Jump to content
Last login: Wednesday, October 5, 2011
"Mexican Consul in San Diego, Remedios Gomez Arnau, does not think it is fair for parents to blame Mexican authorities for unresolved abductions. From her perspective, the answers to abductions must come from the courts, not from diplomacy."
It would seem that Consul Gomez doesn't seem to understand that the courts in Mexico are "Mexican authorities" and that those courts interpret and apply laws written by Mexico's Congress which are signed and enforced by the Mexican executive branch.
Perhaps she was misquoted but she appears to be just another person in a large circle pointing her fingers at the people next to them with no one willing to take responsibility or do anything about the wholesale abduction of American children into Mexico.
When you compare the news coverage and attention paid to children abducted to countries like Japan or Brazil, when the numbers of children abducted to Mexico in a single year dwarf those abducted elsewhere across decades, you begin to appreciate a sort of soft bigotry of low expectations. We are not willing to call Mexico to the same standards of other countries because, well, Mexico has enough issues. Nevermind that these are American children who should have the full advocacy of the American government. These children are often pejoratively referred to as simply being Mexican and, in a not so uncommon display of racist intolerance, told that they belong in Mexico along with all the other Mexicans.
Such sentiments, combined with there being other important bilateral issues between the US and Mexico, give US and Mexican officials enough political cover to do absolutely nothing for these children -- a cover they are more than willing to hide behind rather than spend political capital advocating for these Mexican American children.
October 5, 2011 at 10:49 a.m.
( permalink | suggest removal )
Heaven forbid the news would "sensationalize" international child abductions by calling them child abductions. There is no custody dispute here. Your comparison of a child abduction to a custody dispute is akin to my walking into a bank heavily armed and making a large "withdrawal" of money that I feel entitled to while, after the fact, referring to the whole incident as my simply "having some unpaid debts."
If you loan someone your car for a day and they don't bring it back will you balk at saying they stole your car or spend years saying they "just borrowed" your car and haven't brought it back yet (and this when the car itself has no opinion of its own or intrinsic human rights that differentiate it from a piece of personal property.)
"Ugly custody battle" or "nasty divorce" are, themselves, euphemisms that can gloss over some hideous situations that, in any other context, would be taken much more seriously. Nonetheless, calling abductions to Mexico some variant of a "custody dispute," is fallacious because a custody dispute implies, among other things, a civil legal dispute rather than the commission of multiple State and Federal felonies where a vast array of children's rights are grossly violated (rights to family, language, culture, identity, nationality, etc.) Not to mention that there exist basically no effective mechanisms for the "left behind parent" to ever "win" custody of abducted children once their taken across the border by a Mexican parent.
October 5, 2011 at 10:34 a.m.
( permalink | suggest removal )
© 2013 KPBS