Mother Scores a Victory in Court Fight to Contact Her Son

A Florida mother who hasn’t seen her abducted son in eight years won a key victory Tuesday when a judge ordered a hearing on her claim that Orange County authorities didn’t notify her before allowing the child to be adopted.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Jack K. Mandel rejected, for now, a bid by the adoptive parents for a quick end to the biological mother’s lawsuit.

Mandel’s ruling was a preliminary action in an extraordinary lawsuit in Superior Court, pitting the rights of adoptive parents against those of the biological mother.

The decision also keeps alive Kay Nelson’s hopes of gaining some contact with her son. She was awarded custody after a divorce in Tennessee in 1979, but she alleges that the child, now 11, was abducted by his father and later abandoned in Orange County.

The child--identified only as “Baby Boy L” in the lawsuit--had been placed in juvenile institutions, foster homes, and was ultimately adopted after county employees sought to notify Nelson--efforts which she contends were not sufficient.

Santa Ana attorney Christian Van Deusen, known for his efforts on behalf of the rights of adoptive parents, said he will “seriously consider” an appeal before any hearing can take place.

“Children are people and they have rights, and under these circumstances, their rights have to be put first,” Van Deusen argued. “There has to be a point where the system says, ‘No, we’re not going to disrupt another child’s life.’ ”

Both sides in the case say they are primarily concerned with the boy’s welfare. Nelson, who has not been allowed to speak or correspond with her son, or see a current picture of him, said earlier this year that she is not sure what custody arrangement would most benefit him.

Van Deusen predicted that as many as one-third of all California adoptions might be subject to legal challenge years later if Mandel’s decision stands. He argued that finality and stability of adoptions helps the state in policing them, and suggested that Mandel lacked the authority to reopen the case.

Nelson’s lawyer, Wilma E. Presley, also won a small but important victory Tuesday: the right to see portions of the court files on the adoption, something she had been denied before under California’s stringent rules maintaining secrecy on most juvenile matters.

Presley argued that it was impossible to discover if the county’s attempt to notify Nelson was adequate without access to the files. She contrasted the case of a biological parent who puts a child up for adoption and then has “a change of heart” with that of Nelson’s, who has maintained that she has never given up hope of a reunion with her son.

“It seems to me that fairness requires that Mrs. Presley has a right to know what she’s fighting against,” Mandel said.

The ruling means only that Nelson will have a chance to prove the county didn’t try hard enough to contact her before the adoption. Presley contends that without proper notification, the court lacked authority to end Nelson’s parental rights and approve the adoption.

Nelson has said that she followed her ex-husband to his home in Florida when he disappeared after visiting with the boy. She claims she spent two weeks trying to find him, but failed. Nelson said authorities told her there was nothing they could do to help, and advised her to hire an attorney.

She learned of her son’s adoption only last fall, Nelson said, after she contacted a parents’ rights group. A staff member discovered that the boy’s birth certificate in Tennessee had been sealed by order of the Orange County Superior Court.

In the Orange County case and a related federal lawsuit, Nelson seeks substantial money damages for being denied her parental rights and also seeks to set aside the adoption and regain some form of contact with her son.