bit of an epiphany.
yesterday was very likely one of the most painful days i’ve had in a very, very long time. as a result of it, certain things become clear, not the least of which is that i will never have the relationship i wanted to have with my son.
i am not willing to endure his ugliness of soul and he is not willing to be other than ugly of soul. every effort of care given has been thrown in my face with accusations that he does not want to find false because it might mean having to realize all the things he thought were truth were nothing more than the insurance his “parents” set in place to keep us apart.
he never did pull those court transcripts. he never did ask to talk to those who could validate the truth of what i have told him. he never did as much as try to look into any of it. he made a very minimal scan and when it didn’t fall into his lap, called me a liar and went right back to the same bile and venom he has spewed all along.
i spent six years fighting for him, only to have to give him up in the end. i spent another nineteen hoping they wouldn’t poison him so badly that it would be impossible.
mostly, i hoped he would be open-minded. but his “parents” raised him too well. the result being, in my opinion, that he is just as angry, violent, rash, and hateful as his father and just as passive-aggressive, paranoid, and petty as his step-mother.
it is time to let history be history. i am tired of hurting for the lies of people who had no compunction in relation to tearing my son and i apart and, from all appearances, no issue whatever with twisting him into someone who cannot be happy for all the anger they’ve given him to carry in life.
had he ever bothered to pull those transcripts, he would have found among them the following statement by the court… which, all things considered, sums it all up well enough that i am content to let it stand as epitaph to 26 years of waiting and hope that are so obviously at an end.
the following is the court decision of the last case, rendered February 12, 1988. at the time, i was six months pregnant with my daughter, and by the end of this six year stretch of legal battles, destitute financially. for all i won, in the end i lost, because i could not afford to pursue the next step in this process — the recovery of my son from these people. this judgment set precedent and standing for return of custody. it was the single goal across almost seven years filled with more hideousness out of his “parents” than i care to enumerate:
This adoption petition was filed October 28, 1987.
Paragraph 11 alleges that the biological mother failed to communicate with the child for a period of one year prior to the filing of this petition.
This court finds that this is not a true statement of fact in that
A.) Respondant paid child support up until six months priopr to the filing of the petition to adopt, and,
B.) Respondent communicated by mail with the child in December of 1986, ten months prior to the filing of the petition to adopt, and in June, 1987, only four months prior to filing.
C.) Petitioner has actively engaged in a program specifically designed to hinder communication between the child and his biological mother.
This Court finds that it is not in the best interest of [name removed] for this adoption to be granted and further I find that the biological mother has not, I repeat, has not failed to communicate and support this child for a period of one year prior to the petition to adopt.
This is much, much more to this case that I wish to be part of the record.
This Court very strongly feels that petitioner attempted to file and guide an adoption petition through this court without disclosing important information to the court and only the vigilance of the court clerk and the Judge prevented a substantial miscarriage of Justice.
This move appears to be another step in a process that has been on-going since June of 1985. This process includes the placing of innumerable roadblocks to the creation and maintenance of a healthy relationship between the non-custodial mother and the now six-year-old child. The evidence causes me to condlue that petitioner and the biological father have by scheme and design alienated the affections that normally exist between a mother and a son.
This Court cannot repair the psychological damage that has been done to [name removed] under the guise of love but in actuality motivated by gross selfishness or massive ignorance or both. While this court cannot heal the wounds that have been inflicted upon him, I will not be part and parcel continuing to thrash him. [named removed] conceived this child, carried him for the term of gestation and delivered him into the world. This Court will not condone the efforts of petitioner and her husband to make this mother the surrogate for them.
Lest this Court be misunderstood, I do not hold [name removed] out as being the role model for motherhood. The fact remains that her blood flows in the veins of this child and I will not, based upon the evidence before me, terminate her parental rights.
These decisions are not easy for we human judged. We can be thankful that we are not called upon to decide the punishment for teaching a child to hate his parent. That is reserved for the wisdom of God.
This adoption petition is denied.
This Court will allow both parties five [5] working days to submit authority for or against awarding of attorney’s fees to [name removed] for successfully defending this action.
This. the 12 day of February, 1988.
/signed/
[named removed]
Judge, Superior Court
[county] Judicial Circuit
i wish i could have saved my son from this. i could not. i wish it could have been different. but it was not. i wish it were possible for him to hear this and understand it as being truth. but he cannot.
i love you, daniel. and i miss you and have missed you more than you will ever know. but i cannot go through this again. i am sorry.