Adoption: Infertility, Entitlement, and the Gift of a Child.

Psalm 127:3 Behold, children are a gift from the Lord, the fruit of the womb is a reward.

I’m no Bible scholar but I’m certain this verse is referencing the womb of the mother who carries the child. I don’t believe it’s referring to this mother as simply a vessel for another woman who is unable to carry a child of her own.

Children are absolutely a gift. But, for whom? God has already chosen who He wants to be the mother. He does not allow a pregnancy to occur in the womb of one woman so she will then give her baby away. I refuse to start believing He makes mistakes. The error, or sin, is made by those scrambling around, trying to make alternative plans for the voiceless being who continues to grow, completely unaware, in the safety of their mothers womb.

Adoption has never been and will never be God’s plan. Let me explain why:

1 John 5:17 All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death.

I can’t speak for anyone else so I will say that in relinquishing my firstborn I disregarded the plans God had for me and my daughter. In my arrogance I presumed to know better than Him. He chose ME, not someone else, to be the mother to my child. Every pregnancy is His perfect plan. In God’s infinite wisdom He knew what was best when he placed a child in my womb. When we deliberately make decisions that are in opposition of His plan, we are sinning. I sinned against my daughter and this sin continues to ripple out for generations. Mercifully, by His grace I’m forgiven, but my actions caused harm. Not because my daughter had bad adoptive parents, they’re exceptional people, but because every baby/child experiences life long trauma when separated from their mothers.

Nowhere in scripture is pregnancy or motherhood a sin.

Psalm 139:13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.

When a girl/woman finds herself in a pregnancy crisis she’s swimming in fear. She runs through every available option. Once she decides to stay pregnant, she’s then faced with how she will be able to parent her child. Much of her decisions from this point forward will depend greatly on the responses and support she receives from those around her; her family, her church family, her friends. As her pregnancy progresses, like every mother in the world, she will develop attachments to her child. This is God’s miraculous and perfect design; the bond between a mother and her baby. When those in a position of authority or power sway (coerce) a vulnerable girl/woman away from a relationship with her own child, there is culpability and someday they will have to answer for it. If you claim to follow Christ, there is a responsibility to do what is just and right. (1 John 2:6) Is it possible that in our ignorance we are suggesting a mother make the wrong decision? If we aren’t being obedient to His plan we are complicit in not only a sin, but also an injustice against mothers and their children.

Psalm 127:3-4 Children are a heritage from the Lord, offspring a reward from Him. Like arrows in the hands of a warrior are children born in one’s youth.

I’ve heard this same story told over and over by mothers who have lost their children to adoption; we were told our own children “deserved better,” they put us on a pedestal of selflessness, using the love for our children against us; if we really loved them we would give them away.

For the adopted person, love= abandonment.

Deuteronomy 5:21 And you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife. And you shall not desire your neighbor’s house, his field. or his male servant, or his female servant, his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor’s.

Is it a sin to desire (covet) another woman’s child?

I’m in no position to understand the depth of grief associated with infertility, but I have had several friends who have walked through its wretchedness. Watching them agonize through the process was heartbreaking and I have tremendous empathy. We know that couples will try, often for years, to conceive their own children. When their efforts are proven unsuccessful they often look to adoption as an alternative, or, as a last resort. It then becomes apparent they will settle for any baby to fill their desire to be parents. So often the desire of our heart can cloud judgement and good intentions. There is a very fine line between what a person desires and what they feel they deserve.

In order for one family to be created through adoption, another family must be destroyed. How can we say one mother’s pain trumps another?

James 1:14-15 But each person is tempted when he is lured by his own desire. Then desire when it is conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.

When the desire of our heart is to be a parent and adoption is viewed as a loving option for everyone involved (a “win-win-win”), lines become blurred. We begin to justify an attitude of entitlement by disguising it as an ‘answer to prayer’ or ‘a gift from God’.

What is best for the child?

If a child via adoption is truly a “gift from the Lord”, why does it continue to destroy so many in its wake? Why is there so much pain and suffering as a result? (www.dearadoption.com)

The best place for a child is with their biological parents. Period. When that isn’t possible, kinship care is the better option, rather than being placed in the arms of strangers. Adoption should always be a last resort. Adoption, at it’s inception, was created for children who truly need permanency and love, not as a way to provide children for couples unable to have their own.

Typically, in most adoptions there is a group of people with more power and/or money who believe they have the right to determine what’s best for a mother and her child. The running narrative in our society, and more specifically, The Church, states that a child would be “better off” if they are raised by a married, Christian couple with a stable income, a four bedroom home, two cars, reside in a wealthy suburb, have a college education and substantial savings…etc. etc. When this is seen as suitable criteria, a very important piece of information is being overlooked: This was never the life God had planned for them.

 

Photo credit: Anne Heffron

 

Advertisements

23 thoughts on “Adoption: Infertility, Entitlement, and the Gift of a Child.

  1. As a CASA volunteer I encounter frequently children who’s biological parent/s are incapable of parenting them, even with help and support from family and community. Many times there are no biological family members who desire to parent these children. How long does a child wait in limbo for permanency? A year, two, five, ten? Children need the stability of a family where they can develop and grow. Continued contact with biological parent/s is the ideal and hopefully is supported by all those actively involved in a child’s life. To suggest that parents who adopt, “settle for any baby to fulfill their desire to parent” is as judgemental as those “who believe they have the right to determine what is best for a mother and her child.”

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Thanks for taking the time to read this perspective. I fully support foster parenting and guardianship. I’m well aware there will always be parents unable or even unwilling to parent their children. However, that has nothing to do with the topic of this blog post. This post is specifically directed towards the domestic infant adoption industry, the church, Christians and their responses to a women in crisis. Moreso, I touched on my own personal experience which I have found is shared by many other mothers of loss in the community of adoptionland. I value your insights and commend you for your involvement with CASA.

      Liked by 4 people

  2. Back in the 1970s when I was a teen, and when I was Catholic, it was “Choose Life”. When I was in college in the mid to late 70s, it was still “Choose Life” but by this time I understood that the Pro Life Movement had bumper stickers “Adoption, not Abortion”.

    A bad slogan on a bumper sticker does nothing to promote understanding of the deeper issues involved.

    I am glad to see that you wrote about coveting they neighbor’s child… I’ve been saying this for many years. Yes, it is a sin. Tell that to the Bible-thumpers who steal other people’s children. They are not listening.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. I am an adoptee, from the Korean War. As in many countries, birth control was not available, nor the resources the feed the mouths families have, infanticide is a common fallback, cultural practices and norms can leave a woman pregnant with no option but to become uneducated, unmarried, unemployed, a beger or worse a prostitute that will only reap another pregnancy. I was tossed into a garbage can at birth. Yet, I am grateful for both my first mother and my second mother.
    Yes, I am both Christian and pro-life. It appears you have a very first world view of adoption and your interpretation of scripture. I have lived in 3rd world countries, and seen first hand the realities from their eyes. No, I would rather see the woman who conceived the child, carry and raise the child, I’ve watched many a woman’s milk drip as she “did what she must”. Do I think God makes mistakes, no.
    We live in a sin filled world, where sex is often not seen from the eyes of the west (and even in America), infants and children presented for adoption are Gods plan B. Adoption, from my world view is fraught with emotions and pain for the family of origin and the child. So the same is true for the child you birth, there are no guarantees and no assurances. God created (think conceived) Lucifer, and yet God gave him and you and I the power of choice. Satan chose to rebel against his Creator. Do you imagine God’s heart is not broken that many of us choose to rebel against Him?
    Sometimes, we must acknowledge that what our experience is, does not mirror into all lives, cultures, stories and lives.

    Kindly,
    2 Mothers Child

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thank you so much for taking the time to read this. I, too, am an adoptee with two mothers that I love very much. No, my perspective isn’t universal, yet there are enough of us (mothers of loss to domestic infant adoption) that iit requires a closer look, or another perspective. This post wasn’t referring to trans racial or trans national adoption. While I find it fascinating that so many ‘orphans’ have the same stories of abandonment, we have discovered that only 20% are true orphans. They are ‘paper orphans’ manufactured by an industry to make quite a lot of money. I digress.

      This post is specific to the issues mentioned in the title. The coercion and manipulation of vulnerable women in the name of a ‘better life’ is avoidable. Until we can recognize the complex issues attached to adoption and the corruption involved there won’t be dramatic, necessary change. I share my truths hoping ipeople will listen with an open heart and an open mind. Thank you for sharing your story and experiences with me. Trans racial adoption is something very near to my heart for many reasons, but suffice it to say, I understand how broken this system is. A child deserves, at the very least, to remain in the country of origin. White saviors need to stop buying babies. It’s unethical. The costs to buy a baby could care for an entire village- for years- AND keep a family intact.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. God’s perfect plan? Really? A 14 year old girl who is pregnant because she was raped (repeatedly) by mom’s live-in boyfriend (who’s not going anywhere), and she has to raise the baby in those circumstances, is a “perfect plan?” What kind of God would contrive N that as a perfect plan?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. You don’t get it. The 14 year old girl and the live in boyfriend of her mother will become parents of their offspring if she chooses to deliver. Yes they are the perfect parents and the only parents of their offspring. That does not mean they will be great parents ore even present parents but every person born is perfect as who they are for real whether or not dad is a good guy and whether or not mom is over 18. If the state was fair every person would be obligated to be named parent on their offsprings birth record regardless of the circumstance that caused them to conceive offspring together. That birth record would never be altered nor would the name of their offspring be altered no mater who raises their offspring. And if the state was fair they could terminate custody without terminating obligation. This way their offspring would always have legal recognition as a member of their own family and would be entitled to support if and when their parents were employed regardless of who was raising them. The parents would be obligated to remain involved to whatever extent they wanted or were capable and would not be prevented from visitation with their son or daughter unless they were convicted of a violent crime and a restraining order were warranted. Stalking your own child just to see them and spend time with them should not be worthy of a restraining order its normal healthy parental behavior to stop at nothing to be with our young. If the state were fair nobody would ever under any circumstances be referred to as the mother or father of another persons offspring.p. iptz not necessary and creates confusion about split loyalties.

      Liked by 2 people

  5. I liked your post. But since I reunite families separated for all kinds of reasons not just legal adoption I kind of recoiled in horror when you were talking about gods perfect plan and pregnancy and the pregnant woman being the mom. If I read that 50 years ago I would have totally agreed. Today its possible to be pregnant with another woman’s offspring. Its really just a clever method of classic black market adoption. Egg donation and embryo adoption result in people being abandoned by their mothers once they are born. The pregnant women are not their mothers. Whether the woman carrying the pregnancy raises the person she delivers or not nothing in her pregnancy matters because the person they delivered could still exist if the actual mother delivered her own offspring. Anyone could deliver the mothers offspring and the very same person would be born. Maybe more or less healthy depending on how the woman delivering acted while pregnant….but still the same person. People who were delivered by gestational surrogates don’t search for them and if they are raised by gestational surrogates who are typically their step mothers they often resent them for trying to eliminate their actual mothers from their reality. I hop them search for and find their mothers. The women that gave birth to them that was not the perfect plan. That line of thinking in your post only works for actual mothers who loose offspring in adoptions. I fear that women who buy the ability to give birth to other women’s offspring imagine themselves to be pregnant as part of gods plan for them rather than realizing they are buying the absence of a persons mother for their own sick entertainment in a lifelong game of roll play and house the person delivered will never escape.

    Like

  6. As a person struggling with infertility I get my hopes shattered every month when I desperately look for signs of pregnancy hoping that the infertility treatment I am going through will work and it doesn’t. The agony and the heartbreak you can never gauge. All I desperately want is a child to love and cherish. I see people who do not even want children get pregnant and abort the child, How is it that they deserve to get pregnant and I don’t? If some one is volunteering to give up their child for adoption for whatever reason it might be, isn’t it better for the child to grow up in a home where the mother will love him or her all the more because she knows what she had to go through to adopt that child? Imagine a child growing up in a home with birth parents who cannot take care of the child. Will the child really be better off in such a home? How about considering that maybe God wanted the child to grow up in a loving and nurturing home and that is why he chose the baby to be adopted.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I’m sorry to hear that God is powerless to open your womb. Such incompetence. It sounds to me like you believe you are entitled to a child. Are you entitled to another woman’s baby? I don’t know any mother to carry her child to term then WANT to give her baby to strangers. This typically happens when she feels backed into a corner and lacks support and resources. Let’s discuss what the voiceless infant wants, shall we? If given the choice they would choose their own mother, 100% of the time. A baby experiences trauma when separated from their mother. Mothers aren’t interchangeable- a baby knows the difference. So, I would suggest you consider fostering a child. There are nearly 400,000 children in the system who need permanency and love. OR! You could adopt a mother and child together so their family will remain intact, just as God had planned all along.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Hi Stephanie, I hear this a lot lately: ” you could adopt a mother and child together so their family will remain intact…” Well, not really. hear me out.

        This answer is for “M” as well.

        The idea you are referring to is a noble one. I first heard of a practice similar to this almost 30 years ago at an American Adoption Conference. In France, a young pregnant girl or woman is taken in by an older couple who wishes to take care of her during her pregnancy. They then take care of the mother and her baby after birth. There is no adoption at all. The older couple recognizes that the mother and infant belong together and that they may need a caring place to live stress free until the mother can find a suitable place of her own to live, a job, daycare, or a boyfriend to marry her. Or, she may marry the father of the child. The arrangement is temporary. It is not adoption.

        I would caution against suggesting that anyone here in America use adoption as a means for an infertile couple to adopt a teenage pregnant girl or a young pregnant woman of, say, 20 years old, with the intention of then adopting her newborn as well. Why? Because adoption always results in the adopters owning the adoptee. Yes, I said owning. The concept of adoption means that the person or couple doing the adopting is then allowed to call the adoptee “their own”. The proof of ownership is in the adoption decree which sets in motion the legal process in which a court order is sent to the state department of vital statistics to change the name of the adoptee.

        The name change process in adoption requires the actual medical record of birth to be revoked, canceled, annulled, then sealed, forever (you know this, I am spelling this out for the benefit of “M” above). Then, the Director of Vital Statistics in the State Capital creates a new birth certificate for the infant or older child using information taken from the Final Court Order of Adoption. The new birth certificate replaces the medical record of live birth ( the document signed by the physician verifying the actual birth). With the replacement birth certificate in place, the adopters can now claim ownership of the infant or older child by saying, “Look, I am a mother! Says so right here!”

        To suggest to anyone that the preferable action would be to adopt the pregnant girl or woman and her infant when born is to suggest that two birth certificates be annulled, canceled, revoked, and sealed, and replaced by false-fact birth certificates. It is to suggest that adoption is the approved action, rather than accepting responsibility in a kind and generous manor to offer to humanely take care of the pregnant mother and then her newborn baby until the mother can get back on her feet. Adoption would put the mother in the position of complexity losing her own identity. Adoption would also force identity replacement on the infant.

        Stephanie, I think what you are suggesting is that the mother and her baby be provided a loving home if they need one with the freedom to leave when the time is right. With adoption, that is not an option.

        This is why adoption is never an option. Ever.

        Since we (society) expects adopted people to simply accept our lot in life, I will turn the tables on “M”. She must learn to accept her lot in life. Go to therapy. Mental health therapy. Deal with infertility. So you can’t have a baby? Does that mean you covet someone elses’s baby? No. It means that you have a medical condition for which you have no choice but to accept reality. If you fail to accept reality, and adopt, you will then live in the illusion, and delusion, of replacing your infertility with parenting someone else’s baby that magically became yours through a legal court order.

        This is the harsh reality that all adopted people have no choice in accepting – that we were born to a mother and sired by a father that we have absolutely no legal right to know. We must accept the cruel reality that, by law, we have no legal right to see, or hold in our hands, or own, a certified copy of the medical record of live birth that was created in the hospital when we were physically born.

        As I write this, I am getting very angry. I (as an atheist) do not think any god would want a infant to be separated from its mother so that an infertile woman can claim it as her own. So you ask about negligent or abusive mothers or drug addicted mothers or whatever? I am also a social worker. I know there are situations in which a child does not belong in the home. This is when temporary housing for the child is needed, TEMPORARY. Kinship care is next in line. If those are not possible, then legal guardianship provides a home with legal protections for caregivers and the child. The child’s rights to her own name of birth, the child’s rights to parents, to siblings, to grandparents, to cousins, to aunts an uncles, is preserved by law. In adoption, the adoptee loses ALL rights to family of birth.

        Does that sound remotely Christian? I don’t think so.

        Yet, these are the wishes and perceived needs of adopters and adoptive-parent-wanna-bees.

        “M” – accept reality so you do not ruin a child’s life. Don’t force a child to lose everything so you gain a child to care for. You can love a child without owning one.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. When I say ‘adopt both’ I suppose I meant ‘foster’, or ‘care for’. Absolutely zero ownership, only support. Never in my mind did I mean a legal adoption where names change. There are families who will take in a mother and her baby; help them in every way. They become like family. They are free to leave whenever they choose. It’s quite beautiful and I’ve seen friends do it. As a Christian, this is how it should be done. THIS is the heart of Christ. But, that’s just me.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Stephanie, thank you for your reply on April 22nd clarifying your terminology. I kinda knew your mindset, so it was good to see we both are against ownership and for support of mothers in need. Yes, there are families who will take in both mother and her newborn to care for them both until the mother gets on her feet. Yes, I respect your Christian views. Now it’s time for Christians to respect us as adoptees, to respect mothers in need, and not covet someone else’s infant.

        Liked by 1 person

  7. You are correct that there are many children who need permanency. Foster care is not permanency. Children need to know that they are a legal member of their family and not just temporary in case years later a biological parent might want to come and yank them out of the only home they have known. This can be tempered by continuing contact with the bio family if they so choose. (Some don’t). The suggestion above that a child, born through rape of a 14 year old, should be raised by the boyfriend that raped her is absurd. That’s Just looking for a second generation to be raped by the boyfriend now father. I certainly hope that I misinterpreted this comment because the guy belongs in jail.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Jane, of course a rapist belongs in jail. If he is a father, his name is on his child’s birth certificate. Period. He and the 14 year old girl he raped are, indeed, parents. That is the DNA-provable reality. So, if safety is your concern, the 14 year old mother could be moved to a safe house for battered women and mothers. There, the case workers would help her find long-term housing, perhaps in a foster care situation for herself and her infant. The rapist father would go to jail. His parental rights could be removed, but his child still has rights to her birthright to know who her father is.

      As I said before, I am a social worker. I know the system from the inside. True, foster care is not permanent. But legal, custodial guardianship is permanent until thee child reaches adulthood. Here is one case of a fellow social worker who told me his story: when he was three years old, one parent died. When he was six years old, the other parent died. Instead of adopting him, his grandparents became his legal guardians. That arrangement provided him with loving family he knew as his grandparents. If they had adopted him, his grandparents would legally become his mother and father, and his aunts and uncles then would legally become his siblings. But his grandparents were smart. They provided a legally-binding contract in which they were obligated to provide him with schooling, doctors, and representing him as his guardians when needed. They were parental role models who did not replace his parents. He knew his parents died. He knew his place in his family. In the home, his grandparents were his grandparents. He had the legal right to his own identity and access to other family members. In all adoption, the child loses the right to identity of birth.

      Guardianship can be set up to protect a child from abusive parents. A stranger can be appointed as a custodial guardian who cares for and loves the child. Visitation with abusive parents can be arranged in supervised rooms in agencies, or, the parent or parents may be legally prevented from ever seeing their child again. If that happens, the child still has access to other family members. This happens in divorce and remarriage and in parental death.

      If a parent or parents are in jail, kids can visit their parents in jail. It happens all the time.

      The main argument against adoption is that the child’s rights to all family, the child’s rights to name of birth and birth certificate of birth (there is such a thing as a birth certificate of adoption – the amended birth certificate created upon finalization of adoption). With kinship care, family preservation, and custodial guardianship, the child grows up in an atmosphere of truth. Knowing the awful truth is far better than being whisked away, sheltered in a witness protection program living in a pretend world for the sake of what you, Jane, and others, call Permanency.

      Permanency is adoption agency speak. Adoption social workers earn their living by permanently and needlessly separating children from their families.

      I worked in two homeless shelters where I kept families together, against all odds, including taking a mother and her four young children to visit with her husband and their father in a court room where he shuffled in wearing ankle shackles and with his wrists handcuffed behind his back. He was still her husband and those kids ran to their father with hugs and kisses, and tears. He made a huge mistake. But he is still their father. Do you think for one minute that that homeless mother would have given her kids up to adoption for the sake Permanency? Not on your life! I helped her gain self confidence, job training, child care, and an apartment, all while coping with her husband’s mistake. Adopting out her four children would have killed her.

      Like

      1. The situation with the child and legal guardianship with his grandparents is essentially an adoption under another name. Of course if there are capable relatives available to care for the child that would certainly be the first choice. To suggest that a child visit the father in prison, who raped his mother, resulting in his birth is ludicrous. There are so many issues that would result from this choice. When do you inform the child of the circumstances of his birth? Do you wait until he is 18. Then what? These are similar to issues related to those who wait to tell a child they are adopted. I see tragedy down the road for such a child, not to speak of the mother who certainly would have many issues related to the rape, etc!

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Jane: No, custodial guardianship and adoption are two separate and distinct legal processes conducted in a court of law. Guardianship appoints family members, or friends, or strangers as legal care givers who do not replace the natural parents, but who act as responsible adults who take on parental roles of caring for a child in need. The parents are still the child’s parents. Adoption also provides for a child in need but adoption replaces the natural parents. Therefore, guardianship is not “essentially an adoption under another name.”

        I did not suggest that a child visit her or his rapist father in prison. That is something you surmised. Such a decision is made by a court of law. Visitation with a rapist father might not seem to be in the best interest of the child, but there could be reasons why a judge would allow visitation. The child’s safety is paramount. An Order of protection could be set up to prevent the father to contact the child. However, he is still the father and his name is still on the child’s birth certificate; unless his parental rights are involuntarily terminated and the mother relinquishes her parental rights, thus freeing the child for adoption. Only when an adoption is finalized is the child’s birth certificate revoked and sealed, and then replaced.

        There have been instances where an adult seeks to know, or at least know of, parents who are known criminals. Even children question who their parents are and where their parents are. Each case is different. Revealing the truth to a child is accomplished through age-appropriate language and level of understanding.

        In another situation, one in which I knew the father’s family as acquaintances and not as a social worker, a pregnant woman stabbed another woman to death. The father was granted immediate custody of his baby when the birth occurred in prison shortly after the murder. The mother remains in jail. Her child knows who her mother is and has contact with her mother through letters and phone calls. There is such a thing as rehabilitation. The mother repents, admits guilt, and she is still the mother. She loves her child and the daughter loves her mother. The mother’s name is on the birth certificate. This mother does not, and more than likely never will, have custody of her child. She will be in prison for a very long time. The girl is very much loved by her father who provides for her.

        Jane, just because you don’t like the situation does not erase the facts. You can scream and yell all you want to. That just shows your level of freaking out in wanting to control the situation. You can’t have it all your way. A court judge makes these decisions.

        Jane, any family in crisis has their own counselors, social workers, lawyers, family court advocates and family court judges. The crisis team helps the parents and children through the crisis and sets up long-range goals and action plans.

        Like

      3. I think I was very articulate and in no way freaking out. It’s obvious there is only one side of an issue to you and that is your side That doesn’t work well in a society where there should be thoughtful conversation to solve problems with all sides of an issue explored. Seems we are very short of civility in this country lately and your site seems to extend that lack of consideration of thoughtful discussion.

        Like

      4. Jane, you are the one who wants it all your way. I presented the facts – guardianship is not adoption. It’s the law. Not my opinion. By the tone of your voice, I know who you are. And your name is not Jane. You are attacking me just as you have always done. Identify yourself, troll.

        Like

      5. The case I mentioned about the pregnant woman who is in prison for murder can be found at this link: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/nyregion/09stab.html?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=34775A598D6896E78F92568EEF94D5EF&gwt=pay

        The young woman lived with the father of their twins and of their unborn baby. She ran away to Long Island and took the twins with her. She suffered from some type of depression and wanted to be near her mother. When she stabbed another pregnant woman to death, the twins were taken in by authorities and her daughter was born a few days later. The father, who is the son of a friend of mine, rushed to Long Island where he was granted immediate custody of all three of his children. He drove back to his home 400 miles away from Long Island. He continues to raise the three children as a single father with a full time job.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s