Who has more rights over Samar? - Page 3

Originally posted by: dhakarn

... and as many raised here, the point is SS's hypocrisy n a constant fear of loosing his power...also SDS's too...she only said that no other woman can raise another woman's child like their own n taunts P about it...but she has no problem in handing the child to M who is also an other woman , but is praising her as the real mother [/quote]

Exactly!!!!!! This annoys me so much. It's one thing to be needlessly spiteful of her daughter-in-law, but doesn't it hurt her pride to spout such illogical, contradictory nonsense?! But I guess since her extreme feelings aginst Pratigya are so illogical, I shouldn't expect any different in her behaviour...



Augh, trying to get too deep into Amma's psychology makes me upset; I can't decide whether it's about power or prejudices or what, but whatever it is, I agree she acts just to spite Pratigya. It really bothers me that she can claim she wants the best for her grandson when she's not really paying attention to his needs, just trying to make Pratigya miserable. Also, elle, thanks for the clarification earlier! :)

Edited by dekhiki - 13 years ago

Originally posted by: kEEnkEEn

hear you...but cant help feeling that SS has a point, even though coming from him makes it skeptical, which is as grandparents, how can P think she cares most for Samar, or even more than they do?

maana that the TNs tareeke all wrong - lekin P has used her powers of persuasion many a time to sway SS, and it has worked...sometimes! So why didnt she use her powers or bhashans to explain to SS rather than take the unilateral step of announcing she wont have kids of her own?

To me - the decision to abstain from having her own children is almost a red herring - she did it with complete faith in K knowing he will back her up - despite him bechaara being caught out on the back foot - a much bigger point is she thought she could do it better than the TNs...which is the far bigger bone of contention because you know the TNs will pull the rug from under her feet as and when it suited them - which they now have.

Bringing up Samar was always going to be a temporary thing for P in that TN house - she just forgot...in her love for him

if P can have the jigar to put herself up for the task - she has to equally have the jigar to deal with the conseqs of a change in those same circumstances that compelled her in the first place...and that could be anything, Saktiya's remarriage , or even Ksr getting better...

Originally posted by: elle45

I agree that P was pretty much forced under the circumstances to make an On-the-Spot decision of not having kids. What I would have liked was that just BEFORE announcing it to the family, she would just ask Krishna that "Krishna, hum yeh faisla karna cha rahe hain, batao, tum is mein humare saath ho?"

And then Krishna would have agreed, under the circumstances. But there is a major difference in asking before announcing, and announcing and then explaining to Krishna that he must agree. The outcome would be the same, but the decision mutual.

SDS has no fear of losing power, for her it's all about going against Pratigya. She only said the no other woman line to spite P and EVEN if she knows M will not be a good mother, she will give Samar to M, just to anger P. That is the only purpose in her life now.

Originally posted by: Rahm

As Samar's biological father, I'd say Shakti has the most rights over Samar. It is sad for Prats because ideally she should have been given more rights because she sacrificed a lot for Samar.

To be honest, I was quite unhappy with Prats sacrifice. It's not what she did, but how she did it. She didn't consult Krishna and made a decision that affected them both. That was wrong of her. Being a strong woman doesn't entail belittling one's husband. I think if the creatives showed Prats consulting Krishna and then making the decision, I would have been more supportive of her, but I think this is her karma--Samar being taken away--she took away Krishna's right to a decision such as having or not having a child. Krishna was just as much entitled to make that decision as Prats, but she didn't even once ask him.

I guess I went off topic... sorry, lol.

Originally posted by: sukhi101

Since Shakti is Samar's biological father and Maneka is his wife they do have more of a right over him and Shakti did not have much of a say when his father handed Samar over to Pratigya. However, i personally feel that because Shakti does not really seem to care for Samar like a father should and Maneka is quuite evil as well they should not be given this right. Pratigya has devoted so much time to giving Samar a good upbringing and she does truly love Samar as her own son, she should not have to give up the right to say anything about Samar's upbringing.

Originally posted by: elle45

Personally I think Shakti relinquished his rights to Samar the day he dropped him from the terrace and did not show a significant amount of remorse. Perhaps that is why SS has taken charge of everything.

Also I do not think that Meneka has more rights than Pratigya does. Apart from the fact that she is evil (no one in the family knows that yet) Meneka is just the step-mother of the child, and all her rights stem from Shakti being the father. Even a step-mother has no role in decision-making, like the real father does.

I wonder, in a situation where Shakti truth about the papers and Meneka's truth are revealed... and IF SS kicks Shakti out of the house... does Shakti have the right to take his son with him?