nomoresorrow
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2008
- Messages
- 3,576
- Reaction score
- 262
:applause::applause:
Well said kiki and excellent points! I'd also like to add another dimension for consideration; Abuse allegations are often dismissed simply because the of the assumption that, in the case of divorced parents w/child(ren) & primary or shared custody/visitation issues,...the parent is attempting to alter the custodial arrangement with the child(ren) and thereby the claims are viewed as false. Oftentimes schools, healthcare providers,...become tunnel visioned - at the onset - simply because of their knowledge that the child's parents are divorced. Sadly many legitimate abuse claims are dismissed or overlooked because of this fact alone - simply because the child(ren) comes from a broken/divorced home. What will be more interesting, in my opinion, will be the "new and revised" statements and/or testimony made by Haleigh's physician, school, and any other "obligated to report by law" professionals or personnal NOW - now that the spotlight is on Haleigh/Past abuse claims and any and all past reports/ conclusions made will be scrutinized - watch closely because this is when/where we will see claims of "enlightenment upon reflection" by doctor's, the school,...and their excuse will be that hindsight is 20/20. I've seen this too many many times - when it's too late for the child(ren).
MOO
, because no one who wants Junior--and hopefully Haleigh--safe can afford to allow their vision to become so tunneled as to dismiss the possibility that what some are alleging may in truth have happened. For starters the ONLY person who can possibly know whether Crystal's own account of dad's abuse behind closed doors is true or false is CRYSTAL. Secondly she is not the only one who is reporting dad's violence or abuse (neighbor AmandaK eg frequently heard what she described as abusiveness by dad). And third it seems there is inconsistency between the explanations offered by dad eg for an incident at school and the injuries that resulted. And for all of these reasons, it is always best to err on the side of caution where any child's safety is concerned.
A parent who receives what they believe are mounting credible reports of abusiveness toward his or her children has not only the right but an implicit and obvious duty to protect those children--and to act on their behalf. We've crucified this same mother and others for being remiss or not doing enough earlier. When in the past she lacked the means ie was at a disadvantage w/out resources or representation; and because the abuse experienced or witnessed by Crystal during her marriage had been directed toward or previously limited to her, does not mean that w the perspective of time, as more facts and reports emerge which give cause for concern for the children (not the least of which is one child vanishing) in light of new reports or new information, and w finally some representation of her own, that she can or should not reconsider or fight to ensure Junior at least is protected from those risks. First we fault her for not doing more when she lacked proof and couldn't--but then turn around and fault her for doing something once she hears the reports and has the means.
In this situation it isn't "alienation" (if this is how one perceives it) that represents the most immediate threat or gravest danger to either child but the environment, now exposed, from which Junior's sister has already mysteriously "disappeared" from whom no one has since seen or heard for a month and a half. The lives of Mark Klaas, Ed Smart and other parents of children gone missing were subject to the same scrutiny and any threat or risk w/in Polly's or Elizabeth's eg environment would have been identified as well. If there are factors which turn out to have indeed put Haleigh and/or her bro at risk, those who dismiss this, as mere "mind games and trashing" IMO share that burden. What IS clear is that Haleigh's disappearance has brought to light many risk factors and concerns about the environment in which both she and Junior have been living. Of course he has nothing to say about mom now (about whom nobody is alleging any continued high risk behaviors) because he knows he is the one who insisted on taking the children from her and thus the one who bears full responsibility in this situation.
And as debs rightly points out, if there turns out to be no cause for concern or these reports lack merit, the investigation can quickly establish that too--in which case Junior can remain and Lord willing one day Haleigh brought back safe, to what is then a proven safe, stable, abuse- and drug-free home. But everyone should want those issues cleared up or addressed to eliminate continued or further risks to any child. JMO
arrot:
Well said kiki and excellent points! I'd also like to add another dimension for consideration; Abuse allegations are often dismissed simply because the of the assumption that, in the case of divorced parents w/child(ren) & primary or shared custody/visitation issues,...the parent is attempting to alter the custodial arrangement with the child(ren) and thereby the claims are viewed as false. Oftentimes schools, healthcare providers,...become tunnel visioned - at the onset - simply because of their knowledge that the child's parents are divorced. Sadly many legitimate abuse claims are dismissed or overlooked because of this fact alone - simply because the child(ren) comes from a broken/divorced home. What will be more interesting, in my opinion, will be the "new and revised" statements and/or testimony made by Haleigh's physician, school, and any other "obligated to report by law" professionals or personnal NOW - now that the spotlight is on Haleigh/Past abuse claims and any and all past reports/ conclusions made will be scrutinized - watch closely because this is when/where we will see claims of "enlightenment upon reflection" by doctor's, the school,...and their excuse will be that hindsight is 20/20. I've seen this too many many times - when it's too late for the child(ren).
MOO
