X, haven't we beaten this thing to death yet?
You said:
<<Elian's rights are independent of- -nor subordinate to his father desires or rights. Elian's father doesn't have the right to harm Elian.
The dispute is, is returning Elian to Cuba harmful to Elian?
I say yes for all the reasons I have previously mentioned.>>
X, I don't see anyone here disagreeing with you. Yes, Elian's rights are not subordinate to those of his father. No, his father doesn't have the right to harm him. Yes, all things being equal, Elian would be better off in the U.S. So can we please just accept those points as a given and get past it? Please.
If we can quit rehashing those values questions, then maybe we can finally focus on the practical, real-world considerations: U.S. law, international law, whether this is an immigration issue or a custody issue, jurisdiction, and authority. These determine what will happen. Not sentiment.
The argument you're getting is not that Elian's rights are subordinate to Juan Miguel's rights, it's that Juan Miguel is Elian's official advocate. That's standard operating procedure in the real world. He speaks for Elian. If you want to charge that particular windmill, you're free to do so, but getting smacked by a windmill is less likely if you acknowledge it's a windmill.
The argument you're getting is not so much that returning to Cuba won't be harmful to Elian, it's that courts are predisposed to leave a child to the care of a parent unless the parent presents big-time danger to the child. Whatever harm might be done Elian growing up in Cuba won't meet that legal test. Courts have left kids with their parents under far more harmful circumstances. Anyone who doesn't like that predisposition can work to change it, but that big a change can't happen in a time-frame that's meaningful to Elian.
I'm as much of an idealist as anyone. As a teenager, I took the name of Saint Joan of Arc when I was confirmed. As an undergraduate I wrote my thesis on Don Quixote.
Sometimes reality bites.
Karen
|
