I can't believe anyone is taking the cousin's side! No one has the right to tell another human being who they can and can not associate with. No one! And there is a whole host of control freak issues that often correlate to the kind of personality that would make such a demand.

Maybe I'm naive, but if these letters represent a cross-section of how we, as a society, respond to a child that needs help, then I think our society is in deep trouble. There is something very disturbing to me about the fact that the desire to discard the child as quickly as possible is seen as normal while the uncle's willingness to care for his own flesh and blood is seen as so bizarre.

This is obviously a problematic situation but it seems like people are accepting the letter-writer's version of events very uncritically. It is possible that she resents this new intrusion into her life and that is distorting the way she views events. The husband just lost not one but two brothers; for all we know, this is the only child either of them ever had. We do not know whether he has any children of his own. It is possible that all that is going on here is inexperienced parenting mixed with the desperate desire not to drive away the only remaining connection he has to either of his brothers.

Terror (from Merriam Webster Online): violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands

ter·ror·ism

Pronunciation:

ˈter-ər-ˌi-zəm

Function:

noun

Date:

1795

: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

If setting off bombs in government buildings isn't terrorism, and being the guy in charge of ordering people to do isn't a terrorist, then what and who on earth is?

Can't everybody be wrong? The people who ordered a bad war in Vietnam, and the people who chose to fight it by setting off bombs in buildings?