|
Couple forced to give grandchildren up for adoption by gay men because theyre too old – at 46 and 59 | Mail Online — Too old at 46??? Of course this will be turned into a gay bashing issue, when it is an ageism issue.
Two young children are to be adopted by a gay couple, despite the protests of their grandparents.
The devastated grandparents were told they would never see the youngsters again unless they dropped their opposition. The couple, who cannot be named, wanted to give the five-year-old boy and his four-year-old sister a loving home themselves. But they were ruled to be too old – at 46 and 59.
For two years they fought for their rights to care for the children, whose 26-year- old mother is a recovering heroin addict. They agreed to an adoption only after they faced being financially crippled by legal bills.
The final blow came when they were told the children were going to a gay household, even though several heterosexual couples wanted them.
#19 bobbo –
“Isn’t raising a bad sibling raising a bad kid?”
What I meant, you idiot, was that by your logic any of us with screw-ups for siblings would have been taken away from our parents.
The gay men are not forcing them to give up their children. The government is.
# 22 Stritch84 said, “The gay men are not forcing them to give up their children. The government is.”
Yes, and?
#21–brm==now come down from your hissy fit and explain to us all how laws that should or should not apply to PARENTS should or should not apply to GRAND PARENTS.
Are the “natural rights” of GRANDPARENTS exactly the same as Parents?????
But to the implication of your question, which somehow cannot come to grips with what I clearly and expressly said==yes, any parent, grand parent, foster parent, adoptive parent, overnight guardian or whatever that raises a drug addicted kiddie should be looked at more closely than a similar person who has not.
Don’t YOU think bad child rearing should have some consequences or as you imply, how kiddies come out is a random act of chance?
All your soma are belong to us.
If it is in the Daily Mail it must be true and accurately reported…. I am sure they wouldn’t twist a story just to sell papers…
http://www.mailwatch.co.uk/
In the name of political correctness the tradition of family caring for family was broken here. Not Nazi as suggested above, socialism at its normalcy. Mao Tse Dung called it the Cultural Revolution. no matter how despicable it was, at least you knew it was going on. In Europe, and UK in particular after New Labour, it sneaks up on you, inch by inch… cameras, controls, the judiciary, moral agendas, core of middle class deteriorated… all in the name of the New World Order. And the ‘state church’ is standing by, cheering it on, grinning while its fundament is slowly eaten away. Same thing going on in Scandinavia, the supposedly best place to live in the world… Hah!
Nothing surprises me anymore. Fascism is seeping in everywhere. The frontier of freedom, the US, not what it used to be, far from it. Just wait, the same sad story will be headline news on your side of the pond shortly.
Our mother was 46 when she gave birth to my youngest brother. Our father was 49. We all lived through the experience.
This fascination with gays must stop. Just enroll and be done with it.
Tell them I referred you so I can get to 50,000 points.
# 28 Dallas said, “Tell them I referred you so I can get to 50,000 points.”
Hmmm, what can you buy with those points?
Don’t worry. The gays won’t be around in Britain after Europe becomes Islamic. I think it is against Sharia law or something.
#24 bobbo:
The court is supposed to decide in the interest of the child. Breaking up a family just because the grandparent’s child is a screw-up is not appropriate, and most people would agree.
The criterion you propose is too broad, and really doesn’t say a lot about the safety of the child. An example: parents have their children taken away because their eldest is a schizophrenic who ends up in jail.
If we start judging the fitness of parents based on the behavior of one of their *adult* children, we’d be on a path of misery and pain.
#24 bobbo:
“that raises a drug addicted kiddie should be looked at more closely than a similar person who has not.”
So we give the children to someone who has never raised a kid? How do we know they’ll be good parents?
Besides, raising a drug addicted kid does not mean you’re a bad parent. At some point a person’s actions are their own, not their parent’s.
#31–brm==BUY A CLUE!!!!!
Read Post #10. Doesn’t this “smell like” something else NOT reported is going on??????
While I don’t know the English system, I assume a civil authority is EXACTLY making a decision with the best interests of the kiddies in mind==PS, that speaks against a family maintaining their natural rights.
You are stuck on these Grandparents being “the family” of these kiddies. No facts are presented that is the case. In America, from the mother’s arrest, the kiddies would have been in foster care, often the worst of the three common situations (family relations, foster, adoption).
brm–you obviously care. Now just think a bit better and stop making so many assumptions when NONE OF US have sufficient facts.
Silly Bunny.
This story has not appeared on the standard BBC RSS feed yet (2300 UK time).
I agree with a lot of others here. There must be more to this story than the grandparents age and angina/diabetes.
Holding their access to their grandchildren to ransom over the condition of agreeing with a homosexual family unit though I think is disgusting.
No mention of the mothers stance in this issue either. Another example of fine reporting.
I’m with #8. I hate this story.
In related news, caught the tale end of some report that that “Adolf Hitler” birthday cake kid and his siblings were taken away from their aryan brotherhood nutbag parents.
Bad parenting, over-involved parenting, or just bad politics?
Holy good crap!!! Can’t anyone here read the effen article???
The grandparents were denied custody because they are not in good health. Either of them.
The court and newspaper should never have mentioned that the couple getting to adopt the children are gay. That is irrelevant.
That the mother is a heroin addict is also irrelevant to the story.
That there are other couples is also irrelevant.
That Cow-Paddy commented is a tragedy. He is truly obnoxious.
In all adoption cases the courts find what is best for the child(ren). It is not an agenda of taking children from a loving parent in tough times. It is not ignoring the love grandparents or other family members can give, but the quality of care they can give.
Here the court has made it clear that the grandparents can’t be considered. So in their frustration they are claiming (note, they, not the court) the adoptive couple are gay. True or not, it doesn’t matter. They were appraised as the best.
Please people. The stories have more interesting stuff in them than the headline does. Plus, you won’t look like Cow-Paddy if you actually know a little.
#8 , #35
I give you credit for the creative substitution of the word ‘god’ replaced with ‘nature’. This makes your opinions appear more ‘scientific’.
I think that gay parents are DEFACTO better….they will teach tolerance and acceptance of others, and will raise the kids in a progressive household. We don’t need more conservatives in the world. I’m glad to see that the court is doing something to turn back the tide of barbarians.
#8 This all goes back to the ‘gay penguins’ debate. Gay male parenting in not uncommon in nature. How can it be unnatural?