Adoption Center Of Choice ripoff comprises an elaborate fraud scheme especially since no contact names are ever listed for this adoption agency. Provo, Utah

I am a former client of Larry Jenkins.  I know him to be an upstanding person.  In our dealings he was always ethical, kind, professional,  and very competent.  He worked tirelessly on my behalf, and I will forever be grateful for him and all that he did for me.  If you are looking for an attorney, you will not do better than Larry Jenkins. 

I'm Melinda, the grandmother of the child Shannon posted about in the above posting.

Currently my son is in the middle of a court battle with 'The Adoption Center of Choice' represented by Larry Jenkins, so I will not be commenting on the case while it's ongoing nor will I directly address Mr. Jenkins, but I will comment on this little interaction before me on this public forum.

I believe by the 'implied' rules Mr. Jenkins set down in his response, (one cannot comment on Mr. Jenkins integrity or honesty according to Mr. Jenkins if they do not know him or have done any business with him) and the fact our family has/is interacting with him and know him due to court matters I can comment on what I have read here.

If one does a search on the net, "The Adoption Center of Choice' and Larry Jenkins it is very interesting what comes up. The majority of information that comes up is not favorable. Questions about 'The Adoption Center of Choice' and Larry Jenkins integrity and ethics have surfaced for years now by many. This is not the first time either's ethics/honesty have been questioned or their ties to the Mormon Church and how these 'ties' influence their business practices.

Mr. Jenkins mentioned in his brief and what appeared to me to be a condescending reply to Kathy the following; "I am Larry Jenkins. Kathy does not know me. She has never done business with me and to my knowledge she has never done business with Adoption Center of Choice. She is not qualified to comment on my integrity or honesty."

Did I miss something here? One does not have to personally know a person or have done business with them to be qualified to comment on a persons morality or ethics. If that were so, the majority of us could not comment on the 'ethics and honesty' of the likes of Saddam Hussein, David Koresh, Dennis Hof the owner of the Moonlight Bunny Ranch (brothel in Nevada), Columbia Drug Cartel leader Pablo Escobar, FBI's 10 most wanted Mormon Polygamist Warren Steed Jeffs, etc. This argument is simply ludicrous and has no merit.

I do not see where Kathy called Mr. Jenkins a lying manipulative scum bucket with no morals or ethics. I just see where she posed a question based on her observation of facts and was very respectful. It's amazing to me what people read into things or what areas they seem to be 'overly sensative' in. I wonder how Mr. Jenkins came to this deduction that his personal ethics are being personally attacked by Kathy's posting?

I am also wondering what qualifications are needed to make a comment of personal opinion? I am under the assumption we have the right in this country to voice an opinion.

I don't remember us losing our rights to wonder, question, interact with one another with our opinions and discuss peaceably without malice, deceit or maliciousness.

Mr. Jenkins also wrote the following; "It appears she may have a beef with some of the lawyers for the LDS Church."

Actually, it does not appear that way to me although I respect the right for it to appear that way to anyone else reading/posting here. I would say the above statement appears to be Mr. Jenkins opinion only and looks to me as if it's being used to sway the perception of the readers. But again, that's just my opinion.

So many opinions being thrown around now, Mr. Jenkins, Kathy's, Shannons, mine, I pray this does not get confusing for Mr. Jenkins since it appears to this reader he feels only he has the right to voice his opinions and observations and others may not. Let me say again, this is my opinion.

By Mr. Jenkins written declaration that he does not know this woman makes him by his own words 'not qualified to comment on her integrity and honesty', yet he comments with his personal viewpoint of her possible intent and motive and and seeks to discredit/ridicule her.

Excuse this simple country girl, but how does that work? Is he allowed a different set of standards and if so, why? Who's set of standards do we adopt here in this forum, in life?

To me, based on my set of standards, that screams double standards and borders on questionable ethical practices. Again my humble opinion.

Does Mr. Jenkins, though an attorney feel he plays by a different set of rules as the rest of us I wonder?

Now, I'm not implying he does not generally play by the rules nor understand this, so for heavens sake I pray he does not get overly sensative and think I implied this. I'm basing this on this forum and his written comments here.

With that being said, I read the next statement which reads; " Her logic should tell you something."

I would have to throw in my opinion AGAIN and say, I see nothing wrong with Kathy's logic and it tells me she's highly observant. In fact, her logic is based on facts and her deduction is quite interesting.

On the other hand, I'm greatly disturbed by Mr. Jenkins attitude in just this little interraction in this forum. In my opinion it borders on arrogance.

I believe our perception can be changed by how we look at things, and a 'talented' person can re-direct how we see something by implication, getting us to look from a different view and have us accept that view as the only legitimate factual view. I prefer to look from many angles, not just one presented to me, weigh what I see, weigh the character of who presents each view and trust my perception based on many variables.

I'll be getting to 'know' Mr. Jenkins, I'm watching him intently. I'm also watching The Adoption Center of Choice intently. When this is all over, I will be happy to share with the readers my 'opinion' of Mr. Jenkins and the adoption agency.

I find it very interesting who trips across our paths in life and for what reasons. I'm encouraged we have not lost the rights in this country to speak our opinions in a public forum allowing doors to open for discussion whether you're an attorney or average citizen.

Thank you all for reading my opinion.

I would encourage each reader to THINK independently, research, trust your gut instinct and not blindy accept as truth what is presented to them because of the presenters social level in life, education or strong backing from seemingly impenetrable interest groups buffeting and joining ranks to form a more powerful camp.

When it comes to morals and ethics, social postioning is not indication of either, it only says where a person is socially. Social position doesn't say how that person got there or what their personal ethics are while in that position. You HAVE a right to look, question and discuss what you see, and many times it's the person looking on the outside who sees things from an unbiased viewpoint and sees past all smokescreens.

The question is, what will we continue to accept in our lives, in our country?

Melinda

Cody wants nothing more than to be a father. The state of Utah and Ashley (birth mother) are trying to take away Cody's rights to be a father. Cody got Ashley pregnant, (both over 19 not in a relationship or married) and when she told him, he made it very clear he wanted her to keep the child,

He said he would take care of her financially and provide her with a place to live if her family kicked her out due to the pregnancy. She had told him that her family was going to "disown" her. He stressed at that time, he wanted the baby and was intent on raising the child.

A few months later, Ashely told Cody the child had died, she had a miscarriage. Shortly after, Cody left Wyoming and came up to Idaho to relocate and get his life in order. At this time, he was under the assumption there was no pregnancy. The entire time Cody still had his cell phone and e-mail address, which Ashley had both. She never called again.

When Ashley was 8 months pregnant, Cody's friend Nichole called him on his cell phone stating Ashleys friend told her (Nichole) that Ashley was still pregnant and was giving the child up for adoption already having the adoptive parents picked out and actively involved in this pregnancy. Cody then called Ashley to see if this information was true, leaving a message on Ashleys phone.

Ashley returned the call stating that she wanted Cody to talk to Adam Barnes. Ashley never stated Adam Barnes was with the LDS Family Services, Ashley had given Cody Adams personal cell phone number. His mother did a google on Adam Barnes and found out he was with the LDS services in Helena and got the office number and told Cody Adam was with the LDS agency.

Cody contacted Adam, and Adam tried to talk Cody out of pursuing his fathers rights. Cody stated to Adam emphatically he had NO intentions of giving up his fathers rights, in fact, was going to be exercising them in raising his child. Adam tried to 'counsel' Cody even after Cody stated he did not want any counseling, this was not up for discussion. At this time Adam told Codys mother there was no fathers putative registry in Wyoming. She had already sourced the information and knew there was. (yes cody did sign up on that)

Cody's mother decided to go higher and speak to his supervisor Cary Shelton, telling them Cody has backing (his family), wants to be in this childs life, and they best follow the law. She also talked to Dennis Ashton who is the Director of LDS Family Services in Utah. She told him they have done nothing but lie, manipulate, and threaten (to sue Cody's mother) and she would get every agency involved if she had to with the purpose of putting the pressure on them and exposing what I see as a possible baby brokering ring in the mormon church.

At this time she talked to Ashleys mothers and tried to reason with her, that since Ashely has stated over and over she does not want this child, we are more than willing to help Cody raise this child. She kept saying to her, Ashley has to give this child to a married Mormon couple, that the child needs both a father and a mother, and they will do everything to follow this through.

At that time she also made calls to CPS in Montana, Linda Korth who licenses child placing agencies in Montana, CPS Sheridan and Buffalo, Police Department, Chris Wages Prosecuting Attorney Buffalo, FBI and the Attorney Generals Office in Wyoming soliciting help. Some were co-operative and some were not. In the end, everyone did a hands off. Cody kept calling Ashley phones (home and cell) BEGGING Ashley to please let him know when the baby will be born and ANY information and kept pressuring the Mormon church to have this girl and baby surface since she had disappeared from site and was no longer in Buffalo. She finally called Cody stating she was in Utah, Cody will never father the child (her words) and he will pay child support until the child is in college. Then he was asked, did he understand? He said no, he wanted to know if she planned on keeping the child or gave it up. She would not answer, she repeated the three things she said, and then said, "quit harassing me and my family and have your mother stop calling and harassing us". Then she hung up. That's the last time she returned his phones calls.

Ashley nor her family ever contacted Cody to let him know the baby had been born. Cody found out the child was born by a friend seeing Ashley at a party in Sheridan no longer pregnant. Cody called the hospital in Buffalo, and they said the child was not born there. Cody contacted the police department to have them do a welfare check on the baby. This is the second time we have sent them over. Cody talked to Officer Duncan who at first refused to go over, stating he did not want dragged into a civil matter. Cody stated this was a welfare check, and debated with Officer Duncan until Duncan relented. He was very condescending calling Cody 'bubba', but went over to the house. He called Cody after the welfare check telling Cody Ashley was there, the child was not and she would be calling him that night. He also said Ashley told him to tell Cody, "If he thinks hard and long enough, he'll know where the baby is."

Cody called Ashley that night left two messages, she never returned his call. Earlier we got the LDS family services to write a letter stating they were pulling out,. Cody had sent a letter of intent to the LDS family services much earlier. Everyone has always known Cody wants this child. Later we found out Ashley had indeed had the child in Utah and had gone through an adoption agency there. The child was already with the adopted parents (Cody had already stopped an adoption in Wyoming and in Montana) We could get no information because they claimed cody had not "established his parental rights" in Utah because he failed to do some unknown paperwork within 20 days of the baby being born (remember, we don't know exactly WHEN the baby was born because ashley would not communicate with Cody)

In Jan of 2007 Cody was granted a "hearing" to attempt to reverse the adoption in utah before it was finalized. The commissioner denied that reversal.He is currently appealing.

The adoption agency, or whoever it was on the other side, stated in court that ashley had called Cody and let him know that she was giving birth in Utah and giving up the child there for adoption. Do you really think with that kind of knowledge Cody would have done nothing when he did so much to stop the adoption in the other states.

My question is - should one parent be allowed to give a child up for adoption when the other parent CLEARLY is actively against it and has stopped other ones from going through? We need to revisit fathers rights and make new laws to protect them. If you would like to contact cody please visit http://home.comcast.net/~shannontara


here is an article I found that talks about the same thing with the lawyer representing the adoption agency that has Cody's daughter......

the direct link is http://www.canadiancrc.com/articles/chic...
.......

Utah's adoption laws ensnare poor parents here

Chicago Sun-Times, BY MARY MITCHELL SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST, January 15, 2004

Every child has a father. And I don't believe that father should be treated like a mere sperm donor when a mother puts a child up for adoption. But that is precisely what is happening in Utah, a state that has the most aggressive adoption laws in the country.

Each year, hundreds of pregnant women go to Utah to have their babies. They relinquish their rights as mothers, usually without the father's knowledge. Some fathers are trying to fight back.



Utah's strict adoption laws have been challenged by fathers in North Carolina, Alabama and Arizona. Now they may soon be challenged in Illinois.

"I think the reading of the law is too close to the edge for comfort," said Phillip Lowry, a lawyer who specializes in adoptions in Utah. "It opens the adoptive parents to heart-wrenching drama when these natural fathers come out of the woodwork."



After seeing a commercial about The Adoption Center of Choice in Utah, a 23-year-old Chicago woman who suffers from depression decided to place her 7-month-old son with the agency. Eula McNulty became depressed after she gave birth to her son, but she did not seek medical attention because she was overwhelmed by her parental responsibilities, she said. In fact, McNulty felt desperate. And the baby's father was in a Louisiana jail.

"I had gotten so depressed that I cried all the time," she said. "It was stressful. I went to my family and asked them if they could keep him for a while. Everybody said no."



The day after McNulty called The Adoption Center of Choice, she got a visit from a social worker with Lutheran Family Services. Two days later, she got a call from The Adoption Center asking her to come to Utah.

"They assured me that the father would be contacted," McNulty said. "I was afraid to tell him."



Grandmother's door open

McNulty had been romantically involved with the baby's father, Carlos Orr, for six years.Although Orr is in jail, his mother looked out for his child. Since the paternal grandmother in Chicago was already foster mother of two children, her door was always open.

But McNulty didn't tell the grandmother she intended to surrender her baby. And The Adoption Center of Choice did not contact the child's father.

According to Larry Jenkins, the lawyer representing The Adoption Center of Choice, birth fathers do not have to be contacted under certain circumstances.

"It really depends on how old the kids are, what kind of relationship the kids have had, or if the birth mom was married. Fathers don't have to be notified if they never established a relationship with the children," he said.

On Dec. 10, 2003, McNulty flew to Utah using an E-ticket provided by The Adoption Center. One prospective adoptive family backed out, and McNulty was introduced to another on Dec. 12.

"We all went to dinner that night. They had three kids, and I felt comfortable with them," McNulty said. "Basically, he was adopted by the 15th of December."

She was given an envelope with $1,300 in cash and sent back to Chicago. McNulty's remorse started the next day.

"I called Linda [the adoption agency's representative] that night and told her I made a mistake. I shouldn't have made such a decision so quickly," McNulty said. "She basically told me to go to work, get out and go shopping."

And, Jenkins explained, "Under Utah law, once she signs away her rights, it is effective immediately and cannot be revoked."

Caught up in adoption mill

It sounds like non-refundable baby selling to me. The idea that an adoption agency would pay mothers cash for their babies is abhorrent.

McNulty is not the only poor, desperate woman who went to Utah. Another woman who is too ashamed to let her name be used took her young twins and an infant to that state. She was given $1,800 in cash, supposedly to cover her travel and meal expenses. The children's father is fighting to get them back.

I don't know if Utah's adoption law is the latest weapon to be used by women when their relationships break apart. I hope not.

Like hundreds of other babies in that state, too many black children are being caught up in this adoption mill. Obviously, if the fathers had married these mothers in the first place, their parental rights could not be trampled upon.

"Whatever the mother does doesn't affect the father's rights," said a spokesman with the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. "The father has to take legal action to re-establish custody of the child."

But that's the Catch-22, isn't it? Neither the mother nor the father has the money it takes to wage a custody battle against upper-middle-class adoptive families.

McNulty is filled with regret, and Orr and his family intend to get the child back.

"I thought it would help me feel better," she said. "I thought it would make it much better for [the baby]. Half the time now, I don't get out of bed."

I am Larry Jenkins. Kathy Caudle does not know me. She has never done business with me and to my knowledge she has never done business with Adoption Center of Choice. She is not qualified to comment on my integrity or honesty.

It appears she may have a beef with some of the lawyers for the LDS Church, for whatever reason, but why it would qualify her to comment on my integrity and imply an "elaborate fraud scheme" simply because my office is in the same building as theirs is beyond me. Her logic should tell you something.

I am Larry Jenkins. Kathy Caudle does not know me. She has never done business with me and to my knowledge she has never done business with Adoption Center of Choice. She is not qualified to comment on my integrity or honesty.

It appears she may have a beef with some of the lawyers for the LDS Church, for whatever reason, but why it would qualify her to comment on my integrity and imply an "elaborate fraud scheme" simply because my office is in the same building as theirs is beyond me. Her logic should tell you something.

I am Larry Jenkins. Kathy Caudle does not know me. She has never done business with me and to my knowledge she has never done business with Adoption Center of Choice. She is not qualified to comment on my integrity or honesty.

It appears she may have a beef with some of the lawyers for the LDS Church, for whatever reason, but why it would qualify her to comment on my integrity and imply an "elaborate fraud scheme" simply because my office is in the same building as theirs is beyond me. Her logic should tell you something.

I am Larry Jenkins. Kathy Caudle does not know me. She has never done business with me and to my knowledge she has never done business with Adoption Center of Choice. She is not qualified to comment on my integrity or honesty.

It appears she may have a beef with some of the lawyers for the LDS Church, for whatever reason, but why it would qualify her to comment on my integrity and imply an "elaborate fraud scheme" simply because my office is in the same building as theirs is beyond me. Her logic should tell you something.