The Australian "custody sisters" - Page 2

Charlie Wilkes · 21st February 2013, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

How do you know they weren't kicking and screaming because they didn't want to leave their boyfriends? I note it was only the 2 older girls kicking and screaming.

Did they have boyfriends?

BenBurch · 21st February 2013, 03:06 PM

I have a friend from long ago whose wife took the kids and went to Norway with them when she had visitation. He had custody.

This was 1981 and he was not allowed to see his children at all until they were adults.

And there was nothing he could do to get them back.

WildCat · 21st February 2013, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

Did they have boyfriends?

We know just as much about that as we do their feelings towards the father. If you can speculate, why can't I?

smartcooky · 21st February 2013, 03:55 PM

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

....if I did have a child, and he or she were kidnapped by their mother, and after two years the child wanted to stay with their mother rather than come home, I might take a moment to ask myself why that is. And I'm not sure I would be content with glib answers that turn on the premise that children don't know what is best for them.

I can also say with confidence that I would never condone a process that ended with the child being dragged away by the police, kicking and screaming.

I would think, "this is barbaric, it cannot possibly be in the kid's best interest, and the kid will hate me when he/she grows up."

I agree, and one thing is for certain. That father has taken steps to make sure that his daughters hate him, and will hate him for the rest of their lives.

And why should the media NOT show this in all its ugliness. This kind of child abuse need to be out in the open for everyone to see, not hidden away where people can get away with it.

Kevin_Lowe · 21st February 2013, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

We know just as much about that as we do their feelings towards the father. If you can speculate, why can't I?

Your speculations are a bit wilder and a bit more salacious, since a repeated feature of your speculations is underage girls and their boyfriends, but there's no law against you enjoying those speculations.

However I don't think it's very rational to ignore people's clearly stated preferences on the basis that you can imagine some weird set of circumstances in which they are crazy, or have been "poisoned", or they are brats, or whatever. It's possible but unless you have some evidence you're just making up fairy stories to your own taste.

WildCat · 21st February 2013, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

I agree, and one thing is for certain. That father has taken steps to make sure that his daughters hate him, and will hate him for the rest of their lives.

And why should the media NOT show this in all its ugliness. This kind of child abuse need to be out in the open for everyone to see, not hidden away where people can get away with it.

The only person who took steps to break apart this family was the mother when she took the girls to another country and didn't return. It's tragic that such a simple legal case could take over 2 years to resolve, but that's not the father's fault.

And you have no idea how this will work out, you're just speculating. You sound like the people who said Elian Gonzalez was going to grow up screwed in the head because he was (rightly IMHO) returned to his father. But at least that case didn't drag on for years.

BenBurch · 21st February 2013, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

I agree, and one thing is for certain. That father has taken steps to make sure that his daughters hate him, and will hate him for the rest of their lives.

And why should the media NOT show this in all its ugliness. This kind of child abuse need to be out in the open for everyone to see, not hidden away where people can get away with it.

That was entirely the Mother's doing.

Alienation of affection.

She should have HER parental rights terminated.

WildCat · 21st February 2013, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe

Your speculations are a bit wilder and a bit more salacious, since a repeated feature of your speculations is underage girls and their boyfriends, but there's no law against you enjoying those speculations.

Holy crap, thinly veiled accusations of pedophilia for speculating that teenage girls might have boyfriends?

Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe

However I don't think it's very rational to ignore people's clearly stated preferences on the basis that you can imagine some weird set of circumstances in which they are crazy, or have been "poisoned", or they are brats, or whatever. It's possible but unless you have some evidence you're just making up fairy stories to your own taste.

What person's "clearly stated preferences"? The mother's? Grandma's? You've seen interviews with the girls?

katy_did · 21st February 2013, 04:13 PM

I think the mother has behaved horribly, not only in abducting the kids initially but in not preparing them in any way for the possibility of returning, and inviting the media to witness their distress! She could have made things so much easier for them herself, had she chosen to. I'm not convinced that leaving the kids in the custody of someone who's behaved as she has - separating them from the family and country they were brought up in, and preventing them from seeing their father for years - would be the best thing for them anyway. The court will decide (and I'm sure will take the kids' feelings at that stage into account), but she certainly hasn't done herself any favours.

Here's another fairly recent case, where the father took his daughter to Pakistan when she was three while the mother thought they were going on a day trip. She was eventually found three years later and returned, by this stage of course having little memory of her mother and not even speaking English. Should she have been allowed to stay in Pakistan? Given the choice, I'm sure it's what she would have preferred.

Charlie Wilkes · 21st February 2013, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

We know just as much about that as we do their feelings towards the father. If you can speculate, why can't I?

OK, so your question was along the lines of "how do you know there's no bigfoot."

For a moment I dared to hope you might have something of interest to contribute, but that was foolish of me, and I won't waste any more of your time.

Charlie Wilkes · 21st February 2013, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by katy_did

I think the mother has behaved horribly, not only in abducting the kids initially but in not preparing them in any way for the possibility of returning, and inviting the media to witness their distress! She could have made things so much easier for them herself, had she chosen to.

What is wrong with inviting the media? This was a situation where public authorities were conducting the public's business on a public street.

Given the nature of the business, I'm sure the authorities would have liked to keep it out of sight, but the whole reason civilized countries have a free press is so they can't do that.

katy_did · 21st February 2013, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

What is wrong with inviting the media? This was a situation where public authorities were conducting the public's business on a public street.

Given the nature of the business, I'm sure the authorities would have liked to keep it out of sight, but the whole reason civilized countries have a free press is so they can't do that.

As their mother, she could have made things far easier for them if she'd prepared them for the possibility of returning and calmed them, perhaps even made plans to accompany them rather than making it necessary for police to come and drag them away literally kicking and screaming. That would have been in the children's best interests. Instead, she was more interested in increasing and exploiting their distress because it made for a better media spectacle.

It's not as if the upsetting scene was inevitable, it was orchestrated to be so because the mother felt it helped her case. Footage of the girls and their mother calmly boarding a plane to Italy wouldn't have made the headlines, I guess.

smartcooky · 21st February 2013, 05:51 PM

For those who appear to think the mother is always wrong, you might want to look into the case of Eric Foretich and Elizabeth Morgan.

WildCat · 21st February 2013, 06:01 PM

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

OK, so your question was along the lines of "how do you know there's no bigfoot."

Says the guy who claims to have an invisible unicorn in his yard.

Magenta · 21st February 2013, 06:05 PM

Originally Posted by katy_did

As their mother, she could have made things far easier for them if she'd prepared them for the possibility of returning and calmed them, perhaps even made plans to accompany them rather than making it necessary for police to come and drag them away literally kicking and screaming. That would have been in the children's best interests. Instead, she was more interested in increasing and exploiting their distress because it made for a better media spectacle.

It's not as if the upsetting scene was inevitable, it was orchestrated to be so because the mother felt it helped her case. Footage of the girls and their mother calmly boarding a plane to Italy wouldn't have made the headlines, I guess.

That's what I thought, too. Unless she had really poor legal advice it must have become obvious that there was a strong likelihood that the custody dispute would have to be settled in Italy and that the girls would have to return there, and that they should have been prepared for that eventuality.

WildCat · 21st February 2013, 06:06 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

For those who appear to think the mother is always wrong, you might want to look into the case of Eric Foretich and Elizabeth Morgan.

No, the parent who takes the kids to a foreign country to avoid having a court decide custody is always wrong.

Charlie Wilkes · 21st February 2013, 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by katy_did

As their mother, she could have made things far easier for them if she'd prepared them for the possibility of returning and calmed them, perhaps even made plans to accompany them rather than making it necessary for police to come and drag them away literally kicking and screaming. That would have been in the children's best interests. Instead, she was more interested in increasing and exploiting their distress because it made for a better media spectacle.

It's not as if the upsetting scene was inevitable, it was orchestrated to be so because the mother felt it helped her case. Footage of the girls and their mother calmly boarding a plane to Italy wouldn't have made the headlines, I guess.

Well, if Mom wanted to make the cops look like thugs, it worked.

But the kids themselves were the ones who made a fuss. I don't think that was scripted by their mother. I think they did that because they did not want to go to Italy to be with their father, they were desperate to stay in Australia with their mother, but they were powerless to do anything about it, so they pitched a fit in the vain hope that the authorities might show a little mercy and capitulate.

ponderingturtle · 21st February 2013, 06:44 PM

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

I don't have any children. I have never wanted them.

But if I did have a child, and he or she were kidnapped by their mother, and after two years the child wanted to stay with their mother rather than come home, I might take a moment to ask myself why that is. And I'm not sure I would be content with glib answers that turn on the premise that children don't know what is best for them.

I can also say with confidence that I would never condone a process that ended with the child being dragged away by the police, kicking and screaming.

I would think, "this is barbaric, it cannot possibly be in the kid's best interest, and the kid will hate me when he/she grows up."

Go stockholm!

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 06:51 PM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

I think most people in the media agree that kidnapping your kids should be legal or something.

Only if you're a woman, actually. If you're a man who does this you'll be pilloried by the press

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 06:55 PM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

Kids get dragged kicking and screaming to things they then enjoy all the time. When one parent starts kidnapping their kids it is already a messed up situation. I is just surprising to see so much support fir kidnapping.

Exactly this. And how much of this kicking and screaming is actually done out of a snese of obligation to the mother? I'd bet most of it. My son used to weep when he had to leave his mom on monday mornings but 30 seconds after she was out of sight he was all smiles. He was sad because she wanted him to be sad.

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

Fascinating responses.

I suppose the fundamental question here is whether children are in any sense human beings, and the consensus is "no."

The children are children. We don't reward kidnappers by letting them keep the kids they kidnap simply because they've turned the children against their parents. What sort of world would that be?

Do you not see that a crime was committed? Do you not see that children are victimized by being denied access to both parents? Why does the mother get to decide that the father should no longer play a part in his children's lives. The injustice here is that the mother was able to keep the children for so long, not that they are finally being returned to their other parent.

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

It's too bad his children want nothing more than to get away from him.

You should probably look up Parental alienation syndrome. It is very real.

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 07:07 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Well, then, tell those girls to switch off their affections because you don't like their mother.

Not even going to bother with this bit. The problem with people like you is that once you decide what the principles are, you leave reality behind.

Sorry, tell me where all your righteous indignation was when she decided to take the kids from their father? You didn't give a **** then, but somehow now he's an ass because he wants access to his kids. Do you have kids? Would you want them stripped away from you? I somehow doubt it.

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 07:14 PM

Originally Posted by katy_did

I think the mother has behaved horribly, not only in abducting the kids initially but in not preparing them in any way for the possibility of returning, and inviting the media to witness their distress! She could have made things so much easier for them herself, had she chosen to. I'm not convinced that leaving the kids in the custody of someone who's behaved as she has - separating them from the family and country they were brought up in, and preventing them from seeing their father for years - would be the best thing for them anyway. The court will decide (and I'm sure will take the kids' feelings at that stage into account), but she certainly hasn't done herself any favours.

Here's another fairly recent case, where the father took his daughter to Pakistan when she was three while the mother thought they were going on a day trip. She was eventually found three years later and returned, by this stage of course having little memory of her mother and not even speaking English. Should she have been allowed to stay in Pakistan? Given the choice, I'm sure it's what she would have preferred.

Thank you for being a voice of reason. The very idea that a criminal should be rewarded for criminal behavior is so mind numbingly stupid that I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would defend it.

The mother is the culprit here, the mother is the one who kidnapped the children and spent the last two years vilifying the father and creating drama. I'd lay odds she's a classic cluster "B" personality. Everything she's done has been detrimental to the children, yet she's portrayed as some sort of heroine. She's nothing but a kidnapper.

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 07:16 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

No, the parent who takes the kids to a foreign country to avoid having a court decide custody is always wrong.

No, if a mother kidnaps her child, it's totally alright. Fathers are all emotionally distant abusers and worthless as parents.

Charlie Wilkes · 21st February 2013, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by joesixpack

The children are children. We don't reward kidnappers by letting them keep the kids they kidnap simply because they've turned the children against their parents. What sort of world would that be?

Do you not see that a crime was committed? Do you not see that children are victimized by being denied access to both parents? Why does the mother get to decide that the father should no longer play a part in his children's lives. The injustice here is that the mother was able to keep the children for so long, not that they are finally being returned to their other parent.

If you insist on calling the mother a kidnapper, then it's only fair to call the police abductors, given that they dragged these kids forcibly from their home and transported them to the other side of the world against their will.

I'm not saying the mother should get to decide. I'm saying the kids themselves should have a say in the matter, and be treated as people rather than personal property.

As for access to both parents... the children now have compulsory "access" to the parent they don't want to be with, and no access to the parent they do want to be with.

WildCat · 21st February 2013, 07:29 PM

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

If you insist on calling the mother a kidnapper, then it's only fair to call the police abductors, given that they dragged these kids forcibly from their home and transported them to the other side of the world against their will.

No, because the mother actually broke laws. Part of the agreement to return the kids to Italy was that the father and Italy not press charges against the mother.

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 07:41 PM

Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes

If you insist on calling the mother a kidnapper, then it's only fair to call the police abductors, given that they dragged these kids forcibly from their home and transported them to the other side of the world against their will.

I call her a kidnapper because that's exactly what she did. She broke the law and fled the country with the children. She took them from their father.

Quote:

I'm not saying the mother should get to decide. I'm saying the kids themselves should have a say in the matter, and be treated as people rather than personal property.

Actually you are saying that the mother should get to decide. You have allowed her to sequester the children from their father and poison them against him. Why do you think this is acceptable?

Quote:

As for access to both parents... the children now have compulsory "access" to the parent they don't want to be with, and no access to the parent they do want to be with.

You have no clue what parent they want to be with. They are histrionic in their mother's presence. We see this often with parents who form unhealthy bonds with their children.

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 07:44 PM

Furthermore, allowing the children to decide is actually not at all the best policy. This places an onerous responsibility on children. Children are best served when the parents and court settle on a regular and predictableschedule of visitation.

Damien Evans · 21st February 2013, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

No, the parent who takes the kids to a foreign country to avoid having a court decide custody is always wrong.

For once I agree with you.

Charlie Wilkes · 21st February 2013, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by joesixpack

I call her a kidnapper because that's exactly what she did. She broke the law and fled the country with the children. She took them from their father.
Actually you are saying that the mother should get to decide. You have allowed her to sequester the children from their father and poison them against him. Why do you think this is acceptable?

I have allowed? I heard about it on the news.

Originally Posted by joesixpack

You have no clue what parent they want to be with. They are histrionic in their mother's presence. We see this often with parents who form unhealthy bonds with their children.

"We see this often..." I guess you're an expert in child and family psychology, eh?

I shouldn't be surprised. It seems like almost everyone I meet on the Internet is a world-class expert on every topic that comes up.

lionking · 21st February 2013, 08:21 PM

I wonder how many would be saying "criminal mother!!" if she was hiding the children from a Saudi father who wanted to take the girls back to the life of a medieval servant and early arranged marriage?

All I'm saying is that just because something is according to the law in one country, it doesn't mean it is beyond question. I'd rather see an argument about how the girls are better off in the father's custody rather than "it's just, like, the law, man".

WildCat · 21st February 2013, 08:23 PM

Originally Posted by lionking

I wonder how many would be saying "criminal mother!!" if she was hiding the children from a Saudi father who wanted to take the girls back to the life of a medieval servant and early arranged marriage?

How about we just stick with the story as it actually is, m'kay?

Originally Posted by lionking

All I'm saying is that just because something is according to the law in one country, it doesn't mean it is beyond question. I'd rather see an argument about how the girls are better off in the father's custody rather than "it's just, like, the law, man".

That's for the court in Italy to decide, not the mother and not some peanut gallery of Australian tabloid readers.

lionking · 21st February 2013, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

How about we just stick with the story as it actually is, m'kay?

That's for the court in Italy to decide, not the mother and not some peanut gallery of Australian tabloid readers.

So another "it's just, like, the law, man". Gotcha. Let's see how consistent you are in future.

fuelair · 21st February 2013, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by joesixpack

Thank you for being a voice of reason. The very idea that a criminal should be rewarded for criminal behavior is so mind numbingly stupid that I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would defend it.

The mother is the culprit here, the mother is the one who kidnapped the children and spent the last two years vilifying the father and creating drama. I'd lay odds she's a classic cluster "B" personality. Everything she's done has been detrimental to the children, yet she's portrayed as some sort of heroine. She's nothing but a kidnapper.

joe - I am curious - and obviously you are not required to answer - if something like this happened to you at some point. I say this because reading the articles I am under the impression (for good reason based on the articles about the Italian end) that the mother and likely the daughters have very good reason to suspect the fairness of the Italian courts - especially if they are local to the father's family -as appears to be the case.
And you appear inordinately against the children and the mother.

WildCat · 21st February 2013, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by lionking

So another "it's just, like, the law, man". Gotcha. Let's see how consistent you are in future.

Yes, it's the law. Italy is not Saudi Arabia or some weird country where they circumcize girls or marry them off when they're 11 years old or sell them to settle a debt.

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 08:36 PM

I'm no expert Charlie but I certainly know a lot about it. I have had a lot of personal experience with it and I've read extensively on it because of a custody battle I've faced. Children do best when they have access to both parents. My child's mother has a variety of problems related to mental illness and addiction, and when she lost primary custody she began an active campaign of alienation against me. This amounted to nothing because I had custody of my child through the school week so any attempts she made to portray me in a negative light wouldn't really take.

In spite of his mother's personal problems, I have never tried to poison his relationship with her. This is at the advice of two separate child psychologists and the state's CPS. I could take full custody and limit his mother's time with him to one weekend a month easily. But I don't because it wouldn't be in his best interest. As I have told my son, "You have every right and reason to love your mother. She and I don't get along but that's no reason for you to be forced to choose."

As soon as one parent takes a child and denies access to the other parent they are no longer acting in the child's best interest. I don't see how you could possibly think that the child would be best served by not only denying them access to a loving parent but leaving them in the care of a demonstrably unfit parent. The girls are throwing a fit? Fine, my son shed some tears too, but it never lasted more than 45 seconds after he was out of his mother's sight (yes, I timed it). It all boils down to an unhealthy parent/child relationship where the child feels responsible for their parent's happiness.

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 08:40 PM

Originally Posted by fuelair

joe - I am curious - and obviously you are not required to answer - if something like this happened to you at some point. I say this because reading the articles I am under the impression (for good reason based on the articles about the Italian end) that the mother and likely the daughters have very good reason to suspect the fairness of the Italian courts - especially if they are local to the father's family -as appears to be the case.
And you appear inordinately against the children and the mother.

I am not at all against the children. I am against the mother. Her unilateral actions were not in the best interests of the children at all. I do have personal experience with custody battles and attempts at parental alienation.

I am curious what would have been unfair on the Italian end? What is the reason for this presumption? In my experience US courts don't favor the US parent outside trying to guarantee the parent's continued access to his/her child.

joesixpack · 21st February 2013, 08:43 PM

Originally Posted by lionking

So another "it's just, like, the law, man". Gotcha. Let's see how consistent you are in future.

So wait, he's going to make the girls his servant and marry them off at a young age?

No, he's not. He lives in Europe in a modern state and he wants access to his children. Why is it OK for the mother to be the sole arbiter of how much access he has to his own children?

lionking · 21st February 2013, 08:46 PM

Originally Posted by joesixpack

I am not at all against the children. I am against the mother. Her unilateral actions were not in the best interests of the children at all.

Is this based on mind reading?

I'd simply like someone to articulate why the children are better off with the father, other than saying it's the Italian law (which the Amanda Knox case shows isn't infallible). The opposite is usually the case.

21st February 2013, 03:06 PM	#42
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,107	I have a friend from long ago whose wife took the kids and went to Norway with them when she had visitation. He had custody. This was 1981 and he was not allowed to see his children at all until they were adults. And there was nothing he could do to get them back.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

21st February 2013, 03:55 PM	#44
smartcooky Muse Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 892	Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes ....if I did have a child, and he or she were kidnapped by their mother, and after two years the child wanted to stay with their mother rather than come home, I might take a moment to ask myself why that is. And I'm not sure I would be content with glib answers that turn on the premise that children don't know what is best for them. I can also say with confidence that I would never condone a process that ended with the child being dragged away by the police, kicking and screaming. I would think, "this is barbaric, it cannot possibly be in the kid's best interest, and the kid will hate me when he/she grows up." I agree, and one thing is for certain. That father has taken steps to make sure that his daughters hate him, and will hate him for the rest of their lives. And why should the media NOT show this in all its ugliness. This kind of child abuse need to be out in the open for everyone to see, not hidden away where people can get away with it.
	__________________ _{“The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.” - George Orwell} Last edited by smartcooky; 21st February 2013 at 03:56 PM.

21st February 2013, 04:03 PM	#45
Kevin_Lowe Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Queensland Posts: 10,275	Originally Posted by WildCat We know just as much about that as we do their feelings towards the father. If you can speculate, why can't I? Your speculations are a bit wilder and a bit more salacious, since a repeated feature of your speculations is underage girls and their boyfriends, but there's no law against you enjoying those speculations. However I don't think it's very rational to ignore people's clearly stated preferences on the basis that you can imagine some weird set of circumstances in which they are crazy, or have been "poisoned", or they are brats, or whatever. It's possible but unless you have some evidence you're just making up fairy stories to your own taste.
	__________________ Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists. -- Alfred Mander

21st February 2013, 04:04 PM	#47
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,107	Originally Posted by smartcooky I agree, and one thing is for certain. That father has taken steps to make sure that his daughters hate him, and will hate him for the rest of their lives. And why should the media NOT show this in all its ugliness. This kind of child abuse need to be out in the open for everyone to see, not hidden away where people can get away with it. That was entirely the Mother's doing. Alienation of affection. She should have HER parental rights terminated.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

21st February 2013, 04:13 PM	#49
katy_did Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 1,579	I think the mother has behaved horribly, not only in abducting the kids initially but in not preparing them in any way for the possibility of returning, and inviting the media to witness their distress! She could have made things so much easier for them herself, had she chosen to. I'm not convinced that leaving the kids in the custody of someone who's behaved as she has - separating them from the family and country they were brought up in, and preventing them from seeing their father for years - would be the best thing for them anyway. The court will decide (and I'm sure will take the kids' feelings at that stage into account), but she certainly hasn't done herself any favours. Here's another fairly recent case, where the father took his daughter to Pakistan when she was three while the mother thought they were going on a day trip. She was eventually found three years later and returned, by this stage of course having little memory of her mother and not even speaking English. Should she have been allowed to stay in Pakistan? Given the choice, I'm sure it's what she would have preferred.
	__________________ _{"All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil, to crazy Ahab, were visibly personified, and made practically assailable in Moby Dick".}

21st February 2013, 02:53 PM	#41
Charlie Wilkes Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,997	Originally Posted by WildCat How do you know they weren't kicking and screaming because they didn't want to leave their boyfriends? I note it was only the 2 older girls kicking and screaming. Did they have boyfriends?

21st February 2013, 03:51 PM	#43
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,985	Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes Did they have boyfriends? We know just as much about that as we do their feelings towards the father. If you can speculate, why can't I?

21st February 2013, 04:13 PM	#48
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,985	Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe Your speculations are a bit wilder and a bit more salacious, since a repeated feature of your speculations is underage girls and their boyfriends, but there's no law against you enjoying those speculations. Holy crap, thinly veiled accusations of pedophilia for speculating that teenage girls might have boyfriends? Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe However I don't think it's very rational to ignore people's clearly stated preferences on the basis that you can imagine some weird set of circumstances in which they are crazy, or have been "poisoned", or they are brats, or whatever. It's possible but unless you have some evidence you're just making up fairy stories to your own taste. What person's "clearly stated preferences"? The mother's? Grandma's? You've seen interviews with the girls?

21st February 2013, 05:27 PM	#50
Charlie Wilkes Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,997	Originally Posted by WildCat We know just as much about that as we do their feelings towards the father. If you can speculate, why can't I? OK, so your question was along the lines of "how do you know there's no bigfoot." For a moment I dared to hope you might have something of interest to contribute, but that was foolish of me, and I won't waste any more of your time.

21st February 2013, 05:37 PM	#51
Charlie Wilkes Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,997	Originally Posted by katy_did I think the mother has behaved horribly, not only in abducting the kids initially but in not preparing them in any way for the possibility of returning, and inviting the media to witness their distress! She could have made things so much easier for them herself, had she chosen to. What is wrong with inviting the media? This was a situation where public authorities were conducting the public's business on a public street. Given the nature of the business, I'm sure the authorities would have liked to keep it out of sight, but the whole reason civilized countries have a free press is so they can't do that.

21st February 2013, 05:47 PM	#52
katy_did Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 1,579	Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes What is wrong with inviting the media? This was a situation where public authorities were conducting the public's business on a public street. Given the nature of the business, I'm sure the authorities would have liked to keep it out of sight, but the whole reason civilized countries have a free press is so they can't do that. As their mother, she could have made things far easier for them if she'd prepared them for the possibility of returning and calmed them, perhaps even made plans to accompany them rather than making it necessary for police to come and drag them away literally kicking and screaming. That would have been in the children's best interests. Instead, she was more interested in increasing and exploiting their distress because it made for a better media spectacle. It's not as if the upsetting scene was inevitable, it was orchestrated to be so because the mother felt it helped her case. Footage of the girls and their mother calmly boarding a plane to Italy wouldn't have made the headlines, I guess.
	__________________ _{"All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil, to crazy Ahab, were visibly personified, and made practically assailable in Moby Dick".}

21st February 2013, 05:51 PM	#53
smartcooky Muse Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 892	For those who appear to think the mother is always wrong, you might want to look into the case of Eric Foretich and Elizabeth Morgan.
	__________________ _{“The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.” - George Orwell}

21st February 2013, 06:01 PM	#54
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,985	Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes OK, so your question was along the lines of "how do you know there's no bigfoot." Says the guy who claims to have an invisible unicorn in his yard.

21st February 2013, 06:05 PM	#55
Magenta Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 1,311	Originally Posted by katy_did As their mother, she could have made things far easier for them if she'd prepared them for the possibility of returning and calmed them, perhaps even made plans to accompany them rather than making it necessary for police to come and drag them away literally kicking and screaming. That would have been in the children's best interests. Instead, she was more interested in increasing and exploiting their distress because it made for a better media spectacle. It's not as if the upsetting scene was inevitable, it was orchestrated to be so because the mother felt it helped her case. Footage of the girls and their mother calmly boarding a plane to Italy wouldn't have made the headlines, I guess. That's what I thought, too. Unless she had really poor legal advice it must have become obvious that there was a strong likelihood that the custody dispute would have to be settled in Italy and that the girls would have to return there, and that they should have been prepared for that eventuality.

21st February 2013, 06:06 PM	#56
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,985	Originally Posted by smartcooky For those who appear to think the mother is always wrong, you might want to look into the case of Eric Foretich and Elizabeth Morgan. No, the parent who takes the kids to a foreign country to avoid having a court decide custody is always wrong.

21st February 2013, 06:13 PM	#57
Charlie Wilkes Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,997	Originally Posted by katy_did As their mother, she could have made things far easier for them if she'd prepared them for the possibility of returning and calmed them, perhaps even made plans to accompany them rather than making it necessary for police to come and drag them away literally kicking and screaming. That would have been in the children's best interests. Instead, she was more interested in increasing and exploiting their distress because it made for a better media spectacle. It's not as if the upsetting scene was inevitable, it was orchestrated to be so because the mother felt it helped her case. Footage of the girls and their mother calmly boarding a plane to Italy wouldn't have made the headlines, I guess. Well, if Mom wanted to make the cops look like thugs, it worked. But the kids themselves were the ones who made a fuss. I don't think that was scripted by their mother. I think they did that because they did not want to go to Italy to be with their father, they were desperate to stay in Australia with their mother, but they were powerless to do anything about it, so they pitched a fit in the vain hope that the authorities might show a little mercy and capitulate.

21st February 2013, 06:44 PM	#58
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 26,421	Re: The Australian "custody sisters" Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes I don't have any children. I have never wanted them. But if I did have a child, and he or she were kidnapped by their mother, and after two years the child wanted to stay with their mother rather than come home, I might take a moment to ask myself why that is. And I'm not sure I would be content with glib answers that turn on the premise that children don't know what is best for them. I can also say with confidence that I would never condone a process that ended with the child being dragged away by the police, kicking and screaming. I would think, "this is barbaric, it cannot possibly be in the kid's best interest, and the kid will hate me when he/she grows up." Go stockholm!
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

21st February 2013, 06:51 PM	#59
joesixpack Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Edge of the continent, Pacific county, WA Posts: 3,388	Originally Posted by ponderingturtle I think most people in the media agree that kidnapping your kids should be legal or something. Only if you're a woman, actually. If you're a man who does this you'll be pilloried by the press
	__________________ I never got in trouble by bein' ignorant, I always got in trouble 'cause I thought I wasn't.

21st February 2013, 06:55 PM	#60
joesixpack Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Edge of the continent, Pacific county, WA Posts: 3,388	Originally Posted by ponderingturtle Kids get dragged kicking and screaming to things they then enjoy all the time. When one parent starts kidnapping their kids it is already a messed up situation. I is just surprising to see so much support fir kidnapping. Exactly this. And how much of this kicking and screaming is actually done out of a snese of obligation to the mother? I'd bet most of it. My son used to weep when he had to leave his mom on monday mornings but 30 seconds after she was out of sight he was all smiles. He was sad because she wanted him to be sad.
	__________________ I never got in trouble by bein' ignorant, I always got in trouble 'cause I thought I wasn't.

21st February 2013, 07:00 PM	#61
joesixpack Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Edge of the continent, Pacific county, WA Posts: 3,388	Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes Fascinating responses. I suppose the fundamental question here is whether children are in any sense human beings, and the consensus is "no." The children are children. We don't reward kidnappers by letting them keep the kids they kidnap simply because they've turned the children against their parents. What sort of world would that be? Do you not see that a crime was committed? Do you not see that children are victimized by being denied access to both parents? Why does the mother get to decide that the father should no longer play a part in his children's lives. The injustice here is that the mother was able to keep the children for so long, not that they are finally being returned to their other parent.
	__________________ I never got in trouble by bein' ignorant, I always got in trouble 'cause I thought I wasn't.

21st February 2013, 07:03 PM	#62
joesixpack Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Edge of the continent, Pacific county, WA Posts: 3,388	Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes It's too bad his children want nothing more than to get away from him. You should probably look up Parental alienation syndrome. It is very real.
	__________________ I never got in trouble by bein' ignorant, I always got in trouble 'cause I thought I wasn't.

21st February 2013, 07:07 PM	#63
joesixpack Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Edge of the continent, Pacific county, WA Posts: 3,388	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey Well, then, tell those girls to switch off their affections because you don't like their mother. Not even going to bother with this bit. The problem with people like you is that once you decide what the principles are, you leave reality behind. Sorry, tell me where all your righteous indignation was when she decided to take the kids from their father? You didn't give a **** then, but somehow now he's an ass because he wants access to his kids. Do you have kids? Would you want them stripped away from you? I somehow doubt it.
	__________________ I never got in trouble by bein' ignorant, I always got in trouble 'cause I thought I wasn't.

21st February 2013, 07:14 PM	#64
joesixpack Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Edge of the continent, Pacific county, WA Posts: 3,388	Originally Posted by katy_did I think the mother has behaved horribly, not only in abducting the kids initially but in not preparing them in any way for the possibility of returning, and inviting the media to witness their distress! She could have made things so much easier for them herself, had she chosen to. I'm not convinced that leaving the kids in the custody of someone who's behaved as she has - separating them from the family and country they were brought up in, and preventing them from seeing their father for years - would be the best thing for them anyway. The court will decide (and I'm sure will take the kids' feelings at that stage into account), but she certainly hasn't done herself any favours. Here's another fairly recent case, where the father took his daughter to Pakistan when she was three while the mother thought they were going on a day trip. She was eventually found three years later and returned, by this stage of course having little memory of her mother and not even speaking English. Should she have been allowed to stay in Pakistan? Given the choice, I'm sure it's what she would have preferred. Thank you for being a voice of reason. The very idea that a criminal should be rewarded for criminal behavior is so mind numbingly stupid that I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would defend it. The mother is the culprit here, the mother is the one who kidnapped the children and spent the last two years vilifying the father and creating drama. I'd lay odds she's a classic cluster "B" personality. Everything she's done has been detrimental to the children, yet she's portrayed as some sort of heroine. She's nothing but a kidnapper.
	__________________ I never got in trouble by bein' ignorant, I always got in trouble 'cause I thought I wasn't.

21st February 2013, 07:16 PM	#65
joesixpack Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Edge of the continent, Pacific county, WA Posts: 3,388	Originally Posted by WildCat No, the parent who takes the kids to a foreign country to avoid having a court decide custody is always wrong. No, if a mother kidnaps her child, it's totally alright. Fathers are all emotionally distant abusers and worthless as parents.
	__________________ I never got in trouble by bein' ignorant, I always got in trouble 'cause I thought I wasn't.

21st February 2013, 07:24 PM	#66
Charlie Wilkes Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,997	Originally Posted by joesixpack The children are children. We don't reward kidnappers by letting them keep the kids they kidnap simply because they've turned the children against their parents. What sort of world would that be? Do you not see that a crime was committed? Do you not see that children are victimized by being denied access to both parents? Why does the mother get to decide that the father should no longer play a part in his children's lives. The injustice here is that the mother was able to keep the children for so long, not that they are finally being returned to their other parent. If you insist on calling the mother a kidnapper, then it's only fair to call the police abductors, given that they dragged these kids forcibly from their home and transported them to the other side of the world against their will. I'm not saying the mother should get to decide. I'm saying the kids themselves should have a say in the matter, and be treated as people rather than personal property. As for access to both parents... the children now have compulsory "access" to the parent they don't want to be with, and no access to the parent they do want to be with.

21st February 2013, 07:29 PM	#67
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,985	Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes If you insist on calling the mother a kidnapper, then it's only fair to call the police abductors, given that they dragged these kids forcibly from their home and transported them to the other side of the world against their will. No, because the mother actually broke laws. Part of the agreement to return the kids to Italy was that the father and Italy not press charges against the mother.

21st February 2013, 07:41 PM	#68
joesixpack Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Edge of the continent, Pacific county, WA Posts: 3,388	Originally Posted by Charlie Wilkes If you insist on calling the mother a kidnapper, then it's only fair to call the police abductors, given that they dragged these kids forcibly from their home and transported them to the other side of the world against their will. I call her a kidnapper because that's exactly what she did. She broke the law and fled the country with the children. She took them from their father. Quote: I'm not saying the mother should get to decide. I'm saying the kids themselves should have a say in the matter, and be treated as people rather than personal property. Actually you are saying that the mother should get to decide. You have allowed her to sequester the children from their father and poison them against him. Why do you think this is acceptable? Quote: As for access to both parents... the children now have compulsory "access" to the parent they don't want to be with, and no access to the parent they do want to be with. You have no clue what parent they want to be with. They are histrionic in their mother's presence. We see this often with parents who form unhealthy bonds with their children.
	__________________ I never got in trouble by bein' ignorant, I always got in trouble 'cause I thought I wasn't.

21st February 2013, 07:44 PM	#69
joesixpack Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Edge of the continent, Pacific county, WA Posts: 3,388	Furthermore, allowing the children to decide is actually not at all the best policy. This places an onerous responsibility on children. Children are best served when the parents and court settle on a regular and predictableschedule of visitation.
	__________________ I never got in trouble by bein' ignorant, I always got in trouble 'cause I thought I wasn't.

21st February 2013, 08:00 PM	#70
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 25,283	Originally Posted by WildCat No, the parent who takes the kids to a foreign country to avoid having a court decide custody is always wrong. For once I agree with you.
	__________________ WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN? - Death "Racism is a disease in society. We're all equal. I don't care what their colour is, or religion. Just as long as they're human beings they're my buddies." - Mandawuy Yunupingu, lead singer of Yothu Yindi

21st February 2013, 08:04 PM	#71
Charlie Wilkes Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 1,997	Originally Posted by joesixpack I call her a kidnapper because that's exactly what she did. She broke the law and fled the country with the children. She took them from their father. Actually you are saying that the mother should get to decide. You have allowed her to sequester the children from their father and poison them against him. Why do you think this is acceptable? I have allowed? I heard about it on the news. Originally Posted by joesixpack You have no clue what parent they want to be with. They are histrionic in their mother's presence. We see this often with parents who form unhealthy bonds with their children. "We see this often..." I guess you're an expert in child and family psychology, eh? I shouldn't be surprised. It seems like almost everyone I meet on the Internet is a world-class expert on every topic that comes up.

21st February 2013, 08:21 PM	#72
lionking In the Peanut Gallery Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 29,649	I wonder how many would be saying "criminal mother!!" if she was hiding the children from a Saudi father who wanted to take the girls back to the life of a medieval servant and early arranged marriage? All I'm saying is that just because something is according to the law in one country, it doesn't mean it is beyond question. I'd rather see an argument about how the girls are better off in the father's custody rather than "it's just, like, the law, man".
	__________________ A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill

21st February 2013, 08:23 PM	#73
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,985	Originally Posted by lionking I wonder how many would be saying "criminal mother!!" if she was hiding the children from a Saudi father who wanted to take the girls back to the life of a medieval servant and early arranged marriage? How about we just stick with the story as it actually is, m'kay? Originally Posted by lionking All I'm saying is that just because something is according to the law in one country, it doesn't mean it is beyond question. I'd rather see an argument about how the girls are better off in the father's custody rather than "it's just, like, the law, man". That's for the court in Italy to decide, not the mother and not some peanut gallery of Australian tabloid readers.

21st February 2013, 08:28 PM	#74
lionking In the Peanut Gallery Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 29,649	Originally Posted by WildCat How about we just stick with the story as it actually is, m'kay? That's for the court in Italy to decide, not the mother and not some peanut gallery of Australian tabloid readers. So another "it's just, like, the law, man". Gotcha. Let's see how consistent you are in future.
	__________________ A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill

21st February 2013, 08:29 PM	#75
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 28,911	Originally Posted by joesixpack Thank you for being a voice of reason. The very idea that a criminal should be rewarded for criminal behavior is so mind numbingly stupid that I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would defend it. The mother is the culprit here, the mother is the one who kidnapped the children and spent the last two years vilifying the father and creating drama. I'd lay odds she's a classic cluster "B" personality. Everything she's done has been detrimental to the children, yet she's portrayed as some sort of heroine. She's nothing but a kidnapper. joe - I am curious - and obviously you are not required to answer - if something like this happened to you at some point. I say this because reading the articles I am under the impression (for good reason based on the articles about the Italian end) that the mother and likely the daughters have very good reason to suspect the fairness of the Italian courts - especially if they are local to the father's family -as appears to be the case. And you appear inordinately against the children and the mother.
fuelair Cythraul Enfys Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 28,911	__________________ There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed. Wash this space! We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!

21st February 2013, 08:31 PM	#76
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,985	Originally Posted by lionking So another "it's just, like, the law, man". Gotcha. Let's see how consistent you are in future. Yes, it's the law. Italy is not Saudi Arabia or some weird country where they circumcize girls or marry them off when they're 11 years old or sell them to settle a debt.