I don’t think anyone from the Bio family was involved, quite frankly I don’t think any of them cared enough to kidnap him, none of them put their hand up to care for either William or his sister, they were ok with strangers fostering him.
Possibly, though personally, I find it hard to believe that there was not one single person in the families that was able to offer kincare to William and his sister. Whether that be grandparents, siblings, cousins ..... Brendan's biological father, who they apparently stayed with at some point in time.
It would have been the best way to ensure that William and his sister were not slotted into the permanent care of the Minister, until 18 years old, and/or adopted elsewhere.
The care arrangement was always intended to be permanent.
To me, that says that no-one was ever going to step up to the mark, by agreement. Clean up their act, if that was the kincare issue. Take on the financial/emotional/physical aspects ... while the biological parent(s) cleaned up their own act.
Though, I have to say, I have sometimes wondered if the foster parents weren't some kind of twice-removed, three-times removed relation of the biological parents.
So, I need to agree with kiwi. No motive for anyone close to the family to abduct William imo.
.
I'm not sure if that would be correct/be the case in WT's care arrangement.
Quite often, many family members offer, but due to their own history, or being previous enablers/facilitators of the parents, they are rejected as the courts don't see them as being able to prevent further risk of harm or making correct care decisions.
JMHO.
Unless we know William’s ‘complicated family history’ firsthand, I don’t think we can say either way, although some inference can be drawn on where his ‘best interests’ were served, given his biological parents’ documented history of violent criminal offences and domestic violence, and his biological father’s drug addiction.
As for William’s extended family, we can’t sleuth them and it is up to the NSW Childrens’ Court to make determinations on the suitability of kinship carers, based on evidence provided in individual child protection cases. It may not be the perfect system but it is the only one we have.
Perhaps energy could be better directed to petitioning NSW MPs for an enquiry into the state’s child protection system, rather than making William’s disappearance a cause célèbre. For his sake if he is still alive, his parents’ and his siblings’ sakes.
Making the personal public (or
vice versa) is not always the kindest or the right thing to do for the people intimately involved in a tragedy; especially one as emotionally charged as the case of missing child.. That’s their choice, at the conclusion of the current investigation into William’s disappearance.
This is not a case of for
versus against. This is the case of a missing child, William Tyrrell, no matter who or what had legal possession of his person at the time of his disappearance. Perhaps, a lot more energy could be directed into considering this and his, and his siblings’ inherent ‘rights [as] child(ren).’
This is my opinion. I am here for William and I will not be manipulated or bullied into changing my opinion.