Buckley Family Values

The New York Post is on the case:

Dareh Gregorian: NOT ONE 'BUCK'LEY FOR YOU!: Before he died, William F. Buckley Jr. put his young grandson on the firing line. The intellectual conservative icon - renowned for his erudition and use of uncommon words - excluded his son's illegitimate child from his massive estate, insisting the kid was dead in his eyes. "I intentionally make no provision herein for said Jonathan, who for all purposes . . . shall be deemed to have predeceased me," Buckley's will says, according to the Hartford Courant. The National Review founder and notable New Yorker instead left his entire estate - estimated to be worth tens of millions of dollars - to his only child, Christopher Buckley, and Christopher's two older kids, Caitlin and William.

Jonathan, now 8, is the product of an Christopher's affair with book publicist Irina Woelfle. Caitlin, 20, and William, 17, are the author and former presidential speechwriter's children with his now-estranged wife, Lucy. Woelfle currently works as a publicist in Florida, where she filed suit against Christopher, seeking more child-support money. Christopher, 56, author of the satiric novel "Thank You for Smoking," pays $3,000 a month. But Woelfle's petition says their son has special needs, and she's looking to put him into a private school near her Coral Gables home.

The suit, which was obtained by the Courant, pins the blame for some of the boy's behavioral problems on Christopher's complete lack of involvement. "The father is notably absent from the minor child's life," despite the mom's efforts to try to get him involved, the suit says. "As Jonathan gets older, he requires love, attention and a notable involvement in his life from his father," the suit says. "It is in Jonathan's best interest and welfare for this court to impose a contact and access schedule on the father, so that Jonathan can establish a relationship with his father and extended paternal family."

The filing says the boy has been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and needs a school with a "small, nurturing classroom setting." The filing says Christopher should pay for the school, and makes note that "there has been a substantial change in the father's income" since they reached a child-support agreement in 2003. The Courant estimated the value of William Buckley's estate at more than $30 million.

Jonathan's grandfather wasn't alone in turning his back on the boy, the report says. In his original settlement agreement with Woelfle, Christopher did not want visitation rights. The deal prohibited Woelfle from contacting Christopher directly about Jonathan, and said all communication should go through their attorneys. Christopher currently lives in Washington. It is unclear when his father, who died in February at age 82, wrote his will.

Woelfle and Christopher's lawyer did not return calls.

Let's turn the mike over to first-century rabbi Yeshua ben Yosef:

I say unto you:

• Ask, and it shall be given you;
• Seek, and ye shall find;
• Knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. If your son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will you give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will you for a fish give him a serpent? Or if he shall ask an egg, will you offer him a scorpion?

If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

The argument against Robert Nozick's Anarchy, State, and Utopia that has always had the most purchase with me is that Robert Nozick did not live by it: http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2003_archives/001281.html. This seems to be an equally powerful argument against Buckleyism.

Comments

[rea]

Strangely backwards. Ordinarily, when you see separated or divorced parents arguing over visitation, it's not about whether the noncustodial parent ought to be required to exercise visitation. I wonder what this 8-year-old did to make his father and grandfather bear him such a grudge?

[aimai]

What, you needed an *argument* against buckleyism?

aimai

[mistah charley, ph.d.]

Speaking of asking for fish, and ethical systems in general, here's a Nasruddin story:

Once a renowned philosopher and moralist was traveling through Nasruddin's village when he asked him where there was a good place to eat. He suggested a place and the scholar, hungry for conversation, invited Mullah Nasruddin to join him. Much obliged, Mullah Nasruddin accompanied the scholar to a nearby restaurant, where they asked the waiter about the special of the day. "Fish! Fresh Fish!" replied the waiter. "Bring us two," they answered. A few minutes later, the waiter brought out a large platter with two cooked fish on it, one of which was quite a bit smaller than the other. Without hesitating, Mullah Nasruddin took the larger of the fish and put it on his plate. The scholar, giving Mullah Nasruddin a look of intense disbelief, proceeded to tell him that what he did was not only blatantly selfish, but that it violated the principles of almost every known moral, religious, and ethical system. Mullah Nasruddin calmly listened to the philosopher's extempore lecture patiently, and when he had finally exhausted his resources, Mullah Nasruddin said, "Well, Sir, what would you have done?" "I, being a conscientious human, would have taken the smaller fish for myself." "And here you are," Mullah Nasruddin said, and placed the smaller fish on the gentleman's plate.

from http://abedheen.googlepages.com/mulla.html

[Doctor Jay]

Maybe this is obvious to y'all, but I think I'll spell it out.

I seriously doubt that Jonathon did anything to estrange his father. I expect that Christopher wanted Jonathon's mother to have an abortion and she refused. Christopher says, I turn my back on the child, and will not support him. Irina say, "I'll sue for child support", and does. Grandfather says, "That woman is gold-digging bitch who isn't getting her hands on a dime of my money."

Lovely, isn't it? There are less charitable versions, but they don't seem as plausible. Like Christopher insisting that she bear the child, because of pro-life beliefs, even while refusing all contact. I just can't make that make any kind of psychological sense, though.

[mistah charley, ph.d.]

And speaking of Nozick, I once asked him a question. He gave a public lecture at Buffalo State University (he wore a white turtleneck, a blue blazer, and blue jeans - this was the late '70s or possibly early '80s). Despite being a grad student in a social science discipline, I was a seeker of wisdom and truth. My question was something along the lines of "You mentioned that one way of evaluating whether an action is moral is whether it is in accordance with 'codes of conduct' - 10 commandments, e.g. - and another is the effect of the action on the recipient of the action. But what about the effect of the action on the actor?"

He was silent for an amazing amount of time (30 seconds? 45 seconds? in the context of a question and answer session, it was looooong) and then said that he'd never looked at it from that point of view, and moved on to another question.

I was very surprised, and disappointed.

Later on I saw "Monty Python's The Meaning of Life", and consequently achieved self-realisation.

[Bernard Yomtov]

Well, rock on, that's quite a leap. But let's assume it's true, for the sake of argument. How does that justify Buckley's refusal to provide for his grandchild?

Did Buckley's lawyer lack the wit to create some sort of trust to provide generously for the boy's education and medical care? Could he not be left a sum which he would control when he reached a certain age? None of these things seem particularly difficult.

No. Without much more explanation (what could that be?) this is an act of spite directed at an eight-year-old.

[belicoso]

There is a certain possibility that Irina might be granted a larger child support award, but that would have to be in regards to some sort of increase in Christopher Buckley's income, no court should allow her to skirt the fact that this little boy was specifically excluded from his grandfather's will with this claim for additional support. As cruel as it may sound people may do with their property whatever they wish, even if their wish is to deprive a disabled child. This is the exact same basis around which the Anna Nicole Smith-Marshall estate claim fiasco was based. Anna was willfully and knowingly omitted from her husband's will and the case should have ended there. However, Anna prolonged her absurd claim for over a decade and managed to get a favorable ruling from a CA Bankruptcy Court (because clearly they would have jurisdiction over an estate established in TX). I am optimistic in hoping that Anna's claim died along with her and that Larry Birkhead does not try to pursue it any further. Just as I hope that a judge with a keen eye for the law decides not to set a dangerous precedent by rewarding this child's mother.

[Bernard Yomtov]

"As cruel as it may sound people may do with their property whatever they wish, even if their wish is to deprive a disabled child."

And others may draw inferences about an individual's character from his choices about what he does with his property - all the more so from what he does with it in his will, when he has no further use for it himself.

[Barry]

"As cruel as it may sound people may do with their property whatever they wish, even if their wish is to deprive a disabled child."

Uh, actually, no.