Kyron Horman's stepmother is a profile in contradictions....

[BeanE]

True..but if someone just put whatever they want in a RO it would be up to the other person to prove its BS. IF the other person isnt willing to do that even when its about her minor child...then people will think what they will.

JMO

BBM. That really has nothing to do with law. I thought we were discussing it from a legal standpoint. Not that I'm a lawyer or anything lol.

Anyway. If someone alleges something negative about Terri, it must be true, but if Terri alleges something about someone else, it can't be true. hmmm.

 

[Calliope]

Child support and visitation are two separate issues.

You can't withhold visitation because the other parent neglects to pay support; you can't withhold support because you can't or don't engage in visitation.

 

[stmarysmead]

It was his choice not to be involved in HIS son's life. How she is supported is of no consequence. The money is for support of the child.

In my opinion, there is a moral consequence. SHE is providing no support but allowing all support to come from two men who are NOT the Father.

As for the parents, we all bring our personal history to our opinions. These people love their son no less than any other parent. If this woman came into his life, and as they see it, used him to educate herself FIRST, then adopt her son...and then left him....saddling him with years of support and not encouraging a relationship with the boy...they have an absolute right to see and empathize with THEIR son's pain. How do we know how their son may have suffered in this...if he truly loved Terri? They may have seen his pain first-hand. They may just see THEIR SON doing his very best for a woman he loved only to be used to get her education, child support for her son, and then...kicked to the curb.

We need to imagine how these parents and their son might feel as well.

 

[stmarysmead]

Child support and visitation are two separate issues.

You can't withhold visitation because the other parent neglects to pay support; you can't withhold support because you can't or don't engage in visitation.

Legally, no...as it should be.

I'm addressing how this speaks to Terri's moral compass in my opinion.

 

[kimmera]

Legally, no...as it should be.

I'm addressing how this speaks to Terri's moral compass in my opinion.

Exactly!!! Just because something is legal does not necessarily mean that it is moral or ethical. I believe that TH is the type of person that can rationalize and justify anything she does. As long as it benefits HER, the end always justifies the means! :twocents: MOO.

 

[kimmera]

No, according to the article, the $250k came from the restaurant she had with her FIRST husband. Whatever money she may have put in her pocket from that was no doubt long gone well before she met Kaine. Why else did her folks help her and hubby #2 buy a house? Why else did hubby #2's folks pay for her college? No, she was no doubt flat broke when she met Kaine.

Plus, do we really consider child support as "income?" That is supposed to support the child. I don't think you count that as income on tax returns, do you?

BBM~
No it is not taxable. And I brought up this exact point last night, because lots of folks were using the term 'her income' and I feel the same way that you do. Not to mention, 550/month is not a fortune to raise a teenager on in this day and age. Especially a boy...I raised two boys and they literally ate me out of house and home when they were teens.

 

[debs]

Legally, no...as it should be.

I'm addressing how this speaks to Terri's moral compass in my opinion.

How does what someone else chose to do...or not do...reflect on Terri's moral compass?

 

[BeanE]

How does what someone else chose to do...or not do...reflect on Terri's moral compass?

It doesn't. He chose to pay for her education. He chose to adopt his son. He's not a will-o-the-wisp blown in the wind, he's an adult.

You can't force someone to adopt your child. He chose to.

When adults make choices, they choose everything that goes along with it. Like supporting a child when you adopt them.

 

[Morag]

It doesn't. He chose to pay for her education. He chose to adopt his son. He's not a will-o-the-wisp blown in the wind, he's an adult.

You can't force someone to adopt your child. He chose to.

When adults make choices, they choice everything that goes along with it. Like supporting a child when you adopt them.

Do we have any information regarding whether the adoptive dad- the dad, that is, actually attempted to see his son over the last few years? If he did, and he was refused by Terri and/or Kaine and/or J, there must be a legal record of that.

BTW, being HIV positive is not the same as having AIDS. At one time, it was believed that it would inevitably progress to AIDS, but there are currently many people who are HIV positive who have not developed AIDS. Magic Johnson, for example, has been HIV positive since at least 1991, and he has remained quite healthy. So it's possible that J's bio-dad has also been fortunate.

 

[Ellebelle]

I find it alarming and distasteful for anybody to tell their in-laws how to spend their money and to vocalize and expectation as to who they will include in their will.


Besides, *they* didn't adopt J. And it sounds like they didn't much like or trust Terri. With good reason. Do you suppose Terri still expects their estate to go to J? Even though he has not seen his "dad" in many years? The whole thing is distasteful.

Whoa! Just gave me a thought. I sure hope that the Ecker's have a will that lays out specifics so well that it can't be fought later on.

My aunt, whose grandchildren never were around her after her son and daughter in law's divorce, passed away. There was four grandchildren. Two by her daughter and two by her son. She had specifically said multiple times to anyone who would listen, that she didn't want xxxxxx and xxxxxxx to get anything. Their mother had pulled them from her and when they grew up they still had nothing to do with her. She had a lot of money, possessions, and investments and they sued her estate for their share, and won. She thought she had it covered where they couldn't but she was wrong.

 

[Ellebelle]

There is another article saying her first husband used meth, do you think keeping a baby around a meth user is healthy? I give her credit for getting her baby out of that situation.

The information that daddy #1 changed years later is great for everybody. IMO keeping a baby in a meth environment is child abuse. MOO MHO and an oink.

Since Terri's son is living with him now, I'd like to hear his side.

 

[pdx]

Women do it all the time, I know I did. I don't think Kaine is the kind of man who does both....I have no evidence of it..If you evidence that he ever did, please share. TIA

I'm not sure what you're looking for exactly, but this is what the article says about Kaine taking full custody of K when D 'moved' to Canada (still curious about that..), describing him as the 'primary caregiver'. It's true that Terri lived in his house with him at this time.

Court records show that Desiree had primary custody of Kyron after her divorce with Kaine in early 2003. Both Kaine and Desiree said they worked out a joint arrangement: Kyron stayed with Desiree at night, was in day care and then spent two hours every afternoon at the Aloha house where Terri, Kaine and James were living.

In 2004, when Desiree moved to Canada to seek medical treatment, Kaine gained custody of his son. He said he was primary caretaker, dropping Kyron off at day care and picking him up.

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/08/terri_horman.html#incart_mce

 

[gwenabob]

BBM. Children are not chattel. Adoption is not human trafficking. Dear God.

Not for you or me, but I think we have seen many, many cases where parents do indeed consider their children as their "property". Look at CA.

And I believe that Terri used the back child support owed by Tarver as leverage to get him to relinquish his rights so daddy #2, whose parents "owe" J an inheritiance, (in her mind) to adopt. I think Terri does indeed view her children (and Kaine's child) as "property."
I base this on everything we have learned about Terri including her lack of boundaries wrt her Ecker in-laws, her roommate, her temp teaching job. She seems to view anything she can see, smell, or touch as "hers." JMOJMOJMO>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[stmarysmead]

It doesn't. He chose to pay for her education. He chose to adopt his son. He's not a will-o-the-wisp blown in the wind, he's an adult.

You can't force someone to adopt your child. He chose to.

When adults make choices, they choose everything that goes along with it. Like supporting a child when you adopt them.

"That doesn't."

Respectfully, that is your opinion. My opinion , in this discussion, is Terri's continued ACCEPTANCE of that increased support when she is not working, and SHE is being supported by a THIRD husband speaks to her moral compass. She as an "adult" ..."made a choice" to have a child...but apparently, does not "choose" to provide ANY monetary support herself. She uses others.

Is she a "will-o-the -wisp" with no responsibilities? Did she cheat on No.2 after "making the choice" to let him adopt her child? Who "forced" her to do that? If she is wrongfully accused, who "forced her" to begin a "sext-ing" relationship that would surely create havoc even if she were later absolved...between her and the father of her Baby K? Another Baby she "chose" to have and where was her great show of "responsibility" toward THAT child? "Will-o-the-wisp" Terri again? Always the victim?

When you chose to birth or adopt a child, you "chose everything that goes along with it." Like setting an example of decency and morality.

I'd like to know if she attempted to repay the money spent on her education as well. She "made a choice" as "an adult" to take that money...and could well USE that education to help support HER child and reduce her reliance on the "Non-Father."

 

[pdx]

What? You can't trust me by now? :dance:

bwoahaha.. trust noone... <g>

I was going to comment with some others here on some interesting bits that have been put out but the tone of this thread has turned sort of nasty.
There's no benefit in us turning on each other, folks. :twocents:

Wait ... what does pdx mean?

PDX is the airport code for Portland OR and a common nickname for the city itself. And, the nick I chose for this forum.

I missed the autism reference. I just checked the Oregonian piece and didn't see it. Could you tell me which article it's in please?

Thanks!

BeanE, I take the daily print edition of the Oregonian and read the story in print before I even came into my office & online yesterday. I can confirm that I just walked out to the kitchen in my Birkenstocks and pulled the paper out of the recycling to double check; what gwenabob wrote is what's in print.
(j/k about the Birks; I don't wear mine anymore :dance

 

[Annazed]

The in-laws, in so many words, said Terri's life revolved around J. It seems, from today's story, that Terri's parenting skills started becoming questionable around the time the baby was born.

I would say that supported evidence in the form of a daytime DUI and child endangerment charge in 2005 goes pretty far towards indicating an erosion of parental responsibility long before the birth of Terri's daughter, regardless of how Kaine might view the matter.

 

[BeanE]

IMO, there is something morally repugnant about a woman who takes years of child support from a man who is neither her son's father nor an active participant in her son's life....while she is supported comfortably by another man.

It's morally repugnant to me to deny that an adopted child is the true and real child of their adoptive parent, or to imply that a child should be left unsupported financially by a parent.

Where does that leave the child?

 

[BeanE]

BeanE, I take the daily print edition of the Oregonian and read the story in print before I even came into my office & online yesterday. I can confirm that I just walked out to the kitchen in my Birkenstocks and pulled the paper out of the recycling to double check; what gwenabob wrote is what's in print.
(j/k about the Birks; I don't wear mine anymore :dance

Thanks so much, PDX. I'm on the other side of the country. I thought the reporter was referring to an online article and searched all over for it last night. She didn't say in her comment on the online article that there was an additional article in the print edition.

Thanks for letting me know. :blowkiss:

 

[Ellebelle]

It's morally repugnant to me to deny that an adopted child is the true and real child of their adoptive parent, or to imply that a child should be left unsupported financially by a parent.

Where does that leave the child?

BBM
Sometimes it leaves that child in the mess the bio parent created.

Count me as one of those that thinks Terri was hopping from house to house to find her sugar baby soul mate. When the going got tough, I think she got going and looking for her next victim. I feel this is exactly where she was hoping it would go with MC. She needed a place to stay and play. She was hoping he'd bite. JMO

 

[stmarysmead]

It's morally repugnant to me to deny that an adopted child is the true and real child of their adoptive parent, or to imply that a child should be left unsupported financially by a parent.

Where does that leave the child?

Actually, I agree with you. Where we differ is on Terri's responsibility to do everything in her power to involve the adopted father in the child's life...beyond cashing the check. I have many friends with little love for the "Ex" who still have the child call the Dad regularly...who mail drawings and classwork...who show the child how to Email. They facilitate a closeness that is essential to the child's security...to his feeling of still being loved.

Terri chose this man to be her child's Father. Did she then cheat and leave him? And then, take his financial support without facilitating a loving relationship between the adopted child and Dad?

That's where I'm coming from. Terri bears responsibility too. Is she now plotting murder for hire or, at the least, involving herself with a FOURTH man through this sexting...and creating more havoc in her children's lives? Does SHE ever consider THEM as she indulges herself with these "romances?"