I talked to Penelope's therapist today briefly. She received my message about Harriet wanting to see Penelope for Christmas and be back in life. She said that her initial reaction is to tell her no, but she fears that if she took the case to court, a judge would award visitations. So we might have to just suck it up and let her see Penelope.
Maybe I'm too idealist, but how is this fair? I mean, I know life isn't fair but when do the rights of a parent outweigh the health of the child? Only when it's life threatening? Is suicide considered life threatening in a court? Or does the threatening of life have to come from the parent? But maybe, since the child isn't holding a knife to her chest now, it's not an emergency situation and the mother can see her - but the moment the child attempts suicide, then we can file for visitations to stop. But by then, I'm sure someone has removed the knife from the child's hand and he/she is no longer in harms way which would make the emergency hearing no longer an emergency and the mother can see the child? Do you see where I'm going here? Am I being a little overdramatic? Maybe, but it didn't take much to put Penelope in that place before, and we know it could happen again. But, I guess the issue I'm trying to address is whether when the safety of the child with a parent is being evaluated, is it assumed all kids are mentally healthy and can cope with their parents' "idiosyncrasies" which may not be considered abuse in normal senses, but emotionally devastating for this particular child?
Inconsistent visitations by their mother, I'm sure is painful for any child. But for one with Reactive Attachment Disorder, who has learned to not form attachments/bond due to the continual rejection/neglect, it's just re-traumatizing, over and over and over again. It's torture!
So, here we are in a situation where we have to determine how to best move forward with the least amount of harm to Penelope because of her mother's need to see her. It's easy to get mad and say she is doing this because she should want to see her, versus she actually does want to see her. I'm sure she wants to see her daughter and it's hard on her. But, shouldn't children come first, then the adults in these matters? It's not about what I want, it's not about what Harriet wants - and honestly, it's not about what Penelope wants, but what is best for her that should matter here.
Of the little I know about Family Law and parental rights, I know that the push is to keep families together. I know it's not a perfect system, like most things, but we are talking about children and their futures. Are we talking about keeping them alive or about giving them every possible chance at a normal healthy life? Not be a "statistic" - teen pregnancy, drugs, STDs, crime and jail. Create a legacy of mental health issues to pass on to their children, a legacy of being part of a culture dependent on government assistance. Where is the line between the importance of keeping families together/parents' rights and giving a child a chance? "Where ever the judge draw the lines."
I'm not good about working within issues of discretion - leaving such significant issues up to the experience, knowledge and current mood of one particular person trying to interpret vague laws. In my line of work I have dealt with an adjudication system and when I first started, hearing the words "The chance of winning really depends on who the hearing officer is" was so infuriating. But it is so true. Unless you have an extremely airtight case, it really depends on who you get. There is also a huge political factor. What is the reputation of who is representing you... representing the other side? Attorneys can't give gifts or pay for meals and things but they can be "friendly." Be social. Play golf and what other rubbing elbow activities they do. Is that how it is in Family Court too?
I have lots of worries and questions - over things I have no control over. See, the thing is, I'm not totally against Harriet and Penelope having a highly supervised sitdown in a theaupudic setting. I think there would be a backlash but I also think there could be some progression in her healing process by going through it and coming out the other end. Penelope to see for herself how she really feels. Maybe that's me trying to come to terms with the posibility of it happening, and hoping the backlash/regression isn't severe. I tend to forget that Molly regresses to her 3 year old state for a few days just from getting a greeting card from Harriet. When Harriet writes "I love you and miss you" there is violence on top of the regression.
But the thing is, Harriet doesn't just want to see her, she wants her "back in my life." That means more than just a visit. She wants to see her regularly. Something that she couldn't handle in the 10 years she didn't have physical custody of her - dispite all the efforts made to try to accomodate all her excuses as to why she couldn't see her regularly. It wasn't ordered by a court by Penelope's psychiatrist said Harriet needs to seek therapy before she sees Penelope again, to stop doing these extremely hurtful things. Besides her rebuttal in the beginning, she never said she wouldn't go or didn't want to go. She "can't." It's out of her control so she says. She can't find the location (reschedule?), she can't go downtown (I've seen her downtown btw - plus, if it's an issue, why make an appointment downtown?), and just other excuses. It's easy, and I have several times, gotten mad because of this - but maybe her anxieties are that bad that she can't step foot in therapists office and address her issues. So what do you do then?
And on top of that, how does she think it's going to go with Penelope? She is not the same child anymore. And I don't mean, she's now older and bigger. I mean, when she was in the hospital during that second stay, after her mom cancelled/postponed her scheduled visits for almost 2 months, she snapped. She is not the same daughter who tiptoed around her mother, afraid to say something or do something that would upset her mother and make her reject her (ie. shorten visit, cancel next, take off), and to an extent try to entertain her mother. Harriet could have brought homemade cupcakes made with salt instead of sugar and Penelope would have ate the whole thing telling her how wonderful it was and that it's the best cupcake she has ever tasted. I believe that Penelope will be very distant from Harriet, maybe make some snide remarks, maybe even (which would help Penelope in her healing) tell Harriet how hurt she is. Can Harriet handle that? Can she be strong and allow Penelope to do what she needs to do to heal and forgive? I don't think so. In Harriet's mind, it's about herself, not about Penelope. Even in the time she hasn't seen Penelope, she has flip-flopped on if she even wants to be a part of Penelope's life because of how hard it's been to not see her when she wants to. Last Christmas, Harriet went and met with Penelope's therapists because she wanted to see Penelope and after the therapists explained what was going on with Penelope, why it wasn't best for her to see Harriet, and unjudgementally discuss with her why therapy would help their relationship. The therapists said Harriet left in tears saying she might as well just never see Penelope again, not because of guilt, but because she knew it would probably be a while before she'd get to see her and that's all that she really wants. Harriet never took accountability for her actions, even though she admitted to doing them - but it was always for a good reason. Locking Penelope in her room while Harriet slept until the early afternoon from being up all night on the internet was to keep Penelope safe from getting hurt. "What was I suppose to do, let her run?" That's what she told the therapists after denying it to her mother and I. I have taken her child away from her because I am a bitch and want to hurt Harriet because I don't like her. I have done this to her, she didn't do it to herself. She doesn't see she did anything wrong, so what is there to prevent her from hurting her again with her promises and inconsistent messages? She has "the right" for another chance - even though she was given so many chances over the past 10 years to be there for Penelope.
Ugh..
No comments:
Post a Comment