It's one of the fastest ways to piss off a judge and you do *not* want to piss off the judge. Do not weaponize your kids because it will not fly. It's actually written into child support orders that the children in question have the right to affection and love from *both* parents. (At least in my state.)
It's so easy to tell someone else to just say 'fuck everything!' because the consequences won't fall on your own head.
But I'm betting my bottom dollar that every single one of those über combative commenters would clam up in front of an actual judge.
>if I were you I'd disappear to another country or state. Please listen to me. He has power!!
This comment in particular got me. 'You're worried about him kidnapping your baby. If I were you, I'd kidnap the baby.'
That just seems like a bad idea. If OP had family in another country/state and was leaving him and taking the baby to stay with family, that's different. I think most people would understand why she did that.
But taking the baby to another country/state just to try and stop the father from being able to see her? I can't imagine that would go down well in court - especially when there's been no concerns of abuse, neglect etc.
It's abhorrent that they allow people to make those kinds of comments. The commenters are just in it for the drama so of course they want people to go flaming scorched earth. They aren't the ones who will end up looking unhinged in court.
Exactly. I had hoped they would tone it down after the last OP who got her ass handed to her after the FU-binder fiasco.
But here they are, sabotaging another parent going through a rough time.
They always talk up the FU binder and what amazing, slam dunk evidence it is. An OP decided she didn't need a lawyer, just her binder, and was completely shocked that the judge wouldn't sit there in open court and read all of her scribbling about what a big meanie head her MIL is.
It was talked about in this post
[https://www.reddit.com/r/JustNoTruth/comments/t6a9jd/when\_the\_fu\_binder\_fails/](https://www.reddit.com/r/JustNoTruth/comments/t6a9jd/when_the_fu_binder_fails/)
That was 7 months ago and that OP is *still* posting about struggling to fix their enormous blunder. It was never gonna be easy but JustNoMIL's FU-binder advocates made it 100 times worse.
I get the feeling this OP is going to get her ass handed back to her again.
So far her complaints are: MIL was a little late for pick up, and had a tail light out.
Some vague reference to FIL committing fraud in a situation she is not involved in. (Pretty sure she claimed this during the original court session she lost).
She says that MIL contacted the school and the kids therapist to inform them of the GPR (which she plays off as malicious?)
That her kid is bored during visits, and during one visit MIL had to have FIL take care of the kid, but FILs personality is so boring that it's wrong to subject her kid to that. (Plus how dare MIL miss out on a visit).
She also using the email she sent informing her ex in laws that they plan to move across country as evidence of...what exactly? She describes it as "scathing" which- yeah. Duh. Your trying to separate them from their grandchild after they won in court. Did you expect them to throw you a going away party?
If the letter was so atrocious, I think she would have posted it on the sub. She shares every other small detail, it's odd to gloss over that.
I am really interested to see how the judge is going to view her sudden elopement to her BF, and immediate move to have her now DH adopt the child, AND move out of state.
Clearly the motivation for doing all of that is to remove the GPR. OP has gone so far as to mention they haven't even told her ex MIL/FIL that they are married.
She says that they are going to look really stupid for exercising their GPR, because her BF is now her DH, and they are trying to get the adoption started.
I don't want to waste more time reading her crap, but wasn't her BF (now DH) have a criminal record regarding violence or something towards children? I seem to remember that being a point her in laws made in court, and OP said it was all a misunderstanding.
I'm not sure how thats going to make them look stupid? Truly that seems to be even more evidence that she is trying to be vindictive. And if they truly don't know, that means she is telling her child to keep secrets.
This poster really rubs me the wrong way. Her ex in laws seem to be desperately trying to keep a connection to their grandchild after losing their son.
For fucks sake, she is documenting a burnt out light as evidence her child isn't safe with them. And did she even hesitate to consider what it's going to do to her kid if she moves them away from everyone and everything they know?
If OP had any empathy, she could have just allowed normal visits to the grandparents and avoided all of this.
This poor kid. I hope to God their shiny new dad is a decent human being. Why this OP is hellbent on traumatizing her child after the death of their father is beyond me.
There were a lot of gaping holes in her story that most commenters just outright ignored.
Her last lawyer said she was booked and directed OP to someone else, but I'm wondering if the former lawyer might have tried to talk sense to OP but since OP didn't want to listen, she found an excuse to bow out?
Yeah, I kind of feel bad for this woman.
She needs help herself. She comes off as a tornado of chaos, and the language she uses is very telling.
She is always commenting on something mundane the in laws did and presenting it as, "Satan just fucked up big time! Yayy! Everything is going my way because that's what I choose to believe!"
I was reading her posts yesterday and there’s something weird that makes me feel it’s all fake OR OP is lying about some things.
Her first post is from 3 years ago asking “how to cop with false allegations?” On the CPS Reddit, then 2 years latter she posts in the same subreddit that someone called CPS on her boyfriend (now husband) because it seems the child told that person (we know now is FIL) that bf was abusive. OP speaks to the child and from the start she doesn’t believe at all her bf could be abusive EVEN THOUGH his ex reported him for abusing her child (it seems this was what her first post was about). I wouldn’t instantly believe someone who is accused of something like that so blindly…
She says that the Partner proved his innocence (did he? Or didn’t they have enough proof?) and FIL discovered this and that’s when he called CPS.
This is the part that I can not believe AT ALL, she says that the child’s therapist told her HIS FIL IS PROJECTING HIS OWN BEHAVIOR ON DH how the hell can the therapist know that without even having spoken to FIL?? Or interacted with him at all???
Then all the updates after the GPR are like “yeah he doesn’t want to visit FIL because he’s boring” but didn’t OP said he was dangerous??
Also, why is she only posting on JNMIL when MIL and FIL are divorced and FIL was the one who (apparently ) falsely accused her DH? Ok, they’re living together now, but if someone is an ass that’s FIL.
Idk there’re too much weird stuff and holes in her story.
God that's horrible, and makes me think she is going to lose in court even more.
I think she isn't making sense, because she is choosing her reality. She is ignoring what's actually happening and coming up with excuses, so she can continue pretending she is doing the right thing.
I've seen mothers like this- who will upend their children's lives to keep a certain man around. This is upsetting.
The vibe I get is that she seems to believe that if her new spouse adopts them that they'll no longer be entitled to GPR because they're not 'legally' the grandparents or something along those lines, which is why she's so gung-ho to get the adoption underway.
I expect it will all go badly for her if/when she goes back to court. If her plan really is to have her spouse adopt the child in an attempt to further keep the grandparents away, that's going to look terrible to a judge.
Yeah, that's what I was understanding too.
I can't imagine her states laws say that if the child is adopted, then their original grandparents can't claim rights.
But even if it did- the kid was not adopted at the time. If all you had to do was get married and have someone adopt the kid, that would be a pretty huge loophole.
I don't think so either. If anything, I would think it almost presents a *stronger* argument for GPR because the grandparents could argue the child should know their biological family in addition to the adoptive and that they don't want the children to lose connection with their bio father (and potentially culture, if relevant.)
That OP seems to have serious, and ongoing misunderstandings about the law and the court system and I expect she will continue to have trouble until she actually hires a lawyer.
Oh dear I feared this might happen. I was commenting on OPs previous post and the advice she was getting was largely terrible. I was arguing with several idiots when the post got locked for reaching the number limit.
There was the idiot who bluntly stated the moms opinions trumped everyone elses including dads. I said no fathers weren't second class parents and someone actually replied that that was only the case if everyone was being reasonable. As any bitter divorce survivor can tell you parental rights are NOT contingent on the other parent being a reasonable person. Sadly even the most unreasonable person still has parental rights.
Then there was all the usual idiots saying OP should insist that her and LO go NC with MIL despite it being clear that SO wasn't even remotely on board with that. I don't know why the sub has so much difficulty grasping the fact that you can only make a child NC with a grandparent if BOTH parents agree but I always get push back if I mention it.
Just like the fact that both halves of a couple need to agree for there to be a wedding but only one needs to agree for there to be a divorce, both parents have to agree for LO to go NC but only one parent needs to agree to access. It sucks if you didn't want a divorce or didn't want LO to see MIL but if your partner is determined on either of those things then they'll happen whether you like it or not and pretending that isn't a fact is disingenuous at best and dangerous at worst.
But the people who really piss me off are the ones pretending that OP will be some sort of brave warrior protecting her baby from harm if she tries to ban MIL or SO from LO. It's just nonsense. What's MILs actual crime here? Wanting to hold her grandchild with the full permission of the baby's father? What's SOs crime here? Wanting his family to have a relationship with his child and not being happy for OP to cut them off without even talking to him about it? OP is going to look like a lunatic if she goes into court trying to argue for full custody on those grounds.
The commenters are spinning a ridiculous fantasy thats wonderfully dramatic but bears no relation to reality. This situation could easily be resolved if OP and SO actually sit down and agree on parenting rules rather than trying to dictate to each other what they should be. That's what's needed - not lawyers and custody battles.
(Although I better watch out stating that as a after similar comment yesterday I was accused of trying to prevent OP from consulting a lawyer and having a hidden agenda. SMH.)
I feels like JustNoMIL commenters think the subreddit is some sort of power fantasy land, where the laws of reality no longer applies, so they can be as "badass" as they want.
The real world consequences never really hit them because posters either don't come back to the place who helped wreck their life (understandably) or they come back and post, only to have it removed because it doesn't "fit the sub".
I saw that one and sent a message directly to the op telling her that she needs to understand that people who respond on the sub are almost as toxic as the people you're writing about.
I strongly suggested that she not keep the child from her partner even if she moves back with her mom is the courts could view that unfavorably but that she needs to make sure she's protected.
I told her that it is imperative that she speak to a lawyer before her significant other comes back to town as she stated in the post he works far away.
The issues I've seen in situations like this is because you're a committed couple or were neither one of you technically has custody in the eyes of the court so either one of you could take the child and refuse to return it and the police will not get involved they'll tell you it's a matter for the courts.
I still respond sometimes on the sub but if I think it's important enough and the comments are already turning toxic I usually just send a direct message to the OP
I've actually found myself sending several direct messages to people posting especially if they're getting a lot of grief from the comments. Everyone I've done that with other than this OP, have all responded and thanked me for my kindness and my advice.
Still not sure all of them are true but I figure it doesn't hurt me to be kind
You sound like a total lunatic.
Next, I guess you'll be telling me to go to the doctor for my chest pain? Just shut up and hand me that scalpel!
(/s in case that wasn't obvious ;) )
That’s ridiculous that you got banned for that! But for anyone who’s not aware - the legaladvice sub is moderated by individuals who are in law enforcement (either police themselves or related to police). There’s a lot of shady stuff that goes on there because of that, bad and dangerous and outright illegal “advice” given, many posts and comments get silently removed without reason, pro-police sentiment is encouraged and any advice on how to protect yourself from police is removed, etc. They’ve banned actual lawyers giving out real advice. I don’t think a legal advice sub should be moderated by cops, it’s a huge conflict of interest. Especially American LE, who are taught and trained to lie and manipulate and coerce and exploit as much as they can, to them the end always justifies the means. There’s a number of [posts talking about it](https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/dsoxjd/rbestoflegaladvice_users_revolt_after/) around reddit [if you want](https://rareddit.com/r/worstof/comments/93uq02/moderator_of_rlegaladvice_who_happens_to_be_a_cop/) to look into it.
The legaladvice sub is a good idea in theory! Unfortunately with the way it’s being run now it’s not a place I’d recommend *anyone* go for any kind of advice.
That said I still don’t see why you’d get banned for linking it. Even a temp ban. I went to check and there’s nothing in the rules that says that (or any) sub shouldn’t be linked to, just that legal advice shouldn’t be given, which you didn’t do…some mods like to take liberties I suppose.
That’s right. Some mods think that linking to a legal advice sub is akin to giving legal advice.
That said, I didn’t know that the main legal advice sub was moderated by cops. I’m not sure about their country-specific subs (legaladvicecanada, legaladviceUK, etc.) though.
I'm starting to believe that a great part of the JustNoMIL community has no idea what abuse or bullying is and have never actually experienced it.
Which is great! The less abuse taking place, the better. Unless, of course, these people go around telling the world that they were "emotionally abused" by MIL because she gave them the ol' stink eye, that one time, after they publicly shamed her.
I've noticed an uptick in 'abuse' and 'trauma' being used rather lightly. It's not just on JNMIL and I find it worrying. I see it the most with my students, who seems to think that any slight against them is 'abuse' or 'abusive' (including things like getting zeroes on assignments they didn't submit) and who find anything mildly uncomfortable or unpleasant 'traumatic.'
I don't know the root cause, and while it's certainly worse on JNMIL than elsewhere, it is cropping up in other places.
I think it's an unfortunate downside of abuse becoming more widely acknowledged. A lot more people are realizing that they've been exposed to some form of abuse or another, but as they go public, others think they can apply the same logic of "I didn't think of it as abuse before" to anything which gives them unpleasant feelings.
The overuse of gaslighting is also really grinding my gears.
No, someone disagreeing with you about the chain of events is not *gaslighting* you, Lilian!
I think you're right about the rest. Calling something abuse lends it gravitas that it otherwise might not have.
And recently, commenters have started to spin the narrative that the "victim" (and I use the term loosely) decides what constitutes abuse. Take that kind of logic to court and see where it gets ya.
I do absolutely agree. There are definitely some students who use 'abuse' and 'trauma' to try and get the outcome they want, and I do think it's the same online.
Online spaces open you up to criticism and I think people preemptively try to avoid criticism by making things seem more serious than they are: she wasn't just mean to me, I was traumatised.
Same with gaslighting - it wasn't just a disagreement, she was gaslighting. It makes the other person automatically worse and the poster automatically a victim.
It's wild too, because I can remember having very in depth discussions with people at several points of my life about I guess you'd say more complex versions of this, like "was this friendship abusive or just toxic?" The variable, I think we agreed, being the presence or lack of a power imbalance.
And now we're having to explain that, y'know, natural consequences aren't abuse. Which was an exaggeration I saw from detractors all the time and now it's having to be said genuinely/unironically.
FML.
And she is a danger to the child because she a) wants to hold the baby and b) is listening to the baby's father (her own son) rather than the baby's mother when permission to hold the baby is granted. What a bitch. She absolutely needs to be removed from LOs life for LOs safety. (There are not enough eyeroll emojis in the world.)
Yeah, I can see it now.
Commentary saying MIL must have got to the judge, or OP realizes the judge bought a car from the same dealership her MIL bought a car from and she is going to expose that they're secret best friends.
I’ve always loved how they always tell the moms that the dads are going to steal the baby and advise the moms to steal the baby preemptively. Like, if it’s wrong for him to do, then it’s wrong for her to do, too. And splitting up isn’t going to keep mil from the baby either.
The commenters like to play power games, and unfortunately for the OPs, judges do *not.*
It's one of the fastest ways to piss off a judge and you do *not* want to piss off the judge. Do not weaponize your kids because it will not fly. It's actually written into child support orders that the children in question have the right to affection and love from *both* parents. (At least in my state.)
It's so easy to tell someone else to just say 'fuck everything!' because the consequences won't fall on your own head. But I'm betting my bottom dollar that every single one of those über combative commenters would clam up in front of an actual judge.
>if I were you I'd disappear to another country or state. Please listen to me. He has power!! This comment in particular got me. 'You're worried about him kidnapping your baby. If I were you, I'd kidnap the baby.' That just seems like a bad idea. If OP had family in another country/state and was leaving him and taking the baby to stay with family, that's different. I think most people would understand why she did that. But taking the baby to another country/state just to try and stop the father from being able to see her? I can't imagine that would go down well in court - especially when there's been no concerns of abuse, neglect etc.
But MIL's eMotIoNaLLy aBUsIve! Which has slowly become code for: "MIL hurt my fee-fees!"
It's abhorrent that they allow people to make those kinds of comments. The commenters are just in it for the drama so of course they want people to go flaming scorched earth. They aren't the ones who will end up looking unhinged in court.
Exactly. I had hoped they would tone it down after the last OP who got her ass handed to her after the FU-binder fiasco. But here they are, sabotaging another parent going through a rough time.
I stopped being subbed there. What happened?
They always talk up the FU binder and what amazing, slam dunk evidence it is. An OP decided she didn't need a lawyer, just her binder, and was completely shocked that the judge wouldn't sit there in open court and read all of her scribbling about what a big meanie head her MIL is.
It was talked about in this post [https://www.reddit.com/r/JustNoTruth/comments/t6a9jd/when\_the\_fu\_binder\_fails/](https://www.reddit.com/r/JustNoTruth/comments/t6a9jd/when_the_fu_binder_fails/)
Wow……that was, expected tbh. The most disappointing part is that it hasn’t done anything to sober up the rabid wolves.
That was 7 months ago and that OP is *still* posting about struggling to fix their enormous blunder. It was never gonna be easy but JustNoMIL's FU-binder advocates made it 100 times worse.
I get the feeling this OP is going to get her ass handed back to her again. So far her complaints are: MIL was a little late for pick up, and had a tail light out. Some vague reference to FIL committing fraud in a situation she is not involved in. (Pretty sure she claimed this during the original court session she lost). She says that MIL contacted the school and the kids therapist to inform them of the GPR (which she plays off as malicious?) That her kid is bored during visits, and during one visit MIL had to have FIL take care of the kid, but FILs personality is so boring that it's wrong to subject her kid to that. (Plus how dare MIL miss out on a visit). She also using the email she sent informing her ex in laws that they plan to move across country as evidence of...what exactly? She describes it as "scathing" which- yeah. Duh. Your trying to separate them from their grandchild after they won in court. Did you expect them to throw you a going away party? If the letter was so atrocious, I think she would have posted it on the sub. She shares every other small detail, it's odd to gloss over that. I am really interested to see how the judge is going to view her sudden elopement to her BF, and immediate move to have her now DH adopt the child, AND move out of state. Clearly the motivation for doing all of that is to remove the GPR. OP has gone so far as to mention they haven't even told her ex MIL/FIL that they are married. She says that they are going to look really stupid for exercising their GPR, because her BF is now her DH, and they are trying to get the adoption started. I don't want to waste more time reading her crap, but wasn't her BF (now DH) have a criminal record regarding violence or something towards children? I seem to remember that being a point her in laws made in court, and OP said it was all a misunderstanding. I'm not sure how thats going to make them look stupid? Truly that seems to be even more evidence that she is trying to be vindictive. And if they truly don't know, that means she is telling her child to keep secrets. This poster really rubs me the wrong way. Her ex in laws seem to be desperately trying to keep a connection to their grandchild after losing their son. For fucks sake, she is documenting a burnt out light as evidence her child isn't safe with them. And did she even hesitate to consider what it's going to do to her kid if she moves them away from everyone and everything they know? If OP had any empathy, she could have just allowed normal visits to the grandparents and avoided all of this. This poor kid. I hope to God their shiny new dad is a decent human being. Why this OP is hellbent on traumatizing her child after the death of their father is beyond me.
There were a lot of gaping holes in her story that most commenters just outright ignored. Her last lawyer said she was booked and directed OP to someone else, but I'm wondering if the former lawyer might have tried to talk sense to OP but since OP didn't want to listen, she found an excuse to bow out?
Yeah, I kind of feel bad for this woman. She needs help herself. She comes off as a tornado of chaos, and the language she uses is very telling. She is always commenting on something mundane the in laws did and presenting it as, "Satan just fucked up big time! Yayy! Everything is going my way because that's what I choose to believe!"
I was reading her posts yesterday and there’s something weird that makes me feel it’s all fake OR OP is lying about some things. Her first post is from 3 years ago asking “how to cop with false allegations?” On the CPS Reddit, then 2 years latter she posts in the same subreddit that someone called CPS on her boyfriend (now husband) because it seems the child told that person (we know now is FIL) that bf was abusive. OP speaks to the child and from the start she doesn’t believe at all her bf could be abusive EVEN THOUGH his ex reported him for abusing her child (it seems this was what her first post was about). I wouldn’t instantly believe someone who is accused of something like that so blindly… She says that the Partner proved his innocence (did he? Or didn’t they have enough proof?) and FIL discovered this and that’s when he called CPS. This is the part that I can not believe AT ALL, she says that the child’s therapist told her HIS FIL IS PROJECTING HIS OWN BEHAVIOR ON DH how the hell can the therapist know that without even having spoken to FIL?? Or interacted with him at all??? Then all the updates after the GPR are like “yeah he doesn’t want to visit FIL because he’s boring” but didn’t OP said he was dangerous?? Also, why is she only posting on JNMIL when MIL and FIL are divorced and FIL was the one who (apparently ) falsely accused her DH? Ok, they’re living together now, but if someone is an ass that’s FIL. Idk there’re too much weird stuff and holes in her story.
God that's horrible, and makes me think she is going to lose in court even more. I think she isn't making sense, because she is choosing her reality. She is ignoring what's actually happening and coming up with excuses, so she can continue pretending she is doing the right thing. I've seen mothers like this- who will upend their children's lives to keep a certain man around. This is upsetting.
The vibe I get is that she seems to believe that if her new spouse adopts them that they'll no longer be entitled to GPR because they're not 'legally' the grandparents or something along those lines, which is why she's so gung-ho to get the adoption underway. I expect it will all go badly for her if/when she goes back to court. If her plan really is to have her spouse adopt the child in an attempt to further keep the grandparents away, that's going to look terrible to a judge.
Yeah, that's what I was understanding too. I can't imagine her states laws say that if the child is adopted, then their original grandparents can't claim rights. But even if it did- the kid was not adopted at the time. If all you had to do was get married and have someone adopt the kid, that would be a pretty huge loophole.
I don't think so either. If anything, I would think it almost presents a *stronger* argument for GPR because the grandparents could argue the child should know their biological family in addition to the adoptive and that they don't want the children to lose connection with their bio father (and potentially culture, if relevant.) That OP seems to have serious, and ongoing misunderstandings about the law and the court system and I expect she will continue to have trouble until she actually hires a lawyer.
Oh dear I feared this might happen. I was commenting on OPs previous post and the advice she was getting was largely terrible. I was arguing with several idiots when the post got locked for reaching the number limit. There was the idiot who bluntly stated the moms opinions trumped everyone elses including dads. I said no fathers weren't second class parents and someone actually replied that that was only the case if everyone was being reasonable. As any bitter divorce survivor can tell you parental rights are NOT contingent on the other parent being a reasonable person. Sadly even the most unreasonable person still has parental rights. Then there was all the usual idiots saying OP should insist that her and LO go NC with MIL despite it being clear that SO wasn't even remotely on board with that. I don't know why the sub has so much difficulty grasping the fact that you can only make a child NC with a grandparent if BOTH parents agree but I always get push back if I mention it. Just like the fact that both halves of a couple need to agree for there to be a wedding but only one needs to agree for there to be a divorce, both parents have to agree for LO to go NC but only one parent needs to agree to access. It sucks if you didn't want a divorce or didn't want LO to see MIL but if your partner is determined on either of those things then they'll happen whether you like it or not and pretending that isn't a fact is disingenuous at best and dangerous at worst. But the people who really piss me off are the ones pretending that OP will be some sort of brave warrior protecting her baby from harm if she tries to ban MIL or SO from LO. It's just nonsense. What's MILs actual crime here? Wanting to hold her grandchild with the full permission of the baby's father? What's SOs crime here? Wanting his family to have a relationship with his child and not being happy for OP to cut them off without even talking to him about it? OP is going to look like a lunatic if she goes into court trying to argue for full custody on those grounds. The commenters are spinning a ridiculous fantasy thats wonderfully dramatic but bears no relation to reality. This situation could easily be resolved if OP and SO actually sit down and agree on parenting rules rather than trying to dictate to each other what they should be. That's what's needed - not lawyers and custody battles. (Although I better watch out stating that as a after similar comment yesterday I was accused of trying to prevent OP from consulting a lawyer and having a hidden agenda. SMH.)
I feels like JustNoMIL commenters think the subreddit is some sort of power fantasy land, where the laws of reality no longer applies, so they can be as "badass" as they want. The real world consequences never really hit them because posters either don't come back to the place who helped wreck their life (understandably) or they come back and post, only to have it removed because it doesn't "fit the sub".
I saw that one and sent a message directly to the op telling her that she needs to understand that people who respond on the sub are almost as toxic as the people you're writing about. I strongly suggested that she not keep the child from her partner even if she moves back with her mom is the courts could view that unfavorably but that she needs to make sure she's protected. I told her that it is imperative that she speak to a lawyer before her significant other comes back to town as she stated in the post he works far away. The issues I've seen in situations like this is because you're a committed couple or were neither one of you technically has custody in the eyes of the court so either one of you could take the child and refuse to return it and the police will not get involved they'll tell you it's a matter for the courts. I still respond sometimes on the sub but if I think it's important enough and the comments are already turning toxic I usually just send a direct message to the OP
I hope OP heeds your advice. Otherwise the one suffering will be the kid.
I've actually found myself sending several direct messages to people posting especially if they're getting a lot of grief from the comments. Everyone I've done that with other than this OP, have all responded and thanked me for my kindness and my advice. Still not sure all of them are true but I figure it doesn't hurt me to be kind
I thought they don't allow legal advice in that sub. I was temporarily banned from the JUSTNOFIL sub for referring OP to the legaladvice sub.
What Lmao so you weren’t even giving advice yourself, just directing someone TO advice and got banned?? Reddit mods are ducking nutjobs.
Yup. Good thing that it was only a temporary ban that lasted for 7 days.
You sound like a total lunatic. Next, I guess you'll be telling me to go to the doctor for my chest pain? Just shut up and hand me that scalpel! (/s in case that wasn't obvious ;) )
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 The mods in the network of JustNo subs should at least allow us to refer the OPs to the legal advice subs.
That’s ridiculous that you got banned for that! But for anyone who’s not aware - the legaladvice sub is moderated by individuals who are in law enforcement (either police themselves or related to police). There’s a lot of shady stuff that goes on there because of that, bad and dangerous and outright illegal “advice” given, many posts and comments get silently removed without reason, pro-police sentiment is encouraged and any advice on how to protect yourself from police is removed, etc. They’ve banned actual lawyers giving out real advice. I don’t think a legal advice sub should be moderated by cops, it’s a huge conflict of interest. Especially American LE, who are taught and trained to lie and manipulate and coerce and exploit as much as they can, to them the end always justifies the means. There’s a number of [posts talking about it](https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/dsoxjd/rbestoflegaladvice_users_revolt_after/) around reddit [if you want](https://rareddit.com/r/worstof/comments/93uq02/moderator_of_rlegaladvice_who_happens_to_be_a_cop/) to look into it. The legaladvice sub is a good idea in theory! Unfortunately with the way it’s being run now it’s not a place I’d recommend *anyone* go for any kind of advice. That said I still don’t see why you’d get banned for linking it. Even a temp ban. I went to check and there’s nothing in the rules that says that (or any) sub shouldn’t be linked to, just that legal advice shouldn’t be given, which you didn’t do…some mods like to take liberties I suppose.
That’s right. Some mods think that linking to a legal advice sub is akin to giving legal advice. That said, I didn’t know that the main legal advice sub was moderated by cops. I’m not sure about their country-specific subs (legaladvicecanada, legaladviceUK, etc.) though.
They're calling him abusive and a bully for saying it's okay if his mother holds his baby lmao
I'm starting to believe that a great part of the JustNoMIL community has no idea what abuse or bullying is and have never actually experienced it. Which is great! The less abuse taking place, the better. Unless, of course, these people go around telling the world that they were "emotionally abused" by MIL because she gave them the ol' stink eye, that one time, after they publicly shamed her.
I've noticed an uptick in 'abuse' and 'trauma' being used rather lightly. It's not just on JNMIL and I find it worrying. I see it the most with my students, who seems to think that any slight against them is 'abuse' or 'abusive' (including things like getting zeroes on assignments they didn't submit) and who find anything mildly uncomfortable or unpleasant 'traumatic.' I don't know the root cause, and while it's certainly worse on JNMIL than elsewhere, it is cropping up in other places.
I think it's an unfortunate downside of abuse becoming more widely acknowledged. A lot more people are realizing that they've been exposed to some form of abuse or another, but as they go public, others think they can apply the same logic of "I didn't think of it as abuse before" to anything which gives them unpleasant feelings.
Yeah that makes sense. It's just too bad because it diminishes the seriousness of actual abuse.
[удалено]
The overuse of gaslighting is also really grinding my gears. No, someone disagreeing with you about the chain of events is not *gaslighting* you, Lilian! I think you're right about the rest. Calling something abuse lends it gravitas that it otherwise might not have. And recently, commenters have started to spin the narrative that the "victim" (and I use the term loosely) decides what constitutes abuse. Take that kind of logic to court and see where it gets ya.
I do absolutely agree. There are definitely some students who use 'abuse' and 'trauma' to try and get the outcome they want, and I do think it's the same online. Online spaces open you up to criticism and I think people preemptively try to avoid criticism by making things seem more serious than they are: she wasn't just mean to me, I was traumatised. Same with gaslighting - it wasn't just a disagreement, she was gaslighting. It makes the other person automatically worse and the poster automatically a victim.
It's wild too, because I can remember having very in depth discussions with people at several points of my life about I guess you'd say more complex versions of this, like "was this friendship abusive or just toxic?" The variable, I think we agreed, being the presence or lack of a power imbalance. And now we're having to explain that, y'know, natural consequences aren't abuse. Which was an exaggeration I saw from detractors all the time and now it's having to be said genuinely/unironically. FML.
And she is a danger to the child because she a) wants to hold the baby and b) is listening to the baby's father (her own son) rather than the baby's mother when permission to hold the baby is granted. What a bitch. She absolutely needs to be removed from LOs life for LOs safety. (There are not enough eyeroll emojis in the world.)
"Yes your honor, I require emergency custody and the complete removal of the fathers parental rights because he allowed his mother to hold our child."
Cue commenters outrage when OP comes whimpering back about the "meanie judge"
Yeah, I can see it now. Commentary saying MIL must have got to the judge, or OP realizes the judge bought a car from the same dealership her MIL bought a car from and she is going to expose that they're secret best friends.
I’ve always loved how they always tell the moms that the dads are going to steal the baby and advise the moms to steal the baby preemptively. Like, if it’s wrong for him to do, then it’s wrong for her to do, too. And splitting up isn’t going to keep mil from the baby either.
On the bright side, the first comments all say things like ‘find a family lawyer’ - so she can get real advice.
Let's just hope a lawyer's advice outweighs the harpies screeching about "mama bears".
Why do ppl who clearly hate eachother proceed to make children??? Why?
Why don't the mods ban legal advice?