RSABBMFF:
Well. I am not the op, but I'm going to take a moment to respond to this post, as
there are some characterizations you have made with which I respectfully disagree:
- Experiencing severe emotional distress as a result of a traumatic loss does mean an individual is "mentally ill."
- Experiencing physical symptoms as a result of a traumatic loss does not mean an individual is "sick."
- Experiencing severe emotional distress and accompanying physical symptoms does not mean that someone is incapacitated to the point of being unable to function or to properly nurture and care for a child.
People every single day are confronted with the shock of unexpected tragedies, accidents, deaths and traumatic events. Even in the midst of profound grief and loss, many people have an amazing capacity to soldier on, and to show incredible grace, strength and perseverance in the face of devastating circumstances. They are able to continue to function as loving, responsible spouses, parents and grandparents.
Their lives go on. Their lives are forever changed, and forever diminished, but they force themselves to go on, for the sake of those remaining.
DB and CB are two such inspiring individuals.
Clearly.
The court has already recognized this by awarding them temporary custody of Baby K.
So there's that.
If I were the Frazee custody attorney, the very last thing that I would want to do would be to highlight the traumatic grief and loss PF violently inflicted upon DB and CB.
"Your Honor, clearly these people have been emotionally damaged by the fact that my client violently bashed their daughter's head to a bloody pulp with a baseball bat. Because my client's gruesome, cold-blooded murder of their daughter has caused them severe emotional distress, they cannot possibly care for their grandchild," doesn't exactly sound like a winning argument to me.
JMO.