Imagine the following scenario. You are at the mall, shopping, or sitting in your front yard. You watch as your child is playing, and in the second you turn your head around, somebody snatches her, and drives off, leaving you to begin the heart breaking search for your abducted child. Sometime later, you find out that she was sold to an adoption agency, and then adopted by a family in another country. By some stroke of luck, you manage to find exactly where your child is, and where they have been living. But because of the exchange of money and signatures (not yours or your child's), the law is unwilling to return your child to you.
Sadly, this case is not imaginary. It has been the story of many women in recent years. It is likely the story of many who have their children abducted, never to be seen from again. And yet, people will argue that the child should stay where they are, with the traffickers.
"You shouldn't take the child from the only home they know" "They have been there for 10 years. How can you take them away now"
I wonder, if I were to say that perhaps Elizabeth Smart should have stayed with her abductor, after all, that was the only home she had known for the past 14 months. Or how about Stephen Stayner. He was abducted for 9 years to be found alive. Or let's take the most recent case, of the 3 women who had been in their abductor's home for 10 years. Maybe they should just stay with the only home and family they've had for the past decade. But wait, I forgot. There was no exchange of money, or binding legal (and I use that term loosely) agreements made.
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/05/15/us-wont-return-adopted-girl-guatemalan-authorities-say/
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3695695.htm
Sadly, this case is not imaginary. It has been the story of many women in recent years. It is likely the story of many who have their children abducted, never to be seen from again. And yet, people will argue that the child should stay where they are, with the traffickers.
"You shouldn't take the child from the only home they know" "They have been there for 10 years. How can you take them away now"
I wonder, if I were to say that perhaps Elizabeth Smart should have stayed with her abductor, after all, that was the only home she had known for the past 14 months. Or how about Stephen Stayner. He was abducted for 9 years to be found alive. Or let's take the most recent case, of the 3 women who had been in their abductor's home for 10 years. Maybe they should just stay with the only home and family they've had for the past decade. But wait, I forgot. There was no exchange of money, or binding legal (and I use that term loosely) agreements made.
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/05/15/us-wont-return-adopted-girl-guatemalan-authorities-say/
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3695695.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment