[HPforGrownups] The Dursleys' Motivation for Not Sending Harry to an Orphanage

[Megan Carlin]

No: HPFGUIDX 44032

Phyllis said: 

> Since the Dursleys are not portrayed as the most generous 
>of sorts, why would they keep Harry after he was deposited on their 
>doorstep rather than drive him straight to the nearest orphanage?  

And me:

I think that one sure reason that the Dursleys kept Harry was because they feared not to. Of course neither one of them would readily admit to being frightened by the WW, but it's a good possibility. After all when Harry comes home for his first vacation (following the PS/SS and at the beginning of CoS) all he has to do is mention doing magic and his aunt/uncle/cousin are all aflutter with trepidation. To them magic is this horrid, yet very dangerous thing that none of the three of them understand. It got Lily and James killed, and if they knew *anything* of how they were killed (the paranoia of Voldemort coming for Harry) that would scare even the hardiest of wizards, I believe. Petunia's very close-minded view of her sister Lily and Vernon's own biggotry of anything different wouldn't exactly have them down at the MoM learning how to be supportive of a wizard in the family. Indeed, I think that they probably have a rampant imagination as to what exactly Harry or any other wizard is capable of. 

So maybe when Dumbledore dropped Harry off at the Dursleys, the letter indicated something to the extent that they *better* take good care of him. I wouldn't imagine Dumbledore would threaten them in so many words, but we all know that he is very capable of getting the expected results with choice words. The "or else" now delivered, he could be sure that the Dursleys wouldn't just go drop Harry off at Social Services right off. 


Ponderingly,
Megan


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]