What do you mean, being forced to see your rapist bothers you? He's your boyfriend, right?
From the South bend Tribune: Last week an Indiana Probate Court magistrate ordered Kim Linetty, a rape survivor, to take her three children to visit their father in prison - where he is serving time for raping her.
Although the details of Linetty's case are unusual, the debate over the
visitation rights of incarcerated fathers and the role they should play in
their children's lives is as common as it is contentious...
Why is this contentious? Well, because some states have laws dictating that parents are entitled to visitation, even when they're incarcerated rapists. And okay, yeah, fathers have rights, but come on! Can't we be creative and find a better way to handle this? Apparently not.
Indiana law requires that a noncustodial parent is entitled to reasonable
parenting time rights unless a court finds that time will endanger the
child's health or well-being or impairs the child's development.
But that very determination of what is best for the child is what forms the
basis for so many visitation battles.
Fathers' rights advocates counter Linetty's anti-visitation stance by
arguing that children need their father in their lives even if he is
incarcerated for a crime against their mother.
Children who do not have contact with their father have an increased chance
of ending up in prison themselves, lower self-esteem, higher suicide rates
and a greater chance of alcohol and drug abuse than kids who see their dads,
fathers' rights advocates say.
I'd be interested to see whether these studies control for whether said dads are abusers or rapists.
"The court has determined that it is in the best interest of the children
that they visit their father," said Jeffery M. Leving, a prominent Chicago
attorney who concentrates on men's rights and author of the book "Fathers'
Rights."
"In part, it's about the right of fathers, but the real focus is children's
rights," Leving said...
Linetty is upset by the prospect of taking her children to visit Weldy in
prison.
Well, hell, of course she is! Bad enough that she has to face the man who violently raped her (while threatening to kill her!) again, worse that she has to do so on an ongoing basis, but it's just flat wrong to expect her to be supportive of her frightened children, at least one of whom has said she doesn't want to see her father, at the same time.
Here's what I don't get: The rights of crime victims are well-established. We have crime victims' services departments attached to police departments all over this country. Linetty was the victim of a terrible crime. And if one parent is in prison, chances are there's a caseworker or social worker assigned to the family. So why didn't the judge simply ask another responsible adult in the children's lives, like said social worker, to take them for the required visitation? Seems to me like that approach would follow the law while protecting Mom from being re-victimized.
Let's hope that other judges can make better use of their discretion in cases like these.