What followed was a very chaotic and emotional conversation. I want to tell you everything of it, but I have to set it in order, for else it is not to follow. Sometimes I will show what really was said, but because of the chaotic structure of this emotional conversation I have limited the conversation. Imagine that tante Daphne and I saw the people who made such big mistakes! Imagine that we just lost four beloved persons and were very concerned about you. Imagine that we realized the big mistakes Jeugdzorg made, then already, and you can understand in what kind of mood tante Daphne and I were.
But… imagine you were the persons who made these big mistakes. Four persons lost by a mistake of your side. And your organization hasn’t a very good imago. What should you do? How will these persons react? Mrs. X, who had the conversation with mamma and opa and me, how will she react? And her manager, Mr. G., the responsible person for all this? How will these persons react to our accusations then and how will they react later?
The manager started to express that it was an utmost dramatic event. For everyone: for the children, for mamma, for the family. And he wanted to look which juridical possibilities there still are for us to contact you. He was not very happy with the fact that we recorded this conversation: they were not allowed to speak with us because we were not your parents. But he thought it very important, he said, to look at what the children need in this situation. “It is a drama”, he said, “that these children are in America.”
Tante Daphne: “And you could have prevented this. So much the more dramatic it is.”
Mr. G.: “It is a drama, when you lose your mother and these children are sitting with an age-old sense of guilt.”
Mrs. X.: “Yes, but we have to follow the rules. First, we had to have a conversation with the mother and then we will have an inquiry. That is the normal procedure.”
By the way, it was very good we recorded this conversation to see that Jeugdzorg was lying many times. Despite we lose everything we can prove that Jeugdzorg lied.
You see that already at the start of this conversation Mrs. X. talks about the rules. It looks like she was not able to reflect her actions herself. It looks like that for her the goal of their work is to obey the rules. Crazy rules in the case of this kidnapping and that’s why we react like we did.
Tante Daphne and oma: “But why a conversation after the kidnapping? The children were not there.”
Mrs. X.: ”We wanted to talk with mother about the accusations of father.”
Oma: “But what was the sense of it? Had it still any sense? Did you realize how ugly it was for her to tell she had borderline and was in prostitution while the school-director and Mrs. Van Heusden were there too?”
Tante Daphne: ” We all understand that there must be a conversation, but we don’t understand that this conversation must be just at that very moment, the moment that organizations said to my sister that it is hard to get back the children. As you look at it like that, then it is only kicking down my sister. This father faked this very well. He disappears. Then she got to hear from him: You will never see your children anymore and then she is accused in your conversation with her of abusing her children, for when you have borderline and was in the prostitution, it is possibly very clear that you abuse your children.”
And Mr. G. as her manager reacts: “The conversation was also important, because we must talk about the parental authority. Was it not a case for Child Protection, who ought to keep busy themselves with juridical matters?”
Tante Daphne: ”Why didn’t you say: there is assistance in the Netherlands and these assistants never perceived abuse. You are the only one who thinks like that.”
Mrs. X. “That is exactly the procedure. That comes when the inquiry has been started.”
Mr. G.: ”We receive reporting’s and we do inquiries after those reporting’s and after those inquiries we come to a decision.”
Tante Daphne: “The protocol would be better when you first looked what needs priority in this situation.”
Lack of knowledge of kidnappings
I may continue to tell about how they always were saying they followed the rules, but that will become annoying for you. What was so striking and also so terrifying was their lack of knowledge how to handle in case of kidnappings. They totally didn’t know anything of it. They were only thinking in protocols and were not thinking themselves. Badly enough, these protocols will become their salvation later on, but now reactions of them in which they show they don’t know anything of kidnappings, while there was information about kidnappings at their office.
Mrs. X.: “First, father lodged the accusation anonymously. But we prefer to have an open conversation with both parents. And then we only heard that the father took the children with him.”
Oma: “The Boddaert was already afraid he would kidnap the children and at the Friday before the kidnapping he came with the Boddaert to ask for a hotel. Very strange, as he lived in the Netherlands for years.”
Mrs.X.: “ I think that he was growing afraid.”
Mr. G.: “Did the police say, that it was hard to get the children back? “
Tante Daphne: ”It was said by them, but also by several other organizations.”
Mrs. X.: “We didn’t hear that. I went to someone, who said you could get the children back quickly.”
Tante Daphne: “Quickly?”
Mrs. X.: “At any case in the long run. The accusations had been lodged and then he went away.”
Tante Daphne: ”Yes he did it brightly.”
Mr. X.: “Mrs. Van Heusden did say, she didn’t believe it immediately. She did not want to make a decision immediately. And then father got into a panic.”
Tante Daphne: “Straight. He knew it wasn’t true.”
In the next fragment of the conversation a terrifying lack of knowledge of kidnappings was showed too. Kidnappers often use accusations of abuse to cover their deed and brainwash their children saying to them that the partner staying behind was bad to them. In this case, Mrs. X. and Mr. G. were apt to believe the kidnapper, because she was diagnosed as a borderliner and was in prostitution.
Mrs. X.: “You wanted to keep a positive image of a loving father.”
Tante Daphne: “Not a conflict of loyalty for the children. How unpleasant that he caused that in only five weeks.”
Mrs. X.:” Yes how much he has…. The children should have declared they were abused. Yes, that was his motive.”
Tante Daphne: “Only Mirabelle in the Netherlands.”
Mrs. X.: “Mirabelle had requested him to go with him to America. It has been Mirabelle. That is what father says. We wanted to talk with the children. Father stopped that too.”
Of course the kidnapper stopped it, because I wonder if you would have said mamma and we abused you. Another story.
Tante Daphne: “But the worst is that father is pulling all strings. All Dutch organizations still have contact with him as if he didn’t kidnap the children.”
Mrs. X.: No, it is not decent to say so. He is the father of the children. At this moment he is the caretaker of the children. This all is an objective fact. I let know him that and then we close the case.
She clearly didn’t doubt the kidnapper’s motivations.
Mrs.X.: I said that he had taken the children unjustly. It is like that, of course. On the other side: he has always been a good father. Yes, Judith said that to the police too. That is contributory to how we look at this case.
Of course mamma wasn’t glad the kidnapper kidnapped you and of course she was flabbergasted by the false accusing of her by the kidnapper, while she trusted him that he won’t do anything to you. I wonder if mamma was still alive now she should still think the kidnapper a good father……
Borderline and prostitution
Of course we talked about mamma’s borderline and prostitution to realize how that influenced their view on why mamma should have abused you.
Oma: “Did you realize that a borderline patient might commit suicide in such a stress-situation?”
Mr. G.: “Do you know that there are lodged thousands or more complaints with us. Among them are many borderline patients. It is difficult to estimate how great the danger of abuse is for the children. We have to make an estimation on the base of indications. And there is a great gradation in the seriousness of borderliners. I mean, it is our experience that at the moment you are hesitating it may go wrong. You know of the case of Savanna. Her mother and stepfather also were borderliners.”
Oma: “Afterwards I wonder why father said she had borderline.”
Mrs. X.: “The accusation was that she was recently in the prostitution. For that….”
Oma and tante Daphne: “He used borderline and prostitution for his own purpose.”
Since your mother died we were aware of being isolated. First signal was of course the letter school had written to the parents of the children who were in your classes, while mamma was still alive and was in hospital. Then, with my telephone-call with Suzanne V. , family-coach of the Boddaert, I realized she had already contact with your father, while we were not informed about that. Also Jeugdzorg had contact and more people. Read:
Tante Daphne: “Someone from the Netherlands passed on to the kidnapper that Judith committed suicide. For we didn’t pass it on.”
Mrs. X.: “I think….thought, but I don’t know for sure….I thought the police knew that. For the police said: ”it is passed on to father.” (strange, because the police never said so to us). But that I…should I…look at a certain moment there happened a lot. But I must read that back in the dossier. I did tell the father on the sixth of April, that Judith had died. I was called by the police. And what I did then was calling father to tell. The children were in America. He heard the news from me. I said: “do you know mother has died?” “Yes, he said.” I asked: “do you know when?” “No”, he said. Then I passed on that it was the thirtieth of March. I passed on that. I think it very important, because the children must know.”
Tante Daphne: “Of course we wanted to tell it to the children. There is much of a chance that this father didn’t tell it in a pleasant way to his children.”
Mrs. X.: “Look, the point is…. At a certain moment several things took place. The intention was that the children from school would send postcards to them.”
Oma: “Was that channel opened too?”
I was totally shocked, because Jeugdzorg decided that Boddaert, they themselves, school and also the children from your classes were allowed to have contact with you. We were totally excluded, as if we were a kind of criminals who permitted mamma to abuse you. Jeugdzorg totally ignored that you were kidnapped and brainwashed and that it was their first task to get you back.
Contact with the kidnapper
Tante Daphne: “How bad this all is. One must have had permission of us for a letter that school wrote. Judith was still alive. An illegal person can take his children in this way and assistance organizations know it and don’t do anything, have even still contact with him.”
Oma: “You must have taken a stand, in stead of having contact with him in this way. If you had helped us, maybe we really could do something for the children.”
Mrs. X.: “Do you mean that we could have worked together with your cousin Joleen. We are not allowed.”
Here the so-called protocol was brought up as later will be done many times, when we accuse them of mistakes.
Oma: “How many times did you have contact with the father?”
Mrs. X.: “Twice.”
Oma: “What was the first contact about?”
Mrs. X.: “Then he was in Boston.”
Oma: “And then he called you?”
Mrs. X.: “Yes, he tried to call us. And then at a certain moment I called myself and then he called again.”
Oma: “Was that call claiming?”
Mrs.X.: “No, he was somewhat calmer than in the Netherlands. Then he was compulsive. When he called from America, he wasn’t.”
Tante Daphne: “Then of course he has reached his target.”
Striking things the two then still expressed
When I analyze this conversation the two still said things, which they later certainly wouldn’t say anymore.
Mr. G.: “It is a drama, when you lose your mother and these children are sitting with an age-old sense of guilt”.
Later this will never more be said about us, as your family.
Mrs. X.: “Normally we see people who don’t treat their family well. You had a good contact with each other.”
And now a very important one.
Mrs. X.: “So afterwards you may conclude that we must not have done that like that. But that is afterwards.”
So, they admit they made a mistake. And after we exclaimed that the kidnapper used the borderline and prostitution for his own purpose Mrs. X. said:
Mrs. X.: “He used many things that were unjust. Indeed, he has used it in a way….”
And Mr. G. said this:
Mr. G.: “A sound thinking father will think it very important that his children will have contact with the family of the mother.”
Tante Daphne said mamma and William were not perfect, but didn’t abuse you. She said there was only a not perfect father and that mamma did her utmost.
Mr. G said:
Mr. G.: “We could not leave it like this. It is ill-making for the children. I agree with you that there are concerns and also that this is traumatically for the children.”
The striking things the two then still expressed will later be replaced by accusations towards mamma and us. Now already I can find lies in this conversation, later there will follow many more.
On the 26th of February, a substitute of Mrs. X. said to oma that the dossier was closed, but it wasn’t, because later Mrs. X. still had contact with the kidnapper.
Mrs. X said: “We are not allowed to ask dossiers. We first have to talk with the parents and then do inquiries. Calling organizations and so on”.
Later she said she had contact with the Boddaert.
Mr. G.: “We didn’t establish abuse. It is only lodged and we do an inquiry after it.”
Later on, they will even say that there was more reporting of accusations of abuse by mamma.
Oma: “What did you pass on to Mrs. R. from Child Protection Boston?”
Mrs. X.: “They wanted to know something of the authority. I passed on.”
Oma: “What did you pass on?”
Mrs. X.: “Exactly what you said, that mother had the only parental authority over Mirabelle and Robin and that there was a collective parental authority over Lucas.”
Here she was lying, because we were mistaken: mamma also had the only parental authority over Lucas. She was echoing us, so she didn’t talk about the parental authority.
She also said she spoke to the kidnapper about mamma’s death. Later she said something else.
Mrs. X.: “I did tell to father on the sixth of April, that Judith had died. I said: “do you know mother has died?” “Yes,” he said. I asked: “do you know when?” ”No”, he said. Then I passed on that it was the thirtieth of March.”
Jeugdzorg offers help
Mr. G. : “You don’t trust the catching up of Judith’s children is good. I will make an appointment with our juridical assistant to look what we can still do in the situation. That there will come a relation between you and the children again. I think of someone of International Social Services, who will do an independent search after the situation in the States.”
We made the appointment to have another meeting within some weeks. Then we should talk about how we could get in contact with you. The next time I will write about our conversation with William and Susanne V. of the Boddaert.