Safe Haven Law Debacle in Hawaii
We have blogged about the futility of Safe Haven laws a few times here.
To repeat the words of Reformatina: “Mothers like the mother to this baby are clearly not in the frame of mind to seek out a “safe haven” drop off point.” An issue that no one seems to want to face is that this makes it “it easier to abandon children and effectively wipe away any trace of identity and history that child has.”
In this case, the mother actually did take the baby to a hospital, which is in fact a Safe Haven drop-off. She lied that she found the baby. As the first article discusses, no mother taking a newborn to a Safe Haven can be compelled to share any information. She was arrested for filing a false report with police and released on a $250 bond. If she had just brought the baby to the hospital and not responded when asked about the circumstances of the baby or said ” I don’t know where the baby came from”, would she also have been arrested?
Lawmakers rushed to microphones when this case broke all eager to pass some new law. The baby grab is definitely a bipartisan venture.
The second article brings out the 
HIC adoption agency and a PAP. The idea that this woman wanted to make or or should have made an adoption plan is quite an assumption. No one ever asked if she was coerced to bring the baby to the hospital by boyfriend or family member nor do they ask about her state of mind. HIC is just mad that they didn’t get a 
from this situation. Partial compassion reigns again.
“Detectives are searching for the person who abandoned a newborn overnight Sunday at Sandy Beach Park.
Officials with the Department of Human Services say the baby girl was not injured, but is under observation at the Queen’s Medical Center.
“I think first and foremost, we’re happy to report that the female infant is doing quite well. She’s drinking formula, weighs approximately 8 pounds,” said Patricia McManaman, the Director of the Department of Human Services.
McManaman says the baby girl appears to have been born a week or two early and was delivered within the last 24 hours.
The infant was reportedly discovered unclothed at Sandy Beach by a 21-year-old woman who heard a baby’s cries coming from the shoreline and found the infant alone in the sand.
“Just blessed that the child had an angel that came and helped her out,” said Jonathan Kamai, a Sandy Beach regular. “It would have to be something tragic for someone to just leave their newborn here,” said Kamai choking up. “Just as a father, how somebody could actually just do that kind of stuff — it’s just crazy.”
Scott Lima, another Sandy Beach regular, says he was camping in the area overnight and was woken around 11:30 p.m. Sunday by loud activity outside his truck.
“We heard one van pull up or something and whole bunch of people jumped out and I’m not sure what they was doing, but after they left I went back sleep — and a whole bunch of cops came out of nowhere and they started coning off the area,” described Lima, who says he never saw a pregnant woman or a woman with a baby. “It was kind of surprising to see all these cops over here looking for somebody this late at night, one little kid — whoa, that’s mental.”
Law enforcement sources say an eyewitness reported seeing a woman standing in the water and heard her screaming in pain. When he approached her, she told him she cut her foot on the reef. Later, he reportedly saw another woman with a crying baby leaving the beach.
The closest hospital is just three miles away from Sandy Beach. Hawaii’s “Baby Safe Haven” offers protection from prosecution for anyone who surrenders an unharmed newborn within 72 hours of the child’s birth at a hospital, fire station, police station, or with emergency medical service personnel.
“I think for all women who find themselves in this situation there are an array of options, and I think the last option that’s available to them is the Safe Haven law,” said McManaman.
McManaman says the purpose of the law is to establish a safe haven for newborns and protect the health and safety of the abandoned newborn. Anyone who surrenders a newborn under the law, will be asked to provide the following information: name of the newborn; name and address of the parent or person surrendering the newborn; birth place of the newborn; newborn’s medical history; newborn’s biological family’s medical history including major illness and diseases; the surrendering person’s desire with regard to reclaiming the newborn; and any other information that might be necessary for the department to determine the best interests of the infant. However, the person cannot be compelled to provide the information, and safe haven locations may not refuse to accept a newborn if the person does not provide the requested information.
The infant’s mother has not been identified. Assuming no parent or relative comes forward, DHS officials say the newborn will be taken into foster custody, pending a hearing in Family Court as early as next week.
Honolulu police say the 21-year-old woman who found the baby is not a suspect at this time.
According to HPD, the penalty for endangering the welfare of a minor is up to one year in prison, but anyone who surrenders a newborn under the Safe Haven Law will not be prosecuted. DHS officials say since the law has been on the books in 2007, no one has ever used it.”
Abandoned newborn discovered at Sandy Beach on Oahu
[Fox19 4/29/13 by Mileka Lincoln]
“Original reports from officials stated that the baby was discovered near the water sometime after 11 p.m. Sunday after a woman reported hearing her crying.
That same woman brought the baby to The Queen’s Medical Center, where she is said to be “doing well”. The baby was born about two or three weeks premature and weighed about eight pounds.
The Family Court will determine whether the baby will be returned to her family or if parental rights will be terminated. An initial hearing is set for Monday. The Department of Human Services will ask the court to order Simeona, and any identified father, to submit to DNA testing.
“This poor woman was probably in such a state of desperation and crisis that she felt alone and she felt she had no options,” said Kristine Altwies, executive director of Hawaii International Child. “The child could have immediately gone into a loving, approved, supportive adoptive family home rather than to become embroiled in what could become a drawn-out court process.”
Hawaii International Child is an adoption agency. Altwies wants women to know that they have options, including permanent placement.
“If you are considering adoption, and you’re pregnant or you have a baby, there is no cost to you. You’re provided with the support, the counseling, your medical bills will be covered,” explained Altwies.
“There are so many couples that want a child to love,” said prospective adoptive parent Kristen Eoute of Mililani.
Eoute and her husband are in the process of adopting a child from the mainland.
“It’s something that we’ve anticipated for awhile and it’s exciting,” said Jonathan Eoute.
Two-year-old Anya joined her adoptive parents two years ago. Liana and Michael Grande have an open adoption, meaning they’re in contact with the birth mother.
“I think it helps here just knowing that Anya is well taken care of and she has a wonderful future,” said Liana Grande. “She has brought so much joy to both of us. We’re so happy. We’re so happy to have her. We feel so lucky.””
Honolulu police arrest woman who claimed to find baby at Sandy Beach
[Hawaii News Now 5/1/13 by Nicole Bento]
The mother “initially told doctors and police of hearing screams from a crowd as she sat in her car parked on the beach just after midnight Monday. Moments later, according to police reports, she found a naked baby on the beach.
The woman then took the newborn to a local hospital for treatment. There, doctors confirmed the child was full-term and had just been born. However, the 8-pound infant was otherwise healthy and showed no signs of injury.
At some point, police turned their attention to the woman who claimed she found the abandoned newborn baby. An arrest was made, but police have not shared with the public what led investigators to suspect the child’s alleged mother.
While the woman was not charged at this time for allegedly abandoning her newborn, she and others considering similar acts should know about a Safe Haven law.
Essentially, it allows mothers to take a child born within 72 hours to a hospital, police station or fire house. There, they can drop off the child and face no questions or criminal charges.
Meanwhile, the child, named Baby Sandy, is in the custody of the Department of Health and Human Services in Hawaii.
Authorities have petitioned the court for a DNA sample to prove the woman in the abandoned baby on beach arrest is the child’s mother. Additionally, a search for the father is underway.”
Baby on beach arrest: Abandoned newborn’s mom arrested
[Examiner 5/1/13 by Bruce Baker]
REFORM Puzzle Piece
Looks like you got it all wrong, again. The Mom followed the safe haven law, took the baby to the hospital, but then gave a wrong story instead of just leaving.
And your usual premise of safe haven laws not working is wrong, again. How about New England?
No abandments in years, and no deadly abandonments in over six years.
While your forces were saying the laws shouldn’t be passed there were two to three abandonements per year, with half of them deadly.
According to your way of thinking that region should go back to those days, and statistics.
Why not have a legislator file a bill to rescind the Baby Safe Haven law in a state you choose. That way you can cite al of your false info and supposed data in the hearing and public debate.
Mike, you don’t seem to get the point at all.You somehow think that awareness will stop abandonment and a law will do the simple trick and you must think that processing abandoned children without their history is just fine because it is all about the adoptive parent getting the child, not the child knowing his or her history.
I know this must be your life’s work, but when a woman is not acting rationally or being coerced when she is “in crisis”, she is not going to follow goofy safe haven laws (and give all of that information that the government wants but can’t compel out of her). It is called desperation. No law is going to change that. No one cares *why* she is desperate in this story. Do YOU care if she was in an abusive situation? Do YOU care if she just needs support, medication, counseling? Or do YOU only care if this child is placed with a “caring” adoptive couple which of course implies that she doesn’t care? She obviously took the baby to a hospital (and likely birthed this child on her own, no less!) and the baby was fine at the time. You don’t seem to care about the back story because that is the *messy* part of this type of situation. Birthmother bad, adoptive couple good or do you play by the NCFA marketing of the “selfless birthmother” who relinquishes in a safe haven? How quick can parental rights be terminated is the mantra…Quick, adoption is an emergency in this situation! Well adoption is never an emergency. It is all better when the simple solution of putting a baby (with no history) with that loving adoptive couple, right? Do you know that 1/3 of women who get abortions are coerced into it? Why don’t you care if this woman was coerced into giving the “wrong story”, as you put it? Again, it is PARTIAL compassion…just for the child, not for the mother. What do you think is “false” information here? Go back to the “Old days”…of what? What silly strawmen!
And for a more complete explanation,read Bastard Nation’s position on this issue, which I concur. See http://www.bastards.org/bb-legalized-anonymous-infant-abandonment/
Excerpt
“Bastard Nation Opposes Safe Haven Laws Because These Laws:
Deny the right of identity to infants abandoned “legally” and strip the infant of all genetic, medical and social history.
Include few or no safeguards against third party intervention (father who doesn’t want responsibility, embarrassed grandparents).
Ignore established birth parent revocation timeframes that permit a birth parent — usually the mother — to reclaim her child in a reasonable amount of time.
Deny birth fathers due process.
Contravene sections of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) which give tribes first custody rights in cases of child relinquishment.
Deter adoption through traditional legal channels and replaces standard practice with what some Safe Haven advocates call “non-bureaucratic placement.”
Discourage women from seeking pre-natal and post-natal medical care and counseling, thus endangering the health, well being, and even life of both the mother and the baby. In Florida receiving centers are prohibited from even asking women if they need care.
Create legislative band-aid solution instead of addressing the root socioeconomic causes of baby abandonment and neonaticide: poverty, substance abuse, physical abuse, shame and mental illness.
Reject long-standing best child welfare practice.”
Yep, what they said…
Re: “… HIC is just mad that they didn’t get a from this situation…”
Question: How come if the birthmother solicits a payment from PAPs in exchange for surrendering rights to her child, SHE would be arrested for “baby-selling”, but if an adoption agency collects a handsome sum from the PAPs in exchange for a child, it isn’t?
The birthmother is the person who suffers all the physical discomforts and risks of pregnancy and childbirth, after all, not to mention the psychological pain and suffering after “surrendering” her child. So why is she the ONLY party involved for whom it’s automatically unethical or illegal for her to take a cut from the massive fees infertile PAPs are willing to pay for a healthy baby?
Now, I’m not advocating for regulatory changes to allow this, because of the detrimental effect it would have on the adoptee’s psyche to know he was sold. I’m asking why do we tolerate private adoption agencies doing the same thing, as if calling the money PAPs spend “fees” was anything other than linguistic legerdemain to conceal the fact that babies are their stock-in-trade?
Good question, Astrin. It is a crazy world we live in. I don’t understand it either Hawaii is a state with no revocation period. She would have to sign a document if she was placing. There is no putattive father’s registry in Hawaii either. Just like abortion is not the *opposite* of adoption, “abandonment” (which can mean anything from boarder babies left in a hospital, abandoned OR discarded infants) is not the *same* as adoption or desiring an adoption plan.
Even the Evan B Donaldson (which is pro pro pro adoption) is against safe haven laws.
After this case in Hawaii, why would any woman “safe haven” a baby anyway? Clearly if they don’t follow procedure they will be charged with a crime and have their photo all over the evening news. I’ll bet that’s exactly what someone in crisis needs .
Right on Rally for calling it like it is and shame on HIC for promoting their business because of this sad case. They must really be desperate for babies to sell to clients.
Thanks! And bringing a PAP interview into this story is disgusting. I agree that this will deter others from using the Safe Haven law. There is no national survey of how many children have been “saved” and there is no accountability in most states of whether these programs are effective. Those women who used the Safe Haven…would they be the population of women who would have placed for adoption anyway? With no real data, it is anyone’s guess. This is the ultimate feel-good legislation.