[DWJ] Incestuous dogs (was Byron)
farah.sf at gmail.com
Fri Mar 30 08:04:02 EDT 2007
> Generally, it seems to be a rather tragic case. The sister/mother is under
> public care. It is possible that she was not able to grasp the implications
> and therefore was not indicted as her brother. That the children are in
> public care seems to be more related to the fact that she can't take care of
> them. All this might of course be media hype to reinforce the common taboo
> of incest.
She is not being allowed to speak on her own behalf which complicates our
(In the UK, people who lose children to the courts are forbidden to campaign
on their own behalf "in the best interests of the child" and " to protect
the child's privacy" which is inqiuitous).
More information about the Dwj