Sean Goldman Wants To Stay In Brazil
A new development in the case of the New Jersey father who wants to bring his some home from Brazil.
The kid wants to stay. And he said it on video. (You can watch the clip here.)
Personally, I find this whole story very depressing. This video of the 9-year-old boy, Sean Goldman, saying that he wants to remain in Brazil with his Stepfather, doesn’t do anything to make me feel any better about it.
I’m not saying the kid should or shouldn’t stay. But it’s hard for me to accept the idea that he wasn’t coerced into saying that he wants to “stay in Brazil.”
To review: five years ago, David Goldman’s ex-wife Bruna Bianchi took their son Sean and fled to Brazil. David has been trying to get Sean back ever since. Last year, Sean’s mother died in childbirth, leaving Sean with his Stepdad. David thought he had succeeded in bringing his son back to the United States earlier this month, but that didn’t happen. So he’s still trying.
Again, it’s not up to me, and I don’t know what the legal issues are. It just seems possible that the video of Sean could have been influenced a bit. There’s more on the CBS Early Show, and the Stepfather will be interviewed there tomorrow.
Oy. Can’t we have more idiotic stories like this one?
Source: WCBS-TV
Read more:
Whether he wants to stay or not, he’s not old enough to make that decision. Now after he turns 18 and has been living with his biological father for the last 8 yrs, he’s more than welcome to state that he wished he could have stayed with his step father.
http://www.MyToyKitchen.com
Best Selection of Toy Kitchens on the Web!
And I am sure that his father wants to live with a kid that is going to resent him for the next eight years of his life. These two men need to get together and figure this out. Five years is a really long time. And this kid was pretty young when he left the US, so it is understandable that he has no real emotional attachment to his father. He needs to get to know his father. And right now, there is nothing stopping the father from seeing his son. Just immediately removing this child from what he considers his home will mess him up. But at the same time, this father more than deserves to raise his kid.
And it is silly to just assume that this kid was coerced. What would you be saying if you were nine, living in another country with the only family you remember and then someone came along to tell you that they were your family? Would you jump to leave the home you have? No of course not.
The thing I wonder about though, is what was going on in the marriage in the first place that this woman felt it was okay to just leave the way she did. That is one question I have not seen anyone ask or answer. That to me, would have a lot of bearing on this whole situation.
All in all, in the end, what is best for this kid, not the adults involved, is what needs to happen. And if both of these men love this boy as much as they say, they need to get together and work something out for the sake of this kid.
Shana,
What do you mean by ‘what was going on in the marriage in the first place….’? Can you mention a couple of things that might have been going on in the marriage that would justify taking a child away from a parent? Even if she felt that her marriage was over, she had no right to take the child away. On one hand, you say the father needs to raise his kid. On the other hand, you want to know what was going on in the marriage. How will we know what was going on in the marriage…now that she is doing her time in hell? Stop trying to come across as an intellectual by asking such dumb questions. If she had other serious issues in the marriage, why didn’t she address them in the US Courts?
Her motives are pure and simple….she did not want the child to know his father. She deprived an innocent 4 year old boy of his father. God, in his never failing way, made her pay by depriving her newborn daughter of her mother. Can you imagine the plight of that poor baby girl? This woman, by her cruel act, has caused irreparable damage to 2 children. Her actions are even more dastardly given that both the children happen to be her own. Something tells me her absence in their lives won’t hurt the 2 children as much as her presence did.
The father need not sit down and work out an arrangement with the step dad. If the step dad loved the boy as much as he claims, he should send the boy back to his father and request the father to let the boy maintain a relationship with his family back in Brazil.
Comments
Let the US father have another son. What is stopping him from remarrying and having other kids?
Comments
Sandy,
That is the same thing as me coming and kidnapping your kid and telling you to just have another one this one is mine. You are an F***in idiot.
Hopefully, the Brazilian Court will act promptly to order the return of Sean to his father.
Among other important rulings, Judge Pinto said that, in fact, there was now a second abduction (the second by the step-father who had no legal right to keep Sean after Bruna died). Lins e Silva will not be allowed to use the defense that Sean is “adapted to Brazil” and he cannot claim that Sean’s “habitual residence” was Brazil at the time of the second abduction (wrongful detention). Upon the death of his mother, the right to custody of Sean as a matter of law — Brazilian law, no less — passed to his biological surviving parent, David Goldman. Since Goldman filed his second petition for return under the Hague Convention only 35 days after Bruna’s death, the defense of adaptation to the new environment won’t be accepted.
To quote Judge Pinto:
“In other words, and thinking in theory, it is not reasonable – indeed, it reaches the level of surrealism – to admit that a given person, devoid of familial power upon the minor – a third party -, objects to the delivery of the child to the father or the mother, or both, under the basis that the child is integrated into their new environment.
“To admit this possibility means to open dangerous gaps capable of constituting real absurdities. And the absurd, as is well known, cannot find refuge in the Judiciary.”
Judge Pinto then gave an example . . . theater of the absurd . . . stranger kidnaps child, raises child as his own, gets married, now the child has a “father” and a “mother” . . . and later “siblings.” Can anyone reasonably believe that the law would reward the kidnapper by refusing to return the child to his lawful parents (who have tracked him down) on the claim that the child is “adapted to Brazil?”
“Of course not!” (His exclamation mark) Judge Pinto said that it would be convenient for the court to leave the decision to Sean, but that doing so would be irresponsible and cowardly.
Explaining the difficulty in reunification, Judge Pinto discusses how Lins e Silva thwarted the court-ordered visitation by not being present when in October 2008 he was to allow David Goldman to see Sean and how later Lins e Silva placed restrictions on the visitation that were not in the court’s order (confinement to the grounds, a supervisor within feet of David and Sean, for example).
My entire summary of Judge Pinto’s June Decisions may be read here: http://tinyurl.com/lsfa8k
Other articles about David and Sean Goldman on my Blog may be accessed here: http://tinyurl.com/lcjk59
Jeanne M. Hannah http://parental-kidnapping.com
[...] story has shades of the Sean Goldman case – another international custody case. Sean was kidnapped by his Brazilian mother, who is now dead, [...]
What ashame from the grandmother in Brasil. Let the child to experience life with dad , and a couple of years probably he will decide to come back to Brasil. Why are they so afraid. I think she is selfish and even the child will have a difiicult time adjusting to his new life; he has the right to be with his Dad. Abuela give him a chance!
“Abuela?” She doesn’t speak Spanish!!! She’s Avó!