Dursleys abuse

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 117486


> Pippin:
> She doesn't, you know. She could have sent him along to the 
> orphanage, or put him in foster care. She wasn't Harry's 
> godmother and she hadn't accepted responsibility for Harry 
> before he got dumped on her.
> 
> Once she accepted the responsibility, she could have done 
> better by Harry -- but then again, her idea of "better" is the way 
> she treats Dudley, which is why I think Dumbledore was wiser to 
> leave her alone than to force her to be "nice" to Harry.


Alla:

Sorry, Pippin but she does in my book. I realise though that it might 
be cultural thing. Being a close family, namely a sister means to me 
among other things that if your sister died, you will take in her 
child.

It is just what family does, IMO, especially close family. 

Drifting a little bit OT, but I hope it will illustrate the point. 
There are very few customs of the american society, which I dislike 
and will never be able to follow. Among those is putting your parents
(who are old, but in a good health)in the nursing home. I am not 
talking about very ill people, who can only be helped in  the 
hospital or in  the home.

I know that I am supposed to take care of my parents, not to dump 
them on the state, even if it will mean some hardships for me. They 
are my responsibility, just like I was theirs for quite some time.

Again, I realise that it is a cultural thing,because in the soviet 
union people did not move around much, but lived together or close by 
all their life.

Nevertheless, to me is what close family does - takes care of one 
another, especially in such tragic circumstances, as Harry turned out 
to be.

Pippin:

> And while I can't say much in Petunia's defense, I could certainly 
> understand if the British equivalent of child protective services 
> had more pressing cases on its hands. I would hate to think of it 
> devoting its resources to investigating the Dursleys while other 
> children were being *routinely* beaten, starved, kept home from 
> school because they had no glasses or shoes, etc. 


Alla:

Oh, of course, absolutely. Much worse cases of abuse could be easily 
imagined and happen routinely in RL.

I just take strong exception to the thesis that what Dursleys did to 
Harry is not abuse at all.
 
Del:
snip.

> I don't approve of what she and Vernon did, but I can't completely
> blame them either. They are only human, and what was asked of them 
was inhuman in my idea, especially without giving them help or at 
least keeping a watchful eye on them.


Alla:

What was asked of Dursleys, IMO was an emergency, which under any 
other circumstances (I hope) Dumbledore would not do.

I think that under those circumstances Petunia had to take Harry in 
(which she did) and treat him decently, if not lovingly(which she did 
not) .

Did Petunia resent Lily? Of course. Should she be blamed for thos 
efeelings? Not really, since we cannot help feeling one way or 
another.

Should she be blamed for taking her resentment or whatever out to 
Harry? Yes, definitely, IMO.

I said it is easy for me to argue the other side for Snape, but since 
I don't , Petunia's feelings remind me of Snape feelings of Harry, IF 
I am reading them correctly, of course.

Petunia cannot just stop feeling resentment of Lily and transfers it 
to Harry. Snape cannot stop feeling hatred of James and transfers it 
to Harry (again, if I am correct, of course)

Could they be ordered not to feel that way anymore? No, of course, 
not.
Should they be able to suppress those feelings enough in order not to 
take it out on Harry? YES.

Their rational mind has to grasp the idea that Harry (not Lily and 
not James) did not do anything to them.