Social welfare record / Primary source

Ljiljana Ristić’s 2005 report recommending an end to the search for Cvita Miletić

On 9 March 2005, Ljiljana Ristić recommends stopping the search for Cvita Miletić and says that a meeting with her son should not take place. The report checks Novi Sad death records only from 1 June 1998, leaving the author’s stated 1997 death outside that period.

Novi Sad Social Work Centre 2005-03-09
Ljiljana Ristić signs the social worker’s report of 9 March 2005 concerning the search requested by Milan Petrović on 28 July 2004. Its final recommendation is explicit: the biological mother and her adopted son should not meet, and further searches for Cvita should be stopped. The report identifies Cvita Miletić as born on 23 March 1931 in Bila Vlaka, Benkovac, SR Croatia. It records an address at 138 Žarka Zrenjanina Street in Temerin, where the police patrol was told that Cvita was not known. The Temerin death-register check is negative. For Novi Sad, the stated death-register period begins on 1 June 1998 and runs to the date of the report. The text describes Cvita’s earlier behaviour as psychologically altered, without citing a medical finding. Searches at the psychiatric hospitals in Vršac and Kovin produced no record of her. Despite not locating Cvita, Ljiljana Ristić assesses that she is not in a better condition “today” and uses that assessment in recommending that the search and meeting should be abandoned. The birthplace is given as SR Croatia, but the explanation for the failed Benkovac inquiry invokes the wartime failure to forward data about people originating from Bosnia and Herzegovina. These are different geographical grounds within the same report. Author’s later information: Cvita died on 15 June 1997; the author learned this in 2021. Damjan Đukić told him in 2021 that Cvita had lived with him in 1996–1997, then went to Melenci and died. The report contains neither the 1997 death nor Melenci. Its Novi Sad search period starting in 1998 excludes the author’s stated year of death. The author regards the report’s ending as an arrogant withholding of information and obstruction of his search for his mother.
Back to documents Open PDF Open annotated text

Related evidence

Bojana Vujić’s panel: plaintiff alone, Maja Petrović’s adoption-law defence and an agreed two-year framework — 6 February 2025
Why this source is linked
Related source

Maja Petrović says that a social worker searched for the plaintiff’s biological mother Cvita Miletić after his contact with the CSR in 2005 and promises the details. The linked document is Ljiljana Ristić’s actual report of 9 March 2005. It supplies the contemporaneous account against which Maja’s later description can be read, including the stated searches, the death-register date boundary and the concluding assessment; those details are not quoted at this hearing.

I point out that in **2005**, following the plaintiff’s approach to the Centre in that same year, the social worker handling the matter conducted a search for the plaintiff’s biological mother, **Miletić Cvita**. I will provide all the details of that to the court and the opposing party. Accordingly, I request 30 days to set out my position in detail on all the above. I therefore propose adjournment of the hearing. I agree that the plaintiff should be given 30 days to state whether he maintains the witnesses he has proposed.
Open supporting passage
Bojana Vujić’s hearing: “how he came under their jurisdiction”, CSR opposition and an order for adoption records — 26 March 2025
Why this source is linked
Related source

The record states that Maja Petrović supplies the 9 March 2005 social-worker report on the search for Cvita Miletić, that a photocopy enters the case file and that the plaintiff receives it again despite already possessing it. The linked original report signed by Ljiljana Ristić preserves the actual inquiries and recommendation. This relation identifies the report introduced, rather than a new mother-search event in 2025.

The defendant’s representative states that she opposes the action and the claim in their entirety because the statutory conditions for annulment of the full adoption applicable when it was concluded are not fulfilled. She requests an additional period of **15 days**, during which I will provide a detailed written statement and supply the Adoption Act of SAP Vojvodina containing the provisions. At today’s hearing I submit the social worker’s report in the search procedure for **Cvita Miletić**, dated **09.03.2005**. I oppose the evidentiary proposals to examine all the proposed witnesses about the dysfunctional marriage of the adopters Gospava and Milorad Vasić, since this is not a ground for annulment of the full adoption and such testimony by the proposed witnesses is questionable because of their indirect knowledge of the family circumstances. I agree that the plaintiff should be examined as a party and that the attached written documentation should be inspected, and I request 15 days to provide a detailed written statement and supply the then applicable Adoption Act of SAP Vojvodina which applied at the time of this plaintiff’s full adoption. She also opposes officially requesting inspection of the divorce litigation between the late adopters Gospava and Milorad Vasić, because it and the statements contained therein are not relevant to these proceedings for annulment of the full adoption, since the grounds for annulment must exist at the time the full adoption was established. It is recorded that a photocopy of the social worker’s report in the search procedure for Cvita Miletić dated 09.03.2005 is placed in the file and a copy handed directly to the plaintiff, although he states that he possesses that record.
Open supporting passage
Ljiljana Ristić recommends stopping the search for Cvita Miletić
Why this source is linked
Related source

The report dated 9 March 2005 records social worker Ljiljana Ristić’s recommendation to stop the search for Cvita Miletić.

On the basis of the information presented, it can be concluded that further attempts to locate Miletić Cvita exceed the capabilities of this authority. It should also be borne in mind that Cvita was in a very poor psychophysical and socioeconomic condition when she was receiving protection from the Centre for Social Work in Novi Sad. The assessment is that even today she is not in a better condition, which significantly determines the response to her son's request. It is my opinion that this meeting between the biological mother and the adopted son should not take place and that further searches for Cvita should be discontinued.
Open supporting passage
Two illegal adoptions reported: prosecutor declines prosecution — KTRKO 533/23 (November 2023)
Why this source is linked
Related source

The 2005 recommendation to stop the search and the 2023 prosecutor correspondence document two stages of the same search for maternal origin and access to records. This connection does not establish that the 2005 report was attached to the 2023 submission.

On the basis of the information presented, it can be concluded that further attempts to locate Miletić Cvita exceed the capabilities of this authority. It should also be borne in mind that Cvita was in a very poor psychophysical and socioeconomic condition when she was receiving protection from the Centre for Social Work in Novi Sad. The assessment is that even today she is not in a better condition, which significantly determines the response to her son's request. It is my opinion that this meeting between the biological mother and the adopted son should not take place and that further searches for Cvita should be discontinued.
Open supporting passage