Skip to main content

Women's rights-her body-her baby-the father can go pound sand. 

 

I loved this outcome.

 

 ====================================

An army drill sergeant whose estranged wife put his daughter up for adoption without his knowledge or permission while he was stationed in another state, has been reunited with the little girl, following a nearly two-year battle to get her back.

"I'm just happy right now. I'm with my daughter," Sgt. Terry Achane said. "It's about time."

The Utah Supreme Court earlier this month overturned a request by the toddler's adoptive parents to stay a lower court's December order that the child be returned to Achane, her father.

On Friday the original trial judge, Darold McDade who ruled in Achane's favor, held a transfer hearing that resulted in the little girl and her father being united this weekend for the first time since she was born 22 months ago.

"This is the first known case where the Utah State Supreme Court has removed a child from an [adoptive parent's] home and returned the child to the ... legal father," said Achane's lawyer Mark Wiser.

Wiser called the Supreme Court's ruling a "huge victory" for "equal parental rights," meaning one parent can't put a child up for adoption without the other's permission, and decried the adoption practice in Utah.

"Terry Achane believes that justice is finally taking place," Wiser said, adding that his client remains "heartbroken that he has missed 22 months of his daughter's life because of what happened. This is time that he and his daughter can never replace."

Achane, 31, was stationed in South Carolina on March 21, 2011, when his estranged wife, Tira Bland, gave birth in Utah and turned the baby over for adoption just two days later.

He initially believed that his pregnant wife had followed through on a threat to have an abortion. It was several weeks after the baby, whom he calls Teleah, was born that he learned the child had been adopted and was in Utah.

When Achane contacted the adoption agency that had facilitated the baby's placement with the couple, Jared and Kristi Frei, he was stonewalled, denied information and ignored when he told them he had not consented to the adoption, according to his lawyer.

In his ruling to restore Achane's custody, Judge McDade said he was "astonished and deeply troubled" by the actions of the agency, the Adoption Center of Choice, calling its treatment of Achane "utterly indefensible."

According to Achane, Bland gave the agency Achane's old address in Texas where he lived prior to being stationed in South Carolina, and suggested he would not consent to the adoption. The agency attempted to contact him once in Texas, but seems not to have made any other efforts to receive his consent, Wiser said.

The agency would not comment.

Achane knew Bland was pregnant and had taken her to prenatal doctor appointments in Texas, but Bland cut off all contact with him following his deployment to South Carolina and made arrangements for the adoption in secret, he lawyer claims in court documents.

Calls to the Freis were not returned. In an emails to ABCNews.com, their lawyer Larry Jenkins wrote: "The Freis have asked us not to comment publicly about the case."

The Freis, however, have maintained a blog about the case where they claim that Achane "left [Bland] without any money, a car, or details of his whereabouts. Needing to act quickly for the best interest of her unborn child, and with incredible faith, fortitude, and courage, she put her child up for adoption."

In 2008, Kristi Frei was diagnosed with endometriosis and told she would not be able to conceive, according to the blog.

The Freis insist that it was they who tracked down Achane "several months" after adopting the baby, whom they call Leah, but to "our great shock and dismay" he refused to consent to the adoption.

The judge said in his ruling, however, that the couple knew that Achane had never been consulted and "acknowledged this risk but decided they wanted to proceed forward with the adoptive placement anyway."

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

So now we have a "single" man raising this child:

Sad case on each side.



Sad how? Single people shouldn't raise children? Gee, that's tough if someone with children gets a divorce or their spouse dies. No one told my mom she couldn't be a single parent. No one tells thousands of people who lose their spouse they can't be single parents. IMO it's a happy ending, not sad at all.

Being in the military makes it extremely difficult. Did you read the link? Single parents can't join the military without giving up custody. Those who become single while in service have a very difficult time. Unless he leaves the military, which may not be that easy, he will have to place the child in care of a relative or paid caregiver. So, the child will go from two parents to basically no parents.

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

Being in the military makes it extremely difficult. Did you read the link? Single parents can't join the military without giving up custody. Those who become single while in service have a very difficult time. Unless he leaves the military, which may not be that easy, he will have to place the child in care of a relative or paid caregiver. So, the child will go from two parents to basically no parents.

=============

What does that have to do with a man wanting HIS child? Plenty of people have to make arrangements for their children while they're away. Mothers have been called to active duty. Should some agency run in and take away their children if they have no husband, or are they allowed to make arrangements for the child's care? He should be denied his child because he's in the military? That's crazy. This is simply because he's a man. Who says the so called parents, that basically stole his child, are even fit to have it? 

She could come back and try it. People can be ruthless and cold hearted, and she sounds like she is wretched enough to try it. Threatening to abort the child, letting him think she did, cutting him out of the life of his own child and giving it to strangers. But she did give up rights to the child, and maybe there is a decent enough court systemstill out there to tell her to hit the bricks if she tries it. It's amazing how you automatically assume the child is going to suffer because she is back with her father, her own flesh and blood, the man who wanted her and fought to get her back.  Just amazing. So if you had small children and your husband left you, or died, or vice versa, your kids would have suffered and should have been adopted out?

His ex-wife wouldn't be the first one to try to get a child back after the biological father fought for  custody--and several have won their cases. Since the child has a biological half-sibling, Archane will probably have some contact with his ex-wife. Of if he doesn't, is he being fair to the child or his claims that biology tops everything else?

 

The salient point of the whole thing is that one can't go back. If someone shot and killed the father, that would not be right, but it couldn't be undone. Nor can Achane get back the two years the child has been with her adoptive parents--why I originally said sad on both sides.

 

What will be the fate of the child in 5, 10, of 15 years?

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

His ex-wife wouldn't be the first one to try to get a child back after the biological father fought for  custody--and several have won their cases. Since the child has a biological half-sibling, Archane will probably have some contact with his ex-wife. Of if he doesn't, is he being fair to the child or his claims that biology tops everything else?

 

The salient point of the whole thing is that one can't go back. If someone shot and killed the father, that would not be right, but it couldn't be undone. Nor can Achane get back the two years the child has been with her adoptive parents--why I originally said sad on both sides.

 

What will be the fate of the child in 5, 10, of 15 years?

***************

I don't see why he would have to be fair to a woman that certainly wasn't fair to him, and threatened to kill the child, then gave it away to strangers. Who knows what the child's fate will be. You can ask that about any child born. What if the adoptive father/mother died? Would the children then be placed for adoption? And again, had you or your spouse died, should your children have been taken away from the surviving parent and adopted by strangers? No, he can't get back the two years he was cheated out of, but he will have future years. No one knows what will happen, no one knows what would have happened with the adoptive parents either.  To me the most important point is that his child was basically stolen from him, and he set out to get her back. 

It is my thinking that under the said circumstances in this case that the mother should never have any rights to the child in the future.

 What was her agreement with the adoptive parents? They are the one's who loose since they did provide nearly two years of investment in this kid. It would be especially sad for them if they cannot have children of their own.

Best, I agree he's not obligated to be "fair" to his ex-wife. Let's assume she doesn't now sue to regain custody. In 10 or 15 years, the little girl is going to realize she has a half-sibling out there and want to know why her biological father kept them apart...assuming he does. What about the half-sibling. He/She didn't reject the child. Should he/she be denied the right to know a half-sibling?

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

Best, I agree he's not obligated to be "fair" to his ex-wife. Let's assume she doesn't now sue to regain custody. In 10 or 15 years, the little girl is going to realize she has a half-sibling out there and want to know why her biological father kept them apart...assuming he does. What about the half-sibling. He/She didn't reject the child. Should he/she be denied the right to know a half-sibling?

===============

 

There's nothing to say he will keep that information from her. There's nothing to say she won't get to see/know her biological mother either. But that's gonna be a bit awkward imo. "Here's mommy. I was going to kill you but decided to give you to strangers instead, without telling your dad. Mommy luvs you now though". There's nothing to say the child will be interested in seeing them. Only time will tell. Would she have known her half siblings/real mom if she'd remained with the adoptive family?  How about her dad, would she have known he fought to get her back?

 I simply think the sergeant is putting his wishes above the welfare of the child. Only time will tell if this is correct or not.

****************

How is a father wanting and loving his own child putting his wishes above her welfare? Why have you judged and condemned this man simply because he wants his child? You have no idea how she will be raised, and you have no idea how horribly she might have been treated by the adoptive parents. Why did you put your wishes above the welfare of your children and keep them? Or did you keep them? Why didn't you give them away because their life MIGHT have been better with strangers? 

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

So now we have a "single" man raising this child:

 

http://usmilitary.about.com/od.../a/enlsingparent.htm

 

Sad case on each side.

Why is this a sad case. A man can love and raise a child just like a women. I think that it is great to see a man step up and face his responsibilities. His wife should have discussed this with him and not lied to him. If she did not want the baby then she should have let him have her instead her being raised by strangers. I am glad that he has gotten her back and wish them a wonderful life together. 

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

Being in the military makes it extremely difficult. Did you read the link? Single parents can't join the military without giving up custody. Those who become single while in service have a very difficult time. Unless he leaves the military, which may not be that easy, he will have to place the child in care of a relative or paid caregiver. So, the child will go from two parents to basically no parents.

I am sure that he understands that and will see that his daughter is well taken care of until he gets out of service. One thing about this is that the daughter will always love her dad for getting her back when she is explained what happened. God bless him and his family.

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

His ex-wife wouldn't be the first one to try to get a child back after the biological father fought for  custody--and several have won their cases. Since the child has a biological half-sibling, Archane will probably have some contact with his ex-wife. Of if he doesn't, is he being fair to the child or his claims that biology tops everything else?

 

The salient point of the whole thing is that one can't go back. If someone shot and killed the father, that would not be right, but it couldn't be undone. Nor can Achane get back the two years the child has been with her adoptive parents--why I originally said sad on both sides.

 

What will be the fate of the child in 5, 10, of 15 years?

I figure in 5 years, she will be a beautiful little girl, 10 years, beautiful, but dad's never right, and 15 years she will be turning into a beautiful young lady that has a life time to decide what she is going to do with her life. But there is one thing for certain, She will have her dad beside her. They should stop to her mother before she has time to interfere with them. She gave her up and does not need to get her back. As far as a her body, her baby, the father is the one that put the baby there. At least one parent loves her enough to get her back.

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

So now we have a "single" man raising this child:

 

http://usmilitary.about.com/od.../a/enlsingparent.htm

 

Sad case on each side.

If you were a man, would you not want your child. Just because you become single does not mean that you are not capable of raising that child and give her a good childhood and a good family life. With her real family. He will do just fine. 

I'm pretty sure her adopted family is real also. Never, never, never say an adopted child isn't a real child. I can't imagine that any caring, thinking individual would say something like that.

 

As for the father, didn't he have any leave during the nine months his now ex-wife was pregnant? He knew her condition, why didn't he care enough to at least get an emergency leave when she told him she was terminating her pregnancy? Who paid the hospital bill? A lot of unanswered questions.

He initially believed that his pregnant wife had followed through on a threat to have an abortion. It was several weeks after the baby, whom he calls Teleah, was born that he learned the child had been adopted and was in Utah.

When Achane contacted the adoption agency that had facilitated the baby's placement with the couple, Jared and Kristi Frei, he was stonewalled, denied information and ignored when he told them he had not consented to the adoption, according to his lawyer.

**************************

Maybe you didn't read the article. Calling her dad her real family is somehow wrong? After all, he is her real father. What caring, thinking individual says a father has no right to a child that was taken from him by lies, and thinks it should be left with a family that, from indications, knew he hadn't been properly notified but didn't care about his feelings?

 

*******************************

The judge said in his ruling, however, that the couple knew that Achane had never been consulted and "acknowledged this risk but decided they wanted to proceed forward with the adoptive placement anyway."

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

I'm pretty sure her adopted family is real also. Never, never, never say an adopted child isn't a real child. I can't imagine that any caring, thinking individual would say something like that.

 

As for the father, didn't he have any leave during the nine months his now ex-wife was pregnant? He knew her condition, why didn't he care enough to at least get an emergency leave when she told him she was terminating her pregnancy? Who paid the hospital bill? A lot of unanswered questions.

I was not saying that the child was not real. She is now with her real family. The dad that wants to see his daughter grow up. She was put in an adoptive family. You are reading it wrongly.  I am a very caring person and I am glad that she is back with her real family. I did not even think about saying that the baby was not real. That is so ridiculicious.  Do not put words into my mouth and do not judge me as not being a caring and thinking person. You people get on here and down the parents that do not care for their children and when something good happens you try to bring out the bad. You do not know this man and anything about his life. But all I know is that he wanted his little girl and we should be proud that he does. We can't win for losing with some people when we comment on here. Some will always fine something wrong with what you say. 

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

I'm pretty sure her adopted family is real also. Never, never, never say an adopted child isn't a real child. I can't imagine that any caring, thinking individual would say something like that.

 

As for the father, didn't he have any leave during the nine months his now ex-wife was pregnant? He knew her condition, why didn't he care enough to at least get an emergency leave when she told him she was terminating her pregnancy? Who paid the hospital bill? A lot of unanswered questions.

Just wondering, but what do you think about the women that are in service and has children at home? 

First, why didn't he try to stop the abortion?

 

Second, no LAL, you said the parents weren't real--that the child wasn't really theirs. They look pretty real to me. They look real enough to have changed her diapers for two years. To have fed and clothed her. Yet, you don't consider them real? Do you just hate all adopted children? Should we take them out and shoot them? Just asking...

 

Could it be because they have a different color skin? I'm asking because from looking at the picture, they seem more than real--they seem caring and loving and can offer the child much more than this biological father.

 

A few years ago there was a topic that stayed on here forever! About 60% of the posters thought a teenage boy should have custody of a child he had fathered (read: donated sperm). Over the years I've read in the TD and local blogs how this little hoodlum has been arrested over and over and is now going to prison. Funny all his supporters disappeared after calling him the little boy's "real" father.

Last edited by Kate Colombo
Originally Posted by LAL:
Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

I'm pretty sure her adopted family is real also. Never, never, never say an adopted child isn't a real child. I can't imagine that any caring, thinking individual would say something like that.

 

As for the father, didn't he have any leave during the nine months his now ex-wife was pregnant? He knew her condition, why didn't he care enough to at least get an emergency leave when she told him she was terminating her pregnancy? Who paid the hospital bill? A lot of unanswered questions.

Just wondering, but what do you think about the women that are in service and has children at home? 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

I'm assuming their children weren't adopted by someone else and lived with them for two years. The point is these two years can't be undone. Maybe the biological father is totally innocent in the matter, but he can't get those two years back. What if he hadn't found our about the child for five or ten years? Would you still support him taking a child away from its REAL parents?

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

First, why didn't he try to stop the abortion?

 

Second, no LAL, you said the parents weren't real. They look pretty real to me. They look real enough to have changed her diapers for two years. To have fed and clothed her. Yet, you don't consider them real?

 

Could it be because they have a different color skin? I'm asking because from looking at the picture, they seem more than real--they seem caring and loving and can offer the child much more than this biological father.

 

A few years ago there was a topic that stayed on here forever! About 60% of the posters thought a teenage boy should have custody of a child he had fathered (read: donated sperm). Over the years I've read in the TD and local blogs how this little hoodlum has been arrested over and over and is now going to prison. Funny all his supporters disappeared after calling him the little boy's "real" father.

******************

Just what good does it do a man to try and stop an abortion? I mean seriously. You keep wanting to demonize the child's father without any information about him at all. How do you know what they can offer the child that he can't? Is it because he's black that you automatically think he won't give her what she needs? Why don't you contact them and give them one of your kids or grandkids? Then you compare his story to someone you "know" and the "blog wars"?  That's pathetic. 

 Maybe the biological father is totally innocent in the matter, but he can't get those two years back. What if he hadn't found our about the child for five or ten years? Would you still support him taking a child away from its REAL parents?



No, he can't get those two years that were stolen from him by his ex-wife and the so called adoptive parents, but he will have the rest of his years with his daughter instead of living with losing her.  I guess you think if someone kidnaps a child, as has happened, and found 10 or more years later, they should just get to keep the child.

I don't even know what "blog wars" are. Nor do I know this boy that's going to prison. I'm simply saying that a few years ago I kept reading here how several posters thought a drug addict/thief should have custody of a child he had "fathered." Look how that turned out.

 

We can't know how this will turn out, but we do know the sergeant, whether Jack the Ripper or Father Flanagan, has lost two years with the girl. We know the adoptive parents have been good caregivers for that period of time. Color of skin? No. Army? Yes, he's not going to be there for her that much unless he somehow gets out.

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

I don't even know what "blog wars" are. Nor do I know this boy that's going to prison. I'm simply saying that a few years ago I kept reading here how several posters thought a drug addict/thief should have custody of a child he had "fathered." Look how that turned out.

 

We can't know how this will turn out, but we do know the sergeant, whether Jack the Ripper or Father Flanagan, has lost two years with the girl. We know the adoptive parents have been good caregivers for that period of time. Color of skin? No. Army? Yes, he's not going to be there for her that much unless he somehow gets out.

******************

I'm sure you do know what the blog wars are. I don't know how the case you keep talking about has any bearing whatsoever on this case. He may be out of the army now, I don't know. I do know he fought for his daughter for two years. He should sue the couple and maybe they'd think twice before they ran in and stole another child. I can't imagine why you think people in the service should lose their children. 

Now you should read the article. The family was apparently assured the father, while he didn't know of the pregnancy, wouldn't fight for the child. They are as much victims as the sergeant.

 

Still another case, a young woman in England was taken from her white foster parents when a new social worker took the case. After five years she was placed with a black family and now states it was the most traumatic event of her life.

 

Not remember anything for the first three years of life? That's extremely odd and would indicate trauma or some cognitive problem.

Baby Jessica case

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 

Anna Jacqueline Schmidt aka Baby Jessica 

The "Baby Jessica" case, was a well-publicized custody battle in Ann Arbor, Michigan in the early 1990s between Jan and Roberta DeBoer, the couple who attempted to adopt the child, and her biological parents, Dan Schmidt and Cara Clausen. In August, 1993, the supreme courts of Iowa and Michigan ordered her returned to Schmidt, who named her Anna Jacqueline Schmidt. The case was widely publicized as the "Baby Jessica" case after the name given her by the DeBoers.[1]

Originally Posted by Kate Colombo:

Now you should read the article. The family was apparently assured the father, while he didn't know of the pregnancy, wouldn't fight for the child. They are as much victims as the sergeant.

 

Still another case, a young woman in England was taken from her white foster parents when a new social worker took the case. After five years she was placed with a black family and now states it was the most traumatic event of her life.

 

Not remember anything for the first three years of life? That's extremely odd and would indicate trauma or some cognitive problem.

================

I did read the article, and i also read what the judge said:

 

The judge said in his ruling, however, that the couple knew that Achane had never been consulted and "acknowledged this risk but decided they wanted to proceed forward with the adoptive placement anyway."


  1. acknowledged past participle, past tense of ac·knowl·edge (Verb)

    Verb
    1. Accept or admit the existence or truth of.
    2. (of a body of opinion) Recognize the fact or importance or quality of.



Originally Posted by Bestworking:

BTW kate, the statement was that she had no memory of the couple and no interest in getting to know them. 

 

I quickly read the article. The little girl was 2.5 years old, not three. Her biological mother changed her mind after 5 days and married the child's father. Totally different circumstances.

 

Did the judge make the right decision with "Baby Jessica?" The article goes on to state the adoptive mother has formed an advocacy group and written a book about the experience. It didn't mention the biological parents had done anything of note.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×