Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,047,835 times
Reputation: 11862
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980
Is there another source for that story (seeing as the Daily Mail is basically the UK equivalent of the Enquirer, LOL), and do you realize this took place in the UK? Also, do we know the whole story on WHY the judge ruled out any biological relatives? This isn't an issue of "PC," and I'm not sure why you'd think that for a second! Having witnessed custody hearings with a dear friend not long ago, I can tell you the American Judicial system always tries to keep the child within the family... so there must have a been a darned good reason if they chose otherwise, and I'd like to hear the whole story from a reliable source before judging.
I know you have serious gay-army paranoia, but no court would determine the fate of a child based on being politically correct. For goodness sakes.
I would HOPE there were extenuating circumstance as to why the children were separated from their family.
Their mother said she want them being raised by her parents,not the two men. Heroin addict or not, even if you think she's homophobic that should be her right to choose! Because she feels it's in the best interest of her children. Imagine if you were her...even if you were an addict you was a terrible/unfit parent, I'm sure you'd want the best for your kids. Would you just allow the state to take away your right, regardless of who the kids were going to?
I would HOPE there were extenuating circumstance as to why the children were separated from their family.
I would not only hope, I would assume... things aren't that different in the UK, and as I said above, the courts ALWAYS try to keep a child within the family if possible. Maybe grandma & grandpa had problems with drugs or alcohol too? It is often an inherited trait, after all. Just speculating though, which is all we can do without court documents and/or reliable sources.
Quote:
Their mother said she didn't want them being raised by her parents,not the two men. Heroin addict or not, even if you think she's homophobic that should be her right to choose! Because she feels it's in the best interest of her children.
If her children have become wards of the court, she has lost all rights over them - period. Maybe she should have considered this when she had them, and tried to get clean for their sake? You know, that old "personal responsibility" concept conservatives love to discuss? The best interest of the children would be a clean & sober mom, but apparently that doesn't seem as important to her. But two (most likely sober and stable) gays raising her child? Oh noes, not that!
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,047,835 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980
I would not only hope, I would assume... things aren't that different in the UK, and as I said above, the courts ALWAYS try to keep a child within the family if possible. Maybe grandma & grandpa had problems with drugs or alcohol too? It is often an inherited trait, after all. Just speculating though, which is all we can do without court documents and/or reliable sources.
If her children have become wards of the court, she has lost all rights over them - period. Maybe she should have considered this when she had them, and tried to get clean for their sake? You know, that old "personal responsibility" concept conservatives love to discuss?
I kind of do agree with the last part...she should've taken more effort. If it came down to a heroin addicted mother and the gay couple, I would say the gay couple should get custody. But yes, I guess we don't know what the grandparents are really like, but they can't be that terrible can they?
Imagine if you were her...even if you were an addict you was a terrible/unfit parent, I'm sure you'd want the best for your kids. Would you just allow the state to take away your right, regardless of who the kids were going to?
To answer this part (which you added after I quoted you), if I were her I'd have tried to get sober for the sake of my children. She didn't allow the state to take away her rights, she MADE them take away her rights by failing to get clean. Look, I'm as sympathetic as anyone when it comes to substance abuse, since I've had my own issues with that... but I don't have children, and if I did, I most certainly wouldn't blame anyone else if I couldn't stay sober for them. She clearly hasn't been making sound decisions for a while, so why should they trust her to make this very important one?
I kind of do agree with the last part...she should've taken more effort. If it came down to a heroin addicted mother and the gay couple, I would say the gay couple should get custody. But yes, I guess we don't know what the grandparents are really like, but they can't be that terrible can they?
Oh yes they can! My friend mentioned earlier had to fight her mother (the grandmother) for custody once, and trust me - she IS that bad, in fact much worse than my friend has ever been. Where do you think she learned those bad habits which threatened custody in the first place? Her mom, that's where. Old(er) doesn't always mean saintly, which I think some people often forget.
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,047,835 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980
To answer this part (which you added after I quoted you), if I were her I'd have tried to get sober for the sake of my children. She didn't allow the state to take away her rights, she MADE them take away her rights by failing to get clean. Look, I'm as sympathetic as anyone when it comes to substance abuse, since I've had my own issues with that... but I don't have children, and if I did, I most certainly wouldn't blame anyone else if I couldn't stay sober for them. She clearly hasn't been making sound decisions for a while, so why should they trust her to make this very important one?
Well it doesn't mean we should simply not listen to her, does it? Put yourself in her shoes. She's not mad, she just has drug problems. So her very earnest wish, along with the children's wish, that they be cared for by their grandparents should be totally ignored?
Is there another source for that story (seeing as the Daily Mail is basically the UK equivalent of the Enquirer, LOL), and do you realize this took place in the UK? Also, do we know the whole story on WHY the judge ruled out any biological relatives? This isn't an issue of "PC," and I'm not sure why you'd think that for a second! Having witnessed custody hearings with a dear friend not long ago, I can tell you the American Judicial system always tries to keep the child within the family... so there must have a been a darned good reason if they chose otherwise, and I'd like to hear the whole story from a reliable source before judging.
I know you have serious gay-army paranoia, but no court would determine the fate of a child based on being politically correct. For goodness sakes.
I'm not familiar with that paper, but the only way to know the WHOLE story is through court documents... see my comments above, regarding possible explanations for this decision. Do you really believe a judge would think "Well, the grandparents are wonderful and perfectly capable of raising this child. But I think I'll choose some random gay couple instead, just so I look good to the gay activists." C'mon now, you have more sense than that!
I'm not familiar with that paper, but the only way to know the WHOLE story is through court documents... see my comments above, regarding possible explanations for this decision. Do you really believe a judge would think "Well, the grandparents are wonderful and perfectly capable of raising this child. But I think I'll choose some random gay couple instead, just so I look good to the gay activists." C'mon now, you have more sense than that!
Apparently the Edinburgh Council does not have any sense. They have the decency to apologize - but that doesn't rectify the wrong that they have done by separating these children from their family.
Apparently the Edinburgh Council does not have any sense.
Only if things are as you're interpreting them... have you seen the court documents, and do you know the family personally? If not, you are just speculating at this point.
P.S. The Edinburgh Council is in the UK, so I'm not sure why you're concerned about it anyway. I don't know much about their court system, but hopefully ours does maintain common sense in these cases.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
