Mother Talkers

Father and Daughter in "Relationship"

by gloria

Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 09:20:54 AM PDT

John Deaves abandoned his daughter Jenny when she was just one year old. Father and daugher reunited after 30 years, and just two weeks later...had sex.

"John and I are in this relationship as consenting adults," Mrs Deaves told the Nine Network's 60 Minutes tonight.

"We are just asking for a little bit of respect and understanding."

Yes, you read that right; they're in a "relationship". They also have a nine-month old daughter, Celeste.

Jenny stated that soon after reuniting with her father, she began to see him as a man first, and her father second. But wait. She still saw him as her father...right? Ew.

"I was looking at him, sort of going, oh, he's not too bad," she said.

"Like you might look at a man across the bar at a nightclub."

And what does daddy have to say? "I knew it was illegal, of course I knew it was illegal but you know, so what."

After reading this article, I have SO many questions. Why would they go public with this? How can you be sexually interested in your child/parent? What are they going to tell their daughter, who's also Jenny's half-sister? What does Jenny's mother think about this? And finally, is there really a shortage of good men in Oz?

What do you think?

  • ::

Tags: Incest, Australia, Relationship (all tags)

Permalink | 68 comments

  • first reaction (0 / 0)

    Yuck. And I agree with you - why go public????

    by Stacey on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 09:24:57 AM PDT

  • ew. (0 / 0)

    Ew, ew, ew. And ew.

    if you wobba cypress trees then I will wobba you

    by thais on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 09:36:48 AM PDT

  • I believe this is really common. (0 / 0)

    Amongst both parents and siblings that are separated at or near birth. Happens more often with adopted siblings because those contacts are more common, but it does happen. I believe there is even a name for the phenomenon, genetic sexual attraction. But the current theory seems to be that there is an innate connection between siblings and parents and children, and the sense of attraction that becomes familial love develops in that direction not because that's just what happens, but because the close contact during early years creates a mental taboo that's virtually impossible to break. But if you don't have that close contact at a young age, you never develop the taboo, and so the innate attraction once you're adults goes the way that adult attraction usually does.
    Freaky, sure, I but actually due to design, and it's just unfortunate that it happens more often now due to the increased number of reunions we now have.

    "You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd."

    by Expat Briton on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 09:57:06 AM PDT

    • Yes, it is common (0 / 0)

      and not entirely weird, in the sense that people feel strong connections and they're meeting as sexually active adults, so there's that dimension to the feelings.  More understandable with siblings though.

      I don't know why you would go public.  I don't know why you wouldn't seek therapy.  

      It's a good point about taboos limiting our sexual affection.  We don't relate like bonobos, but for some people it's social conditioning only.  I know that I've met very few sexually mature people that I'm not attracted to in some way and would be willing to share that kind of expression of affection with if society were accepting.  I guess that sounds freaky to many people, maybe there's word for it like omnisexual or something?  But if you like and respect someone you want to share happiness and pleasure.  Um, I'll stop being off topic now.

      by lonespark on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 10:04:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      • Well, apart from the money.. (0 / 0)

        ..there may the possibility that they rather naively believe they'll get public support if the feel what they're doing is clearly right.  People in love sometimes do lose that sense of reason.  It isn't clear to me whether they were being investigated before they went public, but if they were they might both need the money for their defense, and want to prove to the world that there's nothing wrong with their relationship.  OK, now I've put myself in their shoes, I'd like to get out, stat.

        I had to look up what bonobos are. I think I sort of know what you mean about the sexual attraction thing. I do wonder how practical that would be in real terms, though? While I do sometimes find myself wondering how much the "profound" and "emotional connection" things are social conditioning rather than a genuine reaction to sex, I don't think there's any good way to find out, and in this sort of case, you live within society's rules simply because there's too much possibility of messing with other people if you don't. Sometimes I think we just have to shrug our shoulders and say "that's the way it is," frustrating as that may be.

        "You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd."

        by Expat Briton on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 12:43:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        • Not frustrating (0 / 0)

          Most social mores serve a purpose, and when they cease to we usually manage to change them.  Humans aren't all about the casual sex, though it's part of the fabric, because of the way intimate bonding is woven into our cultures.

          by lonespark on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 02:24:17 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    • I remember seeing one of those (0 / 0)

      talk shows in the 80's...I think it was Geraldo, where a woman had given up her son for adoption. She reunited with him after 25 years and said that she was instantly sexually attracted to him. She said that he looked just like his father, and she felt like that poor confused girl that put up her child for adoption in the first place.

      I don't know...I guess I would be naive to think that this kind of thing doesn't happen, but it's hard for me to understand when I simply can't relate. And I seriously have issues regarding why they would choose to go public?!?

      by gloria on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 03:01:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      • I think you just have to figure out.. (0 / 0)

        ..the right part of your disbelief to suspend. I can't relate to why anyone would want to have sex with a man (be it a man or woman having sex with that man). I just don't find the male form appealing, at all. But I can disconnect from that feeling to be able to focus more on the aspects that I do understand - loving a partner, enjoying physical touch, sexual attraction. I'm a degree removed, you just have to reason your way around that degree.

        The whole idea of having sex with my mother (or father) freaks me out completely. OK, so set that aside. What can I relate to? Well, sexual attraction, for sure. I've certainly been in a place where there was someone for whom all reason and sense left the building, and I just wanted to have her. Given what I've seen of genetic attraction, that does seem to fit the bill. OK, what's next?... well, social ostracism. I can relate to that. Not understanding social taboos, yes, there are many I don't understand. It's about finding the right building blocks so you can create this sense of empathy. That's a useful skill to develop, even if the person or people you're trying to relate to are doing something that kind of turns your stomach. It also, of course, doesn't mean that after you've worked through what you think their reasoning and motivations and feelings are, you can't still think they're wrong, or even unpleasant.

        "You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd."

        by Expat Briton on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 12:52:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  • What the bloody hell?!! (0 / 0)

    How selfish can they be? Going public when they have a child? As if kids don't already tease and bully each other enough. That poor little girl is going to have a hell of a time on the playground and just in general. Incest resulting in procreation is reckless. If you're going to be a motherfucker (or fatherfucker as the case may be) DON'T HAVE KIDS!

    Freud would have a bloody field day with these two!

    by hardlyaclue on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 10:21:12 AM PDT

    • Yeah... (0 / 0)

      I could just hear to abuse on the playground now..."Who are you going to tell? Your grandfather/father, or your mother/sister?"

      It's wrong and selfish. If they wanted privacy, they should have kept it private.

      by gloria on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 03:03:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  • ick (0 / 0)

    I'm sure that the deep psychological issues are obvious to all, especially in the case of a daughter who feels she has finally obtained her deadbeat dad.  And dad?  Maybe he's just antisocial.

    But I don't think the ick factor is a valid argument against anything.  It's just a visceral reaction with no logic behind it.  While I think there is almost certainly logic in close relatives not breeding with each other, most of the time ick factors are just based on social taboos that are usually not inherently necessary.  This cases makes me worry about two such damaged people in a relationship with each other (and with a child, my god...), but that's not illegal and is quite common.  Maybe they went public because John Deaves is a narcissist?  Just a loose theory.

    by Erin on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 10:33:43 AM PDT

    • Illegal (0 / 0)

      here in Virginia too.

      by hardlyaclue on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 10:59:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    • I agree with Erin (0 / 0)

      But I don't think the ick factor is a valid argument against anything.  It's just a visceral reaction with no logic behind it.

      What if they didn't know they were biologically related and found out later? Happens a lot and speaks to

      most of the time ick factors are just based on social taboos that are usually not inherently necessary.

      I don't know what I would do if I found out that DH is actually my brother. Why would it change things other than the ingrained social taboo against "brotherly love?"

      I'm also not sure why such behavior is illegal other than the genetic trouble, but whose biz is that anyway?  and/or if it is a way to protect young girls from potentially abusive fathers?

      by GiGi on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 02:12:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      • Weird thought (0 / 0)

        I'm pretty darn sure dh isn't my brother, but what if he was?  We already have kids; the damage is done.  Separating would probably lead to unnecessary pain.

        My question is, how can the state regulate sex between two consenting adults?  I think this is yucky and, at the risk of sounding like an unromantic killjoy, predict that it'll never last.  Dad seems like a sleeze, and I wouldn't be surprised if he turned out to be quite controlling and abusive.

        BUT...they're two adults.  Excuse the tasteless link, but a few years ago I came across this piece, written by John Stossel about his belief that cousins should be able to marry.  I don't know why he would spend his time researching the subject.  And I don't know what bothered me more--the thought of sleeping with my cousin, or the fact that I agreed with John Stossel.  But I came away feeling like he was right.  ONCE.  

        by Erin on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 02:34:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        • My husband was adopted. (0 / 0)

          We now live in the city in which he was born.  It crosses my mind quite often that my kids could end up matched with a relative.  How would we know?  

          As to cousins marrying?  For the largest part of history, they did.  I think it becomes problematic when cousins continue to marry generation after generation.

          by tjb22 on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 02:51:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  • Well, if they were in Ohio, (0 / 0)

    they would both be arrested.  

    by tjb22 on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 10:36:16 AM PDT

  • Their first child (0 / 0)

    died of a congenital heart defect... seriously, don't mate, mates! Also, this raises the issue of what is "attraction" and what is "Daddy didn't love me" pathology. A lot of women abandoned by their fathers find comfort in older men, this one got the exact one she was looking for. To me that is the "ick" factor.

    by Suzanne77 on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 10:52:44 AM PDT

  • Ok, so I find this story bizarre (0 / 0)

    But if you click to the story and look in the margin, there's an equally bizarre news story titled: "Spain: Man carrying mothers head in the street."  What is going on in this world???  Ok, I'm sounding like an old person.  I'll stop.

    "We've GOT to make noises in greater amounts! So, open your mouth, lad! For every voice counts!"

    by progressiveinky on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 11:16:31 AM PDT

  • apple doesn't fall far from the tree.. (0 / 0)

    the father is a product of in-breeding as well?

    the tell tale signs?

    a) knowingly copulating after 2 weeks
    b) going public

    i'd say they have provided best case for why this is illegal.

    by parentalunit1 on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 12:06:01 PM PDT

  • Beyond creepy (0 / 0)

    Sorry, but there's just too much ick factor for me to get around.  But I read about this story last week (and maybe Rachel has more info) but it sounded like the reason they went public is that the police may be watching them since they are perhaps skirting some Australian laws.  Also, the woman's claim that she didn't meet her father until she was an adult apparently isn't quite true; she met him once as a teenager.

    I guess I could give them their distance since they are two consenting adults.  But they brought a child into this, which I just don't understand.  If you know your situation may have physical implications, certainly has social ones, I think it's just selfish to say, "Too bad; we want to be like any other family and have children."  And did you see the photo? They say you start to look like your spouse after many years together, but they look exactly alike right now!

    by cynmill on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 12:12:13 PM PDT

  • More to the story? (0 / 0)

    I wonder if they had to go public before it was leaked or ???  The last sentence of the article reads:

    A South Australian police media spokesman said  "the couple is being monitored".

    Why?

    by GiGi on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 12:51:32 PM PDT

  • they were paid (0 / 0)

    The reason they went public? Money.

    NINE'S 60 Minutes paid the South Australian father and his daughter to talk about their incestuous relationship on television.

    The program also chose to ignore salient facts which were readily available in court transcripts from their recent trial for incest.

    This has caused a lot of controversy here; the program didn't reveal the details of the couple's daughter who died after four days, and they certainly didn't disclose that they paid the couple for the interview.

    Also, it's worth pointing out that these people are under investigation by police and have been prohibited from having sex:

    South Australian police are investigating the payment of money by the show to father/daughter couple John and Jenny Deaves for the interview. John Deaves admitted being paid.

    Police charged the couple with incest and South Australian courts placed them on a three-year good-behaviour bond, which stipulates they not have sex.

    by Rachel on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 03:30:23 PM PDT

    • Ok... (0 / 0)

      but how can the possibly monitor the whole "not having sex" thing? You can say you're not going to have sex ALL DAY, EVERYDAY, but truth of the matter is, if they want to get their freak on, they will.

      by gloria on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 03:33:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      • sure (0 / 0)

        and I wonder how SA police are going to monitor them after they move away; part of the money they were paid is being used to move.

        But what can the police actually do? I mean, there isn't an ankle bracelet that'll alert the police when they're doing the nasty (or, in this case, the nasty nasty).

        by Rachel on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 03:38:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        • Ridiculous (0 / 0)

          what is the crime? I just don't get it. Yeah, it's creepy and weird and nasty nasty, but what is the crime? They are consenting adults. I'd move, too. But I would NEVER in hell go public for any amount of money. Ugh.

          by GiGi on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 03:39:47 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          • I understand what you're saying... (0 / 0)

            they ARE consenting adults...a bit OFF, but consenting adults. I think the crime here is incest. Even if they are consenting adults, having an incestuous relationship is a crime.

            by gloria on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 03:44:55 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          • well, incest is the crime (0 / 0)

            I mean, we can have a philosophical debate as to whether incest is a crime, but for the moment, it is listed as one on the statute books. They went pubilc about their private lives, so of course the police are going to notice.

            by Rachel on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 03:50:52 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            • I guess THAT is what I'm questioning (0 / 0)

              the incest laws...especially among consenting adults. I understand it when minors are involved, but consenting adults. Me no likey.

              by GiGi on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 04:12:14 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              • I'm not sure how I feel (0 / 0)

                consenting adults, fine. But then what about having children in an incestuous relationship? It's known that close relations having children infinitely raises the chances of serious birth defects; is it fair on them?

                by Rachel on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 04:25:01 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                • Is any breeding (0 / 0)

                  fair on children? I mean, really, so many things can go wrong...I have an enzyme deficiency that runs in my family. Should I not have bred? Sam suffered a vascular accident in utero that had nothing to do with anything. My brother's first child died from a cord accident. So much of having babies is iffy. Are that many folks inbreeding that there needs to be a law forbidding sex and marriage among consenting adults?  I think it goes more to social taboos and mores than anything. Perhaps mandate a course on genetics? I don't know. What if they're gay? Is it ok then? The whole thing is just weird and I can't believe I have strong feelings about it either way. Weird. Weird. Weird.

                  by GiGi on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 05:15:26 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  • you raise really good points (0 / 0)

                    I can't answer you one way or the other, but you raise good points.

                    by Rachel on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 05:54:59 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  • ok, I'll charge in here (0 / 0)

                    As a geneticist, I am very very very uncomfortable with the prospect of justifying laws based on theoretic genetic risk. Should we ban childbirth in women over 40 to reduce the risk of Downs?  Should parents of autistics be prevented from subsequent pregnancies?  What about Huntingdons, a horrible fate with a 50% chance of transmission?

                    This couple's chance of having children with genetic disorders is certainly elevated.  They should receive counseling, just like any other couple facing serious genetic risk.  But what they will actually experience is a reduced fertility rate.  Most of the serious genetic defects that they carry in common will result in an inviable fetus.  It is a tragedy - especially since they've already had such a child make it all the way to birth - but in this case it is also nature's way of taking care of something that was never meant to be.  And most children of incest will still be perfectly normal.

                    Only half of my son's children can be normal, no matter who he marries.  His odds are worse than this couple's.  Should he reach this point in his life he will face some difficult decisions.  He will know better than any legislature whether the risk is worth taking.

                    by lyn on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 08:24:29 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                • devil's advocate (0 / 0)

                  I think I'm with you on this one -- that as consenting adults it's fine (though weird), but having kids is not.

                  However, the birth defect issue is tricky.  Does that mean that people who are genetically predisposed to having kids with birth defects shouldn't be allowed to reproduce?  I'm not sure.

                  by Treena on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 05:17:36 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  • Exactly (0 / 0)

                    Does that mean that people who are genetically predisposed to having kids with birth defects shouldn't be allowed to reproduce?

                    Slippery slope and who decides which defects are acceptable?

                    by GiGi on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 05:20:11 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    • Yes (0 / 0)

                      You and I posted at the same time and I think we see this the same way.  It's obviously a tough call, but I think it's one where I need to step back and say "to each his own."  It's not like anyone wants their kids to have birth defects anyway.

                      by Treena on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 05:37:46 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  • The world has gone totally mad. (0 / 0)

                    Incest is a crime. Incest is a crime. Incest is a crime.
                    This is not confusing. It is not unclear.
                    The Australian newspaper story on this is totally outrageous and irresponsible.
                    "Consenting adults"??? The woman grew up without a father-that automatically puts her at an emotional disadvantage.
                    How young seems OK? 17, 18,19,20? Are women those ages "consenting adults"?
                    What message does this sent to young girls who are being molested/incested/raped by their fathers?
                    This is depressing as hell. Not just the story, but the responses to it on a feminist leaning blog for mothers. I'm going to go and have a good cry now.

                    by orphanmother on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 09:08:47 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    • Not incest, per se (0 / 0)

                      that I'm reacting to, but the regulation of adult sexuality. It is a slippery slope re: genetic testing, LGBT rights, etc.

                      Incest aside, child abuse/molestation/rape is a crime no matter WHO is doing the abuse/molesting/rape. So, again, I think it is the social taboo instituted centuries ago - probably to encourage growing ones clan outside of immediate family ties - that we are all reacting to so viscerally.

                      If I'm 18 and want to have sex with my dad or brother or sister or mother - and they are willing - it's really nobody else's business. Really.

                      And, I think it is patently FALSE that women who grow up without a father are emotionally disadvantaged. That is a specious argument that is offensive to single mothers and lesbian parents.

                      by GiGi on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 09:21:18 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      • Parent/Child relationships (0 / 0)

                        If an 18 year old "wants" to have sex with their mother or father...there are serious psychological problems and most definitely criminal sexual abuse on the part of the mother or father that welcomes it and engages in it. It should be somebody's business because it is highly predatory on the part of the parent. Incest is a total violation of the very nature of the parent/child relationship-at any age.
                        Any mother or father who does this to a child is viciously damaging that son or daughter whether they are 8,18,38,etc.

                        It is an easy argument to make that growing up without a father is no problem at all for people who had fathers. Single mothers and lesbian parents have my total respect. Parenting is a difficult job. Growing up without a father in our society can be very difficult for the child depending on where one is raised (the south for example)...that's just the truth-I went through it, I know, and I was at an emotional disadvantage in my teens because of it. But what do I know, maybe other people thrived on not having a father.

                        What I'm reacting to viscerally is the casual response to this particular case of criminal incest. The idea that incest being a crime falls into the negative category of "regulation of adult sexuality" is something I disagree with strongly.
                        I mean, geez, I'm about as far left a Democrat as you can get. But no way in hell do I see incest between parent and child over 18 as non-criminal or the laws against it as an unfair regulation of adult sexuality.

                        by orphanmother on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 10:55:24 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                    • curious (0 / 0)

                      I'm wondering whether your feelings about this would be different if it were an older woman and a younger man.  Or two birth siblings who had been raised in different families.  Or two adopted siblings with different birth parents.  Incest in itself is not necessarily a power issue (though that may very well be the case with this Australian couple).

                      I find it doubtful that incestuous relationships are likely to be healthy, but there is no crime against consensually entering an unhealthy relationship.

                      I think the important differentiation is morally wrong vs. a crime.  Everyone has different morals and will feel differently about various issues.  I think this is considered a crime because people are so overwhelmingly morally against it, but I have trouble seeing this as criminal without a clear victim (though you could certainly argue that the children are the victims, but that's also a slippery slope).

                      by Treena on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 10:35:59 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      • Feelings (0 / 0)

                        My feelings are very strong on this regarding the parent/child relationship:father to daughter or son OR mother to son or daughter. There is most certainly violation there on the part of the parent and clearly an abuse of power.
                        Siblings raised in separate families or adopted siblings, I can't speak to. The sibling relationship is very different from parent/child. But I imagine that most, if not all, incestuous relationships are very psychologically damaging...and physically in cases rape and in some cases resulting suicide.
                             I probably sound like I'm making moral judgments, but I'm not.

                        by orphanmother on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 11:18:39 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        • You don't sound overly morally judgmental (0 / 0)

                          I don't agree with you, but you do have valid arguments that are obviously stemming from genuine concern.

                          I do think that this woman sounds damaged, like you say.  Not that it would matter legally, but she's 31, not 18. I do not think she is making good, sound, educated choices.  Still, where I differ is, I still think she's an adult and should be able to do as she likes.  Yes, she's almost certainly in this relationship for the wrong reasons, but if she wasn't, I really think she would be in a different relationship for the wrong reasons (not illegal, anf few argue that it should be), so...do you not get all the same rights as other adults, even if you have a lot of big, heavy baggage.  I guess I think, often unfortunately, that part of being an adult is the freedom to make choices that could be quite damaging to oneself.

                          I don't agree that your thought that this woman has problems due to being raised without her father is offensive to lesbian moms or single dads, because, even though she was one, it's not that she never had a father.  She did, and he abandoned her, and I think abandonment, even at the age of one, causes problems.  My six-month-old is attached to my husband, and so was my daughter, long before the age of one.

                          I have no clue about this, but I'll ask the scientists...my gut tells me that, genetically, sibs breeding would be worse than parent/child?  Aren't (full) siblings more closely related?

                          by Erin on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 01:05:05 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          • single moms (0 / 0)

                            not dads.  Oops!

                            by Erin on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 01:07:00 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          • asdf (0 / 0)

                            I don't agree that your thought that this woman has problems due to being raised without her father is offensive to lesbian moms or single (moms), because, even though she was one, it's not that she never had a father.

                            So, you are saying abandonment is what puts her at an emotional disadvantage, correct? That's a far cry from saying being raised w/o a father put her at said disadvantage. Two completely different things IMO and I stand by my earlier assertion that the latter is disrespectful and specious.

                            Ok, I'm done with this thread now.  'Bout time, eh?

                            by GiGi on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 01:42:23 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          • same genetic relationship (0 / 0)

                            Aren't (full) siblings more closely related?

                            Nope, exactly the same - 50% related except for the X and Y bits.  

                            by lyn on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 08:23:19 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        • tip toeing in.. (0 / 0)

                          i am with you here. adult consent, genetics aside, it is VERY wrong. a parent, whether mother or father, no matter the circumstance, engaging in sex with offspring should be a crime. the psychological consequences of such an act are enough to persuade me that this is a crime that needs to remain in tact.

                          by parentalunit1 on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 06:19:08 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                    • defining incest (0 / 0)

                      Yes, it is a crime.  But I think it is valid to question why it is a crime, and when it should be a crime.  Miscegenation used to be a crime too, and laws against it were even defended as protecting black women from exploitation by white men.

                      This case gets at the very heart of the definition of family.  Is it genes that matter, or relationships?  I'm both a geneticist and an adoptive mother, so genes don't impress me; I come down squarely on the side of relationships.

                      It is not ever acceptable for a girl to be raped or molested by her father, but that has nothing to do with the fact that they share genes, it is because it is rape and he is her father.  It is an equally horrific crime for a girl to be raped by her genetically acceptable stepfather or adoptive father.  GENES are not the issue here.  

                      The Australian couple did not have a father/daughter relationship.  If they had only discovered their relatedness after the fact, they'd receive nothing but sympathy.  The fact that they did know is what generates the universal "eeewwww" response.  But does it change things in the end?  Should it?

                      I am far more disturbed by the marriage of SoonYi Previn and Woody Allen, who was the father of Previn's younger siblings. But since Allen wasn't married to Previn's mother there was neither legal nor genetic basis to claim incest here.

                      by lyn on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 11:07:19 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      • Sympathy (0 / 0)

                        If they had only discovered their relatedness after the fact, they'd receive nothing but sympathy.

                        I'm not sure about that.  I think you'd still get the ewwww response in that situation regardless of the timing of the discovery.

                        Katherine

                        by pat of butter in a sea of grits on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 11:32:51 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      • Family (0 / 0)

                        The Australian father left his daughter when she was a year old-that means he was probably there when she was born, held her, changed her diapers,fed her,etc. He was fully aware that she was his daughter when they met when she was 31.
                        It makes no difference if the child is adopted- it is every bit the same criminal violation of that child by the mother or father.

                        by orphanmother on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 11:34:47 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

        • Yeah... (0 / 0)

          so the ankle bracelet starts to sound an alarm when it's up in the air??

          by gloria on Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 03:43:43 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Permalink | 68 comments