Advertisement

Girl does not want Mother

503 Views  ⚫  Asked 7 Years Ago
asked on Aug 16, 2010 at 20:12
by   peanuts
I read the sad tale of the court of appeal granting custody of a girl to the mother even though the girl does not want to go back to the mother and chooses to remain with the father. This in my opinion is absurd. It is child abuse and it looks like the courts are indifferent towards crimes committed towards children. The girl clearly does not want to go back to the mother. Why did Hinshawati grant custody to the mother even though the mother left the father and child and went away? Why did the court of appeal uphold Hinshawati's decision? Looks like children do NOT have rights in this God forsaken country. No wonder babies are being thrown away like garbage. We need a comprehensive policy that looks at the best interest of the child rather than allow a bunch of old people who are no longer in touch with the society they serve to make decisions.

I for one would allow the child to remain with the father as he has looked after her all these years and given the mother reasonable access.

I invite comments from the legal community on this issue.  Thanks.
0 had this question
Me Too
0 favorites
Favorite
[ share ]
46 Answers
 1   2   3   4   5   Next »  Last »

answered on Aug 18, 2010 at 17:08
by   SFKL
I disagree. There must be a reason for the judge to do so and for the court of appeal to uphold that decision. To uproot the child from a familiar surrounding is a big decision and since we do not know the facts, there must be a reason to it. Instead of speculating, perhaps lets hope for a judgment where the judge will explain her decision.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Aug 19, 2010 at 01:41
by   Blindmice
Today we have many blind bigots out there. The trouble is they have eyes but sadly they are or choose to be blind. These pathetic people seem to have legal education. It's wasted years on them. To hit the nail on the head these bigots should be behind bars. I hate to say it with pathetic people like SFKL, our world gets chaotic. Must have same thinking as those bigots there. We ought to weed them out.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Aug 19, 2010 at 02:05
by   angmo
SFKL is simply another cunning fox. Shame on SFKL. You are not human like. You already sound biased. Are you sick with brain damage. Did you have had a miserable past. I have been watching your views something is very wrong about SFKL. Sorry truth hurts always.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Aug 19, 2010 at 15:13
by   2moon junction
Hi SFKL,

Please think about the happiness of the child. Came to know recently from the S.Alam court that (HINSHAWATI, the judge) is also a divorcee & is going through some serious psychiatric  problem.

The court should give order to return the girl to the father!
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Aug 19, 2010 at 19:07
by   SFKL
I have stood before HINSHAWATI when she was first transferred to Family Court in KL and I find her strict but fair as she learned the ropes in family court. She has denied my applications sometimes but for most time I find her approachable compared to some other judges even if I disagree with her sometimes. I rarely appear before her in Shah Alam court but I heard she became stricter and worked very diligently, even more than her KL court days. Just because she is a divorcee does not make her have "some serious psychiatric problem". If that is your conclusion, you're every bit as pathetic as everyone else. From my reading I see none here is from the legal community so to speak and I did not plan to reply but reading some personal insults thrown my way despite my answer was a simple "let's read the judgment to know the reasons before commenting", I find it hard not to response. As I have always provided advice in this forum as fairly as I could without taking sides, I feel I have maintained a certain legal integrity. Lawyers may be able to choose their clients, but once taking on a client, we must deal with each case with all our dedication, despite our personal preference and opinion and sometimes I even fail at that and I confess, I am only human.

Look, this is a sad case indeed. Usually without a doubt a girl so big (11 years old I read?), her opinion counts. But for a decision to return her to her mother despite her unwillingness, there must be some strong reasons to back that, reasons we won't know until the judgment is out. There could be many, psychiatric reasons, etc. Reading between the lines, whatever is the sentiments of the young girl, did the father make it difficult for the mother to exercise her rights? Turn the tables around, if this was a man granted custody due to the wife's stubbornness, what would your reaction be? Yes, the court should decide in the welfare of the child and welfare does not really mean what she wants, what they want, but in the opinion of the courts looking at all the supporting evidence, what is best for the child? This is not the first case where a child was forced to return to one parent against her wishes. I read in England there was one and this boy had to move to another town, quite simply because if I am not mistaken one parent made it difficult for the other to have access. Since everyone seems to be talking about parental alienation, this could be the reason in that boy's case. I don't know what is the reason in this girl's case. I am all for equal parenting as in fathers as with mothers can be good parents, doesn't matter the gender or wealth or social standing.

This doesn't make me a pathetic person. Our world would indeed go chaotic if everybody just jump into conclusions without knowing the full facts first. My legal training teaches me not to take sides without looking at BOTH sides of the story. In fact I am not supposed to take sides at all. I certainly don't feel ashamed at all for my opinion and I certainly do not have brain damage. If I do I wouldn't bother spending half my day reading through the posts, sorting out those genuine in need of answers to their questions and answering them to the best of my ability. And since I am not the judge, frankly whatever is my sentiments towards the girl's predicament, makes no difference at all to her case. Her father can appeal to the Federal Court of course and I hope he does but reading a separate thread on I suppose the same case, it seems he has given up for whatever reason.

I am always for sharing. I have always maintained a child is not a property, she or he is a human being with feelings therefore must be treated carefully and with respect. I am however to be honest rather surprised with the Court Of Appeal decision so I maintain, until the judgment is out, none of us will know why they decided the way they did.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Aug 20, 2010 at 06:37
by   WhoDoneIt
Common my dear SFKL, I am extremely sharp in my assessment. We call a spade -  a spade. Face facts and don't twist and turn the way you want it. I cannot blame the way you(not always) think. Your training has thot you that. But you seem bent many a time. I did not comment on you as I was on observing all this while. Now, when a rotten irrational decision is made, clearly why in the hell in god name do you support such. You sound like "one apple polisher I know". Why do you continue to worship blatant idiots. I repeat that you are definitely bent. Do you know that in inlieu of your attitude (asses like you) many have suffered and will continue to do so in our beloved country.

Do some serious soul searching - honestly. My advise to you, whether want to take it or not is entirely up to you - climb down from your ill gotten gains and high lifestye. By now, you would have leached enuff from the poor, down-trodded, under-privilaged, disadvantaged in society who were asking for justice and fairness. Well, we all know it is a high price to pay today. Why, becos of greed. Dont cover-up your tracks by doing lip service elsewhere. It's still not late, think about it carefully. You are not the only one is such a predicament. This profession today has come down so very low that even prostitutes deserve more respect for honest living. So dont try to paint a different picture and act in another way. We all know what it means - truth does hurt all of us. Pratice what you preach and dont be loud. Everyone hates hypocrisy.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Aug 20, 2010 at 06:48
by   WhoDoneIt
SFKL, there are too many lawyers and talk has become is cheap. So the next best thing if you want continue this way is become a politician. I have more for you..
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Aug 20, 2010 at 08:07
by   uberrimae fides
Its revolting to see the venom being sprayed on SFKL on this issue. And what's SFKL's crime to deserve this? Having an opinion that contrasts to yours?

I for one have noted SFKL's tireless efforts in this forum over and over again, helping out those who seek legal advice.

No other legally trained practitioner deigns to help these desperate souls except for SFKL. Don't believe me? Read the threads.

No, the other legal sharks, true to form, seek to bludgeon SFKL for nobly helping without charge. Perhaps these liars, sorry lawyers fear that SFKL is depriving them of cases.

SFKL, I for one respect you and appreciate the priceless help you have unselfishly rendered countless times in these threads. Thank you and God bless.

The rest of you can get fugged.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Aug 20, 2010 at 15:36
by   MEDIATOR
HEY ALL,

WHATS THE PROBLEM NOW ALL HITTING AT EACH OTHER? AS MENTIONED BY SFKL, "There must be a reason for the judge to do so and for the court of appeal to uphold that decision"....I DONT THINK THERE IS A REASON & I REALLY THINK THAT SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG SOMEWHERE???? MAYBE THE JUDGE IS INSANE OR THE MOTHER OF THE CHILD IS UP TO DOING SOMETHING ILLEGAL. FYI, THE GIRL & THE MOTHER HAS GONE MISSING NOW!!!...& THIS IS AGAINST THE COURT ORDER AS THERE WAS ACCESS GIVEN TO THE FATHER UNTIL THE NEXT HEARING DATE!

I HOPE SHE APPEARS IN COURT WITH THE CHILD AT THE NEXT HEARING???
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Aug 20, 2010 at 16:40
by   WatchingBrief
There you go, mediator has thrown in some light to the case. THere will be more to come. We seen enuff cans of worms in Malaysia. What is sickening to me is it's alos happening in family courts. These people are wierdos legally sick in their head. Just becos they can thros a few legal jargon, they think they are god's gift to mankind. Thanks peanut to bring up this matter to reaveal the mess created by ******s and idiots not fit to be sitting is such high chairs and put on pedestals and then idolised. The matter is clear as broad daylight yet some ******s see otherwie. Just for a comparision of profession I bet that my maaid will do a better job than all the ******s talking cramp in this site. Yes, as Whodoneit says "Talk is cheap". There needs to be a severe overhaul in the legal fraternity. Something must be done such nonsense taking place in family court " the above CASE is a fine example. There is no room for bigots operating in disguise and " apple polishers" reasoning with such bigots. Take heed before it's too late or wait till it affects your kin. Great minds think alike but if you choose to go against me - you shall perish too. I got a lot more important things to do but  - got to set the record staright - no room for ******s or bigots hereafter please. See the light not darkness as many of you have done before. A wrong cannot be a right and vice versa. Please take family maters seriously.
0 found this helpful
Helpful


 1   2   3   4   5   Next »  Last »

Your Answer





By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.