Fri | Dec 9, 2016

Why blame the media, Yendi?

Published:Saturday | November 1, 2014 | 12:00 AM

THE EDITOR, Sir:

So, Yendi Phillipps, our popular media personality and former Miss Universe runner-up, is most upset that news about her court custody battle over her child with her ex, dancehall artiste Chino, has gone public in mainstream and social media.

Yendi should know by now that you can't have it both ways. She chose to be a public person, and as such, the lines will always be blurred when it comes to private vs public life. It is the price one pays for fame, fortune and celebrity.

People and the media, fans and those who look up to her as an icon and a role model will, of course, be interested, which is why the story made the news in the first place. Court records, unless where access is specifically restricted by law, are also public records. The court is also a public institution, not a private one, and nothing inappropriate was done when The Gleaner ran the story.

I recall Yendi was the one who was all over the media glowing about her new relationship with Chino, and then her pregnancy, and birth of her child. Chino, everyone knows, is reserved and private, unlike her. So why blame the media now?

Sorry it didn't work out, but that's life. Many of us might not be interested in the specific details of this case, but a child is involved, and the child deserves the best with both parents, if possible.

Why do some moms think they have exclusive rights over a child, more so in a case where it is not like the dad was never present?

In another report, we read Chino's version - that Yendi denied access to him to see his child for several months prior and not even his lawyers could mediate a mutual arrangement for visitation. I don't see how a mom can decide the specifics for custody and specify how many hours the dad should be limited with his child and how much he should have pay for support.

It is unfortunate both parents couldn't work this out in private between their lawyers. Unless a mother can prove that the child's father is abusive, violent and a high risk to the child, which would be very difficult to prove if they lived happily together as a family before, such a request would seem selfish and without any legal basis.

PETE DELISSER

pdelisser1988@Yahoo.com