Baby Richard and Adoption Laws

* Once again a child, Baby Richard, who is now 4 years old, was removed from the only home and parents he has ever known and given to his biological parents (May 1).

The courts have ruled in favor of the natural father because he was originally told that the boy had died at birth. How very sad that through this long custody battle, not one person, including the state Supreme Court of Illinois, thought of the child’s welfare. I would think that this is the ultimate trauma for a 4-year-old--to be taken away from your parents. I am in my 40s now and can still recall the pain and sorrow of being separated from my teddy bear at that age!

When will these judges realize that being raised by your biological parents isn’t always the best thing for a child? Let’s start thinking of the children and save them from “written in stone” judges. Let’s take into account what is best for the emotional well-being of the child.

PATRICIA CALDERA

Santa Clarita

* As a mother, I am filled with overwhelming sadness, fear and anger over the scenes I saw on television of the transfer of Baby Richard from one family to another. Sadness for all parties involved, whose lives are changed forever. Fear that what used to be unthinkable--that a final adoption is not inviolate--is now thinkable. And anger at a justice system that does not function for the good of the people.

Having personally suffered through the convoluted and unfair adoption laws of the state of California and living in the “land of O.J.,” one indisputable fact is now obvious to me. Lady Justice is not only blind, she has never been a mother (by birth or adoption), she takes bribes from rich defendants and tramples the poor who have no money to pay for legal services. She, her handmaidens in the courts and the thousands of lawyers who profess to worship her had better start examining a system that no longer works.

CANDACE BAUDOIN

Tustin

* As a birth father who was reunited with my 21-year-old daughter four years ago, I was dismayed to see yet another editorial regarding this complex subject, drawn in such simple terms (May 3). Of course no one likes the situation that occurs when a child is taken from the parents he knows, but the Uniform Adoption Act is not the answer and is drawn to protect adoptive parents and attorneys rather than children.

Forcing a mother who may be young, poor and vulnerable to make a lifelong decision without counsel or support in the hours and days after giving birth is unconscionable. If we’re to give guarantees to adoptive parents, then let’s respond in like degree and give birth parents guaranteed rights of visitation with their children. There is much information coming out of social and scientific studies as well as anecdotal material about the terrible effect of adoption on children.

Your editorial refuses to acknowledge the strident rejection of this law by birth parents and adoptees. If Solomon were here today, he’d solve this quite easily. He’d outlaw most adoptions and help a young mother keep the most important connection with her newborn child who needs her, not a rich parent.

STEVE LUSTGARTEN

Los Angeles