Grex Parenting Conference

View Responses

Grex Parenting Item 19: Schmidt/DeBoer Adoption Controversy: Whad'ya think?
Entered by mta on Wed Feb 17 14:18:58 UTC 1993:

Has any else been following the Schmidt/DeBoer case with bated breathe, as i 
have?  What do you think?  What solution is in the child's best interest?

20 responses total.

#1 of 20 by danr on Wed Feb 17 16:49:27 1993:

What I'm most interested in is Daniel Schmidt's motivation in all this.
He's had a kid that he's not really kept in touch with, and now all
of a sudden he seems to want this child.  As Mrs. DeBoer was quoted as
saying in the AA News, "There are no winners in this case."

#2 of 20 by headdoc on Sat Jul 10 19:47:15 1993:

I guess what we all think is a mute point.  The case has been decided by the
courts (there is little chance that the Supreme Court will take the case)
and it is clear that Jessica will be returned to Iowa, will have her name
changed and will undergo all the trauma of "abandonment", loss, etc.

As much as I am against this outcome, I do wish the DeBOers had been able to
understand from the beginning the tenuous legal ground they were one.  It 
would have been in Jessica's best interest if they had permitted the child
access to the Schmidt's and vice versa so the child would not now be
having to live with total strangers.  Ever since Dan Schmidt started his
battle to get his biological daughter, the DeBoers knew that legally he
had a strong case and that ultimately, some relationship with the Schmidts
would have to exist.  Their denial was so strong, they lived in a semi
fantasy world and helped to deny Jessica an easier transition now.

Why is Dan Schmidt doing this?  The psychologists who evaluated him said he
was a fighter, a man who sees things in black and white, who wont let
"anything" that is his, be taken away from him.  He can give things up if
he wants to (eg his older daughter) but noone is going to take something from
him.  Jessica is probably an object to him.

#3 of 20 by aaron on Sat Jul 10 20:09:19 1993:

The Schmidts, in my opinion, would have abused any non-supervised visitation
to take Jessica back to Iowa.  They have already indicated that they have
no interest in allowing the DeBoers to visit her.  They aren't the type of
people I would want around my child.

#4 of 20 by headdoc on Sat Jul 17 00:30:15 1993:

Aaron,from my readings, and in spite of the fact that I strongly wish the
DeBoers to keep Jessica, they did not even permit *supervised* visits by
the Schmidts during all this time.

#5 of 20 by aaron on Sat Jul 17 06:44:38 1993:

Did the Schmidts request supervised visits?  (They seem to be the "all-or-
nothing" types.)

I am not sure I would like two complete strangers, who made no secret about
wanting to take my child from me, to visit my child at all.  Would you?

#6 of 20 by headdoc on Mon Jul 19 00:04:58 1993:

Sometimes I subbordinate what I want to what I think is probably best for
someone else.  In this case, if they weren't heavily into denial, they had to
know there was a strong possibility Jessica would be court ordered to have some
contact with the Schmidts.  I would be concerned about the possibility of what
is actually happening, and I would not want my child traumatized by being sent
to live with total strangers.  If the visits wer supervised by the DeBoers or
by someone with positive ties to the DeBoers then Jessie couldnt have been
"taken."  Also the content of discussion could have been monitored.  

I know its all easier in hindsight, but in situations like this, we must be
capable of anticipation and we must really consider the best interests of a
minor child.  I also know I wouldnt have liked it, nor would it have been easy.

#7 of 20 by aaron on Mon Jul 19 23:38:11 1993:

(Do you imagine that supervised visits would somehow have been natural
or comfortable for anybody?)

#8 of 20 by popcorn on Fri Jul 23 01:31:45 1993:

This response has been erased.

#9 of 20 by remmers on Fri Jul 23 12:24:00 1993:

Not sure how much credibility I'd attach to anything the Schmidts say.

#10 of 20 by aaron on Fri Jul 23 20:03:05 1993:

I am.

In any event, it appears that the DeBoers were allowing the Schmidts to
visit, but that the Schmidts balked when the DeBoers wanted to videotape
the visits.  The DeBoers claim that a psychologist told them that Jessica
might react better to the transition if she saw the Schmidt visits repeatedly
on videotape; the Schmidts claimed the DeBoers wanted to use the videotape
as propaganda against them.  (One can infer Jessica's reaction to the
Schmidts from their position....)

#11 of 20 by popcorn on Sat Jul 31 16:11:46 1993:

This response has been erased.

#12 of 20 by aaron on Mon Aug 9 20:24:53 1993:

Sure.  Read #9.

#13 of 20 by popcorn on Mon Aug 9 21:51:58 1993:

This response has been erased.

#14 of 20 by headdoc on Tue Aug 10 01:15:54 1993:

It's not too hard to guess, but I try not to think about it.

#15 of 20 by aaron on Tue Aug 10 04:53:34 1993:

re #13:  I am stating that I am sure how much credibility I would attach to
         anything the Schmidts say.  I did not state whether that meant I
         believed them, although I think the insinuation is that I don't.

         Schmidt supporters claim Jessica is fine.  But why would they say
         otherwise?  (Apparently, she was told that she was going to visit
         somebody in Iowa, not that she was leaving her parents.  Which will
         affect her behavior, at least in the short-term....)

         It is funny (in an ironic, not a humorous sense) that the Schmidts
         (and their attorney) have absolutely no idea what they have done.

#16 of 20 by kimba on Sat May 14 06:42:43 1994:

Now that this has all passed, does anyone know how Jessica is doing w/the
Schmidts?  I know there was a report on TV not too long ago, but unfortunately
I missed it.  So I'm curious as to her adjustment, how she reacts to these
new people in her life, and where her "mommy and daddy" (as she knew them)
are now?  Have the DeBoers even had a chance to see her?  I'm very interested
in how this poor little girl's life has been disrupted.

#17 of 20 by mta on Mon Jun 6 03:42:07 1994:

Latest media reports are that Anna (as she's known now) is doing phenominally
well.  She's bright, curious, and personable.  A tribute to the parents who
gave her her start and the parents who handles her transition.

#18 of 20 by att on Fri Jul 1 19:01:30 1994:

latest reports are press releases from the Schmidts, and should be taken
with a grain(s) of salt.  The video I saw shows Anna pulling away from Dan
Schmidt, and not accepting his gestures of affection.

Anna is a tough little cookie, and will survive, but I feel vastly sorry her.

ps: my adopted son is almost exactly 1 month younger than Jessie/Anna,
so I'm not exactly an unbiased observer.

pps: anyone interested in discussing open adoption?

#19 of 20 by mta on Fri Jul 1 23:32:00 1994:

Sure, I'm always interested in hearing more about adoption...but shall we
make it a new item?

#20 of 20 by aaron on Sat Jul 2 08:14:32 1994:

I did like the suggestion that Jessica "chose" to start calling Mr. Schmidt
"dad" after "only" a month.  Let's see....  I visited a divorce client, the
other day.  Her two-year-old child called me "dad" within half an hour....

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.