Perspectives

Embryo adoption was on the front page of the New York Times this week! Like much of the recent coverage, it discussed a Tennessee family who may have connected in an unorthodox way, but it works well for them. Overall, the article did a great job explaining the concept and talking about options. I always tell myself to not read new article comment sections because they tend to be ignorant- no matter the topic. But it's like a train wreck, and I just can't help myself.

So much of the misunderstanding, I think, stems from the fact that people don't understand how IVF works. No one sets out to create remaining/extra embryos. People who are at the point of IVF have exhausted every other means to create a family. There is no way to predict how the body will respond to the medication. You may retrieve no eggs, three eggs, or twenty eggs. There is no way to predict how the eggs will fertilize. You may have three eggs that all fertilize into embryos, or you may have twenty eggs none of which fertilize into embryos. IVF is almost exclusively paid for out of pocket, too. It's an imperfect situation, and embryo adoption allows grace for every party involved- donors, recipients, and the child.

It really aggravates me when people judge someone for using embryo adoption because they "should" be adopting a child that already exists. Like the child that hiccups and kicks in my stomach isn't real. He didn't have a right to exist beyond the freezer? And like there is an adoption store on the corner where you "just" adopt. We couldn't adopt from most countries due to medical restrictions. We tried foster care and domestic infant adoption. Guess what- no child came to our home. And really, none of this "should" matter, anyway. For all the people who are so concerned with kids around the world without a family, why aren't they stepping in? Why is it only the responsibility of people with infertility to care for them?

Then, a New York Times selected comment talks out of their butt, with no research at all, about how could the kids possibly be healthy if they were frozen for so long... "how long--let's get real--do frozen embryos remain 'fresh' enough to make healthy, normal kids"? Them comment ends with a flippant statement that the babies born, or "survivors" of a "medical experiment" must do so at a "great expense" with "negative long term health effects".

Many more of the comments are pro life vs. pro choice. Understandable given the topic, and everyone has their own opinion on that. The most "liked" comment for the entire article starts with, "These embryos are no more "children" than an acorn tossed on a compost heap is giant oak tree". Whatever. Agree to fundamentally disagree. I am surprised, though, how many comments talk about overpopulation of the world. I guess people who can conceive naturally have a right to do so, but not those who need some extra help.

I try my hardest to remember that huge media coverage like this normalizes something near and dear to me. It is a positive thing. And I try not to fixate on ignorance. I wish I could educate everyone, but I can't. I know embryo adoption is a blessing. I wish more people who could see it the same way.

I Don't See the Problem

Embryo adoption has been in the news again. A Tennessee family used social media to help expedite the placement of their embryos with an adoptive family. I shouldn't ever read news story comments because they never cease to infuriate me. The personal nature of the story makes me even more upset.

The general public apparently doesn't support (understand?) embryo adoption, especially if it's open. Comments on some of the stories included that the family's choice to pursue a recipient family was a "freakshow", a "hot mess", and "a tragedy waiting to happen with any stipulations [an open relationship]" and that it was best for the frozen embryos to be "dumped".

I was further disappointed to see the lack of research by the multiple journalists who covered the story. One story referenced that there didn't appear to be anything [legally] "wrong" with embryo adoption. Hello, Tennessee specifically has a law that discusses embryo adoption making it very much a legal process with clear parameters. Another story interviewed an RE (reproductive endocrinologist) who does not specifically work often with embryo adoption- especially those that are open- who said that "there's a lot of room for there to be problems". Thanks for the vote of confidence. A third story discussed what the psychological impact would be on the adopted embryo children... "What will the adopted children think about their biological parents?"

Obviously yes, there are ethical issues with IVF itself and with using donor "parts" in this procedure. Does that mean the children will grow up poorly adjusted? Will they hate their biological parents for deciding to place them for adoption as embryos? Will they love their adoptive parents less?

Embryo adoption may be a relatively new phenomenon, but adoption is not. Answer those questions for a traditionally adopted child. Some resent their past. Some were not raised in a home of positive regard. Some were caused to feel shame due to the secretive nature of their past. But research shows that the majority of individuals who were adopted do not have persistent, pervasive problems due to their history, especially when they understand their story from a young age and it is normalized rather than shamed.

We chose this path because we didn't want our child to grow up with a 50% chance of physical pain and disability. We didn't want our child to go through surgeries and injuries. However, we very mindfully chose the things we did in this path as to cause our child the very least emotional pain as possible. We have thought long and hard- for over three years- to get to this point and if we had any indication our child would have pervasive problems, we would have just never brought a child into the world.

We fully expect our child to have questions as they grow up, and we will be honest with them. Embryo adoption allowed us to have a child. Our donors loved them enough to place them with us and loved us enough (sight unseen) to give us this blessing. Luckily with the situation we are in, our child will be able to ask questions of the donors, too, if they wish. They can know their roots, and their roots can know them.

I don't see the problem.

In a perfect world, our donors never would have needed to use IVF for a pregnancy and there never would have been remaining embryos. In a perfect world, D and I could procreate and have healthy child. But this is a broken, fallen world. In the midst of this pain, we are experiencing redemption. We fiercely love our child. Our family is not a freakshow. I will certainly do all I can to ensure tragedy never befalls my family.

Utah Adoption Lawsuit

Fathers Blast Utah's Strict Adoption Laws

Suit Filed on Behalf of Men Who Fought to Keep Their Biological Babies From Being Adopted

A federal lawsuit is taking aim at Utah's adoption laws, claiming they don't adequately protect the rights of unmarried biological fathers in the name of getting newborns into stable, two-parent families.

Utah's laws are among the most "adoption-friendly" in the nation, say legal experts, and largely reflect the state's desire to discourage both abortions and a proliferation of single-parent families.

An unwed mother living in Utah generally can relinquish her rights to a baby to an adoption agency 24 hours after she gives birth, sooner than is allowed in most other states. Utah also bars her from undoing her decision if she changes her mind. Fathers, meanwhile, have limited grounds to challenge the adoptive parents' custody of their child. It typically isn't enough to argue that the mother failed to disclose her plans to seek an adoption or outright misled the father.

The lawsuit was filed last month in Salt Lake City federal court on behalf of 12 men who fought to keep their babies from being placed into adoption by their mothers. Three succeeded; nine didn't. It names the state attorney general's office and two former state attorneys general as defendants. A spokeswoman for the attorney general's office declined to comment.

It is the latest challenge to Utah's adoption laws, which place hundreds of children a year into two-parent homes. Last March, the Utah Supreme Court heard arguments in a case challenging the constitutionality of the laws. The court, which has yet to rule, will soon consider two other suits making similar claims.

"Compared to most others', Utah's laws are draconian," said Bruce Boyer, director of the Civitas ChildLaw Clinic at the Loyola University Chicago School of Law. "The state does not make it easy for fathers to protect their rights."

An unwed father living in Utah who seeks to block an adoption in the state must first file a paternity action in court and submit a filing that includes a parenting plan for after the child's birth and proof that he has paid—or attempted to pay—for much of the mother's prenatal care. The father must then let the state's Office of Vital Records know about the suit. All of this requires hiring a lawyer, and can cost thousands of dollars. It also has to happen quickly.

If a father hasn't completed these requirements by the time the mother relinquishes the baby to an adoption agency, he is typically out of luck, even if he didn't know the mother was planning an adoption, according to several Utah family lawyers. 

Defenders of the laws say they reflect a valid and justifiable legislative determination. "It's a religious state in which the traditional two-parent family structure is still very highly cherished," said Lorie Fowlke, a Republican former member of the state's House of Representatives and now a family lawyer in Provo.

Ms. Fowlke said that while Utah's laws may be less forgiving for fathers than those elsewhere, they still afford rights to those who show a commitment to parenting. "We say, 'OK, dad, if you've been involved, buying diapers and prenatal vitamins and you file your paperwork on time, then yes, you can have the rights,' " she said. "Otherwise, we think mothers should be empowered to decide this on their own."

Utah courts have dealt with a number of cases on this issue. In 2010, Jake Strickland, then a 23-year-old Salt Lake City-area resident, began a relationship with a married woman who became pregnant with his child. The couple stayed in communication and had discussed co-parenting, according to court papers filed by Mr. Strickland's attorney in a suit challenging the child's adoption. Based on her assurances, he didn't take the necessary legal steps to protect his rights before the child's birth.

Toward the end of her pregnancy, the mother told Mr. Strickland that a caesarean section had been scheduled for Jan. 12, 2011, according to Mr. Strickland's court papers. But on Jan. 5, 2011, the mother told Mr. Strickland that she had delivered the baby a week earlier and already had put the boy up for adoption.

Mr. Strickland, also one of the plaintiffs in the new suit, has been unsuccessful in trying to invalidate the adoption in the lower courts and his case is pending with the Utah Supreme Court. "I wouldn't wish this on anyone," he said.

Larry Jenkins, the lawyer for the adoptive parents in Mr. Strickland's lawsuit to invalidate the adoption, didn't respond to requests for comment. In court papers, Mr. Jenkins said Mr. Strickland ignored advice to take certain steps to protect his rights. "By statute, Strickland had the responsibility to protect his own rights. He must bear the burden of his failure." 

A lawyer who represented the biological mother shortly after the adoption declined to comment. But in court papers filed in 2011, the lawyer argued that Mr. Strickland "was fully aware of the pregnancy and discussed with [the mother] her desire to place the child for adoption," and that Mr. Strickland acknowledged that he knew of his legal obligations but failed to follow through. 

As recently as the 1970s, states afforded fathers relatively few rights in regard to children conceived out of wedlock. Over time, legislatures softened their positions and allowed unwed fathers more say over their children.

Utah didn't follow the trend, and in recent years has made the laws even less forgiving for fathers, say legal experts. 

Wes Hutchins, the lawyer representing the 12 men, said Utah's courts have been slow to address the problems, part of the reason he turned to the federal courts to declare key sections of the state's adoption laws unconstitutional. "Utah has focused so intensely on 'finality and stability' with its adoption laws that it's lost sight of what's in the best interest of the children in many of these cases," he said.

Todd Weiler, a Republican state senator from Woods Cross who largely supports Utah's adoption laws, said, "As a policy matter, the state has taken the position that we want adoptions to happen easily and quickly—and the vast majority of adoptions of Utah do." Mr. Weiler said that of all the adoptions processed in the state every year, "only a minuscule number have problems," and that the state's courts do a good job of clamping down on abuses. 

A number of lawsuits in recent years have involved mothers who travel to Utah to take advantage of Utah's adoption-friendly laws. Under Utah law, an out-of-state mother can put a child up for adoption in Utah without explicitly telling a father she's doing so. 

"The law is just riddled with traps for fathers," said Scott Wiser, a family lawyer in Salt Lake City who has represented fathers in paternity and other actions. "But for out-of-state fathers, Utah can be brutal."

By: Ashby Jones     Source: Wall Street Journal

Adoption, Commodification and Normalcy [repost]

 Adoption, Commodification and Normalcy [repost]

"Maybe I missed it in earlier issues of the country's largest and oldest magazine on adoption, Adoptive Families, but the ads in the latest issue, Winter 2014, show the definitive commodification of adoption in the U.S.. Similac pays for a full-page ad in an issue with an article on breastfeeding without birthing and offers its specific product, "Similac for Supplementation." Then there are two full-page ads for businesses that deal with embryo adoption: "Embryos available now to start your family," exclaims AER. And the company with the smart name, "Building Blocks to Baby Steps," uses its page to take a swipe at the usual providers of babies, the presumed unhealthy birth mothers: "Embryo adoption is usually quicker and less expensive than traditional adoption with the added bonus of the mom-to-be having control over the pre-natal environment, raising the chances of delivering a healthy baby." And then a bank -- a Christian bank -- offers "Adoption Loans" with rates as low as 8.65 APR. Again, an implicit swipe to the God-forgotten birth moms. It quotes a customer: 'Without this loan, God's plan for our lives and the life of our child would not be possible." Bored already with the quotes? Please wait for this last one, the most expensive, presumably, because it enhances the back cover of the magazine. The ad is from a company called Adoptimist, who promises: "We build effective adoption profiles and marketing campaigns for families hoping to adopt." And they have "marketing plans for every budget." Market yourself to the first mothers and families in competition with other parents to get your baby? What are these people thinking? And what is Adoptive Families thinking?

In the Winter issue there are many more ads: Half and quarter pages from less affluent adoption businesses like agencies and adoption professionals. The magazine allows the following smaller ads: "Children are waiting for you," they say; or they express messages along the lines of 'We deliver right from the hospital, fresh from somebody else's womb in a third world country through surrogacy, from the Philippines, Poland, from Colombia, and so on.' Taken together, they make adoption -- "real body" or embryo adoption with or without a "gestational carrier" (sic) -- look like as just other ways to build a family.

It must be said that the contents of Adoptive Families gives a somewhat less commercial, more realistic image of what adoption is. There are articles on language disabilities in adopted kids, about race and racism in transracial adoptions, some interesting personal stories and there is a book list which contains "real" titles like Cris Beam's To the End of June on our failing foster care system and Kathryn Joyce's investigation in the corrupt world of international adoption. But in the end, the magazine exudes the same message at its ads, and the commodification shows in its contents. In this issue, there is a chart like you can find in car magazines of the costs of adoption and timing involved per country.

There is one small ad that leads away from the adoptive family as a 'normal-family-in-a-normal-commercial-context' narrative. The ad is for Cono Christian School, a boarding school in Iowa. It offers support for children and families "struggling after adoption, divorce, remarriage." Here we get a look into the troubles that can come with adoption: traumatized kids out of control who need to be brought back to "normal" life.

Adoption is not a normal way to build a family. It is a complicated way, which next to happiness for adoptive parents brings sorrow and sadness for all involved. To part from your child in whatever situation you may be in is traumatizing. To be parted from your parents, whoever they may be, is traumatizing. To create a family with a child who is traumatized by her or his adoption is a tough call, because trauma can be contagious, and triggers unresolved trauma in the adoptive parents.
The push for normalcy that Adoptive Families -- or the larger adoption industry, for that matter -- displays does an enormous disservice to the adoption community, to the kids, to the first parents and to the adoptive parents. That normalcy prohibits thinking about adoption in terms of adoption itself and those terms are all about difference. My kids are Black and I am white. I, being gay, have a biological mother, who cared for me from day one. They have a first mother, who they seldom see. I have one set of parents and they have two. They have the traumatic experience of abandonment, which I don't have. They are the exception in almost every crowd, while I am the norm. They are displaced from a foreign world, while I stayed home. They are poor, and I am rich. And so the list goes on. A similar list can be made for the differences between first parents and me, where class difference might be the most prominent.

Normalcy is an unhealthy place for adopted kids. We have to raise our kids in profound understanding and authentic celebration of their difference. Those who want to raise their kids as "normal" kids and try to conform them to their own image just shouldn't adopt. Those who go the path of difference should be trained in an adequate manner before they bring their child home and should get comprehensive support after the adoption. There is nothing "normal" about adoption: For me, that is the greatest gift my kids have given me. I hope I am strong enough to reciprocate."

by Frank Ligtvoet
Source: Huffington Post

I really enjoyed this article and agree with its overall premise. It's unfortunate that adoption has turned into such a money-making arena. I think money needs to be exchanged to ensure children are protected, birthfamilies are well-informed and have the support they need, and everything is legally binding through the court, but it doesn't take $30,000+ to do that. Commercialization of the adoption realm has its place in some aspects, but when people are making a very comfortable living off a family's infertility and another's unintended pregnancy, that's sad. It's sad that adoptive families become in competition with each other. It's sad when unethical agencies siphon money from broken couples. It's sad that some races of babies are "worth" more than others.

Unadoption

http://www.tennessean.com/viewart/20140207/DICKSON/302070120/Dickson-couple-loses-custody-girl-after-apparent-adoption-overturned

 http://www.wsmv.com/story/24647444/dickson-family-hopes-to-bring-girl-home-after-custody-ruling

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2009/sjm_112309.pdf- Copy of appeal decision

https://www.facebook.com/BringSonyaHome- Pro-adoptive family site

 https://www.facebook.com/StandingOurGroundForVeronicaBrown- Pro bio-family site

My local news has published a story about a 9 year old girl who was removed from her adoptive family/foster family. Apparently, through a series of events, the girl was taken as a small toddler from her home state to TN by a caregiver, never brought back to her father, and ended up placed in foster care. After entering foster care, a homestudy found the girls' grandmothers' home to be appropriate, but for unstated reasons, she was never placed there.

In the meantime, the father was sentenced to prison time, and the foster parents filed for the biological parents' rights to be terminated (mother was long out of the picture). The parents' rights were eventually terminated, and a local court finalized the girl's adoption with her foster family. Unfortunately, it seems the court finalized the adoption prior to the father's appeal of his rights being fully terminated. Father filed an appeal, and the termination was overturned in 2009. Part of the 2009 order was that the girl re-enter foster care (still with the same family).

Last month, DCS and the court system decided to reunite the girl with her biological father. Reportedly, the girl had scant contact with her father by phone and was reunited to him with no transitional time. She returned with him to her home state.

My two cents: I think it is sad that a 9 year old was removed from the only family she has ever known. However, I blame DCS and the court system for not following through with the original recommendation that she be placed with relatives and for allowing an adoption that was not legal. The fact that this drug on so long is the fault only of the professionals involved. In my opinion, there is no reason for the case to sit from 2009 til now to make a decision for permanency. Either the father should regain custody or not, and it should not take 8 years to decide that. And, obviously I don't know why the transition occurred how it did- however, the way it happened was not in a child's best interest!

Adoption in the Media: SVU "Wednesday's Child"

A recent episode of SVU took notes from the Reuter's investigation published this fall about "rehoming". This involves a trend of adoptive families, usually having adopted internationally, being unable or unwilling to parenting a child they've adopted. This is usually due to special needs or behaviors in the home. Sometimes the agencies were not honest, sometimes information was left out, and sometimes parents underestimated the effort to parent children who've been traumatized and often institutionalized.

Either way, the adoptive families essentially give the children to people they've met online, often with no oversight or accountability. As the investigation found, this can lead to dangerous and abusive situations for the child. SVU's newest episode focuses on such a case. I won't go into all the episode details to avoid spoilers for anyone who hasn't seen the episode. A recap can be found here. The Reuter's investigation can be found here.

My two cents- I don't think it is wrong in every situation for an adoptive placement to fail but it should be few and far between. There needs to be greater transparency from the get-go, and adoption agencies should prepare families for the worst case scenario before the child comes home. Love isn't always enough. Things like RAD and FAS will almost always require professional intervention.

There should be ongoing financial support for services, especially from the church, since in my opinion, that is the largest group pushing international adoptions. For example, in my state, there are great resources for adoption disruptions and difficulties if the child was adopted from foster care, but if adopted privately, services are private pay and probably not affordable for most (especially since families have already spent so much on the adoption in the first place). I don't think it's right for churches to push orphan care and then leave the families struggling once they get the child home. Churches should have adoption ministries with people qualified to give support to families, or should contribute to such a service.

When support is provided, and the adoption still cannot be maintained, any disruption should be done through child services or an attorney to ensure a through homestudy is done and there are post-placement visits done by a social worker, as required by law.

Adoption Scam

A Madison woman accused of fleeing with her newborn baby after agreeing to give it up for adoption to seven separate families is the newest addition to the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation’s Top Ten Most Wanted list.

Tiffany Lynne Jordan-Johnson, 32, has been indicted on seven felony counts of illegal payments in connection with the placement of a child, six counts of theft and separate counts of forgery and attempted forgery as part of an alleged scheme.

According to the TBI, between November 2012 and March 2013, a pregnant Jordan-Johnson agreed to let seven different families adopt her child after he or she was born, according to a TBI release. She also allegedly began accepting payments from parents and adoption agencies meant to help cover rent and living expenses, although authorities believe she lived in a rent-free, government-subsidized apartment.

Once she met with each family at her Madison home, many of them began purchasing items and holding baby showers for the newborn.

After her child was born in Dyer, Tenn., in April 2013, Jordan-Johnson, her baby, and the youngest of her six other children could not be found. TBI and Metro Police officials are still trying to establish her whereabouts.

Jordan-Johnson has a prior history of misdemeanor assault, the TBI release said. Anyone with knowledge of her whereabouts is urged to contact authorities at 1-800-TBI-FIND. A $1,000 reward has been offered for information leading to her arrest.

Source: http://www.tennessean.com/article/20131101/NEWS03/311010206/TBI-Tennessee-woman-promised-baby-7-adoptive-families

*Note: One of the scammed families commented on the article and has since had a baby boy placed with them. He says they waited 5 years to adopt with four failed adoptions (2 scams). A happy ending in the midst of this sad story.

Baby Veronica Update #2

Veronica returned to her adoptive parents about three weeks ago. Her biological father has dropped all pending litigation regarding the matter and appears to genuinely want Veronica to have peace and be settled in her life. The adoptive parents have reported filed new litigation, though, asking for the biological father to be responsible for legal fees.

I don't know how much of a happy ending this is. I guess time will tell. I think Veronica is in the correct place, simply based on the reported facts that her biological father was willing to (and did) sign away his rights. I think that lack of regard speaks for itself, and the fact that the biological mother made an adoption plan afterwards is really irrelevant because he had already legally said he did not want to be involved. Although she is, in my opinion, in the correct home, it is still so devastating for her to have so much grief and loss in her short life.

My hopes for Veronica would be that her adoptive parents would drop their litigation, so everyone can begin healing. I hope that her biological father can demonstrate trust and that, if he does this, her adoptive parents allow her to have some sort of relationship with him as well as the rest of her biological family she lived with for over a year and a half. I hope that she can re-bond with her adoptive parents and grow into a well adjusted child and adult.

"The Child Exchange"

Adoption was in the news in a major way last week. The article is frightening and appalling.

When reading the article, please take it in context. Remember that many adoptions turn out well, and for those that do not, a disruption can still be handled appropriately and ethically. Many adoptive families, especially those who adopted internationally, are not fully informed or not equipped to parent the children they adopt. Attachment issues and history of trauma are not something to be taken casually. Love is crucial but by itself is not always enough. Education prior to an adoption and adequate support services after an adoption are so important.

Update on Baby Veronica

 From CBS on 8/14/13

A South Carolina couple seeking to adopt a young Cherokee girl took their fight to Oklahoma on Wednesday, hoping to visit the child who previously lived with them for 27 months and seek a compromise with her biological family that would return Veronica to their home.

Matt and Melanie Capobianco believe they have done everything necessary to regain custody of the girl, who is about to turn 4. The U.S. Supreme Court said in June that provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act, which would favor the girl's father, didn't apply in the case, and a South Carolina court awarded the couple custody on July 31.

The ongoing dispute has raised questions about jurisdictions, tribal sovereignty and the federal law meant to help keep Native American tribes together.

"We made the trip to Oklahoma to get our daughter," Matt Capobianco said at a news conference in downtown Tulsa on Wednesday. "Veronica will be coming home, but if there is going to be some thoughtful solution that continues to involve all who love her, then this is the time."
The girl, under a Cherokee Nation court order, has been with the family of Dusten Brown, her biological father. The tribe's chief urged patience.

"The Capobiancos have requested the Cherokee Nation and Dusten Brown to follow the South Carolina court's order, but they forget that Dusten Brown has the same rights to have his arguments heard before our Oklahoma courts and Cherokee Nation Tribal Court," Chief Bill John Baker said. "The Cherokee people throughout time have stood our ground and for the rights of our people, and this is no different. We will continue to stand by Dusten and his biological daughter, Veronica, and for what is right."

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin urged the families to get together and talk — even threatening Brown with extradition to South Carolina on a charge of custodial interference if he was "unwilling to cooperate."

Veronica was born in late 2009. Brown initially did not press his parental rights — the girl's mother is not Native American — but when he discovered Veronica was going to be adopted, he objected and said the ICWA favored the girl living with him and growing up learning tribal traditions.
The Capobiancos and their supporters said Wednesday a compromise is in order.

"We don't seek victory. What we seek is peace for our daughter," Melanie Capobianco said.
Troy Dunn, a family representative, said he was willing to meet with Brown to discuss arrangements.
"Only one side has been deemed the rightful parents," Troy Dunn said at the family's news conference. "Possession is not nine-tenths of the law."

A handful of protesters shouted "Keep Veronica home" and "You're trying to break laws in Oklahoma" at the Capobiancos as they emerged from a hotel after meeting with reporters. Some held signs reading "Keep Veronica Home" and others that were written in the Cherokee language.
Under the Indian Child Welfare Act, the Cherokee Nation has a vested interest in the child and, if invoked at the right time, the law allows the tribe to take over the adoption proceedings. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that South Carolina courts should decide who gets to adopt Veronica, rejecting earlier decisions in South Carolina that said the federal Indian Child Welfare Act favored her father.

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley has written to Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin seeking Brown's extradition after he was charged with custodial interference after missing a court hearing this month. Fallin initially said she would consider the warrant next month, after Brown's expected Oklahoma court appearance, but on Wednesday she tried to use the extradition papers as leverage in an effort to get the families talking.

A first step would appear to be setting up a meeting between the Capobiancos and Veronica.
"Mr. and Mrs. Capobianco deserve an opportunity to meet with their adopted daughter. They also deserve the chance to meet with Mr. Brown and put an end to this conflict," Fallin said.
The Oklahoma governor urged a quick resolution and said, "If Mr. Brown is unwilling to cooperate with these reasonable expectations, then I will be forced to expedite his extradition request and let the issue be settled in court."

Fallin did not set a deadline. The Capobiancos said they didn't know how long they planned to stay in Oklahoma.

Dunn said he would meet with Brown anywhere, anytime to develop a plan to raise the child.
"There is but one solution which takes Veronica's short-term and long-term needs into account: compromise," Dunn said.

Baby Veronica Update

Lawyers for the biological father of a Native American child are expected to make a last-ditch appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday, hoping to prevent the return of the child to her adoptive parents [this was filed according to CBS news].

But the four-year legal saga is likely near an end.

Eighteen months ago the South Carolina Supreme Court ordered 2-year-old "Baby Veronica" removed from her adoptive parents, Matt and Melanie Capobianco, and turned over to her biological father, Dusten Brown. The Capobiancos had adopted the child at birth, and provided what all agreed was a good home. The state court said it was acting reluctantly in transferring custody but was required to do so under a federal law aimed at keeping Native American families together.

In June, however, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that since Brown, the biological father, had refused to provide financial support for the biological mother and child when told of the pregnancy — and because he had renounced his parental rights at that time — he could not later object to the adoption. The high court rejected Brown's argument that the Indian Child Welfare Act trumped state law in such circumstances.

The justices ordered the case remanded to the South Carolina Supreme Court, which in early July ordered the child returned to the adoptive parents. Brown then petitioned for rehearing, and at the same time initiated proceedings in the tribal court in Oklahoma, where he lives.

But on Wednesday, the South Carolina Supreme Court ordered the adoption finalized and told the family court to transfer custody of the child to the adoptive parents, using whatever transition plan is in the best interests of the child.

When Veronica was taken from the Capobiancos 18 months ago, there was no transition period, and she cried and screamed when taken away. The Capobiancos have proposed a one- to two-week transition in Oklahoma before taking full custody and have offered to let Brown visit his daughter in South Carolina.

Source: http://www.npr.org/2013/07/24/205224853/s-c-court-orders-baby-veronica-adoption-finalized

The Myth of the Unwanted Child

Joleigh Little of National Right to Life addressed the 2013 NRLC Convention on Saturday with a talk entitled “The Myth of the Unwanted Child,” in which she challenged the misnomer “unwanted” in relation to children, and shared moving adoption stories and convicting anecdotes about the conditions that children waiting to be adopted endure, particularly children with special needs.

What are so-called “unwanted children”? Are there such things in the world as unwanted children, Little asks, or is it just that there are unfound families? Wantedness and perfection are in the eye of the beholder, she argued, sharing her personal testimony of adopting her daughter, Clara, from Eastern Europe. Although Clara lives with a physical disability, Little sees nothing but physical perfection in her daughter. She argues that this is the case for all children, but that the pro-life movement must work harder to help to connect children that the world views as imperfect with the parents who will see them for the beautiful blessings that they truly are.

Focusing on domestic special needs adoption, Little pointed out that domestic adoption is the answer that we as pro-lifers give to the problem of legalized abortion. These are babies who would otherwise be aborted. She stated that two million couples are waiting to adopt, and this means that for every single child who is aborted, there are thirty-six couples on a waiting list to adopt a baby.
Since upwards of 90% of babies diagnosed in utero with Down Syndrome are aborted, there is a growing belief that these babies are unwanted by anyone, when in fact there are many parents who are looking to specifically adopt children with the condition. Little pointed out that it is the attitudes of doctors towards unexpected prenatal diagnoses that needs to change, since parents are very susceptible to the demeanors of their physicians.

Little shared that adopting a foster child is probably the hardest way to adopt. “The system is broken,” she said. “Currently only 22% of the children in foster care system are available for adoption. Many are older, and have very troubled backgrounds. Many of them cannot be given to families who have small children or pets.” However, even these troubled children are wanted; Little says that the solution is simply to find the families who want these children, because they do exist.

Shifting the focus to international adoption, Little explained that, since the waiting list for international adoption is 2-5 years long, anyone who signs up to adopt today is probably going to be placed with a child who is not yet born. There are many sibling sets available internationally, she says. International adoption also includes children with special needs.

There are currently approximately 147 million orphans in the world. About 250,000 are adopted annual, but each year 14.5 million orphans age out of the system. Never being adopted, they have no family to belong to, and no place to call home. A startlingly high number of these children (10-15%) commit suicide before age 18. They end up on the streets, or living out their lives in some form of domestic servitude or prostitution. Little stated that even living in a single-parent or in any way less-than-ideal adoptive household would be better for some adopted children than to not be adopted at all.

Little shared harrowing stories of orphanage conditions, particularly among children with special needs. In Eastern Europe, less than 50% of the orphan population will live to see their 20th birthday. International special needs children have a high orphanage rate because of the attitude that institutionalization is the only answer for a child with special needs. As a result, even able parents institutionalize their children, some of whom have only minor special needs, such as having been born prematurely.

The audience was shocked to learn from Little that the conditions for children and adults with special needs in many countries are highly comparable to those of concentration camps. In one Eastern Europe orphanage she visited, Little witnessed a wing for children with special needs who were effectively abandoned by the orphanage workers. Workers starved these children, and might change their diapers only once a day. Little shared the story of one family she knew who adopted a four-year-old out of these circumstances who weighed only ten pounds due to the neglect of her orphanage.

Adoption, Little says, is advocacy. It is pro-life advocacy. If you advocate for children who have medical or special needs, adoption plays a huge role. She urges pro-life individuals not to forget about the neglect individuals with special needs world-wide, saying that while our movement begins with tiny unborn humans and spans the spectrum to end-of-life issues, we cannot overlook the children and adults in-between who are suffering from neglect simply because they have special needs. “Simply because they are not perfect in the eyes of whoever is in charge,” she says, continuing: “Adoption gives children a hope and a future. Adoption makes families better.”

“Most importantly, adoption saves lives.” From the women who turn away from abortion at the realization that there are loving adoptive families who can care for their child, to the families who travel domestically and overseas seeking out their perfect (even if disabled) child, adoption saves lives. And families do not need wealth or perfect circumstances to adopt: they just need open hearts that are willing to stretch a bit further. Little suggests that individuals considering adoption visit RainbowKids.com to view a photo listing of adoptable children from all over the world.

Source: http://www.lifenews.com/2013/07/02/the-myth-of-the-unwanted-child-we-must-make-adoption-easier/

SCOTUS Rules on ICWA

The Supreme Court issued a ruling yesterday in regards to adoption. The case before them involved a 3 year old girl, Veronica, who was adopted at birth by a couple in South Carolina. The biological parents were unmarried. Some media sources say the biological mother kept the biological father away during the pregnancy and did not let him become involved. Other media sources say the biological father had conflict with the biological mother and cut off contact with her, not supporting her during her pregnancy.

Either way, the biological father texted the biological mother early in the pregnancy saying he wouldn't support her. He signed a legal document prior to the birth stating he did not want to exercise his parental rights and did not provide support to the biological mother during her pregnancy (for those not versed in parental rights... many to most states use lack of support during pregnancy as a criteria to terminate parental rights... so this is a big deal). When Veronica was born, she was placed with the adoptive couple, as her biological mother planned.

Adoption doesn't finalize as soon as the baby is placed with the adoptive family. There is some lag, usually several months, before it can be finalized in court. When Veronica was 4 months old, the biological father was served with adoption paperwork. He did not want the adoption to occur. Since he is 2% Cherokee (and Veronica is 1% Cherokee), he was able to use the ICWA to fight the adoption in court. The proceedings drug on for months. When Veronica was 27 months, the state court decided due to the ICWA, the biological father was the rightful custodian. Veronica moved from her adoptive parents in South Carolina to her biological father in Oklahoma.

The adoptive parents filed an appeal that went all the way to the US Supreme Court (normally family/custody cases do not go to them, but since the issue was regarding a federal law, they agreed to hear it). A year and half went by, and a ruling was issued yesterday.

The Supreme Court said that since the biological father never established custody (he was not married to the biological mother, did not support her during her pregnancy, and signed paperwork saying he did not want parental rights) that the ICWA did not apply in his case. The ruling said the case should go back to the state court for additional proceedings (presumably, adoption finalization by the adoptive couple).

An excerpt from the ruling: "As the State Supreme Court read [the Indian Child Welfare Act], a biological [American] Indian father could abandon his child in utero and refuse any support for the birth mother — perhaps contributing to the mother's decision to put the child up for adoption — and then could play his ICWA trump card at the eleventh hour to override the mother's decision and the child's best interests. If this were possible, many prospective adoptive parents would surely pause before adopting any child who might possibly qualify as an Indian under the ICWA."

An excerpt from a news article explaining implications of the ICWA law the way it was used in this case: "The case also is about the autonomy of a non-Indian mother. The birth mother's lawyer, Lori Alvino McGill, contends that if Indian fathers can sweep in this way, based only on biology, and override the birth mother's decision, why couldn't sperm donors or rapists who are Indian do the same? 'No other set of men can choose to kind of sit back, renounce all responsibility but hold a back-pocket veto to an adoption choice,' she says." 

I think the court made the right decision. Adoption can have sketchy practices in regards to birth fathers. Some agencies do not make diligent efforts to locate biological fathers. Others bring birth mothers to deliver in certain states because they know it will be easier to evade the man's ability to assert his parental rights. I am firmly against any such practice. However, I also do not think it is fair for a father to bring life to a child but refuse to support the child during the pregnancy, no matter their relationship with the mother (I feel this way about pregnancies, no matter whether they lead to adoption or not).

My final thought is how I hope Veronica can be resilient with the tumultuous four short years she has already had. She has lived in two states with two different sets of caregivers. The first time she moved (from adoptive family to biological father), the "transition" was pitiful. Some adults totally uneducated in child development decided she should be given from adoptive parents to biological father at a office building. She had never met her biological father, but she was dropped off and remained with him. She drove all the way from South Carolina to Oklahoma with her blood family but virtual strangers. She had no contact with her adoptive family after that day. It's really sad to me that so many adults could not come together for what would obviously be best for the child. Hopefully there will be a more thoughtful plan this time. I hope she can have a therapeutic transition and can maintain contact with her biological father and his family. Only time will tell.

'Crack Baby' Scare Overblown

Note: I don't post this to perpetuate any stereotype of a birthmother using drugs and not caring about her child but to educate myself and others since some adoptive situations could involve drug exposure and it is important to know what the effects may be. Just wanted to make sure that is clear! :)

Research in teens adds fresh evidence that the 1980s "crack baby" scare was overblown, finding little proof of any major long-term ill effects in children whose mothers used cocaine during pregnancy.

Some studies have linked pregnant women's cocaine use with children's behavior difficulties, attention problems, anxiety and worse school performance. But the effects were mostly small and may have resulted from other factors including family problems or violence, parents' continued drug use and poverty, the researchers said.

They reviewed 27 studies involving more than 5,000 11- to 17-year-olds whose mothers had used cocaine while pregnant. The studies all involved low-income, mostly black and urban families.

The review, led by University of Maryland pediatrics researcher Maureen Black, was released online Monday in the journal Pediatrics.

Widespread use of crack cocaine in the 1980s led to the "crack baby" scare, when babies born to crack users sometimes had worrisome symptoms including jitteriness and smaller heads. Studies at the time blamed prenatal drug use, suggested affected children had irreversible brain damage and predicted dire futures for them. These reports led to widespread media coverage featuring breathless headlines and heart-rending images of tiny sick newborns hooked up to hospital machines.

"The field of prenatal cocaine exposure has advanced significantly since the misleading 'crack baby' scare of the 1980s," the review authors said.

In recent years experts have mostly discounted any link, noting that so-called crack babies often were born prematurely, which could account for many of their early symptoms. Studies that tracked children beyond infancy have failed to find any severe outcomes.

In some studies included in the new review, crack-exposed teens had lower scores on developmental tests than other children but their scores were still within normal limits. Many studies found that the children's family environment or violence were directly related to the teen's performance regardless of whether their mothers had used cocaine during pregnancy, the researchers said.

The government's National Institute on Drug Abuse notes that it's tough to evaluate how drug use during pregnancy affects children's development because so many other factors play a role, including prenatal care, mothers' health and family environment.

Source: http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/27/18534669-crack-baby-scare-overblown-more-evidence-finds?lite

Nearly 70% of Adoption Credit Claims Were Audited by the IRS

Add another item to the list of red flags that may get you audited: Adopting a child.

The Internal Revenue Service mishandled tax returns of adoptive families, flagging for further review 90 percent of those who claimed the adoption tax credit for the 2012 filing season. And a report by the federal agency’s Taxpayer Advocate Service also found that nearly 70 percent of adoptive families — more than 35,000 — had at least a partial audit of their tax return. By contrast, just one percent of all returns are audited.

"The IRS's misguided procedures, and its failure to adequately adjust these processes when it learned its approach was seriously flawed, have caused significant economic harm to thousands of families who are selflessly trying to improve the lives of vulnerable children," according to the report.

Unless the IRS alters its approach to refundable credits and incorporates more taxpayer-focused procedures, the federal agency will continue to cause problems for taxpayers, the report continues, including those eligible for the new refundable credit contained in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act — also known as “ObamaCare.”

The Adoption Tax Credit was created by Congress in 1996 to encourage adoption and to help offset costs to low- and middle-income families, which are estimated to run as high as $40,000. At the time, lawmakers touted the promotion of adoption as “one of the most important things” to strengthen American families.

But IRS officials selected 69 percent of returns claiming the credit in the 2012 filing season for audit, compared to just 1 percent of all tax returns. The payoff, however, was relatively small, the report found.

“Of the $668.1 million in adoption credit claims in tax year 2011 as a result of adoption credit audits, the IRS only disallowed $11 million — or one and one-half percent — in adoption credit claims,” the report continued. “However, the IRS has also had to pay out $2.1 million in interest in TY 2011 to taxpayers whose refunds were held past the 45-day period allowed by law.”

An IRS official said the agency must make sure claims are accurate. "The IRS implemented the adoption credit program with an approach that balanced the objective of paying legitimate credits in a timely manner with that of ensuring that claims were accurate," IRS spokeswoman Michelle Eldridge said in a statement to FoxNews.com. "Our experiences and lessons learned from other refundable credits taught us that high dollar credits have high risk and the potential for fraud. We must ensure delivery of the credit to those entitled while protecting the government’s interest in minimizing exposure to fraud."

The crux of the problem, according to the report, began in 2010 as part of  the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Congress at that time increased the maximum credit per child to $13,170 and made it fully refundable for the 2010 and 2011 tax years, meaning that even taxpayers who had no tax liability in those years could receive the credit as a refund. That led to a drastic increase in refunds, making more families eligible for larger returns.

In the 2008 tax year, 89,134 taxpayers claimed the adoption tax credit for a total of $354.5 million. By 2010, those figures reached 110,591 and $1.2 billion, respectively. In 2011, 51,539 taxpayers claimed $668.1 million in credits.

The National Taxpayer Advocate recommends, among other things, that the IRS provide examples of acceptable adoption credit documentation for taxpayers, develop a third-party affidavit form for verifying a child’s special needs status and to allow electronic filing of adoption tax credit returns that included substantiation in a digital format.

“The IRS, facing a sizeable refundable credit, reacted with an enforcement strategy that was focused on stopping nearly all returns claiming the credit and subjecting a large percentage of them to an audit, instead of reaching out to stakeholders (including states) to understand the impacted taxpayer population,” the report concludes. “When problems emerged, the IRS simply continued selecting returns for audit. This approach forced taxpayers to withstand lengthy delays and the IRS to expend valuable resources with very little to show for them.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/05/24/nearly-70-percent-adoption-credit-claims-were-audited-by-irs-report-finds/#ixzz2UYD2jm4T

"Child Adopted 24 Hours Before It Was Too Late"

CORPUS CHRISTI - A dream came true for a local foster child who never had a permanent place to call home. That all changed thanks to one family who granted his wish, 24 hours before it was too late.

Damien Cavazos waited his whole life for a family to call his own and he was all smiles Tuesday after being adopted into his new family.

"It's just real special, I got adopted and its one day right before my birthday. I've always wanted brothers and sisters and now I have them and everything," Damien said.

Damien turns 18 years old Wednesday and would've aged out of the adoption system, leaving him with no one to call mom and dad. Rebecca Cavazos, a child protective services employee wasn't going to let that happen.

"They were unable to adopt him so Tuesday morning I walked into my bosses office and I told her I'm not taking no for an answer and he's going to be my son," Rebecca said.

Rebecca had been working to get Damien adopted since November, when she first met him at an adoption event. "I said why are you sitting back here in the corner, he said nobody wants me they want the little ones," Rebecca said.

Damien always believed that parents were only interested in adopting young children into their homes but his wish came true in the court room when Judge Brent Chesney made it official.

"Thank you for making it come true, it was a good birthday wish," Damien said.

Rebecca and her husband Steven say they are the modern day brady bunch with 3 girls and two boys of their own and now a third son. She says she couldn't be happier.

"I couldn't ask for anything more and my children and my family are amazing," Rebecca said.
Damien plans to go to Carroll High School and join the ROTC program.

Watch the video here: http://www.kristv.com/news/child-adopted-24-hours-before-it-was-too-late/#!prettyPhoto[gallery]/2/

Local family adopts 8 children from Sierra Leone

This is a local story that made national news. There's also a good video on the story link.Also, here is another local coverage with a different and very heartwarming video.:

"Cheers and applause greeted the Jones family at the Nashville International Airport Tuesday night as their family suddenly grew by eight. For three years, Mike and Hayley Jones, alongside sons Tyler and Tucker, have been trying to adopt eight children from Sierra Leone.

"When I saw them coming down the hallway, my heart just stopped," said the children's new grandmother, Susan Drake. "I can't imagine Christmas. Christmas with that many children around one tree? Mike and Hayley never lost their faith or their goal. They stayed focused. It finally happened."

With their family and community raising a staggering $15,770 to bring the children home through gofundme.com, the work paid off. "It's just a relief," said Hayley Jones. "It's just a big sense of relief."

"I don't know if you can ever be completely prepared," added Mike Jones. "We've worked on the house and just every little aspect we can. We've tried to prepare and be ready for this point."
Standing all together in the airport, the family created a new portrait of smiling faces that just tripled in size. Ready to head home, each child took two flags, one in honor of their former home and one welcoming them to their new one.

"We have prayed for this moment for so long," said Drake. 'I can't believe it's really here.'"
Credit: WSMV
Previous story: News Channel 5

32 year old man adopted by former foster mother

Nearly 20 years after being ripped apart from his foster parents, a 32-year-old man was officially adopted Friday in San Diego, Calif., by the woman he has always considered to be his mother.

Maurice Griffin was abandoned as a baby. At age three, he found a loving family in foster parents Lisa Godbold and her husband, Charles. “The whole reason we got into foster care in the first place is because we wanted to adopt Maurice,” recalled Godbold.

Over the next 10 years, Godbold and her husband eventually became Griffin’s foster parents, giving him the stable, happy home he had always dreamed of. “It was a great, loving family,” said Griffin, remembering the trips to Sunday school and brunch with his foster family.

But Griffin’s happy family life didn’t last long. Griffin says the foster system failed him, and he was abruptly taken away from the family at age 13. He and Godbold didn’t want to get into specifics about why Griffin was taken from the family, but both of them agreed it was a very painful and difficult time. “It’s like being abducted from your family and being told to deal with it,” said Griffin.

“It was torture; it broke our hearts,” added Godbold. “Not knowing where he was and not being able to have contact with him was like having a child abducted.”

From there, Griffin bounced from other foster homes to group homes, where he says he was abused and mistreated. Through the years and tough times, Griffin held on to his fond family memories.

Meanwhile, Godbold tried time and time again to find her long lost foster son – never giving up.

In 2009, Godbold tracked Griffin down on the internet using social media. From that point on, they vowed never to lose each other again. Their enduring mother-son bond led them to a San Diego courtroom Friday, where Godbold officially adopted Griffin as her son. ”I’m excited – this is 20 years overdue,” said Griffin minutes before heading into the courthouse with his soon-to-be mother.

Though the adoption proceeding was short, Griffin said it was the moment he’s been waiting for all his life. “This is probably the happiest moment in my life. I love my family and I’m happy to be home,” said Griffin, adoption paperwork in hand.

Godbold was also overwhelmed with emotion and said adopting Griffin – even at 32 years old – was a privilege. “This completes the circle. He’s always been my son, but this just completes the circle,” she added. Griffin now joins Godbold and her two biological children to form a happy family once again. Sadly, Godbold’s husband passed away during the time they lost contact with Griffin.

Griffin said he would have loved to be adopted by Charles Friday too, as he was a man he always admired and loved. Both Godbold and Griffin believe Charles was proudly watching over them on this special day.

Their story of family, love, loss, struggle and perseverance is something they hope will impact other foster children and foster families out there. Godbold says the message is simple: don’t give up.

“Don’t give up – persevere. Keep looking for that love, that family connection, whether it’s with an infant or your 32-year-old child,” she added.

Griffin lives in San Diego and Godbold lives in San Jose, Calif., but now that they’re mother and son, they’ll be getting together often. “She’s my mother,” said Griffin. “She has always been my mother.”

By Monica Garske and Lea Sutton, NBCSanDiego.com

Source: http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/16/17340940-32-year-old-man-adopted-by-former-foster-mother?lite

"Little Couple" stars adopt boy with dwarism

"The Little Couple" stars Dr. Jennifer Arnold and Bill Klein are about to become a trio. "We are thrilled to announce that we have adopted a beautiful young boy from China," the pair told People. "We are so proud to welcome William to our family and look forward to bringing him home." The 3-year-old boy, who has dwarfism like both of his new parents, is the first child for Arnold and Klein.

Since they were newlyweds in 2009, viewers have followed the businessman and pediatrician, both of whom are under 4 feet tall, as they navigated marriage, managed challenging careers and attempted to expand their family. After their surrogate suffered a miscarriage in 2011, they remained optimistic.

 

 

Story source: http://theclicker.today.com/_news/2013/03/12/17285633-little-couple-stars-adopt-boy-with-dwarfism?lite

Couple's facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheLittleCouple

Local Adoption Scam

From NewsChannel5.com (click here to see the video of the story):

"They were hoping to become parents by adopting twins, but instead authorities believe a Hopkinsville couple fell victim to an adoption scam.  

The Christian County Commonwealth's Attorney said the couple did everything right for a private adoption, knowing one of their risks is that a birth mother can end up wanting to keep the child. However, authorities say in this case, the woman was never pregnant.

It's not a case Commonwealth's Attorney Lynn Pryor sees often. 

"I think this may be on of the more heartless, evil schemes," said Pryor. 

It's one that stands out after she said 22-year old Sara Pavey pretended to be pregnant with twin girls and made contact with a Christian County couple who wanted to adopt. 

"She went through great lengths to show she was going to doctors, even sending photos copied from google images," said Pryor. 

Pryor said Janet and Matt Wyatt took proper procedures for a private adoption, and in the end paid more than $10,000 to Pavey. 

"I don't want anyone to believe that they were foolish," said Pryor. "They weren't; they hired attorneys to do things properly."

Attorneys like Greg Smith who said unfortunately adoption scams are more common than you'd think. 

"A lot of people have adoptions that have been longing for it for so long, they're ripe for a con-artist to take advantage of," said Smith. 

It's why he recommends soon to be adoptive parents try to be as hands on as possible throughout the pregnancy.  

"Let them go to an ultrasound with them, not only do you get to see the baby moving, but if it's fraud, it's hard to hide it," said Smith. 

While the advice comes too late for the Wyatts, they're taking steps to keep this from happening to anyone else. 

"It breaks my heart that a family that wanted to have children so badly face the reality that they're not going to have two babies they so eagerly anticipated," said Pryor. 

At this time, it does not appear Pavey is in police custody yet. Her last known address is in Virginia. 

She has been indicted on a charge of theft by deception of more than $10,000 and a charge of persistent felony offender." 

Source: Janet Kim and News Channel 5 (Nashville)