Page 1
CONFIDENTIAL
SELF-MANAGING INTEREST COMMUNITY
OF SOCIAL PROTECTION
NOVI SAD
PROFESSIONAL SERVICE
Registry number: 3871/7
Category (code): 3
No.: V-03-335/79
DOSSIER
(Name and surname): Miletić Milivoj
(Current address):
Date of registration: 5 April 1979
Date placed into passive status: 31 July 1979
Page 2
List of files and documents
Date entered into dossier: 16 April 1979
Reference number of this authority: 3871/79
Title of file: Finding and opinion of the psychologistDate entered into dossier: 16 April 1979
Reference number of this authority: 3871/79
Title of file: Personal sheet of the wardDate entered into dossier: 8 May 1979
Reference number of this authority: V-03-335/79
Title of file: Decision on placementDate entered into dossier: 8 May 1979
Reference number of this authority: /
Title of file: Referral for family placementDate entered into dossier: 8 May 1979
Reference number of this authority: 03-320/6
Title of file: Contract on family placementDate entered into dossier: 21 June 1979
Reference number of this authority: V-03-517/79
Title of file: Record of adoptionDate entered into dossier: 31 July 1979
Reference number of this authority: V-03-556/79
Title of file: Decision on transfer for maintenance
Page 3
SELF-MANAGING INTEREST COMMUNITY
OF SOCIAL PROTECTION NOVI SAD
No.: Up-03-335/79
16 April 1979
Novi Sad
The Self-Managing Interest Community of Social Protection Novi Sad, deciding in the matter of the placement of the minor Miletić Milivoj, competent within the meaning of Article 87 of the Statute of the Self-Managing Interest Community of Social Protection Novi Sad and Articles 7 and 52 of the Decision on Social Protection of Citizens in the Territory of the Municipality of Novi Sad, issues the following:
DECISION
The minor Miletić Milivoj, born on 28 June 1974 in Novi Sad, shall be placed with the family of Vizmeg Julka, residing in Irig, on 2 April 1979.
The amount of 1,200.00 dinars (one thousand two hundred dinars), which is the monthly maintenance for the child in the family, shall be borne by the Self-Managing Interest Community of Social Protection Novi Sad.
Payment of the above amount shall begin as of 2 April 1979.
Reasoning
The professional team of this Community considered the issue of the care of the minor Miletić Milivoj and proposed that he be placed with a foster family because he had remained without parental care.
Considering the proposal of the professional team and the available documents, it was established that the mother of the minor Miletić Milivoj was at an unknown place of residence and that his father was unknown, and that he had remained without parental care.
From the above stated, and within the meaning of Article 24 of the Decision on Social Protection of Citizens in the Territory of the Municipality of Novi Sad, it was necessary to decide as stated in the operative part.
A dissatisfied party has the right to appeal this decision to the Commission of the Self-Managing Interest Community of Social Protection Novi Sad for deciding on appeals against decisions on rights from basic social protection, within 15 days of receipt thereof, through this Community.
The following shall be notified:
- Miletić Cvita,
- Vizmeg Julka, Irig
- SIZ of social protection,
- Department for Social Services and General Administration of the Municipal Assembly of Irig,
- Archive.
By authorization of the secretary
assistant secretary
Jovan Srdanov
[Signature: Jovan Srdanov]
Page 4
QUESTIONNAIRE
for foster families
Surname and first name of foster parent: Vizmeg Julka
Address: Irig, Ive Lole Ribara Street No. 70
Day, month and year of birth: 1930, in Hrtkovci
In which year did she move to the place of residence / or was she born in the place of residence /: In 1949 she married and moved to Irig
Occupation and education: 4 grades of elementary school, housewife
Is she employed: /
Name of the work organization where she works: /
Data on the family / household / of the foster parent
Surname and first name: Vizmeg Karlo
Relationship: husband
Age: 1929
Education: 4 grades of elementary school
Occupation: farmer
Name of work organization / school: /
Surname and first name: Vizmeg Verica
Relationship: daughter
Age: 1961
Education: 8 grades of elementary school
Occupation: housewife
Name of work organization / school: /
Has she been convicted, and for what? No
Page 5
- 2 -
Material conditions:
total monthly income of the family ______________________________________________
income from employment _______________________________________________________
income from agriculture: 6 cadastral yokes of land.
income from other activities ___________________________________________________
Housing conditions:
legal status regarding the apartment / owner, tenant, other /: owner
does the family have an apartment or a separate house?: a separate house
number of rooms: 3 rooms, kitchen and bathroom
equipment / comfort /: well equipped
hygienic conditions: at a good level
Health conditions of the foster family: healthy
What are the foster parents' requirements regarding the child:
sex: no preference
age: - // -
number of children: 2
Motives of the foster parents regarding acceptance of the child: they love children, theirs are grown up
How was the foster family found: known from earlier
Since when have they kept children in family placement: since 1966
Opinion of the work organization on the personality of the foster parents: __________________
Page 6
- 3 -
Opinion of the local community about the foster parents, the family as a whole:
Opinion of the social worker about the foster family:
Team conclusion:
Novi Sad, 6 April 1979.
Page 7
SELF-MANAGING INTEREST COMMUNITY
OF SOCIAL PROTECTION NOVI SAD
No.: 05-320/6
Date: 25 April 1979
NOVI SAD
C O N T R A C T
on family placement
concluded between the Self-Managing Interest Community of Social Protection Novi Sad, on the one hand, and Vizmeg Julka from Irig, on the other hand.
Both contracting parties agreed as follows:
The contracting party Vizmeg Julka from Irig undertakes to receive for care, custody and upbringing the minor Miletić Milivoj from Novi Sad, born on 28 June 1974, of father __________ and mother Cvita.
The contracting party __________ especially undertakes:
a/ to care for the health of the child, to take the child to regular medical examinations and follow the doctor's instructions, and in case of illness to immediately seek the assistance of a doctor or health institution,
b/ to provide the child with necessary food, clothing, a separate bed, school supplies and other needs,
v/ to care for the child's schooling and vocational training, taking into account his abilities and inclinations,
g/ to enable the maintenance of contact between the child and his parents, that is, guardian and other interested persons, in the manner and at the time determined by the Professional Service of the Self-Managing Interest Community of Social Protection Novi Sad,
d/ with regard to care for the child, to obligatorily adhere to the advice and instructions of the Professional Service, and at all times allow an authorized person to see the child and become acquainted with the conditions under which he lives,
dj/ to inform the Professional Service of the Self-Managing Interest Community of Social Protection Novi Sad about all major changes in the conditions of the child's life and upbringing.
/ reserved for special obligations /
The Self-Managing Interest Community for Social Protection Novi Sad undertakes:
a/ to provide professional assistance and advice regarding the raising and upbringing of the minor Miletić Milivoj,
b/ starting from 1 April 1979, to pay every month to Vizmeg Julka /through/ the Post Office the amount of 1,200 dinars
in words: ( one thousand two hundred )
Page 8
- 2 -
further until __________ in the month for the current month as compensation for the care, custody and upbringing of the minor Miletić Milivoj
/ reserved for special obligations /
This contract shall enter into force on the day of its conclusion and signing by the contracting parties, with the proviso that each party has the right to terminate it within a period of 15 days, which begins to run from the following day after the written notice of termination has been given.
If the Self-Managing Interest Community of Social Protection Novi Sad, through its Professional Service, establishes that the family in which the child has been placed has deviated from the obligations prescribed by law or by contract, it shall issue a decision terminating the contract.
If the head of the family in which the child has been placed does not agree with the termination of the contract or the decision on termination of the contract, he or she may, within 8 days from the day of receipt of the decision on termination of the contract, submit in writing to the Commission of the Self-Managing Interest Community of Social Protection Novi Sad for deciding on appeals against decisions on rights from basic social protection, a proposal for annulment of the termination, that is, of the decision on termination of the contract. If the Commission does not issue a decision within one month from receipt of the proposal for annulment, it shall be deemed that the termination, that is, the rescission of the contract, has been annulled.
In the event of non-fulfilment of property-law obligations by the Self-Managing Interest Community for Social Protection Novi Sad, the head of the family, Vizmeg Julka, may claim the outstanding compensation through the regular court as a civil-law claim.
The contract is written in two identical copies, one of which is delivered to the head of the family, Vizmeg Julka, and one remains with the Self-Managing Interest Community of Social Protection Novi Sad.
[Signature: Vizmeg Julka]
Place: Irig
Date: 25 April 1979
(Round seal: SELF-MANAGING INTEREST COMMUNITY OF SOCIAL PROTECTION NOVI SAD)
Asst. SECRETARY
Milena Rilok [Typewritten strikethrough]
Srdanov Jovan
[Signature: Srdanov Jovan]
Page 9
Form No. 4a
Dossier No.: 3871/79
Record sheet of contacts and work on the case
(name and surname of the user): Miletić Milivoj
Surname and name and profession of the professional worker: Vera Radovanović, social worker
5 April 1979.
Reception and familiarization with the request.
Minor Miletić Milivoj was left without parental care because his natural father died and the mother is not in a position to care for him.
Registration of the request and formation of the dossier.
Visit to the family of the social protection beneficiary.
Consultation with neighbors.
The child's mother, Cvita, is inclined to prostitution, alcohol, and vagrancy. She is not capable of caring for the child.
Departure to the S.I.Z. for Employment Novi Sad.
Consultation with the social worker of the institute.
Certified health card since Milivoj is health insured through his mother, who is registered with the S.I.Z. for Employment.
8 April 1979.
Establishing the general characteristics of the parents.
Minor Miletić Milivoj, born 28 June 1974 in Novi Sad, from mother Miletić Cvita.
Establishing the social and economic data.
Mother Cvita unemployed, without means, devoted to prostitution, prone to crime, alcohol, vagrancy; she has never cared for the child nor is she capable of doing so.
Page 10
Vera Radovanović, social worker
8 April 1979.
Establishing the health condition.
Minor Milivoj is physically and mentally normally developed and healthy. He is well cared for and neat.
Establishing the circumstances of educational and moral development.
During pregnancy the mother lived a disorderly life; after childbirth she kept the child for a short time, and then abandoned him. He was raised by Pal Lakatoš, who presents himself as the natural father of the child, but this is very unlikely because Cvita was at the same time living with several men.
Establishing family status.
Minor Milivoj is a child born out of wedlock. Paternity has not been established.
Establishing the material origin and development of the problem.
After the death of the natural father, the child remained without parental care.
Verification of housing and other living conditions.
The mother of minor Milivoj, Cvita, has no apartment of her own nor other conditions necessary for life.
16 April 1979.
Work on drafting the decision on family placement of minor Miletić.
Filling in the personal sheet of the user.
Visit to the foster family.
Interviewing the foster mother.
Minor Milivoj was placed with the family of Vizmeg Julka in Irig, who is the sister of father Pal and whom the child knew. Julka agreed to keep the child with regular compensation. A questionnaire for the family was drawn up and a decision on the family placement of minor Milivoj was issued. The health card was handed over to her.
Page 11
Form No. 4a
Dossier No.: 3871/79
Record sheet of contacts and work on the case
(name and surname of the user): Miletić Milivoj
Vera Radovanović, social worker
16 April 1979.
Counseling of the child.
The child cried when he heard that his name was Milivoj because they called him Pal. The foster mother was informed to call the child by his name.
19 April 1979.
Visit to the foster family.
Counseling of the foster mother.
Milivoj is well cared for and well nourished. He is clean and neat. Slightly chilled. He coughs and takes medicines. Adapted to the family and the new environment. There are no behavior problems.
Counseling of the child.
Milivoj is cheerful and satisfied. He states that his name is now Mišo.
5 June 1979.
Visit to the foster family.
Counseling of the foster mother.
The foster mother was informed that a family came forward that wishes to adopt minor Milivoj and that the child should be prepared for departure.
Counseling of the child.
Milivoj was introduced to the adoptive parents and they were enabled to speak with the child and get to know him.
Page 12
[continuation from previous page]
...Milivoj appealed to them very much and they wish to adopt him.
15 June 1979.
Visit to the foster family.
Counseling of the foster mother.
The foster mother was informed that Milivoj would be adopted at the end of June and that she should prepare him.
Counseling of the child.
Milivoj was prepared for adoption and departure from the foster family. He accepted it gladly, satisfied and cheerful.
21 June 1979.
Receipt of the decision on appointment as guardian for consent to adoption.
Visit to the foster family.
Counseling of the foster mother.
The foster mother was informed that Milivoj had been adopted and that he would today be handed over to the adoptive parents.
Counseling of the child.
Milivoj was told that he would go home to mother and father. There were no problems with separating the child.
Visit to the Children's Dispensary.
Counseling of the physician.
Obtaining the health file and vaccination card and handing them over to the adoptive parents.
5 July 1979.
Decision on adoption delivered.
Page 13
SELF-MANAGING INTEREST COMMUNITY OF SOCIAL PROTECTION
PROFESSIONAL SERVICE
NOVI SAD
Form 4
Dossier No. 3871
Date formed: 10 April 1979
Personal sheet of the user of social protection services
I. GENERAL DATA
Surname (father's name) and first name (nickname)
Miletić MilivojAddress (place, municipal assembly, street and number, local community)
Novi Sad, Korn. Stankovića 21From where and when moved
Born in Novi SadDate and place of birth
June 1974, in Novi SadOccupation and qualification
Education
Nationality
Marital status (or marital origin)
Born out of wedlockContent of the request
Filed the request - initiator of the procedure
Page 14
- Members of the household in which he lives
(Blank)
If the user lives in an institution, state its name and address
(Blank)
- Data on the parents
Mother:
Surname and first name: Miletić Cvita
Address (place, street and number): Novi Sad, Korn. Stankovića No. 21 (or 23)
From where and when moved: from Šibenik, 1972
Occupation: unemployed worker
Qualification: unskilled
Name of work organization and address: unemployed
Date of birth: 23 March 1931
Work capacity: [illegible - faded handwriting]
Other significant information: Inclined to alcohol, prostitution, vagrancy, neglect... [illegible]
ran away
Father:
(The entire column dedicated to the father is completely blank)
Comments on source passages (60)
Confidential dossier cover
CONFIDENTIAL classifies dossier 3871/79. It does not name the father or prove a secret court hearing. The operative social-work records and the adoption documents inside this file must be read separately.
Page 1
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Child named on dossier cover
The cover opens dossier 3871/79 under Miletić Milivoj, registered on 5 April and made passive on 31 July 1979. This identifies the original child whose case will move from family placement to adoption; it does not itself establish parentage.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Child named on dossier cover
The cover opens dossier 3871/79 under Miletić Milivoj, registered on 5 April and made passive on 31 July 1979. This identifies the original child whose case will move from family placement to adoption; it does not itself establish parentage.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Placement proceeding, not adoption
Here the authority identifies the child in a family-placement proceeding and cites social-protection provisions. These cited Articles 7 and 52 belong to the municipal social-protection decision, not Article 7 of the Adoption Act.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Placement proceeding, not adoption
Here the authority identifies the child in a family-placement proceeding and cites social-protection provisions. These cited Articles 7 and 52 belong to the municipal social-protection decision, not Article 7 of the Adoption Act.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Operative placement with Julka
The operative decision places Milivoj with Julka Vizmeg and names 2 April as the placement date, although the decision is dated 16 April. That is a placement/effective-date distinction; the work record separately identifies Julka as Pál’s sister.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Operative placement with Julka
The operative decision places Milivoj with Julka Vizmeg and names 2 April as the placement date, although the decision is dated 16 April. That is a placement/effective-date distinction; the work record separately identifies Julka as Pál’s sister.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Team proposes foster placement
The team’s proposal is family placement on the premise that parental care has ended. It is not a consent to full adoption. The father’s death and the mother’s circumstances must remain separate facts rather than a single parentless-child label.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Team proposes foster placement
The team’s proposal is family placement on the premise that parental care has ended. It is not a consent to full adoption. The father’s death and the mother’s circumstances must remain separate facts rather than a single parentless-child label.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Original child inside the unknown-parent formula
Milivoj’s original name is retained, but the decision describes unknown maternal residence and an unknown father. The paternal blank is not the full content of this dossier: the operative entries name Pál and his family. This is the formal narrowing used before the adoption route.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Original child inside the unknown-parent formula
Milivoj’s original name is retained, but the decision describes unknown maternal residence and an unknown father. The paternal blank is not the full content of this dossier: the operative entries name Pál and his family. This is the formal narrowing used before the adoption route.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Placement decision replaces the known trail with unknown father
The 16 April placement decision states that the father is unknown. This is the authority’s formal formula, contradicted by its own 5 and 8 April natural-father entries and the 16 April placement with father Pál’s sister. The contradiction is inside this dossier, before the full-adoption act.
Page 3
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Mother listed for service
Cvita is first on the placement decision’s notification list. That is a named service destination in the act, alongside Julka and public bodies; it does not itself prove that service reached her. The decision must not be read as if the mother’s name were absent from the file.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Child named in the foster contract
The family-placement contract receives Milivoj for care, custody and upbringing under his original name and birth date. Cvita is named; the father’s space is left blank despite the existing Pál trail. Placement does not itself create a new civil identity.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Child named in the foster contract
The family-placement contract receives Milivoj for care, custody and upbringing under his original name and birth date. Cvita is named; the father’s space is left blank despite the existing Pál trail. Placement does not itself create a new civil identity.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Family-placement contract leaves father blank
The 25 April contract names Cvita but leaves the father’s name blank. This is a formal contract field, not proof that the worker lacked paternal information: the work entries already name Pál, his death and placement with his sister. It is the gap between the operational paternal trail and the legal identity channel.
Page 7
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Family-placement contract leaves father blank
The 25 April contract names Cvita but leaves the father’s name blank. This is a formal contract field, not proof that the worker lacked paternal information: the work entries already name Pál, his death and placement with his sister. It is the gap between the operational paternal trail and the legal identity channel.
Page 7
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Authority undertakes help and payment
This clause commits the SIZ to professional help for raising Milivoj and monthly payment of 1,200 dinars to Julka, starting on 1 April. The decision elsewhere starts payment on 2 April. Keep that one-day discrepancy visible; it is not another adoption or another child.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Authority undertakes help and payment
This clause commits the SIZ to professional help for raising Milivoj and monthly payment of 1,200 dinars to Julka, starting on 1 April. The decision elsewhere starts payment on 2 April. Keep that one-day discrepancy visible; it is not another adoption or another child.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Continuation of the same payment clause
The child’s name here continues the preceding contract payment clause across a page break. It is not a new placement decision or an independent proof of parentage. The due-day space is blank.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Continuation of the same payment clause
The child’s name here continues the preceding contract payment clause across a page break. It is not a new placement decision or an independent proof of parentage. The due-day space is blank.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
First operative work sheet
This heading identifies the beneficiary of the first work sheet as Miletić Milivoj. The dated entries below record father’s death, neighbor accusations and insurance through the mother. A heading is a locator for those actions, not evidence of an additional event.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
First operative work sheet
This heading identifies the beneficiary of the first work sheet as Miletić Milivoj. The dated entries below record father’s death, neighbor accusations and insurance through the mother. A heading is a locator for those actions, not evidence of an additional event.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Vera authors the intake narrative
The sheet names Vera as the social worker responsible for the entries below. She records father’s death, consults neighbors against Cvita and obtains insurance documents through the mother. This is the operative author’s role before she later gives adoption consent as special guardian.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Father’s death opens the child’s case
The 5 April intake uses the original child’s name and explains loss of care through the natural father’s death and the mother’s inability to care. This is a specific opening premise; later unknown-father language cannot erase what this intake already recorded.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Father’s death opens the child’s case
The 5 April intake uses the original child’s name and explains loss of care through the natural father’s death and the mother’s inability to care. This is a specific opening premise; later unknown-father language cannot erase what this intake already recorded.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
5 April: natural father is dead
The opening work entry states that Milivoj’s natural father died. It treats fatherhood as an existing relationship, not an unknown vacancy. This conflicts with the formal placement decision’s unknown-father formula and must be read with Pál’s named care and the later placement with his sister.
Page 9
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Neighbors are the stated source
Vera records a consultation with neighbors immediately before the accusations against Cvita. This identifies the source of the discrediting narrative; it is not Cvita’s testimony or a medical finding. The file then uses that narrative to declare her incapable of caring for the child.
Page 9
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Accusations become a care verdict
After the neighbor consultation, Vera labels Cvita through prostitution, alcohol and vagrancy and concludes that she cannot care for the child. This is the official’s recorded accusation, not an established medical diagnosis. The same dossier records insurance through the mother and describes the child as healthy, cared for and neat.
Page 9
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Mother visible in another institution
Vera obtains the certified health-insurance booklet because Milivoj is insured through Cvita, who is registered with the employment service. The same dossier separately records the mother’s address. The file therefore contains both an institutional contact trail and an address alongside the later claim that her whereabouts are unknown.
Page 9
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Cvita is the recorded birth mother
The 8 April work entry names Miletić Cvita as Milivoj’s mother and supplies his exact birth date. This is the maternal link preserved before adoption, not a reference to Gospava Vasić or another later parental layer.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Original birth and mother facts
The 8 April entry preserves Milivoj’s birth on 28 June 1974 in Novi Sad and Cvita as mother. It names the child before the register rewrite, while the following paragraphs both name and dispute Pál’s paternal position.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Original birth and mother facts
The 8 April entry preserves Milivoj’s birth on 28 June 1974 in Novi Sad and Cvita as mother. It names the child before the register rewrite, while the following paragraphs both name and dispute Pál’s paternal position.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Mother and original child entered together
The 8 April entry records Milivoj’s date of birth and Cvita as his mother. It preserves the original mother–child link before the Vasić rewrite. Read it with the following paternal paragraphs: the dossier knows the mother, Pál’s care and his asserted fatherhood, even though its formal father field remains empty.
Page 9
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
8 April: the blanket claim that the mother never cared
Vera’s 8 April entry extends the neighbor-based moral accusations into the total claim that Cvita never cared for the child. The same dossier records insurance through Cvita, says that she kept the child briefly after birth and describes him as healthy, well cared for and neat. These concrete entries must be placed beside that total rejection. The linked court record also preserves Cvita’s own 18 January 1977 statement about Pál and their son Milivoj; her voice is distinct from the accusations attributed to neighbors. The stated source is consultation with neighbors. These passages do not identify the neighbors, set out their individual statements or verification, or cite official evidence supporting the sexual and moral allegations. Cvita's Croatian identity is recorded under the mother's ethnicity field in the civil-register entry order. Author's analytical conclusion: this misogynistic and chauvinistic discrediting of the Croatian mother is used to dismiss Pál's fatherhood and suppress the child's paternal and maternal identity.
PDF 9
Open related document
Vera authors the conflicting paternal account
The 8 April page names Vera above the assessment that praises the child’s condition, names Pál as his carer and claimed father, rejects paternity through the mother’s alleged conduct, then again invokes the natural father’s death. These are her successive entries on the same page.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Recorded condition contradicts blanket neglect
On 8 April the same worker describes Milivoj as physically and mentally normally developed, healthy, well cared for and neat. Those observations do not erase the mother’s poverty, but they contradict a blanket picture of an uncared-for child. The dossier must explain that tension instead of turning moral accusations into an automatic removal premise.
Page 10
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Pál named, then paternity dismissed
On 8 April Vera writes that Pál raised the child and presented himself as his natural father, then rejects that paternity through an allegation about Cvita living with several men. The paragraph supplies no paternity test or contrary judicial finding. The next entry nevertheless again calls the deceased man the natural father.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Pál named, then paternity dismissed
On 8 April Vera writes that Pál raised the child and presented himself as his natural father, then rejects that paternity through an allegation about Cvita living with several men. The paragraph supplies no paternity test or contrary judicial finding. The next entry nevertheless again calls the deceased man the natural father.
Page 10
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Pál named, then paternity dismissed
On 8 April Vera writes that Pál raised the child and presented himself as his natural father, then rejects that paternity through an allegation about Cvita living with several men. The paragraph supplies no paternity test or contrary judicial finding. The next entry nevertheless again calls the deceased man the natural father.
Page 10
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
8 April: father’s death repeated
After doubting Pál’s paternity and recording that paternity was not established, Vera again writes that parental care ended with the natural father’s death. The same page alternates between rejecting fatherhood and using it to explain the child’s situation. The same assessment describes the father both as unestablished and as natural.
Page 10
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Placement uses the paternal family
The 16 April entry places Milivoj with Julka Vizmeg, expressly identified as father Pál’s sister and as someone the child knew. Pál is used as father to explain the family placement. The formal father blank therefore conceals a named paternal-family relationship that the operative worker already knew.
Page 10
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Placement uses the paternal family
The 16 April entry places Milivoj with Julka Vizmeg, expressly identified as father Pál’s sister and as someone the child knew. Pál is used as father to explain the family placement. The formal father blank therefore conceals a named paternal-family relationship that the operative worker already knew.
Page 10
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Follow-up work sheet for the same child
This is the continuation work sheet for the same Miletić Milivoj. Below it the file records crying over Pál/Milivoj, the Mišo name, preparation for adoption and transfer. These are different actions inside one case, not repetitions of a single identity note.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Follow-up work sheet for the same child
This is the continuation work sheet for the same Miletić Milivoj. Below it the file records crying over Pál/Milivoj, the Mišo name, preparation for adoption and transfer. These are different actions inside one case, not repetitions of a single identity note.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Vera directs the name and transfer sequence
Vera is named above the 16 April child-counseling entry. The continuation records her name correction, Mišo, preparation with the Vasić couple and the 21 June parental wording. Her role changes from recording the child’s reaction to preparing the adoption transfer.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Child’s Pál name meets an official correction
On 16 April the child cries when told he is Milivoj because he had been called Pál. Vera instructs the foster mother to call him by his registered name. This is a documented reaction and an intervention in the child’s lived identity; it precedes the imposed Milan Vasić name and belongs to the forced-assimilation chain preserved in the broader commentary.
Page 11
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
19 April: stable care in the known paternal family
Three days after the entry identifying Vizmeg Juliska as father Pál’s sister, Vera records that the child is well cared for, well nourished, clean, adapted and has no behavior problems. Her next June entries prepare his departure for adoption. This passage documents the functioning of the known paternal-family placement before that break; it must remain visible beside the adoption act and the original commentary about erasure of the paternal line.
PDF 11
Open related document
19 April: child now says Mišo
Three days after the crying over Pál/Milivoj, the work record says that the child now calls himself Mišo. This is a new name reaction inside foster care, not yet the later legal name Milan Vasić. The sequence Pál → Milivoj/Mišo → Milan must remain visible rather than being collapsed into a generic identity label.
Page 11
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
5 June: preparation to leave the paternal family
On 5 June Vera instructs the foster mother to prepare the child for departure because a family wants to adopt him. The earlier entries identify this foster mother as Pál’s sister and describe the placement as functioning. The worker’s record now turns to preparing the break with that family. The 1979 adoption record later identifies the same Vera as special guardian giving consent, with the appointment dated 20 June; this preparation therefore precedes that appointment.
PDF 11
Open related document
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.
PDF p. 12
SAPV Adoption Act 1976 · Article 15
Open related document
15 June: adoption is announced before guardian appointment
The 15 June entry announces that Milivoj will be adopted at the end of June and directs his preparation. It presents the outcome as already arranged before the 20 June appointment of Vera as special guardian recorded in the adoption act and before her 21 June work-sheet entry recording receipt of that appointment. The same person prepares the child’s departure and later supplies the consent. These dates and roles must be read together.
PDF 12
Open related document
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.
PDF p. 12
SAPV Adoption Act 1976 · Article 15
Open related document
21 June: receipt of appointment and same-day transfer
On 21 June Vera records receipt of the guardian-appointment decision for consent to adoption. The entries immediately below state that the child has been adopted and will be handed over that day. The adoption record names Vera Radovanović as special guardian, dates the appointment 20 June and records her consent at the 21 June hearing. This cross-reference preserves the worker’s earlier paternal and maternal knowledge alongside her later consent role.
PDF 12
Open related document
21 June: adopters called mother and father
On the adoption/transfer day the child is told that he is going home to mother and father. The wording installs the receiving adopters in the parental position; it does not document restoration of Cvita or Pál’s line. The preceding same-day entry records receipt of the special-guardian appointment, and the adoption decision is delivered only in the 5 July entry.
Page 12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
5 July: delivery recorded after 21 June transfer
The work sheet records delivery of the adoption decision on 5 July. Its 21 June entries already record the adoption and the child’s same-day handover. The adoption act is itself dated 21 June. Keep the act date, recorded transfer date and later recorded delivery separate: the file has a specific sequence, not one interchangeable adoption date.
PDF 12
Open related document
Personal sheet retains original child name
The personal sheet keeps Miletić Milivoj in the name field. The parent section later supplies extensive maternal data but leaves the whole father column empty. Keeping the name does not mean that the paternal identity trail was protected.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Personal sheet retains original child name
The personal sheet keeps Miletić Milivoj in the name field. The parent section later supplies extensive maternal data but leaves the whole father column empty. Keeping the name does not mean that the paternal identity trail was protected.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Detailed maternal record
The personal sheet records Cvita’s name, Novi Sad address, move from Šibenik in 1972, birth date and employment status, then adds moral accusations. It contains concrete maternal identifiers, not an empty mother trace; compare the placement decision’s unknown-residence formula.
9-12
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.
Entire personal-sheet father column blank
The personal sheet gives detailed information about Cvita while the entire father column is empty. The empty column is the formal omission being documented; it is not a new finding of unknown paternity. The same dossier’s work entries identify Pál’s care, natural-father wording and his sister’s placement role.
Page 14
Broader comment
This passage belongs to confidential social-welfare dossier 3871/79. Vera Radovanović’s own operative file does not contain an empty paternal field in substance; it contains a suppressed paternal trail. On 5 April she writes that the child’s natural father had died. On 8 April she writes that Pal Lakatoš raised the child and presented himself as the child’s natural father. In the same page she again uses the formula after the death of the natural father. On 16 April she places the child with Vizmeg Julka, the sister of father Pal, whom the child knew. This is not neutral uncertainty. The file treats Pal as father when that serves placement and care, then erases him when the legal identity channel is filled in. The mother is attacked through neighbor-based moral claims while the child is recorded as health insured through her, healthy, neat, well cared for, and later well nourished. The evidentiary cut is clear: Vera had the mother trace, the Pal/father trace, the paternal-family placement trace and the child’s Pal-name reaction in the same file, yet those traces were not converted into protection of identity, paternity and inheritance position before adoption.