[Mystic Mock]

If a child was kidknapped at birth and was illegally adopted by two people that thought they was adopting legally, and they looked after the child for 11 years but The Police found out that it was an illegal adoption and they wanted to give the child back to the proper parents, do you agree with that?

Discuss while I think my opinion through properly.

[GypsyGoth]

Yep, I think the child show go back. And the ones who kidnapped should goto jail.

[Smithy]

[joeysteele]

It would still be an illegal adoption and the child was still only 11 years old, then yes, the child would have to go back to it's parents,also because the child was kidnapped in the first place,all the more the reason for returning the child to its rightful parents.

[MTVN]

If they thought they were adopting legally then it isn't really their fault tbh, but if the birth parents want their child back they should be given it, and some sort of arrangement could be worked out where the kid could still see the adoptive parents every so often

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

claudia remember the clinic

[Mrluvaluva]

The child's birth parents would have the right to get their child back, but, at 11 years old, the wishes of the kid should also be taken into account. They had grown up calling those people mum and dad, through no fault of their own, and through no fault of their adoptive parents. Legally, the birth parents will have the right, but morally, other factors should be taken into account too, and a compromise reached to mutually satisfy all parties concerned.

The natural instinct for the birth parents would be to take back their child, but they would basically be strangers to the child, who might be in a stable and happy family unit. So many factors would be needed to take into consideration.

These things are always much more complicated than they may seem, and have to be considered uniquely.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by MTVN

If they thought they were adopting legally then it isn't really their fault tbh, but if the birth parents want their child back they should be given it, and some sort of arrangement could be worked out where the kid could still see the adoptive parents every so often

I think I agree with this as it is the birth parents child, but the adoptive parents have brought the child up for 11 years and should be able to see him/her if the child wants them to.

[Kizzy]

The parents gave the child up.....So legally they are no longer legal guardians?...at 11 and with the adoptive parents unaware of any wrongdoing, their opinion should take precidence imo.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally Posted by kizzy

The parents gave the child up.....So legally they are no longer legal guardians?...at 11 and with the adoptive parents unaware of any wrongdoing, their opinion should take precidence imo.

They didn't "give the child up" if it was kidnapped though.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by MTVN

If they thought they were adopting legally then it isn't really their fault tbh, but if the birth parents want their child back they should be given it, and some sort of arrangement could be worked out where the kid could still see the adoptive parents every so often

I agree with this too, it is the ideal situation.

In law however there would be no compulsion,even at age 11, for the rightful parents to be forced to accept such an arrangement and especially even more so when the child was kidnapped and they were in fact victims of a crime.

I would guess, the rightful parents would agree to the adoptive parents having contact with the child as long as they had no knowledge or part of the kidnapping in the first place.

Hardly a weird question by the way jf, it's a really good one actually.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I agree with this too, it is the ideal situation.

In law however there would be no compulsion,even at age 11, for the rightful parents to be forced to accept such an arrangement and especially even more so when the child was kidnapped and they were in fact victims of a crime.

I would guess, the rightful parents would agree to the adoptive parents having contact with the child as long as they had no knowledge or part of the kidnapping in the first place.

Hardly a weird question by the way jf, it's a really good one actually.

Thanks Joey, but i've asked loads of dark questions recently so didn't know how people would react to it.

[Samuel.]

The child should have the final say. Wouldn't be at all fair to take him/her away from what he/she knows as a family after 11 years, regardless of what the biological parents want.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Mrluvaluva

They didn't "give the child up" if it was kidnapped though.

Oh yes sorry...just re read the OP. Wow that puts a different spin on things definately. The child should be re introduced to the birth parents, whilst living with the adoptive parents to minimise trauma. The final say as to residency should ultimately be with the child.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Samuel.

The child should have the final say. Wouldn't be at all fair to take him/her away from what he/she knows as a family after 11 years, regardless of what the biological parents want.

In law, at 11 the child is a minor, obviously the child would be assessed and talked to but in law there would be no precedent for the biological parents to lose a child or agree to conditions following a crime against them.
A court and I could confidently say any court in the UK would not go against the strong wishes of the biological parents unless there would be great instability for the child with them.

I would expect though that in such a case,so great would be the relief of the biological parents to get their child back that if the child wanted to see the adoptive parents too, that they would encourage and support the child in doing so.
The child at only 11 years old though could not him/herself demand that to happen.

[Samuel.]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

In law, at 11 the child is a minor, obviously the child would be assessed and talked to but in law there would be no precedent for the biological parents to lose a child or agree to conditions following a crime against them.
A court and I could confidently say any court in the UK would not go against the strong wishes of the biological parents unless there would be great instability for the child with them.

I would expect though that in such a case,so great would be the relief of the biological parents to get their child back that if the child wanted to see the adoptive parents too, that they would encourage and support the child in doing so.
The child at only 11 years old though could not him/herself demand that to happen.

Hence should, not would. What the law says isn't really what this thread is about.

[Mrluvaluva]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

In law, at 11 the child is a minor, obviously the child would be assessed and talked to but in law there would be no precedent for the biological parents to lose a child or agree to conditions following a crime against them.
A court and I could confidently say any court in the UK would not go against the strong wishes of the biological parents unless there would be great instability for the child with them.

I would expect though that in such a case,so great would be the relief of the biological parents to get their child back that if the child wanted to see the adoptive parents too, that they would encourage and support the child in doing so.
The child at only 11 years old though could not him/herself demand that to happen.

I understand that's more about the law, but I suppose this is more to do with how we feel as individuals. I know this is a totally different situation, but I think some of the similarities apply:

When a couple become separated, and are going through a divorce, they can either go to court to fight for custody of their children, or come to an amicable mutual agreement. A lot of times, the child's wishes are taken into consideration with whom they wish to live with, and that can be a deciding factor.

The child may become very unhappy at being uprooted from the people they have known as their family all their life. Surely their feelings should be taken into account and they should not automatically be returned to their parents? A gradual introduction to their birth parents might be the best way forward possibly?

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Mrluvaluva

I understand that's more about the law, but I suppose this is more to do with how we feel as individuals. I know this is a totally different situation, but I think some of the similarities apply:

When a couple become separated, and are going through a divorce, they can either go to court to fight for custody of their children, or come to an amicable mutual agreement. A lot of times, the child's wishes are taken into consideration with whom they wish to live with, and that can be a deciding factor.

The child may become very unhappy at being uprooted from the people they have known as their family all their life. Surely their feelings should be taken into account and they should not automatically be returned to their parents? A gradual introduction to their birth parents might be the best way forward possibly?

Totally agree with you, the point as to the law that I was hoping to make is that in my view the adoptive parents should have a lot more say on the childs future in this scenario and certainly at least regular contact,at 11 as most rightly say on this thread, the child will only have ever known them as the parents he/she has.

I agree with you again, the child would I am sure, be possibly traumatised by being taken from his/her adoptive parents and handed to people they didn't even know or had ever seen.

I also agree with you that their feelings should be taken into account and as you state a gradual introduction to the biological parents be the norm and enacted.That as an individual is what I would hope could be the result.
Sadly the fact is in this scenario, the law needs to be changed,(as it does on many things now I think), to allow that and I would hope one day it does change in favour more of the childs feelings.
I certainly agree with most on here who have said at 11years old the child should have things built around his/her wishes in the matter.

[Marc]

The parent's who had their child kidnapped should have a chance to be in that child's life, but I think ultimately the 11 years with the other couple would be where the child's life lies.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Mrluvaluva

The child's birth parents would have the right to get their child back, but, at 11 years old, the wishes of the kid should also be taken into account. They had grown up calling those people mum and dad, through no fault of their own, and through no fault of their adoptive parents. Legally, the birth parents will have the right, but morally, other factors should be taken into account too, and a compromise reached to mutually satisfy all parties concerned.

The natural instinct for the birth parents would be to take back their child, but they would basically be strangers to the child, who might be in a stable and happy family unit. So many factors would be needed to take into consideration.

These things are always much more complicated than they may seem, and have to be considered uniquely.

I agree with all this. What a horrible situation it would be though :/

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I agree with all this. What a horrible situation it would be though :/

Totally horrible situation as you say Niamh, what a mess to deal with, really great question from jf and rotten scenario.

Through no fault of theirs at all, the biological parents lost a child, through no fault of their own the adoptive parents who thought all was legal would then find themselves embroiled in a kidnapping of a child situation, of course totally blameless themselves and finally the child being told they were taken away from their biogical parents at birth and likely may not be able to stay with the adoptive parents.
Horrible as you describe it is the only word for it.

[Z]

Originally Posted by Mrluvaluva

The child's birth parents would have the right to get their child back, but, at 11 years old, the wishes of the kid should also be taken into account. They had grown up calling those people mum and dad, through no fault of their own, and through no fault of their adoptive parents. Legally, the birth parents will have the right, but morally, other factors should be taken into account too, and a compromise reached to mutually satisfy all parties concerned.

The natural instinct for the birth parents would be to take back their child, but they would basically be strangers to the child, who might be in a stable and happy family unit. So many factors would be needed to take into consideration.

These things are always much more complicated than they may seem, and have to be considered uniquely.

This. Perhaps the child could build up a relationship with their birth parents over a period of time. So horrible though.