Harry Potter - Dursleys taking in Harry - Compelling Spell?

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 190857

 
> 
> 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?
>

Pippin:
I'm not Steve, but I think the letter did not have to impose magical consequences on Petunia because natural consequences already existed. 

The blood protection Dumbledore can provide if she consents is not only the strongest protection for Harry but also for Petunia and her family. If she refuses to provide it, it will still be in Voldemort's interest to see that she *cannot* provide it -- and neither he nor his servants are in the habit of negotiating with Muggles to get what they want. Dumbledore would delicately point that out. He wouldn't have to bounce wine glasses off their heads or send a Howler to make them pay attention: he has the double murder of Lily and James to announce. 

Of course, if the Dursleys will not keep Harry, Dumbledore will have to retrieve him --  and discuss with Petunia and Vernon both  alternate arrangements for Harry's future and regrettably less effective measures for the protection of their family,  something I'm sure Vernon and Petunia would do anything to avoid. 

And DD would sign as "I remain your faithful correspondent", or some such, which would sound like polite nothingness to Vernon, but would suggest to Petunia that Dumbledore has not forgotten her earlier letter, in which she begged to come to Hogwarts and learn to be a witch. Petunia would die of shame if Vernon ever found that out. 


Pippin