Libyan "stolen" children

[Arthur62]

There seems to be a lot of hype concerning children who are living with their fathers' in Libya. Mothers' are claiming that these children are stolen but surely these children are just simply living with one of their parents. It happens all the time in England when the mother steals the children from the father.

oh, my first

It DOES happen a lot of the time here in england.

But (and I don't care how un-pc this sounds) children need their mothers wherever possible.

Its primeval, we protect our young like a lioness with cubs, to forcibly break that bond is unthinkable

It is also unthinkable to break the bond with their father too. Knowing the bias laws in this country against the father, I do not blame these Libyan fathers taking these children for themselves. It is your kind of philosophy which perpetuates this sort of behaviour at home and abroad it seems. We are all parents, Mum and Dad equally, and until there is a fairer system whereby the child is best placed for it's well being and not by default of sex, situations like this will occur and good luck to them.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with the mum & dad equally thing. We carry them, they have our blood running through their veins, it is a primeval thing that I don't expect men to ever understand. I know that isn't very PC of me, but it's true whether you like it or not.

I'm not saying dads dont love their kids, but you will never undersatnd the bond between mother & child.

I'm fully aware that not every mother feels the same as well, but in the majority yes children should be with their mothers.

Watching that documentary broke my heart, I just cannot imagine the awfulness of somebody taking my children away from me.

Yes, you are primeval for thinking that Mum and Dad are not equal and perhaps you should move forward a bit and understand that a father does not just love his child. Obviously you will never understand the bond between father and child. I can't believe there are some people out there who think they are the better parent by virtue of their sex. Very disappointing and shallow...

I agree with aristomache but to add I would not think it was fair for either parent to take the children to another country and deny them access by one of thier parents.

I haven't seen the program but if you're being ridiculous enough to compare a women being the primary care giver after a marriage split to a man who illegally takes his children to a strange country and away from their other parent then, sorry, you are either very very stupid or just deliberately spoiling for an argument.

Arthur62 bottom line I have breasts I was made to nurture children but I guarantee you I would not be as good ast hunting as my DP nature made us this way there are also test that show a womans morality is better suited to raiseing children. I am a very strong woman and have entered many physical competitions but I am not as strong as my DP and he does not have any food source naturally for a baby fact.

Very true Flame. No parent should deny the access to the other parent unless there is risk.

Nobody can be deliberately primeval, it just is that way!! maybe you don't understand the meaning of the word primeval?

also agree with bubble that you are just spoiling for an argument

The law in this country is biased towards the primary carer. It should in all possible situations consist of a fifty fifty split of time and responsibility.

Denying access to one parent (and obviously I'm talking about cases where no abuse has occurred) under any circumstances is wrong.

I have no idea how you could possibly condone this OP. Your only argument seems to be that two wrongs make a right. And that is plain old silly.

Strength and tits have no bearing on the decision for who is best suited. We all have our strengths and weaknesses which should not set us apart as ideal parents. It could also be argued that perhaps a boy needs his father more than his mother when it comes to development...

Firstly it's illegal to remove children like this, a minor point which seems to have been overlooked

Hardly the same as where legal proceedings have given residency to one parent, usually with access rules for the other parent.

the OP also overlooks the fact that in many of these cases the mother have been the primary or even sole carers and removing children from primary carer in this way is just not on.

"It could also be argued that perhaps a boy needs his father more than his mother when it comes to development"

why? can his father breastfeed him them?

OP dear, you sound like you have ISHOOS!

oh fuck it, I'm done with this

me too

Many women choose to bottle feed their children. Would this make them less of a Parent? Your argument is lame. Breast feeding is but a very small part of a child's upbringing which lasts a very short time.

Its illegal to remove your children to another country. Although I can't agree with those who claim that the mother is more important in a childs life than the father.

Well said huddspur.

I notice you ignored my post Arthur. You still haven't explained your point. You agree it is wrong to cut out one parent, but then revel in the fact that another parent is cut out. This makes no sense to me. Either we are equal or we are not.

Do you have a further argument than your "two wrongs =right"?

stands up and applauds youhavenothingbutahunch

he wont answer it though

The posts were running very fast to answer you YouHave..... my point being is that with the bias and unfair justice system we have in this country, perhaps the only recourse for some fathers is to remove the child from this by taking them away. It is not right,fair or morally right in either way. However, the children are not stolen. They are still with one of the parents. As would be if in this country, albeit with the mother.

But if a mother and father were marooned with a baby there would be no choice but to bf and allow the mother primary care. Thanks to modern technology men can have just as active a role now but they were not designed by nature to be the child rearer.

In addition in the majority of family's the women is the primary carer in which case it is not fair to remove the child from the primary carer (be they male of female) which is what you are claiming to be acceptable.

My bf is male and is in court to stop his soontobe ex-w moving thousands of miles away with the dcs to be with man she had an affair with. Bf is a totally committed and hands on Dad (nappies, toilet training, weaning, the lot) However, despite his very strong position & her pretty awful behaviour, he recognises that the children need their mother and needs to be in their lives.

He would not agree with you Arthur62.

Totally agree with aristomache, how can anyone argue that the mother is not the most important person in a childs life?

Fathers are important too, of course they are, especially for boys, but the mother-child bond is unique.