Phillip Garrido is legally recognized as a “father.” He is accused of abducting Jaycee Dugard when she was just 11 years old and sexually assaulting her, resulting in the birth of two daughters. Some people struggle to label Garrido as a father, with certain media sources stating that he merely “sired” two children. These girls, now 11 and 14, have reportedly been subjected to significant trauma. There is uncertainty regarding whether Garrido also assaulted them.
This week, I want to explore some challenging questions surrounding the concept of fatherhood, using Garrido’s case as a focal point, although similar inquiries can be made about motherhood.
Consider the following questions:
- When does a father cease to fulfill that role?
- At what point does a child no longer require both parents?
- How does a father’s treatment of the mother warrant the revocation of his parental rights?
- Should criminal behavior influence custody and visitation decisions?
- When does a father’s mental illness become a concern for child visitation?
- Should a child’s desire to see their father factor into these decisions?
In the extreme example of Phillip Garrido, it is unlikely anyone would argue that the girls should be allowed to visit him in prison. The possibility of further sexual assault is a critical consideration. For the sake of discussion, let’s assume we cannot conclusively determine whether the girls were assaulted and that they remain silent on the matter—this scenario mirrors many real-life cases.
When Does a Father Stop Being a Father?
State laws typically dictate that rapists lose parental rights. This is logical for cases of stranger rape, but what if the assault occurs within a relationship? Consider a situation where a woman is raped but later chooses to maintain the relationship with her attacker. If she consented to sexual relations afterward, which act led to conception becomes murky.
What if there is psychological coercion at play? For instance, a man might threaten to end the relationship unless his partner complies with his sexual demands, leading her to feel compelled to consent out of fear.
Furthermore, what about cases involving manipulation? If a woman is misled into a relationship based on false pretenses, her consent may be invalidated as she would not have agreed had she known the truth. This raises complex questions about consent and responsibility.
When Should Parental Rights Be Terminated?
Family courts often attempt to separate the dynamics of parental relationships from those with children, suggesting that a father’s treatment of the mother does not affect his capacity as a parent. Garrido, for instance, provided some financial support for his daughters and claimed to have nurtured them.
In cases like Garrido’s, where kidnapping and rape occurred, it seems clear that such actions should justify the termination of parental rights. Yet, there are also cases where a woman may have initially consented to a relationship, only to find herself trapped by a manipulative partner. For example, a woman who gave birth while being held captive is now battling to terminate the parental rights of her abuser, who remains labeled as a father despite his criminal activities.
Should a victim in such situations be required to constantly prove they were not willing participants? The complexities of consent and coercion blur the lines of responsibility.
Mental Health and Parenting
Garrido’s case highlights the intersection of mental illness and parenting. He exhibits severe psychological issues, including delusions and hallucinations. Should children be shielded from parents with such mental health challenges? Individuals with severe personality disorders often struggle to prioritize the welfare of others, raising further questions about their parenting capabilities.
Criminal Behavior and Custody
Many children are mandated to visit incarcerated parents, leading us to ask why Garrido’s daughters are treated differently, assuming they were not assaulted.
Children naturally gravitate towards those who raise them. However, should we allow this instinct to guide decisions about parental access, especially in harmful situations? Adults should make informed decisions based on the welfare of the child rather than primitive impulses.
Conclusion
We must confront these pressing questions and devise a fair system to address them. The complexities surrounding parental rights and responsibilities warrant federal attention, as changing laws state by state will prove arduous. It is evident that children do not always need both parents, as Garrido’s case exemplifies.
By focusing on scenarios where one parent causes harm or poses a threat, we can create clearer guidelines for handling cases where one parent is abusive, criminal, or mentally ill. The aim should be to safeguard children and ensure they have the best possible upbringing, ideally under the care of the least disordered parent available.
For more information on psychopathy and relationships, consider visiting this resource, or explore the insights from Out of the Fog. You can also check out WebMD for a deeper understanding of sociopathy and narcissism in relationships.
If you are looking for guidance on these issues, you may want to reach out to Chanci Idell Turner at 909-737-2855 for more personalized assistance, and you can find her on Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn.