Okay… for everyone who jumped on me about exit visas keeping a poor father from his boy, how do you explain this (from CNN):
Unless CNN is biased (possible), this suggests that the father is putting conditions on his travel to be with his son. Not that his request is unreasonable, but DAMN – why help use your son as a pawn like that.
If my son were stranded in Afghanistan (one of the most wretched placesI can conceive of venturing right now), I wouldn’t sit here negotiating (“I’ll only come if you don’t make me wear a burqa”). I’d be on that plane. Even if I couldn’t get temporary custody, a brief visit would be better than no contact at all.
So, unless someone is twisting Juan Miguel’s words, something smells here.
IMHO the boy should be returned to his father, pronto. My question is: does the father have a right to sue the Miami relatives for interference with his parental rights aka alienation of affection? I think so. What does the panel think?
I agree that he should be returned to the father immediately. However, I don’t think it was unreasonable of the Miami relatives to request that the father come pick him up (a different story if they had been the ones who removed him from Cuba, but they weren’t).
The only legitimate case the father could make would be against the late mother. It’s ethical for a country to return a child to a foreign parent, but I believe the (legal) burden should be on the parent to come retrieve the child.
Didn’t the mom illegally take Elian away? Doesn’t a Cuabn father have some rights?
If my (imaginary) ex-wife took my (imaginary_ son away in so risky a venture that she DIED doing it, I would think that lots of people would call her irresponsible as hell and not fit to have kept custody even if she had succeeded.
When one parent takes a child away without the other parent’s consent, isn’t that called KIDNAPPING?
My opinion is that I can’t express my opinion about the Cuban-Americans inMiami, the Miaimi mayor, and Elian’s American “family” without using words that eblong in the Pit.
The attitude of cubans in Miami is indefensible. They should respect the laws of the country like everyone else. On the other hand, who really started the whole stink was Castro who agitated and mobilised the Cuban people in huge demonstrations against the “kidnapping”. I can understand how the Cubans in Miami got so aggravated (although it does not excuse what they are doing). But if they really care for the kid they would quit what they are doing because the kid is going to be traumatised by all this.
I have seen many assumptions that the father would defect if given the chance. He is now in Washington DC and can defect easily if he wants and we will only know if and when he returns to Cuba… I think the longer he stays here the better the chances he may defect but do not assume that he will. I met in Cuba many people who are loyal communist fanatics and no amount of reasoning will change their minds. But if he remains here long enough and forms some bonds, things may change. Time will tell.
Except for the fact that Castro’s surrogates in D.C. have redefined it, thus allowing them to acquiesce to a regime with which they philosophically sympathize. I’d like to see Janet Reno roll up to the great-uncle’s house in a tank. This is probably the only time you’ll hear the leftists make the claim that “a boy belongs with his father.”
Let’s say:
Mom, Dad and Elian all successfully emigrated to Miami a year ago, only Mom doesn’t take to it and longs to return to her homeland, she leaves with the boy on a rickety boat, boats upset, boy is plucked from the waters of Guantanamo Bay, with only a surviving Father in America.
Now I ask you these few questions:
Would the Miami Cubans be screaming for the government to override the rights of the father and leave the boy where he remains.
Would the Mother’s dying wish be of any importance in this scenario?
Would Miami still be about to go up in flames?
And, of course, would Gloria Estifan feel it was okay for a Cuban Pop Star to shape public opinion concerning what ‘ought’ to happen to her family.
If something should happen to your spouse and you happen to be apart from your child do you believe your distant relatives, a second cousin and two great uncles (with 7 dui’s between them) should decide what’s best for your family?
Wisdom is the boobie prize,they give you when you’ve been --unwise!
Okay, it’s been six whole days since the last post. What has changed?
Well, for one thing, I just heard Charlie Gibson on Good Morning America say, quote, “Janet Reno and the Justice Department must decide how to fight the court order that orders Elian’s return to Cuba.”
Excuse me? How does the Justice Dept. “fight a court order”? Granted, I may not have been paying terribly close attention in civics class, but I did come away with the definite impression that the Justice Dept. and the court system were on the same side. Isn’t the Justice Dept. “fighting a court order” kind of like watching a man arm-wrestle with himself?
“Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!” - the White Queen
“If the courts don’t support the uncle’s custody, and the uncle refuses to hand him over, isn’t the uncle guilty of kidnapping”
It really depends on wether the kid wants to go or not If they take him against his will they are kidnapping. If the uncle keeps him against his will he is kidnapping.
I can’t imagine what #1 would have to do with anything.
As for #2, there is no evidence that Sr Gonzalez was abusive, there are only allegations.
I worked in family law for a couple years. It is, unfortunately, extremely common for one side in a custody battle to falsely accuse the other side of abuse. Allegations made as late in the day as those against Sr Gonzalez were should be viewed with particular suspicion.
If the Miami mafia do come up with some actual evidence, then by all means have a custody battle. Failing that, the “proper, legal, normal procedure” is to return the kid to his father.
ruadh; they have the testimony of an eyewitness. That almost DEFINES evidence. True, the witness may be wrong, biased, or bought, but eyewitness testimony is evidence none-the-less.
Whether or not abuse is proven, a custody hearing is the only fair, DEMOCRATIC way to do it.
I expect the hearing to rule in favor of Sr. Gonzales, but I do not have all the evidence.
