Who should raise Harry (was Sudden Thought re: the Dursleys)

[Amy Z]

No: HPFGUIDX 11230

Marvin wrote:

>Amen.  But Dumbledore might have had still another reason...a basic 
>respect for rule of law and custom, even Muggle law.  If the 
>Dursley's are Harry's next of kin, then it's likely they have 
>the "right" to raise Harry, even if they don't especially want to.  
>Perhaps Dumbledore feels that, however good his intentions, he just 
>doesn't have the right to unilaterally decide that Harry would be 
>better off someplace else.

Well, according to Muggle law, at least American Muggles, Sirius would 
probably be his guardian; parents can name anyone they like guardian 
of their child and that's usually the godparent(s).  Right, list 
lawyers?  A relative could contest custody but the Dursleys 
wouldn't've done that.

But of course this godfather has rather taken himself out of the 
running, or so Dumbledore thinks.  Which just brings us back to the 
tangled question of what Dumbledore et alia knew, when, about Sirius 
during those first couple of days after James and Lily died.  AD knows 
already that Sirius betrayed them--but then why doesn't he warn Hagrid 
that Sirius is dangerous?--and on the evidence of their actions in bk 
1 ch 1, McGonagall knows too but Hagrid doesn't. . .  ?? 

Is there a discussion of this somewhere?  I couldn't find it in the 
archive.

Amy Z

----------------------------------------------------------
If only the hat had mentioned a house for people who felt 
a bit queasy, that would have been the one for him.
                      --HP and the Philosopher's Stone 
----------------------------------------------------------