salt1:


Actually Edo. Did you read the story at all?

Smh

alphaNomega:


Your answers make it more specific, as you can see I am defining the questions as we progress.

There are no answers to such vague questions unfortunately.

neyobills:


There are no answers to such vague questions unfortunately.

Calm down, I'm on your side. Just anwser

alphaNomega:


I am not surprised at all. The blackman has an innate disability to think progressively and analyze any situation. This is why our entire race got colonized in the first place.

A fvking dingbat ornicus even thinks I'm hired by the family because a multi dimensional analysis of this story is alien to him.

Smart guy, we see this all the time. This country is full of stories of families of the father seizing the children. It is a part of our culture. Even people one thinks are educated do it. When a woman and her husband are falling out and divorce is looming, he will start getting advice on how to snatch the kids.

Keep speaking English and trying to analyze. The longer you waste time doing that, the worse it will get

Sterope:
Technically, the family does not have a right to that child when is mum is a live and when the mum has not expressly appointed them as the guidian. His father's properties are his and his mum for their upkeep, the father's family may have some rights in the propertybut it is limited. They can choose not to give the child his father's inheritance, it is their choice. None of the above justifies kidnapping a child from his parent.

Technically if the family does not have a right to the child then the child does not have a right bearing the family name either technically losing any rights to any properties in the man's name.

The child doesn't owe it to them, it is his father's name. The name that his father gave to him. If they have a problem with it, they should confront their son. I expect them to have dial number for the dead.

neyobills:


Technically if the family does not have a right to the child then the child does not have a right bearing the family name either technically losing any rights to any properties in the man's name.

Sterope:
The child doesn't owe it to them, it is his father's name. The name that his father gave to him. If they have a problem with it, they should confront their son. I expect them to have dial number for the dead.

Oh I now get it you want to enforce the child's right over his father's property at the same time deny the family members of the deceased the right of identity over their own grandchild,isnt God just wonderful?

With cold hearted conniving ladies with no dignity like you in the picture,i guess we are in for some real trouble.

Speaking from experience she is in for a long thing. Benin people can be very terrible when it comes to things like this and the Ekhator family I know are very wicked. I was in school with one Ekhator, short devil. Maybe it is not them Sha.

But speaking from experience, she won't get that child till the child grows up to look for her say about age 16 and the child will not be cared for o. In fact, the child will suffer the sins of the mother. I just hope human rights people can help. Benin people are not called wicked for nothing.

Her sister murdered him na

Go lay your complaints at the NHRC office in Benin. That should be a good starting point.

HIS father's property. He is his father's dependant. He is his issue, his father's son. His right over his father's property superscedes his father's family. Unfortunately for you, they cannot enforce those silly rights in court.

Is it so difficult for you to grasp? Why on earth would you assume that those rights are even remotely equal? Let me break it down for you.

See ehn, my dad can ask me not to visit my grandparents. There is nothing my grandparents can do but lament. They cannot enforce such right or bar me from inheriting my mum's. However, it changes with me being an adult, my dad can say what he likes but he can't bar me from visiting them. Relationship between the child and his father's family is to be encouraged however they cannot force it or claim that is a right they are entitled to especially where the mum is disinterested maintaining that link. No one can blame her in the circumstance, they have proven themselves to be distrustful and wicked.

neyobills:


Oh I now get it you want to enforce the child's right over his father's property at the same time deny the family members of the deceased the right of identity over their own grandchild,isnt God just wonderful?

I cant help but to cry, feel enraged. before judging, how did u relate with ur husband's family when he was alive? friendly or enemity? what is the tradition like? because im sure every member of his family can not be thinking in same direction

i pray you get your kid back

the best thing u can do is to have heart to heart talk with them. we dnt go to court and remain friendly. pray, if u believe in that. i bet u didnt have a good relationship with them before. i feel for u.

[quote author=neyobills post=80375813]

I don't get this your logic sorry the surname of the child is of the fathers so the kid definitely belong to the fathers family in my opinion [/quote. which name, are children properties? are they the ones that conceived the child and carried her for 9months or what rubbish are you saying? the child rightly belongs to the mother and is just a relative to family. They have no justification to cut her off from the mother. 2yrs old baby who just lost her father. Even animals wont think like this.

Sterope:
HIS father's property. He is his father's dependant. He is his issue, his father's son. His right over his father's property superscedes his father's family. Unfortunately for you, they cannot enforce those silly rights in court.

Is it so difficult for you to grasp? Why on earth would you assume that those rights are even remotely equal? Let me break it down for you.

See ehn, my dad can ask me not to visit my grandparents. There is nothing my grandparents can do but lament. They cannot enforce such right or bar me from inheriting my mum's. However, it changes with me being an adult, my dad can say what he likes but he can't bar me from visiting them. Relationship between the child and his father's family is to be encouraged however they cannot force it or claim that is a right they are entitled to especially where the mum is disinterested maintaining that link. No one can blame her in the circumstance, they have proven themselves to be distrustful and wicked.

Oh the mom is disinterested in maintaining the link,then she should go ahead to change the name of the child to whatever name she is interested in the link.

You can't be disinterested in the link and at the same time use the link to own properties,you have to be be as disinterested in the properties as with the link.

Does your logic even make any sense to you,why am I not surprised with your comments I can see a cold hearted cunny double faced hypocrite.

You can go and meet her husband on behalf of the family. Tell him to come and give his child another name. If anyone of you kidnappers cannot force the father to change his son's name, you have no point.

I can't see that stupid link you keep hammering on. He remains his father's child and therefore a right to inherit his father's property. The right to his property isn't only by name. His father recognised him as his son and that is all that matters. If the family like, they should even consider him a bastard, it is your headache. They want a fight, let them take it up with him.

Does your own logic make sense to you? Are you one of those douchebags in-laws? We hope to see you Roy in hell. Wicked people!

neyobills:


Oh the mom is disinterested in maintaining the link,then she should go ahead to change the name of the child to whatever name she is interested in the link.

You can't be disinterested in the link and at the same time use the link to own properties,you have to be be as disinterested in the properties as with the link.

Does your logic even make any sense to you,why am I not surprised with your comments I can see a cold hearted cunny double faced hypocrite.

Some of our so called culture are inhumane. The woman should involve a lawyer after exhausting all avenue to a peaceful resolution.Tell them you won't stop them from having access to their grandchild.
As regards the entittlement.please give your husband parent something too.
The genesis of this problems lies in the fact that they see the wife and her children as their property.when your parents write bridal list telling your in-laws you are for sale .At times the whole family contribute to finance such list..Pray very well because African black juju is real.So that you will notnot be be killed before your time.

[quote author=teemotee post=80380274][/quote]

Of course children are properties of the family name they bear,that is why there is something called disown, a father disown a child because he owns the child,are u the one that impregnated her or did pregnancy just fall on her like manna from heaven, a man spends a fortune to marry a land and equally spends a fortune maintaining his family,after his demise you now want to alienate his own family members from their own grandchild,its all shades of wrong.

neyobills:


Of course children are properties of the family name they bear,that is why there is something called disown, a father disown a child because he owns the child,are u the one that impregnated her or did pregnancy just fall on her like manna from heaven, a man spends a fortune to marry a land and equally spends a fortune maintaining his family,after his demise you now want to alienate his own family members from their own grandchild,its all shades of wrong.

did you even read the story at all? Is it the family that are have been refused access to the child in this case? The complaint here is that they took the daughter forcefully and alienated her from the mother. The said mother has not set eyes on the baby since all this has been happening. Wrong wrong wrong! The baby is a human first before being family property and she needs her mother. The mother who also just lost her husband needs access to her child. We are human beings please not animals, remember this when trying to form logical. jeez!

onyeopobo:


Wrong! while the igbo/igboid speaking speaking people of Nigeria have a language that is intelligible, they do not practice tradition as a monolith, meaning there are different different traditions among the different igbo/igboic speaking people. For example the Becheve people in the hills of crossriver state is an igbo community with an igbo king in cross river state, they are into Bride buying and selling till this very moment. And I'm very certain that while that tradition is alien to most other igbo tribe, it does not take away the fact the community is an igbo community.

So technically saying that igbo people perform a certain tradition is right and wrong, because when it comes to tradition the word igbo becomes a complex term, it's usually better to state the clan. This is the basis of contention about whether a clan is igbo or not in many communities outside the SE, people argue with this context forgetting that what makes your clan igbo should be whether or not igbo/igboic language is spoken natively in your community and whether or not that language can be understood on a basic level by other igbo clans without translation, because in general speaking, when it come it comes to tradition, the igbo people are very diverse, it's almost like saying nigerian people practice a tradition.

At the OP go to the police and then lawyer up, although I understand that money might be an issue, put up your acc number here, next to the story and give updates, I'm sure nairalanders would be willing to help

This one is another discussion in general.

seborrhic:

Extremely and clearly one sided,but the most shocking thing is that 90% of posters here have already concluded and calling the husband's family all sorts of names.
The truth about this case and all her wild allegations can only be known if she can provide further details,such as:
-She claimed knowing her husband's death only during the burial,several weeks after his death.
For a wife that was not in coma in hospital,you didn't hear from your husband and u didn't bother finding out why he hasn't called to find out how u are doing?She also didn't tell her own relations to tell them she hasn't heard from him?
It's either she is outrightly lying here or her own family members were also aware of d husband's death and both sides agreed to keep the news away from her for her own health concerns,not a unilateral decision taken by d husband's family.
-She also claimed d husband's death was caused by an overdose of a pain killing injection they were both to be given.Is she now saying after the husband was given,she wasn't given same injection?I find it hard to believe that bcoz d husband was still alive then and there is no way she would have known d dosage was too much to decline receiving same.
I believe that she brought up this overdose theory because both of them were given same injection and in order to forcefully rope in the man's sister as d killer,she is using overdose,otherwise she would have simply said d sister killed d brother with a lethal drug.
-She is also claiming she wants the custody of her child,all good and well,without providing reason the family gave for taking the child,asides her own wild theory of they feeling he used her as next of kin.
Even if the speculation is true,it says a lot that a husband would use a then barely year old child as next of kin,not the wife and mother of the child.
What I see here is appeal to emotions that the social media can weep up for people like this to get the child.But I can bet anything her tale of events used in weeping up these distressed and deprived mother sentiments,are not all what they seem.
I hope for her sake this matter doesn't end in court and both sides can come to a mutual understanding and agreement because if it does,the lawyers on the husband's family side will reap her to pieces and put her in more emotional turmoil,if she still comes up with this kind of story.People with far more believable stories have found it distressing facing an opposing child custody lawyer,talkless of one with question marks everywhere.

The part of the child is where i know you are obviously biased.

The family can do all they want but not forcefully taking the child from the mother. Since the mother is alive, it is her right to decided who becomes guardian over her child and not the late husband's family. There is no reason to justify kidnapping a child unless she gave them permission to keep the child.

It sounds like the family paid you to defend them.

No matter the holes in her story, no one has the right to take her child without her consent.

ornicus:


Smart guy, we see this all the time. This country is full of stories of families of the father seizing the children. It is a part of our culture. Even people one thinks are educated do it. When a woman and her husband are falling out and divorce is looming, he will start getting advice on how to snatch the kids.

Keep speaking English and trying to analyze. The longer you waste time doing that, the worse it will get

I already know your problem.

adanny01:


The part of the child is where i know you are obviously biased.

The family can do all they want but not forcefully taking the child from the mother. Since the mother is alive, it is her right to decided who becomes guardian over her child and not the late husband's family.

It sounds like the family paid you to defend them.

No matter the holes in her story, no one has the right to take her child without her consent.

exactly. where do these people who think it is okay for a child to be forcefully separated from her mother without consent even come from? Not justifiable at all

seborrhic:

Extremely and clearly one sided,but the most shocking thing is that 90% of posters here have already concluded and calling the husband's family all sorts of names.
The truth about this case and all her wild allegations can only be known if she can provide further details,such as:
-She claimed knowing her husband's death only during the burial,several weeks after his death.
For a wife that was not in coma in hospital,you didn't hear from your husband and u didn't bother finding out why he hasn't called to find out how u are doing?She also didn't tell her own relations to tell them she hasn't heard from him?
It's either she is outrightly lying here or her own family members were also aware of d husband's death and both sides agreed to keep the news away from her for her own health concerns,not a unilateral decision taken by d husband's family.
-She also claimed d husband's death was caused by an overdose of a pain killing injection they were both to be given.Is she now saying after the husband was given,she wasn't given same injection?I find it hard to believe that bcoz d husband was still alive then and there is no way she would have known d dosage was too much to decline receiving same.
I believe that she brought up this overdose theory because both of them were given same injection and in order to forcefully rope in the man's sister as d killer,she is using overdose,otherwise she would have simply said d sister killed d brother with a lethal drug.
-She is also claiming she wants the custody of her child,all good and well,without providing reason the family gave for taking the child,asides her own wild theory of they feeling he used her as next of kin.
Even if the speculation is true,it says a lot that a husband would use a then barely year old child as next of kin,not the wife and mother of the child.
What I see here is appeal to emotions that the social media can weep up for people like this to get the child.But I can bet anything her tale of events used in weeping up these distressed and deprived mother sentiments,are not all what they seem.
I hope for her sake this matter doesn't end in court and both sides can come to a mutual understanding and agreement because if it does,the lawyers on the husband's family side will reap her to pieces and put her in more emotional turmoil,if she still comes up with this kind of story.People with far more believable stories have found it distressing facing an opposing child custody lawyer,talkless of one with question marks everywhere.

I don't understand you.I don't know if the supporting stories are true or not.Are you saying it is right for them to separate the baby from the mum?haba

Sterope:
You can go and meet her husband on behalf of the family. Tell him to come and give his child another name. If anyone of you kidnappers cannot force the father to change his son's name, you have no point.

I can't see that stupid link you keep hammering on. He remains his father's child and therefore a right to inherit his father's property. The right to his property isn't only by name. His father recognised him as his son and that is all that matters. If the family like, they should even consider him a bastard, it is your headache. They want a fight, let them take it up with him.

Does your own logic make sense to you? Are you one of those douchebags in-laws? We hope to see you Roy in hell. Wicked people!

With she devils like u roaming God's green earth I guess we have a whole lot to worry about.

His fathers name is his property according to your logic
His father's family nko,not his property,afterall what financial benefits will you guys derive from a bunch of old aunts and uncles,
You want the sweet, his father's property,yet you are disgusted by the sweat,his fathers family.

Do u have a surname, if yes I can only help but pity the man be it father or husband u are using his surname, he is totally hopeless.

neyobills:


Technically if the family does not have a right to the child then the child does not have a right bearing the family name either technically losing any rights to any properties in the man's name.

The child bears a name that the late father gave. No one can take it away. Does the family have patent rights over the name? WTF are you talking about?

deltateam:



Its easy for you to defend your people. Edo people are hooligans. Their ladies are Italians.

oga please if you were chased by Edo people in your dream today please go to your pastor and do the needful and stop polluting my mentions with your senseless coments
Fish brain

neyobills:


There are no answers to such vague questions unfortunately.

Calm down, I'm on your side. Just anwser

UPDATE (after several posts from you and no response to the question): This means you do not know what to do when your in-laws try to take away the properties of your deceased married children. You would fold your hands and watch. The in-laws now own everything. The End.

Sarah20A:
oga please if you were chased by Edo people in your dream today please go to your pastor and do the needful and stop polluting my mentions with your senseless coments
Fish brain

Ozhou.

meobizy:
She has an Esan last name so I suspect she is either from the tribe or married into it.
This case go long as it is tradition there for the groom’s family to take a first child of their deceased son.
I don’t think the tradition is restricted to only them because I’ve heard of Igbos seizing an offspring from their deceased child’s union.
She should head to the court because I’m surprised in this day and age things of this sort still happen.
Another hope she can give herself is the child coming back to her in the next 16 - 18 years.

igbo this igbos that, dem swear with una with igbos, Wetin consign this matter with igbos, the lady no mention tribe n am sure her people no b igbos but u jst wan add am for ethnic bashing abeg go remove Tha igbo part cus she no mention any tribe.

ednut1:
Please take this off social media abeg. What if they harm your child

Is that your next plan?