Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Parent Support Forums
General Parenting
Court
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Marguerite" data-source="post: 296631" data-attributes="member: 1991"><p>I do feel for your husband, but he is going the wrong way about trying to save his son. Denial is only prolonging and amplifying the inevitable. All his battles to save his son will bear nothing if he doesn't adapt and moderate his battle now, towards acknolwedging that there is something INSIDE his son, a bequest from his mother perhaps, which needs to be exorcised (or at the very least, identified and managed). Denial allows this to breed, to grow, to develop and infect outside him. husband is already infected. It's burning you and your stepdaughter. </p><p></p><p>difficult child's best option is in getting help as the therapist described. It is his best chance to ever live a normal life. His worst chance (and HD's best revenge on his ex) is for husband to continue to enable the boy and deny him a diagnosis and appropriate treatment.</p><p></p><p>If we have a child in our care and we want to make tat child happy, we might buy that child all the ice cream he wants. On a diet of ice cream the child will suffer malnutrition, will risk getting overweight, insulin resistance and eventually Type II diabetes. The child may still enjoy the ice cream diet andwhen presented with a healthy savoury meal may throw the mother of all tantrums. But are we really being appropriately parental to continue to feed the child nothing but ice cream, in our determination to avoid the child having a tantrum? No progress is being made towards encouraging the child to eat more normally.</p><p></p><p>Andh wat your husband is doing here is the same thing. Would he listen to the ice cream analogy?</p><p></p><p>As for not telling difficult child's defender - you HAD to do it, husband should have done it because the LAST thing difficult child would have needed, would be to get into court with his PD and have the PD snookered by withheld information.</p><p></p><p>The PD's job is to get difficult child off as much as possible, to get him free and clear, his record clean. If the PD knows there is darker stuff having happened p reviously, then the PD goes in informed and well-armed to fight it, to excusde it, to argue it away. husband should have told the PD, so the PD can help make it ALL go away.</p><p></p><p>on the other hand, if nobody had said anything but CPS lady was in court or someone else spoke up and said, "This is not difficult child's first offence, he's a repeat offender," and PD hadn't been told - then PD's surprise and loss of face would have told very much against difficult child.</p><p></p><p>Doesn't husband wastch Law & Order? Or Boston Legal? He HAS to know that you tell your lawyer just about anything, it is your lawyer's responsibility to get you off regardless. In the British system you don't confess to your lawyer because then he can't allow you to plead not guilty; but even that could be a moral code rather than written in stone. I am not sure, but I think you can even tell your lawyer in the US that you did it, but if you still choose to plead not guilty, they have to try to get you off. Check tis out, I'm not sure. </p><p></p><p>But the thing is, when you said, "You tell your lawyer everything," and husband snapped, "She's not YOUR lawyer," he was being a fatheaded idiot. You were speaking of lawyers, generically. Not talking as if THIS lawyer were your lawyer. ANd for him to retort like that is deliberate obfuscation of the main point - tell her, blast it! Or she risks finding out the hard way and under conditions where she is unprepared and less able to make it go away.</p><p></p><p>You could have spoken more precisely and said, "One tells one's lawyer everything," because that iswhat I understand you meant. But who talks like that these days? (outside Buckingham Palace, that is).</p><p></p><p>He loves his son. That is the only thing that cna possibly excuse his apparently having had an IQ bypass.</p><p></p><p>Honestly! What a fool!</p><p></p><p>I hope this sorts out sooner rather than later. I would be quietly asking the CPS lady why she wasn't there in court, and how you could ensure the best chance of getting difficult child into Residential Treatment Center (RTC), given an enabling father in denial...</p><p></p><p>Marg</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Marguerite, post: 296631, member: 1991"] I do feel for your husband, but he is going the wrong way about trying to save his son. Denial is only prolonging and amplifying the inevitable. All his battles to save his son will bear nothing if he doesn't adapt and moderate his battle now, towards acknolwedging that there is something INSIDE his son, a bequest from his mother perhaps, which needs to be exorcised (or at the very least, identified and managed). Denial allows this to breed, to grow, to develop and infect outside him. husband is already infected. It's burning you and your stepdaughter. difficult child's best option is in getting help as the therapist described. It is his best chance to ever live a normal life. His worst chance (and HD's best revenge on his ex) is for husband to continue to enable the boy and deny him a diagnosis and appropriate treatment. If we have a child in our care and we want to make tat child happy, we might buy that child all the ice cream he wants. On a diet of ice cream the child will suffer malnutrition, will risk getting overweight, insulin resistance and eventually Type II diabetes. The child may still enjoy the ice cream diet andwhen presented with a healthy savoury meal may throw the mother of all tantrums. But are we really being appropriately parental to continue to feed the child nothing but ice cream, in our determination to avoid the child having a tantrum? No progress is being made towards encouraging the child to eat more normally. Andh wat your husband is doing here is the same thing. Would he listen to the ice cream analogy? As for not telling difficult child's defender - you HAD to do it, husband should have done it because the LAST thing difficult child would have needed, would be to get into court with his PD and have the PD snookered by withheld information. The PD's job is to get difficult child off as much as possible, to get him free and clear, his record clean. If the PD knows there is darker stuff having happened p reviously, then the PD goes in informed and well-armed to fight it, to excusde it, to argue it away. husband should have told the PD, so the PD can help make it ALL go away. on the other hand, if nobody had said anything but CPS lady was in court or someone else spoke up and said, "This is not difficult child's first offence, he's a repeat offender," and PD hadn't been told - then PD's surprise and loss of face would have told very much against difficult child. Doesn't husband wastch Law & Order? Or Boston Legal? He HAS to know that you tell your lawyer just about anything, it is your lawyer's responsibility to get you off regardless. In the British system you don't confess to your lawyer because then he can't allow you to plead not guilty; but even that could be a moral code rather than written in stone. I am not sure, but I think you can even tell your lawyer in the US that you did it, but if you still choose to plead not guilty, they have to try to get you off. Check tis out, I'm not sure. But the thing is, when you said, "You tell your lawyer everything," and husband snapped, "She's not YOUR lawyer," he was being a fatheaded idiot. You were speaking of lawyers, generically. Not talking as if THIS lawyer were your lawyer. ANd for him to retort like that is deliberate obfuscation of the main point - tell her, blast it! Or she risks finding out the hard way and under conditions where she is unprepared and less able to make it go away. You could have spoken more precisely and said, "One tells one's lawyer everything," because that iswhat I understand you meant. But who talks like that these days? (outside Buckingham Palace, that is). He loves his son. That is the only thing that cna possibly excuse his apparently having had an IQ bypass. Honestly! What a fool! I hope this sorts out sooner rather than later. I would be quietly asking the CPS lady why she wasn't there in court, and how you could ensure the best chance of getting difficult child into Residential Treatment Center (RTC), given an enabling father in denial... Marg [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Parent Support Forums
General Parenting
Court
Top