Visitation July 2016
It has been over 40 days since Baby Caspian was abducted by Norway’s Barnevernet without any apparent legal reason. On that day, Monday, June 13th, Caspian was awakened from his nap and taken away from loved ones while his mother Nadia was away at an infrequent appointment. Several police officers and Barnevernet personnel came to the home of Margaret Hennum and took Caspian. He had been sleeping soundly under the care Ms. Hennum, a pediatric nurse and Nadia’s friend.
Nadia’s next trial (rettsak) will be on Monday, August 8th. The case will be heard in Alesund, Norway. Apparently, Ms. Hennum and Doctor Ingvild Setså will be witnesses at this hearing.
Nadia has been allowed to travel to Bergen to visit Caspian. She sees him on Thursdays and Fridays and has not missed a scheduled visitation thus far. From her address near Brandal, Norway, it is a 40 minute trip by car to the airport. Nadia then takes an hour long plane trip and a 40 minute bus ride to see Caspian. This has been Nadia’s routine the past three weeks and will continue for at least two more weeks. The travel expenses and the housing costs have been paid for by the Barnevernet.
Nadia and Caspian’s visitations are monitored by people from the Church City Mission. These monitors are contracted by the Barnevernet to make evaluations of visitations. There is apparently no security at these visitations as no police have been present for the first six visitations.
Here are the evaluations that Nadia received for her first four visits with Caspian:
Thursday, July 7, 2016
Evaluation:
“Nice interaction between mother and child with calm mood. They were close together and the mother was engaged with the boy all the time. She spoke with quiet tone. Mother seems in good spirits. The child seemed to be active, engaged with everything around them and smiled a lot,”
Friday, July 8, 2016
Evaluation:
“A quiet and nice gathering. Mother plays with the baby and talked to him in a gentle tone . She follows Caspian and his initiative . Mother appeals to Caspian several times and says we’ve enjoyed today.”
Thursday, July 14, 2016
Evaluation:
“Nice interaction between mother and child with calm mood. They were close together and the mother was engaged with the boy all the time. Mother seems in good spirits . The child seems a little tired from the early moments, but was active and involved with everything around it.”
Friday, July 15, 2016
Evaluation:
“Mother has powered Caspian throughout assemblage. Has only eyes for him. Mother speaks with calm and gentle voice. Showing good face. Assemblage is much influenced by activity. After a supervisor ‘s assessment, an assemblage that something hectic as it is the mother who takes the initiative and constantly introduce new toys. Supervisor experience that Caspian seems tired after one hour visitation. Caspian showed signs of penetrating break on occasion without this being accommodated by mother.”
The Wings of the Wind is not aware of any public statement made by any source responsible for the separation of this child from this mother.
Nadia waits until Monday the 8th of August to find out if she will have custody of Caspian until thursday, August 25th.
The hearing on August 25th will be in Bergen at the County Council for Child Welfare and Social Affairs (Fylkesnemnda).
The court hearing on Monday the 25th will determine who has permanent custody of Caspian.
——————————
My thoughts…
How the case ever began is still a mystery to me. I see no reason why, with the abundance of evidence on Nadia’s side, Caspian should have been taken in the first place.
This case has all of the appearances of an upcoming reunification between Nadia and Caspian.
The charges are unmerited. Nadia has done everything that has been asked of her. In spite of a very emotional situation, she has remained steady throughout her visitations. Her visitations with Caspian appear to be going very well.
I am not certain what some of the terminology in the fourth evaluation means but I hope this will be clearer as I learn more. Maybe there is something lost in translation or maybe there are parts in the fourth visitation evaluation are not complimentary. It is hard to tell.
I’ve learned that language has to be carefully looked at when dealing with the Barnevernet. The word “assemblage” is used. In English, the definition of assemblage is: “a collection or gathering of things or people.” The word is used twice. What does this mean: “After a supervisor ‘s assessment, an assemblage that something hectic as it is the mother who takes the initiative and constantly introduce new toys.” There is “calm” and “gentle” and then there is “hectic” and “constantly.” They seem incongruous. Then there is the last sentence: “Caspian showed signs of penetrating break on occasion without this being accommodated by mother.” What does this mean? Is it a good or bad thing? Am I being too picky here? Maybe, but a child has been taken for no good reason for heaven’s sake.
Will testimony from good witnesses be allowed in the next hearing unlike the hearing that took place on Monday, June 27th, in Molde Norway? Fourteen days after Caspian’s abduction, a decision to continue to keep Caspian and Nadia separated was made by one man called “The Tribunal.” “The report of a doctor; and the eyewitness account of the professional nurse, Margaret Hennum was not admissible evidence,” according to Mr. Harald Grape, Nadia’s attorney.
Ingvild Setså (A doctor approved by the Barnevernet) had checked Caspian’s health the day after he was taken from the Hennum home and his mother, Nadia. The doctor found Caspian to be in good health after being away from Vilde (“the Mothers’ Home” or “Parent Center”), enough to write some type of “medical certificate.” “The medical certificate dated 14 June, 2016 from Dr. Setså mentioned that “Caspian provide(s) very good contact, smiles and is very active, good general condition. He was a healthy and active boy who provide(s) very good contact.” This was a statement that was given by Harald Grape, Nadia’s lawyer.
Margaret Hennum, the pediatric nurse who has taken Nadia into her own home noted her observations of Caspian’s development. They were all positive.
A mother has been deprived of most of 40 very important days in a child’s development. A government supported childcare organization is responsible for what would be called a kidnapping had it been done by “criminals.” This is not the first time the Barnevernet of Norway has done something this unjust. Situations like this are increasing rather than decreasing in Norway.
Nadia’s case is about a mother who loves her child very much and has done nothing to warrant having her child taken from her. She has been informed of visitations with little notice and then has to wait for what seems like ages for important court hearings. The next hearing is about whether or not Nadia gets to have custody of Caspian until the next hearing. Then the next hearing IS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT SHE WILL GET CUSTODY OF HIM…PERIOD.
It is a cruel system of “child welfare.”
Chris Reimers
Caspian
July 8th, 2016
Wings of the Wind 
[…] https://chrisreimersblog.com/2016/07/23/baby-caspian-kidnapped-in-norwayupdate-8/ […]
So heartbreaking. I’m still praying
Thank you, pastor Jim. Your prayers are very much appreciated!
Chris, yes, it is heartbreaking! In trying to make sense of the final report given, it is possible that Nadia in her nervousness and eagerness missed little signs that Caspian was tiring from play. This is her first child and she is under a lot of strain and worry.
Thank you for being faithful to follow up with her and her little son’s story! The photos are lovely.
Thank you for your comment, Maria.
I appreciate someone besides myself trying to make sense of that fourth evaluation.
What you have mentioned is certainly possible as are so many other things.
I have found out that the person doing the 4th evaluation was “new” to Nadia and Caspian. This makes your thoughts even more possible. Maybe Nadia will make a comment herself about it.
I have “talked” to Nadia about this 4th evaluation and I made the decision to put my thoughts about this out there even though she hadn’t mentioned it. She, like you, focused more on the sentence about Caspian tiring. Nadia “told” me that a two hour visitation can be long for a baby of Caspian’s age and I couldn’t agree more. Nadia has also sent me information on this organization that is being contracted to watch these visitations. It appears to be a good organization. I am at the point, after personal “discussions” with a person who probably knows as much about the situation with Norway’s Barnevernet than anyone, of serious doubt about any organization who would connect itself to the BV. That stated, I also want to make it clear that I think any organization could be used by the BV without knowledge of the BV’s internal workings. In other words, someone watching visitations could very well have no idea about what has happened in this case and many like it that are so unjust. They are hired to do a job and, as we have little information about most groups contracted with the BV, we can’t jump to conclusions. There is nothing wrong with “watching” just like Jesus tells us about His upcoming second coming.
You’re welcome for this report. I am honored that I am in a position to make such updates. The Bible talks of defending those who can’t defend themselves and it is very much on my mind as this entire story unfolds.
The photos are cute. They are of a loving mother and a child caught in a “system” that has very strange and unGodly practices.
You’ve been thinking and praying so much about this. We all need to be diligent in the work God gives us. We are praying with you, Chris, for a young mother who has to learn to be a good mother while also being confronted by this world’s false system. Lord bless you!
Thank you for your prayers and your kind words, Maria. 🙂
You’re welcome, brother!
:0)
Hi Maria.. I have used google translate on the evaluation.. But what they mean is that he showed signs of being tired and that I did not give him a break. It’s hard to be in a small room and entertain Caspian for two hours. We can not go out and there is no place to lay him down. But, I have asked if I can take him out for the next visit. So, if I can that it will be good for Caspian. He can then relax in his wagon for a half hour and come out for some fresh air. Thank you for your support, and thank you for following our story and supporting me…
Nadia, what you said made sense about the difficulty of entertaining Caspian for two hours. In your own home it would be a more natural environment for you and him. I’m happy for you that you are making plans for your next visit. May the Lord defend you!
Reblogged this on ARMONIA MAGAZINE – USA.
Seriously? Your doing a great supportive job for Nadia and Caspian, Chris – but – I wonder – you say in your report: “How the case ever began is still a mystery to me.” Really? I don’t understand. Nadia has all the papers and the conclusions done in her case. She is writing on your blog and still this case is a mystery to you?
I think Nadia owe you an open dialogue so you at least understand enough to evaluate yourself and the readers of this blog of the progress done or …??
I don’t mean that Nadia shall give away private information to everyone, but give you some real facts so that you can understand her casesituation.
Welcome once again to my blog, Knut.
I think I understand most of the facts about how this case started, Knut. The facts are what make this case a “mystery.” There is no good reason that she should be separated from her child.
Since you are a Norwegian CPS worker maybe you can enlighten me with more facts in the case. Maybe you can make this story less of a mystery. I think Nadia has been very frank with me. What has she not told me, Knut? What do you know that she doesn’t? Give me one good reason that Caspian should have been taken from her.
You have not answered so many questions I’ve had of you in the past, I wouldn’t be surprised if you didn’t attempt one here.
As i have said to you and other activists before – to alter a case the reasons given for this and that in an earlier conclusion must have changed to either become history or no disturbing effect on the care given 24/7 with great possibility to be the stable future for Caspian or any other child.
As you should know I have no facts to give you coming from the cases I am responsible for or the cases we discuss at my office. This case I only have from you and others telling us what to believe,
I do hope Caspian and the mother find a way to show the local CPS and the authorities involved that they have taken steps in the right direction. If this possible progress is related to some certain circumstances and people I guess the authorities need some assurances – that they do not disappear and if they disappear the stable progress will with certainty continue.
“I do hope Caspian and the mother find a way to show the local CPS and the authorities involved that they have taken steps in the right direction.”
I’ll start this comment with the same you started with last time:
“Seriously?”
You admit “This case I only have from you and others telling us what to believe…”
Before this part of your comment you state something about having “no facts.”
So, which is it, Knut? Do you have no facts except for what I have published or do you have “others telling us what to believe.”
If you wish to show me that this isn’t an attempt at propaganda, please inform me which it is.
Propaganda or not, you have again not answered my question.
Your first and last paragraphs are statements of trust in your employer that shows no vulnerability. (I’m not talking about cognitive “vulnerability.” It seems that the Barnevernet uses “vulnerability” the way the word is used cognitive psychology. It is an erroneous belief, cognitive bias, or pattern of thought that predisposes an individual to psychological problems.)
You have added nothing to my knowledge about the situation, Knut, except to solidify even more my opinion about your unyielding faith in your employer.
Of cause – it’s not me, but Nadia that can tell you the facts behind the situation she and Caspian is in just now. Yes, we have had this discussion several times and I have said to you that as long as we are humans working with humans it’s possible to come to conclusions that the private part don’t like or agree to. The best way to come out of a situation the private part don’t like to be in is to cooperate and do it’s outmost. What reasons has Nadia given you and others reading this blog – if none – I understand your mystery, but conclusions have lawyers and others involved and must be done according to the child welfare act – so – it must have both said and written.
You only have to read my updates, Knut. Read update 6 for more details but here are some:
There was a police report written the day after Nadia left the Mother’s home.
Nadia’s lawyer, Harald Grape, writes about the hearing:
“It is recalled that child welfare leader, who met in committee, substantiated his opinion of the Caspian, he will dwell with mother at Hennum would not suffer as required by law. It was pointed journal dated 14th June where it appears that “Whether she should get the child back there is no reason to believe that the baby will suffer any direct overload…”
and
“After our stay at Hennum it is quite obvious that Caspian has not got lopsided development. Firstly refer to a medical certificate dated 14 June 2016 from the doctor Ingvild Setså. It appears here that the Caspian provide very good contact, smiles and is very active, good general condition. He was a healthy and active boy who provide very good contact. This is a clear indicator that the Caspian in the five weeks he was with his mother after staying at Vilde developed well.”
And Nadia’s lawyer was shocked at the “Tribunal’s” decision:
“How Tribunal has reached this is quite incomprehensible although one assumes reports to Vilde. Vilde was worried about Caspian had a “nascent lopsided development” based on reports that the tribunal had not will be accessible under the committee meeting.”
So, Knut, a child who was just fine based on statements by a mother, a child welfare leader, a pediatric nurse, and a doctor approved by the BV, has been taken from its mother now for over 40 days.
Please explain that to me.
Nadia’s lawyer also made these observations, Knut:
“The Tribunal writes: ‘if the child is going back to his mother, he will again experience instability and fracture, which will be an additional burden for him’”
“..it is quite obvious that the biological principle (is) no longer employed by the county boards in Norway. This violates the ECHR.”
I’ll add, “On what basis was the judge able to tell the future?”
Knut Nygaard: “I do hope Caspian and the mother find a way to show the local CPS and the authorities involved that they have taken steps in the right direction.”
The attentive reader might have noticed from the updates here on the blog, that Nadia in May made a great change in their lives when leaving the observation institution were she had been under observation for nearly five months. Living a more normal life, feeling safe and secure, with people sharing her joy for her child, of course made her do her best. The observations made by her hostess, and the doctor the day after Caspian was taken from her, tell about a child in very good condition. OUT of the sphere of Barnevernet, Nadia is doing perfectly well as a mother, Knut Nygaard. We hope and pray that justice will happen, and the two very soon will be reunited!
A lawyer is just doing his job – his job is to get the Tribunal to agree with his arguments.
Chris – the Nadia and Caspian case do not start with the the entering of the activist help from Hennum. My guess is that this case start long before that – maby in the mothers pregnancy with risk considerations going backwards far beyond that.
As far as I know Hennum had not and has not spoken with the CPS of the possibilities to be a help measure for the child and the mother.
Please correct me if I am wrong, Knut.
Here is the judge (tribunal’s) statement:
“if the child is going back to his mother, he will again experience instability and fracture, which will be an additional burden for him”
Here is your statement:
“My guess is that this case start long before that – maby in the mothers pregnancy with risk considerations going backwards far beyond that.”
So, Knut, your “guess” is that the judge is making his forecast based on something that happened during Nadia’s pregnancy.
If this is true, why didn’t the judge make this clear at the same hearing at the The County Council for Child Welfare and Social Affairs (Fylkesnemnda) in Molde, Norway on Thursday, June 23rd?
I guess the judge and the documents leading up to the given conclusion says much more than “instability and fracture” as risk factors. Some of the cases start because of the pregnancy. The mother or father – or for that case – friends or situation give the
nurse involved no other option than to tell the CPS about a pregnant woman.
Some time ago Nadia lived in an apartment somewhat like this in Bergen
http://m.finn.no/realestate/homes/ad.html?finnkode=79510616
As I understand her situation now she is still living with the Hennum’s here
https://www.1881.no/person/hareid/brandal/margaret-hennum_18498726S1/kart/
That’s quite a difference in surroundings and maybe Nadia need just that change of environment, support and hope for the future – so why does not Hennum talk to the CPS and give them the possibility to let her be the help measure? You know the answer to that, Chris – don’t you? Would you or any activist be a reliable help measure?
“I guess the judge and the documents leading up to the given conclusion says much more than “instability and fracture” as risk factors.”
So, it is another guess, Knut.
Margaret Hennum has done everything she can to help Nadia. She was a witness at Molde. She has talked to the CPS. You give the world a picture of apartments and an address (which is an intrusion into privacy in my opinion even if it might be an incorrect address. The intent is an invasion of privacy.)
My goal is not to be any kind of “help” like the Norwegian CPS gives in many cases. I an only after truth, something you have continually avoided throughout our “discussions.”
Oh?? I should be closer to understand how Norway, Norwegians and the CPS as a whole works than you up in the Springs, Chris.
We have around 5-7Norwegain cases that have some internet support – that’s all. We have over 50.000 ungoing cases. Everyone can tell an internet audience anything about some case. The reader has no security for what is the truth in what is shared.
We have in our country – as you have in yours – or in any country some people who are generally in opposition to authorities and public services that they can’t control. They are not a unified group – they differ in most views and have just this opposition in common. They have no program, no agenda and no alternatives – the are just opinionmakers without any impact other than to be in opposition. You will never find the truth about Norway, Norwegians and our public services trusting their information and opinions – for them situations like this Nadia case is just useful as ammunition for general opposition – this week Nadia – next week someone else – and so the years go by without anything more done than being in oppositon without any agenda further than that.
You don’t seem to know how many cases have been made public. I also don’t know exactly but it is beyond 5-7 by quite a bit, Knut.
You are attempting to make this an “I say/you say” situation and I’m NOT OK with that. (I’ve come back and added the NOT…I “spoke” too quickly when making this comment the first time.) This conversation should be had at a much more professional (higher) level.
You should know more than I because you live in the country and you work for the organization in question.
How many times have I asked for a copy of the training manuals used to train those in the Mother’s Homes? I think you call them Parent and Child Centers.
How many times have you avoided all kinds of questions by many questioners?
You haven’t even responded to my questions about the “Mother’s Homes.”
I’ll just ask one here, Knut. How much of the time is a mother observed during a typical 24 hour day in one of these Centers?
You are not the only Norwegian I’ve met online. I have met others including Margaret Hennum, a pediatric nurse who knows more than I about Nadia’s story.
Do I trust you or her, Knut? Your opinions are as different as darkness and light. I choose to trust Ms. Hennum. I think she is the light here.
“this week Nadia – next week someone else ”
It is a heartless statement, Knut.
It won’t be someone else next week, Knut. Not on this blog. I am following three stories myself and am focused on this one for the time being. The only way it will be “someone else” next week is if justice prevails in this case.
If that happens, focus will turn to Ken Olsen’s case mostly. And then there is the American mother Amy the mother of Tyler.
If the problem becomes as bad in America as it seems to be in Norway, I will have to start following a few of those stories.
Nadia’s story won’t go away, Knut, unless her child is returned to her. If her own family hadn’t been literally torn from her when she was 13 by the CPS, maybe she would never have ended up being such a focus of mine.
“…so the years go by without anything more done than being in oppositon without any agenda further than that.”
I hope not, Knut. I wish we could snap our fingers and make Norway’s CPS a much more successful and helpful organization.
Why is it difficult to get a balanced story in the media in Norway? Why have I only received one comment from the political parties in Norway, Knut? I have asked each for a statement about the Barnevernet. It is all very strange just like Nadia’s case.
I beg your pardon, Mr Nygård! You ask why I don´t give Nadia and Caspian the help they need. Haven´t you, rather informed about this case as you seem to be, noticed that i HAVE offered them some help they needed? Or is private relations, private care and private humanity of no value to you?
Nadia is doing fine as a mother, Knut Nygaard, what more is there to be asked for?
Nothing is better – I hope the Tribunal agrees. What you and I think has no impact on the conclusion to be given.
Knut,
Please use the same “person” to comment. Any new identity will not be allowed through moderation until I get a chance to approve it.
Ok – so I shall wait 5 minutes or more before I post again. I can manage that – here I think your moderation has to do with the links i posted – when I comment just with words I have free speech.
In Norway we get the information about where a person lives by googling it’s name togheter with the telephone number – I’m sure you have the same service in the Springs.
I think I leave you here and go back to my summer holiday in respect to Nadia and Caspian – they need all the support they can get and I hope she will share the truth with you Chris,
You are back to your typical propaganda, Knut.
Deflection, double-speak, etc. You have no answers as usual. Your English has improved today back to where it has been off and on, Knut. Sometimes you are almost unreadable. At the least, it has been easier to communicate with you than it is on some days.
The only home I can recall looking at on Google maps is my own, Knut.
I’m not in the habit of looking up places unless I need them for travel. I certainly don’t publish where others live.
I have noticed that Mr. Nygaard has published were I live. Do you think he is about to pay me a visit, Chris?
Hi Margaret and welcome!
The organization that Knut works for has paid your home one too many visits already.
If it is a “custom” in Norway to publish the locations of where they think someone lives, I think it is an intrusive one.
Knut has taken it to a worse level. He is supposed to be the professional CPS worker. In that capacity, I think it is downright rude for him to act in such a manner.
I have seen, on Facebook, where people publish where they currently are or where they have been using some sort of GPS. It is always a person publishing where they themselves are located. I can’t remember EVER seeing anyone publish where someone else lives. Knut is a unique one.
Do I think he is about to pay you a visit, Margaret?
Well, if he were at your local Barnevernet office, the one that took Caspian away from your home WHILE HIS MOTHER WAS AWAY FOR AN UNUSUAL BRIEF PERIOD, I think it might be possible. Fortunately for you, your children are too old to be taken by the system. If your children were younger and you had done a number of things that appear to warrant an “emergency order” of removal, your chances of a visit by him would increase.
The things that might cause your children to be taken include:
-The mother will not give us insight into her private life, which indicates that she has something to hide. [CPS workers are always looking for something – anything – to use against parents. If a parent is open about private matters, any problem they may have or have had sometime in their life, however normal, is sure to be used against them in the case documents and in court. If the parents choose to say ‘My purely personal affairs are nothing to do with the CPS’, that is, as in this case, also used by the CPS.]
-The boy’s parents fail in their care for him; they do not give him enough to eat. [The mother of one of the boy’s friends noticed that he ate a great deal of cake when he visited her son in their home, and she reported this to the CPS as a cause for worry.]
-The parents do not want our therapy. They say they are depressed after their child has been transferred to the care of the CPS but they refuse to receive therapy which would make them understand that they must put their own wants behind what is best for the child.
-“You must write quite differently if we are to win through getting the child transferred to public care.” [Said by an instructor to a class of general social workers whom he was teaching about child protection. They had as an exercise been asked to read through the documents in a case and write a report summarising the information as a preliminary to further case procedure. They had written a realistic report, mentioning and assessing good as well as bad in the family’s situation.]
-On one occasion the child found a piece of paper and started nibbling at it. The mother did not discover this. [Claimed by a social worker in her report of an inspection she made in the home. The mother objected that she had in fact discovered it and taken the paper away. Since she had no video-recording of the inspection visit, the social office would not accept her information, stating that she could not prove it.]
-The mother suffers from a deep ambivalence regarding entering into inter-personal relationships. [Stated by the CPS in a would-be ‘evaluation’ of her ability to ‘form a relationship’ to her child as well as to other people. The mother’s partner said that he had never noticed any such ambivalence.]
-Because of her good intellectual functioning and verbal skills we are of the opinion that the mother has been judged to function better than she really does.
-The mother wants to stay in bed in the morning. [The baby usually woke up at about 6.30 – 7 in the morning. The mother would then get up and change and breast-feed it. The baby used to go to sleep again at about 10 a.m. The mother, who by then was tired, wanted to rest while the baby slept. She was denied this by the personnel at the institution for mother-and-child, run by the CPS, where she was living.]
These are only a few of the many minute reasons why children were taken from their biological parents.
And then there is this one:
“…if the child is going back to his mother, he will again experience instability and fracture, which will be an additional burden for him.”
You are familiar with this reason, Margaret. It is a statement made by Norwegian government representative who sounds like he/she can see the future.
It seems to be the only reason, against good testimony by good witnesses, that your friend, Nadia, had her son, Caspian, taken away by complete strangers.
Knut wasn’t there that day but his callous remarks make me think that he would have had no problem assisting with the abduction of Caspian.
I highly doubt that you will get a visit from Knut, Margaret, as he lives 8 hours away. At the moment he has no good reason to visit you as there are no young children playing peacefully and happily around your feet.
The passages in the evaluation reports that you wondered about, may read like this (I know Norwegian, barnevernet’s language, and tried out Google translate a bit).
Assemblage is probably the same as visitation (“samvær” in Norwegian)
“Mother has powered the assemblage” is probably “The mother has been the active part in the visitation” (in Norwegian probably: “Moren har drevet samværet”)
“After a supervisor ‘s assessment, an assemblage that something hectic as it is the mother who takes the initiative and constantly introduce new toys.” is probably: “The visitation seems somewhat hectic to the supervisor,, because the mother takes the initiative…” (In Norwegian probably: “Veilederen vurderer samværet som noe hektisk siden moren tar initiativ til ….”
Thank you for the clarification, Mechthild. The way you have interpreted this discussion does seem to make more sense in English. You seem to know the English and Norwegian languages well.
This sentence seems odd to me:
“The visitation seems somewhat hectic to the supervisor,, because the mother takes the initiative…”
The word “hectic” seems odd here and maybe it was the intended meaning. If so, it seems like an strange word to use.
Maybe my English is not all that good. “Hectic” in this context means that there are too many abrupt turns in the mother’s interaction with the child, to the observer’s taste. It does not necessarily mean that there is a lot of action all the time.
Actually, the observer describes what he/she means with hectic: “introducing a new toy, when the child seems to need a break”.
Here is what hectic means in English: “full of incessant or frantic activity”
You can see why “introducing a new toy, when the child seems to need a break” doesn’t seem hectic to me, Mechthild.
A better word should have been used in translation. It is a critical comment in the unfavorable direction I think.
You are right that the description is unfavorable. And the Norwegian “hektisk” DOES also mean frantic activity. And “hektisk” is quite probably the word that was used. That’s the flavor of these reports,
This is an illustration of how reports can be understood in more than one way, Mechthild.
You see that the reports have a “frantic” “flavor.”
I view these reports mostly otherwise, as I can only remember the word used once. The reports seem very favorable, in general, to me.
If your translation is correct, Nadia gave the toy to Caspian in a frantic manner. Looking at all of the visitation pictures I have, there appears to be no “frantic flavor” to them.
It is a strange word that doesn’t seem to match the reality, in this one instance.
“Caspian showed signs of penetrating break on occasion without this being accommodated by mother.”
is probably
“Caspian showed signs of needing a break from time to time, without the mother noticing it”
In Norwegian probably “Caspian viste tegn å trenge en pause fra tid til annen uten at moren imøtekom dette”.
Thank you again, Mechthild.
If your translation is more correct, it is a critical statement. It would also be an opinion of the visitation observer. This is very subjective. What were the signs that Caspian needed a break?
These are only questions the visitation observer can answer. As Nadia has had several visitations, it would probably be difficult for her to remember every minor detail. Also, as most of the reports don’t come for a week it seems, by the time she has gotten a report she has had or is just about to have another visitation. The observer really should be more specific if your translation is correct, Mechthild.
The visitation report you cite in update 9, takes up the theme: “He looked even be tired towards the end of companionship and mother were good to notice this. She took him up in his arms, gave him the pacifier and rocked him while she spoke softly to him.”
So, all seems well the visit after. The monitor is quite observant.
Did you notice the many sentences about “eye contact”? Sometimes missing eye contact is one of the reasons (not the most important one) for taking away small children. Here again, all seems well.
Several Norwegian lawyers, but also expert witnesses, are concerned about this all-too-detailed observations and the all-too-strong weight given to them. They wrote about this in the media, to no effect.
I think I’m with you on all but one point here, Mechthild.
“They had several brief eye contact” is one visitation comment on Update 9. I don’t necessarily think this is a “good” comment. As you have mentioned, missing eye contact is one of the reasons small children are taken. This statement could be interpreted in several ways.
If you have seen my comments, I am pretty critical of the Norwegian press in covering Child Welfare cases in its own country. As far as I can tell, the few comments like the ones you have mentioned, are drowned out by pro BV propaganda. I have read articles that others think are critical of the BV. I have found most of these articles to be unhelpful from my point of view.
I agree that there is no effect. Part of this is because there is not enough factual press reports to make a difference, I think. If there were good articles, I know my friends would have shared them with me.
May we request a link to a short description of the case, of what initially happened. How and where was baby Caspian abducted, and so on.
I appreciate your request. I am working on a timeline with all of the events that are involved in this case. After I have it organized properly, I will make another list of the major events. I will publish both of these timelines here when they are finished. I have a good start on this but it may take me another month or so to complete. If you are in a hurry for this information, you may want to read the first few updates and summarize them yourself. Otherwise, I will try to put something together for you but I am very busy the next few days and may not get to it until Saturday. Here is a good place to start if you need something before Saturday:
https://chrisreimersblog.com/2016/06/13/norways-cps-kidnaps-childtoday/
Then you can type “Caspian Update” into the search box here and see most of the story.
Thank you for asking. 🙂
If you want something from me by Saturday evening, please let me know here and leave the email you wish me to send it to.
[…] July 23, 2016: BABY CASPIAN KIDNAPPED IN NORWAY…UPDATE #8 […]