Wrongful Adoption in Alabama UPDATED

“Kimberly Rossler, 25, gave birth to her son, James Elliott Rossler, on May 28, 2015 in Providence Hospital, Mobile County, Alabama. She brought her son home and they were doing fine. There was never a question about her fitness and no involvement whatsoever from social services or CPS. No complaints or reports were made, to Kim’s knowledge. Yet, three weeks — almost — to the day after Elliott was born, three Mobile, Alabama, Sheriffs knocked on her door while she sat breastfeeding her newborn son. They seized the suckling infant.

What happened to Kim and Elliott is an American tragedy. This young mother and son were victimized by the market- and demand-driven American adoption industrial complex and predatory, private, independent, entrepreneurial adoption that allows baby brokers and unethical practitioners to operate with impunity. To fill the demand (and earn their living), practitioners coerce, pressure and exploit expectant and new mothers with a justification that their babies would be better off being raised by those who pay the brokers’ fees, and with the belief (knowledge?) that in the vast majority of cases, even if the mother cries foul, she would not have the resources to fight the injustice. Unlike the real estate industry, there are not even ethical guidelines for adoption practitioners, and there is no government oversight.”

“Kim learned she was pregnant in October 2014. Baby Elliott’s father, Greg, whom Kim had been “on and off” with, pressured Kim to abort and wanted nothing to do with the child:

“Once I told Greg that I didn’t have an abortion, he began threatening me, saying that he was going to make my life hell and that I was a horrible candidate for raising a human, etc. I now understand and recognize emotional abuse, and am recovering.”

Then Kim made one phone call that changed her life dramatically. She thought she was calling an adoption agency by the name of Adoption Rocks — the first to pop up in her Google search. Unbeknownst to her, she was in fact calling an attorney named Donna Ames, who called her back Sunday evening at 6pm and arranged for them to meet for lunch the very next day, at which time Kim was told:

“Things like, after I placed the baby, I could go on with my life, my education and that this choice, the one so many girls like me have chosen, brings a sense of relief — and I have reason to feel courageous and even heroic for making such a selfless decision.”

According to Kim, Donna also told her that:

“She had ‘the perfect’ Mom in mind for me. She was single, very wealthy, from Birmingham, and was someone who would like an open adoption. She said things like Christmas and birthdays, we could do together. She also said she had other families seeking to adopt, but none who had quite as much money as Kate.”

Kate (Katherine Gilliard Sharp of Birmingham) called Kim the following day and they arranged a meeting two days later.

“I liked her. I liked that she was single and a powerful business woman. I also could tell she really wanted to be a Mom. I really liked the idea of giving her my baby. I hadn’t even felt the baby move yet and it seemed a relief to be able to tell Greg about my choice and to have a plan. I was exhausted from fear, tired of the endless texts and threats from Greg, and glad I could do something special for this stranger, who somehow didn’t really feel a stranger at all. She talked a good bit about her family and loving parents who she had pictures of. The idea of giving him storybook grandparents and private school seemed surreal. Kate talked about hiring a Spanish nanny because she really wanted her child to be bilingual. It sounded like the movies. I was sold.”

Kim told Donna she liked Kate, and Donna assured her she would take care of:

“…all the legal stuff and paperwork and for me not to worry. We met to go over my allowance that she referred to as ‘my monthly gift.’ She wrote down my expenses, including phone and car, even though I specifically stated I did not currently have a car and that I was on Greg’s cell phone plan. She said, it’s ok-you can use if for something else, we just have to put a figure here for the judge to approve you getting money. Naïve, I said ok and trusted her….”

Herein lies one of the most troubling adoption practices in American domestic adoption. Most every state allows for prospective adopters to pay expectant mothers’ expenses. These include living expenses, such as rent, medical, clothing allowances, and transportation. Judges decide upon a “reasonable” amount.

In February 2015, Donna prepared a budget for Kim’s monthly allowance or “gift” as Donna called it.

“Before I ever felt my baby move, Kate, Donna and I went before a judge where I signed a pre-birth agreement. That day, the judge, his explanation, it all felt like a routine court proceeding. I know the judge told me I had five days to change my mind after birth, and Donna told me before and after that day, that nothing was final until the baby was born, and this court proceeding was the way to secure my ‘monthly gift’.”

Judge Don Davis approved a monthly allowance and plans progressed.

“Kate quickly became something like a sister/friend. We texted multiple times a day, every day. We talked about the baby and I began confiding in her about my emotions related to the adoption. I felt myself growing depressed and found myself sleeping day in and out, crying about what life would look like once I gave my baby away. The baby was moving quite a bit, and I began allowing myself some thoughts to consider what being a Mom would look like. It was a war in my head. I could hear Greg and many before him telling me I am worthless, a step mother telling me I would never be good for anything or anybody and Kate — I really loved the idea of my ‘selfless’ act giving her what she always wanted, to be a mother. But then I had parts of me saying: ‘You can do this’; ‘You don’t have to pay for private school to be a good Mamma’; ‘This is going to be hard-but you are going to do this.’ The conflict within became so intense that I knew I needed help. These weeks were so dark, all I could think was ‘I hope I die in labor but my son lives. Kate will be happy and I won’t feel the pain.’

“I confided in Kate about my depressed thinking, and constant crying. I couldn’t keep food down, had little appetite, and leaned on her for every bit of encouragement I could get. …Kate would text with me in the wee hours of the morning when I could not sleep, comforting me, telling me I was going to be okay, etc. I mentioned to her I think I needed a counselor and she said she would reach out to Donna to see if she could find me one.”

Kate and Donna found Kim a counselor who helped her sort out her anxieties and fears. She began to address issues of self-esteem and get in touch with her self-worth, regardless of whether she chose to parent or place her son for adoption. Her depression lifted and she began to see parenting as a real possibility. Her only fear now was hurting Kate, whom she had grown to care about.

“I could not bear the thought of letting [Kate] down. She had been so good to me and I really liked her.

“For many therapy sessions we talked about the practical steps I needed to take to be able to parent; how to cope with Greg in a co-parenting venture. I even had him come to a therapy session to discuss the possibility…. He came and was very hostile and said he would sign his rights away if I chose to parent….

“Kate came to my Dr.’s appointments and every time I saw her, I would get more confused. The war in my mind kept fighting.”

Upon securing a good housing situation with a friend, and knowing that she could return to her job in daycare and take her baby with her, Kim knew in March 2015 that she was ready, able and wanting to maintain her role as mother of her yet-unborn son.

“I chose to parent. It felt right and good. Though scared and feeling incredible responsibility for Kate, I knew this is what I wanted and was determined to give my son what he needed.”

 

Wrongful Adoption: Return Baby Elliott, Part I[Huffington Post 7/7/15 by Mirah Riben]

“Kimberly Rossler’s three-week-old infant son, James Elliott Rossler, born May 28, 2015 in Mobile County, Alabama, was taken from her by Sheriffs, while breastfeeding

Kim had considered adoption with Adoption Rocks and was matched with Kate. After counseling, Kim felt confident in her ability to parent her son and says she informed Donna Ames, the attorney for Adoption Rocks, and Kate (the intended adopter) of her decision not to continue with the adoption plan.

According to Kim, Donna brushed it off as “normal doubts,” but when Kim posted on her Facebook page about baby clothes and names, she received a rather scathing message from Donna telling her she was making a terrible decision and could not do this to Kate.

“Donna texted my therapist telling her that I was mentally unstable and manipulative and had stolen Kate’s money, etc. It was truly terrible.”

Kate was initially kind after learning Kim was deciding not to continue with the adoption plans.

“She apologized for Donna, expressed her irritation with her, and offered to get a new attorney so ‘we can start fresh.’ I did not know what to say. I just felt guilty and wanted to be left alone. I did not want a fresh start. I wanted to parent my baby. And I wanted people to understand. At the same time, I really understood her desperation to have a fresh start (whatever that meant) and I felt so sorry for Kate….

“I spoke a good bit with my therapist about how to talk to Kate so she really understood my decision was final. I wanted to present her with a ‘pay-back’ plan, and I sincerely thought a good solution would be to also offer to be a surrogate for free. Guilt ruled me. I really and truly cared for Kate and wanted her to be a Mom. I just did not want to give her my baby.”

Kim says she was so nervous to talk to Kate that she had her therapist do it:

“On May 26, 2015 almost four weeks away from my due date I had a session with my counselor. We discussed, again, the drama, the hurtful and attacking messages from Donna, my anger toward her, my guilt over Kate, and my confusion about why the communication lines seem to be complex…There was no adoption agency- there was just Donna trying to shame me and manipulate me into adoption. I still felt sorry for Kate. I think she was just desperate for a baby and, like me, trusted Donna.”

Kim’s counselor called Kate, who was now angry and accused Kim of “stealing her money.” Twelve hours later, Kim went into labor and gave birth without Donna or Kate knowing anything. Kim says she had applied for and received Medicaid.

“…nothing had prepared me for the intense love I felt, and the birth of a Mamma Bear who was ready to give my son everything he deserved and more, no matter what it took. Nursing was hard at first but I figured it out and our nursing relationship became one of my favorite memories to date. I was determined to exclusively breast feed him as long as I could.”

While in the hospital, Kim says she received a text from Kate:

“I am devastated but I understand, let me know if you have a change of heart.”

Feeling guilty again, her therapist encouraged her to focus on Elliott and allow Kate’s support network to take care of Kate.

Greg came to the hospital and held Elliott. A few days later he asked Kim for her address so he could send some things to Elliott. Reluctant and somewhat suspicious, Kim gave him her address.

Three weeks later, when the sheriffs arrived at that address, they handed Kim a piece of paper stating that Elliott was going into the custody of Kate Sharp.

“I screamed and cried and said why?! And the sheriff kept stating ‘I don’t know ma’am.’ They allowed me time to prepare his diaper bag and secure his car seat into the police car. Amidst the chaos and my screaming-I could not believe they did not have a car seat.

“After taking my son home, and Kate never meeting him, I had no idea she could possibly have any right to him. I had communicated I was parenting. It was acknowledged by all involved. I liked Kate. How could she do this? I don’t understand. I still want to pay her back. I even want her to be a Mom. I really believe she will be a good Mom. I just want my baby. I want to be his Mom. And now, she has him. I have not seen him [since he was taken]. Her lawyer will not respond to my request to give him the breast milk I have been pumping every two hours. …. I sleep with his swaddle blanket… “

  

“After I gave birth to Elliott, I never wanted to put him down. I held him constantly, stared at him in amazement as he nursed, and I realized I had made the right decision to parent. I learned what unconditional love is. My purpose is to be a mother, Elliott’s mother. Now I am left to pray that the courts use their discretion and make a judgement on my behalf.”

Kate has interlocutory custody. Judge Brown, who signed the order to remove the baby because of “endangerment” due to alleged “mental instability,” said that he never would have signed such an order had he known it was an adoption. It was outside his jurisdiction.

Kim has been told now that she needed to withdraw her pre-birth consent in writing, something she was never told. She says she was, in fact, told that final papers would be signed after the birth and that she then had five days to withdraw.

Judge Don Davis, who signed the consent, is on the Advisory Board ofAdoption Rocks, and Donna Ames, the attorney for Adoption Rocks — who was the only attorney “representing” Kim, is a major donor to Judge Davis’ re-election campaign, making this case and all other adoptions ofAdoption Rocks reek of a conflict of interest, misrepresentation, fraud, deception and undue influence.

The order for removal on grounds of endangerment was signed by a judge who did not know it involved adoption and had no jurisdiction in adoption matters.

Mothers and their children deserve far more. Kim was very fortunate that she had a therapist who was honest and helped her. More often, adoption agencies and practitioners send expectant mothers to counselors who they know will help persuade the mother to relinquish their babies.

Expectant mothers deserve independent legal counsel to explain every step of the procedure to them, and the lifelong ramifications for them and their child. Most importantly, mothers under such great stress and confusion, trying to make a life-altering decision for themselves and their child, need time. They need and deserve time with their babies and neutral option counseling to make an informed decision.

Pre-birth contracts need to be discontinued in the few states that now allow them. They are coercive, a step backward and put all parties of the adoption at risk for protracted litigation.

One-on-one direct payments also need to be outlawed as coercive. They hurt both the new mother and those longing for her child, and open the door for scammers who prey on desperation.

Direct payments between an expectant mother and someone who wants her child create feelings of entitlement for adopters who are left feeling taken advantage of when a mother decides to parent as they have every right to, and as many do once they see their baby. Enmeshment with prospective adoptive parents and receipt of gifts makes young mothers feel they owe their child and feel guilty about wanting to do the most normal, natural thing and care for their own child.

Expenses for expectant mothers in need should first be sought through government sources and charities with no strings attached. In my book, The Stork Market, I suggest that states set up a pool for all prospective adopters to pay into for support of mothers who do not qualify for state support, and also to cover expenses such as counseling and legal representation. It would be a simple add-on fee that goes anonymously into a pool and is used to help mothers in need, anonymously, with no strings or indebtedness or obligation attached.

There is, however, no oversight of adoption. Left to police themselves with little regulation or control, the industry does what is in the best interest of those who earn their livelihood procuring babies for their paying clients.

Adoption is supposed to help find homes for children in need, not dupe loving, capable mothers. No expectant or new mom should be subjected to the predatory and coercive adoption practices Kim endured… feeling attachment for a woman who stole her precious son.

Kim is awaiting a pretrial hearing on July 24.”

Wrongful Adoption: Return Baby Elliott, Part II [Huffington Post 7/11/15 by Mirah Riben]

Kate Sharp, how could you????

REFORM Puzzle Piece

Update:“A recent order from the Alabama Supreme Court confirmed that a judicial recusal in a Mobile County adoption case had been improperly handled, allowing a local mother engaged in a legal battle to keep her son to once again discuss her case publicly.

Last July, Kim Rossler caused a stir when a story about her “wrongful adoption” was published by the Huffington Post. It was widely shared and put Mobile County Probate Judge Don Davis and a local adoption attorney in the crosshairs of the internet’s wrath.

Though she never expected that level of attention, Rossler told Lagniappe this week she felt telling her story was her best chance at getting her newborn son back.

“They weren’t taking me seriously, and I saw it from day one at Strickland Youth Center,” Rossler said. “I would have gotten railroaded by the whole system if I wouldn’t have screamed so loudly.”

That “screaming” was about the adoption of her son, Elliott, who in July 2015 was taken under a court order and delivered to a woman who had agreed to adopt the child. Rossler said she originally intended to put Elliott up for adoption, but changed her mind after undergoing counseling prior to his birth last May.

According to Rossler, she shared her decision to keep her son with all interested parties, including the adoptive mother and the adoptive mother’s attorney, Donna Ames. Rossler admits to authorizing the adoption and accepting money from the adopting parent during her pregnancy but said she was always under the impression she had taken the necessary steps to keep her son.

“I did sign the pre-birth consent and my monthly allowance approval with Don Davis in court, but I did what Donna [Ames] told me to do every step of the way,” she said. “My child went home with me. I was on the birth certificate, and when I told them I wasn’t doing it, they said, ‘OK.’”

Ames, however, has continued to maintain she “never represented [Rossler] in this case,” and was always representing the adopting parent, identified in previous reports as Birmingham resident Kate Sharp.

Adoption Rocks, a nonprofit, pro-adoption organization, was also brought into the story, though the level of the organization’s involvement in Rossler’s case has been disputed by Ames. According to Ames, Adoption Rocks is sometimes used as a meeting place for birth parents and adopting parents or for counseling but doesn’t get involved with adoption cases.

“Adoption Rocks has been totally mischaracterized. I happen to be a founding board member, but we’re an awareness group,” Ames told Lagniappe. “Everybody wants to bring it into this to sensationalize the story, but [this] girl’s parents knew me, and that’s why I was brought in as a private lawyer.”

Rossler claims Ames “presented herself” to be on her side, even testifying in court to say she “had contacted other attorneys” but was told by Ames that “she was the best one and that I needed her to work with me.”

Prior to Huffington Post’s story, Ames dropped Sharp as a client — passing her to David Broome, who has represented her in Rossler’s continued efforts to challenge Elliott’s adoption.

Last year Davis recused himself from overseeing that case. Probate Clerk Joe McEarchern subsequently selected attorney J. Michael Druhan — who has previously served as Davis’ personal attorney — to stand in as an appointed judge.

Rossler’s attorney, Scott Hunter, challenged that appointment, not because of Druhan’s connection to Davis, but because the proper protocol wasn’t followed when he was selected.

According to Hunter, Mobile is unique in that it has specific legislation requiring probate judges have a law degree, and because of that, replacements for a recused judge are chosen from a pre-approved list and selected by either the Alabama Supreme Court or Presiding Circuit Court Judge Charles Graddick.

“The issue isn’t who they picked, it’s that they shouldn’t have been the ones doing the picking,” Hunter said. “McEarchern appointed Druhan. That’s the issue, because it should have been the Supreme Court or the presiding judge.”

Later, Rossler challenged Druhan’s denial of a supplemental motion asking him to recuse himself and an order he entered in July 2015 that prohibited the parties from “publicly discussing matters related to the adoption” — an order issued shortly after Rossler’s story went viral online.

The court ruled in Rossler’s favor and then confirmed its ruling May 27, saying “Druhan was never properly appointed as a temporary probate judge” and, thus, never had the authority to enter any court order.

The decision not only reversed Druhan’s appointment but also invalidated every action he’s taken in the case — overturning the gag order and leaving the probate court 14 days for Graddick to name a replacement to oversee the case.

The deadline for the replacement is Friday, June 17, at which point Rossler’s case will revert back to where it was when Davis recused himself last July.

Though she’s no longer involved in the case, Ames still maintains she did nothing wrong in her representation of the adopting mother or in the advice she gave to Rossler, describing the situation as “very unfortunate for everybody.”

“These are legal proceedings, and the law is designed to be done in a certain way,” Ames said. “I feel like I certainly did everything I could have done. That’s about all I can say, but I do think [Sharp] will be successful in the adoption.”

As for Rossler, she’s spent the last year looking up and studying adoption cases from across the country, searching for any information that could help her “bring baby Elliott home.”

“I don’t know anything about my child. When he left me, he had a closed tear duct, and I don’t even know if it’s ever opened. I don’t know if he ever got acclimated to formula. I don’t even know if he’s developing right. There’s nothing, but it’s not like I haven’t tried,” Rossler said. “Luckily, I have a really good job now, and I can better afford everything that has to do with the court case and be more capable of providing for my son.””

New judge expected soon in ‘Baby Elliott’ adoption case[Lagniappe Mobile 6/15/16 by Jason Johnson]

Update 2:“A Facebook page associated with a contentious Alabama adoption case where a Mobile woman alleged her newborn son was stolen from her can go back online, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled Friday.

Kimberly Rossler alleged she initially decided to give her baby up for adoption and then changed her mind before the baby was born after undergoing counseling. In court papers, she claimed Mobile County sheriff’s deputies snatched her newborn son, Elliott, while she was breastfeeding him in 2015 to deliver him to his adoptive mother.

Rossler claimed she believed the attorney for the adoptive mother also represented her in the transaction and that the lawyer did not tell her she needed to revoke her pre-birth consent to give up the child in writing. The Mobile woman said she verbally told the attorney, Donna Ames of Adoption Rocks, and Katherine Gilliard Sharp, the adoptive mother, that she was backing out of the adoption.

Rossler told her account of the case to Mirah Riben, a contributor for the Huffington Post who described themselves as an advocate who writes “with a focus on exposing the corruption in the child adoption industry”. The story that was published named Sharp as the adoptive mother and included pictures of Elliott even though adoption cases are confidential under Alabama law.

Two years after the story was published, a Facebook page, “Bring Baby Elliott Home,” was created that Sharp said made her “the poster-child for ‘predatory’ adoptions in the United States” and that she was cyberbullied. She argued that the page violated her rights under Alabama law to keep adoption records sealed and that both the page and the Huffington Post story were used to try the case “in the court of public opinion” because Rossler wouldn’t win in court.

Preliminary injunctions ordering the “Bring Baby Elliot Home” Facebook page – which also named Sharp as the adoptive mother and used a picture of Elliott as its cover photo – to be taken down were tossed out Friday by the Alabama Supreme Court. The court said in part that while adoption cases are confidential under Alabama law, the adoptive mother’s name and pictures of the baby were already made public after a two-part Huffington Post story was published in 2015, two years before the Facebook page was created.

“Although we agree [Sharp’s] full name –- i.e., her identity as the prospective adoptive parent in a contested adoption case involving [the baby] — was intended to be confidential,” the Facebook page used information “that had already been made public” by the Huffington Post, the court ruled in a 7-0 decision. “It is undisputed that the Facebook page was not created until after the Huffington Post published its two-part article using [Sharp’s] full name and identifying her as the petitioner in the contested adoption proceeding involving Baby Doe.”

Rossler’s fraud lawsuit against Ames has been dismissed, according to court records.

The Facebook page was not yet back up as of Friday night.”

Facebook page tied to contentious Alabama adoption case can go back online, Supreme Court rules
[Al 6/29/19 by Howard Koplowitz]