A Very Personal Congratulations!

On June 18, 2010, a miracle happened.  Abigail Elizabeth Cortez-Zuco was born.  Resident bloggers Ricky Cortez and Anthony Zuco have been assisting other couples with information on adoption while, at the same time, working to create their own family through adoption.  All you need to do is read their blog to understand how emotional this journey can be.

But now they are a family and I could not be more happy for them.  Time For Families salutes the Cortez-Zuco family and sends them every good wish for a happy and healthy life together!

in Adoption  by Anthony Brown 2 comments

Long Awaited Birth Announcement

We are proud to announce the birth of their daughter, Abigail Elizabeth.

Born: June 18, 2010 at 5:31am. Weight: 6 pounds, 4 ounces. Height: 19.5 inches long

It has been a long anticipated adoption process with challenges, pitfalls and heartbreak, but with enough perseverance , determination and love we can finally start our forever family.  Our journey has not ended, but finally begun and are excited to welcome our new little girl into our heart and home forever.

While found and both of us being on the board of www.LGBTfamilies.info and beginning the adoption process we gave advice we had heard from many professionals as not to celebrate too early, protect yourself and to use the ‘3x’ factor for estimating time and money. Although we gave the same advise, we failed miserably on executing the same precautions for ourselves.  We posted pictures on Facebook and they were faced with a failed adoption and returning the child to the birthmother.  We estimated the costs to be half, not taking into account a failed adoption may double your original estimate. As far as protecting ourselves, I still have no clue how to do that while holding your potential child in your arms, even before they begin to smile back at you.

We heard many opinions of what is ‘meant to be’, we were given other options (as if we had not explored every option imaginable) and people brought to light other “successful” means of expanding families they have heard of.  As if there was an infallible option.  Facing these friendly challenges showed us that we need more education about non-traditional family expansion and how valuable these lessons will be for our children and our children’s children.

We are, although, very lucky to also have support from our church and were mentioned in an article written by Michele Somerville, a partitioner and writer for the Huffington Post, titled Gay Catholic Ministry and Straight Pride.  There is a place for everyone, every parent, every child, every LGBT person and their families and sometimes you just have to search until you find what you have been looking for.

All in all, I could not and would not change it for the world. I often told my husband had I not had the heartache and loss I had from prior relationships, I would not have been ready for you.  Although I think we were well prepared for parenthood, this has given us such depth to be able to parent that much better and provide enhanced appreciation for the newest member of our family. Welcome to your new world Abigail Elizabeth.  We will strive every day to make it better for you and teach you to do the same.

ALL our love,

Papa & Daddy

in Adoption / Parenting / Personal Stories  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

Obama Recognizes Gay Dads

  • By Candace Chellew-Hodge – 6.21.10

  • When President Obama issued his statement this past weekend in recognition of Father’s Day, he mentioned one class of fathers that no other president before him has acknowledged: gay dads.

    Nurturing families come in many forms, and children may be raised by a father and mother, a single father, two fathers, a stepfather, a grandfather, or caring guardian.

    His acknowledgement of the labor of love two men may put into their relationship with their children drew quick reaction from the “pro-family” but anti-gay set. Christian Broadcasting Network White House Correspondent David Brody tsk-tsked the president, warning he’s alienating religious folks:

    First of all, by putting “two fathers” in your proclamation you are really running the risk of alienating networks of pastors and church goers who may buy into the President’s overall but draw the line when it comes to traditional marriage. You put these normally supportive pastors in a tough situation because the fact of the matter is the whole ‘two fathers’ scenario DOES NOT play well in most Churches in America. And that is completely understandable.

    My first reaction to that concern was, “welcome to our world.” The LGBT community has been alienated from most of the world for the majority of history, so pastors and churchgoers who balk at the president’s words can enjoy, just for a moment, our reality. Alienation is something we’re familiar with — kicked out of our families, kicked out of our churches, fired for being who we are, denied housing for being who we are, denied the rights and responsibilities of marriage. You want alienation? Mr. Brody, the line starts behind me.

    Of course, Brody’s reaction is tame compared to Peter LaBarbera over at Americans for Truth about Homosexuality who gives his usual rant about how gay men are promiscuous (because no straight men are, right?).

    But even if two homosexual men keep their disordered relationship “faithful,” homosexual parenting would not be worthy of celebration, LaBarbera said: “It is wrong to force children into a situation where they have two men modeling immoral behavior — condemned by God and all major religions — as the most important role models in their lives.”

    Aside from the “scare quotes” around the word “faithful,” LaBarbera makes no sense here. What “immoral behavior” is he talking about? Does he really believe gay dads have sex in front of their children? Do LaBarbera and his wife do “immoral” things in front of their children? Or, perhaps, LaBarbera believes it’s immoral for kids to see their gay dads go to work every day, take out the trash, and instruct their children to clean their rooms and make their beds. What horrible fathers!

    There is not a shred of proof that gay men are worse fathers than

    straight men. In fact, a recent study, quoted in the Advocate, showed that “gay fathers were more likely to scale back their careers in order to care for their children. Another difference was that gay fathers also saw their self-esteem and relationships with their extended families greatly improve when they had children.” Far from being “immoral” it seems that fatherhood is good for gay men, just as it is for straight men. But, LaBarbera and his “pro-family” cohorts won’t ever let facts get in the way of a good scare tactic.

    Even if President Obama has, by and large, disappointed our community since his election with his foot-dragging on issues like Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), it feels good to be acknowledged, even in a boiler-plate proclamation. It feels good to have the leader of your country acknowledge not just your existence, but your humanity — your extreme normalness.

    If that makes the religious right feel alienated, it really shouldn’t. It simply means that we finally have a commander-in-chief who can acknowledge the reality of the American family and see the humanity of everyone, even if politics prevents him from fully enacting a fairer agenda.

    A belated Happy Father’s Day, Mr. President.

in Adoption / Foster Parenting / Legal / Legislation / Second Parent Adoption / Surrogacy  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

Gay adoption ban coming into play in race for attorney general

Jun. 05, 2010

BY LEE LOGAN
Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau

When voters choose from among five candidates to be Florida’s next attorney general, their decision could have a profound effect on some of the state’s most highly charged issues, from gay adoption to healthcare reform.

Florida’s unique gay adoption ban underscores how the state’s chief legal officer can use the position to advance a personal philosophy while adhering to the duties of the job.

Attorney General Bill McCollum has come under fire recently for advocating the use of an expert witness who has been discredited while defending the state’s ban on gay couples adopting children.

Three Republicans seeking the post — Lt. Gov. Jeff Kottkamp, former state healthcare secretary Holly Benson and former Hillsborough prosecutor Pam Bondi — all say they would continue to uphold the adoption ban.

“The best home for any child is a two-parent home with a mother and a father,” Benson said.

But both Democrats, state Sens. Dave Aronberg and Dan Gelber, say Florida has spent enough defending an antiquated law.

“I don’t think as a lawyer I can make a straight-faced argument that the ban is constitutional,” said Gelber of Miami Beach.

The challenge comes from a North Miami man who wanted to adopt two foster children that are living with him and his partner. A Miami judge ruled the law unconstitutional in 2008. The state’s appeal of that ruling is pending.

McCollum is defending the ban on behalf of the Department of Children and Families. He personally pushed to hire psychologist George Rekers as an expert witness. Rekers was found to have gone on a European vacation with a gay escort.

In public appearances, Bondi refused to say if she would take the case to the Supreme Court if the state loses the appeal. In an interview Friday, she clarified her position: “I will continue with General McCollum’s appeal. If [the Supreme Court] can legally hear it, yes, I will appeal.”

The Supreme Court must first agree to hear the case before any candidate can appeal.

At a Tiger Bay forum in St. Petersburg on Wednesday, Bondi said that as attorney general, she would support whatever law is on the books.

At a May 18 event in Miami Lakes, she mentioned two gay friends before saying that the adoption process as a whole needs reform.

`FIRST DUTY’

“I have friends in Tampa who are in law enforcement who have adopted from overseas, who are in a loving, committed same-sex relationship,” Bondi said.

Former attorney general Bob Butterworth, a Democrat who held the post for 16 years, said Bondi’s earlier comments have some precedent.

“If the Legislature passes legislation, your first duty is to defend it,” Butterworth said. “I’ve handled cases over the years that I didn’t quite agree with, but that’s not my decision.”

Butterworth said he personally disagrees with the law and that judges should decide if a couple is fit for adoption. When the law was first challenged, Butterworth was the head of DCF.

He asked McCollum to defend the suit because he was focused on “turning around” an agency beset by repeated troubles and didn’t want to pick a fight with the Republican-controlled Legislature.

Aronberg, of Greenacres, said the attorney general has wide discretion on appealing cases and that “we have wasted enough taxpayer money” on defending the ban.

A department spokesman said Florida has spent $383,000 on defending the ban, half of which is for attorneys fees. The other half is for general expenses, including $120,000 to Rekers.

The attorney general candidates also split on whether to continue McCollum’s challenge to the new federal health care law.

Republicans have said they will keep Florida as the lead plaintiff in the case, which will likely stretch well beyond November’s election.

“I believe that law is unconstitutional on a number of grounds,” Benson said.

Calling the lawsuit “frivolous,” Democrats said they would take Florida off the list of 20 states listed as plaintiffs. McCollum spokeswoman Sandi Copes noted that even if Florida dropped out of the case, it would continue and another state would take the lead.

UNITED FRONT

One issue did unite all five candidates in opposition — the ballot initiative known as Hometown Democracy, or Amendment 4. An effort to reign in unchecked growth, the amendment would place changes to a local comprehensive plan on the ballot.

The initiative faces strong opposition from business groups and the building industry.

All of the candidates said it would take power away from local officials.

“It would ensure that the only changes to comprehensive plans would be development funded by expensive campaigns,” Aronberg said.

The candidates also are united in supporting the death penalty.

But other issues split the candidates along party lines. Democrats support the Fair Districts amendments that say lawmakers cannot draw political districts with the intent to favor or disfavor a party or incumbent. They also argue the Legislature’s companion amendment is “intentionally confusing” to voters.

Republicans oppose the citizen amendments — Nos. 5 and 6 on the ballot — but support lawmakers’ Amendment 7.

Most Republicans came out against the April 2007 move by Gov. Charlie Crist to simplify the process of restoring civil rights to former felons.

in Adoption / In the News  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

Portugal’s Gay Marriage Law Excludes Adoption

By Carlos Santoscoy
Published: May 18, 2010Portugal’s gay marriage law specifically forbids married gay and lesbian couples from adopting children.

On Monday, Portugal’s President Anibal Cavaco Silva announced he would ratify the gay marriage bill approved by lawmakers in January, making Portugal the sixth European nation to grant gay couples the right to marry.

The president lamented his decision, saying he was only doing so because Social Democrats – led by Prime Minister Jose Socrates – were certain to overturn his veto.

“Given that fact, I feel I should not contribute to a pointless extension of this debate, which would only serve to deepen the divisions between the Portuguese and divert the attention of politicians away from the grave problems affecting us.”

“There are moments in the life of a country when ethical responsibility has to be placed above one’s personal convictions,” he added.

Cavaco Silva, however, might have decided differently if the law allowed gay adoption. Earlier, the president attempted to derail the law by forwarding four out of five of the bill’s articles to the nation’s Constitutional Court. He said he did so because he doubted the bill’s constitutionality. But he set aside the article that bans gay adoption, a clear signal he wanted to ensure it remained in the final legislation should the court vote in favor of the bill. The court’s major found the bill to be constitutional.

The seventy-year-old president announce his decision in a nationally televised address.

“We feel that we’re experiencing a memorable, emotional moment,” Vitalinos Canas, a Socialist government MP, told Euronews. “It’s a huge step for civilization, taken by our country.”

The president’s signature comes just days after Pope Benedict toured the Roman Catholic stronghold of Portugal. Speaking in the city of Fatima, the pope called for a greater defense of what he said were “essential and primary values of life,” among which he included the family. He said the family was “founded on indissoluble marriage between man and woman.”

Abortion – legal in Portugal since 2007 – and gay marriage were “among some of the most insidious and dangerous challenges facing the common good today.”

The pope has taken a similar hard line in neighboring Spain, where Socialists legalized gay marriage in 2005.

Social conservatives in Mexico have denounced a gay marriage law approved by Mexico City lawmakers because it lifted a previous ban on gay adoption. The federal government has appealed to the nation’s Supreme Court, saying it has a responsibility to protect children. In Argentina, a gay marriage bill that includes the right to adopt has won the approval of the country’s lower chamber of Congress, but faces an uncertain future as debate begins in the Senate.

In both countries, adoption by gay and lesbian couples has stirred the most controversy.

Gay marriage is also legal in five European countries: Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, Norway and, most recently, Sweden.

Iceland is also considering legalizing gay marriage.

in Adoption / In the News  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

No Bar to U.S. Adoptions From Russia

May 5, 2010 – New york Times – by CLIFFORD J. LEVY

 

MOSCOW — After nearly a month of contradictory signals, a senior Russian official is now making clear that the government has not halted the adoption of Russian children by Americans.

The official, Andrei A. Fursenko, the education and science minister, whose agency oversees adoptions, said Tuesday night that the Russian government had not formally put in place a legal suspension of these adoptions.

Mr. Fursenko appeared to contradict the assertions of Russian foreign ministry officials, who said last month that there would be no adoptions until the United States and Russia reached an agreement on new regulations. But Mr. Fursenko’s comments would appear to carry more weight because of his agency’s role in the adoption process.

The Russian government had insisted on new adoption rules in response to the case of Artyom Savelyev, who was sent backto Moscow on his own last month, just before his eighth birthday, by his adoptive mother in Tennessee.

The mother said that the boy, Artyom, had severe behavioral difficulties and that the Russian orphanage had lied to her about his condition when she adopted him last year. Russian officials said there was nothing wrong with him.

His plight caused an outcry in Russia, and top Russian officials, including President Dmitri A. Medvedev, spoke out about the need for new regulations.

The State Department said last week that it had never received formal notification from the Russian government that adoptions were frozen. American officials in Washington and Moscow said this week that adoptions were continuing, though some Russian officials may be slowing down procedures because they are unsure about their government’s stance.

Mr. Fursenko indicated that neither his agency nor the foreign ministry had the authority to halt adoptions by Americans.

“A suspension of adoptions is possible only by a law of the Parliament or by an act of the president,” he told reporters, pointing out that neither had addressed the issue.

Mr. Fursenko’s comments should end the confusion over Russian adoption policy and offer some solace to American families who are in the middle of the process, which can be time-consuming, costly and emotionally difficult.

An American diplomatic delegation was recently in Moscow to negotiate a new adoption agreement, and both sides said they hoped to have one signed relatively soon. Russian officials were said to want assurances that there would be more independent monitoring of Russian children after they have begun living in the United States.

Russia was the third leading source of adoptive children in the United States in 2009, with 1,586, after China and Ethiopia, officials said.

More than 50,000 Russian children have been adopted by United States citizens since 1991. The adoption rate peaked at 6,000 in 2003, and then declined as bureaucratic and legal hurdles mounted.

While most adoptions turn out well, cases where adoptive Russian children have been harmed or killed in the United States have drawn widespread attention in Russia. Russian officials said that of the 18 Russian adoptive children who have been killed abroad since the Soviet collapse in 1991, 17 were in the United States.

Mr. Fursenko noted that he was just in Washington, where he discussed the overall adoption issue with Russia’s ambassador there, Sergey I. Kislyak.

“Recently, the ambassador had a gathering in the embassy for adoptive children and their parents,” Mr. Fursenko said. “He said that these are happy families. Moreover, a significant number of these children are sick. They found normal families. The parents emphasize that the children are Russian, which is why they brought them to the Russian Embassy, to show that even though they now live here, their roots are Russian.”

Mr. Fursenko said Mr. Kislyak believed that it would be a mistake to ban Americans from adopting Russian children.

“This is in the interests of the child,” Mr. Fursenko said. “This should never be used to manipulate.”

He added that while there have been instances of Russian children being adopted by “inadequate” families abroad, there have been more in Russia itself.

in Adoption / In the News  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

Debra H. v. Janice R. – An affirmation of Second Parent Adoption

May 4, 2010

By Anthony M. Brown, Esq.

The New York Court of Appeals issued their ruling today on what had been considered to be a potentially landmark case, Debra H. v. Janice R.  In their ruling, the court allowed the plaintiff, Debra H., access to her non-biological child with whom she had been denied visitation from the biological mother, Janice R.  That sounds great, right?  Wrong.

In doing so, the court allowed to stand the precedent  notion that a biological parent can deny access of a mutually planned on, conceived and raised child, or children, to a non-biological parent.  In essence, the court relied solely on the fact that the parties had entered into a Vermont Civil Union to establish parental rights between Debra H. and her child.  That in itself has many repercussions for the dissolution of Vermont Civil Unions in New York, as well as other parents who have not undergone a Second Parent Adoption, which was specifically authorized by this very same court in 1995. 

The court today said that without a Vermont Civil Union in this particular case, there would be no relief for a non-biological parent seeking visitation with a child who may be seriously hurt by the denial of access to both parents.  Only a Second Parent Adoption would secure those rights.  The court steered clear of addressing the best interests of children in such a precarious position, which seems disingenuous as the best interests of the child have always been the touchstone of family law in New York State.

This decision opens the door to challenges based on marital status, but may require couples to have lived in a jurisdiction that honors their marriage before honoring it here in New York.

The reality of this decision is that the court has punted the issue of having family law catch up to modern families to the Legislature.  If past is prologue, we have an uphill battle ahead of us and the only lesson to take from this decision is to do everything you can to secure your rights to any children born into a nontraditional family through Second Parent Adoption after a child is born, and through marriage or civil union prior to the birth of any children.  That said, the court’s decision fails to protect male litigants as their parental rights cannot be effectively established through marital status.

in Adoption / Legal / Legislation / Parenting / Second Parent Adoption / Surrogacy  by Anthony Brown 1 comments

Huckabee, O’Donnell Debate Gay Adoption

[While there is a decided Fox news twist, here is the interview]

This is a rush transcript from “Hannity,” April 30, 2010. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: Our very own Governor Mike Huckabee visited Rosie O’Donnell on her radio show recently, And things got pretty contentious when they touched on the subject of gay adoption.

And here is a bit of their conversation.

ROSIE O’DONNELL, TALK RADIO HOST: Didn’t you try to have a law that said that gays could not adopt?

MIKE HUCKABEE, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: No, there was a constitutional amendment that was placed on the ballot and it was voted on by the people. It was not something I initiated. I did support it primarily because I felt like it was one more way in which we were moving away from the traditional definition of marriage.

O’DONNELL: I just think it’s interesting for a guy that seems to have overcome a lot in your life. You know you have a lot of — were you raised by — you know in a poor family, right, you grew up sort of poor.

HUCKABEE: Right.

O’DONNELL: And you became a pastor and the teachings of Christ is what you follow in your life. And I don’t know, is that a very pious view to be — I mean, is that a pious view to you, Mike, to be —

HUCKABEE: No, I don’t think it’s about piety. I think it’s about — if one is in fact a believer, and accepts that the biblical norms are the norms that we should live by, it’s not a matter of being judgmental.

(END OF VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: And joining me now with reaction to that is the man himself, Governor Mike Huckabee.

Governor, good to see you. Thanks for being here.

HUCKABEE: Well, it’s great to be with you, Sean.

HANNITY: Rosie O’Donnell? Are you out of — you know.

HUCKABEE: Like you asked before. Am I out of my mind?

HANNITY: I did say that.

HUCKABEE: Actually it was a very respectful conversation. To her credit she was very civil. She didn’t try to yell, scream, argue with me. I think it was an honest conversation that the two of us had.

No, we’re not going to come to terms. I think that one of the things that came out of it for me was there is this understanding that if you are a Christian then you’re supposed to believe that Jesus just says hey, whatever you want to do is OK.

People forget Jesus was very divisive. Jesus caused people to have to make real tough decisions about what’s right and what’s wrong. I don’t think he did it with a sense that he was hoping to make people mad but he did make people mad.

HANNITY: But then — this came up in the course of the conversation as I understand it. Because she’s adopted a number of children. I don’t know how many.

HUCKABEE: I think two children.

HANNITY: OK. So she —

HUCKABEE: And I have no doubt that she loves those children and that she has the best intentions for them. It’s not a personal thing. This is not a big issue for me. I don’t go around making this an issue. It’s not something that is high on my priority list to talk about.

HANNITY: Are you against gay adoption?

HUCKABEE: Personally I don’t think it’s the ideal. I think the ideal is —

HANNITY: What do you —

HUCKABEE: Kids need a role model, both a mother and a father. You know, as I told her, rather than try new ways to create a family we ought to work on the one that God gave us, and that is having a mother and a father, creating a generation and then training them to be our replacements.

And I know people will say, well, we don’t have the ideal. But still, kids need both the mother and father role models in their life.

HANNITY: Look, I’ve made similar arguments myself. I think there are certain things that fathers offer their children that mothers naturally don’t. And the things that mother offer children. I think there’s a difference.

But without going down that road, let me ask you this. There’s a story behind the story and how you got invited on the program in the first place. How is that?

HUCKABEE: Well, I was at the College of New Jersey. It’s a wonderful school over — not far from Trenton and Ewing, New Jersey. And there was an interview with a group of what I was told was — were college journalists. Well, it turned out that one of them was actually more of an activist than a journalist and so he would ask me a question and I would answer it.

He obviously didn’t like the answer so he would then start a debate. And I would try to explain to him and give him a little bit more of an understanding of logically why I held the positions I did.

HANNITY: Right.

HUCKABEE: So he took that, wrote a story. It got picked up by a lot of the blogs that support same-sex marriage. Then the mainstream media picked up on it. They blew it up all over the place. Rosie got it from that and that’s how it happened. Turned out this kid had been arrested at an Ann Coulter speech.

HANNITY: I think we actually have that video.

HUCKABEE: Oh you do? OK.

HANNITY: Let’s roll the video here. Here it is. I don’t know if we have any sound on that — this is him being arrested. And he claimed there was police brutality at the time of this arrest. And the video actually showed that there was no such abuse. And he had dropped the suit, as I understand it.

HUCKABEE: Yes. He was screaming. I can’t tell if you have the audio up. But if you do, you can hear him screaming and yelling and really making a scene. He should have gotten an Oscar for his performance.

But this shows that he had a pattern of creating a disturbance and then getting attention and publicity for it. It to me was not so much about same-sex marriage or gay adoption.

As I tell people, my position on same-sex marriage is the same that Joe Biden, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the voters in 30 states where it’s been on the ballot —

HANNITY: Is there a lack of tolerance for those that express their Christian faith in that — in their belief about, for example, either the definition of marriage or controversial issue like gay adoption?

Is there — in other words, is it predicated on this idea well, if you believe that and you’re practicing your faith, you must somehow be bigoted?

HUCKABEE: Well, it’s always interesting to me that I’m considered intolerant if I don’t accept a new definition of marriage. But if someone doesn’t accept the traditional marriage — the only one we’ve had in 5,000 years of recorded human history — somehow that’s a symbol of tolerance.

I just think the burden of proof is on those who want to change the institution. But again, the real issue is, we’re living in a day where the mainstream media can take a story and can manipulate it, can distort it.

This young man released an edited version —

HANNITY: Yes.

HUCKABEE: Of the interview. Wasn’t really depicting what it was.

HANNITY: This has happened to me as well.

Alright, I’ve got to ask you. We just had this in the last segment here —

HUCKABEE: Yes.

HANNITY: — about this horrible oil spill. A number of people lost their lives in the explosion. But more importantly, this happened last Tuesday.

HUCKABEE: Yes.

HANNITY: And it’s only in the last two days that the administration has gotten involved. Now why do I believe that if George W. Bush were president, that this would be the biggest deal, slow to respond, slow to react? And almost everybody is defending the president here for doing nothing.

HUCKABEE: Well because they’re too —

HANNITY: Wasn’t it his responsibility?

HUCKABEE: Well, if Katrina was George Bush’s responsibility, this is Barack Obama’s responsibility. You can’t have two sets of rules. One applied to a Democratic president, one applied to a Republican president.

And I think we’re clearly saying that we do. Can Barack Obama personally go out there with a bucket and start picking up the oil? No.

HANNITY: Yes.

HUCKABEE: But the point is — you made it I think very well. There has been a significant sort of gap between the time of the accident and the time in which now we’re beginning to see federal response.

HANNITY: Some are saying this is Barack Obama’s Katrina? You think this becomes politically his Katrina or potentially?

HUCKABEE: Only if the news media creates it to be.

HANNITY: It’s not —

HUCKABEE: It goes back to even my experience. The media can frame the issues and they can frame the context in which they are presented. So if they don’t say, where was President Obama, no, it won’t be his Katrina.

HANNITY: Alright, Governor, good to see you.

HUCKABEE: Great to see you.

HANNITY: We’ll be watching you in “Huckabee” this weekend.

HUCKABEE: Thank you.

in Adoption  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

Senate panel rejects gay adoption expansion

By Bill Barrow, The Times-Picayune
April 27, 2010, 12:55PM

Lengthy and passionate testimony in the Senate Judiciary A Committee today ended with a 3-1 party line rejection of a measure that would have expanded gay adoption in Louisiana.

Senate Bill 129, which ended up as a combination of two measures by Sens. Ed Murray and J.P. Morrell, would have allowed unmarried couples to jointly adopt and allow an existing parent to petition a court to add a second adult as a legal parent. The bill would have applied regardless of the adoptive parents’ sexual orientation, but the debate centered on the rights of gay parents and their children.

Louisiana law restricts adoption to married couples or single individuals, meaning gay couples or unmarried heterosexual couples can adopt but must choose which adult has parental rights.
arnie_fielkow.JPGThe Times-PicayuneNew Orleans City Councilman Arnie Fielkow

The debate pitted the Forum for Equality, a gay rights advocacy group, the American Civil Liberties Union and other adoptive parents, including New Orleans City Council President Arnie Fielkow, against a long list of primarily religious interests: the Louisiana Family Forum, the Conference of Catholic Bishops and representatives of Louisiana Southern Baptists.

Gov. Bobby Jindal’s office also registered the governor’s opposition to the bill, though no one from the administration testified.

Kelly Bryson of New Orleans asked lawmakers to approve the bill so that she and her partner, Erika Knott, can “complete our family.” Bryson and Knott gained custody of a Louisiana foster child, William, before Hurricane Katrina. Knott adopted the boy in Louisiana. With the couple living in Maryland immediately after the storm, Bryson successfully petitioned for a second parent adoption. Knott has since adopted, again in Louisiana, William’s biological brother Jeremy.

Bryson told senators the she “dreads the conversation when Jeremy asks why William has two parents and he doesn’t.” And she noted that she has no legal relationship with Jeremy, meaning she cannot make health decisions for him and that he has no dependent inheritance rights should she die. “He is entitled to both of his parents,” she said.

Fielkow, who with his wife adopted two Ukranian-born girls, said, “We talk about family values a lot in this country. To me, family values is not putting up more barriers to adoption; it is encouraging adoption.”

John Yeats, representing the Louisiana Baptist Convention, said that the bill was a back-door attempt to enshrine gay unions. He warned lawmakers that “if we allow marriage to become a homosexual institution” society would lose words like “husband” and “wife” to designations like “partner” and “unmarried couple.”

The Rev. Louis Husser of Crossgate Church in Robert said, “This bill is nothing more than social experimentation using our children as guinea pigs.”

Morrell angrily chastised some of the opponents for their testimony, particularly references to news accounts of a gay father who sexually abused one of his children. Morrell reminded senators that former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, a Florida Republican accused of advances on minor House pages, “had a 100 percent voting record with the parent group of the group pushing this bill.”

Sens. Don Claitor, R-Baton Rouge, Jack Donahue, R-Covington and Bob Kostelka, R-Monroe, voted against the measure. Murray was the lone “yes” vote. Only Murray and Claitor asked questions during the hearing. Chairwoman Julie Quinn, R-Metairie, did not vote. Democrats Rob Marionneaux of Livonia and Nick Gautreaux of Abbeville skipped the meeting.

Afterward, Bryson said, “I’m obviously disappointed, but we’re going to keep trying. I’m going to try to get this done before my sons are old enough to know this fight is happening.”

in Adoption / Legislation  by Anthony Brown 0 comments

Judge strikes down adoption ban

Posted on 16 April 2010

Arkansas News Bureau

LITTLE ROCK — A circuit judge today stuck down Arkansas’ ban against unmarried couples adopting or foster-parenting children.

Act 1, passed by voters in 2008, unconstitutionally burdens non-marital relationships and acts of sexual intimacy between adults by forcing them to choose between becoming a parent and having any meaningful type of intimate relationship outside of marriage, Circuit Judge Chris Piazza ruled in a lawsuit challenging the law.

“It infringes upon the fundamental right to privacy guaranteed to all citizens of Arkansas,” the judge ruled in the lawsuit filed by the ACLU.

The state had argued that children are better off raised in traditional family settings, with married parents, and that the law should be upheld because it protects children from abuse and neglect.

in Adoption  by Anthony Brown 0 comments