The last thing I want is to hear a one sided argument form a sensationalist news site about a divorce case. We can both agree that the school should mind their own fucking business, but the father is the one who made the case - and we do not hear the other side or all factors that influenced the court decision. You are expressing an opinion based off of incomplete information.
While it is always true that we don’t know what we don’t know, I believe the article was quite clear as to the role the China virus mask issue played.
What was not explained, and you may not know (but you can easily confirm by a little research online), is that custody cases are long drawn out miseries. Few things happen quickly, unless there is a need, an emergency, an extreme change of circumstance.
The article expressly stated the father petitioned the court based on the school’s letter, and the Court decided quickly!!! There are very few situations where custody is so severely upset, as was done by the Court here. It is egregious.
Further, the mask requirement for visitation is simply another attempt at forcing this woman to submit, with her child as leverage, truly disgusting government overreach and abuse.
Simply, I do not believe there was more to this story than the Covid mask issue. The court’s order was too abrupt, too reflexive, to quick, to be about anything else. It has to be temporary, the mother will be entitled to discovery & an actual hearing but that takes time. In the meanwhile, the Court has stolen this woman’s child because she did not wear a mask!! While there is unquestionably a bigger picture here, the issue (based on timing and facts presented) decided here appears to be limited to and only about the mask event at school and the subsequent actions taken by the nurse/school.
The last thing I want is to hear a one sided argument form a sensationalist news site about a divorce case. We can both agree that the school should mind their own fucking business, but the father is the one who made the case - and we do not hear the other side or all factors that influenced the court decision. You are expressing an opinion based off of incomplete information.
While it is always true that we don’t know what we don’t know, I believe the article was quite clear as to the role the China virus mask issue played.
What was not explained, and you may not know (but you can easily confirm by a little research online), is that custody cases are long drawn out miseries. Few things happen quickly, unless there is a need, an emergency, an extreme change of circumstance.
The article expressly stated the father petitioned the court based on the school’s letter, and the Court decided quickly!!! There are very few situations where custody is so severely upset, as was done by the Court here. It is egregious.
Further, the mask requirement for visitation is simply another attempt at forcing this woman to submit, with her child as leverage, truly disgusting government overreach and abuse.
Simply, I do not believe there was more to this story than the Covid mask issue. The court’s order was too abrupt, too reflexive, to quick, to be about anything else. It has to be temporary, the mother will be entitled to discovery & an actual hearing but that takes time. In the meanwhile, the Court has stolen this woman’s child because she did not wear a mask!! While there is unquestionably a bigger picture here, the issue (based on timing and facts presented) decided here appears to be limited to and only about the mask event at school and the subsequent actions taken by the nurse/school.
The actions by the school simply included some sent letters that we don't get to read. The father dragged the courts into it.
I still don't believe I have enough information to jump to a conclusion here.