ELLSWORTH, Maine — A DNA test has confirmed what many people involved in a child custody case have suspected.
Ryan Masoner, 24, of Fort Wayne, Ind., is the biological father of a young boy living in Hancock County, according to results of the May 1 genetic test. The test indicates samples were collected April 17 from Masoner and on April 20 from the two-year, nine-month-old boy, who goes by the name of Tobias.
The results of the test show a 99.998 percentage probability that Masoner is the boy’s father, according to a copy of the DNA test report.
The boy’s biological mother gave birth to the boy in September 2009 but kept his existence a secret from Masoner for several months, according to a recent law court decision on the case. Court documents indicate that at some point during her pregnancy she told Masoner he might be the father and that she planned to have an abortion.
A Hancock County couple that is friends with the boy’s mother was granted temporary guardianship of the boy in Hancock County Probate Court in December 2009. Since January 2010, when the boy’s mother told him she had given birth to his son, Masoner has been trying to win custody of the boy in the county’s probate court.
Masoner’s mother, Tiffeny Masoner, said recently that she hopes the test results will hasten the the Hancock County Probate Court custody case in favor of her son. The county probate court terminated her son’s parental rights with Tobias in March 2011, but the law Court decision this past March vacated that decision.
Tiffeny Masoner said her family is eager to win custody of Tobias so he can come live with them in Indiana. She said they have been publicly vocal about their situation because they feel that have been unfairly deprived of their rights to raise the boy.
“What do we have to lose?” she said recently. “We’re not going to stand back and let this happen. He’s Ryan’s biological son and our biological grandson.”
Tiffeny Masoner pointed out that the law court decision indicated that, if DNA tests prove that her son is Tobias’ father, the probate court, in the words of the law court, “must immediately reconsider the guardianship it ordered in 2009.” The probate court awarded temporary guardianship after the biological mother had told the court she didn’t know who the father was.
Tiffeny Masoner said the probate court has not yet scheduled a hearing to reconsider the matter.
In a footnote, the law court order suggests that the probate court judge could have terminated guardianship already.
“The mother represented in her first four affidavits that the child’s father was unknown. There is now no dispute that she believed [Masoner] to be the father, and informed him and the court of that fact just weeks after filing her affidavit [in the fall of 2009].
“When, in January of 2010, the court realized that the father had been identified,” the footnote continues, “it could have terminated the guardianship because it was based on the fraud or misrepresentation of the mother.”
In the same footnote, the law court decision indicates that state law sets a limit on how long a temporary guardianship can last. By statute, “the authority of a temporary guardianship may not last longer than six months with some exceptions not applicable here,” the footnote reads.
In March 2011 the probate court judge, James Patterson, terminated Masoner’s parental rights to Tobias after he determined, according to the law court decision, that Masoner “failed to carry his burden of proving that he is able to take responsibility for [Tobias] within a time reasonably calculated to meet the child’s needs” and failed to establish that “a declaration of his parental rights will be in the child’s best interest.”
The law court, however, disagreed and on March 29 of this year vacated Patterson’s decision. The law court said Patterson relied primarily on Masoner’s financial situation and “immaturity” to determine whether he was fit to care for his son.
“These factors were not a proper basis to find [Masoner] an unfit parent,” the law court decision states. “Socioeconomic status or a finding that a parent is less financially stable than potential guardians is not the type of finding that renders a parent unfit as a matter of law unless it is also determined that he is unable or unwilling to ensure that the child’s basic needs are met.”
Bangor attorney Amy Faircloth, who represents the Hancock County couple that has guardianship of the boy, has not returned phone calls seeking comment about the case.
The Masoners’ attorney, Scott Giese of Biddeford, declined to comment in any way about the case. He said this past week that he is barred from speaking publicly about the matter because probate cases are considered confidential under state law.
Kenneth Altshuler, a Portland attorney who is not involved in the case but who does have extensive experience in family law matters, indicated over the weekend that the law court made the right decision in vacating the probate court’s termination of Masoner’s parental rights. Comparing the relative ability of a biological parent to provide for his or her child to that of a prospective adoptive parent’s ability to provide for that same child should not be the basis of any decision about whether to terminate that biological parent’s parental rights, he wrote in response to an email inquiry from the Bangor Daily News.
“It is not which placement is best for this child,” Altshuler wrote. “A biological parent always has a superior claim for custody so long as he/she can meet the basic needs of that child. It is not based on wealth or education. It is based on the current willingness and ability, or the likely future ability, to provide this basic care.
“If a parent can provide the basic care, the parent wins over an adoptive family, even if the adoptive family was Bill Gates,” Altshuler continued. “It is NOT who is better: It is if the biological father can provide sufficient care and, if so, he wins.”
The Portland attorney said it is easy to feel empathetic with Masoner’s situation, given that Tobias was born without his knowledge. He added, however, that the Indiana man could have been more attentive to whether Tobias’ mother followed through with her professed plans to terminate the pregnancy or instead gave birth to the child.
He also said that, given Masoner’s other legal problems, Masoner has a responsibility to make himself a suitable caretaker for his biological son. He was more critical of the boy’s biological mother, however, calling her “irresponsible” and “cavalier” for her initial inability to identify the child’s father and for “not being invested enough” to raise the boy herself.
Altshuler stressed that, despite what Tobias’ biological parents have or have not done, the primary concern should be the welfare of the child, not that of his parents or adoptive parents. Transferring custody of the boy from the Hancock County couple to Masoner, he said, could have a “traumatic” effect on the child.
“There would have to be a gradual introduction and transition to minimize the trauma to the child,” Altshuler wrote. “What is universal about Maine law and the law of every state, is that the welfare of the child is paramount. It is the most important factor in every case, every situation, every set of facts.”
Tiffeny Masoner said that she understands that her grandson’s needs are the most important factor to consider but she said those needs can best be met if Tobias is allowed to live with his biological father and extended family in Indiana. Despite the shroud of confidentiality that surrounds her grandson’s situation, she said, she believes the public should be aware of what is happening. She said she does not think probate officials in Hancock County have handled the case properly.
“The truth needs to come out,” Masoner said.
Follow BDN reporter Bill Trotter on Twitter at @billtrotter.
Thank you Bangor Daily News for following this story. That is clearly a loving father and a warrior who must raise his flesh and blood child. It is a sin to keep that little boy away from his father—both have been victimized and cruelly cheated for 3 years. Shame on you “judge” James Patterson, your decision was as cruel as it was corrupt and unethical. Now give that man his son! So many men are forced by the court to financially support children they did not even father just because so many women lie on birth certificate then run to court to rubber stamp their lies. Here this woman lied to everyone about this boy and committed fraud and perjury in multiple affidavits causing all this suffering and costly court battles
Will DA Carletta Bassano and prosecutor Mary Kellett be criminally charging and prosecuting the mother with fraud and perjury? Will they be putting out press releases with the woman’s mug shot to alert the community and other potential victims of her fraud? What would they do if it was a man who committed such fraud and perjury against an innocent child, the State, and harmed countless people? What would the Hancock County judges do to a man who did something like this? But this liar, even after the Law Court decision has not been charged, has not been prosecuted, and will never be punished for her crimes against all these people for no other reason than because she is a woman. That is why all the crime statistics are always skewed against men; that is why Governor LePage and the legislature pass more and more laws to make it easy to arrest and hold men in jails and depriving them of their rights. The whole system, with the Domestic Violence Industry right in the middle, is based on FRAUD against men and fathers from beginning to end.
So punishing the child, by immediately removing him from the only home he has ever known, is the answer??? And how is it clear that this is a loving father??? The photo of them playing together? It seems that the paternal grandmother is the one most interested in pushing for custody. This child is the victim of his mother’s immaturity and her ability to use him as a pawn in whatever game it was she was playing. The child should get to know his father, yes, but at his own pace. The fact that the father lives out of state should not be cause to rush the little boy to accept his father immediately as his full-time caregiver.
This child has been punished since the day he was born, BY HIS ‘MOTHER’.
She lied to everyone, saying she didn’t know who his father is, when she knew exactly who he is. Had she been honest, this little boy may very well have been placed with his father from the beginning. Her actions prove that she doesn’t care one iota about her son.
neither side was very saintly about the whole thing the fathers actions were less then ideal but
Everyone makes mistakes, he obviously has, but that certainly does not mean that now he knows he has a child and needs to be responsible for the sake of his son, that he can’t.
As far as this specific case goes, the father has done nothing ‘less than ideal’. He was lied to by the ‘mother’. As soon as he realized that she lied about getting an abortion, and actually gave birth to a child, he started fighting for rights and custody.
Hmm my comment to @facebook-1590938054:disqus about having stolen my words for his own comment was removed…..this probably will be also, so be it.
I noticed that. I said hhmmmm too. Didn’t see anything wrong with what you posted. I even checked and he did steal what you had posted.
Yes he sure did!
seems to me she made a responsible decision and put the baby in the care of a loving family.
she didn’t abort the child, she brought a healthy baby to term and made a very mature decision to let a mature, capable family raise him.
FRom your comment I assume you know these people,because if not how would you know they are a loving family. As for the mother adoption is a great thing when all parties agree.Before she gives birth it is up the her what to do,but once the child is born she only has her opinion. there is a reason why you can not just give any child up without the other parents consent. There are some girls who use a baby to hurt people. Say a man decided to take a child he did not want from its mother and put it up for adoption without her consent. I bet that would really wind you up, why not in this case because a women did this to a man.
fraud? no where in this article does it mention she took money from him.
victim? he had sex out side of marriage and is now dealing with the consequences of his own irresponsibility.
according to other posters, the father has a history of breaking the law, including a DUI and breaking and entering. Not exactly daddy material.
And a conviction for receiving stolen property, for which he was incarcerated.
Oh please a DUI conviction says nothing about whether or not you may or may not be parental material. Everyone makes mistakes, he obviously has, but that certainly does not mean that now he knows he has a child and needs to be responsible for the sake of his son, that he can’t.
If courts denied parents children due to sex outside of marriage and scrapes with the law many children would be without their parents.
not a bad option considering the mentality of many parents.
Who do you propose these children go to? There is already a foster care system which is inefficient to say the least. So, all these parent’s YOU deam unfit, because they have had sex outside of marriage, horors of horrors, and having scrapes with the law, we send their kids where and to whom?
you are misreading my comments. I don’t think not wearing a condom makes you unfit.
I think that men need to step up the plate and stop saying women manipulate them when the truth is he could have prevented this entire charade by not engaging in sex outside of marriage, or by taking precautions.
Now, he needs to prove to the court that it is in the best interest of the child; a child who has been living with another family, the only family he knows.
I respect what this man is doing, trying to gain custody, i DO NOT think he is entitled just because of DNA.
The mother obviously doesn’t think he’s fit or she would not have given the child to another family, and yes, she has the right to make that decision.
No she alone does NOT have the right to make a decision for a child that has a biological Father that wants him. She was selfish and immature and the people paying the price for that are everyone involved except her.
She made the decision when she said she did not know the father. Whether or not she thinks she is unfit is not her decision to make, since she gave the child up. All too often the women makes the decision, possibly out of anger or dislike. He is the father, he should of been given the chance.
yes, given the chance to wear a condom.
Again you seem to act like you were there, you were not unless you are the mother no birth control is 100% effective.
I’m not saying it is. What I am saying is: he is experiencing the results of his own actions.
Why are you blaming the father and ONLY the father?
I’m not blaming anyone!! read my posts. I’m just saying DNA is not enough reason to grant someone custody. There is a legal system, let him go through it.
as a matter of fact, I go out of my way to avoid the ‘blame’ word. Blame is a word that co-dependent people use when they don’t want to take ‘responsibility’.
You may not have used the word “blame”, but by sticking up for the mother and dissing the father, you are! At one point you even blamed both parents for being irresponsible. You have changed your mind at some point during your comments and now are blaming the father for not wearing a condom, and saying he’s not responsible enough to raise a child. Unless you KNOW for a fact that he wasn’t wearing one, you, or anyone else cannot make that assumption. All forms of contraceptives are not 100%. She may have been on birth control and told him that and they both thought they were “safe.” And perhaps the reason why he didn’t “stop” her from having an abortion was maybe because he was incarcerated. I don’t know the exact timeline of the events, (and neither do you), but there is room for any reason.
I really think she is very involved in this case. Maybe the daughter of the couple. She keeps saying he did not use a condom how would she know.Also I still want her to answer the question that if the father had taken the baby to Maine and given it away would she be so upset.
He is trying to take the responsibility for his actions, and has come forward. Too often the State does not give the father the same rights. Women are always talking about equal rights, when it comes to custody, divorce the rights are far from equal as we see in this situation.
He is experiencing the results of the mother lying to him and everyone else. Had she been honest with him from the time she knew she was pregnant with his child, I’m betting none of this would have happened.
Yes just as much as she could have been on birth control….they are both at fault but that does not give her the right to lie about that boys paternity, lie to the court about it also, and hand that child over to people that aren’t even related to the child.
She made more bad choices in this deal then he did in my opinion.
Women are so adament about their right to choose.
How do YOU know he wasn’t wearing a condom? Were you there?? No form of birth control, even a condom, is 100% effective.
According to the dictionary:
Fraud (noun): deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.
She most definitely committed fraud. She lied to him and told him she was going to have an abortion. And she did it so that she had the upper hand in the situation and he had no voice.
Victim (noun): a person who is deceived or cheated, as by his or her own emotions or ignorance, by the dishonesty of others, or by some impersonal agency
He most definitely was a victim of the mom. She was dishonest about the abortion.
Whether his past crimes were egregious or not, is there no redemption once he has paid his price to society for his past? I sure am glad I don’t live in your world of judgement and falsities!
The truth: if he’d worn a condom this would not have happened.
Ergo: he has no one to blame but himself.
Blame: is what people do to other people when they can’t seem to take responsibility for their own actions.
Get real!
Truth: Condoms have a 15% failure rate so that would not have ensured that a pregnancy would not have happened. Furthermore, the same standard should be held for the mom. Both were equal participants, thus, equal responsibility.
Ergo: the blame falls on both of them.
Blather: Talk long-windedly without making very much sense …. exactly what you are doing.
you get real. she told him he was having an abortion, he didn’t step up to the plate then. she gave the baby to a foster family, she did not ‘fraud’ him for her own gain.
upper hand? what upper hand? the child is living with another family.Blather: what 1GoodSamaritan2 sees in the when looking the in mirror.
That’s your best? Sad. It’s sad because your finger pointing is worthless.
Worthless because (since your name is “singletrackgirl”) we’ll assume you are female and that fact that you would suggest that he did not “step up” when she told him she was pregnant and FAIL to acknowledge that the woman had complete control of what happened to her body and that of their unborn child. SHE is the one who made that decision, irregardless of what the dad wishes are/were/could have been/weren’t/whatever …. she is in control of her body.
Go re-read the article, she tells dad she is going to have an abortion, then does not, then gives the baby to someone else = FRAUD! She did not tell him the truth, to gain the upper hand in what she was going to do. Why you don’t get it is beyond those reading this!
Bloviate: Talk at length in an inflated or empty way. What “SingleTrackGirl” is best at!
fraud means she did it for personal gain. she had nothing to gain by giving the child to another couple. you read the article.
your personal attacks expose your inability to discuss issues clearly. I didn’t attack or insult you, I disagreed with your comment and stayed on point.
Look ti up in the dictionary, STG. You are missing the definition of fraud … or at least the correct one.
See, this is where people who try to defend the undefendable get sidetracked … really, personal attacks? You are the one who will not accept others point of views.
Don’t be such a drama queen!
???
defending the undefendable? won’t accept others points of view?
this is a discussion forum. i don’t have to ‘accept’ your point of view. particularly when it is so rudely phrased.
Again, to “accept” others point of view does not mean you necessarily have to agree with it. Wow and thank you for clearing up my questions about what this forum is for.
Drama at it’s finest.
:)
LOL condoms failure rate are/ sorry to inform you, the world is a very imperfect place and things go unexpected at times. People are born into circumstances that are not ideal..that is why most of us are here!!!
The truth: She could have used birth control, herelf.
Ergo: Takes two to tango, so both are to blame.
Soapbox: Something you’re on (along with another commenter on here) and need to get down off of.
Dad IS stepping up to the plate and has been ever since he found out his son was in existence.
You need to quit with your rants, because as far as I can see, they don’t make much sense!
You need to quit with your rants, because as far as I can see, they don’t make much sense!
****
That is exactly why I posted, because you don’t see.
Are you blonde?
are you?
You’d make a good politician. You don’t answer questions and talk in circles!
And BTW, yes I am!
I don’t answer questions? ask me something relevant to this article and I will answer you.
Blondes always have more fun!
Hehehehe I KNOW! ;)
LMAO! I think she answered that for you without giving an answer!! Thanks for the laugh!
condoms are only 87% effective only 98% with spermicide so unless you were there you cant say. Doctors use the number because in reality the only true birth control is no sex. Even if you have a tubal ligation you still have a 1to 2 % chance of getting preagnant over a life time. I know some one this happen to she was not impressed.
Truth is if she didn’t have sex or was on the pill it would not have happened either. IT takes two.
This statement is in part, taken from the article that appeared in the BDN on April 21, 2012: “When, in January of 2010, the court realized that the father had been
identified,” the footnote continues, “it could have terminated the
guardianship because it was based on the fraud or misrepresentation of
the mother.”
Even the court admits she has committed fraud……
Bitter much?
I couldnt agree with you more. It is clear to see, after reading these articles, comments and the law court decsion that there is still an issue uniting son and father. My big question here is why does this Father have to prove he is fit if there was never a fault in parenting on his behalf? What gives anyone including the people who have this child the right to challenge this young mans parental rights? The best interest of the child? If the couple who have this child really had the best interest of this child in mind they would not have continued to fight this father after they found out he would not consent to the guardianship or adoption of his biological son back when the child was only a few months old, now because of their actions, the courts actions and no action by the mother almost 3 years have past. This is a horrendous act against this child, some comments talk about the love from the people who have this little boy, if this were a true love they would accept the fact that the Father is unwilling to give up his child, start doing what they should have done long ago while the child was still a baby and stop abusing the court system to keep this little guy from his father. Yes the Mother surley has a tremendous amount of disreguard for this child but really think about the possibilty that the this couple who wanted a child so badly were willing to stop at nothing to keep father and son apart, and in my opinon I am sure the mother wasnt the money train behind this thing.
A son NEEDS his father just as much as a father needs his son PERIOD!
the dad wants to take Parental responsibility? At the ripe old age of 24, he already has some significant jail time under his belt, has been charged and convicted of receiving Stolen property, Violating House Arrest, possession of Drugs, driving intoxicated, having an accident while intoxicated, and then leaving! Lord only knows what he’s gotten away with!! The DUI and accident were only a few months ago. Does he accept responsibility for That yet? Nope…He blames it on the separation from his son! He should be taught Personal Responsibility before he tries Parental ones :) but perhaps this will be the tool he needs to kick his problems…
People grow up and take responsibility—that is the way of life. This father and the little boy have an inherent right to their own biological family. It is not a privilege granted by the State to a father who “wants to take Parent responsibility”, it is a parental RIGHT which an abusive mother and the State has unjustly deprived this man and his son of for 3 years. That boy belongs with HIS loving father who has selflessly fought for his child. Everyday they are not together is a sin, is a crime, and a continuation of child abuse.
Well said. Also Children raise and make people responsible Adults. Before most people have children they are out and around alot, then when a child is born into their lives it grounds them.
obviously he has not proven to the courts that he is a fit parent, which is incumbent upon him to do so.
Why, if he had not been lied to he would have taken his son home from the hospital,no questions asked. There is a difference between being an inexperienced parent and an unfit parent.Has he abused this child no. He has a home for the child,has a job,is engaged and has another child.The judge said he was financially unstable which in this ecomony who is not. If we took peoples children because they were poor what kind of society does that make us. By the way love your birthcontrol comments if it were 100% alot of people would not be here today.
so let him prove to the courts he is fit and its in the best interest of the child.
that is the price for being careless and irresponsible.
They were BOTH careless and irresponsible. Seeing that he has come forward since he has found out about his son, and he wants to have custody of his son, that makes him more responsible than her. (Responsible enough to be granted custody? That’s not YOUR decision or mine. It’s the COURT that will decide that). She LIED to him and said she had an abortion. She LIED and said she didn’t know who the father was. THAT is being very selfish, considering that she was going to deny her son his right to know his father.
I would say it was a very selfless decision. Selfish would have been having the abortion. She chose to bring a healthy baby to full term, to give it life and then provided a capable home for the baby. That is not selfish.
What did she have to gain by carrying a baby to full term? I assuming you have not been pregnant before or you wouldn’t make such a far fetched statement.
First of all, either you are this mother, know this mother or have gone thru a similar experience. Second, perhaps the reason she didn’t go thru with the abortion was because she was too far along to get one and her only other option was to give birth, then give him away (because she obviously doesn’t want him)…….without the ex knowing what she was doing. Somewhere along the way, she got a conscience. That does not make her the saint you are trying to portray her as…….or the bad guy you’re trying to portray him as. It is what it is, so STOP trying to rationalize this in favor of the mother and everything against the father!
And if you read any of my posts on here, you would know that I stated I have 4 children. And if you really must know, I also have had 2 miscarriages……..making me pregnant 6 times. I was married to an abusive louse, but never once did I think of my kids as disposable. And I also allowed my ex visitation (although supervised), even tho HE stopped it. Oh, and I was adopted, so I know what it’s like to be a throw away baby. So, DON’T tell me my statement is far-fetched!
You, young lady have a lot to learn about people and the fact that’s it’s not always the way YOU think it is. Grow up!
why so personal? you seem older and strident, to me.
take care. and take your meds.
LOL!! Strident?? No more than you…..
If this mother taught the father was so unfit she could have gone to court to have his rights terminated then given the baby up. Adoption is great when all agree. If she had gone to court a judge would have said if she wanted to give the baby away then the father would get custody. Then she would be on the hook for 18 years of child support. By taking the child and giving it up without the fathers consent would get her out of taking any responsibility. If she did not want this child she could have called the father from the hospital and walked away.This seems more like payback for something unrelated.
Hey B, I got a comment from you in my email…..but it’s not here…….and it was sent over an hour ago. Something very strange is going on with some of your comments. I know what you commented and they’re basically of the same opinion as mine. I’ll check back later and see if by chance the comment shows up…..
I see that comment is not here. :P
Just what is far fetched about older’s post? Sounds pretty reasonable to me. Seems to me you are too emotionally attached to this situation……
He hasn’t gone to court yet, since the DNA has been proven. So, he hasn’t proven anything to the courts yet. And, where in your “reasoning” would he be a bad parent?
its not up to any one here in the comment section to decide his fitness as a parent. it is up to the courts. which is what I am arguing: that he is not automatically given this child. he needs to prove that it is in the best interest of the child to be taken out of his current home.
Then why do YOU keep going on and on about it. YOU can’t make that decision, either! You keep bringing up whether either one is a fit parent.
WHY do I keep going on…because you keep replying to my comment. why do you think?
I brought up the DNA donor’s ‘fitness’ because as a counter-point to the initial comment which stated that DNA = full parental rights.
please read the entire comment string and take my original comment in its context.
Had he known about his son upon his birth, he would have been able to automatically take him home from the hospital, no questions asked.
Until you have been in this EXACT situation, you have no right to judge.
You really ought to get off your high horse about this “no right to judge” thing. If you really believed it, you wouldn’t be judging the mother, as you did in your reply to Giah (“This child has been punished since the day he was born, ‘BY HIS ‘MOTHER’ [your caps]. She lied to everyone . . . . . . she doesn’t care one iota about her son.”).
she isn’t the only one who needs to get off their high horse about judging others..
You ought to read what I write. My comment isn’t about judging others; it’s about those who say “you have no right to judge” or “don’t be judgmental” and then turn turn around and do exactly that. The distinction between judging and telling others they have no right to judge isn’t a hard one to grasp.
He is judging this man’s ability to be a father, based on unrelated things. The mother has proven through her actions that she doesn’t care about the child. Not the same thing at all.
Please read this very carefully and slowly, because it’s the last time I’m going to say it: The point of my comment wasn’t the fitness of either the mother or the father. It was about the appropriateness of you telling another commenter that he has “no right to judge.” In fact, even though you disagree with him, he has as much “right to judge” as you do.
It is the child that suffers, when two young people throw caution to the wind, and act upon their immediate needs for sex. It takes two to make a baby and people grown up enough to take care of it.
I feel so sorry for this child. He isn’t even 3 years old and he has a mother that is unfit to take care of him, and a father that wants to take him to a place he has never seen. Kids are flexible so he would adjust quickly, But what a choice!!! Sorry little guy :-(
He is a lucky child who has a loving Father. (-;
“A father that wants to take him to a place he has never seen.” Families with children move all the time……and most kids have never seen the area/place. Kids adapt better than they are given credit for. I’m sure the people involved with this case will make sure the transition is a smooth one. I admire the father for stepping up and taking responsibility for his son……..not a lot do that anymore…….they usually run in the opposite direction.
Conceiving and having a child have become such casual things these days, kind of like buying a new toy.
So, the paternal grandmother did such a great job raising her son (the father), she now wants a shot at raising her grandson, too? You did a lousy job the first time. Please have the good sense to leave this child alone.
Just because the father has been in trouble with the law, does not mean his mother did a lousy job. I have 4 children, raised them all the same and one had a few run-ins with the law. He has since paid his debt to society and now has grown up…..at the ‘ripe ol age of 23’. Sometimes it’s not the upbringing, but the poor decisions they make as adults, that get people in trouble. If this is going to be your defense, what about the biological mother of this baby? Then you would have to blame her parents for her decision to lie about this whole situation.
I agree. As a parent all you can do is lead them down the right path and hope that they continue on that path when you aren’t looking!
How can you suggest that the grandmother did a bad job? Is there no redemption in this world anymore? He paid the price to society when he was in trouble with the law. As for being a Dad, he was never given that opportunity. Don’t be such a mudslinger!
Why are you personally attacking the grandmother. You know what they say about glass houses, unless you are the worlds only perfect parent you should not judge.
If this man did not WANT his child, he would not be fighting so hard. He could have blown the whole thing off and never looked back, but he didn’t and hasn’t.
Just another case of a child being born into this world to unfit parents, that is the real crime here.
That being said, the father does have rights and he is fighting for his son. The father doesn’t look good given his criminal history at a young age, but hopefully being a father will help him grow up and straighten out is act.
the problem here is: a single, unwed mother brought a baby to full term and gave that baby up to a loving family. that was a difficult, yet responsible decision for that woman to make.
If a DNA donor, who is not married to the mother, has the right to challenge her decision regarding the baby, then we are just encouraging more abortions.
Are you really going to start terming Dads as “DNA donors”?
And, you are going to make the completely outrageous statement that the mother showed some responsibility in this nightmare? She is the most irresponsible actor in this cast of clowns!
Then, you are going to somehow suggest that this is encouraging abortions?
WOW! I’m beginning to think you are the mother or at least related to the mother.
you think she should have had an abortion then?
I think the law of the land states she has the choice. Whether I am pro-life or pro-choice means nothing because the law states she has the choice, so as citizens that is the law we must follow.
Personally, I think she should have been honest with the Dad and if she said she was going to have an abortion and changed her mind, she owed him that update. Then, he would have either stepped up or not and the child would have either gone to him or another family ONCE and only once. Instead, she was fraudulent and lied and now the child suffers because of HER stupidity and dishonesty.
The father is stepping up to do the right thing now that he’s aware that boy is his, give him a little credit for trying to do the right thing.
I said he didn’t know until it was too late. I never said otherwise. Excuse me for living.
________________________________
From: Disqus
To: frostylobomerlin@yahoo.com
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:05 AM
Subject: [bdn] Re: DNA test proves Indiana man is father of Hancock County boy
itwasntmyidea wrote, in response to frostylobomerlin:
The father is stepping up to do the right thing now that he’s aware that boy is his, give him a little credit for trying to do the right thing. Link to comment
People are born into less than ideal conditions and usually end up okay.By the stone thrower’s logic babies should have not been born during The Great Depression and World War Two.
BIG BIG NEWS!
To some, it is…….especially the people involved in this!
To one little boy it is the BIGGEST OF NEWS!
The “mother” is treating him like he’s disposable, not the father. People (including me) knock men who don’t step up to the plate and be a father to their child(ren). Here is a man who IS stepping up to the plate and he’s still being condemned! This man didn’t know his son existed, and now that he does, he IS showing responsibility. I think he’s brave in the way, he KNEW his past was going to be thrown out in the spotlight and he doesn’t care. He’s doing this because he wants to be a dad to his son.
That’s what I said. Duh.
________________________________
From: Disqus
To: frostylobomerlin@yahoo.com
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:13 AM
Subject: [bdn] Re: DNA test proves Indiana man is father of Hancock County boy
olderandmellow wrote, in response to frostylobomerlin:
The “mother” is treating him like he’s disposable, not the father. People (including me) knock men who don’t step up to the plate and be a father to their child(ren). Here is a man who IS stepping up to the plate and he’s still being condemned! This man didn’t know his son existed, and now that he does, he IS showing responsibility. I think he’s brave in the way, he KNEW his past was going to be thrown out in the spotlight and he doesn’t care. He’s doing this because he wants to be a dad to his son. Link to comment
I don’t think you’re going to find that in this case. Sorry to disappoint you.
….
I wish nothing but the best for these two.
I hope that the courts make a decision that takes into account the fact that this little boy has been the biggest victim of all in this entire mess. I also hope that if he is placed with his father, provisions are put in place to make sure it’s a smooth, painless transition for him. Even if that means Dad has to move to Maine for a bit, have an apartment, and do overnight ‘visits’ for awhile, building up to longer periods of time.
Lastly, I hope that if this boy is placed with his father, the father doesn’t completely shut out the family that loved his son as their own since he was 2 months old.
What really is the worst part is the judge who terminated his rights because he was basically young and poor. I feel bad for this child if things were not drugged out for so long it would not have been so hard on him(a younger child would adjust faster). As a phsycholigist the woman who is trying to adopt this child should have known better. In the end the biological parent will get thier child back. Does any one remember Jessica she was around a month when her parents wanted her back, the adopted couple fought and it took years. If I remember correctly she was 4 or 5 when she was given back to her parents, the scene was horrible I felt so bad for the child. A lawyer once told a family member of mine who was trying to adopt privately never even think about adopting from a mother who does not know who the father is or says that he does not care, or just does not want the child, this could really cause problems late and in court they would not win. They did adopt two children who parent both agreed. There are so many children who are older or not perfect who need homes too,and in these cases you do not have to worry about thier parents rights. I do understand that these people have grown to love this child, I just hope all of this is over quickly for the childs sake and everyone elses.
Imagine being raised by a phsycholigist.. Everyone I’ve every meet in that field was in need of one themselves.. I guess thats why they got into it in the first place.
I fail to see why any of this lengthy blather has anything to do with “NEWS” … it’s barely “infotainment” and not worth one column inch of space. Please, BDN, stop giving these people their Fifteen Minutes of Fame?!!
If you think it’s not a worthy article, then don’t read it or keep up with the posts. Other people, obviously think it is worth reading. It’s a choice you made to read this and comment. No one made you do it.
I bet his son doesn’t think it’s blather and thinks it’s very news worthy.
You edited your post and put this ‘wee todd did’ comment in instead. This was not here before! You had a comment about the parents treating the child as being disposable.