Harry Potter - Dursleys taking in Harry - Compelling Spell?

[June Ewing]

> June:
> ... Maybe Dumbledore had placed a spell that once taken inside
> the house, the Dursleys would have to keep Harry. If they didn't
> maybe their lives would have been in danger.

> Steve:
> I'm curious about precisely what you mean by "...HAVE to keep
> Harry"?
>
> Are you implying that some spell FORCED them to keep Harry.
> Because That doesn't seem right, either morally or logically.
> If the spell compels them, then they have no choice. And if
> they have no choice then they didn't really choose to allow
> Harry to stay.
>
> That seems counter to what I believe JRK's moral codes are. I
> think the Dursley's has to make a choice of their own free will
> in order to activate Dumbledore ENHANCED Blood Protection. And
> the protection at the Dursley is not the protection Lily gave
> Harry, but instead, it is an enhancement of that protection
> provided by Dumbledore, that hinges on the condition that the
> Dursleys freely, even if begrudgingly, take Harry in.
>
> It seems counter to all that is good and right for some spell
> to compel or force the Dursleys to act in a certain way. I
> believe, as should be clear, that it must be an act of free will.
>
> Or perhaps I misinterpreted what you intended to say?


June:
I really don't know. I cannot see the Dursleys taking him in of
their own free will because they obviously didn't want him there,
they have said that themselves and look at the way they (especially
Vernon) treated him. And it is very obvious that whatever that
letter meant that only Petunia knew about it. What, Steve, is your
outlook on the situation? I have racked my brain for a long time
over it and I so want to know what it was all about, so what do you
think the letter meant?