Maternal instinct propagates disorder in the court

by Nancy R. Koerner (Copyright © 2023 – NK Marketing, LLC – All Rights Reserved)

Photo: Original photo by Scott Michael's photostream/flickr

In the treacherous ambiguity of domestic violence, it is an irrefutable fact that an abusive husband may be just the beginning. Although the legal system has made great strides over the years, there are still certain practices that allow for grave injustice. The oppression may be levied not only by the victim’s abuser, but also by an unenlightened judicial system with a subjective point-of-view.

Within the legal process, victimized women may be placed under a microscope wherein every action, facial expression, and verbal innuendo within the courtroom may be scrutinized and judged. These women have already been severely traumatized; they have fled their abusers under dire circumstances, and now the additional terror of being branded as an unfit mother hangs over their heads like a guillotine. The stakes are inconceivable. Considering the reality that their child could be temporarily, or permanently, taken away provokes unfathomable panic. In the grip of such fear, depression, and intense anxiety, the courts know it is quite likely she may behave erratically, thus jeopardizing her legal position. Of course. How could she not? Any woman who sees her child in danger, or realizes that he or she may be subjected to an abusive, uncertain, and motherless future has the potential to erupt. It is not about logic. Like a mother bear torn from her cub, it is maternal instinct to vehemently protect the young.

Sometimes child custody is awarded to the father even in cases where the child, like the mother, has been abused. Sooner or later, with nothing to lose and everything to gain, these women may find a way out, abducting the child against incredible odds. Child-snatching for the purpose of gaining legal jurisdictional advantage is a decision born of extreme desperation. But when any human being finds they are entirely deprived of any lawful means of reclaiming their basic human rights, are they not righteous? Can a moral person obey an immoral law their conscience tells them is unjust?

Paralytic emotions can come into play within the courtroom. The child is terrified to be taken from his or her mother and sent back to the father. The mother is horrified to think that the child may be torn away from her, perhaps to another city or state with limited hopes of visitation and no recourse for the future. Is this substantial cause for erratic behavior, fear, anxiety, and despair in the courtroom? Absolutely. Are her emotions unrealistic? Does it Mean she is unfit? Absolutely not.

It should be noted that one cannot look for logic in this scenario. There is no rationale in motherhood. It is instinct, pure and simple. It is the very nature of the beast. Should a woman, torn away from her cub be expected to behave in a logical manner? Ask the mother bear.

Ripp Report: This article reminds me of the injustice and corruption in the Baldwin County Family Court. The worst abuser of the court is Judge Michelle Thomason. In her court all the attorney has to say is “Your Honor she is crazy”. Why wouldn’t the mama bear be a little crazy when the judge takes her children away?


Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated.