Missing Child: Losing Enzo

I’m going to tell you a story about a father, or at least a guy that thinks he is a father. From what I hear, he is pretty excited about the prospect of fatherhood, and considers it an awesome responsibility. How he came to be a father is far from conventional, but that didn’t paralyze him, and he was looking forward to everything he could comprehend about how his life would change from the moment he looked into the eyes of his own son. For him it was a dream, and his dream turned into a nightmare when his son went missing before he could ever lay eyes on him.

To tell this father’s story, there is only one name he would want you to know, and that’s the name of his boy, Enzo. For over 8 months he prepared with the child’s mother, though there was no romantic relationship between them. On nearly a weekly basis during the prenatal months, the expecting parents spent hours planning how the child would be taken care of. When angered, the mother threatened to run away with the child. Sometimes she humored the idea of co-parenting, but was strongly against broken homes. Because the father refused romantic relationship with the mother, the mother often wanted to abort the child or give the child up for adoption, and favored those options above allowing the father to raise the child absent of her involvement, even when assured no child support would be requested. You see, the mother had a bad experience growing up in a broken home and wanted no such life for her unborn child. At the same time, she wrestled with the thought of abortion. She knew the father wanted Enzo, even if it meant raising him alone. The mother knew how the father was preparing for the child, but was very upset when the father was out of town on the day she went into labor. She had not forgiven her own father for not being present for her mother when she was born. She decided to give the baby up for adoption, saying “He should have been there”. The father was denied access to any information about the child due to HIPPA though some US states have laws that allow anyone to inquire about the identity of a parent leaving an infant child at the hospital, emergency medical services station, or fire station. This situation would have to go to court, and that’s when things really take a turn for the worse.

The effect of COVID 19 caused delays in securing a court date. When a court date was finally set, Enzo would have been 5 months old. The first day in court, the mother’s lawyer submitted a motion to dismiss the case, stating that the child was left at the hospital, so the father should be required to gather any information from the hospital directly, as the mother’s parental rights had been forfeited. The judge denied this motion and ordered the parents to sort out their grievances in mediation. When the mediation date arrived, the mother was uncooperative, exercising her right to remain silent. When Enzo would have been about 6 months old the parents met in court again, and the judge thought it was reasonable to require the mother to disclose the hospital of which she gave birth. The mother gave this information begrudgingly. The father and his lawyer, spent the next few weeks contacting the hospital and worked their way up the chain of command until they got someone to acknowledge and obey the court order over HIPPA and disclose data they had in their system regarding mothers who left their infant at any of the hospital’s locations. There was no match on the mother’s name or child’s name at the hospital that was given in court, for all the reported hospital’s locations in the tri-county area. By the next time, the parents would appear in court, Enzo would have been just about 8 months old, and the father would have to begin apologizing to friends who gifted clothing for the baby’s first few months of life at the intimate baby shower he organized for Enzo weeks before birth. When the inconclusive report from the hospital record search was given to the judge, the mother would be sworn under oath for the first time, and asked to provide sworn testimony under penalties of perjury regarding where she gave birth. The mother, representing herself, stated under oath, that she did not know where she gave birth, and after 8 months, had forgotten. The judge then gave the father and his legal team the ability to search the mother’s phone because the mother reported to be in possession of a photograph of baby Enzo at the hospital, on the day the child was born, which could have been used for geolocation purposes. A private investigator and the father’s lawyer examined the mother’s phone and photo files of the child to no avail. The mother appeared in court with new representation 2 months later, and under oath stated she was never pregnant and the whole thing was made up. The father contests this, but his legal team has lost interest in his case, as it has taken longer than expected and has yielded little money for them. With proper, diligent representation, the father could get the information he needs to find if the baby was adopted, or if something more sinister has taken place of which the mother is trying to cover up. He maintains that he was in the presence of the mother the entire duration of her pregnancy, and even helped her to make a “paper mache” mold of her stomach at 7 months. He has several ultrasounds the mother gave him during the prenatal months that he is forced to cross-reference with local hospitals and clinics, when he gets off from work, due to stagnating support from his legal team.

Men like Enzo’s father, are in need of reform in the area of father’s rights, as well as financial assistance while awaiting on the law to mature around the issues of father’s rights. As Florida Governor DeSantis approves millions towards Father’s rights, there are fathers in desperate need of competent legal assistance. Not only should more Governors initiate similar initiatives in their states, but providing grants to help fathers secure better legal assistance would help since so few laws give the father any inherent rights to a child without DNA testing. When a father has been proven to have done due diligence with respect to establishing paternity, such a grant would allow swift legal paternity actions to be filed to overturn unjust adoptions, and also provide justice in cases when the mother may have acted criminally against her unborn child. Florida happens to be a state that has such laws that allow fathers to inquire about the identity of a parent leaving a child at a hospital, however no hospital would place this state law above HIPPA, even when pressured by a lawyer. The legal teams of hospitals have to be involved which wastes more precious time as the trail for children like Enzo grows colder by the day.

Positively Polarizing Times

The unjustified murder of George Floyd, the protests, and the riots combined with the already stressed economy, unemployment numbers, and unconquered COVID-19 pandemic has had a way of dividing the country in unprecedented fashion. Not only are we being divided into many subgroups based on our opinions on the issues of the day, but we are being much more open about it. The initial public response to the COVID-19 pandemic, with all of its Tik-Toks and social media challenges, has created a phenomenon where more people than ever before have become comfortable being themselves online and have begun welcoming the world into the more intimate parts of their personal life through social media. Americans are sharing images and videos of their children, pets, living rooms, eating habits, and love lives. Likewise, our followers and who we follow has increased and diversified, as more of the population has adopted use of social media platforms. In this time of controversy, Americans, in their newfound comfort for web broadcasted self-expression, are sharing their more intimate opinions and philosophies regarding the polarizing issues of the day. One’s political views has never been so public as it is today.

While the present times are exposing how we are different, they are also showing us how alike we are. The country’s use of the internet and social media has left us with very few barriers to information and very little censorship of ourselves with regard to our opinions, which is exposing how we share similar viewpoints on issues with demographics of people we’ve never associated ourselves with previously. Even in the context of our differences, we’re seeking an understanding of exactly why we have the differences we have with renewed enthusiasm. The time in quarantine has given us unprecedented exposure and acceptance of groups of whom we’ve never previously given our attention to. The people we’ve found refreshingly entertaining and inspiring during the early pandemic times, are now sharing their opinions with us on things like criminal justice reform and giving us unique angles on complex issues. All this opinion sharing is publicly dividing us into much more complex and uniquely diverse subgroups.

If you’ve been paying attention, you should have noticed how there isn’t only two groups or two opinions about the issues plaguing our society these days. There isn’t one unified Republican or Democratic opinion, neither is there one unified white or black opinion. Instead, we are able to see, now better than ever, how misaligned our stereotypes and biases are with reality. There are violent and peaceful people of all races and backgrounds. There are black people who refuse to protest for black issues, while there are white people who willfully stand against injustice in spite of their own personal risks. There are black people who refuse to be violent or loot businesses, and there are white people who are showing up to the scene for the sole purpose of looting. There are unique struggles for the small business owner that are blind to race, and the same for the struggles of the uneducated non-essential worker. For all the different ways a person can choose to identify themselves, there are those who are fine with how their life is working out, and there are those who are demanding change. If we wish, we can continue to focus on what divides us, but it is growing increasingly difficult to remain ignorantly affixed on race-based stereotypes and historical lies. History is repeating itself in a way, that won’t allow us to be passively ignorant because the truth is too frequently flashing across the screens of our timelines. Many are googling historical accounts of abuses of power in America and relearning the lessons fed to them in history classes.

Through research and understanding, we should take the time necessary to break down the mental barriers we’ve placed on people who don’t look like us, believe what we believe, or share our sexual preferences. If we adopt a new understanding and stop categorizing ourselves in all these outdated subgroups, we can have more honest conversations and treat each other as humans, and nothing more or less. This could potentially be a powerful lesson for our collective social consciousness, where “the majority” isn’t viewed as the white majority, but as the voting majority. The voting majority desires to live in peace, with all the rights and privileges the constitution affords the citizen of the United States of America. The voting majority could demand the government to make changes that benefit all people in the country and stop those in position of power from violating the rights of anyone.

This is a pivotal time where we should better understand the quote “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere”, seeing first-hand how the issues that plagues me today can affect you tomorrow. This was illustrated in the supposed mismanagement of COVID-19 by the Chinese government which has resulted in global outbreak and an investigation into China’s actions by other allied nations. This is also illustrated in massive protest and outrage of the American public that is currently aimed at the criminal justice system of our country but has had collateral damage in the form of curfews and property damage that has affected people who never saw it coming. In the midst of division, there are Americans standing together today, that may have never stood next to each other if it were not for the combination of monumental events occurring back-to-back. It is clearer today than ever before, that our differences, as humans, are much less than our differences of opinions. It is clearer than ever before, that our socioeconomic status and education levels govern our choices much more than the color of our skin. As people organize and protest together, new and diverse networks are being formed and I predict this year’s voter turnout and voting results will be unlike anything of the past. The ability to construct a platform that reflects the sentiments of the voting majority, using all the statistical data made available in the last 6 months of social media activity, and the conclusion or lack of conclusion of the issues we currently face is going to make for an interesting election in November.

A Looter’s Mindset

I present to you, the backdrop. Humor with me this scenario…

You believe in the right to protest. You believe in the principle of “government for the people, by the people”. You believe it is the right of the people to stand up and voice their displeasure when their government does not serve them, or worse, wages war against them. In this scenario, you are a black person in America, and there are certainly black people who feel under siege by the police in their communities. This is your reality. You feel, in America, people with darker pigments of skin only benefit from the white majority being morally and financially divided on the issue of how to treat people who have similar skin tone as you. Surely, there are some who still believe you are less than human. Surely, there are some who will believe in your humanity but view your life as something less valuable than a white person’s life. Somewhere out there, there may even be some who believe you are created equal to a white person. Since the abolishment of Slavery in the USA, White America has wrestled with it’s divided opinions surrounding how to treat those classified as “black” in our society. People with brown skin have secured rights within society over the years, but brown people keep finding inconsistencies in society’s enforcement of the laws surrounding the violation of their rights.

The reality that White America is the real America and Black America is some cheap derivative is made painfully clear when you witness someone black being killed by the police on a video you watch from your social media timeline. The image of that person’s last moments on this earth is imprinted into your mind, and you follow the story in the news and on social media to learn more. You find out that no arrests have taken place, and your mind cannot fathom why. For you and people who look like you, the presence of physical evidence like the video you watched does not yield the same arrests that the video would yield if it were you in the video doing the killing. You are outraged.

You decide to protest, and you assemble with a group of other people who share your outrage on the injustice, some you know but most you do not. You hold your sign, yell your message to all that will hear. You reflect on the history of your people as you walk and chant, because the act of protesting in this way is reminiscent of the days of the Civil Rights Movement. Yet, your reality through the prism of the Civil Rights Movement only intensifies your outrage, making you increasingly determined to get more definitive change within the system that oppresses you and people like you. You want to finish what your people started years ago. What will you do differently to bring about the change they could not? You wrestle in your mind for an answer to this age-old question, understanding that both the nonviolent and violent actions of your people, together, led to the incremental changes of the Civil Rights era. Suddenly, you hear glass shatter nearby. Someone in the crowd has caused damage to a business, and people are beginning to enter the building and take things…

What happens next will differ for you based on the combination of a multitude of factors. Your personal core values and morality, your needs, your socioeconomic status and ability to provide your own needs, your familiarity with the business that was damaged, and your level of outrage are only a few of the factors that will dictate what you do next. In fact, if not merely provocateurs, the same contributing factors would be the likely motivation for the unknown person who damaged the building in the first place.

Consider the mindset of the immoral looter. For whatever reason, life experience has not given them the core values and morality to resist the temptation to steal. This person may shoplift on a normal day, merely because they have devised a scheme to get away with it. During a riot or protest, when the police are preoccupied, they could act with no respect or care for the just cause of the people assembled to protest injustice. This kind of person would even seek out such an environment to carry out their scheme, because it presents opportunity to escape consequence.

Consider the mindset of the need-based looter. This person develops a higher sense of morality when they themselves do not have a need. On a day when they just purchased the newest iPhone, they will be zealous about turning in a smartphone they found unattended at the Starbucks condiment counter to lost-and-found. However, when their current phone is “on the fritz”, stumbling upon a shiny new smart phone may be too good to pass up, even though they don’t feel completely right about taking it. This person could simply hear word that Target was broken into and show up to grab a TV because they wanted a new one.

Consider the mindset of the poor looter. This person lives their life on the edge of going without basic needs on a regular basis. This person may or may not be homeless, but they are living in poverty, nonetheless. If they have the opportunity to take something, they don’t have to know what it is or how valuable it is. They’re basic needs are on the forefront of their minds, so much so, that they would take anything and figure out it’s value later. This person could benefit greatly from riot in their community and would certainly seek out the opportunity to secure anything valuable for themselves in such an environment.

Consider the mindset of the vindictive looter. This person can justify doing wrong to those who they’ve associated as the source of their anguish. We all know someone who is vindictive. When given the opportunity to kick their enemy when they are down, they will most certainly take it. If there was a negative interaction with a representative of a business, it may be all this person needs to destroy and loot from the business.

Lastly, consider the mindset of the enraged looter. This person is in a genuine state of rage over the issues that plagues them. There is not much forethought to any of their actions and they are capable of almost anything in this dangerous mental state. They’re looting is out of their anger and it doesn’t have to be anything personal. They are reflecting their pain on the world around them in any way they can.

In America, especially during this time of pandemic, you cannot isolate any of these mindsets to only black people. You, most certainly, should not link the actions of any looter to the cause of the nearby protest. You could consider looting a byproduct of the cause for some, while most others are merely capitalizing off an opportunity for free goods while the law of the land is too preoccupied to enforce immediate consequences. Minus the unknown provocateurs, I believe the video footage of the George Floyd riots reflects the diversity of the people with these mindsets. However, if you tried to isolate these behaviors to only black people or tried to provide some statistical analysis of why the mentalities I discussed are more common among African Americans, you would only be highlighting factors created by systemic racism and highlighting the things that we should be trying to change rather than perpetuate.

Too often, the laws of our society fail to serve the black man and woman. If this yields lawless acts of the black man and woman, we should not pretend to not understand their reactions, whether we agree or disagree with the lawlessness. Looting has always been part of riots because of the lawless climate it creates. If someone would steal on a regular day, they would certainly loot during a riot. When the thing you want for yourself is right before you, nobody is going to stop you from taking it, and if you don’t take it someone else will because you’re surrounded by takers, only a higher sense of personal accountability and morality will stop you from doing so. You cannot fathom what you will do until put into position and presented the temptation of no immediate consequence. This is the mindset of the looter, yet this is ironically the mindset of the police officer abusing his or her power of authority and use of force. If we care about the lawlessness of the rioting looter, we have to care just as much about the lawlessness of the police officer. It is the African American’s desire for police officers to have a similar higher sense of morality and personal accountability in their use of force, yet we are still trying to fix the system that should hold them accountable when they they fail to protect and serve the black civilian. The black civilian only has the ability to loot in times of riot, while the police officer can exert their power over the black person at any time. Certainly, there are abuses the black person endures at the hand of police that are less severe than death. Yet, it is only in the extreme cases of wrongful death do you get the mass media response, subsequent protests, and occasional riots. It is my hope that law and order is reestablished across the board, that there may be justice for all lawlessness and less hypocrisy in the world.