Reply to Sophie Turner and Joe Jonas headed to divorce

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Sophie Turner and Joe Jonas headed to divorce "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The whole thing is a mess but I'm a mom and there are few things more cruel than trying to keep a mom of very young children separated from her children. I will fight pretty much anyone on that, whether we're talking about a woman in prison or a wealthy actress in a mansion in the UK countryside. The bond between moms and babies/small kids is sacrosanct to me and I think it should only be broken if the mom is unwilling or unable to parent. The idea of someone trying to separate me from my kids at that age makes me think very dark thoughts.

Joe Jonas is absolute garbage.[/quote]

Is he trying to keep them apart, or is he trying to prevent her from attempting to establish the kids primary residence in the UK now that they’re divorcing? Because of those IS cruel and one is protecting his rights as a parent.[/quote]

If he is withholding the kids passports, thus forcing Sophie to come to him if she wants to be with her kids, it's cruel. The legalities of a divorce between two people with different nationalities is not my concern -- they should both have thought of that before getting married and having kids. But I just think it's cruel to attempt to separate very young children from their mother. Even if he has a legal justification for it, it's immoral. Their youngest daughter is only like 14 months old. These are babies.

It makes me feel physically unwell to think of a mother of children that age being separated from her children, for any reason other than the idea that she is an unfit mother. It's the only reason. Very young children should be with their mother if at all possible.[/quote]

Is it better to separate young kids from their father? Their reality is that they are from different countries. And if they’re divorced, they could be parenting on different continents. One of them is going to have more access than the other unless they agree to live in one spot.

It’s not crazy to me that if they’d lived on one location since the kids were born and suddenly moved to England as things were going south, that [b]the US born spouse would want to move back where they and their kids had been living. [/b]She could just as easily have pressured Joe to move to the UK months ago knowing that they were headed for a divorce and wanting to establish their residence there. [/quote]That doesn't mean that he can just go ahead and do it without notifying the other parent. He is a shady, conniving, controlling SOB and there is more about him that's going to come out.[/quote]

Yeah, it’s shady, but it’s a generally messy situation. And who knows what causes the dissolution of their marriage. What if she cheated on him? Is he supposed to just let her take the kids to London and uproot his life to follow them? If they had any established residence, it was in the US. I’m not sure who is legally right here but honestly they both seem like a-holes to me who aren’t putting their kids first. She wants to pull them from their home and father in the US, and he wants them here. The real losers are the kids. [/quote]

If Sophie was withholding their passports in the UK and not allowing them to travel to the US to visit Joe, I would say it was equally shady. He is not just "not consenting to them moving to the UK" (completely fine in my book; he wants to be in the US; let a judge sort it out), he is WITHHOLDING their passports. Absent any evidence that Sophie would not let them ever return to US, this is a horrible thing to do. The kids could definitely travel back and forth by a pre-determined arrangement while this is sorted out. He had already filed in the US & while the kids were present there, so he already had first mover advantage before stealing their passports. The fact she filed in NY and voluntarily submitted to the jurisdiction of US courts before filing in the UK makes it clear that she is not going to take the position that US courts have no jurisdiction at all. She basically can't because of her profession & the UK is a signatory to the Hague Convention anyway. This is not a situation where she's going to be able to kidnap her kids indefinitely nor is there ANY evidence that she intends to. On the contrary, that is essentially what Joe is doing by holding the passports hostage. The court will rule against him ASAP.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics