The child’s voice, continuity of care and access to origins across a lifetime.
A 1979 casework file records the child crying over his name and contains family traces alongside descriptions used to justify his removal. The adult’s claim recounts violence and abandonment in the first adoptive household, while the adopter’s own 1984 statement says he placed the child with a foster family to preserve his new marriage and had no contact with him afterwards.
Evidence to examine first
Introduction before three written assessments; Vera evaluates, announces and consents
Milivoj was introduced to the prospective adopters on 5 June 1979, before the three written assessments by social worker Vera Radovanović on 12 June, pedagogue Milosava Gudelj on 18 June and psychologist Cvetko Ratković on 19 June. Vera was one of those three professional assessors: her report of 12 June expressly recommends approving the adoption. On 15 June, the same Vera informs the foster mother that Milivoj will be adopted at the end of June, before the other two written opinions; she is then appointed guardian on 20 June and gives consent to the adoption on 21 June, only 16 days after the introduction. Articles 14, 15 and 17 require examination of the statutory conditions and the child’s interests, professional opinions and a finding that the conditions are met before the adoption hearing is scheduled.
5 June: introduction to the adopters · 12 June: Vera recommends approval · 15 June: Vera announces adoption · 18 June: Gudelj’s favourable written opinion · 19 June: Ratković’s favourable written opinion · 20 June: Vera appointed guardian and gives consent in the 21 June record · Article 14: preparatory examination · Article 15: professional opinions · Article 17: conditions before scheduling
The 1982 Vasić divorce decision records that Milorad had not paid support for Milan since May and gives that as a reason for an interim support measure. His own 1984 statement later records placement with a foster family in August 1983 and no contact since then. These dated records add contemporaneous support and contact evidence alongside the author’s account of childhood violence.
1982: unpaid support and interim measure · 1984 statement: no contact after placement
The psychologist assessing the Petrović couple says their adoption request should not be accepted and recommends foster care instead. The 26 September 1984 adoption record nevertheless states that a positive opinion was given and the statutory conditions were fulfilled. Read the two documents together to examine how the professional warning was handled before another placement.
Psychologist recommends foster care · Adoption record: conditions declared met · Adoption record: positive opinion cited
Questions to examine
- How were the child’s recorded voice and identifiable family relationships weighed in decisions about care and identity?
- What continuity of protection existed between the first placement, the end of contact and the second adoption?
- How can the adult examine and challenge records governing his origins after decades of identity substitutions?
Start with these documents
- Vera Radovanović dossier 3871/79 — father when useful, unknown when identity is at stake — The 1979 casework dossier records the child’s name distress and family connections.
- Statement of Claim — The statement of claim preserves the author’s childhood account, distinctly from official findings.
- Milorad Vasić consent - false parental position from the 1979 void adoption record — The adopter’s 1984 statement provides his explanation for placement and no contact.
- Ljiljana Ristić’s 2005 report recommending an end to the search for Cvita Miletić — The 2005 search report shows an institutional attempt to locate the mother.
- Revision of 29 May 2026: the appellate judgment confronted with the 1976 law and the identity evidence — The revision frames the adult’s identity-rights and forced-assimilation challenge.
- Vasić divorce — child-blame framing and collapse of the first imposed Serbian adoptive frame — The contemporary divorce decision records unpaid child support and the resulting interim measure.
- Petrović couple assessment - ignored negative psychological opinion — The psychologist opposes adoption by the Petrović couple and recommends foster care.
- Second adoption record - Vasić Milan transferred into Petrović Milan — The second-adoption record states that a positive opinion and all statutory conditions were present.
- Vasić pre-adoption assessment (June 1979) — compressed validation of the first identity substitution — The three written expert opinions and their dates in June 1979.
- 1979 full adoption record and decision - operative identity overwrite — Vera’s appointment as guardian on 20 June and consent at the full adoption on 21 June.
- SAPV Adoption Act 1976 - legal mechanism map — The statutory order of examination, expert opinions and scheduling the adoption hearing.
Read child protection and access to origins as a continuous documentary question. The author seeks recognition of his Croatian and Hungarian identity; the sources let rights organisations examine the child’s treatment and the adult’s access to answers.
Current archive coverage: Court record through 29 May 2026; institutional correspondence through 7 September 2026.
PDF edition: 9 October 2026
Download PDF (2 pages) · Complete document index · Full author’s summary