Larry and folks:

Let's focus for a moment on what we all agree on. We all agree that it's a good outcome for Martha to be with her grandmother, and for her to remain there temporarily until her mom finishes her courses, gets the anger managed, and can reunite with her daughter. We all agree (I think) that anti-traveller discrimination was NOT a factor in that part of the case. Most of us agree that anti-traveller discrimination DOES exist, and that it MAY end up affecting Madelyne's case.

As I see it, the big difference is that most of us are waiting until the case plays itself out to decide whether anti-traveller discrimination has taken place, rather than assuming in advance that it will take place. As you can see, the "ripping a little girl away from her ethnic group is illegal and immoral" argument turned out to be unnecessary because that did not happen. As I suggested earlier, why not wait and see what else happens before we condemn the legal system? We'll see if the four driver's licenses turns out to be a trumped up charge or not (I'd guess not, Larry guesses so), and whether the decision of the court seems fair or not.

Until then, we agree on most things--apart from the boundaries between legitimate discipline and abuse, which I suspect vary widely from person to person and community to community. Given that, there's little point in arguing about it here.