A Stitch in Haste

A Stitch in Time Saves Nine...But Haste Makes Waste

A collection of real-world libertarian, individualist and laissez-faire rants on law, economics, politics, culture and other current events
by an average, everyday lawyer & investment banker and part-time pop scholar.

Tossing the Baby Out With The ...
(Why aren't you reading this at the new website?)

---
A sad example that gays can indeed be just like everyone else -- including sometimes being petty and narcissistic:
[Sara] Wheeler, 36, and her partner, Missy, decided to start a family together and share the Wheeler last name. In 2000, Sara Wheeler gave birth to a son, Gavin, through artificial insemination. Two years later, they decided Missy Wheeler should adopt the child and legally become his second parent.
...
Georgia law doesn't specifically say whether gay parents can adopt a child, so the decision was up to a judge in the Atlanta area's DeKalb County. After an adoption investigator determined that both partners wanted it, the judge cleared the request.

The couple's relationship later soured.
Bottom line: Sara is now suing to exclude her ex-partner from the child's life -- on the grounds that gay adoption is illegal in Georgia. She is willing, indeed eager, to sacrifice the entire gay community in order to pursue her own irrational agenda.

Some hasty stitches:

--Sara insists, "it's about motherly rights." Utter nonsense. And, admittedly, it is not (directly) about "gay rights" either. The only permissible consideration here is the best interests of the child. What kind of ogre would seek to exclude a loving, competent adult from a child's life? This is parental narcissism of the most odoriferous kind -- on a par with the worst child custody battles of the heterosexual world.

--Sara insists, "since nothing in Georgia law specifically allowed gay adoption, the adoption should be tossed out." Also utter nonsense. See OCGA § 19-8-3. Furthermore, the impossible-to-ignore gaggle of bigot amendments, including of course Georgia's, warrant the polar opposite of Sara's position: If it's not explicitly banned, then it's presumptively legal. Isn't that among the most basic premises of "the American way"?

--Respect for judgments and decrees is a critical element of the rule of law. What a dangerous precedent it would be if courts could start "de-adopting" people who don't wish to be de-adopted -- or "de-marrying" people who don't wish to be de-married. Even the bigots in Massachusetts are not willing to go quite that far in their mean-spirited attempt to overturn the Goodridge same-sex marriage decision in that state.

Sara has lost at both the trial court and intermediate court level. She is now seeking a hearing before the Georgia Supreme Court. Stay tuned.
Posted by Kip on 26 March 2007


To comment on this post, please visit the new blogsite.