Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
STOLEN CHILD!
I just heard that a 3 year old boy was taken from hospital illegally, with a bogus ex parte custody order, instigated by the boy's father's attorney, self-professed copyright troll John Steele, a Prenda law goon, widely known for his questionable legal tactics, including suing hundreds of thousands of "John Does" in a massive extortion scheme. This boy has been isolated from his mother since August 1.
Despite multiple stays which should have prevented the enforcement and execution of the of the illegal ex parte order, the boy's father took him anyway. The boy was in hospital due to breakthrough seizures as a direct result of the father's [documented] medical non-compliance. The boy was in hospital on a protective medical hold, and a medical directive stated that he could only be in his mother's medical care, due to the documented evidence that the father had a history of medical non-compliance. Using this illegal ex parte order, which the mother was not allowed to see, a "private security firm" accompanied the father and removed the child from hospital, and the staff at the hospital refused to wait for law enforcement to arrive.
The father also has a documented history of "severe psychological and emotional problems" and there is clear police documentation and several instances in the medical record of the father's medical neglect of the boy. If seizure medication is stopped abruptly, it causes threatening seizures; blood tests clearly indicate that the boy's father had not given him his medication. As a result, the unresponsive boy was rushed to the ER.
Now he is gone with his father, who is not an American citizen, but a citizen of the Republic of Ireland. Because the boy's birth certificate was illegally altered a few weeks ago, the family is extremely concerned for the boy's safety.
Now he is gone with his father, who is not an American citizen, but a citizen of the Republic of Ireland. Because the boy's birth certificate was illegally altered a few weeks ago, the family is extremely concerned for the boy's safety.
An account for donations has been set up for a legal fund to assist in this child's return.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
NJ APPEAL DECISION - HARMING KIDS FOR PROFIT IN FAMILY COURT
I have been following a New Jersey family court case that started out in Essex County, and was moved to Hudson County. The mom is a pro-se litigant- up against many high powered lawyers. The appeal was filed pro-se, and while custody of kids was a genuine issue, the trial court made changes without the benefit of a trial. There was no testimony in this case ever. The court used one tainted expert - and - a CD captured something unsavory the day custody was altered a year ago. The father in the case is caught on tape "I am giving this to you to make good to this guy"- nodding toward chambers. The lawyers are heard saying "watch-- be careful - the tape is running"- what did New Jersey family court do with this information? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! The story gets better. The father gifted a large grant one month before the case was heard. What was done about that? NOTHING!
Today- the news came in that a decision was reached in the case. The Appellate Judges affirmed the decision of the trial court to alter custody and parenting time without the benefit of a trial, without any testimony, and without a peer review of the biased report. The court went on TO JUSTIFY CHILD ABUSE ! Yes--- you read that correctly- the appellate division of New Jersey justified why a six year old boy was hit across the face by the paternal grandfather. (This abuse occurred during the evaluation) There was no exam of finances in this case for over six years, and yet the court ruled the mother should pay all experts. The mother has nothing left ! Not one dollar ! The father however has millions of dollars, many lawyers, and purposely ran the mom penniless litigating the case for six years and counting. The court also talks about how the father cannot control his anger at times, but still grants him over 50% of the children's time. The oldest child will not attend parenting time, and they blame her for that too!
I can promise you that if the father had not liked the decision made in the evaluations, there would have been national experts flown in for him. (The court actually promised him he could hire as many experts as he wanted- but denied the mother any independent experts) This case has always had a smell to it-- it stinks! The children were taken from a stay at home mom, and sent to a "nanny". The father continues to muscle the court system, even getting the new Judge to agree it is OK to leave a seven year old boy alone in a hotel room. (The boy had been injured while the father strolled on the beach with a woman) The Judge told the mom she would "do anything to ruin his vacation". The child was left alone on an island repeatedly, and that was deemed acceptable by the Hudson County family court.
I always suspected that the appellate court would take the coward's route - they will rarely go against a fellow Judge in the brotherhood. What recourse does a regular mom have against a mogul? None ! He bought this verdict no matter how you look at it--he had the money to pay all the experts he wanted- he had the money to have all the lawyers he wanted- the mom had nothing! This case has never been on level playing ground. While the husband brought in a parade of high profile lawyers (some worked on McGreevey divorce- Strahan divorce- and mafia cases) the mom was alone.
The case is an unpublished opinion and will be posted on the NJ Court website for 10 days-
http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/unappopin/unappopc.htm
The title of the case is LC vs VC (Essex County) Decision of 7/23/12
Note that the opinion rips apart the mom for everything, and pats the dad on the back for everything. This is the typical family court attitude- punish the victims- punish mom for leaving-- award the monied spouse whatever they want- treat kids like property. The appellate judges should be deeply ashamed of this decision- kids are being impacted because of a biased opinion that women are crybabies. (Please keep in mind my other posts about the Honorable Judge Sol Gothard- only about 7% of abuse reports are false in custody cases) The fair Judge they keep referring to was under federal investigation for his behavior in this case - and they knew it. How much of this decision comes down to retaliation for going against a sitting judge? Note-- they fail to mention that the FBI were actively investigating this Judge, even though the point was talked about at oral arguments. They had to punish her for seeking help from authorities. (Although I cannot imagine what mother would hear the CD of the money exchange and not go to the authorities for help) The court makes mention of the case being moved from Essex to Hudson County- but they never mention why it was done. The case was moved after the FBI began questioning people close to the case.
Any person who wishes to help this mom- offer legal assistance- offer a peer review of the report that was placed into order- please contact me at annieisa74@gmail.com - At this point in time- she is alone with no experts- no lawyer- and no way to help her children. Something really unsavory occurred a year ago- and the appellate court does not care to correct this injustice- and this travesty of justice involving innocent children-- "take care of this guy"-- I cannot sit by and watch this any longer-- to be very clear to the courtwhores that will read this blog-- the mom did not ask me to do this - she did not tell me to do this-- I am just so disgusted with the justice system- I need to try and help in some small way- even if it is only showing support for this family- The truth needs to be told- whether they like it or not - FREEDOM OF SPEECH STILL EXISTS (I hope)
Today- the news came in that a decision was reached in the case. The Appellate Judges affirmed the decision of the trial court to alter custody and parenting time without the benefit of a trial, without any testimony, and without a peer review of the biased report. The court went on TO JUSTIFY CHILD ABUSE ! Yes--- you read that correctly- the appellate division of New Jersey justified why a six year old boy was hit across the face by the paternal grandfather. (This abuse occurred during the evaluation) There was no exam of finances in this case for over six years, and yet the court ruled the mother should pay all experts. The mother has nothing left ! Not one dollar ! The father however has millions of dollars, many lawyers, and purposely ran the mom penniless litigating the case for six years and counting. The court also talks about how the father cannot control his anger at times, but still grants him over 50% of the children's time. The oldest child will not attend parenting time, and they blame her for that too!
I can promise you that if the father had not liked the decision made in the evaluations, there would have been national experts flown in for him. (The court actually promised him he could hire as many experts as he wanted- but denied the mother any independent experts) This case has always had a smell to it-- it stinks! The children were taken from a stay at home mom, and sent to a "nanny". The father continues to muscle the court system, even getting the new Judge to agree it is OK to leave a seven year old boy alone in a hotel room. (The boy had been injured while the father strolled on the beach with a woman) The Judge told the mom she would "do anything to ruin his vacation". The child was left alone on an island repeatedly, and that was deemed acceptable by the Hudson County family court.
I always suspected that the appellate court would take the coward's route - they will rarely go against a fellow Judge in the brotherhood. What recourse does a regular mom have against a mogul? None ! He bought this verdict no matter how you look at it--he had the money to pay all the experts he wanted- he had the money to have all the lawyers he wanted- the mom had nothing! This case has never been on level playing ground. While the husband brought in a parade of high profile lawyers (some worked on McGreevey divorce- Strahan divorce- and mafia cases) the mom was alone.
The case is an unpublished opinion and will be posted on the NJ Court website for 10 days-
http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/unappopin/unappopc.htm
The title of the case is LC vs VC (Essex County) Decision of 7/23/12
Note that the opinion rips apart the mom for everything, and pats the dad on the back for everything. This is the typical family court attitude- punish the victims- punish mom for leaving-- award the monied spouse whatever they want- treat kids like property. The appellate judges should be deeply ashamed of this decision- kids are being impacted because of a biased opinion that women are crybabies. (Please keep in mind my other posts about the Honorable Judge Sol Gothard- only about 7% of abuse reports are false in custody cases) The fair Judge they keep referring to was under federal investigation for his behavior in this case - and they knew it. How much of this decision comes down to retaliation for going against a sitting judge? Note-- they fail to mention that the FBI were actively investigating this Judge, even though the point was talked about at oral arguments. They had to punish her for seeking help from authorities. (Although I cannot imagine what mother would hear the CD of the money exchange and not go to the authorities for help) The court makes mention of the case being moved from Essex to Hudson County- but they never mention why it was done. The case was moved after the FBI began questioning people close to the case.
Any person who wishes to help this mom- offer legal assistance- offer a peer review of the report that was placed into order- please contact me at annieisa74@gmail.com - At this point in time- she is alone with no experts- no lawyer- and no way to help her children. Something really unsavory occurred a year ago- and the appellate court does not care to correct this injustice- and this travesty of justice involving innocent children-- "take care of this guy"-- I cannot sit by and watch this any longer-- to be very clear to the courtwhores that will read this blog-- the mom did not ask me to do this - she did not tell me to do this-- I am just so disgusted with the justice system- I need to try and help in some small way- even if it is only showing support for this family- The truth needs to be told- whether they like it or not - FREEDOM OF SPEECH STILL EXISTS (I hope)
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Poetry by Star Myers
Star Myers' website is located here: http://starmyers.weebly.com/
Star
Myers is a published author in the National Library for Poetry and
earned the governors award for her writing. She writes some of the most
beautiful poems known to mankind.
Star spent the last few years as a Survival and Child Abuse Host, Blog Talk Radio Executive Producer and Regional Director for Dreamcatchers for Abused Children.She is founder of nonprofit Voices Amplified whose mission is to provide resourses and support to all.She is child abuse advocate whose mission is to stop the suffering of children at the hands of their abusers.
Star Myers has released her first book of poetry, "The Searching Soul." Myers invites the reader into her world, as her writings deal with daily struggles and pain people face, they all resonate with spiritual strength and hope for the future that everyone can relate to. One comes away from reading this book feeling empowered.
Purchase a copy at: http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-searching-soul/18179255?productTrackingContext=author_spotlight_160300618_
Star
has released her 2nd book in 3 months titled, The Face Behind the Mask.
This story is of a young girl who is caught in a justice system gone
bad.She is smart and amazing but trapped in a snowglobe of pain and
abuse.She is a true survivor and this is her story.Edges are only sharp
if broken.This story is full of broken edges and will truly break your
heart.Glue can fix all but we must stand and speak not be silenced by
stigmas.
Purchase a copy at:http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-face-behind-the-mask/18797816?productTrackingContext=search_results/search_shelf/center/2
Star
Myers is a published author in the National Library for Poetry and
earned the governors award for her writing. She writes some of the most
beautiful poems known to mankind.Star spent the last few years as a Survival and Child Abuse Host, Blog Talk Radio Executive Producer and Regional Director for Dreamcatchers for Abused Children.She is founder of nonprofit Voices Amplified whose mission is to provide resourses and support to all.She is child abuse advocate whose mission is to stop the suffering of children at the hands of their abusers.
Star Myers has released her first book of poetry, "The Searching Soul." Myers invites the reader into her world, as her writings deal with daily struggles and pain people face, they all resonate with spiritual strength and hope for the future that everyone can relate to. One comes away from reading this book feeling empowered.
Purchase a copy at: http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-searching-soul/18179255?productTrackingContext=author_spotlight_160300618_
The Face Behind the Mask
Star
has released her 2nd book in 3 months titled, The Face Behind the Mask.
This story is of a young girl who is caught in a justice system gone
bad.She is smart and amazing but trapped in a snowglobe of pain and
abuse.She is a true survivor and this is her story.Edges are only sharp
if broken.This story is full of broken edges and will truly break your
heart.Glue can fix all but we must stand and speak not be silenced by
stigmas. Purchase a copy at:http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-face-behind-the-mask/18797816?productTrackingContext=search_results/search_shelf/center/2
Thursday, April 12, 2012
Idaho Woman Arrested For Abortion Is Uneasy Case For Both Sides
Originally posted at: http://boisestatepublicradio.org/post/idaho-woman-arrested-abortion-uneasy-case-both-sides
An
Idaho woman arrested for inducing her own abortion is taking her case to
federal court. Jennie Linn McCormack was charged last year under an
obscure Idaho law for ending her pregnancy with RU-486. She joins an
increasing number of
An
Idaho woman arrested for inducing her own abortion is taking her case to
federal court. Jennie Linn McCormack was charged last year under an
obscure Idaho law for ending her pregnancy with RU-486. She joins an
increasing number of
An
Idaho woman arrested for inducing her own abortion is taking her case to
federal court. Jennie Linn McCormack was charged last year under an
obscure Idaho law for ending her pregnancy with RU-486. She joins an
increasing number of women who get the so-called abortion pill off the
internet. McCormack’s attorney says he’s willing to take the challenge
all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Meanwhile, neither pro-choice nor
pro-life groups are paying attention to the case.
McCormack is a small, quiet woman in her early thirties and a single mom of three. McCormack was raised devoutly Mormon in Pocatello, Idaho, where she’s lived all her life -- and until last year, she was used to going unnoticed. “I kind of always kept to myself. But I’ve never had enemies or anything thing. It’s different now. The stares I get. I had to quit my job because people didn’t want me to help them.”
People recognize her from the newspaper stories that followed her arrest. McCormack won’t talk about the day she had an abortion. She's following her attorney's advice. But here’s what the public record says.
In late 2010, McCormack learned she was pregnant. The father was out of the picture. Her youngest was barely 2 and she was living off child support checks. Getting an abortion would have cost at least $500 and required multiple trips back and forth to a clinic hours away. So, McCormack turned to the rising number of Internet suppliers of abortion pills.
Now, this is where the story gets more complicated. RU-486 is medically recommended only within the first nine weeks of pregnancy. It turns out that McCormack was way past that although she said she didn’t realize it at the time. After she aborted the fetus she was horrified by how far along it seemed. Possibly as much as 20 weeks. McCormack confided in a friend. It was this friend's sister that tipped off the police. McCormack picks up the story on the evening the police arrived at her apartment. “I had just gotten done doing laundry and my little boy was asleep and they knocked on my door.”
The police found the fetus wrapped up in bags on her back porch. McCormack said she didn’t know what else to do with it. The police took her to the station. “I didn’t understand any of it. And that’s the first thing I said when he questioned me. ‘How can you question me about my personal stuff?’ And he said, ‘Well there’s legal and there’s personal.’”
In a preliminary hearing, her medical history and personal relationships became part of a case against her. Her attorney is Richard Hearn, who in true small town fashion, also has a medical license. He says this was unlike any other abortion case he had seen. “There are many cases where they prosecute or threaten to prosecute a doctor. There are not so many where they’ve prosecuted a woman.”
McCormack ran afoul of a 1972 Idaho law that makes it a felony for a woman to perform her own abortion. Not only does the law pre-date Roe v. Wade, it pre-dates RU-486.
Mark Hiedeman was the county prosecutor who pursued the case against McCormack. He says her case raises new questions – about the legality of women obtaining the so-called abortion pill online. Yet, to Hiedeman’s surprise, the case has attracted little attention -- from either side. “You’d think an issue like this would be something people would be more up in arms about and talking about. And I haven’t heard that or seen that and I’m not sure why.”
The reason appears to be in the details. One of the few pro-life groups we could find willing to say anything about McCormack was the Susan B. Anthony List. President Marjorie Dannenfelser calls the case: “Not acceptable. We do not think women should be criminalized. Criminal sanctions or any kind of sanctions are appropriate for abortionists, and not for women.”
And that’s the tricky thing about the case for the pro-life side according to Will Saletan. Saletan writes about reproductive health politics for Slate magazine. “The prosecution of abortion, which always hinged on the doctor being the targeted party, now has to target the woman. And the pro-life movement is completely unprepared for that.”
But major pro-choice groups have also greeted the case with silence. Saletan says that’s because of what they see as the conservative makeup of the current Supreme Court. “If you’re a pro-choice group right now, the last thing you want to do is bring a case before the Roberts Court.”
But, he says, if you do … “This is not the plaintiff you want. Someone who procured her own abortion, fairly late in pregnancy. You want to choose your plaintiff very carefully.”
Three lower-profile pro-choice groups have filed a legal brief on behalf of McCormack. Lynn Paltrow is the president of one of those groups, the National Advocates for Pregnant Women. She sees McCormack as the start of a disturbing trend. “You pass laws first that say only physicians can perform abortions. Then you pass laws that make it impossible for those physicians to provide abortions. And then women take the steps they need to take as they do all around the world, as they did before Roe. And you create a perfect setup for making literally millions of women subject to arrest for having illegal self abortions.”
Back in Pocatello, McCormack is at home, trying to get her 3-year-old son to calm down. He has a painful ear infection. McCormack doesn’t go out much. The injunction McCormack’s attorney filed against the county prosecutor keeps her from being arrested. But the county is continuing its investigation against her. McCormack says church was a solace for a while until she sat through a recent sermon on abortion. She thinks it was aimed at her. “I mean, they can sit there and judge me, but it’s not the easiest choice to ever have to make. And it was all – a lot of it was about my children. I couldn’t put any more on them, or me.”
McCormack has just started a business online to see if she can make some money selling hand-made wreaths and other crafts. But she doesn’t want to say the name of the business, even to promote it. She says she doesn’t want anyone to know it’s her.
McCormack is a small, quiet woman in her early thirties and a single mom of three. McCormack was raised devoutly Mormon in Pocatello, Idaho, where she’s lived all her life -- and until last year, she was used to going unnoticed. “I kind of always kept to myself. But I’ve never had enemies or anything thing. It’s different now. The stares I get. I had to quit my job because people didn’t want me to help them.”
People recognize her from the newspaper stories that followed her arrest. McCormack won’t talk about the day she had an abortion. She's following her attorney's advice. But here’s what the public record says.
In late 2010, McCormack learned she was pregnant. The father was out of the picture. Her youngest was barely 2 and she was living off child support checks. Getting an abortion would have cost at least $500 and required multiple trips back and forth to a clinic hours away. So, McCormack turned to the rising number of Internet suppliers of abortion pills.
Now, this is where the story gets more complicated. RU-486 is medically recommended only within the first nine weeks of pregnancy. It turns out that McCormack was way past that although she said she didn’t realize it at the time. After she aborted the fetus she was horrified by how far along it seemed. Possibly as much as 20 weeks. McCormack confided in a friend. It was this friend's sister that tipped off the police. McCormack picks up the story on the evening the police arrived at her apartment. “I had just gotten done doing laundry and my little boy was asleep and they knocked on my door.”
The police found the fetus wrapped up in bags on her back porch. McCormack said she didn’t know what else to do with it. The police took her to the station. “I didn’t understand any of it. And that’s the first thing I said when he questioned me. ‘How can you question me about my personal stuff?’ And he said, ‘Well there’s legal and there’s personal.’”
In a preliminary hearing, her medical history and personal relationships became part of a case against her. Her attorney is Richard Hearn, who in true small town fashion, also has a medical license. He says this was unlike any other abortion case he had seen. “There are many cases where they prosecute or threaten to prosecute a doctor. There are not so many where they’ve prosecuted a woman.”
McCormack ran afoul of a 1972 Idaho law that makes it a felony for a woman to perform her own abortion. Not only does the law pre-date Roe v. Wade, it pre-dates RU-486.
Mark Hiedeman was the county prosecutor who pursued the case against McCormack. He says her case raises new questions – about the legality of women obtaining the so-called abortion pill online. Yet, to Hiedeman’s surprise, the case has attracted little attention -- from either side. “You’d think an issue like this would be something people would be more up in arms about and talking about. And I haven’t heard that or seen that and I’m not sure why.”
The reason appears to be in the details. One of the few pro-life groups we could find willing to say anything about McCormack was the Susan B. Anthony List. President Marjorie Dannenfelser calls the case: “Not acceptable. We do not think women should be criminalized. Criminal sanctions or any kind of sanctions are appropriate for abortionists, and not for women.”
And that’s the tricky thing about the case for the pro-life side according to Will Saletan. Saletan writes about reproductive health politics for Slate magazine. “The prosecution of abortion, which always hinged on the doctor being the targeted party, now has to target the woman. And the pro-life movement is completely unprepared for that.”
But major pro-choice groups have also greeted the case with silence. Saletan says that’s because of what they see as the conservative makeup of the current Supreme Court. “If you’re a pro-choice group right now, the last thing you want to do is bring a case before the Roberts Court.”
But, he says, if you do … “This is not the plaintiff you want. Someone who procured her own abortion, fairly late in pregnancy. You want to choose your plaintiff very carefully.”
Three lower-profile pro-choice groups have filed a legal brief on behalf of McCormack. Lynn Paltrow is the president of one of those groups, the National Advocates for Pregnant Women. She sees McCormack as the start of a disturbing trend. “You pass laws first that say only physicians can perform abortions. Then you pass laws that make it impossible for those physicians to provide abortions. And then women take the steps they need to take as they do all around the world, as they did before Roe. And you create a perfect setup for making literally millions of women subject to arrest for having illegal self abortions.”
Back in Pocatello, McCormack is at home, trying to get her 3-year-old son to calm down. He has a painful ear infection. McCormack doesn’t go out much. The injunction McCormack’s attorney filed against the county prosecutor keeps her from being arrested. But the county is continuing its investigation against her. McCormack says church was a solace for a while until she sat through a recent sermon on abortion. She thinks it was aimed at her. “I mean, they can sit there and judge me, but it’s not the easiest choice to ever have to make. And it was all – a lot of it was about my children. I couldn’t put any more on them, or me.”
McCormack has just started a business online to see if she can make some money selling hand-made wreaths and other crafts. But she doesn’t want to say the name of the business, even to promote it. She says she doesn’t want anyone to know it’s her.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
STOP JANE CROW LAWS
Sign the petition here: http://www.change.org/petitions/stop-jane-crow-laws
STOP THE HATE AGAINST SINGLE MOTHERS
Greetings,I just signed the following petition addressed to: Senator Glenn Grothman.
----------------
STOP THE HATE AGAINST SINGLE MOTHERS
The state senator, Glenn Grothman, has introduced a bill aimed at penalizing single mothers by calling their unmarried status a contributing factor in child abuse and neglect.
Senate Bill 507,moves to amend existing state law by "requiring the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board to emphasize nonmarital parenthood as a contributing factor to child abuse and neglect."
The bill would require educational and public awareness campaigns held by the board to emphasize that not being married is abusive and neglectful of children, and to underscore "the role of fathers in the primary prevention of child abuse and neglect."
Saying that people "make fun of old-fashioned families," Grothman -- who has never been married and has no children -- criticized social workers for not agreeing that children should only be raised by two married biological parents.
We want YOU to KNOW Mr. Grothman that WOMEN will not stand by while you dismantle our rights in Wisconsin. This bill has NOTHING To do with abuse it has EVERYTHING with SUBJUGATING WOMEN....JANE CROW LAWS DO NOT BELONG ANYWHERE in my life!
----------------
Sincerely,
[Your name]
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
'Our babies were abducted' on the delivery table: North Vancouver woman
Originally posted at: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=c2248fb4-6222-43f2-9320-a41eb1592d2d
Hanne Andersen was an athletic 15-year-old living in North Vancouver when she was raped.
Hanne Andersen was an athletic 15-year-old living in North Vancouver when she was raped.
Six weeks later, she found out she was pregnant.
She had helped raise her younger siblings and wanted to keep the baby. But it was 1982 and social workers convinced her parents - neither were Canadian citizens at the time and unsure of the rules - that the best thing was to send Andersen to a Salvation Army maternity home for unwed girls called Maywood.
Andersen didn't realize it then, but that made her a temporary ward of the state and gave her no say in whether she could keep the baby. She was told she had to give the child up for adoption.
"There was lots of indoctrination going on there," Andersen, now 44, recalled Thursday.
"We had government social workers give us lectures for hours about how we would end up drug addicts if we didn't give up our babies," she said. "There wasn't any other option presented to us. I wanted to keep my baby and was very clear about it from the very beginning."
After a few months at the home, Andersen started losing weight. Her high school counsellor, who was concerned for her health and psycho-logical well-being, helped her leave Maywood.
She was at home for a brief period before she gave birth to her baby at Lions Gate Hospital in North Vancouver.
"I had to ask three times to hold my baby," Andersen recalled. "The last time I had to yell."
The nurse handed her the baby until Andersen blacked out. She later obtained her medical file and learned she was drugged and given a lactation suppressant, Andersen said.
When she woke the next day, her baby was gone.
"I cried for a year," she recalled. "There was no followup. No social worker came to see me. I was close to killing myself. I know other mothers who committed suicide."
Andersen is contemplating signing on to a class-action lawsuit being filed today by the Merchant Law Group on behalf of unwed mothers who were forced to give up babies for adoption going back to the 1940s.
Tony Merchant, head of the Merchant Law Group, said unwed mothers were put in homes operated by the province and were often pressured by people from the Catholic Church and Salvation Army to give up babies for adoption. Merchant said he filed a similar class action in Quebec.
Anderson did not see her child again for 23 years - her daughter eventually tracked her down using birth records and set up a teary reunion in 2006.
Andersen said she maintains a good relationship with her daughter today. "She is beautiful, a wonderful person."
But she is still bitter about what she calls the "abduction" of her baby from the delivery room.
"My baby was taken from me, harvested," she said. "We were used as reproductive slaves to supply the demand for healthy babies for infer-tile married couples."
Andersen has contacted police about pressing criminal charges for her baby being taken and plans to file a formal police complaint later this month.
She has also joined a group that has asked the federal government and United Nations for an inquiry into unwed mothers being forced to give up babies for adoption.
"Our babies were abducted on the delivery table," Andersen said.
She became choked with emotion when she said she never had another baby, although she and her husband have been trying.
"I lost the sense of myself as a per-son and thought I could never be a good mother," Andersen said, crying, "because of all the indoctrination in the maternity home."
She said that a few years after reuniting with her daughter, she fell apart emotionally. She quit her $100,000-a-year job in the real estate industry and recently returned to school.
She also started a group, Justice for Mother & Child, which has a website: www.JusticeforMotherandChild.com
Andersen said she isn't interested in joining Merchant's class action for the money. "It's about getting recognition and for people to know what was done."
So far, about 200 women across Canada have agreed to take part in the lawsuits since the firm started the process half a year ago, Merchant said.
Merchant estimates there may be as many as 40,000 women in Canada who are potential class-action members. They include women who gave babies up for adoption starting in the 1940s and ending in the 1980s.
The law firm has a form on its website for potential class members to fill out: www.merchantlaw.com/classac-tions/umaclass.php
Six weeks later, she found out she was pregnant.
She had helped raise her younger siblings and wanted to keep the baby. But it was 1982 and social workers convinced her parents - neither were Canadian citizens at the time and unsure of the rules - that the best thing was to send Andersen to a Salvation Army maternity home for unwed girls called Maywood.
Andersen didn't realize it then, but that made her a temporary ward of the state and gave her no say in whether she could keep the baby. She was told she had to give the child up for adoption.
"There was lots of indoctrination going on there," Andersen, now 44, recalled Thursday.
"We had government social workers give us lectures for hours about how we would end up drug addicts if we didn't give up our babies," she said. "There wasn't any other option presented to us. I wanted to keep my baby and was very clear about it from the very beginning."
After a few months at the home, Andersen started losing weight. Her high school counsellor, who was concerned for her health and psycho-logical well-being, helped her leave Maywood.
She was at home for a brief period before she gave birth to her baby at Lions Gate Hospital in North Vancouver.
"I had to ask three times to hold my baby," Andersen recalled. "The last time I had to yell."
The nurse handed her the baby until Andersen blacked out. She later obtained her medical file and learned she was drugged and given a lactation suppressant, Andersen said.
When she woke the next day, her baby was gone.
"I cried for a year," she recalled. "There was no followup. No social worker came to see me. I was close to killing myself. I know other mothers who committed suicide."
Andersen is contemplating signing on to a class-action lawsuit being filed today by the Merchant Law Group on behalf of unwed mothers who were forced to give up babies for adoption going back to the 1940s.
Tony Merchant, head of the Merchant Law Group, said unwed mothers were put in homes operated by the province and were often pressured by people from the Catholic Church and Salvation Army to give up babies for adoption. Merchant said he filed a similar class action in Quebec.
Anderson did not see her child again for 23 years - her daughter eventually tracked her down using birth records and set up a teary reunion in 2006.
Andersen said she maintains a good relationship with her daughter today. "She is beautiful, a wonderful person."
But she is still bitter about what she calls the "abduction" of her baby from the delivery room.
"My baby was taken from me, harvested," she said. "We were used as reproductive slaves to supply the demand for healthy babies for infer-tile married couples."
Andersen has contacted police about pressing criminal charges for her baby being taken and plans to file a formal police complaint later this month.
She has also joined a group that has asked the federal government and United Nations for an inquiry into unwed mothers being forced to give up babies for adoption.
"Our babies were abducted on the delivery table," Andersen said.
She became choked with emotion when she said she never had another baby, although she and her husband have been trying.
"I lost the sense of myself as a per-son and thought I could never be a good mother," Andersen said, crying, "because of all the indoctrination in the maternity home."
She said that a few years after reuniting with her daughter, she fell apart emotionally. She quit her $100,000-a-year job in the real estate industry and recently returned to school.
She also started a group, Justice for Mother & Child, which has a website: www.JusticeforMotherandChild.com
Andersen said she isn't interested in joining Merchant's class action for the money. "It's about getting recognition and for people to know what was done."
So far, about 200 women across Canada have agreed to take part in the lawsuits since the firm started the process half a year ago, Merchant said.
Merchant estimates there may be as many as 40,000 women in Canada who are potential class-action members. They include women who gave babies up for adoption starting in the 1940s and ending in the 1980s.
The law firm has a form on its website for potential class members to fill out: www.merchantlaw.com/classac-tions/umaclass.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)