Severely disabled, is she still a mom? (frum woman)

su7kids

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:18 pm

Mama Bear wrote:

the kids are not 2 1/2. they are 4. look at the thread where we said tehillim for her, it was in 2006. they have been asking why they dont have a mommy. at age 4 they can be prepared for what their mother looks like and meet her.

They are 2 1/2 almost 3, in June. You were probably saying Tehilim when she was going through treatment. Read the LA Times article.

tzipp

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:24 pm

The kids are all he has left, he is trying to protect them form trauma, they have enough trauma growing up without a mother. For a child who already feels different not having a mother to visit a mother who is non functional can be traumatic. It is not anyone elses decision to make but the parent's decision, and in reality they have one parent who is raising them, their father. The question needs whether it would be better for the children to see their mother, not the opposite, and no else besides Dan can be the one to make that decision.

(I am not saying Dan is making the right choice, but I don't know what he is thinking, maybe he is planning to have them visit when they are older)

Anyway this topic and the comments disgusts me... Talk about judging someone whoes shoes you never walked in and hopefully never will... I am giving my point of view because the other ones I feel are wrong, but really this topic should be taken down...
I am going to report this topic and let the moderator decide.

Last edited by tzipp on Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:44 pm; edited 1 time in total

micki

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:26 pm

chaylizi wrote:

micki wrote:

but now think of the kids.

but now think of the mother again & imagine yourself (ch"v) in your spot. is this the way you'd want to be treated? she has given up all functionality for these kids & now the man who should have stood with her throughout it all is stabbing her in the back.

I'm not saying either way is right, but you say think of the mother- but is she capable of thought and emotion?
seems from the article that it is her paretns who desire it for her, not her requesting it for herself.

and as to asking for child support, if she is asking for custody, then she is acting like a functional parent. if that is the case then she should pay child support.
I would love to hear dans side.
this is so heartbreaking, I have no answers.

Mama Bear

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:32 pm

I dont c are about all the drama. What I care about is knowing the reality of Abby's life right now, after being in the dark for a long, long time. I couldnt care less about their custody fight. I'm sad that Abby, a wonderful lady whom we enjoyed on atime, is in a permanent vegetative state. Makes me shudder to think of how grateful we need to be when we get out of childbirth unscathed and healthy and able to take care of our children. and at how fragile life is and how we really should appreciate every day that we can take care of our kids and enjoy life, even with all the little hardships and pitfalls that annoy us and make us kvetch day to day.

su7kids

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:33 pm

BinahYeteirah wrote:

The article states that the triplets were born on June 20, 2006. So they're almost 4 years old.

I stand corrected, I still think they may be too young to understand. A 4 year old? 3 1/2 years old?

su7kids

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:34 pm

Liba wrote:

The money was granted long after he left with the kids and cut off her access to them.

He cut off access to them? Her PARENTS moved her to their home, she is the one who was moved, not him and the kids.

Liba

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:36 pm

My son, who is the same age (born July 2006) and developmentally delayed (so understand less, than the triplets presumably) understands love, mommy and disability. Guilt, no so much.

Liba

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:39 pm

su7kids wrote:

Liba wrote:

The money was granted long after he left with the kids and cut off her access to them.

He cut off access to them? Her PARENTS moved her to their home, she is the one who was moved, not him and the kids.

Her parents moved her two weeks after the last time he saw her or allowed the children to see her.

Her parents were the ones paying over a thousand dollars a day to keep her local until that point.

tzipp

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:45 pm

chaylizi wrote:

he wants her to give child support AND have no access. seriously, pick one.

You are probably right here, but if the hospital did not seriously mess up, Dan woulds have his wife and the mother of his children...

Raisin

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:50 pm

su7kids wrote:

Liba wrote:

The money was granted long after he left with the kids and cut off her access to them.

He cut off access to them? Her PARENTS moved her to their home, she is the one who was moved, not him and the kids.

I think it is fair enough that her parents moved her to their home. And if Dan would want them to have access to their mother they could still fly over and visit. Obviously the geographical distance is not stopping the access - he seems to have other reasons.

if you read the commenst under the article there are some interesting points made.

chaylizi

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 6:50 pm

tzipp wrote:

chaylizi wrote:

he wants her to give child support AND have no access. seriously, pick one.

You are probably right here, but if the hospital did not seriously mess up, Dan woulds have his wife and the mother of his children...

and that is his ex-wife's fault because, why exactly? he's punishing her, not the hospital. she needs it for her care first. do you have any idea how expensive care is (even without any experimental treatments). she probably needs 24/7 nursing care & therapy (to keep her moving, so she doesn't become one big bed sore with contracted limbs) & that costs a fortune.

tzipp

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 7:00 pm

doodlesmom wrote:

He should bring the kids to her without mentioning that this is their mother....

Now THAT would be traumatic, not discussing it while having them visit? shock

tzipp

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 7:06 pm

chaylizi wrote:

tzipp wrote:

chaylizi wrote:

he wants her to give child support AND have no access. seriously, pick one.

You are probably right here, but if the hospital did not seriously mess up, Dan woulds have his wife and the mother of his children...

Where did you get the idea that he is blaming her or punishing her?
It seems he is just concerned about the kids.

MamO3

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 7:08 pm

We don't know if she has normal thought processes etc but what if she does? What if she's a completely normal mother trapped in a body that doesn't function? Why does she need to be punished more than she already is?
With therapy these kids can probably handle seeing their mother like that.

Liba

Sun, Apr 11 2010, 7:12 pm

tzipp wrote:

chaylizi wrote:

tzipp wrote:

chaylizi wrote:

he wants her to give child support AND have no access. seriously, pick one.

You are probably right here, but if the hospital did not seriously mess up, Dan woulds have his wife and the mother of his children...

Where did you get the idea that he is blaming her or punishing her?
It seems he is just concerned about the kids.

Denying her the ability to see her children is punishing her.

He won't even let the mother's father tell the children how he is related.

The children are hurting and scared now because they think they have no mother.

It isn't a pretty situation the way it is now either.