next »

[higherandhigher]

I can't comment on the broader issues discussed here and I certainly don't want to minimize any potential problems with various Jugendämter. However, the above is a bit misleading. Enke committed suicide because he had been suffering from depression. He hadn't sought help for his condition because he feared the Jugendamt would remove his (recently adopted) child from the care of a parent who suffered from a mental illness. For what it's worth, those fears appear to have been unfounded.

Yes, to blame Enke's death on the Jugendamt is a stretch at best.

[Enke had sought help for his depression (he'd been seeing a psychiatrist for some time), but he rejected going to an inpatient program. Enke did have some concerns (as you say, apparently unfounded) that he wouldn't be granted permanent custody of his adopted child (in Germany there is a two year foster period before official, permanent adoption occurs).]

germanphd01, I'm sorry for your situation, but I think your best bet is to work with lawyers, embassy personnel, and reporters about YOUR situation and not about the overall problems you see with the "system".

[ferriswheel]

[Enke had sought help for his depression (he'd been seeing a psychiatrist for some time), but he rejected going to an inpatient program. Enke did have some concerns (as you say, apparently unfounded) that he wouldn't be granted permanent custody of his adopted child (in Germany there is a two year foster period before official, permanent adoption occurs).]

Ah, thanks for clearing that up!

[embitteredhistorian]

Wow, this is one of the most disturbing stories I've read about in a while.

Another warning: Germany is one of the few industrialized nations where you can be thrown in jail for words. Expressing "racism" (an amorphous and broadly defined concept if there ever was one) is illegal and is punishable by incarceration. There was a story of an EFL teacher who was deported from Britain to Germany and after a quick trial was sentenced to over a year imprisonment for denying the Holocaust on an Australian website while he was living in another country (Singapore, I think).

I'm not one to defend Holocaust deniers, but I think putting someone in jail for saying something is pretty messed up.

[inthelab]

When I took German in college, one of my teachers said never to call someone a Dorfsdummerl (village idiot) in Germany; you could land in jail for it.  I think that law was older than post-WW II.

[ferriswheel]

Expressing "racism" (an amorphous and broadly defined concept if there ever was one) is illegal and is punishable by incarceration.

Provided that expression disturbs the public peace.

[embitteredhistorian]

Expressing "racism" (an amorphous and broadly defined concept if there ever was one) is illegal and is punishable by incarceration.

Provided that expression disturbs the public peace.

Well there's a watertight, unequivocal clarification if I've ever heard one.

[ferriswheel]

Well there's a watertight, unequivocal clarification if I've ever heard one.

In my understanding, law rarely is either (watertight or unequivocal). ;)

[embitteredhistorian]

Well there's a watertight, unequivocal clarification if I've ever heard one.

In my understanding, law rarely is either (watertight or unequivocal). ;)

No, but some are closer than others, and the "public peace" can hide a multitude of sins. Police in the UK openly admit that they like the "disturbing the peace" law because it basically means they can arrest anyone at any time for any reason. A recent example: http://carlosmiller.com/2009/10/29/uk-police-threaten-to-arrest-photography-for-breach-of-peace/

[qrypt]

Wow, this is one of the most disturbing stories I've read about in a while.

Another warning: Germany is one of the few industrialized nations where you can be thrown in jail for words. Expressing "racism" (an amorphous and broadly defined concept if there ever was one) is illegal and is punishable by incarceration. There was a story of an EFL teacher who was deported from Britain to Germany and after a quick trial was sentenced to over a year imprisonment for denying the Holocaust on an Australian website while he was living in another country (Singapore, I think).

I'm not one to defend Holocaust deniers, but I think putting someone in jail for saying something is pretty messed up.

This can't be for real.  People can be thrown in jail "for words" in most if not all (democratic) countries.  As you say, it is also true in Britain -- one can be arrested and charged for using threatening and/or insulting language.  The notion that it's illegal to insult people here is far more disturbing to me than the prohibition against holocaust denial in Germany. 

Freedom of speech is a great idea, I'm in favor of it in most instances (though it has to be properly understood, it is never the freedom to say anything at all without punishment of any kind by any party) -- and perhaps in another 50 years or so Germany will have earned it back.  It helps that they've apparently stopped arresting foreign academics for calling themselves Dr.

[ferriswheel]

[...] the "public peace" can hide a multitude of sins.

Agreed. So can notions such as "imminent lawlessnes," "due diligence," "reasonable limits," or "fair use." Law is necessarily abstract, and as such it is subject to interpretation. Some interpretations may be objectionable. This does not automatically disqualify the principles or objectives behind certain laws.

Freedom of speech is a great idea [...] and perhaps in another 50 years or so Germany will have earned it back.

I was under the impression it already had. :)

[qrypt]

Freedom of speech is a great idea [...] and perhaps in another 50 years or so Germany will have earned it back.

I was under the impression it already had. :)

Well, I'm saying that it hasn't, thus I think the prohibition on holocaust denial there is appropriate. 

[ferriswheel]

Well, I'm saying that it hasn't, thus I think the prohibition on holocaust denial there is appropriate.

I don't think I quite follow. Are you saying that Germans should not have the right to try and whitewash the Nazi regime, hence the ban on holocaust denial is right and proper? Are you saying that, empirically, there is no freedom of expression in Germany, period? Or is your point something else entirely?

[embitteredhistorian]

Wow, this is one of the most disturbing stories I've read about in a while.

Another warning: Germany is one of the few industrialized nations where you can be thrown in jail for words. Expressing "racism" (an amorphous and broadly defined concept if there ever was one) is illegal and is punishable by incarceration. There was a story of an EFL teacher who was deported from Britain to Germany and after a quick trial was sentenced to over a year imprisonment for denying the Holocaust on an Australian website while he was living in another country (Singapore, I think).

I'm not one to defend Holocaust deniers, but I think putting someone in jail for saying something is pretty messed up.

This can't be for real.  People can be thrown in jail "for words" in most if not all (democratic) countries.  As you say, it is also true in Britain -- one can be arrested and charged for using threatening and/or insulting language.  The notion that it's illegal to insult people here is far more disturbing to me than the prohibition against holocaust denial in Germany. 

Freedom of speech is a great idea, I'm in favor of it in most instances (though it has to be properly understood, it is never the freedom to say anything at all without punishment of any kind by any party) -- and perhaps in another 50 years or so Germany will have earned it back.  It helps that they've apparently stopped arresting foreign academics for calling themselves Dr.

Sorry, I was actually lobbying my criticism against most western European countries including the UK. Germany just happened to be the subject here.

[qrypt]

Well, I'm saying that it hasn't, thus I think the prohibition on holocaust denial there is appropriate.

I don't think I quite follow. Are you saying that Germans should not have the right to try and whitewash the Nazi regime, hence the ban on holocaust denial is right and proper? Are you saying that, empirically, there is no freedom of expression in Germany, period? Or is your point something else entirely?

The former: they shouldn't have the right to whitewash, thus it is right for them to suffer the indignity of having a restriction on speech that other democratic countries don't have. 

[normative_]

Well, I'm saying that it hasn't, thus I think the prohibition on holocaust denial there is appropriate.

I don't think I quite follow. Are you saying that Germans should not have the right to try and whitewash the Nazi regime, hence the ban on holocaust denial is right and proper? Are you saying that, empirically, there is no freedom of expression in Germany, period? Or is your point something else entirely?

The former: they shouldn't have the right to whitewash, thus it is right for them to suffer the indignity of having a restriction on speech that other democratic countries don't have. 

I agree. When the Germans get past citizenship being based on race and blood, and immigration considered a legal possibility, then they will be ready for people to assume they've adopted the same kinds of values as the rest of us.

The mainstream claims of Christian Democracy in particular, not only the lunatic right, is living proof that they haven't. And the Social Democrats aren't much better.