Identifying with Muggles - The Dursley and 'Terrifying' Abuse

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 158262

> Random832:
> I mean their parents. Vernon makes it quite clear that he doesn't want
> Harry going to Hogwarts and Hagrid will hear none of it. If they're
> really his legal guardians, don't they have a right to raise him as
> they see fit (and for those who think that they step over the line
> into child abuse - if that's the case, shouldn't that be determined in
> a court of law rather than having Hagrid or Dumbledore act as JJ&E?)
> 

Alla:

Actually this is the point I am forced to take into consideration as to 
whether Dursleys are indeed Harry's legal guardians in full sense of 
the word. Yes, in RL they have to be allowed to raised him as they see 
fit.

But one can argue that since magic is the integral part of who he is, 
that can be truly dangerous for Harry and people around him to deny him 
the recognition of his abilities, that it can be dangerous for his 
health in both literal and metaphorical sense to not develop his 
abilities, therefore even his guardians are sometimes not allowed to 
act against child's best interest, if that makes any sense.

Oh, and YES of course whether Dursleys are abusive in RL should be 
decided in court, totally.

But JKR is not writing a story about Dursleys and social services IMO, 
that has no place in the story, that is why she punishes them by the 
means that somehow can fit in the plot, as I argued in the past IMO.

JMO,

Alla, who thinks that very strong case can be built against Dursleys as 
child abusers