Would you turn your child in if they face the death penalty

I am glad I don't have to make that decision.
It's possible that not just the young man's father knew but others too but he was given or probably volunteered to be the one to turn his son in.

I don't blame the father I just couldn't do that.

I don’t think it is wrong to hand in one’s child. I think it is something I would struggle to do, which is not the same thing at all.

If I knew he was a monster like Savile, I’m sure I’d think differently.

I agree MOnica- but I'm finding this thread very strange.
Lots of parents have children who are criminals and it isn't necessarily their fault.

There is an assumption here that handing over your child is something wrong, like some unwritten parental rule that your children must be supported by you whatever they've done.
The Kray twins spring to mind- who always treated their mother well, apparently.
I'm also thinking of Jimmy Saville, likewise.
A crime is a crime is a crime, and it is against the law. It is the judge who pronounces sentence, not the parent. If you don't agree with the death penalty for your child (and who in the right mind would?) then you shouldn't believe in it for anyone elses's child either.
These issues lie at the heart of the struggles the US (and to lesser extent here in the UK) are dealing with right now- that it's ok when it happens to someone else but not to me. When we realise it is happening to me (or even thinking it might, as seems to be the case here) then we feel uncomfortable about it.
This is because killing people, whatever the means, is wrong. At least on that I hope we can all agree, excpet if you think it's ok to execute people, in which case it should be ok, however unfortunate it may be, to execute your child.

That does add a dimension to the discussion, but it doesn’t mean that answering the question as posed makes our views irrelevant or that we are missing the point.

The question is already hypothetical, as we don’t have the death penalty in the UK, and I assume none of us have murderous sons. Adding another hypothesis (how would we behave if we were right wing Americans) is really a step too far.

The father’s beliefs will have influenced his decision - of course they will - but we were asked what we would do, not if we understood why he acted as he did.

I am not condescending, but I think as well as thinking how we would react - and my reactions are those of the majority of people on this thread, but I do think we also need to try and see it from the other point of view and think about what and why someone would react as this man has.

There is so much talk of empathy and 'walking in other peoples shoes' and here is a real chance to do just that, to think about what it is to be that man's father, to have the background he does and to make the decision he would make.

No it no longer applies Doodledog
I looked it up and since 1984 the law changed in UK. I think it became too complicated with fewer marriages.
You can still legally refuse to give evidence against your spouse.

I read that the father talked his son into giving himself up rather than turning him in. A subtle difference I think.

Grammaretto

I wouldn't turn a child or any relative of mine in. There used to be a rule that a wife couldn't testify against her husband nor he against her.
I don't know what became of that law but it seems sensible to me.

That came to my mind earlier too. I think it was based on the idea that a women vowed in front of God to obey her husband when they married, so if he asked her to testify on the bible in court that he was not guilty (and he was) she would be in an impossible conflict of interest.

I don't think it still applies.

M0nica, with all due respect your post is deeply condescending, and ignores the fact that everyone here is responding to the OP, which is not asking us to justify the actions of the father of the man who shot Charlie Kirk in the US. We are answering the question of whether we would hand in our children where there is the death penalty, as there is in Utah.

Grammaretto

I wouldn't turn a child or any relative of mine in. There used to be a rule that a wife couldn't testify against her husband nor he against her.
I don't know what became of that law but it seems sensible to me.

That's not the case; you misunderstood the law.

You've also confused "testify" with "reporting",

I wouldn't turn a child or any relative of mine in. There used to be a rule that a wife couldn't testify against her husband nor he against her.
I don't know what became of that law but it seems sensible to me.

His father had to hand him over.. so would I. It doesn't mean condoning the death penalty. It means following the justice system of the state/ country you live in.

Everyone here is thinking like a product of our culture, which is untterly irrelevant to considering how this father thought and why he reacted the way he did.

Probably the majority of the population in the US support capital punishment and can see absolutely no problem with it. many would see its use extended. Ok, so you do nto think like that, neither do I, but we are not Americans.

Equally many of those who support capital punishment, have right wing views, so far to the right of most of us we cannot see them through binoculars. I can see that a man who is a rightwing political supporter, who supports the use of guns and capital punishment might be so revolted by the knowledge that his son, his won son, has shot and killed, not some fleeing burglar, or other person for whom killing is all they deserve, but one of the icons of his life, the great white hope for the future. He may well be so devastated, so horrified, so revolted by his son's actions, he thinkshe would be better dead.

How you feel how you would react in this situation may be interesting, but predictable, but they are irrelevant. The real iinterest, is what motivates this man's father to do what he did. And his view is as valid as yours.

Thanks for returning, and for your explanation.

Turning someone in is objectively the right thing to do, but how many people are objective when it comes to their children?

I'm not at all defending murder of anyone, but in circumstances where it is most unlikely to happen again, so consequences for others would be unlikely, and in the knowledge that my child would be executed I don't think I could stand back and do the right thing.

I can say with hand on heart, however, that my son is a peaceable chap and most unlikely to put me in a position where my words are tested .

Doodledog

It wasn't intended as angry or emotional. Just asking for the view from the other side. It's not an easy thing to justify, but I did you the courtesy of trying when questioned on my first response.

It's not very fair to suggest that people who would not send their child to his/her death don't value life, and then not answer (and in fact walk away) when you are asked to explain how far you would go down the road yourself.

I didn’t intend it to be a frustrating walking away. I apologise for that.

I felt (wrongly) that you were more emotionally involved in the question than I was. I am quite capable of taking up the argument for the other side if I thought that was the one where people were not thinking it through. I was just enjoying debate. Very irritating 😳

Where would I draw the line?
I guess the answer is in the consequences of my turning away and the cost of that to other people’s lives.

I wouldn’t ask other people to pay the cost of preserving the life of a killer because the killer was my child.

I would because some other hateful person is going to shoot him before he gets a fair trial if he is still at large.
Depending on the laws in Utah he might get life in jail in place of death penalty. If this were to happen his family still have their son to visit. He will have a lifetime behind bars to contemplate what he did.

Mothers instinct, love, and the big urge to protect would come into it for me. Plus, like in Utah where they have the death penalty (state sanctioned murder) which I don't agree with makes turning my adult son in a hard NO.

I don't agree with the death penalty so no would not turn him or her in.
I can’t imagine what it must be like to live in a country that allows guns to be carried and that has different executions in so many states. No wonder the kids are mixed up.
Did not agree with a lot Charlie Kirk had to say especially about women, He was entitled to his views and right to express them. Talking is the only way not violence. How do children grow up so indoctrinated an viewing life so cheap?
How do you live with yourself having your child executed, its barbaric.

Mollygo

Where does the line in the sand come?
I don’t know.
This thread was asking about turning your child in if you knew they’d killed especially if they would face the death penalty.

So it’s really not the same as all the other suggested situations.
E.g. I’d have no problem turning my child in for selling drugs (in this country), but turning him/her in to face the death penalty for deliberate killing. I hope I never have to make that decision.

The death penalty definitely makes a difference.

I would struggle to hand in my child unless I really felt it necessary, but the suggestions I made were intended to be fairly random to show that it comes down to judgement in the end. My guess is that nobody is completely 'pure' when it comes to things like this. We make allowances for people we love, and some things bother us more than others.

There are those who would always put the law of the land ahead of everything, but I like to think they are few and far between. Would anyone report their child for photocopying a knitting pattern? I doubt it would get them a criminal record, so it would be a low-risk report at the other end of the scale from murder with the death penalty. OTOH, it's not the sort of 'crime' that most (maybe except knitting pattern designers) would put high on the list of things that upset them.

So what I'm saying is that these things are pretty much always 'emotional' rather than 'logical', as if logic dictates that crime should be reported then there should be no sliding scale.

I think if my son was drug dealing, stealing, etc the best thing to do as a parent would be to ensure he faced the consequences of his actions. We don't let children not understand that actions have consequences.
Fir example if there are any Archers fans on here I thought Neil and Susan did the right thing.

It wasn't intended as angry or emotional. Just asking for the view from the other side. It's not an easy thing to justify, but I did you the courtesy of trying when questioned on my first response.

It's not very fair to suggest that people who would not send their child to his/her death don't value life, and then not answer (and in fact walk away) when you are asked to explain how far you would go down the road yourself.

Where does the line in the sand come?
I don’t know.
This thread was asking about turning your child in if you knew they’d killed especially if they would face the death penalty.

So it’s really not the same as all the other suggested situations.
E.g. I’d have no problem turning my child in for selling drugs (in this country), but turning him/her in to face the death penalty for deliberate killing. I hope I never have to make that decision.

Oh don't disappear, I thought this was an example of a really respectful debate.
Doodledogs post didn't read as angry to me .

I think we would only know for sure how we would behave is if it happened, forcing us to decide.
I feel that I would turn in my AC in a case like the sniper shooting of a public figure. If an AC is prepared to kill because he hates a man’s opinions then he may well kill again.

Lathyrus3

I’m not ignoring your post doodledog but I feel that it’s verging on the angry/emotional.

So my post to worriedwell will be my last on this thread.

I was just debating really.

I valued your comments Lathyrus3 but I get where you’re coming from, after offering opinions you don’t want it to become angry and emotional.I often feel the same way.