# "I hate you", "You are horrible"! (yes another thread on family law)



## grahamg (Jan 13, 2021)

The words "I hate you", "You are horrible", came from the mouth of my young daughter quite often, (though you've all heard about that I know), however, staying in London in twenty years ago, I learnt in an article in Good Housekeeping magazine, I think it was, that other children across the world use those self same words to their father, (/nonresident patent).

It gets really boring and heavy when you start scratching the surface of "parental alienation syndrome", (controversial issue or disease?), and alternatively "parental alienation", (not so controversial)!

However, in a very mild way, and hopefully without too many folk pitching in with "you should have done this or that", I'd like to shed some light on what its like to have those words said to you repeatedly, and whatever insights I might have gleaned.

Here is the minimum background I can give you. First my ex told a court welfare officer my four year old daughter hated me, and how terrible it was she had to force her to have contact with me. The court welfare officer, Mrs Hobson, took a dislike to my ex, didn't swallow any of it, and when we returned to face the judge officiating over the divorce, he threatened my ex she would have to face him if she failed to cooperate.

I'm trying to be quick here, so fast forward eight years, numerous occasions when my daughter stated the words in the thread title, but as maybe only a child could do, followed them with the words, " Keep coming daddy"! However, after disagreements about whether my daughter could come on short holidays, (we'd managed to organise about six two three, or four day stays during those years, but when I asked once more the wheels fell off, and my daughter said, "Don't come again daddy", and a year or so of court expense later I lost their support, as " the child's views are given more weight, and it was clear the contact I had with my child was not enjoyable for her,(/substandard), the decided.

Now here is the insight I'd like to impart, what is it like for a child to say they hate their parent, (whether they do at the moment they say it or not, or for whatever reason, it happens often enough in intact families after all)?

 I'd guess my daughter understood the strength of my feelings for her, so stating she hated me carried no jeopardy for her, and contrariwise, failing to say how poor contact was might make her mother suspect she wasn't 100% loyal to her. My daughter used to emerge from behind her mothers front door, and disappear behind it when I took her home, so hard was it for my ex to have to clap eyes on me, (and this went on for years, though in fairness my daughter was almost always there at the arranged time/date, once every three weeks for the majority of the time, and for the seven hours together you were permitted.

Finally I should state my ex !over our daughter, and was a very attentive parent, and the best one for sure to have custody.


----------



## Judycat (Jan 13, 2021)

My oldest son and I didn't have the greatest of relationships as he was growing. He now calls his mother-in-law Mom. I was taken aback when I first heard it, but I'd rather not wade into those waters. Maybe she insists he call her that. She's in his life more than I am now. I guess I'm of the opinion that life is better if everything isn't either/or. If I need help he comes and if he invites me over I go.


----------



## Murrmurr (Jan 13, 2021)

What I learned is that the _I hate you_'s are code for "You led me to believe you were Superman yet you're not fixing my problems!"

The reasoning behind courts allowing kids of a certain age to chose whether or not they want visitation with a parent is the knowledge that some kids who are victims of abuse by a parent - abuse that can't or hasn't been proven - will keep quiet about it out of fear.


----------



## jujube (Jan 13, 2021)

My mother's answer to "that's not fair", "you're mean" and "I hate you" was always "I'm your mother, this isn't an elected position and I'm not running for Miss Popularity."  

Imagine my shock years later when I was a mother myself and opened my mouth and those words just came tumbling out......


----------



## Tish (Jan 13, 2021)

My Husband may he rest in peace, always used to answer our daughter with "Is that right? Well, pumpkin I still love you."
That usually resulted in her storming off to her room and slamming the door that hard the windows rattled.
I swear to God after raising 3 teenagers I now understand why some animals eat their young.
Thankfully our sons never went through the "That's unfair, I hate you stage."


----------



## jerry old (Jan 13, 2021)

Tish said:


> ..."I swear to God after raising 3 teenagers I now understand why some animals eat their young...."


Strongly recommended


----------



## Pepper (Jan 13, 2021)

jujube said:


> My mother's answer to "that's not fair", "you're mean" and "I hate you" was always "I'm your mother, this isn't an elected position and I'm not running for Miss Popularity."


I always knew my son, as a little boy, would say something akin to "drop dead"...............as a little brat I said that to my mother only a couple of times but it's hard to forget.  Anyway, before I had kids, I plotted my own response.  So 15 years after, and my son says this I..............drop dead.  Perfection, as I had decided that long before.  He, he was around 8? Can't remember precisely.  He got so scared I had my jollies for a shorter while than I would want, "wake" up, confess my sin. 

Highly recommended.  He never said anything like that ever again.


----------



## grahamg (Jan 13, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> What I learned is that the _I hate you_'s are code for "You led me to believe you were Superman yet you're not fixing my problems!"
> 
> The reasoning behind courts allowing kids of a certain age to chose whether or not they want visitation with a parent is the knowledge that some kids who are victims of abuse by a parent - abuse that can't or hasn't been proven - will keep quiet about it out of fear.


I think abuse cases are different, and can be identified as being different not least because those children stating they hate you as mine did, with no equivocation at all completely contrast with cases of genuine abuse, where abused children always make statements shoeing equivocation.

I'm very lucky there were never any accusation of any abuse from my very hostile ex, (or the "new daddy"), so I hope that helps convince you there may be completely different reasons why courts take more notice over "visitation", (rum word that visitation, my fellow fathers rights protestor I mentioned on another thread who insisted fathers should be arguing to be allowed to " parent" their child, wouldn't have liked it I'm sure!).


----------



## Murrmurr (Jan 13, 2021)

grahamg said:


> I think abuse cases are different, and can be identified as being different not least because those children stating they hate you as mine did, with no equivocation at all completely contrast with cases of genuine abuse, where abused children always make statements shoeing equivocation.
> 
> , so I hope that helps convince you there may be completely different reasons why courts take more notice over "visitation",


Yes, abuse cases are different, however the US laws created to protect the abused child applies to all children who find themselves in family. court.


----------



## grahamg (Jan 13, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> Yes, abuse cases are different, however the US laws created to protect the abused child applies to all children who find themselves in family. court.


It could hardly do otherwise I agree, but the point I hoped to make concerned assumptions being made by the courts where there are no concerns at all about any element of child abuse, hence my view you should perhaps look for other justifications as to why children say the things they do, these exact same things said across the western world, without any equivocation, is quite startling in itself I feel.


----------



## grahamg (Jan 14, 2021)

Someone who might fit the bill in terms of the scenario set out in one of the above posts about whether an infant might be taken home by a man or woman:


----------



## Pepper (Jan 14, 2021)

Your beautiful little girl reminds me of Bindi Irwin.  Graham, your pain seems so intense.  I'm very sorry you lost so many great times with this fabulous child.


----------



## grahamg (Jan 14, 2021)

Pepper said:


> Your beautiful little girl reminds me of Bindi Irwin.  Graham, your pain seems so intense.  I'm very sorry you lost so many great times with this fabulous child.


I keep saying it, but forget any pain I might have felt, and think about the thousands, maybe millions who did not have the luck and advantages I had, meaning that if I could be condemned ultimately by court officials, (to an extent only I was condemned, as they didn't believe me, and felt they knew more than I what made my child say what she did). 
In my view making you justify your role in your child's life is in a sense, the same as denying you a relationship with your own child, because neither you nor they needs to feel someone else, or outside the family is telling you what to do or say. 
I judged what was the best for my child, as far as I could in the limited contact I had with her, and she perhaps thrived all the better because of it, why should I regret that outcome, (whether I'm in the picture or not)? So please do think of the others, those without such an open, easy to enjoy child, my parents cherishing her so much too, (anyone might wish to take her home, or you would, according to our forum friend above!).


----------



## grahamg (Jan 14, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> Yes, abuse cases are different, however the US laws created to protect the abused child applies to all children who find themselves in family. court.


Apologies to everyone I've confused, my post above showing the photos was in connection to questions you'd raised in the "Fertility rates declining" thread, (I'll come back with those questions so it makes sense later, if that's okay?).


----------



## Elsie (Jan 14, 2021)

I very often for hours took care of my grandson each day while his parents worked.  I think he was around 8 when I verbally disciplined him and he responded, looking sadly frustrated, "I hate you."   And I said, "It's okay, you have a right to feel any way you feel, even if you say you hate me."  He fell silent then and not long after everything was back to fine between us.  I believe it would have been a mistake to chastise him for speaking his mind, even though it hurt me.


----------



## grahamg (Jan 14, 2021)

Elsie said:


> I very often for hours took care of my grandson each day while his parents worked.  I think he was around 8 when I verbally disciplined him and he responded, looking sadly frustrated, "I hate you."   And I said, "It's okay, you have a right to feel any way you feel, even if you say you hate me."  He fell silent then and not long after everything was back to fine between us.  I believe it would have been a mistake to chastise him for speaking his mind, even though it hurt me.


The parents of a good friend of mine, (who is my boss too), used to describe how they responded to their grandchildren by emphasising how they loved them, but not always whatever it was they were doing, (so similar to the story you've related).
I remember my very innocent child sometimes having difficulty sharing things with her cousins, one of my sisters two children, who were slightly younger than my daughter. When she was sitting on my knee, I attempted to lift my neice up onto the other knee to read them both a children's book, and my daughter attempted to spread herself to prevent my doing this, so being a bit selfish and silly, or asserting she was "top dog", as the oldest!


----------



## grahamg (Jan 14, 2021)

Here we go with the Murrmurr quote from the other thread, plus a baby photo from the next generation, (my first grandson therefore):

Quote:
"...., let's say we tested this theory - put a swaddled baby in the arms of a group of women, do the same with group 2, an equal number of men.   I think a majority of the women would take the baby home. A majority of the men, on the other hand, would probably look around for its mother."

What do you think, anyone want to take him home with them?


----------



## Pepper (Jan 14, 2021)

I will!


----------



## Pepper (Jan 14, 2021)

On baby's left sleeve, at the wrist, there appears to be a stain.  Is it drool?  Mmmm Adorable!


----------



## grahamg (Jan 14, 2021)

Pepper said:


> On baby's left sleeve, at the wrist, there appears to be a stain.  Is it drool?  Mmmm Adorable!


Didn't notice that I must admit, (I wonder how many men did?).
This boy is always in a hurry my daughter said, or at least at feeding times when he has no patience perhaps, (what else would you expect, "Get on with it mummy"!).    .


----------



## Murrmurr (Jan 14, 2021)

I would, if he needed taking.

I admit, Graham, I've gotten confused. Your posts are not easy (for me) to follow. 

To the actual topic, and based on my personal experience, I commented : What I learned is that the _I hate you_'s are code for "You led me to believe you were Superman yet you're not fixing my problems!" and I'm going to leave it at that.


----------



## Elsie (Jan 14, 2021)

If any man holding the swaddled baby asks, "Who's the mother, where is she," and gets no info, wouldn't the majority of those men make a point of finding her?


----------



## grahamg (Jan 14, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> I would, if he needed taking.
> I admit, Graham, I've gotten confused. Your posts are not easy (for me) to follow.
> To the actual topic, and based on my personal experience, I commented : What I learned is that the _I hate you_'s are code for "You led me to believe you were Superman yet you're not fixing my problems!" and I'm going to leave it at that.


Well, your an exception to your own rule, (or acting in the opposite way to most men?)?
I can tell you the head of the "Child services department in Wales, (known as CAFCASS here), told an assembled group of excluded" father's he could "envision being excluded from his own children if he were abusing them"!
His words did not impress many of my fellow campaigners, because if it isn't too obvious thing to say, most folks cannot envisage abusing their own children, and do their absolute best to prevent others abusing them, (see other threads on this forum regarding abuse scandals where this fell down for a variety of reasons).
I know that man was trained to suspect everyone, "including himself bizarrely", but no one can really live their lives like that, when our children start to fear anyone hugging them, might be abusing them even us loving them to bits!


----------



## Murrmurr (Jan 14, 2021)

grahamg said:


> *Well, your an exception to your own rule, (or acting in the opposite way to most men?)?*
> I can tell you the head of the "Child services department in Wales, (known as CAFCASS here), told an assembled group of excluded" father's *he could "envision being excluded from his own children if he were abusing them"!*
> His words did not impress many of my fellow campaigners, because if it isn't too obvious thing to say, most folks cannot envisage abusing their own children, and do their absolute best to prevent others abusing them, (see other threads on this forum regarding abuse scandals where this fell down for a variety of reasons).
> I know that man was trained to suspect everyone, "including himself bizarrely", but no one can really live their lives like that, when our children start to fear anyone hugging them, might be abusing them even us loving them to bits!


If so, I was likely influenced by my childhood experiences and the 20-some years that I was a single father. 

I wouldn't want to be around my children if I abused them. They'd be better off somewhere else.

Again, I'm not at all sure what the point of the thread is at this point. Could be me, but it seems to have meandered. Also, I haven't read all the comments. But I think this addresses it...

When your own kids say they hate you it's usually during their teen years, which are difficult for all concerned, but it does happen when they're younger, particularly when they have more to deal with than a child should, i.e., a divorce. At the core of such proclamations, I believe, is fear and insecurity. They are overwhelmed, they count on grown-ups to fix things, and are gravely disappointed and disillusioned to discover that parents can't fix _everything_, and then horrified at the realization that they'll just have to find ways to cope when all they want to do is be a kid.

That's my opinion on the topic. Whatever else I contributed was just additional meandering.


----------



## grahamg (Jan 14, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> If so, I was likely influenced by my childhood experiences and the 20-some years that I was a single father.
> I wouldn't want to be around my children if I abused them. They'd be better off somewhere else.
> Again, I'm not at all sure what the point of the thread is at this point. Could be me, but it seems to have meandered. Also, I haven't read all the comments. But I think this addresses it...
> When your own kids say they hate you it's usually during their teen years, which are difficult for all concerned, but it does happen when they're younger, particularly when they have more to deal with than a child should, i.e., a divorce. At the core of such proclamations, I believe, is fear and insecurity. They are overwhelmed, they count on grown-ups to fix things, and are gravely disappointed and disillusioned to discover that parents can't fix _everything_, and then horrified at the realization that they'll just have to find ways to cope when all they want to do is be a kid.
> ...


You couldn't in all honesty imagine abusing your own child though could you, unless you were unhinged, which you clearly are not(?)


----------



## grahamg (Jan 15, 2021)

grahamg said:


> The most beautiful and engaging child ever?!
> 
> View attachment 144640
> 
> View attachment 144641



"Oh, and don't all jump to say how much like her dad she is", (no bawdy comments reqd btw !),.....
No, No, its all right, I understand, apparently its around the eyes she favours me, and you can't see my beautiful blue eyes can you(?)


----------



## Autumn72 (Jan 15, 2021)

Murrmurr said:


> What I learned is that the _I hate you_'s are code for "You led me to believe you were Superman yet you're not fixing my problems!"
> 
> The reasoning behind courts allowing kids of a certain age to chose whether or not they want visitation with a parent is the knowledge that some kids who are victims of abuse by a parent - abuse that can't or hasn't been proven - will keep quiet about it out of fear.


This is so true, as ny grandson is now has been going through with his father who bever married my  grandson's mom, my daughter. She had a restrainung order on his father. A twist of hell followed the why he has his son since five.....my 2nd daughter April did her voodoo as good intentions pave the highway to hell as they say.....its been a understatement in my honest opinion


----------



## grahamg (Jan 15, 2021)

There is no doubt some horror stories concerning fathers do occur, and whatever has gone wrong, it is very hard to fix, or even limit the damage!
However, "putting that to one side", (as of course as a topic, its worthy of its own thread), where there is no abuse being perpetrated by anyone, and no suggestions of abuse being put forward even, only arguments between those who have cherished the child, and the state allows one side total control, I can't believe anyone, other than the selfish ex, really, truly benefits by the courts not being at least obliged to try to help the other parent, lest by not doing so, fathers are discouraged from even attempting to do their best by their kids!


----------



## grahamg (Jan 15, 2021)

I hope no one minds, but I intend to mention "a few facts", or my recollections I hope you will accept as facts, for this discussion anyway, (I say that for those of you who always think, "there are two sides to every story, and we've not heard the other side", which will automatically frustrate the discussion because my ex., and daughter "are not available"!).

On the day my regular contact with my daughter ended, when she was aged twelve, the following happened:

1). As I drove away from her mothers house my daughter told me her mother and stepfather did not want me to see her, (they had just returned from a week long trip to Eurodisney, so had time to " work on" my daughter). I stopped the car a couple of miles away, and tried to find out what was going on, but all I could discover from my child was this contorted logic, "her mother, and self styled real daddy, on!y wanted what she wanted"!
If that were the case there would be no need for my daughter to emphasise their views on my contact with her, she would simply say, "I don't want to see you" and leave it at that, or put forward her reasons if she chose, like I was so "boring, and never took her anywhere enjoyable", (as was said to court welfare officers months later).

2). I was told to bring my daughter home an hour or two early on this last contact day, so when I took my daughter to visit an aunt and uncle some miles away, and my uncle showed my daughter some party magic tricks, I had to decline when they asked us to join them going out for lunch with their family. My daughter and I then went to MacDonalds for our lunch, (probably the first time I'd taken her there, but it was closer to her mothers home, so we didn't have to travel too far to get her back at the appointed time). My daughters behaviour towards me as we ate, was that she was sort of acting, or had other things on her mind.

3). As I drove up the road to her mothers house, her mother was standing on the pavement outside her house, (you may recall I told you in ear!ier posts my daughter used to emerge from behind the front door, and when she went home would disappear behind it, (so it was very unusual that my ex should be standing outside her property).

4). Fifty yards or so from her home, when she'd seen her mother, my child said the words "Don't come again daddy"! I slowed the car and said, "Don't be silly", and then I left her with her mother. When I returned to my home in the south of England a few hours later, I found I had an answerphone message, just my daughter speaking, saying simply this, "Don't come again daddy, I won't come with you if you come to pick me up"!

5). I tried to ring my daughters home, but the reason I had to take her home ear!y I was told was because they were going out, so no one answered.
I then put the matter in my lawyers hands, (we'd had various court battles trying to get my ex to agree to my daughter coming on a short holiday with me some years before, when ironically we had the chance to do many more interesting things, (but if you believe the rationalisation given afterwards that it was the quality of the contact that leading to it stopping, I'm afraid I've lost you, and can't think how you will ever come to understand or accept matters were as I've stated).


----------



## AnnieA (Jan 16, 2021)

Have you been able to work through things now that she's an adult?    Btw, she was such a lil' cutie in the childhood pics!


----------



## grahamg (Jan 16, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> Have you been able to work through things now that she's an adult?    Btw, she was such a lil' cutie in the childhood pics!


Not as yet,....., want more pics?


----------



## grahamg (Jan 16, 2021)

Still looking for more pics of my daughter you'd like, but in the meantime here is a photo of her grandad, who my daughter flummoxed, or left in a quandary whilst playing the "Yes/No game", with his granddaughter, after she asked him "Are you happy grandad", and he'd just come out of a short stay in hospital, so couldn't say he was happy as he'd always like to have done, as a very positive/strong person, so he lost the game under the "hesitation rule"!


----------



## AnnieA (Jan 16, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Not as yet,



  Hoping and praying that changes.


----------



## grahamg (Jan 16, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> Hoping and praying that changes.


Do save both your hopes and prayers for those great many fathers in such worse situations than I find myself in, with my very happy memories of my daughter, my pride in her impressive achievements (as a doctor, nay surgeon), and her loving nature, along with, let's face it, "all the steel she gets/got from her mother!"


----------



## AnnieA (Jan 18, 2021)

grahamg said:


> Do save both your hopes and prayers for those great many fathers in such worse situations than I find myself in, with my very happy memories of my daughter, my pride in her impressive achievements (as a doctor, nay surgeon), and her loving nature, along with, let's face it, "all the steel she gets/got from her mother!"


 
I'm not gonna!  Whatever God is, there's room for prayers for all hurting people and your pain comes across in so many threads. Intellectualizing it and diversion doesn't hide it. I will continue to pray for reconciliation for the two of you. And I am happy for the things that bring you joy in your daughter!


----------



## grahamg (Jan 18, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> I'm not gonna!  Whatever God is, there's room for prayers for all hurting people and your pain comes across in so many threads. Intellectualizing it and diversion doesn't hide it. I will continue to pray for reconciliation for the two of you. And I am happy for the things that bring you joy in your daughter!


No, please dont, you're not really doing God's work, (whatever God is as you say), if you trouble yourself over folks who really dont need it, and thereby ignore the ones suffering so much worse, because you imagine they're no different than I am.

You've forced me into it, but lets just list the achievements of my ex in raising our child, and then put that in the balance somewhere, (and in a funny sense against myself).

1). She loved our daughter.
2) She realised "as the adult" she had many decisions to make concerning our child, (for example changing her school, when she felt our daughter wasn't progressing quickly enough, much to the chagrin of our daughter who loved the "play learning" ethos of her first school).
3). She was unbelievably attentive to the needs of our child, and taught her many things, (she was the best parent between the two of us by a mile).
4). Our daughter was never in any real danger of being abused by anyone, given the "warrior nature" of her mother, (her words!).
5). As a trained teacher, computer expert, etc. bringing in good salary, she provided for our child and took her through college.
6). Her mother had vey high ambition for our child, without which she probably wouldn't have made the great strides she did, educationally, (top of her school year, lined up for a place at "Oxbridge", though just missing out, but still went on to qualify and practise as a surgeon.
7). Our daughter had over 650 Facebook friends at one time, and her mother encouraged her to make loads of friends.
8). Do I need to go further, (I can do you know!)?

Given all the above you could ask why all my moans?

 Well, my daughter did develop a stammer when aged 2/3 years, at the time our marriage broke down, and I pride myself that my contact with her, and never drawing any attention to her stammer, and continually trying to boost her confidence heled it disappear completely, (I had a slight stammer myself when nervous, and likewise no one tried to draw attention to that either and it went away).

Then there is the unfairness of the process by which a noncustodial parent receives criticism from professionals who can never love our child as we do, and comments about my not taking my daughter anywhere interesting are really such trivial matters, given how well she was doing, and the main point is your relationship with your child depends upon you telling them what you think, not what you think some other busy body might think is what your child should be hearing, and the values, they believe should be instilled in them.

Are you with me now, and do you wish to show your love of God, and put, your thoughts and prayers to good use, by trying to assist in a nascent movement to change what is going on all around in family law?


----------



## grahamg (Jan 18, 2021)

Elsie quote:
""....quality of the contact that leading to it stopping,..."? Was there a signed contract by both mother and father of just what that "quality" is to be? Did the child tell her mother of the activities done with her father (that daughter enjoyed?), but mother resented her having enjoyed doing things with her father, so conned her daughter into believing many false hurtful things about her father (and the activities?) and thus their daughter thought him a bad influence? Sounds like that poor child may have been manipulated by a controlling false info giving mother."

Grahamg response:
Please see the above comments I made in relation to another forum members views, and try to balance your quite reasonable arguments and opinions in the light of the things I've listed, as very important positives concerning my ex. and our daughter.


----------



## grahamg (Jan 18, 2021)

AnnieA said:


> Quote: "Btw, she was such a lil' cutie in the childhood pics!"


You didnt say whether you wanted another photo, but here is one giving proof of the harsh conditions my daughter was forced to endure during the seven hours of contact every third Sunday, as she slaves on mending, or tapestry under the draconian conditions at her grandparents farmhouse:


----------



## grahamg (Jan 21, 2021)

Shall I just keep posting these photos?


----------



## terry123 (Jan 22, 2021)

My youngest daughter at age 16 said "you are the meanest mother of all my friends' mothers" as I insisted upon a curfew.  She later retracted that when one of her friends had an earlier curfew.


----------



## grahamg (Jan 22, 2021)

terry123 said:


> My youngest daughter at age 16 said "you are the meanest mother of all my friends' mothers" as I insisted upon a curfew.  She later retracted that when one of her friends had an earlier curfew.


You didn't love her any less for that, nor her you I would guess!   .


----------



## terry123 (Jan 22, 2021)

grahamg said:


> You didn't love her any less for that, nor her you I would guess!   .


Your right!!


----------



## grahamg (Jan 23, 2021)

terry123 said:


> You're right!!


The "picking up", and "dropping down" of children by either parent, is what I believe is harmful to them, and their relationship with their parent/parents, and extending maybe further on in their lives when they've not experienced the constancy you clearly show, and your child shows you back equally, (by picking up or dropping down, I mean one or other side allowing the child or the parent to believe they dont care about each other, so beyond the fact contact between a non resident father after divorce is a stop start affair you understand, because at least the expectation of the visits and contact remains even if the child does lack the constant or daily presence of one parent in their life).


----------



## grahamg (Jan 25, 2021)

This post fits into this discussion thread much better than the "General Discussion" section, where it was a follow up to an inadvertently posted response I made there a few days ago. I hope someone takes the trouble to read the arguments put forward carefully, and not just dismiss them, because I'd suggest they are of importance to anyone who has children, or grandchildren who might one day become estranged parents due to the way we're all treated under family law systems across the Western world, (apologies its quite long): 



> Pepper said:
> All I meant was, @grahamg was Our children are not born with the job of loving us in return. Children aren't born with jobs.



This is an extract from the linked article above, (link repeated here again), shedding more light upon the suggestions being put forward concerning children, (do try to digest all this if you wish to continue to impugn Professor Akira Morita, and profess your understandable wishes for the best for all children everywhere):
https://www.firstthings.com/article/1995/08/abandoning-children-to-their-rights

"American society has long been committed to protecting and developing its children, as the existence of the nation’s public schools and juvenile courts demonstrates. The concept of minority legal status has also protected children from their own temporary lack of capacity. Rather than discriminating against children, this tradition gives them advantages designed to protect them from abuse and nurture them toward maturity.

Not until the early 1970s did the first Kiddie Libbers appear, arguing for the first time that children “are autonomous individuals, entitled to the same rights as adults.” This assertion relied not on new evidence that young people have adult-like capacity, but on the liberationist ideology that kids are people too. This ideology drew support from Supreme Court opinions in the 1960s that recognized rudimentary constitutional rights for public school students and other children.

But child autonomy claims have not really carried the day in American law. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell captured the collective judgment of American courts and legislatures in 1979 when he wrote that “the peculiar vulnerability of children, their inability to make critical decisions in an informed, mature manner, and the importance of the parental role in child rearing” together justify “the conclusion that the constitutional rights of children cannot be equated with those of adults.”

Break

"Among the fundamental axioms of American law is the doctrine that the parent-child relationship antedates the state just as natural individual rights antedate the state in the Constitution’s political theory. Parents are not trustees who receive authority to rear their children through delegations of state power over children. Rather, as the Supreme Court held in distinguishing biological parents from foster parents, the natural parent-child tie is “a relationship having origins entirely apart from the power of the State,” while a foster placement arranged by state agents “has its source in state law and contractual arrangements.” Because of this principle, the Court has said, “the child is not the mere creature of the State,” and the social structure-partly in order to limit state power-presupposes a system of family units, not just a mass of isolated individuals who all stand in the same relationship to the state.

Agents of the state in America have thus never had authority to intervene in the child-parent relationship until they establish jurisdiction through formal proceedings: divorce-related custody issues; adoptions; findings of serious parental unfitness, neglect, abuse, or abandonment; or child misbehavior severe enough to require state intervention."

"Article Nine of the CRC, however, provides that children may be separated from parents when “such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child.” Articles Three and Eighteen add that while “parents have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child,” the “best interests of the child will be [parents’] basic concern.”

Does this mean that any parental care that falls short of serving the child’s “best interests” is sufficiently flawed to trigger intervention? Could a child trigger state intervention merely by requesting state review of the “reasonableness” of parental conduct compared to the child’s view of his or her best interests?"

Break

*"The CRC’s developmental language reflects perfectly desirable psychological aspirations that do not (and, like hopeful but unenforceable expressions of a child’s “right” to be loved, cannot) mirror legal reality."*

Break
"But some adults who want to liberate children are not as motivated by children’s interests as by their own interests-some ideological and some that merely serve adult convenience. Adults face a conflict of interest in thinking about autonomy for children. When they disengage themselves from the arduous task of rearing and teaching children in the name of increasing children’s autonomy, adults’ actual-even if not fully conscious-purpose may be to increase their own autonomy by freeing themselves from the burdens of providing meaningful care. Even worse, some pro-child autonomy claims are merely a smokescreen intended to protect the interests of adults who profit from such claims while indirectly exploiting the actual interests of children.

In addition, a growing clamor over legal rights for children may create the illusion that parents, teachers, and other adults owe children only what the law demands of them. The increased appearance of autonomy for children becomes then essentially the default position that results from reducing our sense of adult responsibility for children. The assertion that untutored, unguided children already enjoy all the autonomy they need may relieve adults of demanding obligations, but that assertion is ultimately a profound form of child neglect. Children cannot raise themselves."

Another major concern with the autonomy-based approach of the CRC is its failure to distinguish between state paternalism and parental paternalism. By assuming a direct relationship between children and the state, the CRC could have the effect of reducing parental commitments to childrearing while concurrently increasing the dependency of children on the state. To the extent that governmental policies foster noncommittal attitudes on the part of parents, either because parents believe they have no right to give direction to their children or because they fear that in giving them direction they might meet state-supported resistance, both the children of those families and the larger society will suffer.

For most parents, the “rights” of parenthood leave them no alternative but an assumption of parental responsibility, because that responsibility, both by nature and by law, can be assumed by no one else until the parent has failed. *But when state-enforced policies undermine traditional parental rights, those same policies will inevitably undermine the assumption of parental responsibility. To undermine parental initiative is not wise when society has found no realistic alternative to it. Indeed, it may be that children have a right to policies that require parental accountability. Yet contemporary society reveals increasing adult indifference toward the nurturing of children. The CRC’s attitude only exacerbates this tendency.

There is great irony in the observation of Akira Morita, a Japanese legal scholar who has studied the CRC’s drafting process. *Professor Morita found that after a decade of leisurely discussion, the CRC’s hastily composed 1988 draft-particularly its emphasis on child autonomy-resulted from “a hurried compilation of the then current discussions as heavily impacted by the growing momentum toward the end of the Cold War. In other words, the ‘civil rights and liberties of the child’ was a child of the ideological victory of the United States over the USSR.” In his view, the impending collapse of total state paternalism in the Soviet Union helped convince the drafters that they should accept the anti-paternalistic ideology of the CRC. The drafters thus significantly confused state paternalism with family paternalism, for the Western liberal tradition has long viewed strong familial authority as a primary check on excessive state power. Nonetheless, the anti-paternalistic flavor of the times helped lead the drafters “in the final phase of deliberations in Geneva” to “defeat an attempted resistance by the representative of West Germany who tried to defend the traditional paternalistic structure of child and family law in Western society.”


----------



## grahamg (Jan 25, 2021)

I'm sorry I haven't managed to interest anyone in the wisdom expressed by Dr. Akira Morita I believe is so important to all of us, to all our families, and by extension the future of our world. I appreciate the last post was maybe too long for most forum members to wish to read, so I've chosen just one short paragraph from the linked website, or article, and I've done so particularly tonight because I've listened to a young woman on the BBC radio five live show hosted by Dotun Adebayo use statistics about marriage breakup etc. as being better for children, in the face of so much evidence to the contrary, (I've slightly exaggerated her claims, or misconstrued them there I admit, just as she did when cleverly choosing the words to drag out the evidence she wanted us all to accept or focus upon).

Here is the one paragraph from the linked article or website that might stimulate your interest:
_"“In addition, the family was frequently cast in a negative light in relation to girls. For example, the document called for governments and NGOs to "formulate policies and programmes to help the family ... in its supporting, educating and nurturing roles, with particular emphasis on the elimination of intra-family discrimination against the girl child." This portrayal of the family is negative in two respects: first, it identifies the family as a hotbed of discrimination against women and girls and second, with the persistent attempts by radical women's rights groups to link discrimination to violence against women and girls, and to have violence against them recognized as a violation of human rights, it further blurs the line between private and public spheres”"_

https://www.firstthings.com/article/1995/08/abandoning-children-to-their-rights

Authors:
_Bruce C. Hafen is Professor of Law and Provost at Brigham Young University.
Jonathan O. Hafen , his son, is an associate at the Chicago law firm of Sidley & Austin._


----------



## grahamg (Feb 3, 2021)

When I had a beard briefly in 1988, the year I took my one trip to the USA, and bought the little dress in Denver. (or two piece with ribbons).


----------



## grahamg (Feb 3, 2021)

Some more photos for your delectation and delight:


----------



## grahamg (Feb 5, 2021)

More photos, oh go on then,.......,    !


----------



## izzy (Feb 9, 2021)

Tish said:


> My Husband may he rest in peace, always used to answer our daughter with "Is that right? Well, pumpkin I still love you."
> That usually resulted in her storming off to her room and slamming the door that hard the windows rattled.
> I swear to God after raising 3 teenagers I now understand why some animals eat their young.
> Thankfully our sons never went through the "That's unfair, I hate you stage."


Thank you for your post really made me smile as I sit in my car -1c not wanting to return home after spending the night in a premier inn.  I can say with hand only heart I love my daughter and always will, but like her that is another matter.  In short if I could hop in my car and never return home I would.  in short if you have a child who loves and respects you cherish every moment because the alternative is a living hell.


----------



## grahamg (Feb 10, 2021)

izzy said:


> Thank you for your post really made me smile as I sit in my car -1c not wanting to return home after spending the night in a premier inn.  I can say with hand only heart I love my daughter and always will, but like her that is another matter.  In short if I could hop in my car and never return home I would.  in short if you have a child who loves and respects you cherish every moment because the alternative is a living hell.


We certainly hear quite a few similar stories, where one or other parent has been shown, or must be assumed to have been lacking, or worse than just "lacking", and as you suggest_ maybe for each one of them there will be children or grown up children anyway, apparently hell bent on taking out "revenge" on their parent, (or whatever the right word is?).
However those situations are still the extremes, and cannot account for the vast numbers of excluded parents post divorce or separation. The words used to condemn even an "okay dad/parent" go something like this, "he'll only let you (/the child) down again if he has contact"!
Once inculcated in the child's mind, reenforced by one thousand other small denigrations, ridicule, making the child feel disloyal or embarrassed about the other parent, there is "only one winner",(if you know what I mean?).


----------

