Why wasnt Harry sent to either a lightsided wizarding family or a muggle fam

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 150126

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "John" <clark.kentjr at ...> wrote:
>
> Dumbledore's reasoning for sending him to the Dursleys was that
> he wanted Harry to live a normal life and not be blinded by the 
> fame, but can that really be the case? ... So who was the idiot
> that apparently gave a sketch of Harry to the entire wizarding 
> world so they could easily identify him?
> 

bboyminn:

Again, I am reminded of a group of blind men examining an elephant.
They are all completely different in their descriptions, yet they are
all correct within the context of their limited preception.

Wanting Harry to have a normal life was only one small part of
Dumbledore's intent. True, he did want Harry to grow up away from the
fame that would surely follow him in the wizard world. Even if placed
with a wizard family, it would have been difficult to truly hide who
Harry was from people. Magic is powerful, but people don't pop out
babies overnight. It would have been too much of a coincidence for
Harry to disappear one day, and for some non-pregnant family to have a
new baby the next. 

Yes, you can take precautions and build a cover story, but that is
just what they did with Harry living in the muggle world, yet, in his
early life, wizards like Dedalus Diggle were able to find him.

Next, regardless of the presence of his Godfather, Petunia is Harry's
nearest living relative and that gives her some legal priority in
determining Harry's disposition. Likely, if challenged in a /fair/
court; Petunia would have gotten custody.

> John Concludes:
>
> I know what will be said, "What about the blood wards?"  Blood
> wards didn't stop the Basilisk, blood wards didn't stop the 
> Peter Pettigrew, new blood wards didn't stop the dementors, or
> Dobby who could've easily been sent by the Malfoys to kill him, or
anybody else for that matter. ...
> 
> John
>

bboyminn:

Well, let us look at the 'Blood Wards' as you call them. First,
Dumbldedore clearly says that the protection of 'blood' was the
strongest protection that he could give Harry. Now listen carefully;
as long as Harry is in the /place/ where his mother's blood dwells,
there he can not be harmed. 

He can not be attacked or harmed by anyone intent on doing him harm.
Whether that person or persons are Voldemort, his death eaters, random
fanatics, or the Ministry itself. No one can truly harm him while he
is at the Dursley. 

Now some may argue that the Dursleys harmed Harry in abusing him. True
they may have caused him pain and discomfort, but they did no real
harm, at least no physically harm. They did not harm him in the ways
that Harry's enemies were intent on harming him. 

Keep in mind that when delivered to the Dursleys, Harry was a toddler.
Small and helpless, and at that time, most vulnerable to attack. It's
not likely that the Dursley, cruel as they were, would leave Harry
sitting on the front curb or leave him at the shopping mall. Most
likely and reasonable, Harry would have spent the first few years of
his life rarely leaving the Dursley's house, the one place where he
was most thoroughly protected. 

At age five (or so), Harry would have gone to school, and while his
protection would have been lesser there, he was still in a crowded and
reasonable safe place. Further after several years, the immediate
threat to his life would have lessened as former Death Eaters and
Voldemort suporters went back to their quite safe
appearing-respectable lives. With the exception of a few fanatics,
there was no need for people to continue to actively support a Dark
Lord who, for all intent and purpose, no longer existed. Especially,
when that support was likely to land them a long stretch in the very
unpleasant Dementor guarded prison.

You mention the Basiliks and assorted other people who acted against
Harry in the books, implying that Harry didn't seem very well
protected by the 'Blood Wards'. Yet you will notice that Harry escaped
from every enemy he faced. Who's to say the 'blood wards' were not
responsible? 

I'm not saying they were responsible, only that we can't say that they
were not. The Protection of Blood is actually in two parts. Lily's
blood, or at least her sacrifice, left Harry with protection that
Dumbledore says still linger in Harry protecting him even AFTER
Voldemort used Harry's blood to regain his own body. 

The second level of Blood Protection, is the additional protection
that Dumbledore put on Harry, to protect him while he is at the
Dursley; the /place/ where his mother's blood dwells. So, the place,
that house, is a safe haven for Harry. Until the blood charm expires,
Harry can always retreat to that house, and there he can not be harm.
Voldemort himself says that he can't touch Harry while Harry is at the
Dursley's; more protect by Dumbledore than Harry can possibly realize.

Now, we don't know the nature of that "Place where his mother's blood
dwells' protection. We don't know how it would manifest itself if it
were ever called on. Would it act like the Fidelus Charm, hiding the
house? Would it act like Protego Shield Charm and rebound or repell
any attack? Would it act like the Patronus Charm and sent out Avatars
to defend Harry and the house? We don't know. All we know is that
while Harry is at the location, he is absolutely safe.

Since we don't know how the Blood Protection Charm works, we, also,
can not determine with certainy, it's boundaries. It is limited to the
house, or is it limited to any and all land that the Dursley's own? Is
it concentrated on that one place, and gradually diminishing as you
move away, or does it end at the boundary of the property? What if
Harry is with the Durselys, which would imply under their protection,
but none of them are on Dursley owned property, say they are at the
shopping mall, is Harry still fully protect, limited protection, or no
 protection? We can speculate, but with out further information, which
I believe we will have in the next book, we can't really say.

None the less, it seems that Harry's protection at Privet Drive is
absolute. 

Further still, we have evidence that the Ministry is closely
monitoring the Dursley's in case any illegal magical activity should
occur there. That close monitoring would serve as an early warning to
the Ministry should there be an attack on Harry.

That combine level of absolute and secondary protection could not be
offerred to Harry under any other circumstances. Dumbledore clearly
says that the 'Protection of Blood' is the strongest protection that
Dumbledore could devise. 

For what it's worth.

Steve/boyminn