In the course of writing my post about the baby dump law in Mississippi, After almost a decade, Mississippi “safe haven” legalized child abandonment scheme still fails, last week, I dropped a quick e-mail on Marley Greiner/Bastardette to ask about any history relating to the dumps in Mississippi she might have or overview statistics she might have pulled together in the course of her work.

For years Marley compiled and authored the Baby Dump News (or BDN,) a weekly e-mailed round up of media reports and other information pertinent to newborn abandonment, infanticide, “safe haven”/”Baby Moses” legislation, and related matters.

As many states don’t compile statistics on these matters, and even those that do had numbers that time and again proven incorrect when compared with even newspaper reports, Marley’s tracking during this first decade of the dump laws provided critically important documentation.

In many ways, she tracked the rise and growth of the baby dump industry, it’s proponents, it’s opponents, and the week in and week out unfolding saga through webpages, blogs, emails, legislative hearings and newspaper articles. In the course of this tracking, she became somewhat an “inadvertent” expert on what was actually happening across the country in relation to such.

He response to my brief email stunned me, within mere hours of my request, she had come back to me with all the issues of the BDN with information about cases in Mississippi as well as additional places to search for cases. (This was more than I possibly could have hoped for.)

With the help of my partner, Mike, we went back through our digital archive of the Baby Dump News (as to date, only archives from 2007 are available online) and pulled these news reports.

Obviously these cannot by their very nature give a full picture of what has gone on in Mississippi as some untold number of neonaticides are simply never discovered.

In other cases, those of abandoned kids, or bodies found, again, it then becomes a question of whether or not the story was reported, or even if it was reported, whether the news article was found in the course of Marley’s research.

There may well be other cases that were reported on not cataloged below.

Some states have routinely been folding border babies, (kids born in hospitals and never taken home by their parents) into their  “safe haven saves” statistics, but in theory at least, according to one of the articles Marley found,  the Mississippi law should not be including them in the totals.

As to whether or not the state’s totals contain other oddities or not, we’ll likely never know. Reporters simply take them at face value.

These days, tools like google alerts (which first went live in 2003) have certainly made doing this kind of research much easier, but there’s still no substitute for solid research and looking beyond those numbers at what the genuine circumstances involve.

Unfortunately what we’ve found in other states is that even if border babies were not originally folded into “safe haven” statistics, over the years they may come to be.

So bearing in mind the limitations of what these links represent, here is what I’ve been able to mine back out of Marley’s work:

• BABY DUMP NEWS, June 13, 2002 V. 2, #20
  MISSISSIPPI
  Jackson Clarion-Ledger, May 22, 2002
  Life sentence in death of newborn is upheld
  http://www.clarionledger.com/news/0205/22/m17.html

  JACKSON-- Conviction of Lindsay Kathryn Welch upheld by Mississippi Court of Appeals.  Welch was a student at Mississippi State when she gave birth in her dorm room.  Prosecutors claim she let baby die and then put the body in the trash.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, October 27, 2002, v2, #40
  MISSISSIPPI
  WAPT-TV, Jackson, October 25, 2002
  Newborn drop-off law nets 6 babies in first year
  http://www.thejacksonchannel.com/news/1741097/detail.html

  JACKSON--Six babies left in Mississippi hospitals since state's safe haven law went into effect more than a year ago.  Four left in Hinds County, one in Union County and one in Harrison county.  (No mention if these were authentic safe haven drops or boarder baby abandonments.) One has been adopted and the rest are in fostercare waiting for adoption finalization.  Gloria Thornton Salters, of DHS, says without any apparent authority, that if not for the law, the children would have been left to die.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, November 3, 2002, v2, #41
  MISSISSIPPI
  Biloxi Clarion-Ledger, October 29, 2002
  Newborn drop-off law saves 6 lives in state
  http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/news/state/4372401.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

  BILOXI--Longer version of last week's article.  Under law hospitals can ask questions about child' health, but cannot ask who the mother is or where she is from.  Law does not include mothers who give birth in a hospital and decide to abandon their children there.  In those cases, mothers are required to be registered at hospital under their names and to sign waivers to turn over their babies.   If mother wants to reclaim baby shortly after legal abandonment state reportedly will work with her and have her attend classes.  None of the mothers who left babies under the state's program have tried to get them back.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, November 17, 2002, v2, #43
  MISSISSIPPI
  Jackson Clarion-Ledger, November 16, 2002
  Conviction stands in baby's death
  http://www.clarionledger.com/news/0211/16/m16.html

  JACKSON--Mississippi Supreme Court refuses to hear appeal of Lindsay Kathryn Welch in the death of her newborn found in a trashcan in 1999.  Claimed illegal search of her garbage left outside of home after police received tip about baby.  Welch, a former U. of Mississippi student is doing 8 years in prison.

• BABY DUMP NEWS,  January 19, 2003, v3 #3
  MISSISSIPPI
  Jackson Clarion-Ledger, January 18, 2003
  Police hunt for body of infant believed discarded
  http://www.clarionledger.com/news/0301/18/m07.html

  CLEVELAND--Police search landfill for infant believed to have been hauled there after being placed in dumpster.  19-year old Delta State University student triggered search after she sought medical treatment shortly after giving birth.  Says baby was stillborn and born off campus.  Mother, described as distraught, is cooperating with authorities.  According to article, as of October 2002, 6 babies have been dropped-off under the safe haven program.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, March 16, 2003, v3 #11
  MISSISSIPPI
  Jackson Clarion-Ledger, March 16, 2003
  Abandoned-baby laws criticized
  http://www.clarionledger.com/news/0303/16/m06.html

  JACKSON--Mississippi Special Assistant Attorney General Elizabeth Carroll Hocker disagrees with EBD report.  Says 9 infants, 6 of them in 2002, have been safely anonymously abandoned in state.  Feels that they weren't found dead is good sign.  7 have been adopted and 2 are in prospective homes.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, November 30, 2003, v3 #48
  MISSISSIPPI
  Jackson Sun Herald, November 25, 2003
  Mississippi calls newborn program a success
  http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/7346294.htm

  JACKSON--Puff piece on MS SH law.  Claims that 13 babies have been dropped off and another 3 were dropped off and retrieved.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, April 25, 2004, v4 #18
  MISSISSIPPI
  
  1. Jackson Clarion-Ledger, April 20, 2004
     Dead infant found in bag
     http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040420/NEWS01/404200380/1002

     JACKSON--Newborn found dead in garbage bag at Madison County landfill.  Unclear how baby died or how long it was in bag.

  2. WLBT-TV, Jackson, April 20, 2004
     State law protects unwanted newborns
     http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=1797624&nav=2CSfMQOB

     JACKSON--Review of state SH law and its history.  Ol' Miss Medical Center clinical nurse Kelly Joyner says several infants have been dropped off since law went into effect July 2001, including one in March.  Special Asst. AG, Elizabeth Hocker says that 11 babies "have been turned over to  hospitals instead of abandoned."

  3. WLBT-TV, Jackson, April 21, 2004
     Baby in garbage had just been born
     http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=1801075

     JACKSON--Autopsy indicates baby was suffocated and case now treated as homicide.  Police have a few phone tips; mother could face capital murder charge.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, May 2, 2004-, v4 #19
  MISSISSIPPI
  
  1. WLBT-TV, Jackson, April 25, 2004
     Deceased newborn found at dump site
     http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=1811998&nav=2CSfMZE6

     JACKSON--Update on landfill case.  (BDN v4 #18).  Police ask public assistance in solving case.  Reward of up to $1000 offered through Crime Stoppers.

  2. WLBT-TV, Jackson, April 26, 2004
     Cops hope DNA will identify infant
     http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=1812871&nav=2CSfMZrd

     JACKSON--Detectives following up tips received after Crime Stoppers broadcast. DNA tests ordered on body. Jackson Police Department planning funeral and burial.

  3. University of Mississippi Daily Mississippian, April 28, 2004
     ERs take unwanted newborns
     http://www.thedmonline.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/04/28/408f726849f17

     OXFORD--Officials publicize state's SH law.  Baptist Memorial Hospital in Jackson has had at least one drop-off.  Hospital doesn't offer counseling services for mother but does referrals.  Family Crisis Services in Oxford  says women who SH are "under a lot of stress" and FCS would offer them counseling services.   "We would ask them to sit down and discuss the reasons why they're doing this.  We want to offer them counseling before they make such a drastic decision."  Assistant Police Chief says if women tried to drop off baby at police station, they would be referred to FCS.  Fire chief says he has never had an abandoned baby case in 32 years with department.

  4. WLBT-TV, Jackson, April 30, 2004
     Donations pour in for newborn's burial
     http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=1824085&nav=2CSfMga3

     JACKSON--Jackson-area residents continue to donate funds for funeral arrangements for baby.  Plot donated; Peoples Funeral home offers services and other arrangements; music teacher  purchases burial outfit.  Police chief believes baby may have come from Madison or Rankin County.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, May 16, 2004, v4 #21
  MISSISSIPPI
  
  1. WLBT-TV, Jackson, May 12, 2004
     Services held for abandoned infant
     http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=1859273

     JACKSON--Update on landfill /Baby John Paul Doe case BDN v4 # 18, 19, 20). Account of baby's funeral; quotes from those who attended.

  2. Jackson Clarion-Ledger, May 12, 2004
     Tiny casket weighs heavy in "significance"
     http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040512/NEWS01/405120364/1002

     JACKSON--Feature on Angela Washington, who returned home from hospital after suffering miscarriage on day she learned of discovery of  Baby John Paul Doe's body.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, May 30, 2004, v4 #23
  MISSISSIPPI
  
  1. Biloxi Sun-Herald, May 20, 2004
     Baby boy abandoned at church door
     http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/8708522.htm

     GULFPORT--Newborn boy,  Baby Matthew,  left on doorstep of St. Matthew Evangelical Lutheran Church.  County Prosecutor says he's been in DA's office for 14 years and never heard of an abandoned baby before. Police Lt. Alfred Sexton says that abandonment didn't comply with SH law, but may be in the "spirit of the law."  Child welfare workers say it is usual for babies to be abandoned in public places; usually left in hospitals.

  2. WLOX-TV, Biloxi, May 23, 2004
     Counselor wants compassion for mother of abandoned baby
     http://www.wlox.com/Global/story.asp?S=1888715

     GULFPORT--Rachel Nilsen, from Pregnancy Resources of Mississippi in Ocean Springs  hopes that authorities aren't hard on person who left baby at church.  Admits it would have been better  to drop  off baby in "the care of a responsible adult" but believes there's a "real possibility that this person felt that they could not care for this child and they wanted  to put this child in some good hands."

  3. Biloxi Sun Herald, May 25, 2004
     Charges in baby case await investigation
     http://www.sunherald.com/mld/thesunherald/8751943.htm

     GULFPORT--DA declines to press charges in Baby Matthew case pending outcome of final investigation.  Mother known but not yet named.  Unclear if she is asking Youth Court for custody and if charges will be filed after Youth Court judge rules in case.  Relative of mother called Sun Herald on Saturday saying mother was very scared and panicked and asked if she could be arrested for abandonment.  First baby abandonment in Harrison County since 1993 when a girl was found dead on I 10.  DHS says 14 babies have been SH since law went into effect.

  4. Biloxi Sun Herald, May 29, 2004
     Baby law not well-known
     http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/news/local/8790050.htm

     GULFPORT--Info piece on Mississippi SH law; complains that schools don't teach how to abandon your baby in the curriculum.  Anon. caller to Sun Herald asked where they could find poster and hotline number, and paper finally learned that Attorney General is responsible for publicity.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, June 13, 2004, v 4, #25
  MISSISSIPPI
  
  1. Biloxi Sun Herald, June 8, 2004
     Focus on drop-off law grows
     http://www.sunherald.com/mld/thesunherald/news/local/8865803.htm

     JACKSON--Update on landfill/ Baby John Paul Doe case (BDN v4 # 18, 19, 20, 21).  DNA evidence rules out suspect in newborn's death.  No details.

  2. Jackson Clarion Ledger, June 9, 2004
     Police back to square one in dead baby case
     http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040609/NEWS01/406090351/1002/NEWS01

     JACKSON--Information on state's SH law.  Says 14 babies have been "saved" since law went into effect 7/2001.  Beth Casey, counselor for Harrison County Youth Court wants SH publicity to target high school and college students.  "Your high schoolers and college kids who become pregnant all too often try to conceal their pregnancy rather than tell someone.  People need to know that churches are not a safe place according to state law."

• BABY DUMP NEWS, June 20, 2004, v 4 #25
  MISSISSIPPI
  JacksonChannel.com, 6/17/04
  Autopsy slated for infant found at UMC
  http://www.thejacksonchannel.com/news/3429856/detail.html

  JACKSON--Body of newborn girl found by workers sorting sheets at University Medical Center; not full term and officials suspect it was stillborn.  Looking for parents.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, June 27, 2004, v4 #26
  MISSISSIPPI
  
  1. WLBT-TV. Jackson, June 21, 2004
     Dead baby at UMC may have been put in laundry accidentally
     http://www.wlbt.com/Global/story.asp?S=1954849&nav=2CSfO3fn

     JACKSON--Update on UMC case.  (BDN v4 # 26).  Body found in laundry determined to be stillborn; may have been placed in laundry by mistake.  Investigation continues.

  2. Jackson Clarion-Ledger, June 23, 2004
     Investigation confirms stillborn mistaken placed in UMC laundry
     http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040623/NEWS01/40623002/1002

     JACKSON--Simultaneous stillbirths at UMC caused mix-up which led to one body going to laundry instead of pathology.  No criminal charges expected.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, August 8, 2004--v 4 #33
  MISSISSIPPI
  
  1. Greenwood Commonwealth, August 3, 2004
     Woman suspected of killing her baby arrested by police
     http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=12591564&BRD=1838&PAG=461&dept_id=104621&rfi=6

     BELZONI--Lasalle Denise Brown, 24. arrested on Humphreys County warrant in investigation of disappearance of newborn.  State HS called authorities when they learned that her newborn could not be located after Brown's boyfriend, Calvin Stowers, 39, removed baby from residence and she had not seen the baby since.  Stowers already charged with murder and is in jail.

  2. Biloxi Sun Herald, August 6, 2004
     Search suspended for body of missing newborn
     http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/news/politics/9336304.htm

     BELZONI--Police suspend search for baby's body; claim they have enough evidence to carry case.  Brown says she saw Stowers put baby in garbage can.

• BABY DUMP NEWS, May 29, 2005
  MISSISSIPPI
  Spero News, May 23, 2005
  Mississippi pro-lifers intervene
  http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?idCategory=32&idsub=120&id=1441

  NO DATELINE--Feature on Mississippi anti-abortion radical Roy McMillan who was found naked and abandoned at birth in a shoe box on the steps of a church.

2007- (online)- Marley appears not to have found any articles relating to Mississippi.

2008- BDN ceases publication. Marley was kind enough to search through her personal files for that year, but has found no articles relating to Mississippi (yet).

2009- still working, but did send across the sad case of  Theresa Clincy  who abandoned 2 kids: 1, a 3-month old on a porch. The kids were able to remain in the family, living with her sister according to the last few piece.

There are a number of articles about the case and WAPT in particular had a fair amount of coverage.

• March 11, 2009: Boy Who Found Abandoned Baby Honored At School
• March 15, 2009: $25,000 Bond Keeps Abandoned Baby’s Mother In Jail
• March 18, 2009: DA To Revoke Probation For Mother Of Abandoned Child
• April 1, 2009: Abandoned Baby’s Mother Awaiting Mental Evaluation
• April 13, 2009: Abandoned Baby’s Aunt Cares For Sister’s Children
• April 24, 2009: Abandoned Baby’s Aunt Keeping Family Together
• July 22, 2009 Single Mother Asks For Help For Jailed Sister’s Kids

2010- I will handle this in a separate post (or posts) later this week as the latest cases certainly deserve a post (if not posts) all their own.

But the (at least) three cases I’ll be working with will be those of:

• Linda Nash who stabbed her newborn to death. The baby was born at home; Linda says she didn’t know she was pregnant.  She’s a Type 2 diabetic, and an adoptee.
• the dead baby found in a suitcase earlier this summer
• and this latest child abandonment of a (live) child left at a Salvation Army donation drop off, outside the legalized child abandonment system

Again, the post really represents the work Marley has done over the course of a decade. I simply wanted to provide some background context to the Mississippi piece I was writing. On any one of these cases there are a number of articles, some of which are listed here, some of which aren’t.

Mississippi is but one case study of how these laws simply have not achieved what they promised they would. Children are still abandoned and dead babies are still being found. Women are still going to jail and families are still being torn apart.

Kids are being stripped of their identities, family history, context, medical histories etc. in a gross violation of their human rights.

Even of those women who do bring their kids to a baby dump site, their post-birth health and safety, let alone parental rights, physical and psychological needs are all too often considered secondary to “catching” a kid (most of whom, in Mississippi at least, appear to be entering the adoption system.)

It’s a mess, but a mess far too many people are just fine with.

(At least until some of these kids grow up and are old enough to speak on their own behalf, that is.)

Перевести на русский

The big news tonight is that Russia has put a freeze on all US adoptions until Russia and the US can come to an agreement on terms relating to those inter-country adoptions, (most likely adding additional follow up for Russian children, who remain Russian citizens after adoption) and sign a treaty to that effect.

To those of us who have been following the circumstances leading up to this suspension over the course of years now, none of this comes as a surprise, particularly since Russia had come right up to this brink in the last major US/Russian adoption related incident, (see my posts on Dmitry Yakolev.)

To understand the process by which things came to this critical point, one first has to understand the broader context.

Marley Greiner/Bastardette has been tracking some of the Russian adoptee murders and other forms of abuse, such as the high profile case of Masha (”Allen”) who was adopted by pedophile Matthew Mancuso on her blog “NIKTO NE ZABYT — NICHTO NE ZABYTO/Nobody is forgotten. Nothing is forgotten. A memoriam for Russian adoptees abused and murdered by their forever families.”

Be certain to see her overview Cases: Forever Family, Forever Dead.

Scrolling back through the posts and cases provides a great deal of background to how this level of frustration and anger has built over time.

Also be sure to see her overview of the consequences (and lack thereof) to the adoptive parents, The Russian Adopted Dead: a review of killers and sentences.

I have also done a scant few posts about some of the Russian Adooptees: Masha, Dennis Uritsky here in Maryland and somewhat more in-depth coverage of essentially the last major international incident concerning American adopters of a dead Russian adoptee, the sad death of Dmitry Yakolev/ Chase Harrison.

With that as backgrounder, we then come to the events of the last 24 hours.

Start with this lengthy video segment from Russia Today,

Clearly, each and every system in place to prevent such failed one by one, falling like dominoes.

After the 11 hour flight from DC back to Moscow he was brought to the Russian Education and Science Ministry Thursday afternoon by a man who had apparently been paid $200 by the adoptive mother to meet the boy’s United Airlines flight when it arrived. He had been adopted a mere 6 months ago.

While it’s unclear what Artem had been told about the trip, we have details such as these beginning to emerge:

The online website Gazeta.ru said the child had almost completely forgotten how to speak Russian during his time in the United States, and answered questions posed to him in his native language in English. He said his adoptive grandparents were “good” but his mother was “very bad”, claimed the website. During his time in the US, he had been given a new name – Justin Hansen.

Allegedly he was told by his adoptive mother, from Shelbyville, Tennessee, that he was going on an excursion to Russia and would return home to the US in a couple of weeks. “His adoptive mother beat him and pulled him by the hair,” said Pavel Astakhov, the Russian president’s human rights ombudsman. “Reminding him of her makes him cry.”

At the orphanage in the far eastern town of Partizansk, where the child lived before he was adopted, teachers denied that he had psychological problems. “He’s a smart, clever kid,” said Svetlana Glukhovtseva. “He took in everything we taught him very well.”

Anyone with a shred of empathy can sympathize with the betrayal he must have felt upon realizing that far from some kind of “excursion,” his new “forever mommy” had decided to ship him off as if taking the boy to a returns department.

The Russian media is running with the “returned purchase” meme and I’m convinced, it’s a very valid analogy. They, like many of us Bastards, recognize the American adoptive mother is attempting to pass Artem off as nothing more than ‘defective merchandise’, and are furious at the callousness of her these actions.

There have been promises of an investigation here on the American end to see whether or not any laws were broken, I can only hope such would take into account not merely the actions of these individuals, but the entire system that enabled this human rights travesty.

Children are not objects.

They should not be treated as such.

They should not be purchased, nor purchase-able.

Artem was not treated as a family member, he was treated as little more than an allegedly ‘broken item’ shipped back to the manufacturer.

Now that he’s back in Russia, the Russian media are reporting he will likely go back into the child welfare system after first receiving physical and psychological examinations and some counseling. The language barrier alone may make him feel all the more isolated in his home country.

Bastardette blogged about Artyom Saveliev / Artem Saveliev /Artem Justin Hansen’s flight last night,  LEAVIN’ ON A JET PLANE: RUSSIAN ADOPTEE DUMPED ON PLANE, SENT BACK TO RUSSIA

Throughout the day today, she has posted several updates:

First an initial update that includes a variety of images relating to the case: Artem’s official adoption listing profile on the Russian government website prior to the adoption, and “after pictures” both with his “Forever Family” adoptive Mommy, Torry Ann Hansen and upon arrival back in Russia at the Domodedovo Airport. Bastardette also includes the image of the note that was sent with Artem on his journey to the ‘returns department.’

ARTEM SAVELIEV/ARTEM JUSTIN HANSEN: A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS

Later on, she added a second update about the Renton Washington agency that placed him, WAPAC, World Association for Children and Parents. WAPAC is Council on Accreditation (COA) accredited and a Joint Council on International Children’s Services (JCICS) and National Council for Adoption (NCFA) member. Earlier today, the Russian government suspended WAPAC’s Russian operations.

She also points out the possibility that Torry Hansen may have been elligible to adopt the boy at a greatly discounted price at the time.

As WAPAC was in Washington State (and ultimately responsible for the placement) and the Hansens live in Tennessee, there have been some questions as to who did the home study.

See Bastardette’s post:

SAVELIEV/HANSEN AGENCY IDENTIFIED: WORLD ASSOCIATION FOR PARENTS AND CHILDREN

I don’t have video up at the moment, but Bastardette also appeared on Russian Today this afternoon to speak about the case. Other American adoptees are also speaking out about this case.

In this link’s video segment you get a feel for the American Home the boy was placed into.

Meanwhile on the American end, pieces such as this are appearing attempting to put forward a bit more of the adoptive Mother Torry Hansen and Adoptive Grandmother, Nancy Hansen’s perspective on the incident:

Russia threatens to suspend US adoptions after woman sends 7-year-old boy back to Moscow alone

The article also contains preposterous nonsense such as this from adoption industry lobbyists, NCFA, desperately trying to maintain Russia as a sending country:

“Child abandonment of any kind is reprehensible,” said Chuck Johnson, acting CEO of the National Council For Adoption.

NCFA associated individuals have been key to how the baby dump laws, (often call “Baby Moses Laws” or “Safe Haven” laws) legalizing child abandonment came to pass here in the United States. For this latest incarnation of NCFA to decry child abandonment is for them to deny their own organizational history!

But clearly there’s another, more pertinent reason NCFA and JCICS are issuing releases and working hard behind the scenes on this case right now, even above and beyond their desires to keep Russia a “sending country”, WAPAC is one of their own.

Neither NCFA nor JCICS mention that WAPAC is their own member agency (see here and here), as they desperately run around try to sell the it’s an “isolated incident” line, pretending that this latest outrage is not situated firmly within a vast pattern of ongoing history of cases pertaining to what Russian adoptees have suffered at the hands of their American adopters: abuse, starvation, beatings, murders, being adopted by a pedophile, left to die in hot cars in summer, and now sent back alone on an international flight.

“Isolated incident” my ass.

Go see this piece from CNN in which the adoptive granmother claims she was following online instructions from a lawyer:

Nancy Hansen, the Tennessee woman who put Justin Hansen on the plane in Washington, insisted she did not abandon the child, but was following instructions from a lawyer she found online.

and

When the lawyer she found online advised her the adoption could be reversed, Hansen booked the flight and paid the fee for a steward to escort Justin through the airport, she said.

She hired a driver in Moscow she found online to pick the child up from the Moscow airport, she said. She found “safe references” for the driver online, she said.

She then prepared a letter for Justin to present to Russian officials, which included a photo of the driver, whom she identified as “Arthur,” she said.

and we hear from the agency, World Association for Children and Parents for the first time:

The Seattle-based agency which Hansen said her daughter used to coordinate the adoption said it found out about Justin’s return only Friday.

“We were alerted to this situation by our branch office in Moscow, Russia, and are shocked and saddened by this turn of events,” said a spokeswoman for the World Association for Children and Parents.

In the 1 percent of the cases where the dissolution of an adoption has been needed, the agency “has always supported and worked closely with [adoptive] parents to assist the child in moving into a new adoptive family,” she said.

See this comment left over on Bastardette’s blog by an anonymous commenter for more details.

Case in point?

Glendale, AZ, where a 15 year old gave birth in the hospital bathroom, leaving a baby boy in the bathroom trash can, “about 100 feet from a Safe Haven” dumpbox.

(first reported September 30th.)

Newborn found dead in Glendale hospital bathroom

Glendale police are investigating a baby found dead in a hospital, allegedly in a trash can.

The baby was found on Saturday in the emergency room at Banner Thunderbird Hospital, only about 100 feet from a Safe Haven drop-off location.

A teen went to the emergency room with her mother complaining of stomach and back pains.

The teen then allegedly gave birth in the ER bathroom and did not tell anyone. A member of the cleaning crew found the baby boy in the trash. Police have not confirmed the details.

(Be sure to see the video segment attached to the article, in which the usual refrain of ‘more marketing, more ‘education’ in schools’ is repeated.

Just another in the long sad saga of how these babydump programs (and in this case, specifically, the dumpbox managed to) fail, spectacularly.

My partner and I photographed the Glendale Thunderbird dumpbox, back in May of 2003. At the time, it was located at “Thunderbird Samaritan Medical Center” (now Banner Thunderbird Hospital,) and at the time lamely named the “Thunderbird Nest.

As you can see, the dump site is almost impossible to miss from the emergency room entrance from the parking lot.

Naturally, (for a state that doesn’t offer genuine sex-ed) the ‘who to turn to for help’ listings off the Banner Thunderbird babydump webpage is a who’s who of compulsory pregnancy/anti-abortion coercive pregnancy indoctrination centers and other christian organizations, with Planned Parenthood tucked in as if to offer up some sick version of “fair and balanced” pro-babydump advice.

Apparently everyone’s answer to a program that simply does not work is to throw yet still more resources and effort into it, even as it (to tragic result), fails yet again.

Can anyone doubt that this 15 year old, (now facing down possible prosecution) will now be more than willing to recite precisely what the dump pushers need to have her say, as if on cue?

Of course more education would have helped… if only someone had told me before it was too late! Etc.

Will we be surprised to hear such? Not in the least, we’ve heard it time and time again. What better way to escape prosecution that to do ‘community service’ with the babydump law pushers?

***UPDATE***

Naturally, there’s always more to the story and Marley, over on her Daily Bastardette blog has dug out still more pertinent details. Please see her piece

ARIZONA: MORE “SAFE HAVEN” FANTASY; BLC LINK,

for more details concerning Kimberly Marshall, from the video piece, quoting Marley:

…who is not a physician as labeled in the news report , but the RN who manages the hospital’s Pediatric Ed Clinic,

and sure enough,

Ignored by the press, at least in this specific report, is the fact is Kimberly Marshall is the head of the Arizona Safe Baby Haven Coalition pimping tragedy to pimp her agenda.

is this nonsense getting predictable or what?

about the way boarder babies, those born at hospitals and left there after birth are being systematically folded into babydump, or so called “safe haven” statistics in Ohio.

While this is nothing new, it’s good to see another article pointing out the failures of the “safe haven” legislative schemes (similar to the article about New Jersey doing the same that I blogged earlier, New Jersey- Boarder Babies being folded into “Safe Haven” statistics.)

While “safe haven” legislation pimps continue invoking images of desperate pregnant teens secretly giving birth and claim the legislation is vital, lest these women murder their newborn offspring, and insist that only legislation will keep these babies “SAFE” (from their mothers) clearly border babies, born in hospitals and left when the women check out are not exactly fodder for choking, drowning, suffocating headlines.

Conflating these two scenarios goes beyond disingenuous.

The dump pimps with their pet legislation get to relabel babies born safely in hospital “saves,” the states get to move babies out of their border babies columns and into the “safe havened” column in their statistics, making them look good (and potentially changing their financials as well) but at what cost?

That women who deliver in hospitals and then leave the child at the hospital are now viewed as “safe haven” mothers, or there but for this (et-hem) “Lifesaving” legislation (cough, cough) she may have turned to infanticide?

That the infant themselves will be permanently stripped of biological and family ties, their individual cultural and heritage, and most importantly, their authentic identity all in the name of sliding them into a new class of eventual adoptee or foster child, the anonymized by the state “havened” dumpees?

What does this say about how we as a culture view women and the lifelong genuine needs of the children themselves, in whose name this damnedable legislation was passed in the first place?

The Ohio stats begin to tell the ugly story:

Lucas County Children Services in Toledo has handled six cases since Ohio’s Safe Havens law took effect in 2002, Executive Director Dean Sparks said. All were infants born in hospitals and left there by mothers…

and

Franklin County documented three Safe Havens babies this year, two of which took place in the hospital where the babies were delivered.

Cuyahoga County has had two this year, both in the hospitals where the babies were born.

Neither of those counties, the state’s most populous, could provide details on how and where all of their Safe Havens cases have occurred since 2002.

Due to the lack of reporting requirements (that opponents of the dump laws like myself wanted at the time this terrible legislation was initially passed) the counties , who apparently are unable to account for their dump cases, are the primary form of ’statistical reporting’. The state only collects the data these counties inadequately report.

The bottom line is, no one CAN know how many of these kids have been created. Even the state itself has no idea.

The state doesn’t know, either. The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services cannot provide a statewide breakdown on how Safe Havens cases occur, because it doesn’t keep track, said Jennifer Justice, chief of the Bureau of Family Services.

The raw numbers it reports have varied from 52 to more than 70 since the law went into effect. Justice said the discrepancy probably is due to a new child-welfare computer system.

Michigan and Kentucky’s “stats” tell the same story of border babies routinely reclassified as “safe havens:”

In Michigan, a large majority of the 76 babies given up under the state’s “Safe Delivery” law have been born in hospitals and left there, said Jean Hoffman, a consultant assigned to the program.

In Kentucky, 22 of 24 babies given up since 2002 under that state’s safe-haven law were surrendered in the hospitals where they were born.

The “safe haven” scam is that ultimately these are border babies being given a new more palatable narrative and marketing scheme.

There is already a technical classification for these babies born in hospital, “border babies.” Only lack of awareness of said terminology allows those advocating such schemes to get away with this rebranding.

None-the-less, true believers continue to intone their broken mantra “if it saves just one”, or we need this legislation, otherwise women will kill!

Those of us critical of the emerging babydump industry can’t help but take one look at drivel such as this from an adoption lawyer,

Columbus lawyer Thomas Taneff, who handles many adoptions, said some women incapable of parenting need the option that safe-haven laws afford.

and can’t help but point out that the dump laws provide a new source of (largely information-free, or “as-is”) kids, infusing them into a landscape wherein wanna-be-adopters are a dime a dozen, whereas actual kids to adopt, particularly healthy, white infants, are not surprisingly, utterly scarce. Naturally adoption lawyers, those who earn income from adoptions, are going to be supportive of any law that frees up more “product” to the adoption marketplace.

In the end, the dispatch article points out precisely what critics of the laws have said all along,

On one point, the sides agree: The nation needs reliable data on safe-haven laws, which now are in effect in all 50 states.

Sadly (though not surprisingly,) no. Those who have advocated enacting these laws DO NOT support accurate data collection, they have consistently, actively worked to have any amendment requiring data collection stripped from the final versions of the bills.

They continue to oppose data collection requirements even now after the bills have passed, insisting that reliable data is unnecessary, after all, it allows their claims of ‘thousands of babies saved’ to go unsubstantiated, and unsubstantiatable.

Mind you, when their ’saved” babies are nothing more than born in a hospital, and remaining in a hospital until children’s services come to pick the kid up and enter them into the foster system the whole scheme sounds far less dramatic than the “saved (from ‘potentially murderous mothers’) babies!”

But then that’s the babydump laws for you, marketing and rebranding at it’s best, (well that and a paycheck for the dump pimps.)

NEBRASKA: POST-FIASCO BABY CATCH– ‘NO QUESTIONS ASKED”

Both her piece, and this have been crossposted to our Nebraska blog chronicling NE’s series of legalized child dumps, Children of the Corn.

Monday evening a baby boy was left at Box Butte General Hospital in Alliance under Nebraska’s aged down new dump law created over the legislative special session. (Nebraska law, originally accepted older kids, but was “aged down” in the wake of their “big kid” dump fiasco that made international headlines.)

This marks the first legalized infant abandonment in Nebraska since the final “big kid” dump in late November ‘08.

Quoting Marley’s piece,

According to Nebraska Health and Human Services Chief Executive Officer Kerry Winterer (RIP Todd Landry), in an HHS press release:

“It’s important to gather information like family medical history to meet this child’s current and future needs,” he said.

Officials asked that anyone with information call the HHS office in Gering at 308-436-6559, the Box Butte County Sheriff’s Office at 308-762-6464, the Alliance Police Department at 308-762-4955 or the Nebraska State Patrol at 308-632-1211.

While it appears the “fiasco” taught Nebraska at least a little about the vital importance of preserving at least a few scraps of information for the kid, clearly Nebraska has yet to learn the broader lesson:

EVERY SINGLE LEGALIZED CHILD ABANDONMENT MARKS A FAILURE:

• a fundamental failure of the state to protect the long term interests and human rights of these kids.
• A failure of the state to treat these instances as what they are, marking a crisis for the parent (s), be that psychological, economic, covering over traumatic events such as incest or domestic abuse, etc.
• The state inexcusably providing what amounts to a “make it all just go away” vent, whereby underlying core issues, and genuine needs, are simply ignored. The kids themselves are left to deal with the legacy of such.

Monday marks yet another sad day, a day on which the State of Nebraska failed one of its most vulnerable and least able to protect their own interests, and a day when whatever family this child once had is left to disappear into shadows with their own lifetime’s worth of a festering secret that can never be rectified.

Nebraska had an opportunity after seeing what legalized child dumping or what is oh so politely reframed as “safe haven,” meant to those old enough to speak of their own experiences of being “legally abandoned.” An opportunity to dismantle its dump system. Instead they chose to preserve it, aging down to those unable to speak about their own experiences. In essence, Nebraska found a way to silence its most directly affected and experienced critics, at least until they grow older, long after this crop of politicians leaves office.

No, this is not some “greater good,” this is not a “save,” nor should this act be celebrated. This is nothing more than rot from within. Shame on Nebraska for maintaining its system of secrets and lies, pushing the lifelong consequences of such down onto a newborn.

Last Friday, December 5th, 2008, the SECA web-page finally went live. (http://www.stopdumpingkids.com/)

SECA, short for “Stop Encouraging Child Abandonment,” is a concept that has been a long time coming.

From the first of the legalized child abandonment laws passed in 1999 until now, efforts to repeal and stop the dump laws have suffered from a lack of an alliance dedicated to focusing primarily on the issue.

Before SECA, responses to dump laws had been piecemeal, portions of existing organizations’ broader missions. Over the years numerous organizations have opposed and testified against the legalization of child abandonment, and individuals have contacted legislators and worked against legalized child dumping. But, there had been no one place dedicated to dismantling the evolving child abandonment infrastructure.

Thus, SECA has finally been created.

Stop Encouraging Child Abandonment works toward nothing less than the full and permanent repeal of laws that legalize child abandonment.

We feel it is not the proper role of any government to encourage child abandonment as policy.

We approach this work firmly grounded in a human/civil/identity rights perspective. We support kids, women, and reproductive autonomy.

The need for SECA had become apparent over the past nine years, but the child welfare crisis in Nebraska with its law legalizing the abandonment of older children finally made it clear to the broader public, a formalized response to legalized child dumping is necessary.

Since the beginning, the consequences of such laws have been clear to those of us “in the field.” With bills rushed through state legislatures and policy and legal criticisms by and large dismissed, the general public simply never had reason to even think about the consequences of “safe haven” laws. Most people had never heard the voice of a kid who had been legally dumped. They had never seen the desperation of mothers and families utilizing the legalized abandonment laws.

Nebraska changed everything.

Nebraska’s older kid dumps, and the state’s eventual age down of eligible dumpees from 18-year olds to those 30 days and younger has solved nothing. It has merely attempted to put off dealing with the inevitable consequences “safe haven” laws create until the infants abandoned under the new law grow old enough to speak for themselves.

The child welfare abandonment disaster across the United States, legalized everywhere except Washington DC., is far from over. It is just beginning.

Out of that context, SECA was born, not so much a formal organization, for now more of a collective voice of allies, organizations, bloggers, and individuals among others working together towards the repeal of the dump laws.

If you are interested in working against the legalized child abandonment laws, or already are, SECA can serve as a resource in that work.

We can be contacted through the SECA contact page.

***

So here’s a brief post I’ve been meaning to write for some time now. Start with this November 21st article out of the Star Ledger in New Jersey, How you can put a baby in a loving home.

Sure enough, “Boarder Babies” are being folded into New Jersey’s “safe haven” stats.

(See the National Abandoned Infants Assistance Resource Center’s 2005 Fact Sheet on Boarder Babies, Abandoned Infants, and Discarded Infants {link opens a PDF} for some basic information on the boarder babies phenomenon and some of the ongoing issues with “safe haven”/legalized child abandonment laws.)

Keep that in mind the next time you hear some legalized child abandonment advocate bragging about their alleged number of “baby saves.” How many babies turned in under the safe haven program? ‘Oh we’ve “saved” tons!’

Just don’t look too closely, or you might realize how many of those were exactly the problem we’ve had all along, boarder babies, now just moved out of one column and into another. Which is to say the “baby savers’” stats are for shit at this point.

Lumping in the boarder babies not only vastly inflates the “safe haven” numbers of alleged baby “saves,” (a pure mis-characterization, as it’s pretty damn difficult to “save” said babies from mothers who are abandoning them after birth at the hospitals where the children were born. These were babies who never had any genuine chance to be “at risk” of anything outside hospital walls, in some cases, they were never outside a nurse’s care.) but it also sets up one hell of a conundrum.

You have state and federal programs geared towards preventing boarder baby abandonment, trying to encourage womyn to take their babies home rather than walking out the hospitals without them while SIMULTANEOUSLY creating a separate program going the exact opposite direction, wherein the state actively encourages womyn to abandon their newborns or infants.

On the one hand, you have the state putting programs and funding towards family reunification and getting the kids out of the system whenever possible, on the other you have the safe haven program working at cross purposes in most states encouraging anonymous child abandonment making family reunification an impossibility, dumping kids into the system.

Articles such as this, New program hopes to keep ‘border babies’ in arms of their parents are common. Unfortunately even within existing boarder baby programs you have programs already pulling in opposite directions. You have the mothers themselves, as but one number, 63% (link opens a PDF) of them want to keep their kids, and yes, you have programs geared towards either keeping them together or working towards reunification, but at the same time you have Child Protective Services (often encumbered by guidelines created in relation to American drug law policy) making the final determination as to whether or not the child will ultimately be discharged to go home with their parents.

Boarder baby policy(ies) is already more than enough of a conflicted mess without adding “safe haven” laws into the mix.

Boarder Babies are not only a huge drain on the entire health system, they are the ongoing “background noise” of health care itself. This has led program after program aimed at dealing with such, (and the media) to label the ever mounting numbers of abandoned at hospitals post birth and after the mother’s discharge an all out “boarder baby crisis.”

Let’s be clear here. The alleged raison d’etre for the legalized abandonment/”safe haven” schemes was to “save” babies who were supposedly at risk of immediate harm. A boarder baby born in a hospital, and either abandoned by its parents or forced to be left behind by a child protective services determination is NOT and NEVER WAS in any danger. It was born in a hospital and in most cases has been in hospital care its entire life up to that point. To lump boarder babies into baby-dump/”safe haven” stats is not merely disingenuous, a BLATANT fabrication.

Unless of course, the whole point was always to increase the supply of adoptable history free infants, permanently separated from their parents of origin.

Seeing as to how the legalized abandonment laws were the (sick) spawn of the National Council for Adoption (NCFA), and the primary organization pushing for the dump laws, the National Safe Haven Alliance grew out of the NCFA, I’ll leave it to readers to make up their own minds about said motivations.

More recently of course you have the federal adoption ‘bonuses’ to states that move children from the public system into “permanent homes.” Children who are abandoned are automatically categorized as “special needs” and states placing “special needs” kids get even larger adoption bonuses.

When you hear the term “safe haven” keep in mind that much of what we’re really talking about here is fast tracked, so called “non-bureaucratic placements,” i.e. adoptions whenever possible.

While the preferred mythology of the “safe haven” babies is that of the alleged young and desperate (preferably white) teenage mother with nowhere else to turn, “safe havening” her (preferably equally white, or at least passable) newborn only to be adopted as soon as possible after relinquishment with (yet another preferably white, preferably heterosexual) loving couple out in the ‘burbs with a white picket fence and a dog, add the reality of boarder babies into the mix and clearly there’s more to to all this than first meets the eye.

When boarder babies are lumped under those same words, adopters may find themselves with a kid going through weeks of withdrawal or even lifelong effects after drug additions, lifelong effects that even experts can’t predict, or they may be receiving an HIV+ child. Due to the lack of prenatal care and the facets of their mother’s lives (poverty, inadequate food in the household, mental illness, addiction, etc) the adopters’ newly acquired little bundle of joy may turn out to be quite a bit more than they bargained on.

Under normal conditions, boarder babies are some of the least desirable kids in the adoption food chain, for many of the reasons I listed above. That said though, via re-branding, boarder babies can now go up for adoption as “saved” “safe haven” babies, suddenly now a desirable commodity to some.

This is tremendously beneficial to the state, as without the re-branding, boarder babies tend to languish in hospital care for months, only to eventually be bounced around the foster care system, they’re the kids nobody wants.

Take this older story out of the New York Times, BOARDER BABIES FIND COMFORT IN FOSTER GRANDPARENTS’ ARMS, in which the low income elderly are being recruited to deal with the them:

Besides providing a support system for the babies, the foster grandparents’ program tends to counter stereotypes of older people, said Marcia Vogel, the director. ”It shows how useful they can be,…

“Safe Haven” babies come “as is.” Most states actively make no point of collecting medical information or histories on the kids. The less known about them, the more marketable they are.

So it’s “buyer beware” for the adopters who clamour to get a hold of the little media friendly “saved babies.”

But that lifelong question mark of lack of information while a downside for the kids, is an upside for the state and its marketing. Phone lines buzz with desperate infertile couples trying to get a hold of “Safe Havened” babies after news reports.

So, how many other states are padding out their numbers of “safe haven saved babies” with boarder babies?

Perhaps more importantly, how many states are ’solving’ their boarder baby problem by sliding them over a column?

I can just hear it now:

‘Wow! New Jersey, fewer boarder babies? That’s great! How’d you manage that?’

***

So Monday, in what could set a pattern for the “safe haven” cases, the court hearing for the first of the abandonment cases disappeared into a closed court session.

Nebraska, having non-anonymous legalized child abandonment, now appears to want things closed on the back end, in the court hearings.

Clearly this is more of the state attempting to cover its own ass than any genuine privacy concerns as the names of both the parents and the kids are not merely in the public record, but some parents have come forward to the media doing interviews and using their children’s names on Television and in print media.

None-the-less, yesterday Douglas County Juvenile Court Judge Douglas Johnson took the “rare” step of closing the hearing. No reason was given for having done so.

This particular case, dating back to September 1rst is not counted among the official Nebraska DHHS “safe haven” cases, as the boy was left off at a police station. Police stations are not state designated dump sites. The boy was however, placed in foster care following the abandonment, so he was certainly no less dumped than any of the other kids.

Not only is his case not among the officially state recognized “safe haven” statistics, but now his court proceedings have gone behind closed doors as well.

See Judge closes hearing over teen left by mother at police station:

In a rare decision, a Douglas County judge closed a court hearing Monday in a case related to the Nebraska safe haven law.

The hearing was for a 14-year-old boy whose mother left him Sept. 1 at the Omaha Police Department, mistakenly thinking that it qualified as a “safe haven.”

His mother was expected to enter a plea to an allegation that she neglected the boy by leaving him at the police station.

When the hearing was about to start, attorneys approached the bench to speak privately with Douglas County Juvenile Court Judge Douglas Johnson, who then announced that he was closing the hearing.

No written motion was filed, and no reason was given for the decision.

Fortunately, the Omaha World-Herald is still paying attention.

Unlike most of the rest of the world who seem to think the situation is now ‘resolved’ and attention can now shift elsewhere, the World-Herald staff appear to understand what a unique situation the Nebraska legislators and Governor created by passing their “child” abandonment law, and they continue to keep a watchful eye (as best they can what with closed hearings and all) despite the roadblocks thrown in their way.

The World-Herald objected in court and requested a delay to consult with its attorneys.

Johnson would not delay the hearing, saying it was important to expedite the case for the child’s sake.

“What an unfortunate decision,” World-Herald Executive Editor Mike Reilly said. “The U.S. Constitution, Nebraska statutes and common law all call for the public’s courtrooms to remain open to the public. Exceptions are to be made only through a public hearing process that was flouted here without explanation.”

In short, to whatever extent, the World Herald staff ‘get it’. They understand that secret hearings on cases Nebraska would far rather just go away, far from the public’s gaze are not an acceptable outcome.

The World-Herald is continuing to follow safe haven cases through those proceedings in order to educate the public about the law and its ramifications.

Perhaps the paper, like those of us who have been nose down in the details of these cases have come to understand that what happened in Nebraska was extraordinary, and that the ongoing child welfare mess on the back is likewise extraordinary.

Certainly most of these kids who were legally abandoned would most likely not have been were it not for the actions of Nebraska lawmakers. Much as the world’s attention is easily distracted, for some of us these kids are not to be forgotten.

Their ordeal, far beyond the mere act of being “legally abandoned” is ongoing. Their cases are only now beginning their journey of winding through the courts. Their custody issues and situational stability are still very much up in the air.

To the paper’s credit, they understand that the issues these kids face didn’t fade just because much of the media glare has moved on.

The World-Herald is also fighting for open hearings in the Gary Staton case. This will be particularly critical as the Staton kids are also at the heart of what may well be the first Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) claim in relation to any state’s “safe haven” law.

Equally critically important, Nebraska DHHS has filed a motion to retro-actively strip identifying information out of public documents.

This would create the first retro-active removal of information already in the public record relating to kids dumped under the law, in essence, a form of after the fact anonymity, something the Nebraska lawmakers did not write into the law in the first place.

The DHHS is doing an end run after the fact, attempting to obliterate information already in the public record by way of the courts.

The World-Herald also is fighting efforts to close a hearing in one of the official safe haven cases.

That case involves a father who left his nine children at a hospital under the safe haven law. The case increased national publicity about the safe haven law.

An HHS attorney filed a motion to close an Oct. 8 hearing a day before the hearing and requested that identifying information about the children and witnesses be removed from public documents.

The HHS attorney argued that the children’s need for privacy outweighed the public’s interest.

The World-Herald argued that access serves an important function to provide information about the cases. Additionally, family members have granted press interviews.

That decision is on hold while HHS is appealing another issue in the case.

Back in the September 1rst case, we see precisely what Marley and I have been writing about, when one parent dumps a kid, the other parent’s parental rights are trampled. Now it appears the boy’s father hopes to gain custody.

In the police station case, the guardian ad litem filed a motion last week requesting that visits between the teen and his mother be suspended temporarily at the suggestion of the boy’s therapist.

Action on that motion took place during the closed hearing.

The court’s order detailing the mother’s plea and any required services for her, determined during the closed hearing, was unavailable by the time the court closed for the day.

Johnson commended the mother for making positive progress.

A portion of the hearing about the boy’s father was held in open court.

The couple are divorced, and the mother had legal custody of the teen.

The father has been visiting his son, and HHS workers recommended making those visits unsupervised.

The father’s lawyer said he hopes that the teen can live with him.

This morning, the Omaha World-Herald published another article about the closed hearings, Bruning upset haven hearing closed:

Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning on Tuesday told lawyers for the State Department of Health and Human Services that they may not file motions to close hearings or seal evidence from the public without his consent, which he expects to be rare.

“I can’t foresee a circumstance where that would be necessary,” he said.

Bruning learned about the issue Tuesday through a World-Herald story about efforts to close two juvenile court hearings related to the safe haven law.

“The state’s interest is that the public know everything we’re doing,” Bruning said. “That’s what’s going to rule the day at the end, even when the state business is a bit messy and less than pleasant, as it has been in these safe haven cases. It brings up difficult realities.”

Juvenile court hearings are typically public and part of the usual process when a child is placed in foster care.

Then we learn Juvenile Court Judge Douglas Johnson closed the hearing thinking that the boy abandoned at the police station was a safe haven case, which clearly, according to Nebraska DHHS it never was.

This is remarkable, as it means even judges hearing these cases are unaware that some of these cases never qualified as “safe haven” cases:

Douglas County Juvenile Court Judge Douglas Johnson closed a hearing Monday about a 14-year-old boy whose mother left him Sept. 1 at an Omaha police station, mistakenly believing that it qualified as a “safe haven.”

Clearly when it comes to the court phase, a ghost in the machine dump such as the September 1rst case is being treated as if they are official “safe haven” case. They’re all lumped together for the judge hearing the case.

If even the judges hearing the cases can’t distinguish those that are ‘official’ vs. those that never met the Nebraska legal guidelines, then where are we?

In any case, Attorney General Bruning said the closed hearing didn’t come as a result of a DHHS motion:

Bruning said Tuesday that the HHS attorney, John Baker, did not make the motion to close the hearing.

As for keeping the public record intact, the World-Herald brings up an interesting recent Nebraska precedent:

In the other case, an HHS motion is pending to close a hearing and remove identifying information from court records in the case of a father who left his nine children.

Jodi Fenner, HHS chief legal counsel, argued in court documents that the children’s need for privacy outweighs the public’s interest.

The World-Herald argued that access serves an important function to provide information about the cases.

Baker of HHS also argued extensively in December against the release of juvenile court exhibits about Robert Hawkins, the 19-year-old who killed eight people and himself a year ago at the Von Maur department store.

Sarpy County Juvenile Court Judge Robert O’Neal released the records, compiled when Hawkins was a state ward to receive mental health services as a teen.

***

I wanted to include a few more links about the boy from Davis in Yolo County, California who was dumped Friday before Governor Heineman signed the 30 day limit into law. I blogged about his case very briefly at the time, Squeaking in under the wire, another big kid safe haven dump.

Keep in mind, this was the roughly 16 hour drive from near Sacramento California to the Southwestern-most corner of Nebraska, and Kimball County Hospital . Basically a ‘cross the state line and dump him quick before the law changes’ dump.

Nebraska DHHS has their press release about his case from the 22nd. They label him the 36th case in the official statistics (link opens a PDF.)

Our unofficial stats, find him somewhere closer to at least number 47. (We feel secure in saying even our estimates are low.)

He is now in the process of being sent back to California.

These first two articles go into a little bit of detail about the way in which he was dumped:

Nebraska to send back abandoned Davis teen

She told the boy to pack his bags, and with her oldest son and a friend, drove all night.

Only when they were at the hospital did she tell her son she was leaving him there.

She said the boy got out of the car and walked into the hospital without looking back.

The woman said she had expected to feel relief but instead felt “sick to my stomach.”

and

California ‘haven’ teen being sent back

The mother didn’t stay long after reaching the Kimball hospital, local officials said.

She left “as soon as she dropped him off,” said Kimball County Attorney Dave Wilson.

Interestingly, there is no word about whether the Mother went in with him to dump him or not.

If not, would he have otherwise been another self “haven” wherein the kid shows up without a designated dumper?

I’ll be keeping my eye out for more details on this, as Nebraska has refused to accept self “haven” cases in the past as part of the official “safe haven” program. I’m wondering if an exception was made for this boy as they had traveled so far.

The following article (& videos) lay out the woman who adopted him’s side of the story. (Legally, she’s his “adoptive mother.”)

Yolo Mom Who Abandoned Boy In Nebraska Speaks Out

Lori says she struggled to raise Kevin ever since taking him in as a foster child at age four.

(He had reached 14 by the time he was dumped.)

Be sure to see the 3 videos connected to this last piece. In one, the woman claims she was unaware that Friday was the last day before the law was set to age down, she thought it was going to change at the end of the month. (Note that at the end of this video segment, the California law is erroneously described as being for infants 14 days and younger, California’s legalized abandonment law actually only applies to infants 3 days old or less.)

Despite her promise:

She told Kevin, her 14-year-old son, “if you walk into this hospital, they will find a home for you.”

Odds are pretty slim a 14 year old with a so called “troubled past” is going to be adopted by someone new anytime soon. He has been in Nebraska foster care for the last few days as preparations were being made to ship him back to California.

This final article confirms his adopted status:

Davis mother drops kid off in Nebraska

She had adopted him when he was four years old.

19 of the 34 kids included in the most recent version, updated November 17th, of the Nebraska DHHS “matrix of commonalities of safe haven cases” (link opens a PDF) are currently or had previously been state wards.

12 of the 34 tabulated cases were listed as “Adopted/Guardianship or Relative Placement.”

As the California boy came in after this latest version, he has not been included in these statistics yet. (Nebraska made it up to 36 officially counted cases before the law changed, the “matrix” only goes up through number 34 so far.)

As I have said before, the crisis these generation 1.0 of the dump kids in Nebraska face is in many cases a crisis of adoption and kids already entangled in state care.

The next generation, those dumped under version 2.o of the dump law, those 30 days and younger, remain to be seen.

There has however been one case of a self “haven” who falls squarely between the two generations, a 12 year old who was disqualified and is going by and large unnoticed. He came in on Sunday after the law had aged down.

But as for Kevin, from California, he is unfortunately just another kid dumped into Nebraska’s “returns department” for no longer desirable adoptees.

Sure, everyone wants one when they’re young and cute, but similar to many adopted pets, as they grow older, bigger, and less manageable, now kids like those once cuddly and adorable pets have been dumped, abandoned by those who no longer wanted them.

***

Backtracking here a little, Saturday, the Wall Street Journal ran a major story on the Nebraska legalized abandonments, Safe Haven: a Mother’s Agonizing Choice.

The article provides more information about some of the kids from the parents’ perspective.

As for the kids themselves, the article contains a small but critically important detail that may explain part of the reason the directly affected kids’ voices in all this have been so absent.

In Tyler’s case at least, he is effectively shut up by conditions the state has put upon his placement:

After staying at a youth shelter, Tyler was recently sent by the state to live with a relative on his father’s side. The relative declined to allow the child to be interviewed, saying it was a condition of Tyler’s placement with his family. State officials also declined to make Tyler available.

(emphasis added)