Saturday, October 9, 2010

WIN FOR GRAYSON & BEN!!

Late Breaking News: "The Vaughns have signed new papers agreeing to give Grayson Wyrembek back to his father, Benjamin Wyrembek, by the end of the month, never to see him again, and to drop all further resistance to the law and justice and to stop trying to take this child from his Ohio family.
Pray it's true and conformed shortly...
REPORTED: October 8, 2010 at 10:46 PM
(WHAS11)  Unwilling to surrender in their fight to adopt the boy they have raised since he was an infant, a Southern Indiana couple may never see three-year-old Grayson Vaughn again after the end of October. 

What a choice for the Vaughns on Friday behind closed doors in a judge’s chambers.  As described by Ed Vaughn, Jason’s father, they are risking never seeing Grayson again in order to hold on to whatever chance they might have to become his adoptive parents.

So Friday, there was another setback for the Southern Indiana couple; Ed Vaughn told us mediation had failed.   The court wanted to make mediation contingent on the Vaughn’s dropping the adoption; they refused.

Speaking by phone from Toledo, where Grayson is in extended visits with his biological father, Ed Vaughn said they threatened to take Grayson if they didn’t agree to the terms and they would take him today.  “I’ve never seen judges threaten to take people’s kids if they don’t do what they’re told, and have them sign mediated agreements where they have to sign that they weren’t coerced.  You know, it feels to me like North Korea, or some communist country.   We’re all relieved right now.  We’re all relieved that we get to leave here this weekend with Grayson,” said Ed Vaughn.

Ed Vaughn told us it would not be surprising if Grayson had to stay in Ohio.  Another hearing was held late Friday afternoon, but there had been no word yet on what happened in that court proceeding.
  
UNCONFIRMED: The judge had both sides in his chambers. Ben Wyrembek offered the Vaughns visitation of Grayson and to still see him sometimes (similiar to Grandparents right).  They said they wanted all or nothing.  So the judge said there will be a transition period.  Ben will have Grayson on the weekends and the Vaughns during the week days and at the end of the month Grayson will be with his dad solely.
 

51 comments:

Susie said...

If it is true that they want all or nothing, that only proves that they look at this poor child as a possession. If they truly loved him as their child, they could never walk away like that.

I pray that they at least do everything possible to make the transition easy for Grayson, instead of filling his head with garbage and making it harder.

Susie

Mirah Riben said...

I have it from a good, reliable course and I believe it is true. You are quite right, Susie. It speaks volumes - as has this entire case - to their selfishness and their lack of understanding of the best interests of a child they have called "their" son! I believe they have shot themselves in the foot with their very negative attitudes of entitlement that are very visible to the judges. They dug their own grave!

Rebecca Herman said...

That was very generous of Ben to offer visitation, I do not think I could be as kind to someone who had kept my child from me for almost 3 years! He's truly trying to make this as easy as possible on his little boy. Shame on the Vaughns!

Mirah Riben said...

It goes to character and an ability to put a child's best interest above your own...something the Vaughns are obviously incapavale of. making the decsion to return Grayson more right than ever! Benjamin is a mensch! A true Daddy in every sense of the word...blood, commitement and deed

Megan said...

I find it odd that so many are quick to defend a person who offered no support to Grayson's biological mother during her pregancy and never attempted to contact Grayson in his three years of life. And speaking on the "all or nothing" point, I would NEVER allow my children to spend time with a criminal, Grayson's parents were only protecting his safety. That's what good parents do. Additionally, what does it say about Mr. Wyrembek's "character" that he is now suing for $400,000? For three years he hasn't paid a single penny to support Grayson and now he wants money?! You say that the Vaughn's view Grayson as a possession; is it better that he be a paycheck? As a mother/baby nurse I send babies home with "parents" who have no business raising a child. A year later they come back, pregnant again, and have lost custody of the baby I sent home with them. It happens all the time. The people in this group need to get some real world experience. A parents right to screw up a child should not supersede a child's right to be raised in a loving home.

Mirah Riben said...

...and hundreds of us find it very odd that anyone (other than family and close freinds0 would support strangers keeping a child - against court orders top return him - from a father who very obviously showed his concern and interest and was pursuing every legal avenue to reclaim HIS SON FROM DAY ONE!!

Megan said...

Had he been concerned with the welfare of Grayson from day one, he would have supported him from the moment his biological mother found out she was pregnant. He didn't, nor did he attempt to contact Grayson or his parents through any means other than legal filings. No birthday cards, no phone calls, no Christmas gifts. He never asked for updates regarding his health or development. My point is this: some one is obviously concerned for Grayson's welfare and it isn't the guy who ripped him from the only parents he's ever known. Grayson is not a son to Ben Wyrembek, he's a financial plan.

Steph said...

Megan, you are so right. There is no history of caring about the birthmom or Grayson beyond litigation. Ben can't unring that bell, the damage is done and well documented in the court files. No amount of justification by even the best intended of bystanders can erase it and the numbers now indelibly stamped on Graysons forehead: 400,000 US DOLLARS

Mia said...

Oh Megan...please stop drinking the Kool-aid...The Vaughns did everything possible to stop this man from parenting his child. The ran to another state to get him blocked from visitations and to not get a DNA test. The Vaughns wanted a baby and they were going to get one by any means necessary! About that criminal charges, he had a disorderly conduct charge over 6 years ago...really this is the big bad criminal?? Give me a break! I for one am glad he is suing the Vaughns...these people have lied and manupulated the system to circumvent a pesky parent who actually wanted his child.

Mary G. said...

My goodness Megan, you have been drinking the Vaughn's kool aid haven't you? Please go to Davidfhouston.com click on documents, then click on public and download all the pertinent files for the real facts in this case. Your ignorance is staggering. There is not right to place for adoption, Jovan Bocvarov stated on his paperwork he is not the childs father, the state statute everyone claims means the Vaughn's can adopt this child has been misinterprated. The Vaughn's gambled and they lost, in the process they lied, they defied court orders and have painted Mr. Wyrembeck the villain. Saying he has violence problems, he has one disorderly conduct 6 years ago. Saying he is has been arrested for drug paraphanalia, but they fail to mention the charge was dropped and thrown out of court. They refused to attend the Best Interest hearing- they stalled the DNA testing for 14 months, have lied, stalled and obfuscated for three years. Now they are upset because Mr. Wyrembeck is suing not only them, but, Drucilla, the agency and the agencies CEO? Would you all like some cheese with that whine? Then of course many of you bring "God" into this. Frankly I believe my God, and my savior are ashamed of this family, and must be weeping for the child and his family.

On top of all this I believe Mr. Wyrembeck has been a class act during this whole process, unlike the Vaughn's who have paraded this boy on televison, and defamed his father in front of him and believe it is perfectly allright to do so. Now they want to bring it all back to tv and try to win the sympathy vote. Also the letter writing they wish to do to the judge is a waste of time. Our Judges are not allowed to take into account private opinion in deciding a case, they must use the law to do so.

maryreunited said...

Megan and Steph- So I see you both have been imbibing the Kool Aid the Vaughn's are offering their "guests" I see yet again that ignorance wins out. The Vaughn's caused this, they lied, they stalled, they obfuscated the facts. And now they are outraged when Mr Wyrembeck sues? Puhleezzzzzzzz! Want some cheese with that whine? Obviously you and your ilk don't get it. Drucilla cut him out of her life, her then husband admitted he was not the child's father. Mr. Wyrembeck has every right to raise his child- that is something that is federally protected. Drucilla surrendered her rights, not his. The fact of the matter is the statute used to claim he has not right to his child has been misinterpreted. The fact of the matter is if the Vaughn's had done the right thing at the start, they probably wouldn't be getting sued. The fact of the matter is the Vaughn's have done everything possible to ensure that Mr. Wyrembeck has never had a chance to be a father to his son. What would you do if someone came along and took your child, then held them hostage for three years and when you wanted them back-claimed they were better off with them simply because they had, had them so long.
The Vaughn's refused to attend the Best Interest hearing they were invited to attend. They have paraded that child on televison, defamed and degraded his father and now in a bid for sympathy are going back to the news networks to trot out their tears yet again. Writing letters to the judges will do no good, Judges are not allowed to consider private writings when deciding a case. They are only allowed to consider the law-

You all need to give it up. All your prayers were answered, the answer was NO! I believe my God, and my savior are ashamed by the behavior of this family, and are weeping for what has been wrought in this child and his family's lives.

Anonymous said...

is it possible that ben was kept away from the pregnant drucilla because of, you know, drucilla's marriage? did he even know she was prego?

Anonymous said...

Well done all of you GGB supporters that do NOTHING but support "Father's Rights" and live in la la land!!! Mike BEGGED you to come and help him because the world completely disagrees with everything he posts and what do you know....here you are! I feel sooo incredibly sorry for the sadness and dysfunction in each of your lives that you would want something sooo horrific for a beautiful, young, happy little boy! My favorite is whoever on your link refers to God as "G-d".....but, God will provide, we will NOT stop fighting and we WILL bring Grayson HOME....he IS and always will be....a VAUGHN! To Jason and Christy, he is their beautiful son....as to where he is now....soooo glad it is finally official and out for everyone to see, Grayson is ONLY a financial plan!

Mirah Riben said...

This last comment is DELUSIONAL. He is a Vaughn?!??? LOL. ROFL!! Did they drain his blood and DNA and insert theirs??

TRUTH: He NEVER was...not by blood, genetics and not legally. NEVER EVER was a Vaughn and never will be if GOD and the law all that is right, moral, ethical and humane have anything to say about it....and...oh, that's right, they do and did!

GIVE IT UP! You can continue to spread your lies and try to demean Benjamin but it is MEANINGLESS! He was barred from contact and you berate him for not contacting! Give me a BREAK!!

Stop the lies. GIVE IT UP. You lost! You supported the loosing side. Not GOD or anything can or will change that!

Let it rest.

I am glad he is suing everyone involved for another reason. And I pray to GOD he WINS all his law suits so it stands as a warning for anyone who ever dares to try these shenanigans again!

This is not the first case of its kind, but it sure would be nice if it was the last!

Parents have a right to raise their kids UNlESS THEY ARE FOUND UNFIT! Get that through your heads. People do not loose custody because of dropped charges or because of minor infractions. Even people in prison serving hard time for felonies maintain custody!!! He had a fitness hearing. The Vaughns LOST. He won! Get over it!!

Maryreunited said...

Anon? Who is Mike? And really most of us have been active in the Family Preservation movement for years. You have as much to learn as all the other's who support the Greedy, Grasping Vaughn's. You know if they had done the right thing I doubt they would have been included in the lawsuit. Grayson is not, nor has he ever been a Vaughn. See he is and always has been a Bocvarov- the use of the name Vaughn is only to foster the image that the child is theirs, a "possesion" and not a child who deserves to be raised by his natural family.

You feel sorry for us? Gee thanks- I don't feel sorry for any of you. Not one ounce of pity in my heart for the people responible for Grayson's pain and turmoil, and not one ounce of pity for the ignorant who support them. If the Vaughn's had won, you do know that most likely it would have been Mr Wyrembeck who would have been ordered to pay their legal fees right? You all make me ill with your prattle about the "best interests of the child" Guess what? None of you are God, none of you are the Judge and Jury and the Vaughn's who had the chance to attend the "best intersts" hearing lost. Get over it-

Mirah Riben said...

Unlike those who are impassioned by this ONE CASE for some personal connection, I have 30+ experience with adoption issues.

If time made someone a member of another's family Jaycee Duggard would be a Garrido...the name oif the people she lived with for EIGHTEEN YEARS - the vast majority of her entire life!!

If time with people changed your kinship then everyone who went to college and had the same roommate for 3 years would be related to that person!

Let's not be STUPID!

What the Vaughns did was unconscionable. They should have dropped their claim the minute they knew about Ben's interest and that he had the law on his side. What gives anyone the right to fight any parent who has not been found unfit?

All the dirt they have tried to dredge up and the mud slinging was all stuff they dug up AFTER the fact to JUSTIFY their greedy immoral actions. Many of their own supporters turned away when they learned the truth instead of the lies they spread.

Grayson is a Wyrembek and always will be no matter what babysitters or teachers or others are in his life.

Mia said...

I wished I lived in LaLaLand with the Vaughns but unfortunately, I deal with reality. I don't support father's rights, I am for PARENTAL RIGHTS!!! I am not an activist, I am just a mom who believes a person has a right to parent their child without outside influences. I have never given a child up for adoption. But this case opened my eyes to the uglies of adoption. Just because you paid "fees" for a child doesn't not make him yours. And don't give me the regurgitated the legal father crap. The courts have decided. Frankly I feel the courts have some blame here. They should have took Grayson, placed him foster care once the REAL parent filed. That way, he could be returned IMMEDIATELY once he was given custody. If this was about money like you claim, I am pretty sure The Vaughns would have offered him $ to go away a long time ago. Please go blow your smoke up someone else's butt...I can research and think for myself...

Mirah Riben said...

You nailed it...except for one thing. Grayson was with FOSTER parents all along! That's all the Vaughns never were anything more, even though the media reported them as adoptive parents. They never adopted Grayson! The media are very confused and ill-informed on adoption issues.

But I know - you mean a neutral foster home and one without an adoption agendas! And a guardian ad litem for kids involved in these contested adoptions.

Anonymous said...

I wonder how many of the Vaughn supporters would be willing to donate one of their own children to a stranger to hold hostage for 3 years while they fight to get them back. Then have those same strangers go on tv and to newspapers to libel, slander and denegrade the child's biology.Poor child has been basically called the scum of the earth by the Vaughns and their supporters due to his "alleged" dreadful biology. How sad for real adoptees to read these "hero adopters" true thoughts of the child's bloodline.

Mirah Riben said...

EXCELLENT SUGGESTION!!!!

Anonymous said...

Even if Ben did make some mistakes in his past doesn't mean he should be ruled out as a fit parent. I too made some mistakes but that doesnt mean I can't raise my children. Maybe I am not rolling in money or have lied to get supporters help.....doesn't mean I cant raise balanced children. The issue here is the kidnappers think they are better people and that they have the right to have proof that Grayson is in good hands. THEY DON"T I gave birth to 3 children and don't remember having to prove to anyone that I was fit. Vaughns why don't you worry about your own children cause I am sure they need some love and attention!! OR WAIT maybe worry about your marriage cause I am sure it needs some attention too. YOU never were or never will be Grayson's family....the sooner you accept that the sooner healing can take place!!!

Mirah Riben said...

Exactly!

Steph said...

There are exceptions to every circumstance and when it comes to children and family values the differences are greater than the similarities. So is the passion for what we believe is right. Generally I would have leaned toward Grayson belonging with his biosdad when the birthmum gave up her rights to this child. But now that I understand some more of the reasons why she decisions she did it gave me pause. You might be right, someday Grayson might take offense to dreadful biology innuendo. At the same time Grayson may get real angry with his biological father for throwing his biomum out of the car on the freeway in the dark of night. And maybe ever more we are not privy to happened during the brief encounter between Ben and Drucilla that contributed to her making the decision she did. Grayson may learn someday that his biodad failed to support his biomum during what may have been one of the most stressful and confusing times of her life. It would have been much simpler and easier for her if she had an abortion. But she didn't, here is wonderful Grayson. That birthmum made the best decision she felt could for her child by picking the Vaughns adopt him over raising him herself or surrendering him to his biological father. Grayson may very well learn all this and more some time in the future.

Mirah Riben said...

You are obsessed and obsessing! But is USELESS!!!

1. Benjamin had a fitness hearing. You cannot re hear the case here. I mean go ahead and keep slinging mud...but it makes no differences.

2. If Grayson's mom was abused by Ben, did she report it? Was there a police report of any kind? Or this just something new she or you have made up? If it was true, did she bring it up at his fitness hearing? If she didn't, why didn't she? if she did and it was considered - well, either way, it's kind of a done deal, guys.

3. My favorite: "And maybe ever more we are not privy to happened during the brief encounter between Ben and Drucilla that contributed to her making the decision she did." And maybe the sky is made of marshmallows! Maybe. maybe...Again, see number two above! Applies equally to any "maybe" 'encounter."

You sound like a political ad - nothing but mud slinging. Why? Do you really think it will change things now? Are you really that out of touch with reality?

You know, we could play the "maybe" game too. maybe the Vaughns practice witchcraft and, maybe they planned to sacrifice Grayson in a cauldron with frog innards at midnight on the full moon...

Anonymous said...

A post on KGH....sooo perfectly said, "this is nothing but a legal kidnapping. I am in shock that this was allowed to happen. I have a 3.5 year old and a 21 month old, and I can tell you that if I dropped them off with a stranger tomorrow to never see the fam...ily they love again, they would NOT be okay. Ever. And, even if by some miracle little Grayson is okay "someday", that does not negate the pain and suffering he is going through right now. Why the hell didn't they question the motives of the man who calls himself his father?! If he is willing to put his "son" through this, then clearly he doesn't love him above himself. That is not the kind of parent any child needs. No child should ever have to go through something this awful. This is not about any of the parents at all - I feel for the Vaughns, I truly do, but I can't stop thinking about what GRAYSON is going through to try to imagine how they feel. I am sure it is horrible and I never want to know that kind of pain, but this whole thing is about GRAYSON'S well-being. If Ben truly loves him then he should have let him go. I can just imagine how this conversation is going to go one day. "Oh yes son, I loved you so much - I loved you enough to rip you away from the only family you had ever known. I pulled you away from your mother, arms around her neck, crying for her, and took you away from them forever. I loved you enough to bring you to my home and my life, having no job and no way to support you, despite the fact that the Vaughn's had no trouble providing for your needs." Makes me absolutely sick."

Anonymous said...

Have you absolutely lost your mind MIRAH!? I am sorry that you have had nothing better to do than wreak havok on perfectly stable/happy homes for "30 + years"!! Again, the 8000 people that personally know the Vaughns and can testify to the people they are, can rest their heads at night knowing they are fighting for the well being of Grayson. You and the mere few on GGB who have never met "Ben" and only see this as another "case"....I am not sure how you ever rest! You have absolutely ZERO information on the PEOPLE involved!!! This is NOT a "case" it is the life of a beautiful little boy....it is sooo terribly sad that each of you have had sooo much dysfunction in your lives that you can't see that this is ONLY about Grayson and not your "Fathers Rights" soapbox!!!

Maryreunited said...

Anon- you make the case for us. Simply because you wish it to be true, does not make it true. You say we don't know Mr Wyrembeck, neither do you. All you know is what you have been spoon fed by KGH. Certainly this is a distressing case, this child did nothing to deserve what happened. You all keep saying that Drucilla had the right to choose this for Grayson. You say this based on innuendo and suppostions made by others. But the fact of the matter is this, Mr. Wyrembeck never surrendered his rights. Because this is so he has the legal right to parent his son. You are the ones who are out of their minds. You have lied, defamed and outright slandered the Wyrembeck family in the name of your cause! You all disgust me-

Maryreunited said...

As an aside I was doing some research on memory and stumbled upong this-

"And no, simply showing us the correct information doesn't fix it. Quite the opposite: research shows tha...t once we've seized on an incorrect piece of information, exposure to the facts either doesn't change what we think, or makes us even more likely to hold onto the false information. You can guess why this is: our self-image triumphs over all. It's more important that we continue to think of ourselves as infallible than admit we're wrong." That would explain the stubborness of the KGH supporters and their views!See More

Rebecca Herman said...

It does not matter if the Vaughns are wonderful parents, what matters is whether the law allows them to be considered for having custody of Grayson. And right now, that is not possible unless both biological parents terminate their rights, or the rights are terminated by unfitness. And Ben was not found unfit, therefore legally the Vaughns simply cannot be allowed to adopt him. Could you imagine the horrific legal precedent if they got their way? How many families would be hurt? If you want a child even if things weren't done properly all you have to do is hold physical custody long enough, say you have a nicer 2 parent home more money etc - you cannot see why this is WRONG?

The fact of the matter is:
The Vaughns chose to fight a contested adoption, bonding to the child, allowing the child to bond to their family, knowing that they might lose. During this time, they refused visitation with the biological father, ensuring that if they lost in court, Grayson would have to be handed over to a stranger instead of someone he would have spent every weekend with for over a year.

Mirah Riben said...

Ya' gotta love it!

Drucilla's wishes and right to decide as Grayson's mother should be honored.

BVut Ben has no equal right to make decisions or have rights as his father!

It's too hysterical!! You couldn't win in court, and you aint winning here with that kind of double talk and circular "reasoning."

It's comical! Listen to yourselves. Do you hear how nonsensical you are being?

Rebecca Herman said...

In fact, just think - if fathers aren't allowed to prevent an adoption the mother wants, and the mother manages to get the child into the physical custody of pontential adoptive parents - those if you that support the Vaughns, do you not realize your son, brother, grandson, nephew, etc could lose his child to someone who can claim to have a richer, nicer, two parent home? And if you say "Well, my relative is deserving of his child, or a better person than the father in this case, etc" it doesn't matter - because the damage from setting the legal precedent that what the father wants doesn't matter will have already been done!

Steph said...

Thanks for pointing out that Ben never surrendered his rights. That is probably the crux of the matter. Ben was acutely aware the child was his - he attended an ultrasound with the birthmum. after that, during the balance of the pregnancy Ben chose not to support the birthmum. Whether she shunned him given his aggressive nature is another topic all together. Once Ben understood Grayson had been born - and adopted - Ben then failed to support him emotionally or financially. He chose to litigate. Now if he expressed interest in his sons wellbeing or development, milestones etc. over the months it took to validate parentage, I would certainly hold the Vaughns culpable here. But I cannot; that didn’t happen either. The Vaughn’s are not hard to contact; look at all the media that has found them for heaven sake! But I digress. Ben made decisions to litigate rather than even attempt to have a civil conversation in the best interest of this child from the get go. The child was abandoned by his biodad and surrendered by his birthmum. Having said this, combined with Bens substantial history with law enforcement, how anxious would anyone be to simply hand over an innocent child? The birthmum wasn’t. Should this have been a custody battle between Ben and the birthmum? Perhaps so. But Ben chose to wait and make his claim after the baby was adopted by people with resources. Very clever indeed. 400K USD clever. Poor Grayson.

Anonymous said...

Its all about winning not about the child with the Vaughns!

Mirah Riben said...

"If the best interests of the child is to be the determining factor in child custody cases persons seeking babies to adopt might profitably frequent grocery stores and snatch babies from carts when the parent is looking the other way. Then, if custody proceedings can be delayed long enough, they can assert that they have a nicer home, a superior education, a better job or whatever, and that the best interests of the child are with the baby snatchers. Children of parents living in public housing or other conditions deemed less affluent and children of single parents might be considered particularly fair game." -- Justice James Heiple, Illinois Supreme Court in the "Baby Richard" case."

Mirah Riben said...

WHOA!! Grayson was never adopted, Steph! And you know it.

And here you go again, talking out of both sides of your mouth at once:

He abandoned her - she rejected him for alleged abuses. ROFL once again!

And you KNOW he was barred from any contact with the Vaughns! But, do you really think Jaycee's parents are interested in hearing about her life from her captors? Do you think Elizabeth Smart's parents are? he did what he needed to do to get his son back! Nothing more and nothing less. he acted with far more dignity than the cry-baby Vaughns who exploited their own children in their unending - STILL ongoing - media WHORING!!

Really Steph - and Megan - you are wasting your time here. Have you not figured that out yet? You are not convincing anyone here with your utter BULL. Go sell it somewhere else! Sell it to someone naive enough and who knows nothing about this case or adoption...or for that matter knows nothing about common decency and morality!

You have your firm beliefs and we are not going to change your mind, nor you ours!

So, for the umpteenth time: GIVE IT UP!

You are not going to change the court's decsion no matter what you say -- or believe!!!!

I think on that note, I just may close comments here...this is really getting very old, tiring and repetitive and it is totally unproductive.

Anonymous said...

It is getting impossible. Vaughn supporters are tending to spew the same ole same ole - sometimes I think they copy and paste each others comments and post them.
Facts are facts and they can't change them just because they want to in order to further the Vaughn's cause.
Now they are resorting to slandering Grayson's father.
After this last attempt the Vaughns are making with yet another adoption petition it will all go to rest and Grayson can live a wonderful and peaceful and fulfilling life with is real family.

Dan Harris said...

Steph and Megan, funny thing about "supporting the bmom"... especially when the bmom's HUSBAND doesn't want you or any reminder of you around.
SHE was the one having sex outside of HER marriage. You keep forgetting that part when decrying his "lack of support to the bmom".
HER HUSBAND NEVER claimed Grayson as his son, he wanted rid of the reminder that his WIFE fucked around behind his back.
SHE had no right to keep Ben out of HIS son's life any more than the Vaughns.
SHE used Grayson as punishment to Ben for not doing what SHE wanted.
How doe you thing GOD felt about that?

As for the Vaughns, they KNEW from day one that Grayson's true FATHER wanted to raise him.
They KNEW that the courts had denied their adoption petition. They KNEW that the court had ORDERED Grayson returned to his rightful FATHER.
THEY KNEW ALL OF THIS but continued to carry the fight for what THEY WANTED.

They, their attorneys, and the adoption agency are ALL complicit in the kidnapping and holding hostage of GRAYSON WYREMBECK for 3 years.
They ALL defied the courts ruling, KNOWING the facts (that they so conveniently leave out when talking to the media.

Grayson is HOME where he belongs.
This episode in his life will affect him for life. He will find the truth when he's able to understand and want to know the TRUTH. He will see how he was held hostage by an "affluent" couple who violated court orders for 3 years, keeping him from his own father.
HE will make his own decision as to who acted in his best interest.
7000 or 7500 internet friends of the Vaughns that wanted to keep him separated from his TRUE FATHER will keep him aware that others do not hold his best interest as priority above their own wants.

Anonymous said...

Absolutely mindboggling!! What matters is the life of this innocent child and no one should settle for anything less...This transcends which adult wronged which more or which adults' rights were most violated. The focus of all adults involved should be how can Grayson be LEAST wronged...until all concerned find a way to make Grayson a winner in this EVERYONE loses, most of all Grayson.

Anonymous said...

Mind boggling!! What matters is the life of this innocent child...This transcends which adult wronged which more or which adults' rights were most violated. The focus of all adults involved should be how can Grayson be LEAST wronged...until all concerned find a way to make Grayson a winner in this EVERYONE loses, most of all Grayson.

Mirah Riben said...

I contend that both sides wanted to win.

However, one side has nature, God (if you prefer), and the law all on his side. He is a total victim here. He has done no wrong since learning he had a child but seek proper recourse in the law.

The other side has violated court orders, courted the press like Paris Hilton doing a sex tape - only with their KIDS! - and is coveting and harboring a child like a possession that they want. They want what they want like a child or a drug addict. They refuse to accept truth or reality or the law. They are stubborn, greedy and at this point quite pathetic. They are causing harm to their own two kids to fight for a child that IS NOT THEIRS!

Steph, you scoff at the fact that Ben never relinquished his parental rights. How would you feel if someone simply snatched you child in the supermarket and refused to give him back. Said, you weren't watching your child for that few seconds and that gives him the rights, cause you were being a bad mother at that moment!

Give me a break! We do not take or keep another's child when that person has not volunraily relinquished their rights or had their rights terminated because of abuse. That is not and never was the case here. You had a case where one parent wanted one thing for their child and the other parent wanted another. The two parents had equal say and while one is allowed to abdicate their rights, the other chose not to, thus maintaining SOLE rights to the child, Grayson. What is so hard to understand here?

He is Grayson's father. Always was and always will be. What is so hard to understand. His rights were never terminated. And no matter how many parking tickets or other offenses he has against him in the past does not change that!! I have told you umpteen times people serving jail sentences for felonies maintain custody of their children. Women give birth while serving prison sentences and maintain custody. Committing a crime, in and of itself, does not deem one unfit to parent. get it through your heads! And more importantly nothing you say will make it happen.

Mandy Lifeboats said...

I so have to wonder how many PAPs, adopters, adoption agency owners, agency reps, adoption attorneys and social workers compromise the 7000+ supporters on the KGH site???? Methinks that site is top-heavy with PAPs and adopters. A case like this scares the crap out of them. Once upon a time it was the image of the Boogie-Lady Birthmother showing up on their Savior Doorsteps, that scared the crap out of adopters...in a time when father's had next to nil rights to claim their own children. Times do change and now more fathers are claiming their parental rights to their own children, when the mother surrenders her parental rights. All children have TWO parents when they are conceived and born (well at least the old-fashioned way)...PRIOR to any adoption. In this case Drucilla surrendered her parental rights, Ben did not...therefore by law he does have the right to demand custody of HIS child. And this ridiculous argument of Ben being involved with Drucilla while she was pg...for God's sake KGH supporters...she was legally married to another man!!! I'm not judging Drucilla for having an affair with a single man while she was still married...but when a pregnancy occurs (conceived with the man of the affair), sure can make things quite messy...and messy this was right from the outset. Drucilla was already a mother to a 15 yr old son, when she gave birth to her 2nd son. Drucilla was in debt to her eyeballs and was filing bankruptcy with a divorce on the horizon. Drucilla was in a mess long before her baby was born. Still the fact remained Ben did what he had to do has required by law, as the FATHER of this baby that he strongly suspected he was. He could not support the fetus, not knowing for sure if he was the father or not, while the fetus was in utero. SOOOOOO...when the baby was born he signed up with the Putative Father Registry. He also quite immediately then requested a DNA test of the baby...which was now held in captivity by the The Vaughns. They DID NOT allow the DNA test to be done immediately. They stalled for just over a year..finally a court-order was issued for the DNA test. The Vaughns' hindered Ben and the courts hindered Ben in his immediate quest for a DNA test. The man was doing what he was supposed to be doing..but the Vaughn's were intent to delay, stall and ignore the rights Ben had to his own child. The court system is equally at fault, for dragging their feet, for allowing this case to be interminally dragged out. Once the DNA was in, and no legal reason to keep his son from him...the courts themselves should have held these people in contempt, if these people did not comply, they should have been arrested and jailed and the authorities should have went in and physically removed this little boy from these people who were holding a child in their home...who were not the legal parents, who had no legal right to keep this child in their home. Am I sounding heartless about this child...no I truly am not. I am a mother of 4 now adult children and a grandmother. But when people are holding captive a legal parent's child, then drastic measures must be taken to remove the child from the captors...immediately...and not years later. This case has really shown just how entitled so many adoptors really feel about keeping stranger children in their homes, irregardless of laws. They want what they want when they want it. The Vaughns, their family (especially Jon Riggs and Phyllis Vaughn) and many of their supporters, sound like a huge room of children having one gigantic temper tantrum...kicking and screaming all the way. So sad...especially for this poor kid and for all natural parents who only want to love and raise their OWN children.

Mirah Riben said...

Thank you Mandy and Dan.

Mandy you spelled the facts out very well. But these MORONS ask why Ben didn't support her while she was married and pregnant and why he didn't try to visit his son while they were holding him illegally and fighting him every step of the way - preventing him from even being DNA tested! Yeah, you're really going to seek to sit down and have tea with people who are disallowing you to even get to step one and prove the child they are coveted is yours??

Would any of these people - or any sane person (maybe not one and the same) - have done any of the asinine things they are suggesting Ben should have?

Ben acted with dignity and within the law. the Vaughns did not. Period. He's right; they are wrong, wrong, wrong...always have been and still are. No amount of tears of mud slinging at Ben will ever change that!

Give it up! Loose with SOME dignity?

Mirah Riben said...

Mandy,

One of the reason there is so much fear is that it is being fed intentionally or unintentionally by the media that keep identifying the vuaghns incorrectly as grayson's "adoptive parent.s" Some reporst i have read have said that they adopted this boy thre eyears ago and now the father has come back to claim him!

I searched news articles and many do not name Ben, but identify him only as "the biological father."

All of this adds to lopsisded invalid, biased reporting that scres people who beleive whatt hey rea din the newspapers!

Ben has not been the media whore the Vaughns have bene so their side of the story has beenheard FAR FAR more yielding them and their lying version of the facts many supporters who are blind to the truth and wish to stay that way: don;t confuse me the facts!

Some, who have heard the truth have left their camp. Orgers see only the 1950s BS that a child is "better off" siwth a MARRIED coule - a couple who by all odds has a 50/50 chance or remainign married, and probably far less given the stress they inflicted on themselves. ben, on the other hand, has every possibility of marrying, and whether he does or not is no one's business. He has extended family support and Grayson will be very cherished and well cared for. Grayson has grandparents and likely aunts uncles and cousins! he is with them now. he is wit family. He is safe. Give it up.

But you need to know that still to this day people are rehashing and arguing on my Blog about just such a contested adoption that took place in the 1960s. Yes. over 40 years ago. That was not a typo!

Go here to see the most recent comments on this blog post follow up on the case of baby Jessica and the DeBoers:

familypreservation.blogspot.com/.../baby-jessica-in-new-again.html

Mirah Riben said...

Let's talk about Grayson. His rights and his best interest.

Every child born has an unalienable right to be with their family, unless that family is found to be harmful to them. Period! Your kids have that right, mine do, and so does Ben's son, Grayson.

It is absolutely in Grayson's best interest to be raised by blood kin over strangers! And that goes equally for IMPERFECT parents!

Why do you think social services in every states works toward that goal first before terminating parental rights? It is not to be done lightly...and never because someone else wants the child!! That is never a reason! Which is of course why Vaughn supporters are trying to trump up "cause." but have nada, zip, zero.

Mirah Riben said...

From David Houston:

"When you file 3 years worth of frivolous and meritless litigation you need to pay for the damages you have caused. And I think that is great because people like the Vaughns need to be held accountable under our laws, just like the rest of us are. When you cause unjustified damage to others in violation of their rights, you should expect to be sued. The poor Wyrembek family would just like to live in peace and raise their child have some privacy...

"The Vaughns will never give up on taking Ben’s son, because they will never know that he is safe. No court, judge or evidence can convince them of that. So those of us that believe fit parents like Ben should be allowed to raise their children in peace without interference by people like the Vaughns have to consider more drastic steps, like lawsuits, harassment charges, restraining orders and the like. The Vaughns give us no choice as they cannot be reasoned with.

"Sad that Christy Vaughn still does not comprehend that she never had an adoptive child and that Ben’s son was never her child. And no Christy, it was not God that put Ben’s son in your arms. It was Drucilla Bocvarov and a hospital worker; neither of which was God."

AND:

**** "When you cause unjustified damage to others in violation of their rights, you should expect to be sued. The poor Wyrembek family would just like to live in peace and raise their child have some privacy and I cannot blame them for that. If and when any member of the Wyrembek family wants to hear from a Vaughn, they know how to contact you. Leave them alone." ****

Anonymous said...

Careful Mirah....I think it is YOU that may be sued for SLANDER! What a complete JOKE you and all of your followers are!! I am guessing most of you are also Obama supporters as you have such HATE in your heart to those that have worked their @#$@#$ off to become "affluent" as you would say!! For crying out loud......get a life and let GRAYSON be your focus NOT SLANDER!!!

Mirah Riben said...

I am ROFL laughing! Slander requies a lie. I am telling the truth and you have been LYING!

1. Ben was not required to pay any support prior to knowing if the child was his, which required a DNA test that the Vaughns blocked till they were forced to...and then the wait for the results.

2. After that was determined they refused his requests for visits.

It's all in the court records.

had he abandoned his son as you claim he would have lost. He won. You lost.

It's sad. It's not easy after all that was invested. but as has been said, they gambled. They lost. It's that simple. They need to help their two kids heal from this instead of prolonging it more.

Maryreunited said...

Anon, hiding behind anonymity is a cowardly thing to do. Those who do so invariably are cowards in the end. I challenge you to find one lie told by any supporter of Mr. Wrembeck and his family. I on the other hand can right now point out at least one lie from your side of this debate. I suggest you have a lot to learn- I suggest you all take off the rose colored glasses and let the clear light of day invade your minds. None of what has happened is Mr. Wyrembecks fault, I lay blame right where it belongs, with the Vaughn's and their attornies. If they had done the right thing to begin with that child would not have been traumatized again- yes, you read that right. I said traumatized again. The first trauma was losing his mother at birth, and being handed to a complete genetic stranger instead. I have said it more than once now-if Mr. Wyrembeck is such a terrible person and unfit prove it. Provide the evidence of it. In other words it's time to PUT UP, OR SHUT UP!

Anonymous said...

That was a knee slapper, trying to bring Obama into it! OMG! I SOOOO needed a laugh tonight!

Anonymous said...

I see we are getting somewhere......didn't take long for you all to show your true colors! Night!

Mirah Riben said...

anonymous said to anonymous...

Do you think you could at least identify yourselves and anon 1 and anon 2 so we can tell if it is not the same person?

RussiaToday Apr 29, 2010 on Russian Adoption Freeze

Russi Today: America television Interview 4/16/10 Regarding the Return of Artyem, 7, to Russia alone

RT: Russia-America TV Interview 3/10

Korean Birthmothers Protest to End Adoption

Motherhood, Adoption, Surrender, & Loss

Who Am I?

Bitter Winds

Adoption and Truth Video

Adoption Truth

Birthparents Never Forget