Janet Jenkins has asked a judge to hold her ex-partner Lisa Miller in contempt for not turning over their daughter, Isabella, to her by the deadline. A lawyer filed an emergency motion for contempt on Friday. She has also released a statement appealing to the public for help.
“I am so worried about Isabella. I do not know where she is or whether she is okay.
Isabella is my daughter. Lisa and I decided together to have a child, and that we would use alternative reproductive technology to do so. We picked out a donor together. I was there with Lisa when she gave birth to Isabella. We gave her both our last names, since we were both her parents. After Isabella was born, Lisa and I cared for her together. We both fed her, played with her, changed her diapers, and loved her.
Eventually, the courts ruled that I was Isabella’s parent, but in my heart I’ve always known that. It was devastating to me, as I’m sure it was to Isabella, when Lisa withheld contact between me and my daughter.
My goal has never been to separate Isabella from Lisa. I just want Isabella to know and love both of her parents. I just want to be with her, like any parent.
Please help me find my child.”
Anyone with information regarding Isabella’s and Lisa’s whereabouts should call the Center for Missing and Exploited Children at 1-800-843-5678 or the Bedford County Sheriff’s Office at 540-586-4800.
H/T BTB
“Anyone with information regarding Isabella’s and Lisa’s whereabouts should call the Center for Missing and Exploited Children at 1-800-843-XXXX or the Bedford County Sheriff’s Office at 540-586-XXXX.”
Why? Lisa Miller hasn’t been charged with ANYTHING. And its Janet Jenkins who allegedly has a history of violence and forcing Isabella to take baths with her.
No thanks. Sorry Janet, no help from me.
Eric, unless you provide substantial proof of any child abuse claims, your comments will be moderated. Until then, the record clearly shows that Miller is the one breaking the law by repeatedly violating custody agreements, while Jenkins appeals to legal methods of getting her daughter found and into proper custody.
Once again, that information is:
Center for Missing and Exploited Children at 1-800-843-5678 or the Bedford County Sheriff’s Office at 540-586-4800.
Here:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/oct/08102707.html
It would be nice if BOTH SIDES of this issue could be fairly noted and the accusations made by each party made public. So far, everyone prints everything Jenkins and her attorney say and next to nothing by Miller.
Moderator Action: Text of article removed, link is sufficient — comment space is for comments.
Fair enough. Thank you.
Eric Jones,
Virtually that exact same comment was posted on an article from the Augusta Free Press by someone named Anon. That same person posted other comments under the names Blah and Derek James in an attempt to give the impression that multiple people in agreement were making comments in support of Lisa Miller, rather than just one person loading up the blog comments.
A small group of Lisa Miller supporters appear to be trying to give the impression that she has much more support than she actually has. Unfortuately, when dishonesty is exposed, it undermines the message.
How can we take anything Miller says seriously if her “pro-family” solution to the years-long custody battle is to repeatedly flout the justice system and finally disappear from the face of the earth with her young daughter? Her days of being a “useful pawn” for the Far-Right are numbered.
Honestly, Eric, LifeSiteNews does not count as “substantial proof of any child abuse claims.” Even as a source of news they fail, as they are beyond biased, and have ignored corrections even when basic facts are presented.
The court has been all over this case. They took extraordinary action for a reason, and it’s not because of any grand conspiracy. No one in a civil society should defend the actions Miller has taken to evade a court mandated change of custody. And given her actions to date, I would not be inclined to put much value in any accusations, even if they should come directly from Miller’s mouth.
From where I sit, LIberty Counsel, et al, seem to have used this woman by feeding and exploiting whatever part of her has decided that the ills of her life rest on her being a lesbian. On some level she can be forgiven for this (though not released from responsibility), but LC really can’t.
After checking the comments mentioned at the Augusta Free Press, and comparing them to information provided privately with the comments, I’m convinced that the comments here under the name Eric Jones are part of an attempt to spam unfounded accusations against Jenkins rather than to discuss the facts of the case. XGW will not knowingly be used by anyone in this way.
The commenter has been banned as is asked not to attempt to comment at XGW in the future.
Possible aliases: Eric Jones, Eric Smith, Derek James (for internal use)
If the LifeSiteNews account is even close to an actual reflection of what Miller said in that interview (if there was one, there just isn’t any way to take them at their word), I certainly wouldn’t be using it as proof that she is sane or a fit parent. Her accounts of the psych ward alone sounds obviously fabricated or severely blurred, which forces one to ask what really went on there. I would need to see the medical records to believe any of it.
In the end, no good comes from trusting LiveSiteNews on any subject, but even as propoganda, this one fails.
Oh goodness,
Listen, I really don’t care if Jenkins took a bath with Isabella or if Jenkins was a bit unkind to Miller during their domestic partnership. Maybe it’s true, maybe it’s not.
Jenkins simply isn’t Isabella’s mother. Judge Cohen can’t make Jenkins Isabella’s mother simply by banging his gavel.
As a nation, it’s time to be sensible. The ordinary citizen of this nation is not nuts. We know how women become mothers, and we know how mothers behave when their children are threatened.
Obviously, Lisa Miller is Isabella’s mother. The best thing for Isabella is to leave her and her mother in peace.
Eventually the lunatic fringe will find something new and daffy to do and forget all about terrorizing Isabella and Lisa Miller. Until that happens, ordinary people have only to continue practicing common decency with regard to this national embarrassment.
Why is Cohen still on the bench? C’mon Vermont. Enough already! Show some pride, show some common sense, show some spark of humanity. Fix your mess please.
There are people here who are arguing, ridiculously I might add, about how much support Lisa and Isabella Miller do or do not have.
How much support do you imagine they need? Natural behavior doesn’t require much support. It continues unless grossly interfered with. The laws of nature dictate that one does not get in between the mother and the cub. Anyone with a lick of sense knows that. Anyone who’s ever participated in or observed a healthy parent-child relationship knows that tormenting Isabella and Lisa Miller is 1. stupid, 2. wrong, and 3. counter-productive.
It’s the unnatural behavior Jenkins is attempting to engage in that requires extensive support. Breaking up the Miller family and keeping Isabella captive and separate from her mother for her entire childhood is going to require a great deal of cooperative effort. Good luck with that plan, loopy left!
The family was broken up when Miller refused to let Jenkins see her daughter – years ago – by denying her any custody or visitation whatsoever.
Families are more than just a mommy and a daddy who have intercourse and give birth to a child that genetically can be traced to them. Thank goodness, too. Otherwise children might be subjected to a life on the lam, hidden from law enforcement, because their biological parent decides they are above the law.
Reason magazine has an interesting article concerning families that “go against ‘natural law'” and how they relate to the legal system.
Elizabeth: What is your definition of “natural?” If no one should come between a mother and her cub, then men do not have custody rights in a heterosexual union that has been disolved?
If you are so pro-nature then why are you on a computer? Computers are not NATURAL they are man-made. Why aren’t you living in a cave and grunting instead? Since humanity discovered fire we have been going against nature so stop with your trip down Nature’s Lane.
When two people enter a civil union they make a commitment. If one of the two parties involved decides to step out of the relationship they still have obligations under the law. If what you are proposing is that Jenkins no longer has rights because her ex decided to “go natural” then you are ignorant of basic civil law.
If you are so pro-nature, then why would you defend a woman who conceived by artificial means? Wherein homosexuality can be proved to be a part of nature, artificial conception cannot.
And further, just by the fact of giving birth does not make the one who gave birth the right to be a parent, or to prove that she is the right parent for the child. When separations occur, in our society, a third party has to intervene and determine what is best for the child. According to your logic, a crack whore on death row who gives birth to a child should be the one who raises the child by the mere fact that she gave birth to child. Good logic…NOT.
The simple and undeniable fact is that Jenkins can not ask for help in locating her daughter because she has no daughter. The only person who has a daughter in this case is Miller. Jenkins has no biological or legal connection to Isabella. A court order granting full custody of someone’s daughter to an unrelated stranger is preposterous. Miller has the right (indeed, the obligation) as Isabella’s true parent/mother to protect her daughter from this harmful misguided ruling using any and all means necessary. I truly hope Miller is successful in doing so.
Ms. Conley: I just wish you people would start being honest. You do not care about little Isabelle. What you care about is stopping the dreaded homosexual agenda, designed to forced all truly good people– i.e., people like you– to accept that which they don’t approve of– i.e., people like me.
Try saying this: I hate queers, and I will do or say anything I can to insure that they are not accepted as fully functioning parts of the human family. Extra points for doing whatever you can to make sure we live furtive lives of shame and loathing.
Of course Janet is her mother. Real laws, passed by real people, who actually know something about real gay people, instead of the dark and fervid imaginings of the social/religious right, say that she is her mother. She helped raise this child– while she could.
What is important in what you have to say is the subtext, that you yourself may not actually be aware of, though I sincerely doubt that. Subtext is everything, especially when dealing with people who are just plain old garden variety bigots, but who want to appear as reasonable, concerned, decent people.
What you are REALLY saying is that big ol’ lesbo could not possibly have the truly human feelings of motherhood and love for Isabelle, because she is in fact a big ol’ lesbo, and everyone KNOWS they couldn’t possibly have truly human feelings. Why look at her: she took a BATH with her daughter. Probable sexual abuse– you know how big ol’ lesbos are. Sexual abuse! nudity! Genitalia! I used to take showers with my dad. He wasn’t gay, and it didn’t turn me gay. I frequently visit hot springs resorts. Naked Hetero parents often bathe with their naked children. It’s not sexual and it is not abuse.
The sexual abuse is in the minds of people like you. Hmm.
It’s always the same thing– the great gay conspiracy to hide the truth about the evil and the sickness that is homosexuality. You accuse Janet, the state of Vermont, and gay people in general of being deliberately, ideologically self-blinded, engaged in a vast conspiracy to hide the truth, which you and your merry band of homohaters alone know. Of course it isn’t true. The only conspiracy here is that we wish to be treated like the functioning human beings we are instead of diseased pariahs, a threat to all that is holy.
What you really are saying is in the subtext– the gays are gonna get your children. They’re sick, diseased individuals, not merely different. they’re going to molest your children. Your children will be exposed to homosexuality. they’re trying to turn your children gay. That’s ALWAYS the subtext, and always has been. That gays molest children is only really good for the right-wing nutcases. No one else really believes it, and so if they say it, it just makes them look bad.
The subtle appeal to fear is what you do so that it looks reasonable. but it is just the same old hate, just wearing a cheap tuxedo instead an open raincoat.
Understand? Because everything you have to say about gay people is not justified by what you claim “proves” your point. But what is really happening that this proof just gives your flailing arms a straw– or a gold ring– to grasp at, a cheap justification, however weak, but something, anything, that allows you, and your merry, merry band of homobigots, to hold on to your cheap knuckle-dragging prejudices towards gay people whom you do not know, nor know anything about, but who for some reason, scare the HELL out of you– or attracts the hell into you.
You would know, but the only thing you allow yourself to know is your prejudice. That has safety in it. But here’s the dilemma. Your gutter-crawling prejudices are not something you can be proud of. But you can’t parade that in public, lest someone catch on to the true game here. Only Freddy Krueger-Phelps is brave enough, or dim enough, to say I HATE FAGS. That must be very frustrating to you when deep down inside you can’t fathom why anyone in their right mind would think attacking gay people is wrong, especially with lies, distortions, and half-truths.
The most merciful interpretation of what you have to say is that is just ignorance and “sincere religious belief.” Really, though, it’s just a lousy, lazy lie, but a useful one. It does what it is supposed to do– make gay people into inhuman, or subhuman, or at least, terribly damaged people, who hate all that is good and holy and wholesome, who want to bring all good things down into the GLBT sewer, where we can molest and make it as dirty as we are.
Quoting someone else, who said it brilliantly: “This is the stock and trade of bigotry: make the target impossible to relate to by destroying the most basic connections between members of the in-group and out-group. It is the fundamental mechanism all haters use to divide and isolate for persecution those they despise. Watch for this pattern, it’s far more common than most of us might expect, and is almost universal in everything this type of individual says against LGBT people, their relationships, and the way LGBT people approach their duties to society. Bigots love to masquerade as rational when in fact they have only one objective: dehumanization of the target of their hatred.”
Moderator Reminder:
Please remember that you must provide a valid email address with your comments. We do check this and your comment won’t be posted without a VALID email address. This will be kept private and used only if there is an issue with your participation here best dealt with privately.
Thank you.
Actually Steve, her legal connection is quite clear, since Jenkins and Miller were in a Civil Union in Vermont (think of it like a marriage – but for gays!) and because they brought a child into the world together, as a united couple, and because a JURIST (think of it like a person who knows a lot about legal stuff!) has several times declared Jenkins has a right to visitation and now custody.
And of course, we all know biological connection has nothing to do with how you are connected lovingly with a progeny. Otherwise people could be making the claim that Joseph did not really love Jesus of Nazareth as a son, and had no need or right to protect him by fleeing to Egypt. Right, Christians?
Elizabeth Conley, it isn’t Vermont’s mess that needs to be fixed. Vermont is playing by the rules, right down the line. Lisa Miller is the one who has made a mess, and boy what a mess it has become.
Lisa Miller just refuses to face up to the consequences of her actions and decisions. If she didn’t want Jenkins in her daughter’s life, she should never have entered into the Civil Union and never concieved and bore the child within the Civil Union. She had choices. She made choices. Choices have consequences.
Adults face up to their responsibilities, whether they like it or not. Ms. Miller hasn’t faced up to any of her responsibilities. Even now, she has kidnapped the child (lucky for her, the Vermont law treats this sort of kidnapping as custodial interference with the lowered penalty of 5 years in prison).
Eventually we all have to face the consequences of our actions. If Ms. Miller had done so earlier in this process, the consequences would have been far more beni
Emily K, Your sarcasm and condescending tone is so stereotypical it’s almost laughable. That aside, under Virginia law a civil union of this type (which is most definitely not a marriage) is not recognized. Thus my original statements stand. Jenkins has no legal or biological claim to Isabella as her daughter.
It’s well worth noting that Jenkins had ample opportunity to adopt Isabella and become a legal “parent”. However, Jenkins made no attempt to do so during the full year that the three of them lived together before Miller chose to leave the homosexual lifestyle. That in and of itself says volumes about her true emotional attachment towards Isabelle.
Miller believes Jenkins is harmful to her daughter’s well being. Based on the virulent statements that Jenkins has made about Miller, her Christian faith, etc, I would agree with that conclusion. Miller offered to agree to supervised visitation, which Jenkins refused.
I firmly believe that Jenkins is simply using an innocent young girl as a weapon to strike back at a former love interest. For these and other reasons I fully support Millers actions and hope she is successful in protecting her daughter.
Steve, the Vermont court has jurisdiction. They have civil unions. Thanks to States Rights, fleeing to Virginia won’t let you escape your parental responsibilities.
Steve, your pig-headed ignorance is not laughable.
Janet Jenkins is a legal parent. Vermont has said so. Virginia has recognised the Vermont ruling. Recognition by Virginia of the former civil union is a separate (and irrelevant) matter, as are your ill-informed opinions frankly.
Obviously we’re faced with a dilemma here:
1) either you know more about the laws and the facts in this case than the Supreme Court of Vermont, the Supreme Court of Virginia and the Supreme Court of the United States; or
2) you are talking complete rubbish but apparently don’t care if some people break the law.
I wouldn’t encourage people to break the law if I was you.
You, or anyone else, could be the next victim.
Grantdale, your comments serve as further proof that civil discourse with those of your mindset is impossible and demonstrate where the true intolerance rests.
Additionally, the comments made by both you and Emily are incorrect in asserting that VT law is superior to VA law in the case of said unions. That matter has not been definitively decided yet by the SCOTUS (declining to hear a case is not a ruling). The same “states rights” that Emily cites for VT are the same rights that give other states the freedom to follow their own state laws and state constitutions rather than having them dictated by others. The final outcome remains to be seen.
That said, I will not be posting any further in this forum (to your great joy I’m sure). As the saying goes “Never wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty and the pig likes it.”. I’ve gotten dirty enough already in trying to have a civil discussion here.
Good Day.
Isn’t it funny how some people keep pointing to Lisa’s biological rights are probably the same people who celebrated when biological mother Sharon Bottoms had her son taken away by her own mother, for being in a lesbian relationship. And in the very same state, Virginia.
Steve honey– if you look up “disagreement”, “intolerance”, “discussion” and “facts” in the dictionary, you will find that they don’t mean the same thing.
Anyone with ties to the “ex-gay” movement is already by definition mentally unstable, so Jenkins has every reason to be very afraid for Isabella.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1w3-tOfGEtA
Oh. Don’t forget “ideology” and “victim” “legality” and “I hate queers”.
Ben,
Your long and fanciful rant about what you imagine I think and feel has nothing to do with reality.
The people who stand to lose the most from Judge Cohen’s bad decision are homosexual biological parents. Their legitimate parental ties to their offspring will now be subject to all manner of tenuous claims made by various former partners.
Sure, heterosexual parents are concerned. We can easily see the risk. Homosexual biological parents, who are more directly effected, will be catching on to the hazard at any moment.
As a population, homosexuals are better educated and more affluent then heterosexuals. They won’t remain blind to the risks Vermont Civil Unions pose to their finances or familial ties. They’re going to catch on.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Vermont
“Civil unions can be dissolved in Vermont family court in exactly the same manner as divorce of married couples. But while there is no residency requirement to contract a civil union, there is a six-month residency requirement to dissolve one. An attempt of a Connecticut resident for a formal dissolution of his Vermont civil union with a New York City resident was rejected by the court of appeals on the basis of lack of jurisdiction.
”
Gay civil unions are poised to be messier to get out of than heterosexual marriages. Savvy, well educated, affluent gays are going to get gun-shy, particularly if they are also biological parents.
Ben, this isn’t about sweet, vulnerable gays and the mean ol’ heterosexuals who want to spoil their fun. This is about families, both gay and straight.
Being a queen is charming, being a drama queen is goofy. Get a grip.
Elizabeth said:
You started your comment complaining that Ben made assumptions about you, then appear to do the same. I’ll avoid addressing what appears to be a new diversion of the intent behind Miller’s flight from justice to simply request an authoritative source for your statement above.
“The people who stand to lose the most from Judge Cohen’s bad decision are homosexual biological parents. Their legitimate parental ties to their offspring will now be subject to all manner of tenuous claims made by various former partners. ”
So you now support full marriage rights for gay people?
You’re really concerned about how they could be negatively impacted by the judge’s decision?
Somehow I don’t think so. If there is a mess, the anti-gays created it. Simple marriage rights would have avoided the whole thing.
And i haven’t a clue about what’s REALLY going on in your mind? True, i don’t know you personally. but i certainly know your mindset. We don’t hate homosexuals. we love them. We really do. We just want to make sure that their lives are made as difficult and unpleasant as possible. your whole position is given away by your insistence that Janet is not Isabella’s mother.
And david, she didn’t mean to say better educated and more affluent. she meant smarter and better dressed. Naahh. I’m being a bit smarmy. no evidence for that, either.
I think most gay people are fully aware of how bad civil unions and their separate and nowhere near equal rights and responsibilities are. Unfortunately, in order to protect our lives and families, we’re forced to accept them. .. for the nonce.
I also think you are being less than ingenuous in your new-found concerns. If you can say: “I support marriage equality for gay people.” maybe i’ll take them seriously.
From reading Conley’s rant, one would think that she would favor ending all marriage, civil union and domestic partner laws for gay or straight couples in this country. There was nothing in her criticism of Vermont Civil Unions that couldn’t also apply to Vermon heterosexual marriages.
Splitting parents could settle things the old fashion way without the pesky interference of courts: personal or clan violence. Wow, perhaps Conley would prefer bloodshed to a judge following the laws of his state.
By the way, for folks interested in the characters in this case, I would actually recommend reading Lisa Miller’s interview with Lifesitenews https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/oct/08102707.html
I realize that right wingers have referred to it, and David Roberts is highly critical of this site. While I ignored Lisa’s unfounded accusations against Janet, I found it remarkable how the story that Lisa Miller tells about her own life is completely devoid of personal responsibility.
Her drug abuse is blamed on her parents. Her alcoholism is blamed on her husband. Her suicide attempt is blamed on her husband. Her stay in a mental hospital after the suicide attempt is blamed on the State of Virginia. Her lesbianism is blamed on the employees of the mental hospital. Her relationship problems with Jenkins are blamed on Jenkins. Her flight from Vermont is blamed on Jenkins. Her legal problems are blamed on the Judge Cohen. And her current flight from justice is blamed on Judge Cohen and Ms. Jenkins.
Further, she seems to be supported by her parents, then her husband, then back to her mother, then Jenkins, then the Fallwell church.
Her story is completely devoid of any sense of personal responsibilty or supporting herself. This was a puff piece supposed to make Miller look good. It just made me that much sadder for the kid that is caught in the middle of this selfish, irresponsible character who is trying to paint herself as some sort of martyr. There is a martyr in this story, and it is the little kid.
Elizabeth said:
This statement is incorrect.
It has been used against Jews before as well, most prominently during the anti-Semitic genocide of Fascist Europe. In that context it is also incorrect.
If being gay (or Jewish) is supposed to mean you have a ticket to affluence, why am I struggling to make ends meet and on Food Stamps? Why are none of my gay friends driving BMWs and Mercedes’? Why are they struggling to pay off student loans?
John said:
I thought the same thing — very sad.
“You started your comment complaining that Ben made assumptions about you, then appear to do the same.”
Nope, I’m merely well acquainted with the demographic’s statistics.
That’s the stats. As a population, gays and lesbians do well educationally and professionally.
Since Elizabeth Conley can’t provide a source for statistics, what she says about “knowing the demographic” of gays and lesbians is a lie and should be ignored.
https://www.rainbowreferrals.com/sponsors/statistic.asp
Reality is more interesting than anything the ideologues can dream up.
There are important issues of individual and corporate well-being that frankly dwarf the gay marriage vs traditional family debate.
While ideologues focus on the noisy, smaller issues, more important issues of child rights, parental rights and state rights are being determined without the general population ever being aware of the high stakes.
All Americans need to understand that partisan bickering is not helpful in establishing a safe environment for all children, all parents and all families, regardless of race, wealth, education, theology or sexual preference.
Janet Jenkins isn’t Isabella’s parent, and the state should not be taking Isabella from her parent and bestowing her on a third party unless it is in Isabella’s best interests. The court appointed (yes, this person was selected by Cohen) child advocate warned Judge Cohen that this transfer of custody was definitely not in Isabella’s best interests.
Therefore we have two departures from appropriate child custody policies that should alarm all people, regardless of demographics and personal passions.
1. Children belong with their parents unless the parents are unfit.
2. Children’s well-being is of paramount concern in determining custody issues.
Do you really, really want these two departures from traditional custody decisions to become the new norm?
Think. Look at the big picture.
Does this benefit the gay and lesbian population?
Really?
I predict that these two departures from appropriate custody decision making practices will devastate the gay and lesbian families you want to protect.
If Judge Cohen’s bad custody decision is not overturned, the results will reach far beyond Janet Jenkins, Lisa Miller, Isabella and the small, insignificant, short-sighted public debate over Vermont-style gay and lesbian civil unions.
Cohen is not the only dumber-than-dirt short-sighted judge in the world.
Remember Sharon Bottoms? In VA Judge Parsons awarded Sharon’s mother custody of Sharon’s son because he deemed Sharon’s lesbian lifestyle “immoral”. That’s a very, very dangerous precedent.
Think how much more dangerous Judge Parsons would be if he could select any number of “more virtuous” unrelated parties to be a “better” custodian for a child than the child’s parent/s?
Like I wrote earlier: think.
Please think.
Poor Judge Cohen, he has only the law to rely on. He does his job, and the Supreme Courts of both Vermont and Virginia agree that his decision is legal, binding and will not be reversed. The US Supreme Court doesn’t even want to hear this case, because it is obvious on it’s face that there is nothing for them to address.
Ms Conley, perhaps Judge Cohen isn’t the one who is dumber than dirt.
Despite popular myths, this information is not surprising given the high level of discrimination experienced by gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people, who come from all sectors of society, without regard to economic status, and experience discrimination that may at times affect their earning power,
Income Inflation Myth (PDF)
The link you provided is from an advertising group wishing to prove a new market to advertisers — hardly authoritative. Part of their source info comes from 50 year old data?
Elizabeth said:
And what kind of precedent would be set by allowing parents to flaunt visitation orders by the courts? This situation took years to develop and can hardly be blamed on a judge you consider to be “dumber-than-dirt short-sighted.”