Rep. Harris & wife rehome adopted children Now with Exorcism

[thoughtful]

What a sleazy character Harris is. I only hope he was not abusing those girls, sexually or with "whip the sin out of them" punishment. I'd like to think this nightmare could not be any worse than what we already know about.

On the totally shallow, lighter side . . .

I generally say I want to snark on people like him for their heinous acts and horrible mindsets, and that I won't pick on appearance or style.

But, if there was ever a picture that tempted me to snark on clothing, this was it (and I don't care if they were wearing ugly stuff on purpose, as people often do with these particular items of clothing -- it's still :pink-shock:) :

I couldn't even caption it -- it was just too painful to the eyes.

[SunnyAndrsn]

Probably veering off-topic, but I'm falling down the rabbit hole of REactive Attachment Disorder. It seems like there Are a huge amount of strong feelings and differing opinions on what it is, when it's appropriate to be diagnosed, and especially forms of treatment.

For those of you with experience -- what are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that there are a lot of co-morbidities of children in foster care, orphanages, etc, and any child that has had a disruption in their home of origin--for whatever reason--will have difficulty with attaching to a new caregiver. This is NOT the same as RAD. Children exposed to drugs in utero *MAY* have a host of subtle dysfunction because of those exposures that are not recognized for what they are.

I've had MD's tell me that there is no proof that meth causes long-term damage. Humph! My husband is a child psychologist and strongly disagrees. Having cared for babies that are withdrawing from meth side by side with healthy newborns, there is no doubt in my mind that these children have been harmed. FAS can be subtle as well.

If the bio mother did not disclose her use during pregnancy, it can be further hard to properly diagnose. These are kids that get mis diagnosed as ADHD. They may be diagnosed with a conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, etc. Or they may have multiple diagnoses that make it difficult for well-meaning but ill prepared foster parents and adoptive parents to care for the child.

Bottom line: It's the kids that are going to suffer because people grab onto whatever is popular. Right now, it's RAD. I'm happy to hear from another poster that RAD information is being provided to potential adoptive parents. In 2001, this was not the case.

[older than allosaurs]

I started hearing about RAD in the (maybe) mid-'90s and found enough match up with one daughter's background and behaviors that were giving me fits that I tried out a mild version of holding therapy. It very soon became apparent that this was a no go.

The promoters use that kind of circular logic that tells you the more a child fights it, the more she needs it, so you are supposed to double down until she gives up. They say you are providing the boundaries that the child needs and wants but cannot consciously accept, but no. That way lies abuse and the willful denial of a child's autonomy. I couldn't do it and I'm sad and embarrassed to admit that I tried even for a few short sessions.

But I do get how desperate you can become when you can't seem to find a way to reach your child who is finding new and escalating ways to create chaos. I felt so inept, so sorry for her that I couldn't seem to get through and a bit sorry for myself that my best efforts were rebuffed year after year and our life was so tumultuous. It was hard for me to imagine what kind of life would be in store for her.

It turned out I needn't have worried. She just needed time and support. She's a university graduate, she volunteers with children in foster care, and she calls her lucky mom daily. It's another example of "we grow too soon old and too late smart." If I had the energy of 25 years ago along with the knowledge those 25 years have provided, I could take in another high-demand kid or two and probably be more effective and less stressed.

[Mama Mia]

When I worked directly with small children who had been in and out of Foster homes, substance exposed, etc. in the early 90's it must have been before RAD was a diagnosis in common usage, because I don't recall it ever being used, despite working with kids who certainly fit the definition. But they could fit so many other definitions of disorders as well! Sometimes it really concerns me that a new bandwagon of diagnosis is jumped on and small children are shoved into boxes and subjected to questionable treatments. It's a fine line, I think, between getting kids the help they need for lrgitimate issues -- and defining behaviors as issues in order to qualify for help. If that makes sense.

It was definitely a problem with Conduct Disorder and Oppositional Defiance Disorder diagnosis when I worked in group homes. Those labels meant big money from the state for care. Thousands of dollars a month difference if the teen had a diagnosis that qualified as Severely Emotionally Disturbed. So there would sometimes be kids whose main issue was really that they decided to join a gang for all the reasons kids join gangs --given a Conduct Disorder or Oppositional Defiance Disorder diagnosis and put in therapeutic care with kids who struggled with severe mental illnesses that were very detached from reality. A really, really bad combo for everyone involved.

It sounds like RAD is something that could easily be diagnosed too frequently. I would think that one issue could be that it must be really, really hard for a parent who had always wanted children, struggled with infertility, maybe spent tens of thousands to adopt -- to discover that parenting wasn't the ideal they thought it would be. Or that the Tools that worked with their easy going , non traumatized children just won't with this new child.

I'm not at all trying to imply that there aren't huge benefits to early diagnosis and treatment of mental health disorders for children. But I wonder how often a specific diagnosis is overused inappropriately because it's the current thing, or the label opens other doors, or it feels so much better to have a reason things are so fucked up.

[SoybeanQueen]

Our kids had a foster mother who used shockingly similar tactics to try to get our kids (biological siblings) separated and then to have them moved elsewhere. She did it before the adoption process officially started, although the kids had been with her for years and she was supposed to be the adoptive placement. One of mine had the fake RAD diagnosis with the animal abuse and other scary things. There are legitimate RAD behaviors, too, but it was all lumped in together at first.

We never saw any evidence of harm to animals or smaller people. We supervised carefully until we could determine whether or not there were risks. The foster mom claimed that one of our kids killed a pet and harmed another. I truly don't believe it. It's been several years now and I have never seen this kid be cruel to a pet, or to any human, for that matter.

My experience is that RAD is maddening and frustrating and sad but not a physical danger to others. Regardless, it's pathetic to see people giving up after 6 months or so. They should be prepared for a bare minimum of a year for adjustment, but I've seen more than one book that suggests it takes at least as long as their longest previous placement to feel safe about not being moved again (or to trust the adults).

[SoybeanQueen]

It sounds like RAD is something that could easily be diagnosed too frequently. I would think that one issue could be that it must be really, really hard for a parent who had always wanted children, struggled with infertility, maybe spent tens of thousands to adopt -- to discover that parenting wasn't the ideal they thought it would be. Or that the Tools that worked with their easy going , non traumatized children just won't with this new child.

I'm not at all trying to imply that there aren't huge benefits to early diagnosis and treatment of mental health disorders for children. But I wonder how often a specific diagnosis is overused inappropriately because it's the current thing, or the label opens other doors, or it feels so much better to have a reason things are so fucked up.

I agree with all of this. Early diagnosis is good, but for younger kids can depend too heavily on reports from the adults in their lives. In the case of our child, the foster mom was the only one who witnessed the dangerous and scary behaviors. That was enough to get the diagnosis. Labels do open doors, but it can also be difficult to take a diagnosis away later. I worry that my children may have trouble later in life because of some of the too-hasty diagnoses.

[salex]

The foster family who had the girls before the Harris family had fought the Harris adoption, --may have been covered...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/0 ... the-girls#

An experienced foster family that housed the two younger girls for a year and a half prior to their adoption by the Harrises has approached the Times with their story. Craig and Cheryl Hart say, among other things, the adoption was allowed to proceed over the objections of the foster parents and local DHS staff only because the head of the the Division of Children and Family Services (DCFS), Cecile Blucker, exerted pressure on behalf of Justin Harris. DCFS is the arm of DHS responsible for child welfare.

The Harts also say the middle sister — who would have been 4 years old at the time she entered the Harris home in 2012 — was not violent or dangerous. They claim the Harrises were warned repeatedly by themselves and local DHS staff that their home was not a suitable placement for the two girls or their older sister.

Officials from the Division of Children and Family Services say they cannot comment on the adoption case, but Cecile Blucker needs to answer to the people of Arkansas—did she intervene on behalf of the Harris family over the objections of DHS staffers and the former foster family? Everyone involved in the case objected to the adoption, but later gave tentative approval, with conditions:

"And at the hearing, the ad litem attorney — you know, the one who is representing only the interests of the children — said, 'When we met less than a couple of days ago, everyone's recommendation was for these kids to not go to this home. Now, what has happened in the last 24 hours that everyone's recommendation has changed?'"

"Harris' face was getting all red," Cheryl said. "And the ad litem asked him, 'Did you make calls?' And he finally said, 'I did what I had to do to get these girls.' I expected the judge would [stop the adoption] but she gave them the oldest girl." The younger two soon followed.[/q

[2xx1xy1JD]

My thoughts are that there are a lot of co-morbidities of children in foster care, orphanages, etc, and any child that has had a disruption in their home of origin--for whatever reason--will have difficulty with attaching to a new caregiver. This is NOT the same as RAD. Children exposed to drugs in utero *MAY* have a host of subtle dysfunction because of those exposures that are not recognized for what they are.

I've had MD's tell me that there is no proof that meth causes long-term damage. Humph! My husband is a child psychologist and strongly disagrees. Having cared for babies that are withdrawing from meth side by side with healthy newborns, there is no doubt in my mind that these children have been harmed. FAS can be subtle as well.

If the bio mother did not disclose her use during pregnancy, it can be further hard to properly diagnose. These are kids that get mis diagnosed as ADHD. They may be diagnosed with a conduct disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, etc. Or they may have multiple diagnoses that make it difficult for well-meaning but ill prepared foster parents and adoptive parents to care for the child.

Bottom line: It's the kids that are going to suffer because people grab onto whatever is popular. Right now, it's RAD. I'm happy to hear from another poster that RAD information is being provided to potential adoptive parents. In 2001, this was not the case.

We have close friends whose foster son was not properly diagnosed with FAS for a long time. The agency knew that his mother had done drugs and that the child had been through abuse and neglect with both the bio mom and a previous placement, but it hadn't occurred to them that FAS was also involved. It seems that she drank when coming down from a high, and the alcohol actually did more lasting brain damage than the drugs did.

[2xx1xy1JD]

When I worked directly with small children who had been in and out of Foster homes, substance exposed, etc. in the early 90's it must have been before RAD was a diagnosis in common usage, because I don't recall it ever being used, despite working with kids who certainly fit the definition. But they could fit so many other definitions of disorders as well! Sometimes it really concerns me that a new bandwagon of diagnosis is jumped on and small children are shoved into boxes and subjected to questionable treatments. It's a fine line, I think, between getting kids the help they need for lrgitimate issues -- and defining behaviors as issues in order to qualify for help. If that makes sense.

It was definitely a problem with Conduct Disorder and Oppositional Defiance Disorder diagnosis when I worked in group homes. Those labels meant big money from the state for care. Thousands of dollars a month difference if the teen had a diagnosis that qualified as Severely Emotionally Disturbed. So there would sometimes be kids whose main issue was really that they decided to join a gang for all the reasons kids join gangs --given a Conduct Disorder or Oppositional Defiance Disorder diagnosis and put in therapeutic care with kids who struggled with severe mental illnesses that were very detached from reality. A really, really bad combo for everyone involved.

It sounds like RAD is something that could easily be diagnosed too frequently. I would think that one issue could be that it must be really, really hard for a parent who had always wanted children, struggled with infertility, maybe spent tens of thousands to adopt -- to discover that parenting wasn't the ideal they thought it would be. Or that the Tools that worked with their easy going , non traumatized children just won't with this new child.

I'm not at all trying to imply that there aren't huge benefits to early diagnosis and treatment of mental health disorders for children. But I wonder how often a specific diagnosis is overused inappropriately because it's the current thing, or the label opens other doors, or it feels so much better to have a reason things are so fucked up.

Unfortunately, I saw some situations with maddening diagnoses of convenience.

One case involved a perfectly normal, sweet little boy in foster care. His foster parents had insisted from day one that the child was difficult and disturbed, allegedly because at 14 mos. he was "rough" with his 2 mo. old sister. He was basically still a baby himself! His "difficulties" gave them access to extra care and resources. During the trial, it came clear that this couple that presented as a model foster family was anything but.

Another case involved a "disturbed" Somali teen, in the 1990s. Child protection officials were convinced that his illiterate grandmother couldn't possibly understand her grandson's complex issues. In fact, it's quite possible that she was the only one who was able to understand, since she had rescued him from the civil war, gone through the refugee camps with him and taken him to Canada. What did those assessing him know about the ordeal and loss he had experienced?

Yet another case involved a teen mom who had been in the foster care system from age 13. She had been molested by her father and tossed out by the rest of her family, then bounced around from home to home. Yes, by the end, she was unhappy, uneducated and angry. They stuck a mental health label on her, which I suppose was easier for the system than saying "we royally fucked up a perfectly normal young woman in our care". She had thrived in a caring maternity home and could have been a perfectly good mom with support, but the label haunted her. Her son will soon be 18, and I pray to God that he looks up his records and finds out just how much his mother loved him.

[ILoveJellybeans]

Please do not trust any information on that website (attachment.org). It is the website of Nancy Thomas, a proponent of dangerous holding therapies and cruel "attachment therapy." She has no credentials as any kind of medical or mental health professional and no academic background. She used to be a dog trainer and has stated that she uses some of the same techniques on children as she did with dogs. Some choice quotes:

These are from various sources; you can see the full citations here. She is right up there with the abusive fundies we talk about.

Second - she often uses the terms "attachment disorder" and "reactive attachment disorder" interchangably. There is no such diagnosis as "attachment disorder." What she describes as RAD is not the true clinical diagnosis of RAD that appears in the DSM V. KateFowler posted a Mayo Clinic link upthread that gave a good overview of the clinical, evidence-based diagnosis of RAD. I would post the information directly out of the DSM, but my copy is on loan to a friend. The list of symptoms of "RAD" posted on Thomas' website have nothing to do with the clinical diagnosis of RAD, except for "Indiscriminately affectionate with strangers" and "Inappropriately demanding & clingy." More than a few of them are completely subjective and ridiculous ("Parents appear hostile and angry" - how can the actions of two other people be a "symptom" of something in a third?)

There is a whole community that has sprung up around this definition and symptoms of "RAD," promoted by Thomas and various others. What they talk about is not RAD as defined by the mental health and medical communities. They often promote harmful and cruel therapies and discipline methods. Google Candace Newmaker if you're curious and have a strong stomach.

Let me be clear - I am not saying that the behaviors described are not real or scary and difficult to manage or in need of treatment. But they are not RAD. The explanation could be any number of things depending on the circumstances of the child. The child may meet the criteria for conduct disorder. Reactive attachment disorder is rare, and its symptoms do not include violence, aggression, firesetting, cruelty to animals, etc. Too often the term seems to be thrown around as a catchall diagnosis for children with a history of abuse/neglect/time in foster care and behavioral problems. Calling it RAD and using Nancy Thomas-style "treatment" (essential oils, anyone?) is not the answer.

Thank you for letting me know-I used this example because it was linked to elsewhere in the thread :)

[Mama Mia]

Reading all that Nancy Thomas and attachment therapy information :shock: :shock: just awful.

I had never made the connection before but was advised by my severely ADHD kids school counselor to do a hold on him if he wouldn't go to time out, or go to his room. He was 6 or 7 , mid 90's. I bet that's where they got the idea! Horrible, horrible strategy for him. He would go bezerk if restrained at all in general. -- car seats as a toddler he would escape from, dentist was a disaster - he would go into a panic and bite, setting his broken arm as a 5 year old required several strong medical workers ---- anything involving being confined -- ALL huge, huge battles. So when he already upset and I tried to wrap myself around him to keep his arms and legs " trapped" until he calmed down -- holy fuck -- that was awful! I tried it a few times and realized it was absolutely not a good idea and I can see how people end up dead.

And I have just NOW have suddenly put the pieces together. Right this minute -- that school desks probably brought out that exact same feeling of being imprisoned and trapped and panic! A bazillion modifications and conferences and medications and battle after battle after endless, hopeless, soul crushing battle about school. And if I , or any of the teachers or counselors, had thought about just not having him sit at a fucking desk his whole school experience might have been at least tolerable! OMG, I am going to go sob uncontrollably now. My poor baby :cry:

[2xx1xy1JD]

Attachment Theory is one of those concepts that gets really misunderstood.

It is NOT about being physically attached to a child 24/7 (Dr. Sears' books notwithstanding).

It is NOT about simply having an affectionate relationship with a mother.

Instead, it's about the infant/child's ability to develop TRUST in a primary caregiver. Can they rely upon a caregiver to come back after they leave? Can they rely on a caregiver to meet their needs? Will they seek out the primary caregiver when they need something?

Physically restraining a child or otherwise disrespecting their personal space does nothing to encourage that trust.

[Toothfairy]

That article led to this one:

http://www.reuters.com/investigates/ado ... icle/part1

Fuck these people. This is horrible. They need to be in prison for child trafficking. How could anyone do this to a child? Children aren't toys you just pawn when you get tired of them. Anybody could claim that child you're advertising. Anyone can kill, harm, abuse children. And you're just giving them to anyone. That's a crime.

[Toothfairy]

I haven't read this whole thread but did read some of the articles. Justin Harris and his wife are just disgusting human beings. They should be thrown in jail. Stop hiding behind Scripture for your actions.

I do agree with the article about private/ international adoptions. Often adoptive parents have no support or guidance. Every one of these children are dealing wi th some sort of trauma. Often the parents don't know what to do when the child doesn't attach or always show signs of distress. There should be more support programs for these parents however I'm not excusing their behavior. When you adopt a child you make a commitment to love and cherish it forever. Child trafficking is wrong and even more damaging to a child.

I've seen some comments about RAD. 2×× comments are spot on. Children who have RAD don't develop a healthy attachment. They lack the ability to trust and usually are abused and neglected at an early age. Their is treatment for it. You have to find a therapist that specializes in this type of therapy. It's hard finding one depending on what area you're in.

[Mama Mia]

We have close friends whose foster son was not properly diagnosed with FAS for a long time. The agency knew that his mother had done drugs and that the child had been through abuse and neglect with both the bio mom and a previous placement, but it hadn't occurred to them that FAS was also involved. It seems that she drank when coming down from a high, and the alcohol actually did more lasting brain damage than the drugs did.

That was definitely what I recall from working with substance exposed kids. The initial withdrawal from hard street drugs made caring for those newborns really tough. And many, but by no means all, of those toddlers and pre- schoolers seemed to have some neurological damage from pre- natal drug exposure. Although of course it was impossible to sort out how much was due to the drug exposure, how much was due to all the life chaos and neglect being removed and returned, and how much was just because.

But most definitely it was the kids who had FAS who had the most severe and permanent damage and difficulties.

[older than allosaurs]

That was definitely what I recall from working with substance exposed kids. The initial withdrawal from hard street drugs made caring for those newborns really tough. And many, but by no means all, of those toddlers and pre- schoolers seemed to have some neurological damage from pre- natal drug exposure. Although of course it was impossible to sort out how much was due to the drug exposure, how much was due to all the life chaos and neglect being removed and returned, and how much was just because.

But most definitely it was the kids who had FAS who had the most severe and permanent damage and difficulties.

This is my understanding, too, from my kids and from piles of reading while we were running a special-needs adoption support group. FAS/FAE result from permanent brain changes caused in utero by exposure to alcohol. Exposure to alcohol restricts brain growth and permanently alters neuronal patterns. Effects vary with time of exposure, amount, and additional factors of the pregnancy.

Most effects of other substance exposures--for example cocaine and heroin--are transient, and any permanent ones tend to be subtle. Sensory integration difficulties, trouble with regulating emotions, attention issues, irritability--those may make the early years rough for all concerned, but if the child wins the parent lottery and has a stable, committed home, they can be dealt with and they tend to fade over time. My analogy for my cocaine-exposed daughter was that her nervous system had been sandpapered.

It's not a big sample, but I do know maybe half a dozen people who have knowingly adopted children with FAS, and I don't think a single family was able to raise the child in their home all the way to adulthood. That doesn't necessarily mean they gave them up, but there were periods of residential treatment, respite situations, etc. I haven't seen anything like that same degree of difficulty with children exposed to other drugs.

[KateFowler]

I haven't read this whole thread but did read some of the articles. Justin Harris and his wife are just disgusting human beings. They should be thrown in jail. Stop hiding behind Scripture for your actions.

I do agree with the article about private/ international adoptions. Often adoptive parents have no support or guidance. Every one of these children are dealing wi th some sort of trauma. Often the parents don't know what to do when the child doesn't attach or always show signs of distress.

There's a HUGE difference between being unsure of where to get help for newly adopted kid and HANDING THAT KID OVER TO A NEAR-STRANGER, INDEFINITELY after just a few months.

Internationally adopted kids tend not to speak English -- and if they're not a baby/toddler at the time of adoption, it may well take 2-3 years for them to become fluent. Don't even get me started on folks who give up on their new Russian/Ukrainian/Chinese 11 year old after less than a year. Bitching that a new kid is "non-compliant" because they've no idea what you are saying in English... no words. No. Words.

There should be more support programs for these parents however I'm not excusing their behavior. When you adopt a child you make a commitment to love and cherish it forever. Child trafficking is wrong and even more damaging to a child.

It's incumbent on the parent to ASK FOR HELP. Harris never bothered. He just REHOMED.

I've seen some comments about RAD. 2×× comments are spot on. Children who have RAD don't develop a healthy attachment. They lack the ability to trust and usually are abused and neglected at an early age. Their is treatment for it.

Yes! And finding help for a kid with a mental illness -- like RAD -- is a PROCESS.

It is NOT like getting help for a kid with a broken arm, ie x-ray diagnosis is 100% accurate, cast + physical therapy fixes 99.9% of broken arms within 6-8 weeks.

You have to find a therapist that specializes in this type of therapy. It's hard finding one depending on what area you're in.

Even assuming a kid REALLY does have RAD (or any other severe mental illness) and appropriate treatment is available, it may well take years. My baby sis was diagnosed with a severe mental illness in grade school, my parents got her lots of excellent help and true stability took nearly a decade. Which is about average for early-onset kids.

[thoughtful]

He now says that Blucker was aware of his giving the girls away.

Today, Harris added a new dimension to his story. In an interview with KTHV he said Cecile Blucker, the director of the DHS Division of Children and Family Services, was aware of his handoff of the children to Francis but didn't report it to other authorities. DHS still won't comment.

http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/ar ... n-decision

http://www.thv11.com/story/news/local/2 ... /24683497/

[salex]

Justin Harris also gave another reason for his actions but did not elaborate: His wife was dying of pancreatic cancer.

Next to the last sentence in this article

wusa9.com/story/news/features/2015/03/11/arkansas-lawmaker-adopted-daughters/24745953/

was? is??

[Idolatry]

Wouldn't it be a miracle if God rewarded you for giving your children to a child molestor by curing your cancer?

[SoybeanQueen]

I do agree with the article about private/ international adoptions. Often adoptive parents have no support or guidance. Every one of these children are dealing wi th some sort of trauma. Often the parents don't know what to do when the child doesn't attach or always show signs of distress. There should be more support programs for these parents however I'm not excusing their behavior.

Do the agencies not provide any support or guidance? One would think that paying thousands of dollars to work with an agency would at least come with decent pre- and post-adoption education and support.

[SoybeanQueen]

There's a HUGE difference between being unsure of where to get help for newly adopted kid and HANDING THAT KID OVER TO A NEAR-STRANGER, INDEFINITELY after just a few months.

She said what they did was disgusting and not OK. Nowhere did she indicate that being unsure of where to get help was the same as giving a child to a stranger. Do you realize that it seems like you're shouting down people who have similar opinions to yours?

[formergothardite]

Has anyone else wondered if he always adopted them with the intentions of giving them away to this guy?

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

My very first job I worked with a lady that was in the process of adopting a child through the foster care system. She had been the child's foster mother for two years, but confided in me that after the adoption they were going to let a family friend take the child. She passed it off as these were great people who loved and wanted this little girl but couldn't adopt because of "stupid government regulations". At that time I was still stumbling my way out of ATI and did not think anything was weird about it, but now I am horrified. She ended up getting another job before the adoption went through, but I wonder what happened with that child. She would be in her mid-20's now.

[salex]

Has anyone else wondered if he always adopted them with the intentions of giving them away to this guy?

{L_MESSAGE_HIDDEN}:

My very first job I worked with a lady that was in the process of adopting a child through the foster care system. She had been the child's foster mother for two years, but confided in me that after the adoption they were going to let a family friend take the child. She passed it off as these were great people who loved and wanted this little girl but couldn't adopt because of "stupid government regulations". At that time I was still stumbling my way out of ATI and did not think anything was weird about it, but now I am horrified. She ended up getting another job before the adoption went through, but I wonder what happened with that child. She would be in her mid-20's now.

Yez i wonder that aswell as it was so quick and the reasons so scripted. It could also explain why he got so red inthe face and upset while the adoption was onghoing. If he had already recieved payment for a couple of kids and he needed to deliver. Unless i missed it it has been about his fam ik ly suffering at the hands of the 6 year old not so much about ever loving yhe girls. My most cynical self thinks this group targeted a sexually abused child thinking, as was reported inthe selling into marriage case in CA, she was already "Damaged goods" and thinking if she turned in the new unofficial family they coild point to her history of abuse and say she was making it up because of her past. All conjecture but fiyts the scenario.

[formergothardite]

It is strange how determined he was to get these two girls despite them not being a good fit for his family, yet he seems to have absolutely no attachment to them. It doesn't seem like they continued with this adoption against all advice because they loved these children, they just wanted them, and then promptly gave them away.

This article that was written before it came out that Harris was the legal parent of these girls is chilling:

I'm confident nothing happened to our children," Harris said.

The "our children" part is in reference to the children in his preschool, he did not appear to view these girls as part of "his children".

http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/ar ... -with-rape

And of course, the monster child molester blames the little girl for what he did to her. She asked for it. :angry-banghead: