Baby Richard

Regarding "The Court That Cut the Baby in Half," by Dennis Prager, Commentary, May 16: There are pretty good arguments for both litigants in this tragic case, but it seems to me that Prager's response to this court decision raises more questions about him than it does about our judicial system. Certainly Prager has a right to his opinion regarding the decision. But when he implies that the judges involved were Nazis because they made a ruling that he does not agree with, claims that a child custody case is more tragic than the Oklahoma City bombing, where scores of people were killed, and then implies that "forcing" a child to live with his biological father is a fate worse than being murdered, one must question whether Prager has gone over the edge.

A man who battled fiercely for more than three years to win back his son from an adoptive couple has left his wife and the boy once known as Baby Richard. Otakar Kirchner moved out several months ago and the son is with his mother, Otakar Kirchner's lawyer, Loren Heinemann, said. Danny Kirchner was adopted by Kimberly and Jay Warburton shortly after birth, before his biological parents had married. The boy's mother, Daniela Kirchner, said she believed Kirchner had abandoned her.

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.

Re your editorial, "Oh Baby, What a Mess Parents Make!" June 25: Times editors ask which is most important--bonding, heritage or stability for the child; you suggest stronger adoption laws. By law, we adoptees may not choose with whom we bond. By law, adoptees, as in the general population, are raised in homes that may initially appear stable but can become unstable. By law, adoptees are denied knowledge and access to their true heritage. What the legislators, courts and wanna-be adoption experts cannot manipulate or predict is our outcomes.

A man who battled fiercely for more than three years to win back his son from an adoptive couple has left his wife and the boy once known as Baby Richard. Otakar Kirchner moved out several months ago and the son is with his mother, Otakar Kirchner's lawyer, Loren Heinemann, said. Danny Kirchner was adopted by Kimberly and Jay Warburton shortly after birth, before his biological parents had married. The boy's mother, Daniela Kirchner, said she believed Kirchner had abandoned her.

Re your editorial, "Oh Baby, What a Mess Parents Make!" June 25: Times editors ask which is most important--bonding, heritage or stability for the child; you suggest stronger adoption laws. By law, we adoptees may not choose with whom we bond. By law, adoptees, as in the general population, are raised in homes that may initially appear stable but can become unstable. By law, adoptees are denied knowledge and access to their true heritage. What the legislators, courts and wanna-be adoption experts cannot manipulate or predict is our outcomes.

Re the child custody issue of 19-month-old twins, June 15-16: This case may find public opinion resting unfavorably on the Indian Child Welfare Act. A predominant argument in all this is that the "interests of the children are not being considered." Such popular jargon dismisses the importance of being with one's family/culture of origin, especially one with a worldview that values its members as special and crucial to the whole. With the infants but 3 months old, the pre-adoptive parents--understandably distressed--missed the spirit and denied the letter of the law, while allowing precious time to pass.

The heart-wrenching picture of 4-year-old Baby Richard sobbing and reaching for his adoptive mother as he was carried off by his biological father says it all about a legal system preoccupied with the rights of biological parents instead of the best interests of the child. Ripped from all that he had known, Baby Richard was whisked away from suburban Chicago on Sunday by a man whom he had never met.

The Supreme Court, refusing to intervene in a highly emotional dispute over the adoption of a 3-year-old Illinois boy, on Monday let stand a state court ruling that may send the child to live with the biological parents he does not know. Lawyers for both sets of parents said that the high court's action clears the way for another hearing to determine who finally will get custody of the boy known as "Baby Richard." An aide to Illinois Gov.

The Illinois Supreme Court justice who wrote the fiercely disputed Baby Richard ruling survived an impeachment effort over his attempts to duck traffic tickets and other alleged abuses of power. A state House panel voted, 8-2, against impeaching 63-year-old James Heiple. The justice has charged that he is a victim of lingering resentment over the Baby Richard ruling, the 1994 decision that took a 4-year-old boy away from his adoptive parents.

Re the child custody issue of 19-month-old twins, June 15-16: This case may find public opinion resting unfavorably on the Indian Child Welfare Act. A predominant argument in all this is that the "interests of the children are not being considered." Such popular jargon dismisses the importance of being with one's family/culture of origin, especially one with a worldview that values its members as special and crucial to the whole. With the infants but 3 months old, the pre-adoptive parents--understandably distressed--missed the spirit and denied the letter of the law, while allowing precious time to pass.

Regarding "The Court That Cut the Baby in Half," by Dennis Prager, Commentary, May 16: There are pretty good arguments for both litigants in this tragic case, but it seems to me that Prager's response to this court decision raises more questions about him than it does about our judicial system. Certainly Prager has a right to his opinion regarding the decision. But when he implies that the judges involved were Nazis because they made a ruling that he does not agree with, claims that a child custody case is more tragic than the Oklahoma City bombing, where scores of people were killed, and then implies that "forcing" a child to live with his biological father is a fate worse than being murdered, one must question whether Prager has gone over the edge.

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.

The heart-wrenching picture of 4-year-old Baby Richard sobbing and reaching for his adoptive mother as he was carried off by his biological father says it all about a legal system preoccupied with the rights of biological parents instead of the best interests of the child. Ripped from all that he had known, Baby Richard was whisked away from suburban Chicago on Sunday by a man whom he had never met.

The Supreme Court, refusing to intervene in a highly emotional dispute over the adoption of a 3-year-old Illinois boy, on Monday let stand a state court ruling that may send the child to live with the biological parents he does not know. Lawyers for both sets of parents said that the high court's action clears the way for another hearing to determine who finally will get custody of the boy known as "Baby Richard." An aide to Illinois Gov.

Baby Richard, ripped from the only parents he had known for four years, is now in a new home with his birth parents. He is there to stay because the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal by his adoptive parents. The high court's action ends this sad custody dispute, but it does nothing to discourage these harmful tugs of war. Such harm can be prevented by new laws that protect the child while balancing the competing rights of the biological parents and the adoptive parents.

Buried inside your Jan. 21 edition was a short article regarding the little boy known as "Baby Richard." He was taken away from his adoptive parents after a long court battle and placed with his biological parents. The biological father has left his wife and child. The judges who ruled in this case must take a long hard look at the injustice done to this little boy whose life has been changed forever by this misplaced decision. Biological parents are not always the best place for a child.