Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

Judge upholds child support in Russian adoption

Posted by   + Show Post

 

LEWISBURG, Tenn. (AP) — The Tennessee woman who ended her adoption of a 7-year-old Russian boy by putting him on a plane to Moscow by himself lost her bid Friday to keep from paying $150,000 in child support.

Torry Hansen made her first court appearance Friday in a case that began in April 2010 when she sent Artyom Saveliev away from her home in Shelbyville with a letter that said he had violent behavior problems and she no longer wanted to be his mother.

Criminal charges were never filed but the Seattle-based adoption agency she used, the World Association for Children and Parents, sued her last year for child support.

Hansen, who now lives in Redding, Calif., went through a string of lawyers as she contested the child support and never responded to summonses to appear in court or at depositions. After Circuit Court Judge Lee Russell ordered her in May to pay $150,000 in child support, she hired a new attorney, former federal prosecutor Edward Yarbrough of Nashville.

In court on Friday, Hansen told the judge her previous attorneys did not keep her informed about the case and advised her she did not need to come to court. She also said that she gave birth to a daughter last year and could not come to court because of the pregnancy.

Hansen never spoke to the press before Friday, but her mother, Nancy Hansen, told The Associated Press in 2010 that her daughter, then 33, had to return the boy when he developed serious behavior problems. Nancy Hansen claimed he hit, screamed and spit at his adoptive mother and threatened to burn down the Hansen home and kill members of the family.

"Without going into depth, I can say he was very violent. I can say he wanted to kill me and he tried to kill my sister," Torry Hansen said in court Friday.

She said that the boy threatened to stab her mother to death. She started to tear up when describing how the threats of violence sent her mother to the emergency room in Shelbyville.

"That was when my parents decided to take him, because he was so violent," she said.

She said it was her parents' decision to put the boy on a flight to Russia, but she was aware of the decision and acquiesced.

"I have never mistreated or abused him or any child," she said.

Under cross examination, Torry Hansen told the court that she never called the police or the state Department of Children's Services about his behavior.

"I called numerous psychologists and was told there would be a 6-week wait to get in," she said.

When asked whether she was aware that a Russian court found that her actions constituted neglect and abuse, she said, "I am aware that they felt putting him on the plane was emotionally disturbing."

Ruling from the bench, Judge Russell upheld his default judgment against Hansen, ordering her to pay child support for Artyom, who now lives in a group home in a Moscow suburb. Russell said Hansen had not cooperated with the court and he wasn't convinced by her arguments.

Yarbrough said Hansen has been making the child-support payments and will be required to continue doing so.

The case contributed to a decision by Russia in 2010 to delay some adoptions by U.S. parents. Russia on Monday ratified a new agreement with the United States that gives the country greater power to regulate international adoptions.

After the judge's ruling, Yarbrough said the litigation is not over and his client still has options, such as appealing the order or requesting that it be modified.

"I think it is a loss, we wanted the judge to set aside the default judgment and have a full trial, but there are other options for us," he said.

The attorney for the adoption agency, Brentwood attorney Larry Crain, said the child spent six weeks in a psychiatric hospital when he was returned to Russia because of the trauma he experienced.

He said the case has had huge implications on international child adoptions, as well as sparked outrage in both countries.

"I believe even the accord last week was due to the fact that finally this court, when no one else would step up and do anything for this child, finally this court did ... " he said. "Now we believe there are safeguards in place to prevent this from ever happening again."

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-upholds-child-support-russian-adoption-205244777.html

by on Jul. 15, 2012 at 7:08 AM
Replies (41-49):
tweety101149
by Platinum Member on Jul. 15, 2012 at 9:58 PM
1 mom liked this


Quoting Refurbished:

 

Quoting muslimah:

 

Quoting RollingStone:

I doubt the group home will even let him see a fraction of that money.

 I don't know but I'll tell you what...

I would have sent the brat back too.

Still, when you adopt, you've accepted that child as if they were your own flesh and blood.  She may not want to parent him, but she also knew the risks and accepted them.  She should still be responsible for the child as if it were a child she gave birth to.

I think they are also trying to send a message to future adopters to only do it unless you are committed to the child, no matter what. 

 

When you adopt a child at the age of 6-10 years old from Russia some adoptive parents are not aware of the psychological problem and other issues the child may have.  In many instances parents were not aware of how serious the child's transition would be, nor the extent of the psych. issues. many had.  I am sure even parents of their natural born children would not keep under their roof a child that threatened to kill them.   This young Russian child is one of many who had trouble transitioning.  I think that some of the caretakers or the directors of the "orphanges"/institutions are not exactly forthcoming with the issues of the Russian children in particular.   I don't hear or read as many of the these problems with cildren from other adoptions from other countries.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892211/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/23/AR2010042302223_2.html

butterfly on headlynda  




Ziva65
by Gold Member on Jul. 15, 2012 at 10:00 PM


Quoting stringtheory:

Fair enough... But had this child been biological (I know you alluded to this in your first quote), she would have had to figure something out, and she would not have been the first.

Quoting Ziva65:

 


Quoting stringtheory:

She doesn't sound like one who is cash strapped... A plane ticket to Russia for a minor traveling alone? Could have covered an emergency room visit for a psych evaluation...


Quoting Ziva65:


I would think, as with your own child by birth, the right thing to do is to seek emergency psychiatric help. Perhaps commit them to a psychiatric hospital, even if indefinitely. But, that isn't free, so if someone doens't have means or the type of insurance that would cover it, what do they do? I personally think if one can't handle that financially, then don't adopt, or even have a child for that matter. It's not like if it were a birth child she could send him back.



To me, it's a known risk with adoptions from Russia and Romania. Very sad, but it seems prolific.


I wasn't descriptive when I said that. I was thinking more in terms of institutionalizing the child, as many of those are not covered under the insurance. I was thinking more in terms of these places costing 4000-5000 month at least. (Our neighbors had to do this for an adopted child, and they are spending hundreds of thousands per year to keep him locked up somewhere, though it's more a high end place...insurance didn't cover it at all. Sad, but they are far better off without him in their home, and I don't relaly want him next door either :( Even then, there is a process to get to that point, which she didn't even do.


this woman though really didn't think about her actions, and the best way to approach it. I don't quite get it. I suppose she was really desparate and wasn't thinking at all. Even talking with an attorney, higing a psychiatrist, going to the ER, calling the police, etc. etc. There were other things she should have done immediately.

Right, I totally agree with you. Even if it were a biological child- even then she'd have to go through some process. ER, psych emergency, locked facility... something. I don't really know the law enough, but I don't think she could just drop him off in front of a hospital and leave him there... (there is a law about that too, and I seem to think it isn't only for infants, but IDK.)

Ziva65
by Gold Member on Jul. 15, 2012 at 10:02 PM


Quoting tweety101149:

 

Quoting Refurbished:

 

Quoting muslimah:

 

Quoting RollingStone:

I doubt the group home will even let him see a fraction of that money.

 I don't know but I'll tell you what...

I would have sent the brat back too.

Still, when you adopt, you've accepted that child as if they were your own flesh and blood.  She may not want to parent him, but she also knew the risks and accepted them.  She should still be responsible for the child as if it were a child she gave birth to.

I think they are also trying to send a message to future adopters to only do it unless you are committed to the child, no matter what. 

 

When you adopt a child at the age of 6-10 years old from Russia some adoptive parents are not aware of the psychological problem and other issues the child may have.  In many instances parents were not aware of how serious the child's transition would be, nor the extent of the psych. issues. many had.  I am sure even parents of their natural born children would not keep under their roof a child that threatened to kill them.   This young Russian child is one of many who had trouble transitioning.  I think that some of the caretakers or the directors of the "orphanges"/institutions are not exactly forthcoming with the issues of the Russian children in particular.   I don't hear or read as many of the these problems with cildren from other adoptions from other countries.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892211/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/23/AR2010042302223_2.html

Right, there and Romania I think. Interesting point you bring up about them not being forthcoming. It seems that could be a good defense. IDK though, it still doesn't justify her actions, but it seems to be a good defense. Some of those stories are pretty horrible. I think for the children at that point, there really isn't much hope.

Josie_P
by on Jul. 15, 2012 at 10:03 PM

As someone who lives in Russia, we are very pleased with the outcome. When you adopt a child, you take on their flaws and perfections. What would she have done had this been her own flesh and blood? Put him in a cab to an insane asylum?


But I do wonder if it's $150,000 a month? Holy crap, that's a lot! That could repair probably 3 or 4 orphanages here. 

Refurbished
by on Jul. 15, 2012 at 10:51 PM


Quoting tweety101149:


Quoting Refurbished:


Quoting muslimah:

 

Quoting RollingStone:

I doubt the group home will even let him see a fraction of that money.

 I don't know but I'll tell you what...

I would have sent the brat back too.

Still, when you adopt, you've accepted that child as if they were your own flesh and blood.  She may not want to parent him, but she also knew the risks and accepted them.  She should still be responsible for the child as if it were a child she gave birth to.

I think they are also trying to send a message to future adopters to only do it unless you are committed to the child, no matter what. 


When you adopt a child at the age of 6-10 years old from Russia some adoptive parents are not aware of the psychological problem and other issues the child may have.  In many instances parents were not aware of how serious the child's transition would be, nor the extent of the psych. issues. many had.  I am sure even parents of their natural born children would not keep under their roof a child that threatened to kill them.   This young Russian child is one of many who had trouble transitioning.  I think that some of the caretakers or the directors of the "orphanges"/institutions are not exactly forthcoming with the issues of the Russian children in particular.   I don't hear or read as many of the these problems with cildren from other adoptions from other countries.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892211/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/23/AR2010042302223_2.html

True, but it's possible that those issues were not evident beforehand.  Moving to a foreign country, having to learn a new language are stressful even for well-adjusted children in intact families, much less a child who has been in an orphanage.  Moving to another country, losing his previous caretakers, gaining a new family may have exacerbated a mild problem. 

Any time we become a parent, whether it is through adoption or birth, there is a risk that the child will have problems.  I do agree that she may not have been able to keep him in her home, but by adopting him, she accepted the responsibility of being his parent until he is 18. I believe she should pay child support, whether she choses to continue parenting him or not.

Many men decide that they don't want a child after it has been born.  They aren't required to have a relationship with the child, but they are required to pay child support.  I believe her case is no different. 

tweety101149
by Platinum Member on Jul. 15, 2012 at 11:13 PM


Quoting Refurbished:

 

Quoting tweety101149:

 

Quoting Refurbished:

 

Quoting muslimah:

 

Quoting RollingStone:

I doubt the group home will even let him see a fraction of that money.

 I don't know but I'll tell you what...

I would have sent the brat back too.

Still, when you adopt, you've accepted that child as if they were your own flesh and blood.  She may not want to parent him, but she also knew the risks and accepted them.  She should still be responsible for the child as if it were a child she gave birth to.

I think they are also trying to send a message to future adopters to only do it unless you are committed to the child, no matter what. 

 

When you adopt a child at the age of 6-10 years old from Russia some adoptive parents are not aware of the psychological problem and other issues the child may have.  In many instances parents were not aware of how serious the child's transition would be, nor the extent of the psych. issues. many had.  I am sure even parents of their natural born children would not keep under their roof a child that threatened to kill them.   This young Russian child is one of many who had trouble transitioning.  I think that some of the caretakers or the directors of the "orphanges"/institutions are not exactly forthcoming with the issues of the Russian children in particular.   I don't hear or read as many of the these problems with cildren from other adoptions from other countries.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892211/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/23/AR2010042302223_2.html

True, but it's possible that those issues were not evident beforehand.  Moving to a foreign country, having to learn a new language are stressful even for well-adjusted children in intact families, much less a child who has been in an orphanage.  Moving to another country, losing his previous caretakers, gaining a new family may have exacerbated a mild problem. 

Any time we become a parent, whether it is through adoption or birth, there is a risk that the child will have problems.  I do agree that she may not have been able to keep him in her home, but by adopting him, she accepted the responsibility of being his parent until he is 18. I believe she should pay child support, whether she choses to continue parenting him or not.

Many men decide that they don't want a child after it has been born.  They aren't required to have a relationship with the child, but they are required to pay child support.  I believe her case is no different. 

I understand the analogy.  No child natural born or adoptive comes with a guarantee, but, if the Russian agencies declared this child fit and hid certain issues whether neurological, or psychological or a combination of both the adoptive parents should be able to have recourse without fault.  This is why many have said the Russians have deliberately adopted out "special children" without disclosure.  Many parents to be opt to terminate a pregnancy that reveals in ultrasounds/amnio. that there are severe probelms.  I am not saying it is right, but it happens.  Men that don't want children after the they contributed to the "creation" of that child., should be held accountable.., for that child if his "partner" keeps the child,  he knew the risks involved in having sex.  In case of adoption if dislosure is not given and known by the agency there should be an opt out.  

butterfly on headlynda  




GoddessNDaRuff
by Silver Member on Jul. 16, 2012 at 12:23 AM

I don't feel sorry for her. She should pay. If she'd given birth to him what would she have done if he started acting crazy? She should pay every red cent of that money. You adopt a child, that child is yours for better or worse just like if you give birth. Now he's a US Citizen abroad living in a group home again. She should have to pay for everything he needs until he is grown.

Refurbished
by on Jul. 16, 2012 at 8:10 AM


Quoting tweety101149:


Quoting Refurbished:


Quoting tweety101149:


Quoting Refurbished:


Quoting muslimah:

 

Quoting RollingStone:

I doubt the group home will even let him see a fraction of that money.

 I don't know but I'll tell you what...

I would have sent the brat back too.

Still, when you adopt, you've accepted that child as if they were your own flesh and blood.  She may not want to parent him, but she also knew the risks and accepted them.  She should still be responsible for the child as if it were a child she gave birth to.

I think they are also trying to send a message to future adopters to only do it unless you are committed to the child, no matter what. 


When you adopt a child at the age of 6-10 years old from Russia some adoptive parents are not aware of the psychological problem and other issues the child may have.  In many instances parents were not aware of how serious the child's transition would be, nor the extent of the psych. issues. many had.  I am sure even parents of their natural born children would not keep under their roof a child that threatened to kill them.   This young Russian child is one of many who had trouble transitioning.  I think that some of the caretakers or the directors of the "orphanges"/institutions are not exactly forthcoming with the issues of the Russian children in particular.   I don't hear or read as many of the these problems with cildren from other adoptions from other countries.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892211/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/23/AR2010042302223_2.html

True, but it's possible that those issues were not evident beforehand.  Moving to a foreign country, having to learn a new language are stressful even for well-adjusted children in intact families, much less a child who has been in an orphanage.  Moving to another country, losing his previous caretakers, gaining a new family may have exacerbated a mild problem. 

Any time we become a parent, whether it is through adoption or birth, there is a risk that the child will have problems.  I do agree that she may not have been able to keep him in her home, but by adopting him, she accepted the responsibility of being his parent until he is 18. I believe she should pay child support, whether she choses to continue parenting him or not.

Many men decide that they don't want a child after it has been born.  They aren't required to have a relationship with the child, but they are required to pay child support.  I believe her case is no different. 

I understand the analogy.  No child natural born or adoptive comes with a guarantee, but, if the Russian agencies declared this child fit and hid certain issues whether neurological, or psychological or a combination of both the adoptive parents should be able to have recourse without fault.  This is why many have said the Russians have deliberately adopted out "special children" without disclosure.  Many parents to be opt to terminate a pregnancy that reveals in ultrasounds/amnio. that there are severe probelms.  I am not saying it is right, but it happens.  Men that don't want children after the they contributed to the "creation" of that child., should be held accountable.., for that child if his "partner" keeps the child,  he knew the risks involved in having sex.  In case of adoption if dislosure is not given and known by the agency there should be an opt out.  

She'd have to have proof that they actually hid an exisiting condition.  I'm not convinced that he had one.  The problems she had with him could have been caused by the stress of an international adoption or from her own lack of parenting skills.  She did not allow any professionals to evaluate the situation before sending him off, so there's no way to really know for sure.

Letting her off without that proof would open up a huge can of worms.  For example, what about parents whose children develop schizophrenia?  Schizophrenia most often develops in the teen years.  Her case could set a precidence for parents of those children, who could go on to say, "I didn't sign up for this" and then refuse to parent their child, adopted or not.  I watched a documentary about a woman who adopted a boy from China.  He was a perfect child when she went to get him, and he developed normally for the first two years.  He suddenly became nonverbal, and developed severe autism.  If they let this woman off, then the mother who adopted the Chinese boy theoretically could just send her child back too. 

I feel for her that the child may have threatened her life.  In her case, maybe having him raised in a different setting would be best.  But she still should pay child support, IMO.

tweety101149
by Platinum Member on Jul. 16, 2012 at 1:19 PM
1 mom liked this


Quoting Refurbished:

 

Quoting tweety101149:

 

Quoting Refurbished:

 

Quoting tweety101149:

 

Quoting Refurbished:

 

Quoting muslimah:

 

Quoting RollingStone:

I doubt the group home will even let him see a fraction of that money.

 I don't know but I'll tell you what...

I would have sent the brat back too.

Still, when you adopt, you've accepted that child as if they were your own flesh and blood.  She may not want to parent him, but she also knew the risks and accepted them.  She should still be responsible for the child as if it were a child she gave birth to.

I think they are also trying to send a message to future adopters to only do it unless you are committed to the child, no matter what. 

 

When you adopt a child at the age of 6-10 years old from Russia some adoptive parents are not aware of the psychological problem and other issues the child may have.  In many instances parents were not aware of how serious the child's transition would be, nor the extent of the psych. issues. many had.  I am sure even parents of their natural born children would not keep under their roof a child that threatened to kill them.   This young Russian child is one of many who had trouble transitioning.  I think that some of the caretakers or the directors of the "orphanges"/institutions are not exactly forthcoming with the issues of the Russian children in particular.   I don't hear or read as many of the these problems with cildren from other adoptions from other countries.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892211/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/23/AR2010042302223_2.html

True, but it's possible that those issues were not evident beforehand.  Moving to a foreign country, having to learn a new language are stressful even for well-adjusted children in intact families, much less a child who has been in an orphanage.  Moving to another country, losing his previous caretakers, gaining a new family may have exacerbated a mild problem. 

Any time we become a parent, whether it is through adoption or birth, there is a risk that the child will have problems.  I do agree that she may not have been able to keep him in her home, but by adopting him, she accepted the responsibility of being his parent until he is 18. I believe she should pay child support, whether she choses to continue parenting him or not.

Many men decide that they don't want a child after it has been born.  They aren't required to have a relationship with the child, but they are required to pay child support.  I believe her case is no different. 

I understand the analogy.  No child natural born or adoptive comes with a guarantee, but, if the Russian agencies declared this child fit and hid certain issues whether neurological, or psychological or a combination of both the adoptive parents should be able to have recourse without fault.  This is why many have said the Russians have deliberately adopted out "special children" without disclosure.  Many parents to be opt to terminate a pregnancy that reveals in ultrasounds/amnio. that there are severe probelms.  I am not saying it is right, but it happens.  Men that don't want children after the they contributed to the "creation" of that child., should be held accountable.., for that child if his "partner" keeps the child,  he knew the risks involved in having sex.  In case of adoption if dislosure is not given and known by the agency there should be an opt out.  

She'd have to have proof that they actually hid an exisiting condition.  I'm not convinced that he had one.  The problems she had with him could have been caused by the stress of an international adoption or from her own lack of parenting skills.  She did not allow any professionals to evaluate the situation before sending him off, so there's no way to really know for sure.

Letting her off without that proof would open up a huge can of worms.  For example, what about parents whose children develop schizophrenia?  Schizophrenia most often develops in the teen years.  Her case could set a precidence for parents of those children, who could go on to say, "I didn't sign up for this" and then refuse to parent their child, adopted or not.  I watched a documentary about a woman who adopted a boy from China.  He was a perfect child when she went to get him, and he developed normally for the first two years.  He suddenly became nonverbal, and developed severe autism.  If they let this woman off, then the mother who adopted the Chinese boy theoretically could just send her child back too. 

I feel for her that the child may have threatened her life.  In her case, maybe having him raised in a different setting would be best.  But she still should pay child support, IMO.

It is interesting to note that many international adoptions have failed miserably and the children have been returned.  Why is this woman singled out to pay child support.   Also interestingly enough many of these international adoptions come from eastern europe Ukraine/Russia.  It is a shame, but I am willing to bet full disclosure of these children's medical/psychological backgrounds are not disclosed.   I agree every parent wants a perfect child, and many whether a bio. child or adopted child are not.  But then by all rights the children with issues should be listed as special needs kids so the adoptive parent will know what to expect or if they have the patience, the ability to raise a special needs child.

 

http://poundpuplegacy.org/disrupted_placement_cases

butterfly on headlynda  




Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)