Discrimination Against Mothers Who Relinquish

I have written that about my clear memories of the 1960s, right after I relinquished and was trying to "pass" for normal and go about my life...there was a headline making contested adoption case of Baby Lernore: The DeMartinos v. Helen Olga Scarpeta.

My co-workers were following it like decades later people followed the OJ case. There was no escaping it. Every day I rode the NY subway to and from work over hearing people talking about the case.

And ALL sympathy was on the side of the adopters. The mother, Helen Scarpeta was VILIFIED for "changing her mind" and taking her child from the "only mother she had ever known."  How DARE SHE?!

And the words that seared into my mind that I will never forget were: "Any dog can give birth."

I had thought that times had changed and people were a bit more sophisticated, educated and sensitive now.

And then three days ago I received a comment to my update post about the Baby Jessica contested adoption case. Unlike the DeMartinos who defied court orders and absconded with the child, in Jessica's case she was returned to her parents.

It is now 2010. We've evolved -- or have we? The following is the comment I received. I debated all this time whether to post it or delete.

Just because the law says one thing, it doesn't make it right. Many unjust laws that were on the books in the past have been changed, and this is the same thing. So what if Dan and Cara were her biological parents? Barnyard animals can copulate; that alone doesn't make anyone a fit parent. She willingly gave her away and LIED on the adoption documents. As an adult, she has full responsibility. People get depressed, but as adults, we still take ownership of our actions. We don't scurry around, trying to deflect the blame. So, we can safely assume that Cara, being such a good Christian, apologized to the Deboers and asked their forgiveness, as others forgave her for her horrible misbehavior? Oh, and Mirah, the seeds have been planted to overhaul the adoption process and to get the laws that you are so fond of changed. There's no going back! :D

This anonymous idiot speaks about the law, but ignores the fact that the law was on the side of Dan and Cara and that Cara IS her daughter's other by birth, law, custody and in every way imaginable.

As for taking "ownership" of actions - those who take children using coercion need to do just that.

Anyone who lives or work with animals - barnyard or not - knows that you never take a baby of any breed away from its mother until she has weaned that baby. Yet we treat human babies with less concern than we treat animals!

The moronic anonymous commenter is correct that Cara lied. That is why Dan's constitutional right to parent his child was violated and that is what gave HIM the right to contest the adoption, and that is why HE WON!