JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- ALT - Mie Prefecture - Yokkaichi City - June start
- NPO法人グローバル教育推進機構（GLAD), Mie
- Salary: ¥230,000 / Month For a full working month. Some months differ.
-
- Business Teaching Positions - Part-time - Kanto Region
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥3,000 ~ ¥5,000 / Hour
0
IpManDisciple
Once again I am compelled to educate Mr. Todd as to some facts.
First of all, your statement:
demonstrates that you have an extremely limited understanding of the way the diplomatic corps -- all over the world -- operates. These folks bend over backwards to say nice things about their foreign counterparts. The US Department of State would NEVER print such a potentially disruptive -- vis a vis smooth relations with another nation -- statement without VERY GOOD REASON. I can assure you, State would much rather this situation did not exist as it just makes their jobs all the more difficult.
Second, it is not just the United States which understands that Japan's system of jurisprudence deprives foreign parents of their human rights. I'm not sure whether or not you missed the entire paragraph in Del Vecchio's article where he discussed the TWO joint demarches by the Ambassadors of Australia, Canada, France, Italy, New Zealand, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States, calling upon Japan to sign the Hague Convention, and who noted in their Joint Press Statement:
see
http://japan.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20091016-78.html
http://japan.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20100130-74.html
I'm quite sure you don't mean to suggest, sir, that the governments of eight advanced nations have it all wrong, and Mr. Michael Q. Todd has it right. If you do, I believe you may find it difficult to sustain that contention.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
From the US Department of State website, on the page entitled International Parental Child Abduction Japan:
"In practical terms...in cases of international parental child abduction, foreign parents are greatly disadvantaged in Japanese courts, both in terms of obtaining the return of children to the United States, and in achieving any kind of enforceable visitation rights in Japan. The Department of State is not aware of any case in which a child taken from the United States by one parent has been ordered returned to the United States by Japanese courts, even when the left-behind parent has a United States custody decree. In the past, Japanese police have been reluctant to get involved in custody disputes or to enforce custody decrees issued by Japanese courts."
(see http://travel.state.gov/family/abduction/country/country_501.html)
No racism here, eh?
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
Should be: the International Child Abduction Prevention Act of 2009.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
The Japanese "stance" will change when economic sanctions are imposed on this backward country for its human rights violations, such as can be found in the pending US House bill HR 3240, the International Child Prevention Act of 2009. The Japanese will NEVER change just because a handful of Japan apologists want to make excuses for the very system that oppresses them.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
@Blue Tiger - You don't know what you'd do under his circumstances, as you don't even know what his circumstances really were. Everything you know about Del Vecchio's case is based on a few short paragraphs, yet you presume to offer up advice and pretend like you have all the answers. From what he said, he was forced to take that half-assed agreement or receive a ruling from a judge awarding full custody to his wife and no visitation for him. That's what he said, and unless you are prepared to call him a liar, I don't see as how he had any choice. Your self-righteous, know-it-all attitude is typical of all the gaijin who come to this country and assume the mantle of "Japan expert," and try to convince the uninitiated masses of GEOS and ECC teachers out there that they "really understand Japanese culture and customs." The rest of us know better.
@michaelqtodd -- You don't see any racism evident in a court that tells somebody they cannot hope to win their case because they're not Japanese? And do yourself a favor and actually read the Hague Convention before you comment on it and wind up sounding foolish. It directly addresses issues both of abduction and access to children. The US State department makes no distinction between the two -- both types of cases are considered violations of fundamental human rights. The Embassy is the refuge of last resort, to be sure, after a Japanese national kidnaps -- yes, that's the right word, KIDNAPS -- a child or denies a former spouse access, and after one learns the truth that the Japanese legal system is just a farcical dog-and-pony show, and is totally incapable of dealing with 21st Century realities.
You gentlemen ought to do your homework before you do your pontificating.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
Coming to Japan for some questioning, boys? Get ready for some torture and denial of human rights.
Posted in: Antiwhaling protester to be brought to Japan for questioning
0
IpManDisciple
And you never answered my question, Mr. Todd: May I ask, sir, what you have done to correct the injustices inherent in the Japanese legal system with respect to the cause?
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
Who cares what your kindergarten principal thinks. Talk to the 70 odd Americans back in the States whose kids were abducted by their Japanese spouses and spirited off to Japan. Ask them if they think "the problem is going away quickly."
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
@michaelqtodd - Yeah, everybody wants to have access to their kids, but few are actively working towards the goal of actually achieving that for EVERYBODY, by speaking out in the media, holding protests, petitioning their government, and so on. Some men have decided to fight this injustice as men, and not capitulate by schmoozing the ex-wives and going hat in hand asking for handouts. Some men are standing up and demanding that Japan change its so-called "legal system" so that both parents can be guaranteed BY LAW to be able to see their kids. At great personal sacrifice, they have chosen not to play nice with the women who take their kids away from them, and they have chosen to air Japan's dirty laundry for the whole world to see, so as to change the laws that deny them their God-given right to be with their families.
You apparently are, or were anyhow, a left-behind parent. May I ask. sir, what you have done to correct the injustices inherent in the Japanese legal system with respect to the cause? All this talk about "negativity" and "creating one's own realities" is just a steaming hot load of New Age psychobabble and does not advance the cause forward one centimeter. Instead, it rewards tyrants. Seeking to create harmony with immoral people is in itself immoral. Every single foreigner in this country should be in full support of the "left-behind parent" effort, as should every single Japanese, as the impotent legal system here fails, by very definition (shinken - exclusive custody) fully 50% of ALL parents, gaijin and Japanese alike, who get divorced in this country. That fact that any gaijin gets any custody at all is simply by sheer luck, generous amounts of butt-kissing, and perhaps a dash of economic necessity on the part of the former Japanese spouse thrown in for good measure.
"There but for the grace of God go I." Chew on that.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
@michaelqtodd and @BlueTiger - And I say we shame the perpetrators of these injustices and yell out the names of both the criminals involved and the heartless government which succors them. Your whole "Let's all play nice in the playground, boys and girls" approach to this serious violation of the rights of both children and parents is simultaneously naive and lacking in compassion for the true victims of these injustices. This is a systemic problem, that requires revamping a legal system that is clearly incapable of protecting these families. Get real.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
@KyokoSmile - You're doing the right thing and pursuing the course of justice. Your children will need you someday to tell them the truth, that their mother never gave up on trying to be a part of their lives. Suicide is not an option. It never is. Be strong for your loved ones. You seem like a woman of deep convictions, so you will eventually succeed, by the grace of God.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
@igotchu -- Point well taken. Maintaining a focus of the TRULY IMPORTANT goals and not getting distracted by certain Japan apologists is essential to this effort.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
@michaelqtodd -- Re: your comment:
"Just had a good time with my daughter. Will see her again on Saturday when she is putting on a performance with her friends. I am attending with her mother and grandparents. No doubt my daughter will like us being there together watching her."
I am sincerely glad to hear that, no sarcasm intended. Just remember that the first time you cross your ex-wife, for whatever reason, she has the power to bar you from your daughter's life and leave you standing out in the cold with the rest of the left-behind parents.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
@michaelqtodd - Why do you stubbornly refuse to accept the fact that with some people, no amount of sweet talking or reaching out works. As I said before, we know virtually nothing about the details of Del Vecchio's case.
You yourself said in a previous post:
"Presumably a job requiring some degree of intelleigence so I will give Tony the benefit of the doubt and not call him an idiot"
So why can't you imagine that maybe he did try your soft diplomacy approach? Your assumptions about this guy whom you know VERY LITTLE about, and his ex-wife whom you know NOTHING about, reflect poorly on your intelligence and powers of reason. With all due respect.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
@michaelqtodd:
It's obvious that you didn't understand anything about what Del Vecchio said in his article. In it, he clearly said:
"After over two years of litigation, and just before the Tokyo District Court was to hand down a ruling on the case, I reluctantly accepted my soon-to-be-ex-wife’s idea of an “agreement,” which permitted visitation with my daughter Lili once a month “as long as it wasn’t against the child’s will.”
That doesn't sound like a "mutually agreed divorce" to me, but a man with a gun pointed to his head being told to sign or else. Had he allowed the judge to rule, he would have gotten zip.
You've argued before that you know people who have been granted visitation, but again you failed to understand what the man said, to wit:
"My illusions about receiving justice in Japan were first shattered during my divorce’s preliminary “chotei” (mediation) process, when I was told that, unlike in the United States, only one divorcing parent here could obtain custody, and it would be impossible for me to do so because, not being Japanese, I didn’t have a “koseki shohon” (family register). Nor could I expect any court-ordered visitation, as no provision for this exists under Japanese law."
As you can see, he says he was told during mediation that (1) only one parent could get custody, (2) that he could not hope to get custody because he wasn't Japanese (blatant racism), and (3) that he could not expect visitation because there was no provision for it under the law. So if the foregoing is not true, he was lied to by the court officers. I don't know why he decided to pursue the case for two more years after learning all of this, but I'd have to guess he was hoping his ex-wife would eventually tire of the litigation and give him what he wanted. I for one admire his perseverence and courage in light of the insurmountable odds stacked against him.
There are a great many things none of us know about his case. I don't know why you seem so cocksure about what took place. The "realities" you are presenting are of your own invention. I don't know why you are so intent on placing "100%" of the responsibility on him in light of what you know (i.e., virtually nothing) about the case.
Anyway, if what he says is true -- that he has been denied visitation for five years -- I should think that certainly makes him a victim. And you seem intent on blaming that victim. the way someone would blame a rape victim for wearing too short a skirt. Learn some compassion, mate.
I've been reading through the previous posts where people are taklking about his wife's infidelities. Del Vecchio never said anything of the sort, again, if you take the time to read what he said, to wit:
"Regardless, I pursued my legal effort to its foregone conclusion, along the way submitting evidence of my wife’s transgressions and arguing for the right to be a parent to my only child."
Exactly what those "transgressions" were, he never says. They might very well be infidelities, but they might have been something else. Stop READING INTO what he says and start READING what he says. That is the mark of an intelligent individual.
Finally, he seems like a realist to me, not a starry-eyed dreamer like you. He is looking to his government to pressure Japan into changing its laws by publicly condemning Japan for its human rights violations, a point no one on this forum has seen fit to comment on. Instead, lots of people are, indeed, blaming the victim, and not supporting efforts to reform the flawed and racist legal system Del Vecchio describes. Maybe if people like you would stop apologizing for Japan and start supporting efforts to bring this backward country into the 21st Century, things might improve for all of us "gaijin."
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
Fact -- We aren't always able to "create our own realities," especially in a xenophobic country that is light years behind the rest of the world when it comes to parental rights. Japan has been "studying" the Hague Convention for 20 years, and is still no further along than it was in 1980. What does that tell you?
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
Fact -- What occurs between a couple in a marriage is a completely separate issue from what transpires afterwards with respect to the children born of that marriage. For Mr. Todd to suggest that Del Vecchio's loss of parental rights is related in any way to what MAY OR MAY NOT have occurred during his marriage seems uncharitable at best, and downright cruel at worst. Del Vecchio has the right to be a part of his daughter's life -- at least in the civilized world -- barring COMPELLING evidence that this would present a danger to the child. Get real people!
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
Fact -- Divorce is an ugly process in many cases, and vesting power in a spouse with an axe to grind is questionable at best.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
Fact -- If a Japanese spouse wants to deny access to a former spouse, there is precious little that person can do about it.
Article Unavailable
0
IpManDisciple
Fact -- There are no contempt of court provisions in Japan, so even if an "agreement" is reached, neither party can look to the courts for enforcement.
Article Unavailable