Supervised visitation?

[RRevak]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NH

I wonder if this will change how supervised visitations are handled?

http://start.toshiba.com/news/read/category/Top%20News/article/ap-man_child_dead_after_shooting_at_ywca_in-ap

 

[single317dad]

I'd like to say that this will affect how we look at family violence as related to mental illness, but the hard fact is there just isn't the money or manpower in the budget to address those things properly. I'm not sure how this could have been prevented under the current system.

 

[Ohiogal]

I'd like to say that this will affect how we look at family violence as related to mental illness, but the hard fact is there just isn't the money or manpower in the budget to address those things properly. I'm not sure how this could have been prevented under the current system.

I don't see how it could have been prevented at all quite frankly. You can make proclamations but you can't stop crazy.

 

[LdiJ]

I don't see how it could have been prevented at all quite frankly. You can make proclamations but you can't stop crazy.

It could have been prevented had he had to pass through security. He shouldn't have been able to bring a gun into a supervised visitation facility.

 

[Ohiogal]

It could have been prevented had he had to pass through security. He shouldn't have been able to bring a gun into a supervised visitation facility.

Then he could have shot his son in the parking lot. He could have shot mom there as well. He also could have killed himself in the parking lot. Or killed everyone at the child's school or at mom's house or a variety of other places. And HOW do you know there was no security there? Is that an assumption?

 

[LdiJ]

Then he could have shot his son in the parking lot. He could have shot mom there as well. He also could have killed himself in the parking lot. Or killed everyone at the child's school or at mom's house or a variety of other places. And HOW do you know there was no security there? Is that an assumption?

I agree he could have shot mom or the child elsewhere. By security, I was talking about the type that would have identified a gun and prevented it from being brought into the facility. Obviously that type of security didn't exist. It does exist in some YMCAs. That particular incident could have been avoided had the type of security existed that would have prevented a gun being brought into the facility.

 

[single317dad]

I don't see how it could have been prevented at all quite frankly. You can make proclamations but you can't stop crazy.

No, but you can treat it much more effectively than we do. Giving them a pill and sending them on their merry way to mingle with the rest of society isn't working. We need to reevaluate our approach to mental health; not to say that alone would prevent this type of incident, but it may reduce the occurrence.

 

[Ohiogal]

No, but you can treat it much more effectively than we do. Giving them a pill and sending them on their merry way to mingle with the rest of society isn't working. We need to reevaluate our approach to mental health; not to say that alone would prevent this type of incident, but it may reduce the occurrence.

I can agree that we need to approach mental illness better as a society. I agree with that. My only point is if this man wanted to kill his son and himself, he would have done that. My use of the word "crazy" is unfortunate and I apologize because I was only trying to state that you can't prevent someone who is determined to do this from doing it.

 

[LdiJ]

I can agree that we need to approach mental illness better as a society. I agree with that. My only point is if this man wanted to kill his son and himself, he would have done that. My use of the word "crazy" is unfortunate and I apologize because I was only trying to state that you can't prevent someone who is determined to do this from doing it.

I also agree. However, if someone can be stopped who is having an "episode" it might prevent them from attempting it again. It might shock them into understanding what they were really attempting to do.

 

[single317dad]

I can agree that we need to approach mental illness better as a society. I agree with that. My only point is if this man wanted to kill his son and himself, he would have done that. My use of the word "crazy" is unfortunate and I apologize because I was only trying to state that you can't prevent someone who is determined to do this from doing it.

I agree. We're on the same side here. Enjoy your vacation

 

[RRevak]

I posted this as i'm slightly on the side of Ld. This occurred at a YMCA which is known for being a "safe house" type facility. What i'm failing to understand is how this man even managed to get a loaded gun inside, be able to pull it out and shoot the boy and himself, all while being "supervised". If the facility would have taken better safety precautions, esp if it was being used for supervised visitation which generally occurs when there are issues, then maybe this poor boy wouldn't have been shot. As OG pointed out; Yes the father (who had already demonstrated he was unstable) could have chosen to shoot him elsewhere, but I still can't help but feel THIS instance could have been prevented had the facility taken a few minutes to ensure he was unarmed before entering. Singledad makes a very valid point about how mental illness isn't handled well enough, esp in domestic situations like this one, and this article shows that maybe its time judges take threats more seriously. How many times have we had posters state their ex's make threats of suicide and/or violence and we tell them to prove it or a judge will brush it off? If courts took threats more seriously to ensure the safety of both the ones making threats, and the ones being threatened, this type of situation might have been avoided altogether. I can't help but feel the court system failed this poor boy by letting his obviously unstable father slip through the cracks.

 

[Isis1]

I posted this as i'm slightly on the side of Ld. This occurred at a YMCA which is known for being a "safe house" type facility. What i'm failing to understand is how this man even managed to get a loaded gun inside, be able to pull it out and shoot the boy and himself, all while being "supervised". If the facility would have taken better safety precautions, esp if it was being used for supervised visitation which generally occurs when there are issues, then maybe this poor boy wouldn't have been shot. As OG pointed out; Yes the father (who had already demonstrated he was unstable) could have chosen to shoot him elsewhere, but I still can't help but feel THIS instance could have been prevented had the facility taken a few minutes to ensure he was unarmed before entering. Singledad makes a very valid point about how mental illness isn't handled well enough, esp in domestic situations like this one, and this article shows that maybe its time judges take threats more seriously. How many times have we had posters state their ex's make threats of suicide and/or violence and we tell them to prove it or a judge will brush it off? If courts took threats more seriously to ensure the safety of both the ones making threats, and the ones being threatened, this type of situation might have been avoided altogether. I can't help but feel the court system failed this poor boy by letting his obviously unstable father slip through the cracks.

at the same time....how do we protect those abusing that very system? that's where it becomes a violation of civil rights when we jump on every false accusation. how do we maintain that?

 

[Ridewithme38]

First let me say, I would never hurt my child and ANYONE who would deserves the worst imaginable....

With that said, My daughter is my heart, my soul, my life....If I was forced to only be able to see her under 'supervised' visitation.....I'd absolutely lose my mind, I don't know what i'd do...i don't think these supervised visitation situations ever help, you can't build a relationship with your child when they are lead to believe that you are a danger to them...

IF the world was full of butterflies and rainbows and i got to decide, if independent therapists(paid for by both parents) decide a parent is a danger to the child, he should NOT see the kid until he get's his 'stuff' together...Supervised visitation is just torture.

 

[LdiJ]

First let me say, I would never hurt my child and ANYONE who would deserves the worst imaginable....

With that said, My daughter is my heart, my soul, my life....If I was forced to only be able to see her under 'supervised' visitation.....I'd absolutely lose my mind, I don't know what i'd do...i don't think these supervised visitation situations ever help, you can't build a relationship with your child when they are lead to believe that you are a danger to them...

IF the world was full of butterflies and rainbows and i got to decide, if independent therapists(paid for by both parents) decide a parent is a danger to the child, he should NOT see the kid until he get's his 'stuff' together...Supervised visitation is just torture.

It may be "torture" to the parent but its not necessarily viewed that way by the child...and after all, it IS all about the child isn't it? Not all about the parent.

 

[Ridewithme38]

It may be "torture" to the parent but its not necessarily viewed that way by the child...and after all, it IS all about the child isn't it? Not all about the parent.

I don't see much difference between this and seeing a parent in prison....There have been studies that that is not healthy for the child. But you are right, every child will react to this situation differently. Some will be able to look past the 'supervisors' and focus on the time with mommy or daddy, others will ONLY be able to see the restrictions involved.