Rebecca Minnock - on the run with child after court battle

[BreakingDad77]

Is this one of those cases we wont get to the bottom of as to whether she is someone with MH problems or scheming father driving her to them?

Katie Hopkins for President of the family division I say.

I know it is a strongly disliked term but isn't that FB group post the why some use the term 'Golden Uterus' ?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-33126845

Good Lord! If ever there was a person who needed saving from theirselves it's RM. She's back in court Monday 10am and today she's quoted as saying:

"...but would do it over and over if it meant he was safe with me."

We can safely guess what Judge Wildblood will make of that that comment.

I agree, I find this 'she is the mother she must be right' attitude really alarming and it is EVERYWHERE - on this thread, on the Facebook groups, on the comments to the newspaper articles (can you guess I am trying to avoid tidying up)

One lone voice of reason on the Indy comments - to say that women are super duper special parents by virtue of their genitals is dangerous, as this argument can then be used against women in other fields. You can't be a scientist/politician etc as all your brain cells are used up being super nurturing.

I am a woman and a mother and I absolutely reject and object to this bizarre attempt to pigeon hole all women. There is no way I recognise myself in the Maypole article. I think its dangerous crap.

Some women make great mothers. Some women are terrible. Same with men and fatherhood. You are a good parent if you are a decent person- if you are willing and able to recognise that sometimes the needs of your child have to be your top priority. Not always, but certainly most of the time and certainly while they are as young as this child is.

KD - it is very interesting. On the one hand you could say that the courts will go easy on her as she did do a brave thing and the right thing to come forward.

But if she continues to spout stuff like that, she might as well go into court wearing a T shirt saying 'give me 10 years'

O dear. Just read the link

In another post on a separate page, Ms Minnock wrote: "To all the mums and dads fighting for their children: please keep going and never give up.
"I will never give up on keeping my beautiful baby safe."

To me this reads as if she is urging other parents to break court orders. She certainly isn't remotely interested in purging her contempt.

Its horrible; I feel like I am rubbernecking at a car crash. But I think Monday's judgment is going to be a very important one and will have serious implications for many other cases. Whether the Judge comes down hard or goes easy will give a very clear message.

She's not bright, is she? She's tried to make out it that running was a spur of the moment thing despite the fact that her mother and the mother's boyfriend have said it was pre-planned to get publicity in the hope of overturning the court decision. So what does she do? She does her utmost to get maximum publicity including the nauseating video, and then goes public on Facebook saying she hopes that all this will result in the court decision being rethought. She couldn't make it more obvious that what her co-conspirators have said is 100% true.

It is also difficult to understand how on earth she thinks the court can rethink anything in the absence of an appeal from her - there simply isn't any mechanism for it. Even if she does appeal, it is extraordinary that she somehow thinks that the fact that she went on the run and then paraded her child in front of the Mail's video cameras could ever be an argument in her favour.

As for the support she's had, we've seen the thought processes - or rather the lack of them - on here. It really does come down to little more than "But she's his mother, and anyway the courts sometimes make mistakes". I can't bring myself to look at what that dimwit Hopkins has written, but I bet it's little more than that.

It is horrible, and of course have have every sympathy for the child and his father but I feel the same way Spero.

Even though my own case has (seemingly) ended, I do hope this highlights what some fathers are up against and the Judge doesn't treat her behaviour lightly.

If she is imprisoned and faces a long time being supervised when seeing her son then it will only make her a martyr to her supporters.

Thankfully their opinion holds no weight and hope the Judge comes down hard.

I'm sure he will be aware of her comments over the past 48 hours.

I agree, I find this 'she is the mother she must be right' attitude really alarming and it is EVERYWHERE - on this thread, on the Facebook groups, on the comments to the newspaper articles (can you guess I am trying to avoid tidying up)

It is alarming, but at the same time, it's probably a good thing, in the longer term, thst it has been exposed as so widespread.

From anecdotal evidence that is posted on forums, websites and even magazine stories, I thi there has been a lack of awareness within the legal profession that these views ever held by anyone other than the occasional, misguided individual.
What this case has revealed is that it is likely that there are members of the legal professional, and those that support them, that hold these views. Court clerks who advise magistrates, administrators who collate papers, even professionals who write reports on behalf of the court.

I think it's time this debate was brought out into the open and that 'we' as a society are honest about our collective confidence in the justice system when it comes to situations involving children and their mothers.

Oh Lord - just noticed that her supporters have got some petition going asking social services "to re-examine the custody case." Yes, if you can't find either evidence or legal arguments in support of your case, a load of credulous strangers signing some stupid petition is really going to work, isn't it?

Peruvian, I don't think has anything to do with confidence in the justice system regarding mothers. I don't believe that that system as a whole subscribes to a view that the mother must be right, any more than I believe that it has any bias in favour of fathers. It is unsurprising that a higher proportion of mothers tend to succeed in custody disputes, simply because a higher proportion of mothers tend to be primary carers for children.

A much higher proportion of abusive parents, neglectful parents and selfish parents are men, though. In this case it does seem pretty clear that RM is in the wrong, and what worries me is the ammunition her behaviour is going to give to abusive fathers in future: 'You won't get away from me, I've got rights' etc.
Yes, our legal system is reasonably OK (nothing is 100% infallible) but it does have its roots in a society where women were property and not to be believed when they made accusations against their (quite literal) lords and masters. I hope that all the family courts will continue to examine evidence carefully and always investigate thoroughly when there are claims of abuse.

I agree with that statement.

Selfish is not quite the same as bad, as in law-breaking.

Men are reared to be entitled and selfish and in a relationship they are more likely to expect all of their needs to be met. They are more likely to attempt to control a partner.

I know, I never called the police while I was with my X as it would have made his SO angry. So, when I finally left, there was no proof, nothing on paper, nothing documented, no proof whatsoever that he had bullied and controlled me for a decade. I fled to another country to try and have a chance at a life. I will name change now. He knows where I am (now). After initially trying to have me ordered back tot he UK, he never bothers with us now. He wanted the children under his roof, or not at all

My Barrister, a deputy District Judge, once said to me "Mothers that do this with young children hold a lot of power. It's not right but it's the way it is and what you will have to do is take that power away bit by bit until she doesn't realise it's gone."

So I did, and it took several years of being calm, civil and not responding to threats and attempts to retain control over my through our child, as well as several court orders all in favour of my child and me. It seems now, that I am there.

The only genuine reason I can think of for a mother to be given more importance upon separation is if she is breast feeding. Even if the mother was the primary carer, well, dynamics change upon family separation and the important thing is to cause as little upheaval as possible for the child. But this doesn't mean that over time a new routine can be introduced so the child can have the full involvement of both parents.

'Primary carer is bounded about as though it's a law, 'if mother was primary carer whilst father was out working full time for the family then it must always remain that way.'

I think the system supports separated mothers to a far greater level than that of fathers. In fact, upon separation we are often treated as disposable.

Not all fathers have lots of money because they have been out working whilst the mother is at home sacrificing a career for the children.

Many of us are left homeless, lose jobs due to stress with no option but to face the daunting task of fighting through courts for our children whilst the mother does her very best to thwart contact to little or no punishment, can carry on as normal and as 'primary carer' receives 100% of child benefits.

I even faced some of the 'well you must have done something to cause the mother to behave this way' from a few people. Even after several years of court, facing allegations that my ex was actually guilty of, not me. And clearing my name, I bet some people would still suspect I was responsible for my ex wife's behaviour because mothers, they're just incapable of behaving badly aren't they.

I would guess that there are people seething whilst reading this thread as they will perceive it as an attack on poor brave single mothers.

There is no evidence to support your views that men are more likely to be abusive, neglectful, entitled and selfish parents. Nor are they more likely to be controlling.

Neither parent has the monopoly on bad parenting. If it had been the case that a man abducted his child after spending years trying to destroy the relationship between the child and the mother, there is no doubt he would be widely condemned.

The same is not true of society when it is the mother doing the above.

This case will not give any ammunition to abusive fathers.

Hopefully it will help to prevent the actions of mothers that emotionally abuse their children and their fathers.

A much higher proportion of abusive parents, neglectful parents and selfish parents are men, though.

What are the figures for this please?

They'll be from the Gynocentric Goggles Notebook.

Men are reared to be entitled and selfish

Are they? Women - mothers - rear their own sons to be entitled and selfish??

Some men are reared to be entitled and selfish as are some women.

Who's doing the rearing? Their primary care givers of course.

I really, really hope for the kid's sake that the father isn't some kind of manipulative bully who's cornered this woman and driven her to this behaviour.

I was threatened with a residence transfer if I didn't facilitate contact with a bullying emotional abuser who revelled in threatening me with taking ds and took great pride and pleasure in trying to portray me as an unstable nutter Cafcass lapped his stories up.

Guess who never pays a penny towards the lad and who only sees him once a year now?

Guess who's a good, solid and reliable parent who has gone all out for the lad and given him a great start in life?

Things aren't always as they seem. Men do like their own way regardless. I wonder if he's going to enjoy seeing her being reduced to supervised visits. Let's hope he's permitted to enjoy an equal relationship with both parents one day.

I suppose time will tell.

How on earth can you read the FACTS in this case and then make a statement such as "Men do like their own way regardless".

If some said that with the genders reversed then they would rightly be branded a sexist.

If you bothered to read about this case properly then you wouldn't make such ridiculous statements about hoping the father isn't some kind of manipulative bully who's cornered this woman and driven her to this behaviour.

Your own terrible experience is clouding your judgement when the facts of this case are clearly available to see.

The only person responsible for the child not being permitted to enjoy and equal relationship with both parents is the mother.

If I was the father I would very much enjoy the mother being reduced to supervised visits as it seems it is the only way the child will be protected from her emotional and psychological abuse.

Wow sonny, that's quite an admission.

I think it's just sad. I don't think she's got any idea what she's done at all. Of course that is why she has to be supervised, although it looks as though she's talking herself out of even that at the moment.

It's just sad. I couldn't enjoy that. I would be devastated that my son had someone like her for a parent.

I don't believe that that system as a whole subscribes to a view that the mother must be right, any more than I believe that it has any bias in favour of fathers.

ici apologies, I worded my comments badly. What I mean is that this case has exposed the a significant minority of society who do subscribe to the position that "she is the mother, she must be right".

If you has asked me last week how many people believed that mums are the better parent, I'd have said "not many". I knew there were a few "diehards" as they were referred to earlier in this thread, but overall, I'd have said that the attitude described in the USA as Golden Uterus was pretty rare here in the UK.
I suspect that many of the legal professional shared my view. That they occasionally came across a case where the mother refused to accept that the court needed evidence, but that generally, it was rare and that on the whole, everyone accepted that cases needed to be decided on the basis of evidence.

This case has challenged the view I hold, and I hope it challenges the view that is held by the legal professional about themselves, as well. If more of society as a whole believes that "the mother is always right" then it is possible, if not likely, that there are people working within the family justice system that hold that view. Far from being rare in our society, it is a widespread belief.

Not sure why it's such an admission to be glad that action will be taken to prevent the other parent from continuing to abuse my child?

It is quite clear from her behaviour over several years that this mother is a controlling, manipulative liar.

The reason she thinks she can get away with it is because people such as yourself feel 'sorry' for her.

Peruvian,

I think it the view is more widespread than many are willing to accept.

We have our own Prime Minister publicly denouncing 'deadbeat' fathers on, of all days Fathers day, are we likely to see a Prime Minister publicly denouncing 'deadbeat' mothers on Mothers Day?

Not likely.