Spalding wrote: "Do you appreciate the range of circumstances that the state/judiciary can now consider as abuse or neglect ?"
--------------------------------------------


Explain it to them:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ark-ruling.html
--------------------------------------------


http://childwelfare.net/resources/SufferTheChildren/jh_novoice.html

------------------
Bo pen nyang.

[This message has been edited by Taike (edited 07-15-2010).]

In all actuality Taike makes a ton of sense as far as his parenting philosophy is concerned. Just his concept of solving the problem seems wrong to me, especially in this already overly litigious society of ours.

First off, bogus, BS lawsuits prompted by pissed off kids who didn't get their way should never see the light of day.

That said...

Some kids get great parents, some get brutal parents and most get something in the middle. There's things they did well, and things they didn't do so well. Parenting is a difficult challenge, now more than ever, IMO.

The kids with pretty bad parents are facing a huge uphill climb compared to those who have it better. Don't we all see smaller kids in a grocery store, gas station, etc. where they're acting up horribly and the parent(s) with them seem like something out of a dump? Poor hygiene, screaming and yelling at them in public, etc. usually our kids learn how to be parents from their parents. They model their parenting behavior off of what they experienced growing up. If Dad smacks Mom around, we know that junior is more likely to do the same. So maybe this family goes home and there's even more yelling, perhaps some low level physical abuse, etc. Maybe they don't go to church, maybe they use alcohol/drugs to a bad degree. We all know situations like this, right? Don't you think that those kids are at a disadvantage because of who had them? I do.

That kid has an uphill fight to try and break out of that culture. I've seen friends of the girls come over and they look like little street rats but sometimes after they feel comfortable they relax around us parents and a whole other side comes through. If you take a kid like that from poor parents and put them with better parents, there will be a difference.

Should their be a mechanism for children to use if they're really getting the short end of the stick? Not talking abuse-that's clear cut...But moreso the bad situations. Who do they turn to for relief? I don't think its the courts, but rather the teachers are the ones in the best situation to know these kids and help shape their lives and futures.

As an aside, I appreciate the dialogue that's gone on here in The Bar over the last few months. For me, its WAY more interesting than what's been going on in the regular arranger forums...

------------------
Bill in Dayton

[This message has been edited by Bill in Dayton (edited 07-15-2010).]

The positive take-away here is a very positive and agreed upon theme about the importance of good parenting.Any disagreement is on sub-set issues and is more semantic than anything.

And, remember, this comes with a "family" connection...the adopted grandpa of "daDude", an honorary member of Taike's family, and the "part-time" dad of my man Rory.

You can imagine how important family is to me!


Best to all!


(D.O.D.)

Dear Old Dad

And you think the answer is that everyone should be sued ????? parents ...councils ??where does the money go round stop Taike ????

Who funds the Councils Taike ? Take a wild guess.....oh thats right people like you and me through our taxes. Yes your point sounds more and more sensible as i think it through.

or maybe not.

This girl's case should never have seen the inside of any court but like i said you clearly have no concept of the range of circumstances that the state/judiciary can consider as being within their jurisdiction to interfere or term abuse or neglect.

In the cases you mentioned clearly crimminal acts were being purportrated against children. If a criminal act is committed crimminal prosecutions should follow full stop. Not monetary claims through Civil Courts because the unintended side effect is more claims for frivoluos things just like this court case illustrates.Have you heard of the No win No fee profession. You know the kind 'wheres theres blame theres a claim' type thing ?

How many more claims will now be made from children who in their view 'should have been taken into care' or who feel they were unfairly treated by their parents discipline' . The no win no fee industry has just found another cash cow and you want to endorse that ?

Sure there is a place for the Law but not like this and certainly not for monetary damages.

[This message has been edited by spalding1968 (edited 07-15-2010).]

Spalding, I think stated very clearly that I wasn't talking about the case you mentioned in your first post. I was talking about the case mentioned in my previous post.

Neither have I said that all cases should be financially compensated.

There is nothing wrong seeking financial compensation in the case I mentioned. The councils didn't do their job. And who pays their salaries?

"I do wish that more children sue their parents for neglect and abuse."
This is about being held accountable. Again, it's not about money!

You really shouldn't believe that all cases are alike or that people are all the same. Some sue out of greed, others out of vengeance, others for justice.

Taike



------------------
Bo pen nyang.

what would they sue their parents for Taike if not for financial compensation ?

Excerpt from: http://www.westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=2803

"Michelle responded by running off to her mother, who was apparently more lenient about such conduct. But since Mr. Boudreau retained legal custody, Michelle still needed his consent to go on the school camping trip. So Mrs. Boudreau convinced Michelle�s court-appointed lawyer, Lucie Fortin, to take Mr. Boudreau to court to dispense with his consent. Justice Suzanne Tessier heard the application, and granted the relief sought. All three of these women � Mrs. Boudreau, Ms. Fortin, and Justice Tessier--accepted 12-year-old Michelle�s view that Mr. Boudreau�s discipline was excessive."

Nowhere does it say that Michelle Boudreau had been compensated. She was granted relief sought which, if I'm not mistaken, means that she was allowed to go on the camping trip.

And once again, it cleary states that it was the mother who set the lawsuit in motion. I doubt the daughter would even know where to start.

To me the case is more about one parent getting even with the other. Both the mother and judge are wrong. The daughter's merely the tool used to get even with her ex. It's a ridiculous lawsuit but we all know that's how some exes behave.
--------------------------------------------
I just wish that bad parents are held accountable for their actions. That doesn't mean that they should end up paying large sums of money. No, far from it. But it would benefit both parties if such parents learned parenting skills.



------------------
Bo pen nyang.

"I do wish that more children sue their parents for neglect and abuse."
This is about being held accountable. Again, it's not about money!

I understand your point about making parents accountable for their actions but law suits are the wrong place for that. This is the point i am making.

This case had nothing to do with neglect or abuse and could not be dealt with by granting a child the right not to be negelcted or abuse. they alreday have that right under law.

You are quite right that this case was about the child bouncing one parent off the other. Dad said she cant go so she got mum to give her authority to go through the use of the courts. My concern is based upon my experience of engaging with family law in the UK and having an appreciation of the nonsense that gets passed off as justice behind the closed doors and secrecy of the courts , especially concerning childtren.

You are quite right, this was a rediculous lawsuit but the facts are that it occured and the result was that the courts saw fit to stamp its authority over the fathers in matters that had nothing to do with abuse or neglect and it sets a precedent that no doubt will come to bite us all on the ass some day.

Children whose parents abuse or neglect them are best dealt with by crimminal courts because abuse and neglect are crimes and recieve a much more thorough testing of evidence than civil courts. I guess thats what bothers me the most about any promotion of taking parents to civil court if in the eyes of a child they feel hard done by,as the term abuse covers such a wide range of things that everything is arguably potentially abuse. Even potentially denying your child a trip camping.