Wednesday, 26 September 2012
-
Rapist Wants Visitation Rights
A man was convicted of raping a 14 year old girl when he was 20. She had a baby and he is the father.
Now he wants visitation rights. He wants to see his child. The victim of the rape does not want the guy in her life.He pays child support. Here is the link: LinkIf the rapist is paying child support, should he get to see his child?
-
recommend
- recs 2
-
email
- sent 0
- like
Related Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to TheTheologiansCafe's Xanga Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in TheTheologiansCafe's local time zone: GMT -06:00 (Central Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (95)
Absolutely not. I can't believe people are taking his request seriously.
No. And I wouldn't want his money for child support.
Not only NO, but HELL NO!
After he raped his girlfriend's little sister. This is exactly what happened to Jaycee Dugard's rapist. And he ended up kidnapping her at age eleven and making her his sex slave for 18 years, while he was on probation. The legal system never learns. I wouldn't put it past them to hand that baby over to him. Watch them.
Yes-- The mother's dislike of the man doesn't mean he's not the father of her child.
Also, the commiting of a particular crime (rape) doesn't mean he magically lose a given right (visitation). This is as arbitrary as saying that anyone who jaywalks should lose the right to vote or anyone who robs a bank loses his constitutional protection from cruel and unusual punishment.
No. I wouldn't want his child support, either.
Whats the precedence? This couldn't be the first time this has happened...
He raped a child, so great idea to give him access to another one. Genius.
He raped a 14 year old...how is he suppose to be trusted with a baby?!?!
This is disgusting!
No and he is a felon with no rights.
@Celestial_Teapot - I feel like "dislike" is quite a soft word for it.
The question is morally repugnant; I am beyond words, other than to say NO.
I hope the girl (and child) is lucky enough to have found an appropriate father figure in the baby's life, though.
Rape topics are too serious and unbecoming in certain atmospheres..but no he should not..
Given the circumstances, I feel like this is where the legal system gets extremely illogical. This lacks common sense. Putting aside the fact that this guy raped his child's mother, he raped a child, period. Why should a convicted sex offender and child abuser gain access to a child directly through the court system? Ridiculous.
@Celestial_Teapot - That is a good point of view but there are certain crimes where a person should lose all rights to compromise. And in this case the man is forcing himself absurdly into this woman's life..
@Lithium98 - Only if you're the CEO of said bank.
fuck that shit
Nope. he forcibly caused the mother to become pregnant with that child against her will, so she has the right to forcibly keep him out of that child's life against his will.
@Lithium98 - "If I rob a bank and get caught, do I get to keep the money later?"
At pottery barn, you break it you buy it. The manager shouldn't be able to prevent you from keeping the shards even after paying for it.
@raspberryjade - "Nope. he forcibly caused the mother to become pregnant with that child against her will, so she has the right to forcibly keep him out of that child's life against his will."
The mother made the conscious decision not to abort the fetus. Shouldn't she accept responsiblity for her own choices?
@Foodhog - "He raped a 14 year old...how is he suppose to be trusted with a baby?!?!
This is disgusting!"
Visitation rights =/= custody rights.
Sure: Felons of violent crimes generally make unsuitable parents. No one, though, is arguing that the rapist should be preferred over the mother in raising the child.
You may not like this, but there are basic rights and basic responsibilities that come with being a parent. No ammount of popular outrage changes this.
@thefittedsheet - "Putting aside the fact that this guy raped his child's mother, he raped a child, period. Why should a convicted sex offender and child abuser gain access to a child directly through the court system?"
Because the court system has decided that certain rights and certain responsiblities come with being a parent. Why else is the man legally directed to pay child support?
If the man clearly poses a threat to the child: then sure, out of the safety of the kid, keep the guy far away.
The father, in this case, though, has not demonstrated himself to be a danger to his own child. Irrational fear, alone, shouldn't be enough to deprive an individual of basic and fundamental rights.
@MyPublicSite - "This is exactly what happened to Jaycee Dugard's rapist. And he ended up kidnapping her at age eleven and making her his sex slave for 18 years, while he was on probation. The legal system never learns."
Anecdotes make poor basis for general policy.
You know, circumstances and motiations for crime actually vary from case to case. So too their recidivism.