Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Rebecca Minnock - on the run with child after court battle

999 replies

BreakingDad77 · 11/06/2015 11:16

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?

OP posts:
sonnyson12 · 14/06/2015 22:19

Kingtut,

I didn't, I noted your post.

I just don't understand why you are accusing people of being misogynistic with any plausible explanation.

Yawning and eye rolling are not going to convince anyone of your point of view.

Twinklestein · 14/06/2015 22:19

Did I say 'she can't be emotionally abusing her child because she... had a warm relationship with her child'? No, my point was actually that the SW and the psychiatrist didn't agree on the nature of their relationship.

Funnily enough I'm aware that we are not the judging the case. We are at liberty to analyse it though.

PeruvianFoodLover · 14/06/2015 22:21

Do you actually have anything of any worth to contribute to this thread KingTut?

tuts contribution is of equal value to all others; it is representative of a minority, and it is her willingness to express her views that I hope will keep this debate alive long after Ethan has forgotten about his 17 days on the run with his mum.

Icimoi · 14/06/2015 22:24

I should imagine that, as a barrister, Spero knows all about the hours that QCs work. But they have the benefit of being self employed and therefore organising their workload at least to some extent to fit round family life, and if anything QCs tend to be in court rather less than junior barristers. These days there are more and more women who become barristers, QCs and judges.

sonnyson12 · 14/06/2015 22:25

Twinklestein,

I don't believe that just because it was reported that mother and son had a warm relationship means that she wasn't emotionally harming him.

I think the difference between physically and emotionally abusing a child is that the symptoms of emotional abuse will be more difficult to see and take longer to have an affect that is identifiable.

Abducting a child and parading him in the media and on television but it still did appear that they had a warm relationship to anyone watching.

It also did appear that the mothers actions are emotionally damaging for a child.

sonnyson12 · 14/06/2015 22:26

Peruvian,

I was referring to the the one liners accusing people of misogyny with no plausible explanation. Hardly conducive to a debate?

KingTut · 14/06/2015 22:27

I will agree on the number of hours worked by QC's and Judge's. I even had a barrister say to me that Judge's can be very out of touch. It isn't a gender issue though, it's a lifestyle/education/background issue.

sonnyson12 · 14/06/2015 22:27

Now that I can agree with.

TtipParty · 14/06/2015 22:28

oh god, i shouldn't read this thread right now. my situation could well go this way and i have no faith in the legal system at all. especially now.

Icimoi · 14/06/2015 22:28

Twinklestein, I don't think there is a discrepancy between the social worker and the psychiatrist. It is entirely possible for RM to have a warm relationship with her son on a day to day basis and yet also to act abusively towards him by denying him contact with his father and poisoning his mind against him.

KingTut · 14/06/2015 22:28

If a monkey doesn't want to see, hear or look, I am not going to waste my energy in a dragging a horse that doesn't want to drink, to water. I will call misogyny when I see it.

Icimoi · 14/06/2015 22:33

Even with details of the allegations made by RM, Twinklestein, it would still be impossible for members of the public to assess the case, if by that you mean decide whether the judge was right. That would only be possible if we had been in court throughout and read through all the documents that he did.

sonnyson12 · 14/06/2015 22:34

TtipParty,

I'm sorry to hear that you are going through the legal system. Although there may be parallels to your own situation, I don't think you should read too much into this case enough to cause you any additional worry during what must be a highly stressful time.

Twinklestein · 14/06/2015 22:35

But they have the benefit of being self employed and therefore organising their workload at least to some extent to fit round family life

Seriously?

Spero · 14/06/2015 22:35

Twinkelstein - I am a lawyer and a single parent. When I am on the Western Circuit I may be out of the house from 5am to 9pm or I have to stay overnight in a hotel. I don't get to see my daughter for days on end.

Yet, strangely, I do have an attachment to her, a bond with her and I do understand what she wants and needs. That isn't because I have a magic vagina; it is because when we do spend time together I make sure I am focused on her, not the camera from Sky news or the cheque from the Daily Mail.

Lawyers are not experts in child development, that is true. Which is why, in cases such as this they will hear evidence from those who ARE - such as child psychiatrists and the child's guardian.

sonnyson12 · 14/06/2015 22:36

Kingtut,

I'm confused, am I a half monkey half horse misogynist?

I can assure you I am not a misogynist, or a monkey, or a horse.

Spero · 14/06/2015 22:37

Twinkelstein - yes seriously. When I am not in court, I can do my work when I choose. So I can go to my daughter's sport match at 2pm, have tea with her and put her to bed then work from 8-midnight or as needed.

I may not know anything about being a QC but I imagine their lives aren't that much different - you have spells of working really really hard and then some time when you are not in court and you can juggle paperwork around your family.

PeruvianFoodLover · 14/06/2015 22:37

I was referring to the the one liners accusing people of misogyny with no plausible explanation. Hardly conducive to a debate?

sonny exactly my point - if those who share tuts POV are unwilling or unable to engage in debate, then that raises significant questions about whether the family court system is representative of social justice.

Currently, the court system operates on the basis of evidence. tut is representative of an increasing minority who believe this is unfairly bias against women.

I think that is is discussion that needs to be had. I wonder if, as the discussion continues, it becomes apparent that society as a whole would be more comfortable with a system that avoids placing mothers under scrutiny.

KingTut · 14/06/2015 22:37

The thing is even if a psychiatrist wrote a hundred page report, with their opinion. You could then get a two page report from CAFCASS taking out what suited their agenda from the psychologist report, to make recommendations on CAFCASS's opinion to court.

sonnyson12 · 14/06/2015 22:38

Spero,

Can you tell me more about your magic vagina or would that be misogynistic?

KingTut · 14/06/2015 22:40

Don't quote lies about me, you said those things, NOT ME. Go looking on this tgread you won't find it, I never said that. Interesting how you manipulate FACTS....

Icimoi · 14/06/2015 22:41

King Tut, you keep implying that the court shouldn't rely on the opinions of professionals but haven't responded to all the points made further back in this thread to similar assertions from you. The fact is that those opinions are based on facts that RM doesn't and can't deny, for example the lack of any evidence of her allegations of drug abuse, and the fact that the alternative allegations of abuse weren't made until that allegation was disproved. Subjecting her child to an examination for sexual abuse without foundation is in itself highly abusive.

sonnyson12 · 14/06/2015 22:42

Peruvian,

Why should mothers that make allegations in the family court not be placed under scrutiny?

A court system that didn't operate on evidence would be very dangerous indeed. There would be chaos. How on earth that is unfairly biased against women?

Surely it would then be biased against men thus making it a misandric issue.

Spero · 14/06/2015 22:43

King Tut - but that isn't what happened in THIS case. ALL the experts agreed with one another. That's why she ran and why she didn't appeal. Because her lawyer would have told her she had no chance of overturning any decision based on the unanimous opinion of three different experts.

Yes, sonny, according to some on this thread my magic vagina apparently endows me with special powers to
a) adjudicate on all cases involving children
b)always know what is right for my daughter, including cutting her father out of her life as and when I feel like it

If my magic vagina tells me to do it, who I am to argue with its Ineffable Womanly Wisdom?

And yes btw I do have a pretty low opinion of my ex - but my daughter doesn't. She adores him. So I keep my mouth shut and my opinions to myself. She will find out soon enough, but it will be her choice what kind of relationship she has with her father, not something I imposed upon her. I have no right whatsoever to do that.

sonnyson12 · 14/06/2015 22:45

Kingtut,

I thought you were referring to me as being a misogynist.

Sincere apologies if I am mistaken.

Not really interesting though, you did wrongly accuse me of wanting to have power and control over my ex wife.

Swipe left for the next trending thread