Our family is facing an emergency, and we have less than 30 days to act.

We are the adoptive parents of a wonderful 9‑year‑old boy. He has three younger siblings who were separated from him in foster care. For the past year, we have been fighting to adopt them so the children could grow up together in the same safe, stable home.

We were selected and approved as the adoptive home for all four siblings. Our home was the only home willing and able to keep the children together. The children had already completed multiple overnights with us, had bedrooms prepared, and had expressed their desire to stay together as a family.

But because two of the siblings were placed in a separate foster home that wished to adopt only those two, the adoption plan for all four children together was never allowed to move forward. Instead of evaluating the children’s best interests, the system became stuck in a conflict between placements. As a result, our son has now gone over six months without seeing two of his siblings — without court approval and despite a court order mandating sibling visits.

We believed we were finally close to a hearing where a judge would look at the facts, hear evidence, and decide whether the Department of Child Services (DCS) was wrong to block the adoption. Instead, our case was dismissed before a consent hearing because of a loophole in Indiana law — a conflict between two statutes that has never been resolved by any Indiana court.

This loophole doesn’t just affect our family.

It affects every family in Indiana who tries to adopt a child from foster care.

What came out in court — and why it matters

At a previous hearing, something happened that shocked everyone in the room.

Two separate DCS‑approved visit supervisors testified under oath that the children’s interactions with each other were positive, loving, and safe — the exact opposite of what had been reported to the court for months.

It also became clear that decisions about sibling contact had been made based on misinformation that did not match what professionals were actually observing.

For the first time, the truth about the sibling bond was finally coming to light. We believed this would lead to a full hearing where the judge could evaluate whether DCS was wrong to block the adoptions.

But before any of that evidence could be reviewed, the case was dismissed because of a conflict between two laws — a conflict so serious that even veteran attorneys say it needs to be resolved by the Indiana Supreme Court.

The loophole that hurts families

Indiana has two laws that contradict each other:

- One law says DCS cannot withhold consent to an adoption unless it is in the child’s best interest.

- Another law says an adoption cannot be granted until a “period of supervision” has occurred.

- But DCS controls placement — so if they refuse to place a child with a family, that family can never complete the supervision period.

This means DCS can block any adoption they don’t like, even when it harms the child, simply by refusing placement.

And the courts never get to review whether DCS’s refusal is reasonable.

This loophole gives DCS power over the courts while avoiding accountability for their actions.

That is exactly what happened to us.

The judge did not say we were wrong.

He did not say the children shouldn’t be with us.

He did not hear any evidence at all.

He dismissed the case because the law contradicts itself.

Why this matters for all Indiana families

If this loophole stands:

- DCS can block any adoption without ever being questioned.

- Judges lose the ability to review whether DCS is acting in a child’s best interest.

- Siblings can be permanently separated with no hearing.

- Relatives and pre‑adoptive families lose all rights if DCS refuses placement.

- Children lose the chance to grow up with family, even when it is safe and appropriate.

This is not just our fight.

This is a fight to fix a broken part of Indiana law that harms children statewide.

Why we need financial help

To protect the children and to fix this dangerous loophole in Indiana law, we must immediately file:

- an injunction to stop the younger siblings’ adoptions from being finalized before any evidence is heard

- an appeal to challenge the dismissal

- a request for the Indiana Supreme Court to review the statutory conflict

These filings require highly specialized legal work. Two attorneys have offered to take the case:

- A nationally respected appellate attorney who can take the case directly for $40,000

- Our current attorney, with guidance and oversight, for $25,000

Both options are expensive because appeals and Supreme Court cases require:

- extensive legal research

- drafting appellate briefs

- preparing the record and transcripts

- filing fees

- emergency motions

- potential oral argument before the Indiana Supreme Court

We have already put everything we have into this fight. We currently have $10,000 available between savings and our existing retainer, but we cannot cover the full cost alone.

Without legal action, the younger siblings’ adoptions may be finalized within weeks, before any judge ever reviews the evidence, the testimony, or the truth about the sibling bond.

Once those adoptions are finalized, the children will be permanently separated, and the loophole that allowed this to happen will remain in place for every other Indiana family.

How your support will be used

Every dollar raised will go directly toward:

- attorney fees for the injunction

- appellate filings and briefs

- required transcripts and court documents

- legal preparation for a potential Indiana Supreme Court review

We will provide updates as the case moves forward.