Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

My Photo

Top 100 Family Law Blogs

All Top Family Law Blogs

Top Family Law Blogs

Justia Family Law Blawgs

VISIT MY WEBSITE

RESOURCES - SINGLE AND DIVORCING PARENTS

« UIFSA | Links to State IV-D office home pages | Main | Facebook downgrades privacy »

Comments

Michael, thank you for your comment. Let's hope that Sean Goldman's return was the first of many. There are still over 60 American children wrongfully detained by the country of Brazil.

U.S. citizens can help the left-behind parents of these children by urging their representatives in Congress to support Rep. Chris Smith's proposed International Child Abduction Prevention Act, HR 3240.

The Bring Sean Home Foundation is not finished! They have just begun. You can help. Visit http://bringseanhome.org to see how you can help. There is a helpful link to a web page where you can directly email your representatives in Congress asking them to support this bill here: http://bringseanhome.org/hr3240.html

Thinklogically can certainly make an argument, but the best arguments (the winning arguments) tend to be supported by facts. Sean Goldman's Brazilian family cried many of these same arguments, but ultimately the courts (however delayed and corrupt they may have been in the lead-up) had to rule on the facts of the case -- and NOT the so-called & subjective truths as the de Silvas and Thinklogically spun them. I'm an American living in Brazil and I've observed how things really do operate down here. Typically money and privilege and influence rule here. Sean's Brazilian family had all three and really did feel entitled to get/buy what they wanted as if it were the natural law. Nothing against them, but this is what they know and how they live. Really, the only reason the David Goldman was able to regain custody of his son was because the US government got involved and put significant pressure on the Brazilian government to do what was right according to international child abduction law. Otherwise this Brazilian family would've continued in their local corrupt method of paying and knowing the right people, and David Goldman would never have been able to get close to his son.

Thinklogically is clearly someone from the family. Seems like a Brazilian national writing. Being a Brazilian myself with English as my second language, I can tell. I wouldn't be surprised if it is Paulo Lins e Silva or his son.

thinklogically,
You don't work for the Lins e Silva crime cartel by any chance, do you? Your lack of knowledge of the background of this case is astonishing. Do some research before you spew your venom and ignorance.

Dear "Thinklogically":

You could not be more wrong that the Sean Goldman case is not an "abduction". I invite you to read Judge Pinto's decisions. http://tinyurl.com/lsfa8k Under the Hague Convention it is absolutely true that the mother's taking and retention of Sean in Brazil was a parental kidnapping. She simply used the Brazilian court's willingness to overlook its obligations under the Hague Convention and the convenient "the child is acclimated" excuse. The mother is deceased. The stepfather is a stranger to the child biologically. Brazil and New Jersey have a parental preference: If the custodial parent dies, the non-custodial parent is given custody. Lins e Silva and the grandparent do not have standing to rely upon the "acclimitized" exception to the Hague Convention or upon the child's preference, either.

The "facts" you allege are incorrect -- either factually or as applied under the Hague Convention. Your statement that David Goldman "was quite content for the child to live there with his mother --until she died" is insulting and absolutely false. David Goldman has been fighting since 2004 to recover custody of his son -- long before Bruna's death.

Don't make this a crass case about David Goldman trying to control his son's inheritance. Your comments are insensitive, incorrect, and demonstrate a willingness to be manipulated by the Brazilian stepfather's and grandparents' fallacious allegations that have no basis in truth as to those "factoids" you recite with such confidence. [Definition of fallacious http://tinyurl.com/yef9k8f] for you since you're likely part of the Brazilian family.

this case is in my opinion wrongly classified as an "abduction". it does not meet the criteria. There was no court order violated when Mom took son to Brazil. Mom had an equal right to him at that time. Father did not file for divorce in the US and establish jurisdiction, or order the parties home to the US which certainly would have happened if done in short notice of her leaving and failing to return, but instead he allowed her to obtain a Brazilian divorce. further, he did not go to Brazil to try to see the child or establish vistitation, to my knowledge. He was quite content for the child to live there with his mother --until she died. The only question is, how much money did mom leave in trust to her son, with her wealthy husband? Makes you wonder. And further, how is it in a child's best interest to go live in a country he doesn't remember, with a father he's seen twice, and leave his home, his sister, and the only family he knows? Dad would be better off establishing a relationship and visitation schedule and leaving him where he is for now. Maybe when he's older and is ready on his own terms the child can come to the US. People so often forget the perspective of the child while fighting so hard to establish an adult person's "rights" to that child.

I could not agree with you more. De Silva is a kidnapper, plain and simple. He has no right to keep Sean from his father.

This case is, in many ways, similar to Michigan's famed "Baby Jessica" case of the 1970s. There, the mother gave up a child for adoption only later to rescind her consent and cooperate with the biological father to recover their child. Two years of delay caused by court action in Michigan certainly increased the pain for that child. But to use the delay caused by the wrong-doers as an excuse why the child should not be returned? Tragic.

De Silva's retention of Sean Goldman, a child that is NOT
his, is reprehensible. Because he married the boy's mother
does not qualify him to take the child from his biological
father. While the argument that Sean would have difficulties
leaving Brazil are valid, it is the de Silva family that
has created the difficulties. De Silva has no right to
another man's child and I can't believe that the Brazilian
government continues to support the corruption. Love is
a wonderful thing and when and if the boy is returned to his
dad, he absolutely can live a happy, fulfilled life. It is
up to the de Silva's to reassure Sean that his biological dad
loves him and that he has a family in the United States.
This is a moral decision that Brazil needs to make.
Sean has many more years to grow up. He should be with his
REAL dad.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Toolbox

March 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

Other Resources

Disclaimer

Blog powered by Typepad