is strong and well publicized as adoption coercion cases go; the case raises many issues that need to be presented including donor conception, so there would be an avenue to educate on the complications of that form of adoption; and Quets is pushing through every legal avenue offered without appearing to stop for anything.
This is the case to take to the public and to bring adoption reform to the world's attention.
The number of hits means nothing. read the comments here, they are mixed. The case is complicated and people are curious about all the many aspects of it. Some are very opposed to what she has done...maybe not on my blog, but I am sure there are lots of folks in the general public that consider her a criminal for kidnapping the twins, or other negative things.
The bottom line for OriginsUSA is that we do not have the resources or ability to do much to help Allison.
Allison pled guilty...as charged...to 2 counts of international kidnapping. It's over... Now the kids can grow up in the peace they deserve.
Pleading guilty is not the same as being guilty. Pleading after 8 months of waiting for trial tells me that something else is up.
A travesty of justice is all I can think in connection to this case.
Again...it's over. I can only assume that one one not plead guilty if one were not.
The adoption is final....
The adoption is final? Since when? That's not in the news anywhere.
And guilty pleas are entered all the time for reasons other than guilt.
this wont be over for many years. these children will inevitabley learn their "story". allison's repeated self sacrifice verses the needhams lack ther of will tell the tale. i am going to bet, before it's "over" these children will wish they were reunited with allison. i will take it a step further. i hope a few adult adoptees will share their thoughts here.
Since this week. Final...it is over. Hopefully the twins and thier parents can find peace. Allison's attorney said it was all final on the news in Raleigh.
Hi, I'm from Australia and only heard of the case when dr phil was on tv today with the details. I've been on the Internet trying to find out up to date information. Is it true, her case just lost? As a sufferer of HG and nearly dying in the pregnancy and taking almost 3 years to recover from the pregnancy (physical damage) and mental, I was lucky to have my mum move in to care for my daughter and my husband! I was still too ill and a wreck! This is a DISGRACE. When I saw the show I couldn't stop crying. Only in America... this is absolutely appalling.
Check out www.needhamfriends.com
Your blog keeps getting better and better! Your older articles are not as good as newer ones you have a lot more creativity and originality now keep it up!
I do not drop a great deal of remarks, however i did some searching and
wound up here "Allison Quets Seeks Support".
And I do have 2 questions for you if you do not
mind. Could it be only me or does it look like some of the comments come
across like they are coming from brain dead people?
:-P And, if you are writing at additional places, I'd like to
follow everything new you have to post. Would you list of every one of all your communal
sites like your Facebook page, twitter feed, or linkedin profile?
Feel free to surf to my web page - conservatories
Wow - six years after the fact!
Brain dead? No. I see lots of opinionated comments, passionate comments.
Likely this anonymous comment was all a ploy to get a link posted.
She should not have kidnapped any children for any reason. Complete nut. Those children should not be with her because she is crazy.
That being said, all states should have a minimum two week waiting period after placement of adopted children and required counseling of birth mother during that time. It is ridiculous that any state (such as Florida) make adoption final one DAY after a parent gives up a child.
Post a Comment