On the other hand (was Re: Disliked Uncle Vernon)

[Doriane]

No: HPFGUIDX 93099



I snipped a lot, sorry :-)

Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote :

> You brought up that some would be sure to argue the Dursleys 
> should abide by the prevailing code of British society.  I 
> personally think they *should* be held to that code, yes,

Del answers :

But nobody did it. Neither Muggle nor Wizard. Nobody cared. The 
Dursleys are definitely not the only ones responsible for the way 
Harry was treated. Harry's teachers, for example, should have talked 
to the Child Welfare or whatever it's called in Britain. But they 
didn't. Why do we expect the Dursleys to obey our moral code, when 
nobody seems concerned that they don't ?


Susan wrote :

> If the Dursleys objected that much to having 
> Harry dropped on their doorstep, if they where determined that to 
> take him in would mean they would mistreat & abuse him, then why 
> did they not pass on the "offer"?  Why *not* enroll him in an 
> orphanage or turn him over to foster care? 

Del answers :

I can see at least 2 obvious reasons.

1. As others have mentioned, we don't know how things went. Maybe 
they had no choice.

2. It wasn't according to their own moral standard to give away 
their nephew. They don't care about being nice, but they want to be 
respectable. And respectable people provide for their orphan 
nephews. In fact, Harry even became a tool in constructing their 
respectability. Look at the way Aunt Marge talks to him, about how 
he should be grateful to Vernon and Petunia for taking him in. No 
doubt the Dursleys mentioned as often as they could that they took 
in and provided for their nephew, even though his parents had been 
such losers. Even saying that he has to go to St Brutus is logical 
then : no matter how much they did for him, Harry still ended up 
being a criminal, poor Dursleys, so many efforts wasted !

Del