MikeyIdea

I hear fewer ambulances now than in the past but not a big difference, still more than normal for sure. This is in Udon. A friend of mine went to a hospital in a town not far from here a few days ago. It was busy but not overwhelmed in any way. Sure, staff is stretched (tired) but it looked like that's more because they must also take care of the covid-19 quarantine on the other side of the road (easily over 100 patients mainly from Bangkok, no or weak symptoms) and vaccinations. I went to take the second vaccine there Thursday, definitely a positive experience. I hear they have taken in quite a few extra staff. Difficult one to call. I see no signs at all of that it's getting worse "up here", that's for sure. Cases that pop up occasionally in the town are swiftly taken care of, close contacts are tested, people are ordered into home-quarantine. Strange in a way, this area is very far from the dreadful word "herd immunity" so why isn't it getting worse? Perhaps it's because the very vast majority here seem to really follow home-quarantine rules and mask usage is good (except in the fields and sitting in the evenings "with the normal gang" having a beer). I simply don't know but it's not getting worse.

That is not what I see and hear around Udon, Sakon Nakhon, Nong Bua Lamphu, Loei at all. Infection rates are pretty stable at a manageable level. Where in Isaan is the infection rate soaring?

City? It works fine in the NE around where I am now, heard the same from some friends in other parts of the NE but these are all towns (and 3-4 weeks between shots). You are not called in towns, you just come if you want. It seems they still have (big?) problems in cities. I couldn't get shots in the city I live but I used to stay with a friend in a town not far away (before delta) so I drove over (using a N95 mask all the time) and his gardener and I went and took the shots together, used his ID card as registered address. Don't tell anyone ????

I think that could happen - if they don't run out of vaccines and fix the problems they have in the bigger cities. I got both my shots upcountry now. I'll give a first hand account of my experience. The first thing I have to say is that it was efficient and well organised. I was impressed the first time and more impressed when I got the second shot. 5 stations with chairs neatly arranged and spaced out, strict numbering system, OK, 4 stations could have been enough but 5 wasn't a problem. Large area open on 3 sides. Staff came with free water regularly. A number of beds available if you felt sick after the shot. Plenty of polite support staff. 500 and a bit people first time, 6-700 people the second time. I was ready in 1.5 hours both times. Not bad at all ???? The only drawback was that I had to wait half an hour after the shot to see if I developed any side effects. I waited 15. All free for everybody, foreigners (living there) of course welcome , I saw 3 + myself both times.

The Guardian writes that it is quite common https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/30/gps-giving-second-covid-jabs-just-three-weeks-apart-despite-nhs-guidance Wed 30 Jun 2021 19.21 BST "Many other countries operate shorter gaps between doses than the 12-week delays in the UK" It's becoming more and more clear that booster jabs will be needed with all vaccines. I'd agree with getting the protection up quicker now, you'll need another jab in 6 months anyway and it'll keep you out of hospital until then. Simplistic thinking, I know. But I think it works ????

I got my 2nd shot (AZ) Thursday. 3-4 weeks after is standard in Thailand now. News outlets don't have to pick it up, they know. I don't see how it would put recipients at risk but it could affect long term protection of course. It's always a trade off, quicker protection, shorter long term protection, slower protection, longer protection. I'm glad I got my second shot quickly to protect me now when it's really needed, I'll just have a booster shot early next year.

It's good that you planned the separation well and were hard ???? I am not a lawyer but I had a lot of interaction with how Juvenile law in Thailand is implemented. Most Thai judges don't know how unfairly western juvenile and family law in Catholic or in countries where christianity is or was strong is implemented but they would be appalled if they did. Let's see what you wrote. Thai Juvenile and family law implementation strictly separates husband / wife, assets and children. A failed husband / wife relationship has nothing to do with being a bad parent except violence or criminal activity of course. Taking care of the child does, especially the future. The farang who thinks that he should have the child because he can pay for an international school will be dissappointed though. That is not how it works. Legal parents have equal rights to the child. The richer parent can use assets/money to bargain for a better deal IF the other parent accepts and wants that. Leaving the matrimonial house wouldn't affect physical custody of the child (or assets), not taking care of him/her certainly would. Most (mothers or fathers) bring the child if they leave because physical custody can be used to improve the court outcome, and they miss the child of course. There is no advantage being the mother in a custody battle after a a certain age (generally a year old or so). But there are big buts... But your Thai lawyer may very well be your worst enemy regardless of how nice he pretends to be, destroying everything. Always have your own interpreter loyal to you. Always take good care of your child and keep evidence (no formal income doesn't matter). Never give in if you don't get a fair share, just go on to the next court if you have to. That's how to deal with it. Next: The mother brought the child so by writing Quote 9/10th of the law meant possession End Quote you must have meant the house. You know where I am getting at. Assets you have worked for before you even met the to-be wife are by default affected if you marry in some countries and what you two worked for together while you were married is affected if you move away? Why? Because you broke the promise at the altar? You know Thai law. Whatever is owned before marriage stays that way and whatever is earned during marriage is shared 50/50 when you divorce. Where's the common sense in the western implementation in many countries? I really dislike how religious beliefs still are affecting juvenile and family law in many western countries. I call it the bible belt countries, nearly all catholic countries, most of South America, most of the US, Southern Europe. It does not make any sense at all to me. Some western countries are now very good but way too many still favour the mother.

Do you think a multi-cultural child's future is limited to one country? There was a British guy here on TV some 15 years who thought it was easy, he lost his child because of it. When he broke up with his Thai wife, the wife didn't allow him to bring the child to the UK so he just took him and flew home. The mother promptly went to Juvenile court and got sole custody (for less than 10,000 baht!), contacted childrens organisations in the UK, got help and UK Juvenile courts enforced the Thai sole custody order and sent the half British half Thai child back to Thailand. I heard of the case several years later when the guy still was in the Supreme court of Thailand unsuccessfully trying to get access to his child. Both countries *should* be involved in the future of a multi-cultural child. If parents can discuss, courts are not necessary but that is not the case here.

I should clarify this: Most of the lawyers I dealt with had never heard of a case where a mutual agreement regardiing children was enforced

I think you're too hard. Some people simply don't WANT to communicate. How do you know that the father hasn't tried to talk and discuss? Don't assume things about others you don't know, it sounds silly. I've been in Thailand for 30 years, you meet a lot of people and see a lot in that time. Many Thai women have a habit of simply not wanting to discuss, especially if they don't like the possible options. If there's no good option, just keep quiet and go on. It generally hurts everybody, especially the children although Thai's don't think so and it's common in Thailand. The relationship with my daughters mother was like that. It was doomed from when my daughter was born and the more I tried to discuss, the less the mother wanted to discuss. When she refused to talk, I wrote to her in Thai, when she didn't want to read that with the excuse that she couldn't understand it, I even had Thai friends correcting me (even though I knew she could understand what I had written). My friends smiled and said - She doesn't want to read it. I answered - I know but I just want to do everything I possibly can. I took her to a Thai psychiatrist (as she can't speak English), the psychiatrist got nowhere with her because she didn't want to talk about it. The Thai psychiatrist still wanted to keep the relationship together even if it was bad for the child though. I've been in Thailand for too long and I adapted too much so I decided to keep it together because our daughter wants her mother. I was weak and didn't force the separation. It was my daughter who solved the problem at the end. When she was 15 years old, she told my mother she didn't want mummy and daddy to live together any longer. Mummy became hysterical of course, at least she didn't hit me this time. My daughter had already told me - Daddy, I will come with you so it was easy for me to just sit there and keep quiet, it was relief. There isn't a day when I don't blame myself for not forcing a separation. It took a month to plan everything, we helped mummy to move to her mothers home, locked up the house in Bangkok and moved to a rented house upcountry. We sit and talk sometimes, my daughter and I. She says it would have been much better for her if mummy and daddy had broken up much earlier. I didn't touch her mother for 14 years so my daughter finds it difficult when her boyfriend touches here, getting better though. Her mother solved all domestic problems by refusing to communicate and she would always respond with a quarrel no matter how soft I was if I wanted to continue the discussion - and I'd walk away. My daughter tends to not communicate in her relationship too. And she sees discussion as the start of a quarrel. It doesn't matter how much I have tried and still try to teach her that's it's not a good way, it doesn't have to be like that. She still does it because it's the only thing she's ever seen her mother do. She refuses to contact her mother, even on mother's day and nothing I say can make her change her mind. I hope this will change one day, it's not good for her. The moral of the story is: Some people simply don't WANT to discuss and nothing is going to make them and don't wait, it's better to break up when the kids are young. The big question is WHY the mother doesn't want to discuss. My bet is that it is because she doesn't like the options. PS One more thing. I vehemently disagree with that children need their mother more than their father. I find the comment stupid!. This is not rocket science, it's children we talk about. They simply need the better parent more. DS

I was a juvenile court interpreter in Thailand in the past. I do not agree that Thai Juvenile courts favour the mother, they're fair. The father (both western and Thai) got more time with the kids than the mother in the cases I interpreted / followed. In most western countries yes, the mother is favoured, especially in catholic countries or where christianity is / was strong (this originally comes from religion). Buddhist countries are different except for very young children of course. There are other problems in Thailand though It's the Thai lawyer you should worry about. Expect that they don't fight 100% for you and contact the other party to "discuss" how to get a mutual agreement regardless of it's good for you or not. As the Thai lawyers I dealt with said - Thai mothers alienate more than fathers. Thai fathers "try to get on with it and get a deal that is good for both" more often. Heard many times, many Thai mothers don't. - Thai courts are not good at dealing with parental alienation. They don't want to go against the childs wish, or "wish" and their opinion matter when they are much younger here. - The Thai Juvenile court system has it's tricks. The system is that mothers and fathers should reach mutual agreement (best for the kids), they don't like to order if it can be avoided. Problem is that it's virtually impossible to get mutual agreement cases taken up in higher courts. Never accept mutual agreement if you worry that the other party will not follow the deal Court orders for assets are enforced no problem. Most of the lawyers I dealt with had never heard of a case where a mutual agreement was enforced. You'll still have to find the children yourself if a court order is enforced

Or whatever country you're in, not important if it's a western country, they have all signed the Hague convention. Don't know why I thought the UK.

Yes, absolutely. And Juvenile lawyers say the same, more women than men

A few things here: Both the UK and Thailand (now) have signed the Hague convention so it's country of habitual residence that apply. That is the UK. This is a bit difficult to enforce but I do expect that Thai juvenile court will (at the end of the day) comply. You need to plan this carefully. Don't act without doing what you can to set set yourself up legally for (if but much more likely) when the mother takes the children. She won't stay for sure but you do have the legal right to keep them in the UK or force Thai court to "send them back" (i.e., you to come and fetch them) - most likely a long battle which will involve you agreeing to let the mother see them a few times a year (which you don't have to comply with if the children don't want to go (case in Chiang Mai), you have to go to Thai court if you are summoned though). Your Thai lawyer will be your enemy and everybody will push you to accept a mutual agreement - kamm yaam, (which is virtually impossible to enforce so do not! agree). Only way is to refuse mutual agreement and (probably) go on to the appeals court, possibly the Supreme Court. Don't worry, we're talking about flesh and blood here so waiting time will not be more than a year. It's civil cases that takes years, not juvenile. The court or "department of court order enforcement - gromm bang kapp kadi" will not! help you to find the kids. This could be a problem regardless of if you have a clear court order supporting you. I suppose you are legally married in the UK and that they have UK passports. Keep the UK passports in a safe place but even so: Problem with the UK: The UK allows one (legal) parent to sign for a replacement passport (unlike nearly all other western countries where both parents must sign). if mother has the UK passports, get new ones and hide them. Now about the Thai passports. Are you legally married in Thailand? If not, the mother has sole custody and sign for their passports herself. She can go to the Thai ambassy and take out passports herself and you wouldn't even know. In theory, UK immigration should not let the kids out, especially not that young and on blank passports. Blank passports, i.e., no stamps from previous trips is a big! warning sign for immigration by the way, increases the chance that they refuse to let them out a lot. You could get legitimized (or register marriage in Thailand), unlikely since the mother already probably don't want to stay but she will not! be able to get any Thai passports without your signature if you do. Don't hesitate when (if) the kids dissapear, be prepared and go to court the next day, save up money. There are organisations dealing with kids situations like this (Care is one), contact them and ask for advice. Be careful about giving out contact information, you don't want them to be able to contact the mother. . Sorry for your situation, be patient and plan well. Good luck - the outcome won't be down to luck though ???? Michael

Why should there be a link to the Pattaya group?

Bad luck, isn't it? A baby dies of covid only a day later. Your post looks a bit silly now

So a drunk driver cannot kill your mother, no you sound too young for that, your grand mother, and covid cannot kill young people? Drunk drivers break the law when they drive because they can kill others but most don't of course, that's why they are put in jail regardless of if they have an accident or not. People like the Soi Buakaow gang break the law when they sit there drinking because they can kill others but most don't of course, that's why they are now starting to put some Thai's in jail regardless of if they infect others or not. As the ThaiVisa scofflaws always are so quick to point out unfair treatment of farangs, I'm sure that you'll be happy when some farangs start to get jail sentences for breaking covid restrictions, same as some Thai's do. As you used the word outlandish first, I will use it back - I find it outlandish that you don't understand that laws have a purpose.

That's a slight misunderstanding. They go to jail because of the risk they expose others to, same as drunk drivers. Do you think that it is draconian that drunk drivers go to jail?

I was talking about the ones they would or could have spread it to because of their irresponsible behaviour if they hadn't been arrested. It sounds like you, like me, also think it was good that they were arrested.

The only thing that is relevant is how many others they give it to in the future. It's just somm nam naa if they catch it themselves.

Also irrelevant. Does that change the law? Yes? No? If if doesn't, follow it or somm nam naa Rocking Robert said it best

What has what others do got to do with breaking rules? Why even mentioning it?

There's one thing I don't agree with here. What has what others do got to do with breaking rules? Why even mentioning it?

Heavy fine first time, put them in jail for a month the second time, deport them and make them persona non grata the third time if they are foreigners please

Sorry to bust your bubble but that's not your choice to make. Authorities make that choice for you. Accept or more to somewhere where authorities have different rules.