Talk:Natalia Grace

The details of Natalia Grace Barnett's life, especially her age, are highly contentious and have been the subject of numerous lawsuits. Legally, in the United States, she is aged at 34, but birth records from the Ukraine show her to have been born in 2003. Of course, this is already outlined the section `Life`, however her birth year in the first sentence of the article reads 1989.

I hesitate to edit the article directly as I'm unsure of the reason for this discrepancy. That being said, I believe it to be inaccurate and perhaps even damaging to the individual given the recent uptick in public interest about her story. For this reason there needs to be further clarification on why her birth year is stated to be 1989

rather the year shown on her birth records, which is 2003. 2603:3021:2901:E800:D942:266F:970A:E35D (talk) 00:11, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

:I edited the header to indicate that Natalia's birth year is disputed and to include information regarding her birth certificate year of birth (2003) and the legally changed date of birth by her adoptive parents (1989) and clarify the reason for the discrepancy. DynaGirl (talk) 20:21, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

::На Украине много коррупции, поэтому ей могли изменить год рождения в документах за деньги 176.195.16.100 (talk) 21:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Should there be a redirect of the TV show The Curious Case of Natalia Grace to this page? eyeCommented (talk) 09:01, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

is there anyway to publicly get access to the court case(s) and their filings? this can be used as sources to better write and clarify this wiki entry. eyeCommented (talk) 09:04, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

:You may be able to obtain records as outlined here: [https://www.in.gov/courts/help/mycase/ https://www.in.gov/courts/help/mycase/]. I haven't used it. From my few uses of the Federal court records system, you may have to try a variety of ways to find what you want; identifying the exact case (and its designation) can be a bit difficult and confusing. - R. S. Shaw (talk) 18:14, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

::Seems i cant access that link outside of the USA. However I did find this document https://irp.cdn-website.com/1c91a0ab/files/uploaded/Opinion%20-%20Memorandum%20Received%20fr%20(6)%20(1).pdf

::Can you maybe link (publicly accessable) documents in relation to this case? I would love to read them. eyeCommented (talk) 03:26, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The current article treats the Ukrainian birth certificate date of September 4, 2003 as fact, and it is only when you read down to the Abandonment section that you discover that in 2012 a court ruled for her birth record to be changed to September 4, 1989 making her 22 instead of 8 at the time. Note some sources outside Wikipedia suggest a 2013 court ruling making her 23 years of age, not 9 years of age.

I have no clue which claim is true, and frankly the discrepancy in date is troubling, but until such time as the prosecution present evidence of the Ukranian claim, mustn't the legal birth date\age be used here? The Tippecanoe Superior Court has stated that her age is a settled matter in the courts after all. 121.45.138.79 (talk) 06:16, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

:This was already discussed and settled in the first section of this talk page. As the issue is ongoing the resolution there seems appropriate. 2603:6011:51F0:4B30:68C2:11E2:61A6:5C99 (talk) 07:31, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Having just watched the finale of Season 2, I am surprised there is not yet any mention HERE of an apparent break with the Mans family. The closing caption before the credits says her story will continue, implying there is new conflict to report. And there sounds to be audio of the new parents condemning and washing their hands of her.

No further details are given, pending a new season, perhaps.

https://www.etonline.com/natalia-speaks-finale-natalia-grace-docuseries-ends-on-a-shocking-cliffhanger-watch-the-final

Wmohler (talk) 11:13, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

A statement (a facebook post - i can not confirm this is her account) from Kristine Barnett appears to be a response to allegations of abuse made against her.

Kristine asserts that Natalia was loved and cared for within the family and that any discipline she received was within normal parental bounds. Kristine mentions that they (the Barnetts) were booked and cleared of charges related to Natalia's alleged abuse, and were not guilty.

Kristine alleges that Natalia is a sociopathy and manipulates sympathy to cover her extreme actions and portrays herself differently in public settings compared to her experiences living with her.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/KristineElizabethPearson/posts/pfbid02seNwGr8aLqhUewHddtuNqNTDiv5gkgaKdG7Sz3B5B5uXzMgGSAzUtk8ZnxWKb38Rl

eyeCommented (talk) 03:18, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

{{Edit semi-protected|Natalia Grace|answered=yes}}

Change the birth year from 2001 to 2003 as all the used citation is actually saying 2003 2001:4C4E:24C4:F200:72:D43:96EC:CC75 (talk) 09:44, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:File:Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done —Sirdog (talk) 17:27, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Shouldn't this article have a table of contents? I think it will make it easier for readers to get the key details at a glance. Saptajit D (talk) 16:10, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

:It does have a table of contents. Joyous! Noise! 21:05, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

::@Joyous! I mean a table regarding personal details. Saptajit D (talk) 02:25, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:::You mean a biographical infobox? MWFwiki (talk) 01:39, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

::::@MWFwiki Yes Saptajit D (talk) 05:26, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Maybe a portrait of her. Saptajit D (talk) 04:48, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:If you can locate a picture that meets copyright requirements — or create one — and justify why the picture adds to the article, then yes MWFwiki (talk) 20:04, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

{{tq|"Natalia had a previous adoptive placement in the United States prior to her adoption by the Barnetts.{{Cite web |last=Flynn |first=Sheila |date=2023-06-05 |title=Six-year-old saved by adoption or murderous adult imposter: Who is Natalia Grace? |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/natalia-grace-michael-burnett-adopted-girl-b2351428.html |access-date=2023-06-23 |website=The Independent |language=en}}{{Cite web |date=October 27, 2022 |title=Natalia Barnett testifies against adoptive father in trial alleging neglect |url=https://www.jconline.com/story/news/crime/2022/10/25/natalia-and-kristine-barnett-allegedly-had-a-caustic-relationship/69581569007/ |access-date=2023-06-23 |website=Journal and Courier |language=en-US}} She took the name Natalia Grace Barnett after being adopted by them."}}

This part either needs expansion or simply to be removed. It reads to me, as someone who is not terribly familiar with the case, that the "previous" adoptive family is being purposely rushed-over. If they're so unimportant, they probably shouldn't even be mentioned. Otherwise, there should be some explanation of what happened there (assuming sources have reported this, which I'm sure they have). Was she officially adopted by them? "Adoptive placement" is very... weasel-wordy.

Regardless, that last sentence is poorly-worded. "...after being adopted by them." Who? The first family? Why would she take the name "Barnett" after being adopted by the first family? I realize the Barnetts were mentioned in the previous sentence, but the primary focus of said sentence was the first adoptive family.

If no one has any objections or suggestions, I will re-write the latter half of this section after this has remained opened for a week (7 days), assuming consensus cannot be reached earlier.

MWFwiki (talk) 20:12, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

:Ten (10) days, no response. Went ahead and changed to:

:{{tq|In 2008, she was brought to the United States after being adopted by Dyan and Gary Ciccone, residing in New Hampshire. The Ciccones would place her back up for adoption in 2010, due to what they alleged to be her "disruptive behavior." She was adopted by Kristine and Michael Barnett in the spring of 2010, with her adopting the legal of name "Natalia Grace Barnett" upon adoption.}} MWFwiki (talk) 02:33, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

In S3E02 of "The Curious Case of Natalia Grace" she is referred to as "Natalia Grace Renee Mans" by Mrs Mans. Should "Renee" be included in the article? 170.62.100.227 (talk) 23:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

:Not if we don't have a source. Otherwise, yes. MWFwiki (talk) 02:36, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

{{reply|MWFwiki}} Re name: not the same person but I added sources; my question is, should this article be titled "Natalia Grace" if her name was recently changed to "Natalyah"? J3133 (talk) 13:24, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

:No worries. Short version, probably not; Please see WP:COMMONNAME. Long version... probably not, but maybe eventually. If "Natalyah" becomes the name that she is overwhelmingly referred-to in most media, then yes. However... it would be perfectly appropriate to mention in the article proper that her name has been changed. Part of the issue is that she... well, she seems to change her name a lot. Given this, changing the title may be touching-on WP:TOOSOON. But again, perfectly fine to mention it in the article, assuming one has the sources.

These are just my opinions, though, and they mean no more than anyone else's.

You may open a move discussion — see WP:RSPM — and see what the prevailing opinion/consensus is.

MWFwiki (talk) 18:45, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

So, the section "abandonment," considering there have never been any convictions, should we re-name it to "Alleged abandonment?" Probably touching-on some BLP issues by directly accusing them (the Barnetts) of abandonment. I believe that Natalia was a child and they did indeed abandon her, but that isn't how Wikipedia works.

I realize there is an argument to be made that they factually abandoned Natalia, but considering they were affirmed "not guilty," and considering "abandonment" is an actual charge in certain jurisdictions, I believe we should tread carefully.

Thoughts? Assuming no responses, I will assume "silence is consensus" after 7 days and alter the section title accordingly. MWFwiki (talk) 22:08, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

:Seven (7) days, no response. Went ahead and changed to:

:{{tq|Alleged abandonment}}

MWFwiki (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

:It is not disputed that she was abandoned. The only dispute was whether it was legal to do so. --Rob (talk) 04:01, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

::Leaving someone alone is not necessarily abandonment. However, abandonment can have legal implications and both the Barnetts were affirmed "not guilty." I left this open for seven days and no one commented. This is a possible WP:BLP issue, and when it comes to possibly contentious wording, the most neutral wording should be chosen. If you have an issue with the wording, start your own RfC. We have media outlets that outright [https://www.wthr.com/article/news/crime/tippecanoe-county-man-found-not-guilty-of-abandoning-adopted-daughter-michael-kristine-barnett-indiana-natalia/531-9fd43d96-f825-4dfa-8cca-a7c23e166071 describe] the Barnetts as having been found "not guilty of abandonment." "[https://www.wthr.com/article/news/crime/tippecanoe-county-man-found-not-guilty-of-abandoning-adopted-daughter-michael-kristine-barnett-indiana-natalia/531-9fd43d96-f825-4dfa-8cca-a7c23e166071 Alleged abandonment]," "[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/waterloo-indiana-kristine-barnett-1.5300565 accused of abandoning...]" "[https://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/a29090895/kristine-barnett-michael-daughter-adoption-age-abandon/ Accused of Abandoning Adopted Kid]," etc etc. Yes, one can argue that she was de facto abandoned, regardless of the legality/her age/etc. However, it also has legal implications, so one must take care. WP:BLP's (and other supporting and sub-policies') implication is clear: when a criminal charge has not been confirmed by a court, any language that may suggest that an individual is guilty should either be qualified (for example, as "alleged") or presented in a way that makes clear it is an accusation.

On the flip-side, I don't have an issue with the wording further-down, "Cynthia Mans, who took Natalia in after discovering her abandoned in the Lafayette apartment..." as that is describing a natural state, not necessarily suggesting criminality.

To be clear, I believe the Barnetts abandoned a child. But what I think doesn't matter.

MWFwiki (talk) 00:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

"Through an August 2023 DNA test, the health testing company TruDiagnostic estimated that Grace was about twenty-two years old, suggesting that she was eight years old when her adoptive parents abandoned her in her first apartment in 2011."

I can't edit this sentence since it's restricted, but the way this sentence is worded is strange and confusing. "Suggesting" is also an awkward and non-ideal word choice in this context. Suggest reworking to the following:

Through a DNA test run by the health testing company TruDiagnostic, it was estimated that Grace was about twenty-two years old at the time of the test in August 2023, supporting that she was eight years old when her adoptive parents abandoned her in her first apartment in 2011. 98.116.120.148 (talk) 00:18, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

:The first part of the sentence, maybe... but the latter half? I don't see what is the issue, unless you're arguing further simplification of language is needed. "Suggested" is perfectly acceptable in this context. I don't see what makes it "awkward."

:Also, as I pointed-out in an earlier Talk section, we need to be careful with how we state the Barnetts "abandoned" her. I agree that they did. But the law does not. Full-stop. Abandonment is a legal term with legal implications. "Alleged abandonment" is the best phrase.

:MWFwiki (talk) 23:21, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

:Altered it a bit. How's that read MWFwiki (talk) 23:28, 24 April 2025 (UTC)