Saturday, March 12, 2016

Mother's Baby: Father's maybe.

A minor gasp was heard in the outbuildings yesterday which attracted a little attention. We do not hear much from South Africa, which once was part of the Anglosphere until the lights went out, but the events of the past few weeks has opened up a longer running conversation about DNA testing.

It is not often we hear of baby-snatching either, even in the backwaters of Tasmania. But it has come to light, almost by accident, that a case has been heard of in the bottom end of the Dark Continent.

It raises questions. 

A mother always knows when she has had a baby. It is quite definitley hers. Fathers on the other hand have to simply hope. It has been the case since time immemorial and due entirely to the 'certainty / uncertainty' gap which discriminates against men and in favour of women.

It even protects women when they lie.

And as women are human, they are as subject to the propensity to lie as any. But they can, in this instance, lay claim to special facility.

Let's look at the tale:

A 19-year jail term culminates years of heartache over South African baby snatched at birth
A South African seamstress has been found guilty of snatching a newborn baby from her sleeping mother in hospital, marking the culmination of a case that has gripped the country ever since the disappearance two decades ago.

The 51-year-old woman, who cannot be named to protect the identity of the child, said moments before her conviction on Thursday that she was “not sorry” for how she acquired the girl, adding: “I will always be her mother.”
It is astonishing that this anonymity remains and is only ever applied to female criminals. It happens with almost every case of false accusation, for instance. Ostensibly to 'protect the child', it simply protects criminal women.  Here, in this case, we can see who the real mother is. We can know her name. But we cannot know the criminal's.  Just what sort of lunacy is this?

Her biological mother, Celeste Nurse, who appealed for her safe return every year on her birthday but now has little contact with her, wept as the judge told the defendant how she had fabricated “a fairy tale” to avoid taking responsibility for her crime.
Judge John Hlope, sitting at Cape Town’s high court, said he had “listened to her lies for days” about how she was given the baby in an informal adoption arrangement with a woman she barely knew, and never realised she was abducted.
Real mum leaves Court

“You must have been the person who removed the child from hospital,” he said. “One doesn’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that one does not buy babies. Your story, if anything, is a fairy tale and the court rejects it with the contempt it deserves.”
"One does not buy babies"?? All around the world, erstwhile 'rocket scientists' know full well that almost anyone with a hospital gown can murder babies at will even before they have taken their first breath.  Then they can sell bits of the baby to all and sundry and make a fine profit.  The Judge's own Court would protect the doctors. !

Judge Hlope said he found “trustworthy” the evidence of state witnesses who told the court they saw the woman at the hospital, one of whom said she had unsuccessfully tried to snatch her own child. 

He found the woman guilty on three counts of kidnapping, fraud and contravening child protection laws, stripped the bail agreement she had during the trial and warned her she faces 10 years imprisonment when she is sentenced on May 30.
The disappearance of Zephany Nurse, as her birth parents named her, from Groote Schuur Hospital in Cape Town on April 30, 1997, made headlines around the world. 

Unknown to them, their daughter was living just a few kilometres away. 

She was reunited with them by extraordinary coincidence in February last year after her younger sister started at her school and classmates noticed their striking resemblance. Cassidy Nurse, 14, told her parents about the older girl and they invited her home for tea. After meeting her, they contacted the police, who confirmed the girl’s identity through DNA tests.

In an interview given outside court shortly before she was found guilty, the woman said “Zephany” had sent a message wishing her luck before the verdict and telling her she loved her. “The Lord knows why He placed her in my arms,” she told South Africa’s News24 website. “I thank Him for the 17 years and 10 months I had with her.”
Reports suggest that the girl continues to live with her kidnapper’s husband, whom she considers to be her father. Zephany’s biological father, Morne Nurse, told journalists last week that he and his wife had “a bit of contact still” with Zephany, but would not comment further.
So a father and a mother lose their daughter to a thief. They grieve for 17 years.

But hey, let us not know the name of the wicked woman who stole the baby. 

The 'Identification' was by DNA testing. It is a technique well known now and the technology is sufficiently widespread that anyone can have a DNA check on themselves and their children. 

Whoops, of course they cannot. 

A Father cannot.

A Father is disallowed in most jurisdictions from knowing is he is the Father of a baby.  Unless the mother agrees.

Mother's Baby: None of Father's Business, 
seems to be the rule.

A mother can saddle a man with the cost, both emotional and financial, of raising another man's child,and.... get this.... we are not allowed to know her name either !

Paternity fruad is rife in our society.

Notice that the mantras about 'It must never happen to one more child', and 'One is too many', never seems to get applied to children whose paternity is kept hidden to protect a woman who cheats and lies.

And here it is applied to a baby-thief.

There is a case for DNA testing babies at birth. 

There are mandatory blood tests conducted on new-borns in almost every reasonable country. But that tiny amount of blood is analysed to find sickness-causing isses. 

The same tiny blood sample could establish paternity and give Fathers the same certainty as mothers.

Perhaps test after six months too. Just to make sure the mother really is the mother!

The argument goes that such knowledge would cause strife in families. HELLO !

Knowledge brings comfort along with Power. It brings fairness. It brings certainty.

Strife? Hmmm. Yes, perhaps. That can be dealt with without the greater heartache and pain that usually occurs where secrets are maintained in thses matters.

And the Law has no business keeping those secrets.

It aids and abets crime. 

Against Fathers.



  1. Just to add to your post: do you know that taking your children overseas without the other parent's permission isn't an international crime because the majority of people doing it are women and the majority of men who spend years and mountains of money trying to see their children are men.
    Countries won't make something a crime if it will incriminate more women than men.
    Yet, we mostly only hear of the cases where men have 'stolen' their children.

    1. Yes, that does seem to be the case. (Sorry about the delay: the Bouncer was busy doing some emergency glass-washing). The 'protection' of women and the deliberate punitive measures against men is rife. Few women seem to think this is what the 'real' 'patriarchy' is about .... making life more easy for women than for men.

  2. Not sure if my post got through, but did you know that the reason why it's not an international crime to leave a country with your children after a divorce is that the majority of cases where it happens it's by women.
    The international community will never bring any laws in that will criminalise more woman than men, even if the women could claim abuse.


Ne meias in stragulo aut pueros circummittam.

Our Bouncer is a gentleman of muscle and guile. His patience has limits. He will check you at the door.

The Tavern gets rowdy visitors from time to time. Some are brain dead and some soul dead. They attack customers and the bar staff and piss on the carpets. Those people will not be allowed in anymore. So... Be Nice..