As announced by Deb in her blog today, the Missouri court that had been refusing to give the increasingly-slim Gary Stocklaufer another chance to make his case for parenting the son he and his wife have been raising since birth has has taken back its big fat NO and granted a new hearing.

Good. This seems the least the judge could do in a case where a family is at stake.

Parliamentarians in Australia are suggesting in a report that the children of drug-addicted parents in that country "should be forcibly adopted out".

Recommending that adoption be the "default care option" for children under five who come to the attention of child welfare officials because of parental drug use, such a shift in policy would put the shoe on parents' feet, forcing them to make a case for keeping their kids.

Not everyone agrees, and some opposition party members are saying that the "universal best interest of the child test" should determine what happens to the kids.

The president of Family and Friends for Drug Law Reform calls the report a "disaster", and "draconian", and the Australian National Council on Drugs insists: "Often children are a parent's motivation to get off drugs. Adoption is permanent, there is no second chance."

A British mother of nine, reputed to be "addicted to having children", has had all of hers taken into care ... six for adoption.

The woman was said to have "felt compelled to get pregnant every two years", and her husband to have " a history of temper tantrums" and a "a Svengali-like character with a complex, controlling and self-centred personality".

There was an incident in which he banged a table and shouted at the little girl, who fled to her room.

And if you think that one is a headscratcher of some magnitude, check out this one from the UK about a pregnant British woman who is scheduled to lose her daughter at birth because she was diagnosed with a borderline personality disorder after being raped at the age of 14.

Her former psychiatrist has stated clearly that: 'There has never been any clinical evidence to suggest that Fran would put herself or others at risk, and there is certainly no evidence to suggest she would put a child at risk of emotional, physical or sexual harm.'

Not good enough, apparently.

Yet on August 16, a child protection case conference recommended that Fran's baby should be taken away at birth - a decision based in part on the contents of a letter from consultant paediatrician Dr Martin Ward Platt, who has never met Fran and could not be present at the meeting.

These stories out of the UK are beginning to give me a pounding headache.

A guy who bills himself as "The Dr. Phil behind Dr Phil, Frank Lawlis, has a new book out, and like all self-help books these days its burdened with a title that goes on for miles: Mending the Broken Bond: "The 90 Day Answer to Developing a Loving Relationship with Your Child".

Lawlis says the most important message he'd like people to take away from the book is that parents often sabotage themselves by giving in to the "self-esteem" needs of their kids. Positive attention, including giving too many gifts and overindulging kids, can be just as harmful as negative attention, he says.

Part of the first chapter and a true-false quiz about parenting are available at the link above.

For information/instructions on how to subscribe FREE to your favorite AdoptionBlogs, please visit this link.