In 2004 Sean Goldman and his mother, Bruna Bianchi, traveled to Brazil for a two-week vacation. They never returned to New Jersey where Sean’s father, David Goldman, waited. His wife called him saying she and Sean were not returing and if he ever wanted to see his son again, he would have to assign sole custody to her. Bianchi then obtained a divorce from Goldman and married a Brazilian lawyer. Last month she died after giving birth to her daughter. Goldman saw this as an opportunity to finally regain custody of Sean after the Brazilian courts failed to agree to his previous appeals. So the question that has arisen is whether or not Sean should stay with his stepfather and stepsister in Brazil or be returned to his biological father in New Jersey who is filing for custody.

The question involoves national laws of both the Unites States and Brazil and international law. The answer is not based the law or what is legal; it is based on morality. Should a boy live with a man who has no blood relation to him or his biological father whose son was abducted from him.

Goldman obviously has the right of custody to his son. He has done nothing wrong and just wants to play, laugh and spend time with his own son. However, Sean needs to be considered as well and what is best for him. He has been raised by his stepdad for the past four years. He has lived in Brazil and become part of his community. He also has a new sister. He may not want to leave Brazil. But isn’t that the reaction when any kid finds out that he or she might be moving out of his or her home?

Nobody wants to leave the place they have been living for the past four years. Kids don’t want to leave their school and their friends. But when they do move, they make new friends and get used to the new school and community. So despite the fact that Sean might be reluctant to move to New Jersey with his true father, it would be the same as if his whole family were moving as well. The boy should be with his true father, both for the son and Goldman.

Some argue that it would be wrong to take him away from his stepdad despite him having no blood relation. The boy has been raised by him. Let’s say a boy is kidnapped by a stranger for several years. He is raised by the stranger and the boy is told that he is the boy’s father. Then the boy is found by his true father. What these same people are saying is that this boy should stay with the stranger because that is who has raised him.

So you can kidnap a kid and keep them long enough they become yours. That just doesn’t seem to make sense to me. What about the father’s right to his son. Is that totally discarded. He is the creator of the child; the boy belongs to him. It is only right for a boy to live with his true father unless there are valid reasons not to such as child abuse.

However, there are no such reasons in this case. Goldman is a worthy father who deserves to have his abducted son returned to him. The mother is dead and, however tragic, no longer creates an argument that she also deserves custody. Goldman is Sean’s only real parent left who deserves custody. Forget the legalities of it all and look at the morals. There should be no reason why a boy’s true, deserving father should be prevented from raising his own son.