Drimo Posted February 18, 2004 Share Posted February 18, 2004 http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2546043 People do some crazy things. Coming from a divorced family and having to deal with custody battles, I understand why this mother did such a thing, but to actually do it was crazy. And placing the 17 yr old in foster care is something I don't think is right. He was raised by his mother (who is now facing criminal charges) and at that age is able to choose his own guardian (I believe the age at which one can do this is 14). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callaway Posted February 18, 2004 Share Posted February 18, 2004 I've heard the comment made many a time, husbands/wives come and go. But blood is forever. I can understand why a parent would refuse to allow their child to be taken from them. Though who has the right to make that decision is beyond my understanding. What's sad about this scenario is how the child is now stuck in foster care, which unless he's been living out of a cardboard box, is absolute hell. For f@cks sake, he's nearly an adult. Let the child decide if he wants to contact his father, why turn the kid and his life inside out for him. Maybe it was for the best? Dad beat on the mom? Dad was a deadbeat? Now for the second time in his life, his world as he knows it has changed forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drimo Posted February 18, 2004 Author Share Posted February 18, 2004 Maybe it was for the best? Dad beat on the mom? Dad was a deadbeat? Now for the second time in his life, his world as he knows it has changed forever. It says in the article the father won the custody battle (which is rare) and the mother didn't like it, so she took off for Mexico with the kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nowimnothing Posted February 18, 2004 Share Posted February 18, 2004 If the father won the custody battle there definitely must have been something wrong with the mom. Most courts are painfully biased towards the mother in these cases. Edit: No i didn't read the article yet, so don't yell at me if theres something in there that contradicts what i said :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted February 18, 2004 Veteran Share Posted February 18, 2004 It says in the article the father won the custody battle (which is rare) and the mother didn't like it, so she took off for Mexico with the kid. He won FULL custody too. And they are planning to reunite the father and child. I would assume that foster parents thing is very temporary. Mr Griffin said: ?The father still has legal custody based on a 1989 court order giving him full custody.?The order is still standing and he has a legal right to be with his kid.? He added: ?Children?s services have been in contact with the father, and children?s services will work out a date and time where the two can be reunited.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aem4162 Posted February 18, 2004 Share Posted February 18, 2004 I've heard the comment made many a time, husbands/wives come and go. But blood is forever. I can understand why a parent would refuse to allow their child to be taken from them. Though who has the right to make that decision is beyond my understanding. What's sad about this scenario is how the child is now stuck in foster care, which unless he's been living out of a cardboard box, is absolute hell. For f@cks sake, he's nearly an adult. Let the child decide if he wants to contact his father, why turn the kid and his life inside out for him. Maybe it was for the best? Dad beat on the mom? Dad was a deadbeat? Now for the second time in his life, his world as he knows it has changed forever. what calloway said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts