Family secrets

Perhaps it is a good discussion topic in general on how families tend to keep secrets and indeed why.
This is particularly relevant to the Clan McCann as many believe they must know at least part of what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

I'm opening with a secret from a friends' family. He was warned not to get too friendly or close to a girl at school. He was about 17 and rather in love with her. His family just forbade him to see her. Thirty years later he found out she was his half-sister. His fathers' daughter by another who passed her off as her husbands' child. The whole village knew. Everybody knew, nobody ever told.

The Tia case brings these strange relationships into the open - but why the complicity of the grandmother? Did she too have something to hide?

Tigger , you have made a very good point with this post.

I do not often watch daytime television as I work full time , however, the little I see of these "DNA Tests" shows , it only reinforces to me that there are reeally no rules of society any more. When a young girl sits on one of these shows and says 50/50 ! I often wonder if morals are a thing of the past.

While I would not like society to revert to the draconian ways of banishing unwed Mothers , I do think life in 2012 is a step too far.

During and after WWII far more illegitimate babies were born. Wasn't it the case that these were often put up for adoption, or passed off as the child of the mother of the girl having the baby?
As a consequence many people in their 50's and 60's have accidentally discovered during family research (birth certificates etc.) that they have siblings in other parts of the country or the world.
Secrets never passed on to the children but known to the whole family, just never talked about.

I've read of several cases where someone discovered that the person they thought was their sister, was in fact their mother. A good example of how a family can keep secrets.
I would think there are plenty of instances where a family member would have committed a crime and it is known to the family, but never mentioned and kept from the 'outside' world.

So the knowledge many members of one family may have about a crime is never discussed, or simply denied if it ever comes up. It's not a conspiracy as such - it's just what quite a few families do.

Besides, once the crime has been committed, what can the family do if the only moral option is to take them to the authorities? Morals don't come into these situations imo, keeping the family secret is far more important. The crime has been committed, if yet another is committed, the family often separates itself from the criminal, but never passes their knowledge on to 'strangers'.

'We don't talk about that' was the standard phrase if some subject on the family came up which my mother didn't like. If you knew what was good for you, you never did but just 'knew' there was something about Uncle John, or whoever which was out of bounds.

Re the behaviour of the extended McCann family after 3/5. Their enthusiastic promotion of the Fund - and 'selling Maddie' - there are other questions.

I'm just beginning to realise that they behaved (with their immediate participation in long-term plans) as if Maddie had already been 'written off' some time ago.

I believe part of the family went on a holiday to Turkey in June or July that year, Philomena was part of that group or had arranged it.

They could have changed this booking to go instead to Portugal or Spain to 'look for Maddie'. But as far as I know, none of the McCann family physically looked for Maddie. They turned up to do the babysitting as far as I can see. The diary tells us that Kate thought there was too much family around and most of them were packed off home at the end of May to make way for a more streamlined 'team'.

The family must also have known perfectly well that the iconic photograph didn't look much like the lost girl.
In their enthusiasm they must have released various photographs which prove this beyond a doubt - once in the public domain, hard to retrieve.

The buzz-word was and still is - 'family' . Maddie had to be returned to her 'family'. The whole family went out to PdL where they did - nothing. Just a jolly break in the sunshine.

Inquiring Into Our Past: When the Doctor Is a Survivor of Abuse
Lucy M. Candib, Judith A. Savageau, Linda Weinreb, George Reed

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Health care professionals like other adults have a substantial exposure to childhood and adult victimization, but the prevalence of abuse experiences among practicing family physicians has not been examined. Also unclear is the impact of such personal experiences of abuse on physicians' screening practices for childhood abuse among their patients and the personal and professional barriers to such screening.

METHODS: We surveyed Massachusetts family physicians about their screening practices of adult patients for a history of childhood abuse and found that 33.6% had some experience of personal trauma, with 42.4% of women and 24.3% of men reporting some kind of lifetime personal abuse, including witnessing violence between their parents. These rates are comparable to or higher than those reported in prior studies of physicians' histories of abuse.

RESULTS: Physicians with a past history of trauma were more likely to feel confident in screening and less likely to perceive time as a barrier to screening.

CONCLUSIONS: Given the high prevalence of prior childhood and victimization of both men and women physicians with the associated effects on their clinical work, we recommend that educational and training settings adopt specific competencies to provide safe and confidential environments where trainees can safely explore these issues and the potential impact on their clinical practice and well-being.

Family Medicine Volume 44 Issue 6 June 2012

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Discussion: This study shows that a substantial proportion of practicing family physicians have a personal experience of childhood and/or adult physical and sexual abuse, comparable to prevalence rates of personal trauma found in the general population........

i have noticed more than one photo out there of a very young madeleine wearing lots of make-up... not just a little..... a lot.... clearly applied by someone older- while this in itself is not all that unusual... its disturbing that a parent who feared what was happening to their missing girl would choose to release those particular pics..? i do have a daughter- she has at times worn a little make up- but ther only time she has worn a lot is when her face was painted as a tiger of something !!! she is a lot older than madeleine was- but has never worn the amount i saw on those pics- & i certainly wouldnt be taking & disstributing pics if she was !!!! i know kids play with make up- or request haviong it put on- but those pics were disturbing- such a small child- such a grown up amount of make up !!! i certainly would not put thaat on my girl- not even now- never mind when she was a toddler!!! it seems strange- and its even more strange that those pics have been issued to the world- where they report that they believe someone has this little girl- why would they put out pictures like this -for the person they think has her- to see ??????[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

There have been lots of comments on earlier topics Butterfly23 about the inappropriateness of some of the photos that the McCanns considered were fit for public viewing.

Three of the worst ones appear in this video (from about 1.03 to 1.25) issued for the third anniversary in 2010.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I feel that it's all a big joke to them, knowing that no matter what they do or say, the media will continue to portray them as innocent victims.

had not seen that particular video before- very thought provoking- 1st its strange the photos they choose to favour ( the lolipop one / the lots of make up etc ) - 2nd ...it would lead you to believe that since madeleine went missing they have done nothing but search, make calls, research & follow every imaginable lead to find her.... this is not true !!! they have spent time buying a house, suing folk & hiring ruthless lawyers & a p.r. team !!!! ...the p.r. team who came up with that video !!!!!!!!!!!!...[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

..have been giving that video a bit more thought- cannot help but notice...rather than it seem like a desperate appeal for more information on their missing daughter...it is far more like a 'promotional' video for kate and gerry....its more like an advert for them - selling them ( & the fund!) as a 'idealistic' couple devoted to finding their beloved daughter!!! obviously this is what the money raised goes on- promotion- oh, & a house.... and lawyers.....p.r. company etc..... !!!! the truth is getting obscured by lots of fancy p.r. tricks !!!![You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

A parent’s sense of guilt after sexual assault nearly impossible to comprehend

The guilt Teri Henderson felt after her young daughters revealed their father had spent years sexually abusing and terrifying them was overwhelming.

She beat herself up over it for years. She was suicidal at times. She felt she shouldn’t be their mother anymore.

“There was a time I didn’t think I deserved to be their mother,” Henderson said. “I was supposed to protect them, and how can this happen right under my nose? They’re my babies. And visualizing these things that he did. It’s horrible. It’s horrific.”

The guilt may be easy to understand, and it’s a common feeling among so-called nonoffending parents, but it’s a rarely discussed factor in a world already burdened by shame, secrets and denial.

Kelsey Manship, now 24, was just 2 when she told her mother that Robert Manship had hurt her. Henderson was “borderline hysterical,” but doctors couldn’t say for sure whether Kelsey had been abused.

Years passed, and Henderson always had doubts. She had fears that something was wrong. There was a sense of foreboding sometimes when she went to make the beds in the girls’ room after they left for school. Something was wrong.

But there was also so much doubt. What should she do? She couldn’t believe her husband of more than a decade would do such a thing. Neither did the few friends or family members to whom she went for advice. Did she break up her family without proof? Was she crazy?

“You think, ‘Is there something wrong with me?’ ” Henderson said. “Hindsight is 20-20, you know? I didn’t have any proof. I never saw anything.”

In 1995, having moved from a military base in New Jersey to Litchfield, the girls came forward. Henderson’s worst fears were true, and she snapped into action. It took a long time and international cooperation, but Robert Manship was sentenced to prison in May.

But the guilt was debilitating. The fact that the predator was inside her home made it worse in some ways.

“You sit as a mother and you watch outside as your kids are playing and you pray to God no one’s ever going to take them,” Henderson said. “And I remember telling my cousin one day, ‘God, he was right behind me the whole time.’ You don’t want your kids to be kidnapped and you worry about them all the time if they’re playing outside. They were safer outside than being in the house.”

Kristie Palestino, executive director of the Granite State Children’s Alliance, said Henderson’s plight is incredibly common among nonoffending parents.

“That’s actually a really great example,” she said. “It’s deeper than denial, but denial is what it ends up looking like. I think it’s really hard for the nonoffending parents because they’re also being lied to and manipulated.”

Palestino, who was discussing sexual abuse in general and not Henderson’s case specifically, said it’s also easy to blame the nonoffending parent from afar, to judge him or her for not finding out sooner or going to police faster.

“It’s just not as simple as that, and I think we have to be careful not to victim-blame,” she said. “There’s a million different reasons why this would happen, especially someone who wasn’t supported somehow.

“It’s just a really hard thing to report. There’s shame involved. There’s so many layers.”

Joseph G. Cote can be reached at 594-6415 or jcote@nashua telegraph.com. Also follow Cote on Twitter (@Telegraph_JoeC).
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Still a struggle after two decades for childhood victim of sexual assault


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Wife of Worcester Park paedophile found guilty of tampering with investigation into her husband

The wife of a convicted paedophile from Worcester Park has been found guilty of meddling with the police investigation into her husband.

Wendy Hopkins, 60, denied intending to pervert the course of justice by tampering with statements in September 2010.

But she was found guilty at Kingston Crown Court today.

A jury retired for three hours and 27 minutes before returning with a 10 to two majority verdict.

She shook with apparent nerves as the guilty verdict was delivered by the jury foreman.

Her husband, mobility scooter repairman Michael Hopkins, 63, was jailed for eight-and-a-half years last August.

He was found guilty of sexually and indecently assaulting children over a nine year period.

The couple had been married for 20 years and enjoyed drinking and holidaying in Malta together.

Mrs Hopkins, who works in customer services at Interval International, in Raynes Park, will be sentenced at Kingston Crown Court tomorrow by Judge Susan Tapping.

Judge Tapping also sentenced her husband.

Mrs Hopkins, who lives in Church Road, Worcester Park, was given overnight bail.

Perverting the course of justice is punishable by a prison sentence of between four months and two years, according to the Crown Prosecution Service.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Prosecutor Simon Connolly said: “Wendy was a very strong matriarchal figure. She stood by her husband and supported him, as it happened, to the end.

“She then took it upon herself to meddle in the investigation that took place. She wanted to protect her husband. ”She searched for material that would make her husband appear “whiter than white” including anything that would discredit his victims, he claimed.

Paedophile's wife Wendy Hopkins, from Worcester Park, accused of tampering with child abuse investigation

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Wife joins paedophile husband behind bars after trying to sabotage police investigation

The wife of a convicted Worcester Park paedophile will join her husband behind bars after she was found guilty of trying to mislead police investigating him.

Wendy Hopkins, 60, was jailed for 12 months today for perverting the course of justice by tampering with statements about her husband in September 2010.

She was found guilty at Kingston Crown Court yesterday.

Judge Susan Tapping said Mrs Hopkins was unwilling to hear allegations against her husband Michael.

He was jailed in October for eight-and-a-half years for a string of attacks on girls as young as six-years-old.

She said: "I have no doubt that these serious allegations were a complete bombshell to you.

"You are one of countless women who love and trust a man."

But she added: "These men are skilled at hiding their offending."

But defence counsel Marcus Fletcher said: "This is a woman that has been married for 20 years.

"When partners feel very very much in love, that love can blind partners - that's what's happened in this case."

He added Mrs Hopkins, of Church Road, Worcester Park, was "a woman of exemplary character" who "has worked her whole life".

But he conceded: "This offence strikes at the heart of the criminal justice system - and she knows that."

The jury had retired for three hours and 27 minutes before returning with a 10 to two majority verdict the day before.

Mrs Hopkins, a customer services supervisor at Interval International, in Raynes Park, cupped her shaking hands as she was told she would go to prison.

Judge Tapping said: “The manipulation of evidence is very serious indeed. This offence is too serious to drop. Custody is the only possible sentence to reflect the gravity of what you did.”

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Olympicana_Reloaded wrote:Wife joins paedophile husband behind bars after trying to sabotage police investigation

The wife of a convicted Worcester Park paedophile will join her husband behind bars after she was found guilty of trying to mislead police investigating him.

Wendy Hopkins, 60, was jailed for 12 months today for perverting the course of justice by tampering with statements about her husband in September 2010.

She was found guilty at Kingston Crown Court yesterday.

Judge Susan Tapping said Mrs Hopkins was unwilling to hear allegations against her husband Michael.

He was jailed in October for eight-and-a-half years for a string of attacks on girls as young as six-years-old.

She said: "I have no doubt that these serious allegations were a complete bombshell to you.

"You are one of countless women who love and trust a man."

But she added: "These men are skilled at hiding their offending."

But defence counsel Marcus Fletcher said: "This is a woman that has been married for 20 years.

"When partners feel very very much in love, that love can blind partners - that's what's happened in this case."

He added Mrs Hopkins, of Church Road, Worcester Park, was "a woman of exemplary character" who "has worked her whole life".

But he conceded: "This offence strikes at the heart of the criminal justice system - and she knows that."

The jury had retired for three hours and 27 minutes before returning with a 10 to two majority verdict the day before.

Mrs Hopkins, a customer services supervisor at Interval International, in Raynes Park, cupped her shaking hands as she was told she would go to prison.

Judge Tapping said: “The manipulation of evidence is very serious indeed. This offence is too serious to drop. Custody is the only possible sentence to reflect the gravity of what you did.”

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A warning to all - even including officers from Operation Grange (and not forgetting those who worked on the Hillsborough investigation) - not to manipulate evidence.

Crecheman?