Re: What on earth were they thinking?
- From: Cynic <cynic_999@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 01:10:46 +0000
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 12:58:56 -0500, Mike Ross <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Excuse me, but this is an adult woman of 20. Unless she's somehow vulnerable -
seriously mentally retarded or something - what on earth are a 'legal guardian
and a local authority' doing meddling in her private life?
They are supposedly acting on behalf of the interests of the *child*
not the woman. The child may stand to benefit or be disadvantaged by
the father knowing or not knowing that the child exists.
Perhaps the woman (as an example) cannot support the child and so
wishes to offer it for adoption even though the father could provide
an excellent loving home, and the woman wants to prevent him knowing
that he has a child so that she can spite him, and maybe rub his nose
in the fact a bit later after his child has been adopted.
It would be quite right in such a case for someone else to decide
whether the father should know based upon what is likely to be best
for the child.
--
Cynic
.
- References:
- What on earth were they thinking?
- From: Mike Ross
- What on earth were they thinking?
- Prev by Date: Re: To; The Todal, its time to take down UKLM rejected posts
- Next by Date: Re: RIP and key destruction
- Previous by thread: Re: What on earth were they thinking?
- Next by thread: Re: What on earth were they thinking?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
