Thank God the grandparents lost! I wonder if the WTS is paying for their lawyers. They got nerve. I found this particularly interesting since my MIL I'm sure is going to try to indoctrinate our soon to be born son. We plan on telling her that if she tries anything, she will be shunned. Hey, if they have a right to shun, so do we!
Ewanchuk v. Ewanchuk: JW grandparents' rights case
by expatbrit 29 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
blondie
Actually, the grandparents (with the help of the WTS) would have to prove that both parents were such a physical and mental danger to the children that their parental rights would have to be terminated. That is the only way in many states, that grandparents can get custody. A difference in religious views is not enough unless that religious view can be proven to be putting the child in physical danger.
Anyway the WTS itself says that taking care of other people's children does not absolve the parents of ultimately being responsible before Jehovah for the spiritual status of the children. Specifically, if the child is not old enough to be accountable before God, then God will judge the child based on the parents' spirituality. That is why they say children will die at Armageddon based on their parents' life choices.
-
No Apologies
Scully:
I guess when the grandparents are JWs, they are incapable of tearing families and children apart'', whereas if the parents are JWs and the grandparents are not, it becomes "very damaging and increase[s] the damage to children".
The other feature I want to discuss is the rights of access for both parents and the right of both access parent and custodial parent to have free interchange of information and to teach the child what he believes as well as what the custodial parent believes. This is all part of family life. Lots of people disagree on many things. Children are entitled to know that and to know the access parent as well as the custodial parent as a person.
Pretty language there, Mr. How. But what about when the grandparents want to shove what THEY believe down the grandchildren's throats against the wishes of the custodial parent??
Can you give any example where Mr. How is trying to defend some kind of double standard based on whether the grandparents are JWs or not? I sure don't see it in the quotes you listed? I don't think taking kids to a church or a Kingdom Hall once or twice a year qualifies as 'shoving it down their throats.'
I detect just a faint hint of bias from the posters on this thread. Try this: If the grandparents were Catholic, and the daughter-in-law was a JW, how would you feel about this case?
and then this.
Hawk:
The roof project didn't work out the way we hoped. Damn.
Love, Scully
No problem.
I gotta few ideas.
hawk
what's with the coded messages? What's a roof project, and why should I care to read about it?
Let the flaming begin!
-
bluesapphire
No Apologies, my mother is a hard core Catholic. She would never attempt to teach my children her hard core beliefs either -- and I'm Catholic too. We just disagree on too many issues. In fact, she posts here and she can attest that she and her husband are both very careful with what they talk about in our home in front of my husband and our kids -- OUT OF RESPECT for our household and our decisions.
I can guarantee that probably most Catholic grandparents would NEVER EVER dream of taking their kids to court to have her "rights" to teach the grandchildren her faith. It just wouldn't happen. Catholics and generally people of most other religions would know the obvious which is that it is the parent's right to teach their children their own religious beliefs. Only JWs would stoop to this level of bigotry. They have so much hatred for anything non-JW that they have to stoop to the level that these grandparents did and make a court issue where there should have been none to begin with.
Edited to add: If the Watchtower is behind this (and I suspect they're there somewhere) it only shows how desperate they have become. That since they can't find anyone at the doors anymore and youth are leaving, they will have no choice but to go after the grandchildren of those who have left. Utterly pathetic!
Edited by - bluesapphire on 20 October 2002 16:12:34
-
expatbrit
Hello No Apologies:
I personally feel that the judge focussed upon the most important aspect of the law: what is of most benefit to the child. Everything else must bow to this principle.
Thus, the religion of the participants is not really the core issue here (I posted this case because it has interest relevance to this discussion board). If the grandparents were Catholic and the DIL a JW, the deciding factor would still have to be the best interests of the child.
Religious conflict between family members loved by the child is definitely not in the child's best interest. It gives enormous emotional pain and confusion to the child. You may trust my word on this, my early years were spent in a bitterly divided household religiously.
Thus, I cannot agree enough with the judge when he said that if religion is a source of conflict, that conflict can be removed. I would go so far as to say that it should be removed. Again, this is true whether Catholic, JW, Baptist, or whatever.
As has been mentioned, mainstream religions are far more tolerant of religous differences. It is only fundamentalist sects and cults that generally produce this variety of court case. As for Mr. How, we all know that as a JW he will argue today whichever side of an issue happens currently to be in the Watchtower's interests, and next week may argue completely the opposite. His "principles" are determined by Watchtower. I have recently observed him quarterbacking the most obscene lying and deception in a courtroom I think that I have ever seen. A mere double standard or two in child access cases will not prevent him sleeping the sleep of the holier-than-thou theocratic war-wager, I'm sure.
Expatbrit
-
LDH
Hey guys,
Just stepped in to say HI and I saw this article. Does anyone have the URL? I'm also wondering why the Society did not bankroll the JWs case.
Could it be that a child's immediate health is not threatened? They seem to only be interested in intervening when they can cause the immediate death of a child.
Lisa
-
gypsywildone
It's never in the best interest of a child to get the shit kicked outta them in the back of a kingdom hall, tell the kid their whole family is gonna die because God's gonna kill them, have the kid sit through hours of mind numbing rotten spiritual fruit, or make them feel like a freak because all the joy is drained from their life. Kids just want their grandparent's love, and this making "love" contingent on following a cult is spiritual abuse!
-
Scully
No apologies:
I guess you missed this thread:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=38750&site=3
As for the "coded messages" between Hawkaw and myself: it pertains to a conversation that you were not party to. If you had been party to it, you'd know what it was.
Love, Scully
-
expatbrit
Sorry, here is the link to the full article:
http://www.canlii.org/nt/cas/ntsc/2002/2002ntsc67.html
The counsel for the JW grandparents was James Brydon, whom I believe to be a Watchtower lawyer. Thus, WT was bankrolling the case in this sense.
Expatbrit
-
Big Tex
Thanks Expatbrit. Fascinating article. I must admit when I began reading the judge's decision, I was concerned the case would go against the mother's wishes. But it seems as if he reasoned the problem out and considered all sides which is about all you can ask a judge to do. I know a couple of years ago there was a case here in the States regarding grandparent visitation rights. Fortunately the case was decided in favor of the parents.