By Roberta Lerici
On 22 April 2010 during the sit-in in front of the Juvenile Court to protest against a decree of the Judge R. Ianniello, and the subsequent sending 14 agents of the police team catturandi of Latin America to take a child Sezze and place in a family home by prohibiting any visit to the mother or her relatives, acting as spokesman for the Victims of Juvenile Justice Committee, were received by Vice-President of the TDM, Dr. Foschini and I presented the following appeal, together with some 2000 signatures that have signed it.
Committee Juvenile Justice Victims
E-mail comitatovgm@gmail.com
Al President
Of Juvenile Court Dr. Melita Cavallo
Rome, April 22, 2010 Dear Dr.
Horse, we want to condemn the initiative with our disproportion of the order issued against the son of Mrs. VP, compared to the size of the case. We believe that the last decree of Judge Robert Ianniello, is to be considered a rare cruelty. Fourteen of the team agents
catturandi of Police of Latin America, sent on the orders of the Juvenile Court to withdraw for a child to a foster home, are the direct consequence of legitimizing the use of force (winning all resistance ...) contained explicitly in the measure dr. Ianniello. In the same decree is still forbidden for the mother to the child.
These provisions appear to us a real affront to common sense, and differ radically from the best guidance and sensitivity regarding the rights of children are intended to promote a so-called "mild justice."
We wonder, also, what would happen in the psyche of the child, if he had been present at the raid. And we answer that this would certainly have caused devastating effects much more serious than any parental shortcoming. A child of 8 years can not be violently torn from mother's care, with the use of public force, if not for the gravest reasons, which directly endanger his physical and psychological integrity and in accordance with the views expressed by specialists who have had the opportunity to see, know and listen to the child. In the case of small A. these assumptions are completely absent.
Dr. Sabatello, CTU appropriate, in its report has not even suggested a move away from the mother neither sudden nor soft, but has only suggested areas of therapy and listening. We must note that unfortunately is not the first time that some judges of this Tribunal, created to represent and protect children in the best possible way, are distinguished by traumatizing measures for the fragile psyche of children.
many separations from parents capable and loyal they were ordered, only to "heal" the aversion to the other parent? How many children have had to leave school, with friends and ordered by the court? Over the past two years we have seen different and we do not think it is good to create artificially the orphans, when one must walk the path of listening and care of the child and family relationships.
The Juvenile Court, considered the highest duty of protection of children must know to interpret its mission out of the logic of archaic-and nineteenth-century patriarchal exercise of power that requires interpreters to conduct family (mother-father-sons), but must be used wisely and prudently to know all the diagnostic, therapeutic, mediation and listening to safeguard the welfare of children by helping parents in need.
segregation of children "in foster homes" should be a last resort really supported by reasons of protection from danger and serious harm to children, but can not be punishment to be imposed in case any of the family "dare" to disobey the orders of the court. Family relationships, the needs of children, belong to a universe with complex and varied, and need for self-competence, patience, listening and emotional empathy. E 'in this direction that we ask you to lead the work of the judges of the Court that she directs. The appeal that addresses the committee of citizens, therefore, aims to bring about a true reflection on the current situation of juvenile justice.
Children can not be treated as movable property of which you have the "seizure" while waiting for parents to reach an agreement, thereby depriving the child of his affections, his habits, his classmates, the his affective and relational points of reference. The discomfort should be listened to and then treated, but not punished. The court in a Juvenile Court is called upon to add to her professional a human richness and sensitivity that should characterize the competence of an ordinary court, without these skills and without this knowledge, you end up confusing a criminal fugitive with a child who expresses his discomfort (whatever that is) disobeying the orders of the court and refusing to go with his father in the home or family.
In conclusion to our appeal, we ask you to return to the small A. the hope of being heard and understood with a course of treatment (as well as asked the CTU) and a judge who can take action with the serenity that this case requires. We ask you to start a debate within the Court that to single out at the end of his career, of precise guidelines that guide judges in their difficult task and they enter into the substance of the provisions of the employment "in the family home" indicating serious cases that could justify such a solution.
The appeal to you is backed by the "Movement for Children" and the twenty associations that are part of, sponsored by the "Victims of Juvenile Justice Committee, and supported by about 2000 people who signed it, as the list signature is attached.
victims Juvenile Justice Committee-mail: comitatovgm@gmail.com-sito: comitatovgm.blogspot.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment