Mother awarded visitation rights to daughter who suffered torture, starvation at hands of adoptive parents
SECOND CHANCE
Print- •
-
Share
- Share this item
-
Grab the link
Copy and paste the link:
- Blog about it
- Close
- •
-
10 Comments
- •
Favorite- •
-
Report error
-
Thank you for your submission.Error report or correction
- Close
-
- •
TIMELINE
2001 - Teresa Camarillo loses custody of her three children: Crystal, Crystal's older sister and younger brother.
2001 - The siblings placed in foster care with Steve and Bettie Ramirez, their aunt and uncle, who eventually adopt them.
Aug. ...
- SHOW ALL »
TIMELINE
2001 - Teresa Camarillo loses custody of her three children: Crystal, Crystal's older sister and younger brother.
2001 - The siblings placed in foster care with Steve and Bettie Ramirez, their aunt and uncle, who eventually adopt them.
Aug. 23, 2007 - Crystal Ramirez's body taken to Belmont Volunteer Fire Department by Steve Ramirez. Gonzales emergency personnel find no signs of life.
Aug. 24, 2007 - Ramirezes arrested.
Nov. 19, 2007 - A Gonzales County grand jury indicts the couple for murder and injury to a child.
January 2008 - Bond reduced against the state's recommendation; the couple is released from jail.
June 2008 - A Gonzales County grand jury adds additional indictments of unlawful restraint and endangering a child to the couple's charges.
Feb. 2, 2009 - Ramirez murder trial begins.
Feb. 9, 2009 - Couple found guilty of murder and sentenced to life in prison.
August 2009 - Camarillo awarded limited visitation of Crystal's older sister at Child Protective Services Office .
Nov. 16, 2009 - Camarillo awarded in-home visits with Crystal's older sister.
Dec. 19, 2009 - First scheduled home visit for Crystal's older sister and Camarillo.
GONZALES - The 2007 starvation death of 8-year-old Crystal Ramirez might breathe life into the relationship between her sister and mother.
A judge granted Crystal's birth mother, Teresa Camarillo, in-home visitation rights with Crystal's older sister, who also suffered starvation and torture in the hands of other guardians.
When Crystal died, her sister was 10 and her brother was 7.
Six years earlier, Camarillo's drug use forced Child Protective Services to remove the two girls and their younger brother from their biological mother's home. The children's aunt and uncle, Steve and Bettie Ramirez, then adopted the children. The Ramirezes, however, were found guilty of murdering Crystal and were sentenced in February to life in prison.
Since, the children lived with an adoptive couple who live near San Antonio.
On Nov. 16, Judge Karin Bonicoro approved an agreement that allows Camarillo to host Crystal's older sister on a limited basis.
"It's a very big step," Camarillo, seated on the steps of the Gonzales County Courthouse, said. "I never thought I was going to get this far. I thought that nobody was going to hear me and realize I wasn't that same person anymore. It's another step."
The judge ordered background checks on anyone inside Camarillo's home during the visits.
"I don't want you to get any false hopes," the judge told Camarillo, noting the visits are once a month for a few hours and not overnight stays.
The children's San Antonio-area adoptive couple approved the biological mother's visitation, as did Child Protective Services.
Mary Walker, a protective services spokeswoman, said it's unusual for adoptive parents to allow birth parents visits with children.
"Once parental rights are terminated, Child Protective Services does not usually revisit the situation," Walker said. "Terminations are final orders from the court and CPS considers it a permanent order mandating that the biological parent or parents are no longer the child's legal parents - thus freeing them for adoption."
Camarillo knows she owes the adoptive parents a debt of gratitude.
"That they are allowing me to bring her home for a little while. I really do appreciate it. They didn't have to do it," said Camarillo.
After court, Camarillo and her daughter joined other family members in a meeting room outside the courtroom. The 12-year-old girl beamed as her biological family crowded around her.
Camarillo, camera in hand, also smiled broadly.
"She's excited that she's going to come home for a little while. I think it's a little overwhelming for her right now," said Camarillo. "She didn't expect everybody to be here. But we wanted to show her what our family really is about and how we are - to give her a chance to know us like she should have from the beginning."
The girl accepted a new bracelet and returned her mother's hug. And many more.
"That's as happy as I've seen her in two years," said the girl's attorney, Forrest Penney, who watched from the courthouse hallway.
Camarillo reflected on the past that led her to lose custody of her children.
"I'm not a bad mom. I just made some bad choices in my life," she said. "Choices that you make hurt everyone around you. You're hurting the people that love you."
Now, however, she has a second chance with Crystal's sister.
-
Print
- •
-
Share
- Share this item
-
Grab the link
Copy and paste the link:
- Blog about it
- Close
- •
-
10 Comments
- •
- Favorite
- •
-
Report error
-
Thank you for your submission.Error report or correction
- Close
-
- •
Comments
I whole heartedly disagree with the statement made by Simplelogic. Parents loosing custody of the children at the hands of a State agency like that of CPS (Texas Department of Family and Protective Services) are in some cases needed. But the State really has no right to play the roll of God. Parents who loose their children due neglect and/or abuse should have the opportunity to correct their wrongs through some kind of rehabilitation. At which point they have the right to be with their children; even if it is only supervised visitation. The children should also have some rights in deciding on the meeting with the estranged parent (if they are aware enough to choose).
Did you know that children removed from their parents then placed in alternate care; e.g. foster home, staying with relatives, adopted out (even to relatives), are likely to suffer some of the same, if not worse, abuse and neglect. The State pays money to those who take the responsibility of the children. Could it be that these “do gooders” are doing their kind act based on the revenue and not from a caring heart?
I like what PatientEarth has to say. I too feel as though CPS, and some judges, over step their bounds and are out of control in their practices of interfering in family lives.
December 13, 2009 at 4:16 p.m.It's a horrible situation for the little girl. Just when she has some stability in life with the adoptive parents, a bad chapter is revisited, the re-introduction of the person responsible for her ordeal, her mother. Everyone should have an opportunity to be forgiven for "choices they've made", but some things just can't be undone. When you've done something repeatedly, to get your children taken away from you for their safety, you should NOT be allowed to re-unite with them until after they have reached adulthood. Years of bad choices just CAN NOT be easily forgiven. This is not a case of a woman who just awoke from a coma, she CHOSE drugs over the precious gift of children. SHAMEFUL !!! Stop confusing the child that you gave birth to. You've perpetrated a lifetime of harm already for this little girl. MOVE ON, ask for forgiveness from GOD, and stay away from drugs, thugs and ANYTHING that could impregnate you again.
December 13, 2009 at 3:12 p.m.PE- Good point.
December 13, 2009 at 3:04 p.m.Funny how only AFTER a tragic event do we concern ourselves with the childrens well being. Fact is if the mother had taken personal responsibility and been a mother to those children, then CPS would have not been involved, they would not have been removed from the home, therefore that little angel would still be alive. The mother is just as guilty as the murderers.
December 12, 2009 at 6:36 p.m.Sidenote- I see dad is no where in the picture. Women please, respect yourself, and if you decide to have children be a parent and quit blaming "bad choices".
Well, speaking from experience, I don't think it was a wise choice to allow the biological mother to reunite with her daughter. Pulling the child from the biological family the first time, and then the loss of her sister is devestating enough....God forbid, but what if the biological mother does something else?!? Its not easy to get your child taken...they give you chances after chances....and I feel like once the mothers rights were terminated it should be PERMENANT! As far as the welfare of the child, if the child was removed from the home...then that was for the best interest of the child....who in their right mind would put the child back into that predictiment??? Going through the therapy to face what has happened...and then to back track to allow visits in itself a tragedy...this child will never heal....plus giving visitation will give the child/parent that there is false hope for a permanant reunion!
Shame on those adoptive/foster parents! These poor children have gone through enough! There are PLENTY of couples in this world who would love to have children but can't!
December 12, 2009 at 3:56 p.m.I'm very glad that the judge made this decision.This child deserves some type of healing process.I've followed the Ramirez case from day one and IMO I feel like this judge made a healthy decision.
Teresa,if you're reading this please know that I pray everyday for you and your family.
December 12, 2009 at 9:48 a.m."I'm not a bad mom. I just made some bad choices in my life," she said. "Choices that you make hurt everyone around you. You're hurting the people that love you."
Excuse me for asking, but isn't this a working definition of a bad mom? I mean, aren't there plenty of moms who neglect their children because of a drug habit? We must all hope that Camarillo has turned her life around. In any case, the judge was wise to mandate background checks on everyone.
What a pathetic situation.
December 12, 2009 at 12:01 a.m.