I was thinking Luke

Murdered by his own Father.

---

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

---

@twinkles**stars wrote:

So now the whole family should be punished and never see this child? Ok..... 😞 

---

If adopted .... yes.... isn't that how it works?

 

 

---

No. Children are adopted for many reasons and family still have contact. Depends on the circumstances. The childs family are not responsible for the womans actions....at this point in time?

Daniel and Luke are both biblical names and since the family have been reported as being devout christians, if either of those names were chosen, the only thing outrageous about it is the sensationalist reporting by the media. Poor little bubs has had a rough start to life. I hope that the woman did what she did due to mental impairment. What she did was abhorrent but it would be more so if it was done out of pure cold-bloodedness. Perhaps the baby will end up being fostered by a suitable family member. Can adoption still be forced these days? I thought those days were long gone.

---

@twinkles**stars wrote:

---

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

---

@twinkles**stars wrote:

So now the whole family should be punished and never see this child? Ok..... 😞 

---

If adopted .... yes.... isn't that how it works?

 

 

---

No. Children are adopted for many reasons and family still have contact. Depends on the circumstances. The childs family are not responsible for the womans actions....at this point in time?

---

 I know several people who were adopted.  None of them had contact with biological families as children.

As adults, some have made the choice to seek out their biological families......some were not interested.

When a child is adopted, the adoptive parents are given all rights and responsibility of the child.  I think it would be totally their 

choice whether the baby had any contact with the biological family or not.

 You never know, his family might try to get custody of him.

Personally, I hope his life goes onward and upward.

---

@azureline** wrote:

---

@twinkles**stars wrote:

So now the whole family should be punished and never see this child? Ok..... 😞 

---

I find it strange that anyone even mentions it................ his name is irrelevant, it's to protect his privacy, not hers. What I also find objectionable is the press and the public hounding her relatives. Disgusting behaviour. 

---

Could not agree more.  And as the woman is Samoan, she may not be familiar of names of murdered children.  My guess is that whatever they named the baby the press would find some strange connection with the name.  And public just laps it up.

Adoption today is quite different to what it was in the past, many families have open adoptions and maintain contact as extended family. Suitable family members can also apply for custody and get it.

I suppose the courts will decide under the circumstances.

It would kindest if the boy were returned to his family. Maybe not in the care of his mother if she is unstable.

Kindest? maybe. I personally think a young couple who have their name on the adoption list, similar culture, similar family values.

---

@azureline** wrote:

Adoption today is quite different to what it was in the past, many families have open adoptions and maintain contact as extended family. Suitable family members can also apply for custody and get it.

I suppose the courts will decide under the circumstances.

---

I don't believe an open adoption  would be good for this boy.

After all.... his mother tried to kill him.

Surely, you would try to protect him from that......  At some stage he will use google......