Father's Rights: Tentative at Best!

My book, "The Stork Market" contains a chapter on fathers' rights which have been eroded by Putative Father Registries. Now in every stat, these laws require fathers to jump through additional hoops to maintain their constitutional right to parent a child of theirs - in some states, even when they are named on the birth certificate...and DNA tests are not sufficient without PRIOR registration!

With a bill proposing federal PFRs, I strongly believe and encourage all Fathers' Rights organizations in the nation to join together to fight this egregious and blatant disregard for the right of a parent to maintain a relationship with and nurture their child, unless found to be unfit.

The following opinion piece sheds light on the adoption industry's practices in playing fast and loose with fathers' rights and causes to think more carefully when the media tells us that a father was abusive or violent or the mother did not know who the father was.

This great illustration by Eric Rolon accompanies the piece.

Note that this is being done to good men in many cases who are willing and able to step up to the plate and want to parent their child. And this, in a time when we hear so much of the evils of "fatherless" children!

Adoption laws challenges fathers rights to child By AARON BROOKS

In my Nov. 30 column, I wrote that a father’s right to his child is severely impaired by laws governing adoption. In this column, I intend to provide evidence that those laws are unconstitutional and easily manipulated.

Legislation called 750 Illinois Compiled Statute 50 governs adoption in Illinois. Illinois’ adoption legislation is similar to that of the other states. Subsection 8b of 750 ILCS 50 governs the consent that must be obtained for an adoption, stating that the consent of the mother is required, and that motherhood along with a right over that child is established by the natural act of birth. The father’s consent is needed “if the father” physically meets specific criteria.

In requiring the father to perform acts to establish his right over the child that are not required of the mother, 750 ILCS 50/8b violates the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states, “No State shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of laws.”

The most disturbing aspect of adoption is the role the adoption businesses play. They are not, as their mission statements proclaim, “helping find good homes for unwanted children.” Instead, they are trying to sell any and all children they can get their hands on, with wanton disregard for the barest form of ethics.

The sleazy nature of the industry shines brightest when it comes to informing the biological father that the mother has decided to give the baby up for adoption. Most states, including Illinois, have laws that require the adoption agency to notify the father prior to the adoption, but a major loophole is being exploited to bypass the inadequate and unequal protection fathers have under the law.

To provide proof of the crime, my wife called four adoption agencies in Illinois. My wife posed the following questions: “If I were pregnant, then how would I give my baby up for adoption?” and “If I did not want the father to know about the adoption because he would disapprove, then how would I go about that?” It is important to note that the questions were always given as hypothetical, and if the sales agents were not astute enough to notice, then they should brush up on their hypothetical syllogisms.

Agent (In response to the second standard question): “The only way to not contact the father is if you do not know who the father is, or if you are afraid for some reason; you know, if it was like a domestic violence situation — if you are afraid of him, that he would do something physical. Or anything like that.”

Wife: “So pretty much, if I do not want the father to know about the adoption, then I just have to say he is violent?”

Agent: “Right, I mean if that is what you want to do. It is a legal form, so if it is found out that you are lying, you could face perjury charges, but I cannot force you to tell the truth [ha ha]. I can only go by what you tell me. For him not to be notified you have to have a good reason, not just that he would fight the adoption. So it has to be a really good reason. That is what I am saying.”
Wife: “Is it better if the father finds out after the adoption?”

Agent: “If he finds out after the baby has been adopted, there is nothing he can do.”

The preceding response was the norm given by the adoption agencies we called. It is important to note that the adoption agencies that we called were not fly-by-night operations. Also, if I could communicate the malice for the father in the agents tone, it would make you throw up, or light a torch.

My next column will again expand on father’s rights. I will talk about the agent’s last statement, what can be done and how I proved that “best interest” is a sham.

----

If you care about parental rights as I do, you will want to watch for the follow up at NothernStar.info.