It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
"According to court documents, Osterman is partially right. Under state statutes, a parent's rights must be initially protected until such a time a court can consider cause for the termination of parental rights. This is true even in a case such as this one, where the father is a convicted sex offender whose child exists solely because of his assault of an underage girl.'
"The court order mandated that DHHS make every reasonable attempt to establish that Rubens' rights were protected as the biological father..."
Originally posted by whoswatchinwho
"According to court documents, Osterman is partially right. Under state statutes, a parent's rights must be initially protected until such a time a court can consider cause for the termination of parental rights. This is true even in a case such as this one, where the father is a convicted sex offender whose child exists solely because of his assault of an underage girl."
Originally posted by jsobecky
reply to post by TheColdDragon
Totally, absolutely wrong.
A 13 year old CHILD cannot give consent.