Daddy’s a pedo
A widely circulated video showcasing a gay couple’s “surrogacy journey” has revealed that a baby boy is currently in the custody of a registered child sex offender. The couple, Logan Riley and Brandon Mitchell, gained viral attention after posting a video introducing their newborn son. It has since emerged that Mitchell is a convicted pedophile.
Guess what. Surrogacy=anyone can get possession of a baby, no questions asked.
I hadn’t really understood that before. It’s not like adoption. There is no screening process.
The video, which was initially shared by the couple on their own social media platforms, was meant to offer a heartwarming glimpse into the first year of their newborn’s life. However, it quickly drew scrutiny after being reposted on July 27 by Irish right-wing activist and political figure Derek Blighe on X (formerly Twitter).
So there was pushback, but then the facts came out.
But just 24 hours after the video went viral on social media, it has been confirmed that one of the men in the video is a registered child sex offender.
Brandon Keith Mitchell is a Tier 1 sex offender in the state of Pennsylvania, and was arrested in 2016 after attempting to solicit a 16-year-old boy for sexual abuse. The victim in the case was a student at Downingtown West High School, where Mitchell had worked as a chemistry teacher. He was 30 years old at the time.
Well, maybe surrogate baby will have 15 good years before it all goes wrong?
Mitchell pleaded guilty to felony child pornography possession and one court of Corruption of Minors, and was sentenced to up to 23 months of incarceration. But court records show that he was granted parole just two months following his conviction.
Part of his conditions included that he have no unsupervised contact with minors and that he surrender his teaching license. He quickly moved on to obtain a job as a chemist at Eurofins BioPharma Product Testing in Lancaster, where he has worked for the past 9 years.
…
Reduxx reached out to the division Pennsylvania State Police responsible for maintaining Mitchell’s registration, and was informed that the state does not automatically forbid individuals convicted of sex crimes from having children, gaining custody, or exercising parental rights.
While Pennsylvania’s adoption law does prohibits sex offenders from adopting or fostering children, gestational surrogacy circumvents any such laws through pre-birth parentage orders.
So there you go. That kid is doomed.
Age of consent is 16 in many places… Obviously teachers shouldn’t be propositioning students (nonconsensually even more so) and the law’s the law but this is hardly perversion.
It looks like more of the “how dare these two poofs be allowed to have kids? Homos are paedophiles” angle. I know in your case you’ve got a hate on for surrogacy so it’s different for you but that’s obviously the angle here.
BKiSA, it appears the age of consent in Pennsylvania is 16, but…certain factors change that. It can still be statutory rape in cases where there is a significant age difference, and also where there is a significant power differential.
While I might question this as being pedophilia, I think it was probably a legitimate prosecution. It isn’t unusual for teachers to be prosecuted when they proposition students, even the students who are approaching adulthood. And even college teachers can get in a world of trouble if they proposition students, and college students are legally adults. They won’t be charged with statutory rape, but all sorts of crap can descend on their cranium.
Whether it is pedophilia or not, it shows a lack of judgement, a lack of consideration for the feelings of others in his custody, and a practice of ignoring the law and ethics around his position.
Oh absolutely, a person with a position of responsibility must be required to exercise sound judgement and y’know, not engage in that sort of activity. As for age of consent, it’s an arbitrary line but you’ve got to draw it somewhere because there’s got to be one. No, the legal stuff is what it is.
I just know that while *Mister* Robinson would be of little interest to my 16 year old self, his distaff counterpart definitely was. We’d have little interest in Muhammad’s youngest “wife,” if she’d been 16 instead of 6.
What is “I know in your case you’ve got a hate on for surrogacy” supposed to mean?
You don’t like surrogacy and your point of interest in this case is surrogacy. That’s the beginning and end of it. I dunno what Reduxx’s opinion on surrogacy is for heterosexual couples but I can guess about Derek Blighe.
You say that as if it’s bizarre in some way. Why the fuck should I “like” surrogacy? It’s renting or borrowing a woman’s body to gestate a child for someone else. I don’t simply take it for granted that women are for sale or rent.
And why do you say “this is hardly perversion” as if I had said “this is perversion”? I didn’t say a damn thing about “perversion” and it’s not my point or a hidden subtext or a monster under the bed.