Identifying with Muggles - The Dursley and 'Terrifying' Abuse

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 158238

> a_svirn:
<SNIP>
 As for the
> Dursleys, they were Harry's guardians, because Dumbledore decided so,
> not because of any laws muggle or wizard. When it suited Dumbledore he
> regarded them as Harry's guardians. When it didn't suit him he didn't.
> The law doesn't have anything to do with it. 
<SNIP>


Alla:

I would not claim familiarity with Great Britain laws, but do you know 
for a fact that the only living relative does not get the preference in 
being a guardian there?

I would think that Petunia being Harry's aunt would make courts give 
her guardianship almost automatically unless she refuses.

But as I said, can be wrong and please correct me if I am.

But in any event, even if I am wrong , nothing would make me thing that 
Petunia does not have moral obligation towards Harry as his aunt.

As to legal obligations in the US, somebody upthread brought the Texas 
Law - and this is what it is for me in the nutshell - aunt has an 
obligation to save a nephew or be held criminally negligent, really to 
me it is very simple.

Actually, I am not even sure if this is true in all states, since I 
don't deal with family law, but IMO it really really should be.

JMO,

Alla.