Printer-friendly versionSend to friend

What would you do in this situation?  A young woman has a young child, she is divorced and the child's father is an active part of the child's life.  The young mother--let's call her Jane, she has a college degree, she works hard to provide a clean, safe home with healthy food for her child.  The father--let's call him Bill, also works hard, pays his child support and sees his child regularly.  The child's parents, Jane and Bill get along very well even though they have had their differences.  Neither parent is involved in drugs or criminal activity.  The child is thriving well and well adjusted.  That is until a Wyandotte County Judge comes along. 

Two outside people who have ulterior motives decide that Jane and Bill need to spend money on attorneys instead of the child.  They take Jane and Bill to court.   The judge decides that outside people (who have no vested interest in the child, no blood relation) can have more to say about what happens to the child than the parents.  These outsiders do not love or care for the child. Their sole motivation is themselves.  The outsiders know a particular judge very well, especially the female outsider.  They were very close a few years ago, even though the judge and female outsider were married to other people.  The judge decides that the outsiders are to have overnight visitation with the child every week.  Both parents say NO, the judge says too bad.   

Jane and Bill who are normal protective parents DO NOT want their child to see these outsiders.  These outsiders have nothing to do with this child other than to make grief for these two parents.  When it was brought to the judge's and the outsiders attention by mental health professionals that the child does not need to be with the outsiders, the outsiders said NO and the judge listened.  This judge makes the decision that Bill will give up his visitation weekend on occassion so these outside people, who are not family can have the weekend with the child. 

The outsiders wanted information from Jane, Jane said it is none of your business,  'the child's father and I are the only ones who need to know'.  The judge gave the order tell or go to jail.  Jane knowing she was taking a risk---is tired of being told how to raise her child, decides to stand up for her child and the child's well being.  Jane tells the judge no.  The judge says go to jail until you tell.  

Now IF the information these outsiders is seeking was relevant to them I would understand but rest assured it isn't---they want an address.  Not even an address of either parent, they already have that.  So the information has nothing to do with the child or the parents.  So now Jane goes to jail with no idea as to when she will get out.  (When you go to jail for contempt there is no 48 hour hold, there is no bond, the judge is the only one who can let you out)  She is defending her right to be a mother without interference from a court which has no right to be sticking their nose in.  This child's parents are not drug dealers, criminals, living off the government, or bad people they have never been in jail (until now), they both love their child even though they divorced. 

I wonder if the decision the judge made had anything to do with the fact that Bill is black?  Or maybe the judge like many other previous Wyandotte County officials has secrets that he is trying to keep hidden, why else would someone who is educated in the law make such stupid decisions? 

I have seen drug addicted women with 5 kids be allowed to keep their children and put them at risk everyday, not take them to school, not feed them and the Wyandotte Coutny officials allow them to have the right to say where their child goes.  But I guess if you are a decent human being then the Wyandotte County Courts don't give a damn, they are only worried about protecting themselves, not about doing what is right.