The end of August and early September brought two miracles to this Lawyer.
On August 30, I had a “Confirmation of Consent Hearing” for a couple who had a child placed with them through an Agency. They came to me in February when they learned that the Agency was going under. It took us till May to make the agency’s Trustee in Bankruptcy cough up the file. They had had the child since August 17, 1994 some 10 days after his birth. With the file we began the proceedings including a Petition to Confirm the Consent and to Involuntary Terminate the Father’s rights. The natural Mother had, after placing the child with the Agency, stayed in touch with the Agency to learn of his, the child’s progress. When the Agency went “Kaput” there was of course silence…no communication between the natural mother and the agency. We served the mother with notice of the hearing to confirm her consent to the adoption, given to the agency in August 1994. Then the clouds appeared … a telephone call from a friend or her brother-in-law stating she had “changed her mind”. We advised that she had to still appear in the Court and write us a letter revoking her consent.
The legal tragedy was, that all of this should have been completed by November 1994 and maybe even into February 1995, but the Agency had not been diligent…or was too busy trying to survive. In any event the mother’s consent, which could have been confirmed in 40 days after it was given, was now being revoked a year later. We also could not allege that the mother had abandoned the child since the facts were seemingly against us. She had stayed in touch with the Agency until they, the Agency, was not there to contact. We waited for the hearing and prayed for her to again” change her mind” and not appear. BUT SHE DID! The court terminated the Father’s rights and postponed the hearing to permit the mother to get an attorney or have one appointed. I indicated to the Court that my clients, the Petitioners, were contemplating filing an action to involuntary terminate her rights on the theory that she had abandoned the child for a period of more than six months. It was a weak attack at best, but the only one we had.
I met with my clients on Thursday, August 31. They were, of course, not happy about the situation, and did not want to sue the Mother. They are Mennonites and their religion would not permit them to sue. They were torn between their love for the child and their faith. So despite their anguish I was advised “No suit!” unless it was a sure thing, which it was not. So for this reason and not wanting to prolong the agony, they said arrange for the transfer back to the Mother. We decided to transfer the child back on Tuesday morning. I made the arrangements. The Petitioner-father, and his Pastor-friend, brought the child and his new birthday gifts to the office. The
Petitioner-Mother could not bear to be there to say “good bye”, She felt better doing that at home, She also now had to break the news to the other three children who had been joyous about having a baby brother. It would be almost as hard on them as on Mom and Dad. The transfer was made and the natural mother and her sister and her sister’s husband, assisted her. The story appeared to have a sad, even if legal, ending but then THE MIRACLE!
On Thursday morning, on my tape of phone messages, there was a call from the natural mother. She asked: “Would the petitioners consider taking the child back?” I had no problem answering that question! Unfortunately I could not do it on that day, so I arrange for them to come to the office on Friday at 10 AM. The natural mother was to come in shortly before that (She worked until 9 AM).
She, the natural mother, came alone this time with the child and his toys, etc. She arrived even before time. She executed new consents and since we now had a hearing date we served her with notice of that also. She left by 10 AM. Judy babysat with the little guy out on Oxford Avenue. He, the one year old, liked watching the traffic. It kept him amused. Judy and he waited anxiously for the return of the Petitioners. The reunion was tearful and joyous at the same time. Then the happy couple went off agreeing with me that indeed a “Miracle” had occurred. It was the work of the Lord they proclaimed.
The Natural mother’s change of heart, she said, had come after reading a letter the petitioner-mother had sent along with the baby’s things. It was a letter full of love and hope for her (the natural mother) and for her son…but she also let her know that she would sorely miss him and would be here, if she ever changed her mind.
The other miracle was a bit less dramatic but just as heartwarming. We were instrumental in bringing together two girls born of the same mom 26 and 27 years ago. The youngest some how learned that although she was adopted, she had a natural sister who was also adopted. She traced the paper trail to Paul McSorley as the attorney for the adoption of her older sister. She wrote me a letter asking my help. Judy located the file and it confirmed that she and our child had the same mother. I had placed the child in 1969 and so I proceeded to try to contact the adopting parents. We succeeded and the father agreed to leave it up to his daughter now 27 years of age (teacher and married). She was ecstatic about the idea. So I called the sister who had started the whole thing and told her the good news. I gave her the phone number of her newly found sister, and said I would call her and advise her that she would soon receive a call from her newly found sister. I never had the chance to make the call. They decided not to wait…both phones were soon busy! I later learned they were to meet over Labor Day weekend at the Adam’s Mark Hotel on City Line… a halfway spot between their homes. I received a note of thanks from the seeker and it was she who advised me of their anticipated meeting. I also received a phone call from the grandmother of the girl I had placed. She was very pleased and reminded me that she was the one to whom I had physically delivered the little girl some 26 years ago. She was almost as happy now as she was then!
Some people hearing the story of my bringing these two sisters together suggested it should have been on the Oprah show or the likes
A follow up to the miracle “number one”: “The mother who changed her mind” story: I have received another written document from the mother confirming one more time her intent to leave the child be. The hearing is in 10 days and with her present conduct I feel certain I could convince a court, that should she appear and start to revoke again, they should not and would not allow a revocation.
This writing of the Jottings commences a new thing. I am typing this myself on a computer, a PC, if you please. It is my good neighbor’s but I am doing it in anticipation of purchasing one my self. I thought a bit of training and info about them might be better than just diving right in…so here I am. I even purchased and am reading the book “PCs for Dummies”… a classic in its field. (Footnote: Sept. ’97 I have just reset and corrected the one typed in 1992)
The Inquire recently had in an insert called, “Weekend”, a story describing places in West Philadelphia. The area is now called “University City. It is comprised mostly of the University of Pennsylvania which now goes out as far as 43rd and Chester Avenue. There to my surprise was a story on” Clark’s Park”. The park we played is as kids – the park where I had a nightmare experience one time when deserted by my brother John and cousin Eddie. But the Inquirer was not reporting that but did observe that.
“In l990, John Edgar Wideman immortalized the park and its basketball players in his Pen/Faulkner Award winning novel, “Philadelphia Fire”. Turn left and head south about one block. Just before Chester Avenue, you’ll find a bronze statute of Charles Dickens with the character Little Nell from The Old Curiosity Shop (1841) staring up at him. They are separated and locked together by her gaze’, Wideman wrote, “Both figures larger than life, greener than the brittle grass.”
What I found of interest was that this statue, which I saw often as a growing boy, is the only one of the author in the World. His will stipulated that none be erected of him. Frank Elwell created this one in 1890 and gave it to the Dickens Family, who rejected it. It was erected in the park in 1901. Every February, the author’s fans celebrate his birthday by holding readings at the statute he never let stand. I was amazed that such a thing had happened in my old neighborhood. It never impressed me as being of the “historical” type.
The experience of a “nightmare quality” referred to above, was when John and Eddie left me with two sleds after an afternoon of sledding. Darkness came and as I started to leave I was surrounded by six or seven boys who started to taunt me to give up the sleds. I ended it by dropping one and swinging the other over my head as I ran for what I believed my life out of the now famous Clark’s Park.
I now bring this issue to a close. I am now in the computer world. This part of the September Jottings was typed on my Packer Bell. I am now an owner, and into the world of Computing. It is a strange world – a language of its own and a new culture growing by leaps and bounds (see footnotes). I’ve jumped on the comet and am hanging on with both hands. I do rejoice every time I make a typo and then watch it dissolve with the push of a button.
A thought before I leave: “You’re not a realist unless you believe in miracles.” (Sadat)
See you all soon! (f.n. Retyped and edited, Sept.97)
NEW YORK TIMES
SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 1995
P.S. September Jottings:
We received word yesterday, Sept. 27 that Win had been hospitalized. The news today is that she under went a catheterization and all is well. She will be staying with her doughier, Mary Theresa, when she leaves, which we hope will be today, Sept. 28th. Mary T’s phone number is 1-610-436-5656.
I’ve enclosed a cartoon that appeared in the N.Y. Sunday Times “Views and Opinions” Section. Who is the fruitcake maker?