In Family Court divorce procedure in Japan, when an abducted and alienated child reaches 13 and is interviewed by a "Court Investigator" (supposedly a court psychologist of sorts) to determine the child's preferred residence (mother or father), each child is interviewed alone. HOWEVER, each parent is soon given a written report of that interview. If the child knows that this will happen then what is at play is UNDUE INFLUENCE, which undermines any claim that the child's expressed wish is authentic. If the child doesn't know this, EXACTLY THE SAME DANGER of PARENTAL 'REPRISAL' AGAINST THE CHILD that we see in this tragic case are a real possibility. Actually more so, since the alienating parent demands complete allegiance, and the parent who is alienated is prevented by law from being able to be there to protect their child.SO HOW COME the Officials in Noda City's Education Board who admitted handing a copy of a school questionnaire, (in which a third-grader wrote she had been physically abused by her father and asked teachers to help), to the father at his strong request, about a year before his arrest over her death APOLOGIZED at a press conference Thursday (Jan31) for conducting an act that "extremely lacked consideration," saying officials of the city's education board yielded to Yuichiro Kurihara's request due to his "intimidating demeanor" that made them "frightened." WHEN EXACTLY THE SAME ACT is part of normal family court procedure for the whole country, including Noda City?
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Actually "Bullfighter" the single custody split in Japan is NOT 80% 20% in favor of mothers. It is 99% in favor of mothers; even the sole custody that is awarded to 1% of fathers being divorced is because that is the wish of that mother, usually because she does not want to mother that child.
5 ( +5 / -0 )
To those knocking Japan please recognize that the Japanese family courts don't do anything to non-Japanese any differently from how they do anything to Japanese. They don't do anything, they have no powers to enforce anything except monthly support money from father to mother. They have no powers to enforce visitation, so they don't. They can't. They have no powers to ensure joint custody, so they forbid it except for as long as the marriage endures. That though, is misleading. Becoming a parent for a Japanese woman is a job and status for life. A tenure guaranteed no matter how well or badly you parent. Becoming a parent for a Japanese man is a zero-hours contract. No matter how well you parent, the arbiter of your performance is the contentment of your wife. At her whim, sayonara! That might be because you treat her badly. That might be because you treat her well. What she especially might not like is you parenting better than she does. She will leverage you out of the house for long hours of work to make sure you bring home sufficient salary to match her expectations. Is that patriarchy? Japanese husbands hand over all their salary to their wives. Financial management here is recognized as a 'domestic chore' but not one she'll be wanting any help with. That 'patriarchy' is, it turns out, 'matriarchy'. Frankly, considering the imbalance of power, it is a credit to millions of Japanese mothers that they are caring and diligent. However, thousands are only diligent UNTIL they have a child. Beforehand it is impossible to discern which type your fantastic romantic partner is. They don't even know themselves! Personality disorders and extreme selfishness will only manifest once your baby's born. That is the pivotal moment, either that, or the second child, or the second set of twins in Cook's tragic case. The greatest joy, but the greatest risk. The family court are powerless to protect your relationship with your children. Powerless to protect your children's relationship with you. Even if you are a famous Japanese father such as Takahashi Joji, the abrogation of due process in the family court means that false DV charges will always succeed in alienating you from your children and leaving them totally dependent on the one less adequate, indeed seriously inadequate, parent. Vulnerable and trusting, your children will soon enmesh and come under the undue influence of your ex. They will decline the court investigator's invitation to visit you because they have come to believe fearful stories about you, and to despise you. The court will forever imagine that it has done a worthy job keeping you out of your kids' developmental years. They will be mistaken.
5 ( +9 / -4 )
Making false domestic violence allegations IS domestic violence, especially when done expressly to facilitate the most chronic and long-term damaging form of domestic violence of all, alienating the child and other parent from each other (perhaps forever). In this case, as reported, subsequent events confirm what the police and courts could not have found out at the time, not even with an investigation, that her actions were malicious fabrications with ulterior motives. Indeed, that's why the police, stuck in the middle of a 'He says- She says' argument, and facing the dilemma that he might perhaps be violent, PLAY SAFE by keeping to the 'Duluth' principle of ASSUMING that he poses a threat so, to prevent (supposed) further violence SEPARATE the parties. And certify him to prevent him finding out where she(actually THEY) now reside.
Trouble is, that also separates the father from his child/children, which is EXACTLY WHAT THE MOTHER WANTED ALL ALONG.
Facing almost exactly the same scenario, my own Judge backed down from making such a judgement, fearing that she would lose career brownie points if (as likely) an appeal reversed her judgement. Praise this Judge for courageously validating one of the true victims of domestic violence (the father), a decision which will also vitally help the other victim (the child).
4 ( +4 / -0 )
There are some important ramifications with this. Generally speaking knowing that you can't be adult until 20 doesn't exactly motivate maturity in most late teens. More particularly, those poor kids treated as property by a parent, can get free of the abducting parent's controls.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
As strangerland points out, this type of appalling behavior has been around for thousands of years. Some might say that there are always these types about. Perhaps that is true. However, in this case I would argue that it would be a confirmation bias that assumed he probably was this type. He was just as likely just like you or me for years and years. Can we check his record Japan TODAY? Then what something pushed him over the edge? Of course I do not condone this heinous crime. I point out that just maybe there was a cultural element. The immeasurably sad loss of his two children and his wife (her children too, of course) point to the very real possibility that he came to realize that he had already lost them to the single custody rule. If so, he would have been 100% confident that the fad of false accusation of d.v. would have reduced visitation to nil, (since 'due process' and the need for evidence are completely circumvented in the Family Court). Even if visitation had been granted, it would have been minimal, and not backed up by any enforcement. His future was 99% locked into the 'patriarchal' world of work and earning a living for a family. Great! Except that now he was being discarded from his family. It is a cultural characteristic of Japan that the patriarchal world 'donates' nearly all its income to enable the 'matriarchal' home. And whilst thankfully we no longer frown on 'single mothers', it is unfortunate that the term has now assumed a status equivalent to something like 'victim and noble warrior against oppression'. A badge no doubt sometimes deserved, yet you can wear the exact same badge, even if you have discarded a perfectly reasonable spouse (okay), from his children (chronic emotional abuse).
The danger with assuming that there are always these types of men is not only that some of them are women, but that we don't think that we can do anything to prevent such heartbreaking outcomes. I think we can prevent some of these events by ending the matriarchy/patriarchy schism in Japan, not just in the work place, but also in the home.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
To all those commentators calling the father malicious, selfish, pathetic, cowardly, scum, a loser, and undeserving of sympathy, I strongly suggest that until less than a year ago this man was just as worthy as you. Consider especially that the more worthy 'hands-on' father figure you are; the greater disquiet awaits you should you be denied access to your child(ren) when your wife leaves (which he was, and you will be). Everybody has their breaking point, and single-custody divorce robbed him, and will rob you of so much. No longer a husband. No longer a father. Enslaved as a breadwinner by the person you once loved. Humiliated to your own children. A crummy couple of hours a month of visitation that your ex can sabotage at whim, and even THAT can't be enforced. Powerless, destroyed, no longer whom he used to be, what was left of him snapped!
Frankly, it is arrogance to assume that you won't.
Thank you 'therougou'.
Vindictive Ex, Facilitated by the Courts, Recklessly Succeeds in Pushing Previously Loved and Reasonable Man to Breaking Point.
-4 ( +3 / -7 )
Thank you Iomae for clarifying that, and of course you are right, IT certainly does not WARRANT a murder. Actually, I did not mean to suggest that IT did. What I wanted to say was that this is a case where IT (the sheer devastation of a relationship breakdown IMPOSED ON YOU AND YOUR OWN CHILD) involves something of a far greater magnitude and complexity than 'only' the break-up of a marriage or romance. As the earlier comment by Johny Shaftman highlights, the intensity of feelings can be so overwhelming that a 'mental snap' is a real possibility in any of us (though especially the young). And thank you to LFRAgain for mentioning the strong possibility of mental instability playing a part here. However, LFRAgain is mistaken to say "...not on the part of the victim". Can any parent who deliberately acts to exclude the other parent from involvement with their children not invite suspicions of mental instability? Moreover, although LFRAgain says "The sheer devastation of a relationship breakdown is nothing new to humanity... ", I agree except that what is certainly only recent to humanity (in Japan) is the sheer scale of RELATIONSHIP BREAKDOWNS IMPOSED BY ONE PARENT ON THE OTHER PARENT AND THEIR CHILD due to the single custody system.
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Thank you Educator60 for letting us know that this couple though divorced had a child together. And thank you LFRAgain, with Educator60's information we can extend your point about the sheer devastation of a relationship breakdown IMPOSED ON YOU AND YOUR OWN CHILD by the single custody system unique to Japan.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
Mifune is guilty of moral harassment because as a wife and mother she should encourage a good relationship between father and daughter. Instead she has disparaged the father to the daughter and then steered the daughter into an alignment with her against the father. The abruptness of Mifune's change of heart toward Takashi indicates a new love interest as the route cause, rather than any genuine shortcomings (the media long portrayed the couple as emblematic of warm togetherness). If she wanted to be free of a broken romance she should be free; But she shouldn't have been free to emotionally abuse her own child and her ex by tearing them apart. Which one of you readers would actually be callous enough to NEGOTIATE 2 photographs a year? She has caused heinous harm to her own child; and the father knowing this, is broken hearted. Charles Noguhi's comments are very accurate in this thread, thanks Charles!
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Posted in: 'Bully insurance' now on the increase