Ex-Lesbian Lisa Miller "Disappears" as Date Passes for Court-Ordered Transfer of

By Matthew Cullinan HoffmanJanuary 2, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Ex-homosexual Lisa Miller has apparently disappeared following a court order to transfer custody of her daughter to lesbian Janet Jenkins, her former partner, on January 1st.Miller failed to comply with the order yesterday, and her…

Full article…

This is truly the right thing to do. I would do no less.

Here’s a prayer intention for them: forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=6126036#post6126036 There’s no other way we can help them but getting on our knees :slight_smile:

I agree with this mother.

What an awful situation this woman is in. :frowning:

I would do the same thing.

I just don’t get this ruling…:confused:

Is there any precedent of taking a child away from a birth mother and handing it over to her ex-live-in-boyfriend?

Really odd and sad.

This is my thought also. This ruling is just crazy, the ex is not even the child’s parent. Our world has lost it’s mind.

Very sad.


When Judge William D. Cohen of Vermont Family Court dissolved the couple’s civil union, he awarded custody to Ms. Miller but granted liberal visitation rights to Ms. Jenkins.

Judge Cohen awarded custody to Ms. Jenkins on Nov. 20 after finding Ms. Miller in contempt of court for denying Ms. Jenkins access to the girl.

This is crazy!

Not the biological parent… not married… Why on earth would this child be handed over?

I hope she has lots of help on the run.

The goal of the judge was to punish the mother, the child is the means to do it. Kind of makes you glad the judge wasn’t Solomon.

I don’t know the answer to the question, but the comparison is not the same. I think the comparison would be handing a child over to an ex-stepfather because they were in a homosexual civil union (which should never have been allowed). I wonder why the homosexuals are pushing for homosexual marriage, when they seem to be getting what they want quite nicely through homosexual civil unions.

I agree with you, Mary Gail, that it is odd and sad (I would add outrageous and absurd), but I’m just sayin’… it’s because of the civil union.

The facts:

Custody was awarded to the biological mother, with the other parent - or “parent” depending on your viewpoint - having visitation rights.

The custodial parent decided that she didn’t want the child to see the other parent (or “parent”) any more, so unilaterally decided to stop her from visiting, despite her undertakings to the court.

Desperate to see her child, who called her “Mommy” too, the other parent - or “parent” had to go to court just so she could see her daughter again. So the court told the custodial parent that she really had to at least allow visitation, as she’d promised. She said she would. Swore it on the Bible.

Then refused to do it, claiming that Man’s Laws didn’t apply to her, only God’s.

So another court case, another promise. This time, the Judge told the custodial mother she’d be fined if she didn’t comply.

She didn’t. So yet another court case - this time to get a fine imposed. It was, She promised to pay, and promised to allow visitation this time.

She didn’t. She neither paid, nor allowed visitation. The non-custodial parent (or “parent”) would drive the 200 miles just to see her daughter, and be told “it’s not convenient today, maybe next week”.

So another court case. This time, the custodial parent made allegations of sexual abuse against her former lover. The case was extensively investigated, but the most diligent forensic work showed no evidence whatsoever that any of the claims were true.

So another court case. Another set of promises, and another fine. Then another. Then another. Then another. None of the fines were paid, until her local evangelical church sent around a collection for her.

No visitation was allowed. Even the grandparents were forbidden visitation when the custodial parent found out her former lover had gotten a new girlfriend, she was insanely jealous.

At last the Judge had had enough. The only way the initial agreement could be enforced was to transfer custody, with visitation rights to the other parent.

The (now former) custodial parent merely said “God will provide”, as she’d been living quite well on the charity of others for some time now. While collecting even more in child support payments from the other parent, or “parent”. Enough to pay her lawyers, though of course, not enough to do that and send her daughter to a good school. By now, the unpaid fines amounted to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

She emptied the joint accounts meant for the long-term education of the child, then vanished. She’s reported to have declared that she’d see her daughter safe in the arms of Jesus.

While a woman matching her description is known to have left the country, she did so alone.

The (now) custodial parent is frantic with worry, and just hopes that her child is still alive, and being cared for by someone.

If I were the judge on this one, I’d have done the same. The moment Ex-les filed a child support complaint against Now-les, she loses her right to contest Now-les’s, uh, “paternity.”

Having done so, she has to abide by court orders or appeal them. If she loses at the trial level, she can petition the trial court or the appellate court for a stay of the order granting Now-les partial custody pending appeal, but if she doesn’t get the stay, she, like all litigants, is bound by duly entered orders of court unless and untill the appellate court says differently.

If she is in contempt of a custody order, a trial court is perfectly within its rights to transfer custody to enforce compliance.

We all have to abide by the Rule of Law.

I don’t like the idea of “two mommies” any more than the next guy, but her lawyer screwed up when the child support complaint was filed. No child support, no standing (at least in Pennsylvania, anyway).

Can’t have your standing and eat your child support too.

There was no complaint: the child support was an integral part of the custody agreement.

When the ex-les fled the state of Vermont to the more gay-hostile state of Virginia, as Virginia doesn’t recognise same-sex relationships engaged in in other states, she thought she’d had the last laugh, as her ex- was obliged to keep up payments without any visitation rights.

But the Virginia courts - and this was taken right up to the Supreme Court of Virginia - while they didn’t recognise same-sex relationships from other states, gave “full faith and credit” to judicial orders from them.

The Virginia police on the other hand have refused to co-operate with the FBI on the matter. The orders (by the Virginia court IIRC but could be wrong) that the ex-les obtain some psychiatric help for her acknowledged delusional mental health state have not been enforced either.

Right now, the hope is that the child may still be alive. Or if not, that the body will be discovered soon. I don’t know if the local evangelical church is still paying the fines as they become due: if not, a warrant for arrest on those grounds will soon be issued, and possibly one for a kidnapping charge as well. The courts are holding off in the hope that the situation can be resolved without criminal charges being laid. No Virginia court wants to be held responsible for “taking a child away from its Christian mother to give to a Godless lesbian”.

Had the still-les been male, no doubt he would be receiving sympathy now for his terrible situation, not knowing whether his daughter is still alive, or being tortured by the mentally unstable mother to “get back” at the ex-. But because the relationship is same-sex… not so much.

Hopefully the reports of the ex-les’s mental instability are exaggerated, and the extent of her hatred less than we fear. Hopefully both she and her daughter are being looked after by an “Underground Railroad”, even if it means the custodial parent will never see the child who calls them “Mommy” ever again.

I just did a search to find out more about the child support, and I didn’t see one mention of child support related to this case. I used Google’s news search function and keyed “Lisa Miller” + “Child Support”, specifically.

Do you have a source about the child support, Zoe? :confused:

This is just such a tragic situation, especially for the child. And I came very, very close to being the birth mother in a similar situation – thanks be to God’s grace alone that I was unable to create the situation that would have led to yet another tragedy for another child…

Unfortunately both the conservative religious groups and the liberal gay-rights groups are so determined to prove their person is in the right that it’s nearly impossible to know which facts are correct. I mean, I know what’s been reported in the media, but the media is also tainted as to which facts they report and how. Hopefully those actually working on the case have a clear view of abuse, mental illness, etc, because Lord knows those of us on the outside of this mess can’t figure it out (without ulimately being swayed by personal opinion).

Prayer for this child and those involved is essential at this time. As a mom myself, I know how hard it is sometimes to share my son with his biological father (my ex) who is hostile to all things Catholic. I can only imagine how much harder (near impossible!) it would have been to share my child with a non-biologically related adult whose beliefs were contrary to my own.

Let’s please all just keep praying for Isabella and all children caught in these sort of tragic situations.


Try the search string “child support janet jenkins” and don’t restrict it to news - the agreement is years old, it’s not “news”.

Yes, this situation definetly needs prayer., sadly.
I guess I’m failing to see why Jenkins(the non-biological partner) would have a right to this child, whether,visitations, custody or otherwise,unless she legally adopted this child. Then she would have rights, but I didn’t read where she legally adopted this child. Someone correct me if I’m wrong.
It would be the same thing in a step-parent situation(which this woman essentially was a step-parent) In which the non biological step-parent never legally adopted the step-child(or did she?)
My friend has three boys- the first two from another boyfriend, the youngest from the man she married-whom she has now divorced. He is the biological father of the youngest son.
I don’t think he has a right to any visitations with all but the youngest who is his biological son-as he never adopted the other two. But the issue has never come up in their case as everything is amicable and he does see the other boys anyway. I’m not an expert on child cases-just wondering.
If this woman did Legally adopt Isabella, she could have a case here.

Okay, so I did the string you suggested with news and got 0 news hits. Then I did it unrestricted, and my results were:

  1. A mention in a blog supporting Janet Jenkins, with no source
  2. A mention in a blog supporting Janet Jenkins, with no source (crosspost of 1)
  3. A mention in a blog supporting Janet Jenkins, with no source
  4. A mention in a blog supporting Janet Jenkins, with no source
  5. A mention in a blog supporting Janet Jenkins, with no source
  6. A mention in a blog supporting Janet Jenkins, with no source (crosspost of 1)
  7. A mention in a blog supporting Janet Jenkins, with no source
  8. A mention in a blog supporting Janet Jenkins, with no source

Aaaand that’s about where I gave up.

I’m not saying it’s untrue, but if Janet Jenkins was indeed paying child support, why doesn’t even one of the 810 news hits with “Janet Jenkins” + “Lisa Miller” say a word about it? It’s completely relevant to the issue!

I pray for this woman and would do no less in her situation. How awful!

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.