Dan Dorn seeks to deprive paralyzed woman of visitation with her kids

[LinasK]

This really is a shame. And nice guy, divorcing her because she's paralyzed. I guess he was kidding when he said for better or for worse, huh?

From the pictures I saw in today's paper, this family appears to be Orthodox Jews from the way they are dressed. I'm not saying this to be bigoted, because I myself am Jewish, but my personal observation is that Orthodox men are notorious for treating women as second-class citizens, and I get the impression of this guy as a particular misogynist. He appears to be blaming the wife for her own condition- which was caused by medical errors in childbirth- giving birth to his own kids! By hiding the mother's pictures from the kids, he's acting as if she were dead to them!!! Talk about shunning!:razz: I also believe this is why he divorced her.:twocents:

 

[CCmakes3]

Good points, Buzzie. I have typed literally thousands of wills and trusts over the years I worked at law firms, but I never encountered a case remotely similar to this. It may be possible for the parents to put Abbie's money in trust for her children (and for all we know, Dan may have no objection to their doing so); or it may be they will have to petition a court to create a trust on Abbie's behalf. (To do the latter, I think they'd have to make a good argument that Dan would misuse the funds.)

(P.S. I'm sorry to refer to principals by their first names. I try to avoid doing so, but there are a lot of people named Dorn in this case.)

FWIW, I think we were all unfair to Mr. Dorn--including myself, and I was DEFENDING his position! But we can only work with the media reports we get.

I'm sure I'm not the only one here who can say this whole mess has made me feel a bit sheepish for not feeling exceptionally lucky every moment of every day! Tragic circumstances can really complicate relationships, as everyone's individual interests in the situation almost immediately change. Inevitably, actions are taken out of panic, grief, self-preservation or defensiveness that will definitely be open to criticism from all angles.

 

[yosande]

The judge has ruled:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/paralyzed-...-visitation-rights-children/story?id=13223968

It's only an interim decision, four months long, but it is good news that she was acknowledged to have a right to see her children.
But, even as the mother is allowed to see her children, her primary caregiver is restricted from being in the room with them. That is very disappointing indeed, and all because she has faith, and hope in her daughter's recovery, which is a completely normal response.

The grandmother must give up her hope and her faith in her G-d and her daughter to be healed of this disability.
I don't think that is constitional either.

As the grandmother has hope for her daughter, her exhusband has none, so his negative attitude will be allowed to come into the room with the children and their mother, and the positive hope from their grandmother is banned.

Think about how that will effect the children, who long for their mom to be well, but are deprived of their grandmother's hugs, and hope.

And this man is a devout orthodox believer in the G-d of Abraham, isaac, and Jacob. The same G-d who kept Daniel from being eaten by lions, and Shadrach, Meshach, and Abennigo, (sp on all names) who were not harmed when thrown into a fiery furnace for their hope, and honor of the One True G-d, the Holy One of Israel.

May Hashem forgive him, and deliver him from such small faith, and have mercy on his soul. Imo, he is more disabled spiritually, than she is physically.

This family will be in my prayers. Hope in Hashem, and honor for one another can heal hardened hearts. I can in my heart hear his children asking him to pray for their mama, that she will get well.

I also pray the children will be able to see their mother, and their grandmother, more often when the final decisions are made.

How ironic that their faith is passed from mother to child in their religion, but the children are deprived of seeing one or the other, and it is because of their faith that they are forbidden. So ironic.

Yet, with G-d, all things are possible.

 

[yosande]

I couldn't agree more. Absolutely tragic and not at all malicious. I think we can all understand that perhaps the grandmother needs to believe her daughter will get better; it may be the only way she gets through each day.

But I agree with Mr. Dorn: passing that belief onto the children would be cruel.

Hope is not cruel. Just the opposite. It is very kind.
Faith is something the world refuses to hold onto.
But in our constitution, it is forbidden to deprive anyone of it.
And again, in Judaism, it is the maternal line that passes the Faith, and the traditions from one generation to another.

ETA; False hope is an oxymoron, imo.

When hope is received, it is a very kind friend. When hope is forbidden, one is left only with dispair. So, which is better; hope, or dispair?
As time goes by, hope is tested, but it never leaves one in dispair. It simply moves from hope in this life, to hope in the life to come when this one is completed.
Their mama is here for a reason. That reason is to inplant nourishment to her children. That nourishment is Hope and Faith in their spirits. That's just moo though.

 

[Nova]

Hope is not cruel. Just the opposite. It is very kind.
Faith is something the world refuses to hold onto.
But in our constitution, it is forbidden to deprive anyone of it.
And again, in Judaism, it is the maternal line that passes the Faith, and the traditions from one generation to another.

ETA; False hope is an oxymoron, imo.

When hope is received, it is a very kind friend. When hope is forbidden, one is left only with dispair. So, which is better; hope, or dispair?
As time goes by, hope is tested, but it never leaves one in dispair. It simply moves from hope in this life, to hope in the life to come when this one is completed.
Their mama is here for a reason. That reason is to inplant nourishment to her children. That nourishment is Hope and Faith in their spirits. That's just moo though.

With respect, yosande, there is a difference between hope and delusion. Would it be alright if I tell the children to watch the street every day, because someday soon their mother is going to drive up in a Rolls Royce and take them to Disneyland? Of course, not. Not even if for some reason I had faith that it would happen.

I also think you misunderstand how our laws on separation of church and state work. They tend to defer to parents (over grandparents) when it comes to teaching religion to children. In this case, nobody can stop the grandmother from having faith in her daughter's recovery, but the court can--and has--prevented the grandmother from contradicting what the father tells his children.

ETA "False hope is an oxymoron"? Then pardon me while I sit on my a$$ and hope to win the lottery. Surely you can see there are hopes that are reasonable and there are hopes that are, in fact, hopeless. The latter are called delusions and they generally end in heartache (if not the insane asylum).

Hope and despair aren't the only possibility options. There's also honesty and it isn't always a bad thing. Upon surrendering false hope, one may be left with more reasonable expectations and even new hopes that are more likely to be realized.

 

[Trident]

Hope is not cruel. Just the opposite. It is very kind.
Faith is something the world refuses to hold onto.
But in our constitution, it is forbidden to deprive anyone of it.
And again, in Judaism, it is the maternal line that passes the Faith, and the traditions from one generation to another.

ETA; False hope is an oxymoron, imo.

When hope is received, it is a very kind friend. When hope is forbidden, one is left only with dispair. So, which is better; hope, or dispair?
As time goes by, hope is tested, but it never leaves one in dispair. It simply moves from hope in this life, to hope in the life to come when this one is completed.
Their mama is here for a reason. That reason is to inplant nourishment to her children. That nourishment is Hope and Faith in their spirits. That's just moo though.

Beautiful post. I believe you bring out the true spirit of G_d and love.

 

[Tuffy]

I am so glad these kids will get the chance to visit their mother. Sad that the courts had to order it.

I think this is a victory for disabled people everywhere. They should have the same legal rights as non-disabled people.

 

[Nova]

I am so glad these kids will get the chance to visit their mother. Sad that the courts had to order it.

I think this is a victory for disabled people everywhere. They should have the same legal rights as non-disabled people.

Just so we're clear: we now know the father was NOT objecting to the children seeing their mother. He was objecting to their grandmother telling them their mother was going to get better, when no medical expert agrees.

 

[Tuffy]

Just so we're clear: we now know the father was NOT objecting to the children seeing their mother. He was objecting to their grandmother telling them their mother was going to get better, when no medical expert agrees.

Why did the children not get to visit the mother then? I think he was keeping them away from her. Plenty of people have issues with their ex inlaws, and disagree on what children should hear. I think there was more of an issue with the mom being paralyzed than anything else.

So I guess even though he didn't object to them visiting her, he still kept them from visiting her?

Either way, still not right! IMO

 

[Shear22]

Just so we're clear: we now know the father was NOT objecting to the children seeing their mother. He was objecting to their grandmother telling them their mother was going to get better, when no medical expert agrees.

Do you have a link to this information? I had not heard this.

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

I agree - it think it would be most positive for the children to see their mother. It appears the December visit went well, and don't see why a visit every 6 months would be harmful (more if the children want it).

She is still their mother and the children have the right to see her - regardless of what the dad says. I would hate to insinuate that the father is trying to get the children to forget their mother -- but that's what it sounds like to me.

MOO

Mel

Yes, I think this man has selfish intentions.."in sickness and in health" etc...he forgot some of his vows.
The time spent with their Mother is invaluable. The benefits, in my mind, far outweigh any of the negative the Father has come up with. Shame on this man for trying to erase his ex-wife and the Mother of his beautiful children. It is the very least that he can do to take these children to visit every 6 months. The Mother loved them before they were even born, she has the right to visit with them. I think the children would be more traumatized years down the road to find out their Father tried to keep them from their Mother.

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

It's only an interim decision, four months long, but it is good news that she was acknowledged to have a right to see her children.
But, even as the mother is allowed to see her children, her primary caregiver is restricted from being in the room with them. That is very disappointing indeed, and all because she has faith, and hope in her daughter's recovery, which is a completely normal response.

The grandmother must give up her hope and her faith in her G-d and her daughter to be healed of this disability.
I don't think that is constitional either.

As the grandmother has hope for her daughter, her exhusband has none, so his negative attitude will be allowed to come into the room with the children and their mother, and the positive hope from their grandmother is banned.

Think about how that will effect the children, who long for their mom to be well, but are deprived of their grandmother's hugs, and hope.

And this man is a devout orthodox believer in the G-d of Abraham, isaac, and Jacob. The same G-d who kept Daniel from being eaten by lions, and Shadrach, Meshach, and Abennigo, (sp on all names) who were not harmed when thrown into a fiery furnace for their hope, and honor of the One True G-d, the Holy One of Israel.

May Hashem forgive him, and deliver him from such small faith, and have mercy on his soul. Imo, he is more disabled spiritually, than she is physically.

This family will be in my prayers. Hope in Hashem, and honor for one another can heal hardened hearts. I can in my heart hear his children asking him to pray for their mama, that she will get well.

I also pray the children will be able to see their mother, and their grandmother, more often when the final decisions are made.

How ironic that their faith is passed from mother to child in their religion, but the children are deprived of seeing one or the other, and it is because of their faith that they are forbidden. So ironic.

Yet, with G-d, all things are possible.

Beautiful Post!

 

[jjenny]

This really is a shame. And nice guy, divorcing her because she's paralyzed. I guess he was kidding when he said for better or for worse, huh?

Her condition is much more serious than just paralysis. I don't think many husbands/wives would stick around in such a situation,it just human nature whether we want it or not.

 

[Nova]

Why did the children not get to visit the mother then? I think he was keeping them away from her. Plenty of people have issues with their ex inlaws, and disagree on what children should hear. I think there was more of an issue with the mom being paralyzed than anything else.

So I guess even though he didn't object to them visiting her, he still kept them from visiting her?

Either way, still not right! IMO

No, he did bring them to South Carolina for a visit and had offered to bring them back every year. At least that's my understanding of what came out with the judge's ruling on the case.

What's confusing to me is that the grandparents were arguing in court that a year was too long because the mother might not survive that long, yet the grandmother was trying to tell the children the mother would get better. Perhaps the court claim was just a legal maneuver.

 

[Nova]

Do you have a link to this information? I had not heard this.

From i.b.nora's post #46 above:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/paralyzed-...-visitation-rights-children/story?id=13223968



Third paragraph.

 

[Truthwillsetufree]

Her condition is much more serious than just paralysis. I don't think many husbands/wives would stick around in such a situation,it just human nature whether we want it or not.

Respectfully and adamantly disagree with part of your post BBM. I have known several people in my lifetime that serious illnesses of this nature have occurred and yes, all of their spouses were by their sides to the very end. One, was that of a young adult who was in the same state that Dorn is in and his parents took care of him in their home until he died. He was not passed off to a nursing home or group home, his parents took care of him. I value my family and my friendships because these people are honorable people, that is who I surround myself with. I do not doubt for one second that these people would stay with their spouses in the event something of this horrific nature would occur. It is not human nature to cut and run.

 

[Nova]

Respectfully and adamantly disagree with part of your post BBM. I have known several people in my lifetime that serious illnesses of this nature have occurred and yes, all of their spouses were by their sides to the very end. One, was that of a young adult who was in the same state that Dorn is in and his parents took care of him in their home until he died. He was not passed off to a nursing home or group home, his parents took care of him. I value my family and my friendships because these people are honorable people, that is who I surround myself with. I do not doubt for one second that these people would stay with their spouses in the event something of this horrific nature would occur. It is not human nature to cut and run.

I can't imagine abandoning my spouse if he were incapacitated. But I'm 57 and we've been together for more than 30 years. Would I have been as self-sacrificing at 27? I'd like to think so, but we'll never know.

In fairness to Mr. Dorn, he was faced with 3 babies to raise on his own AND he apparently had a severe conflict with his wife's parents as to her prognosis. Perhaps he thought it a kindness to let the wife's parents attempt to rehabilitate her if they thought doing so was possible. By divorcing his wife, he gave up the right to dictate her care in favor of her parents; for all we know, this may have been quite an emotional sacrifice on his part.

Isn't that what so many people demanded of Terry Schiavo's husband? That he walk away and let her parents care for her, since her parents believed she was responding in ways doctors said was impossible?

 

[STEADFAST]

It's really impossible to know what is in other people's hearts, what they can endure, and what action would have the best outcome in the future. All I know is that if I were the mother of these children, I would not want my children to visit me, since I could do nothing for them. I would want their father to marry again ASAP and give my children the absolute best mother he possibly could, and I would want my children to consider this woman their real mother without reservations or guilt.

However, if I were the mother of the paralyzed mom, I would want my grandchildren to know their mother.

Such a sad situation.

 

[feddup]

I can't imagine abandoning my spouse if he were incapacitated. But I'm 57 and we've been together for more than 30 years. Would I have been as self-sacrificing at 27? I'd like to think so, but we'll never know.

In fairness to Mr. Dorn, he was faced with 3 babies to raise on his own AND he apparently had a severe conflict with his wife's parents as to her prognosis. Perhaps he thought it a kindness to let the wife's parents attempt to rehabilitate her if they thought doing so was possible. By divorcing his wife, he gave up the right to dictate her care in favor of her parents; for all we know, this may have been quite an emotional sacrifice on his part.

Isn't that what so many people demanded of Terry Schiavo's husband? That he walk away and let her parents care for her, since her parents believed she was responding in ways doctors said was impossible?

I will never understand Terry Schiavos husband. BTW, that circus went on not too far from here. I felt so sorry for her family. Terry was starved to death.
Maybe this guy wanted the same thing for his wife? who knows....she is so lucky her parents have her, she is safe but still....x husband, let the children come and visit her. Children at age 5 are smart and more forgiving, they will love their Mother. Its the only one they will ever have.
I see alot of expression in the womans face. Seeing lively children, HER children might help her.

 

[Soulmagent]

Would the triplets be able to recieve social security because their mother is disabled?

I do not understand why he would need to sue the estate for child support. Were the children's interest not represented in the lawsuit?

Also if her parents have POA over her estate then I was under the asumption that they could appoint a trustee over the estate in the event of their death or her death who under supervision of the court would look after the interest of the child. I do not think the court would appoint her ex husband as a trustee to his childrens interest. I also thought they would not be able to obtain anything until they were 18 or 25 if a trust is set up prior to her death. No one would be able to touch what is left after the estate is settled. I realize this is not exact but would it all go something like that?

I dont understand the child support from the estate. That is like them paying for their own child support in the long run. It is also coming from their mothers medical settlement and I am not sure she could be legally held to child support in her condition.

This is one of the most complex case I have ever heard but I am glad the kids get to see her.