Michaela Barriball and the Moral Superiority of Women
Through continued torture Michaela Barriball eventually murdered helpless infant boy Malachi Subecz whom our wise Family Court ordered to her care. None of the articles we found regarding this case made any mention of Malachi’s father. Fathers clearly aren’t even important enough to consider, at least until they fail to maintain their affectionately named ‘child support’ payments. Clearly little of that money in Malachi’s case was actually spent on his care given that he was fed so little that he weighed the same at his death at 5 years old as he had two years earlier. Whether these payments were adding to Michaela Barriball’s income or merely reimbursing government for her benefit money, the case reminds us that so-called ‘child support’ can serve primarily as ‘mummy’s lifestyle enhancement’ and how foolish it is to provide such money without any accountability for how it is spent.
Our Family Court appeared to think that sole parenthood by some unrelated woman would be better than care by the child’s father or extended biological family. It seems that Malachi’s mother, imprisoned for her own criminal behaviour (that also wasn’t clarified – we can’t go besmirching the feminist image of women’s moral superiority now can we?) expressed a preference for this unrelated woman to care for him. It goes without question that a mother’s wishes should always be prioritized by the Family Court.
Commentary on this case has sought to hold responsible child-care staff, our child welfare department and others for not raising an alarm or intervening. Sentencing judge Justice Davison was reported as saying “Unless responsible adults are prepared to speak out and contact the police, the opportunities to prevent further trauma or damage to the child are lost”. Fair enough, but where’s accountability for the Family Court? One might say “Unless the Family Court discontinues its feminist bias and starts following up on cases to see how often its decisions harm children, children’s lives will continue to be harmed.” Rest in peace Malachi.
Michaela Barriball is just another reminder that women can be as cruel and violent as any man. She is another reminder of the dishonesty of feminists and of the White Ribbon campaign that implies only male violence and female victimhood are true or worth worrying about. Michaela Barriball highlights the foolishness of government and its departments in supporting White Ribbon and displaying its posters in their foyers. Shame on this society for denigrating the male half of our population on the basis of a small proportion of miscreants, and for failing to value men’s and fathers’ wisdom and contribution.
I haven’t read anything, about the father.
Her boyfriend, got more mentions.
And without doubt, is an adult who should have acted.
So we are left with, assuming things.
Maybe the father, was never named on the birth certificate.
Just another dad, who doesn’t know he’s a dad.
Maybe for feminism, the fathers story is to sad to tell.
Even if the opposite, with dad being a monster is true.
Whatever the answer, he was safer than this woman.
And in all cases, he was father enough.
For her to choose to have, a baby with him.
Even the fathers family, is not in the articles.
I thought, there was already reporting.
But this has big questions, about who becomes offenders.
So will daycare staff, who notice but don’t report.
Become now liable, for not reporting potential abuse.
Do we go down a path, where everything is reported.
No normal child, can avoid hurting themselves.
And if every report, requires investigation.
Can you imagine, the huge invasion into our lives.
Women’s Refuge, may need millions more.
Orange Tamariki, will be ruining families everywhere.
As policy will be, to be on the safe side.
Every child will be interviewed, to betray the parents.
I think history has examples, similar.
I think spellcheck got me, with Oranga not Orange.
I guess there is murders, that can’t be stopped.
In this case a male has psychosis, and kills a prostitute.
“Van Hemert had a long history of mental illness.”
So actually in hindsight, the signs of problems existed.
While many show the same signs, but don’t murder.
The same as the Barriball case, as there were signs.
The health system sees signs, just as childcare sees signs.
If either had better actions, could the murder be stopped.
Barriball looked at, for abuse problems when noticed.
Van Hemert labeled high risk, with more services.
Barriball killed a child, and shouldn’t be around them again.
Van Hemert killed, so medication must always be monitored.
So in both cases, life on parole is necessary.
Could a partner killer, be trusted with a new partner.
Ten years minimum, is lenient for killing a person.
As for life on parole, is there something you can’t allow.
Just as being a woman, should not be an excuse.
Neither should mental health, be an excuse.
In the example Barriball, got the longer sentence.
So there seems to be no superiority, with murder sentences.
The system attempts, to weigh culpability.
Women killing partners, may be a different story.