Now that you brought it up, Robin…Here is the latest “safe haven” news release from A Safe Place for Newborns distribution list, September 8, 2008. ( This press release is not online. I tried to post the entire email, with graphics, here, but due to the vagaries of Blogger, the right half of the page was cut off. If anyone would like the original email, let me know and I”ll forward it to you.)

A Precious Life Saved and Now a Future.

A Mother and Father decided to have their baby born safely in a Hospital. The baby is a health little boy. Not able to properly care for for this child, they made a compassionte decision to leave the baby in the “Safe Haven for Newborns” program. They told us – “We want him to have a chance in life and now he will.” The baby’s name is Andreas

We are assisting the biological parents at this time.

Saving Lives: Newborns and their parents!

Our mission contiones…………Saving one life at a time.

Nick Silverio, Founder.

Our mission continues………..Saving one life at a time. Nick E. Silverio, Founder

Please visit www.asafehavenfornewborns.com to learn more.


A newborn left under the “Safe Haven” program, either by the Letter of the Law or Spirit of the Law was not abandoned.


We receive so many requests to adopt a “Safe Haven” baby. Realistically, it is virtually impossible to ask for and expect to adopt one of these children. The adoption process is regulated by the State of Florida and is the same process for all children that are placed with adoption agencies. To learn more about Adoption and/or to find an agency or agencies in your area contact:

For Florida: 1-800-96ADOPT

For the other 49 states and Puerto Rico: 1-888-200-4005, www.adoptuskids.org

To unsubscribe visit: http://www.asafehavenfornewborns.com/unsubscribeme.asp

Gloria M. Silverio Foundation 501(c)3 – “ A Safe Haven for Newborns.

6801 NW 77th Ave. Suite 404

Miami, FL 33166

Phone:(305) 882 1304 ext:103

Cell: (786) 246-1304

Fax:(305) 889 0017

Website: www.asafehavenfornewborns.com

Email: [email protected]


Now how was Baby Andreas endangered? Silverio himself acknowledges that the parents decided on a hospital birth, which indicates that his parents cared for him and eliminates the chance of him being recklessly dumped or murdered to nearly zero. It also eliminates to nearly zero the chance for his parents to be anonymous.

If the parents were genuinely unable to care for Andreas, a hospital social worker could have presented them with services and options: public and private assistance, temporary foster or respite care, adoption placement. Instead Andreas was “safe havened.” Of course, we have no idea what that means or who suggested the parents do it. For all we know Andreas will be placed in an open adoption or even retrieved. (I know for a fact this has happened, because I know a Florida attorney who has been involved in both successful scenarios.) We’ll never hear about that, though, from the safe haven mob. All we’ll hear from them ad nauseaum is how babies are being saved through compassionate deception.

We don’t hear:

How many Florida “safe haven surrenders” follow the intent of the “safe haven” law?

How many babies have been turned in by “distraught” parents threatening to kill their newborns if they can’t leave them secretly and anonymously at a hospital or fire station?

How many newborns are “safe havened” so one parent can hide the baby from the other?

How many babies and their parents, are , in fact, anonymous?

Why are babies born in hospitals being “safe havened” when hospital social workers offer options for ethical counseling and informed choice and consent…not to mention assistance to keep the family in tact?

How much money have Florida adoption agencies made off of “safe haven” placements. (In Florida “safe havened” newborns go directly into the private adoption mill, not public agencies).

Are hospital social workers now part of the state manufactured “safe haven” dragnet?

Or is “safe haven” just easier and cheaper?

It’s time “safe havens” in Florida and other states be investigated and exposed for what they are: Fast track, unethical surrender engineered by untrained do-gooders and baby millers.

It’s time somebody be held accountable.


  1. Social workers have been doing this same thing for years “making” sure mothers had no help, no support etc.and then being able to market a baby.

    the only thing new here is the safe haven aspect, and all those mothers who just want to give their babies away.

    Save havens years ago were the maternity homes, they were “safely” holding the mother until she gave birth.

    do gooders.

  2. The system here, in FL, will have that baby adopted so fast he won’t have time for a diaper change. I have learned that the new mantra down here is “get them into the adoptive home ASAP before the mother can come looking.”

    Somebody did a number on those parents. Might be one of the “terrible trio,” adoption agency attorneys who GUARANTEE surrrender.

    Those parents are going to wake up to such pain and wish they could go back. But there is no going back in this state. 24 hours is the max, Mama.

  3. “It’s time “safe havens” in Florida and other states be investigated and exposed for what they are: Fast track, unethical surrender engineered by untrained do-gooders and baby millers.”

    You can say that again.

  4. I share your concern about baby safe haven laws. I wonder though if the battle hasn’t already been lost 🙁 ?

    States have adopted these laws in droves. I don’t think there is much chance we are going to get them repealed. The backers of these laws have mounted a successful propaganda campaign that while scurrilous and inaccurate has been effective
    I admire your fortitude, but I wonder if we aren’t butting heads against a wall.

    On the other hand, open records laws seem to be moving forward–even if at a much slower pace than we would like.

  5. Yes, but, but, but, but . . .
    Wasn’t the “spirit of the law” originally that SHs were intended for only for those in the direst of circumstances ? That was the excuse, anyway.

    Or have I missed something here?

    The “safe haven’ mentality is part of a belief system that opposes transparency and openness.

    You can’t just roll over.

  6. “Wasn’t the “spirit of the law” originally that SHs were intended for only for those in the direst of circumstances ? That was the excuse, anyway.”

    EXACTLY!! And I don’t believe these young people meet that criteria. Someone has done a number on them or maybe they found out that a baby is w*o*r*k, a four-letter word that a lot of people don’t want to hear.

    There were days with my first raised child, who was colicy, that I sat and rocked her and cried right along with her. But I never considered abanoning her and my ex and I were not very well off, at all. It was a lot of responsibility and no walk in the park, but that kid grew up to be one of my very best friends and a joy in my life. So did her little brother. They were worth the work.

  7. Jeez, yes. I’m very curious about the circumstances behind this story.

    If the parents *really* felt they were unable to care for their child, were they expecting to leave the baby in the hospital as a ‘boarder baby’, but were persuaded to swell SH numbers rather than follow proper procedure because it would be less hassle for them ?
    It may even be they’d originally intended to go the adoption route, but got hijacked along the way.
    It’s entirely possible they were simply ambivalent and with a little encouragement could/would have kept their child.
    Really, who knows? And what decent person would presume to question such manifest ‘wonderfulness’?

    It’s just so fishy there’s no real information given, just this phony sentimental rubbish about ‘A Precious Life Saved’ – which is a canard if ever there was one, since the kid’s life was clearly never in danger. It shouldn’t have been raised as an issue.

    And what about the ‘anonymity option’?
    If this surrender is really in the ‘spirt and the law’ of SHs (which it isn’t, but anyway . . . ), how does the hospital handle it?
    Do they have to perform unethical bureaucratic contortions in order to split the patient’s records from the SH surrendering?

    Inquiring (and disgusted) minds would like to know.

  8. My medical records were used by “another” woman. She was typed into my place as mother when she NEVER gave birth, at the exact, same minute, time and place that I did its called adoption at its finest, “as if born to” (but not really born to) just the legal, altered, true and supposedly accurate records are modified.

  9. Well, this shows how badly I am avoiding the news broadcasts and print these days. Newborn drop-offs are bad enough, but this takes irresponsibility and cold-heartedness to a new level. Well, we have those surrendered as infants who will wonder if they were loved and now, older children who will know they weren’t. Goddess, what a mess.

  10. I’m doing a case-by-case study of Ohio’s SH cases. I don’t hve information on all of them, and probably never will, but I have a substantial number of cases which leave paper trials if you know what to look for. A good number of them appear to be in-hospital births, but with the secrecy surrounding the cases, it’s hard to prove most of them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *