Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

La ley del menor
La ley del menor
La ley del menor
Ebook215 pages4 hours

La ley del menor

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

4/5

()

Read preview

About this ebook

Acostumbrada a evaluar las vidas de los demás en sus encrucijadas más complejas, Fiona Maye se encuentra de golpe con que su propia existencia no arroja el saldo que desearía: su irreprochable trayectoria como jueza del Tribunal Superior especializada en derecho de familia ha ido arrinconando la idea de formar una propia, y su marido, Jack, acaba de pedirle educadamente que le permita tener, al borde de la sesentena, una primera y última aventura: una de nombre Melanie. Y al mismo tiempo que Jack se va de casa, incapaz de obtener la imposible aprobación que demandaba, a Fiona le encargan el caso de Adam Henry. Que es anormalmente maduro, y encendidamente sensible, y exhibe una belleza a juego con su mente, tan afilada como ingenua, tan preclara como romántica; pero que está, también, enfermo de leucemia. Y que, asumiendo las consecuencias últimas de la fe en que sus padres, testigos de Jehová, lo han criado, ha resuelto rechazar la transfusión que le salvaría la vida. Pero Adam aún no ha cumplido los dieciocho, y su futuro no está en sus manos, sino en las del tribunal que Fiona preside. Y Fiona lo visita en el hospital, y habla con él de poesía, y canta mientras el violín de Adam suena; luego vuelve al juzgado y decide, de acuerdo con la Ley del Menor. Con lo que ocurre después para ambos compone IanMcEwan, con un oficio que extrae su fuerza de no llamar nunca la atención sobre sí mismo, una pieza de cámara tan depurada y económica como repleta de conflictos y volúmenes; una novela grácil y armoniosa, clásica en el mejor sentido de la palabra, que juega su partida en el terreno genuino de la escritura más indagadora: el de los dilemas éticos y las responsabilidades morales; el de las preguntas difíciles de responder pero imposibles de soslayar. La ley del menor habla del lugar donde justicia y fe se encuentran y se repelen; de las decisiones y sus consecuencias sobre nosotros y los demás; de la búsqueda de sentido, de asideros, y de lo que sucede cuando éstos se nos escapan de las manos: lo hace con la seguridad tranquila de un maestro en la plenitud quintaesenciada de sus facultades.

LanguageEspañol
Release dateOct 7, 2015
ISBN9788433936370
La ley del menor
Author

Ian McEwan

Ian McEwan (Aldershot, Reino Unido, 1948) se licenció en Literatura Inglesa en la Universidad de Sussex y es uno de los miembros más destacados de su muy brillante generación. En Anagrama se han publicado sus dos libros de relatos, Primer amor, últimos ritos (Premio Somerset Maugham) y Entre las sábanas, las novelas El placer del viajero, Niños en el tiempo (Premio Whitbread y Premio Fémina), El inocente, Los perros negros, Amor perdurable, Amsterdam (Premio Booker), Expiación (que ha obtenido, entre otros premios, el WH Smith Literary Award, el People’s Booker y el Commonwealth Eurasia), Sábado (Premio James Tait Black), En las nubes, Chesil Beach (National Book Award), Solar (Premio Wodehouse), Operación Dulce, La ley del menor, Cáscara de nuez, Máquinas como yo, La cucaracha y Lecciones y el breve ensayo El espacio de la imaginación. McEwan ha sido galardonado con el Premio Shakespeare. Foto © Maria Teresa Slanzi.

Related to La ley del menor

Titles in the series (100)

View More

Related ebooks

Literary Fiction For You

View More

Related articles

Reviews for La ley del menor

Rating: 3.7840082741433023 out of 5 stars
4/5

963 ratings115 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Die 59-jährige Richterin Fiona verhandelt schwierige Fälle im Familenrecht. Sie ist sehr gut in ihrem Beruf. Auch im Fall eines siebzehnjährigen Jungen, der aus religiösen Gründen eine Bluttransfusion verweigert, entscheidet sie nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen, ja, sie nimmt sich sogar trotz der Dringlichkeit die Zeit den Jungen im Krankenhaus zu besuchen und kennen zu kernen. Ich fand das Buch sehr interessant. Zum einen schildert es plausibel und glaubwürdig die Arbeitstage einer Familienrichterin, eine Entscheidung nach der anderen, von denen aber keine auf die leichte Schulter genommen wird, dazwischen schnell ein Sandwich. Man bekommt sehr großen Respekt davor, was es heißt, unter Druck zu handeln und man bekommt auch Respekt davor, wie man es mit einem solchen Beruf noch schaffen kann, Mensch zu bleiben, Beziehungen zu pflegen, zu musizieren.Der Fall des jungen Leukämiepatienten Adam wird für Fiona erst nach der Urteilsverkündung zur Belastung, da sie mit ihrem Urteil eine emotionale Konsequenz verursacht, auf die sie nicht mit professioneller Routine reagieren kann. Letztendlich ist sie hilflos und zudem auch zu sehr unter Anspannung um sich wirklich Gedanken über diese Konsequenzen zu machen. Und hier kommt nun der Handlungsstrang mit ihrem Mann Jack hinzu. Nach 30 Jahren Ehe möchte Jack eine Affäre haben. Sie trennen sich. Die folgende Handlung zeigt auch wie gut es sein kann, in einer Ehe zu sein, gerade jemand mit hoher Belastung benötigt auch einen sicheren Hafen, einen Ort zum Loslassen, jemanden, der einen liebt. Ich fand das Buch daher insgesamt stimmig und sehr interessant, gerade was die medizinischen Fälle betrifft. Es ist interessant zu sehen, dass bei aller ethischen Auslegung und gefühltem Rechtsempfinden das Recht doch eine eindeutige Richtschnur bietet. Allerdings werden im Buch auch Fälle dargestellt, bei denen die Rechtssprechung versagt. Und dadurch wird deutlich, dass es gut ist eine gewissenhafte Richterin wie Fiona zu haben.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    A good description of a judge's professional life but the story was just bizarre. The story of her marriage was unreal.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    This was our book group choice and I have left my review until after our discussion over. An excellent dinner on Sunday. I have a soft spot for Ian McEwan, which he occasionally tests a bit (On Chesil Beach), and despite its relatively low Good Reads rating I think this is towards the top end of his oeuvre. What impressed me most was the way he combined legal exactitude with literary elegance in the writing and the way in which the lead character was made so totally believable. He draws in a number of big issues through the use of imaginary cases and weaves them into a moving personal story without Amy missteps. As, nearly, always I look forward to his next novel.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Brilliant.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    An author, I believe, takes a risk when he centers his novel around one character. So often a reader will rate their enjoyment of the book on whether or not they can relate to the character. In this story the main character is Fiona, approaching sixty she is a high court judge in the family court. She had given up the idea of having a child, concentrating on her career. She is long married to Jack, but their marriage has now hit a big road block.In the beginning I felt a huge distance from the character, what kept me reading was her very interesting court cases and her inner thoughts about her judgments. But then, she does a few, very human out of character things and I slowly began to warm to her. Soon a big case, involving a seventeen yr. old boy, a Jehovah's witness whose parents and himself are refusing a life-saving blood transfusion on religious grounds, will alter her life in unexpected ways.This is a quiet, introspective novel, the writing almost seamless. I enjoyed all the music references throughout as Fiona and a fellow lawyer play at various events. A whole person began to emerge, flawed like most of us, I began to take this character to heart. My enjoyment of this book slowly crept up on me and I realized just how much this author had included in this rather short novel. So I ended up liking this much more at the end than I did at the beginning.ARC from the publisher.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Book on CD narrated by Lindsay DuncanFiona Maye is a High Court judge who presides over cases in family court. She is highly regarded for her intelligence, sensitivity, and knowledge of the law. She is called upon to try an urgent case. A child and his parents are refusing life-saving treatment due to religious beliefs, and the hospital wants the Court to mandate that the treatment be given. His condition has deteriorated, and time is of the essence. But while Fiona is dealing with this heart-breaking legal case, her personal life also demands attention. The decisions she makes will have consequences for all. I like the way that McEwan explores hidden emotions and the effects of those feelings on the characters’ decisions and actions. Fiona is trained to consider both sides, and to make decisions based on the evidence and the constraints of law. But she is human, after all, and humans frequently let emotion cloud their decisions. Try as she might to restrain her feelings, Fiona cannot entirely escape them. In the course of the novel Fiona faces several moral and ethical dilemmas; the decisions she faces in court are influenced by her personal life, and vice versa. I was interested in the situation from the outset, partly because I recently retired from working at a major medical center in a pediatric hospital. Healthcare professionals are faced with these kinds of decisions more often than you might think. But McEwan lost me as the novel progressed, and when it ended I felt like I was missing something. This is the fourth novel by McEwan that I’ve read, but the first that isn’t also a selection for my F2F book group. I really enjoyed the discussions on those other novels; they helped cement the works in my memory. As I write this, it’s been a few days since I finished the book, and I have already lost details of it. Lindsay Duncan does a fine job narrating the audio book. She has good pacing and great skill as a voice artist. I believed her when she was voicing Fiona, and I believe her when she was voicing Adam. 5***** for her audio performance.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Ian McEwan is one of my husbands favorite authors. I had never read anything written by him before. This is one of the best books I have read in a long time!
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    In the old world, common sense prevailed or failed. In the early days of judges, the wise man or woman drew difficult decisions from personal intervention. But today the steps are separate; the judge on her bench, the social worker at the gate, the doctor with drugs and machines, and the elder, holding fast to religious interpretation. Ian McEwan’s The Children Act invites readers into the mind of a good judge, a woman who holds the lives and futures of children and others in her hands, and chooses wisely. But personal intervention isn’t always something you can control, and even the wisest decider can’t see the future.Balancing childlessness with a care for decisions about children, wounded love with a need to measure the substance of a parent’s emotion, and the logic of music with the progression of law, the author draws readers to think about problems not often seen, and view them through different eyes. How much is a life worth? Where does belief come from? And what price might faith demand?Evocative descriptions of places, powerful emotions, and logically satisfying decisions all rise from the page. But behind it all is a musical balance—emotional discord in the beauty of jazz juxtaposed with reliable chords played in perfect time; violin next to piano; persistence violating the judge’s need to move on.By the end, the reader too moves on, moved by a glimpse of glory and sorrow, never seeing the future but hearing its music in hope.Disclosure: I’ve been meaning to read this for ages. So glad I finally did.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    This was ok but too many summarised legal cases with which it was hard to sympathise. Not sure the act which the whole thing hinges was quite thoroughly embedded or credible.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    I am not a fan of Ian McEwan’s writing so when I saw that I had to read this for my library’s bookclub I was not looking forward to it. I have to say that my initial opinion of Ian McEwan’s writing was further confirmed upon the reading of this book.

    I found the book was really slow to read, especially when McEwan was dealing with the personal relationship between Judge Fiona Maye and her husband. The writing at these points gave me the impression that writing about personal relationships was not something with which McEwan was all that comfortable. However, when McEwan wrote about the court case of Adam the book was far more interesting, better structured and generally far more absorbing to read - I lost all sense of time when I was reading these bits - than I ever did with the parts concerning the judge’s marriage.

    Another area where this book was let down was by the sheer length of the chapters. There were only five chapters in the entire book, with most of them being around 40 pages long each. This can be, and often is, a turn off for many people, and I must say that I was one of them. I found myself wishing he would hurry up and end each chapter because I felt like I was having to drag myself through the book to get it read.

    McEwan also did something that is a pet peeve for me when reading books: introducing words that are foreign to its readers without providing their meaning. In this case, the word mentioned was otolaryngology, which is the study of diseases of the ear and throat. When this is done, it’s as if authors assume their readers are going to know exactly what they are talking about. When I was taught to write essays at school we had drummed into us that you write as if the person who was going to be reading it had no clue as to what you were talking about. The same approach can, and should be, adopted when writing a book. A book is essentially a really long essay!

    There were, however, a couple of interesting comments he made which I felt were note worthy: 1) He posed a question about whether the Anglican church - it is interesting that he singled out the Anglican church - was a cult or not. This is a question that I have heard a number of people, over the years, ask about churches in general. I maintain that whilst people may feel that churches appear to be cult like, when one is in a cult it is extremely difficult to leave, whereas in a ‘normal’ church you are free to leave whenever you want to; 2) “A child shouldn’t go killing himself for the sake of religion.” This quote immediately reminded me of a number of organisations where this sort of thing happened, is still happening in today's world - Jones Town, ISIS, and any war.

    Overall, I didn’t like this book very much at all. I could only give it 2 stars and I think that was probably generous, and I certainly wouldn’t read any more of his books unless I absolutely had to.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    A fascinating case to judge when a boy refuses a blood transfusion because of his religion. And this alongside the crumbling marriage of the judge - the small politenesses, avoidances, and fears of public judgement felt staggeringly true. And, a recurring theme in McEwan’s writing, the obsessive stalking character...
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    Ian McEwan is one of the very few authors whose every novel I read, even though the last one I thought was really good was Atonement. Sadly, for me, The Children Act contributes to a continuing decline.
    Fiona Maye, the family division high court judge seems at first an interesting main character and court cases usually provide engrossing dramatic set pieces for novels. However, here, the central case concerns the well-worn issue of Jehova's Witness parents trying to prevent a hospital giving a potentially life-saving blood transfusion to their teenage son. The outcome is never in doubt so there's little drama there. Instead, the novel centres around Fiona Maye's relationship with the teenager who she interviews in hospital to help her in her final judgement. His subsequent obsession with her leading to a key incident which shapes the final section of the novel, I found unconvincing and I couldn't engage with it. Likewise, the final set piece, an amateur concert given at the Inns of Court by Fiona and a barrister colleague, is flat and lacks drama. Shadowing all of this is Fiona's growing marital problems although this also failed to engage me, especially when her husband is not a very fully developed character.
    Judging by the 'acknowledgements', McEwan was fascinated by, and did a lot of research into High Court procedures. It reminded me of his similar first person research into neuro-surgery for the Henry Perowne character in 'Saturday'. It's as if McEwan is regretting his career as a novelist and fantasising about an alternative professional career
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    This is my fifth McEwan read, and he is one of my favourite contemporary authors. I love his bizarre plot settings, and the discomfort that he puts me in as a reader. The Children Act therefore comes with a harsh 3.5 star rating from me for a bit of a failure on that very point. The Children Act is narrated by a female London judge who is presiding over a case where a hospital wants to force a Jehovah's Witness couple and their son - who is a few months off being of adult age - to allow them to give the son a life-saving blood transfusion as part of his leukaemia treatment. At the same time as she is judging other people's lives in the family court, the protagonist's own marriage is teetering on the brink. Were this a book by another author, this may have been a four star read for me, but as a McEwan novel it just wasn't up there.. It was very readable and i spent a pleasurable few hours turning the pages, but it lacked that McEwan shock factor that his other novels have in spades. I wasn't hooked by the characters, and I didn't have that "say WHAT??!!!!" moment that I had with his other novels.Glad I read it, but definitely not my favourite of his.3.5 stars - bring back the McEwan weirdness.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    As thought invoking James Joyce, Ian McEwan tells a more rich and thought-provoking story in a mere two-hundred pages than many of today's extended, multi-part series of novels.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    The case in front of High Court judge Fiona Maye is not easy – a boy a few months short of his 18th birthday is refusing a necessary blood transfusion because of the faith of his family; they are Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Hospital argues that based on The Children Act of 1989, wherein the child’s welfare is of paramount consideration, they should be allowed to override his (and his parent’s) wishes and save him. Maye is intelligent, sensitive, and well-rounded. She can dissect cases in front of her and draw fact-based conclusions, even when those leave her troubled. It’s interesting to see her navigate this and other cases.However, her own life is also complicated - her husband feels neglected, possibly going through a midlife crisis, and is considering (maybe already having) an affair. We see that it’s easier for her to be the third party and judge from a distance, and that even the most intelligent, rational, and sensitive people go through what seem like clichéd acts in plays or stories (and of course life itself). We also see that Maye has to live with the consequences of her decision in the Jehovah’s Witness case – it doesn’t just ‘go away’, and life is messy. I also found it interesting to think about her reaction to the boy falling in love with her, vs. what a man’s would be, what her husband’s would be, if he was the judge and it was a young woman falling for him. I’ve read eight books by McEwan now, and find that he’s at his best in describing relationships. In this one, the feelings and emotions of the middle-aged couple in their long-term marriage ring true. As always, his prose is clean and direct, and he’s smart and cultured without being pompous or overbearing. Well worth reading.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Yes, this definitely scores as a 'favourite' . Of course it's flawed, but for me, with my age and in my circumstances, this book is just right. Like my previous book, music features strongly, and in this case it all had particular resonance with me. I surely still have a copy of Keith Jarrett's "Facing You" in my cupboard, not too far from Schubert's "An die Musik", some Scriabin Preludes and maybe even "Down by the Salley Gardens". I have no particular interest in or knowledge of law, or Jehovah's Witnesses for that matter, but the context of the story worked well for me to tell about the relationship troubles of an aging middle-class baby-boomer (childless) couple. I admired McEwan's ability to perceive and describe the subtle signs and symptoms of relationship tensions and relaxations.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    This was our 3rd McEwan. Not thrilled. His preoccupation with sex is annoying; he comes across as a horny teenager. In this one, the 59-year-old husband tells his wife Fiona that he needs to have an affair because they haven’t had sex in 7 weeks. Really?! And this makes his wife feel guilty because she’s been busy at her job and has remained childless. Really?! The actual narrative revolves around the Children Act of 1989, which authorizes UK courts to ensure the safety and welfare of children. It is Fiona’s responsibility as a family court judge to determine if religious beliefs endanger a child. The focus is on Adam, an almost 18-year-old with leukemia; his parents, Jehovah’s Witnesses, refuse to allow him to have a transfusion to save his life because the Bible forbids it. What transpires after Fiona visits Adam in the hospital is highly improbable: the rapport between the two is strange, bordering on the creepy. Further, the relationship between Fiona and her husband is no less weird but it’s a convenient and trite way to portray women and men according to McEwan’s sophomoric attitude. The details of the legal cases are the main attraction in this short book.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Fiona Maye is a judge dealing mainly with family court matters, such as divorce and the custody of children. She is reeling from a decision she made to have Siamese twins separated, against their parents' wishes, to save the life of the viable twin. She has concealed the fact that she is suffering from her husband Jack, who tells her that he is going to have an affair as they have not had sex for seven weeks. He leaves her and Fiona is assigned a case where a 17 year old Jehovah's Witness, Adam, and his parents are refusing a blood transfusion which would enable Adam to recover from leukaemia.I found this book very readable, but I am not sure what exactly it is about. Jack returns and Fiona still doesn't tell him about the effects of the Siamese twins case, despite a reference at the end of the book to the fact that if he hadn't been living elsewhere at the time she would have discussed Adam's case with him. (So does she share her troubles with him or not?)Adam starts to stalk Fiona, sending her letters and following her across the country and after she kisses him briefly (really? - something to do with him being so full of life and Fiona being childless?), he writes her an angry poem. I found Adam tiresome, although his dilemma was one I could sympathize with; my favourite part of the book was when his parents were so overjoyed that the court ruling had gone against them. What was he to do with that reaction? Frankly I thought Fiona was lucky not to have been disciplined. The very ending was kind of sweet, although, remember that this is a man who thinks seven weeks without sex entitles him to an affair - lucky they didn't have children...
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    One of the things I like about Ian McEwan novels is that he's never in a hurry - if he wants to go on for page after page about how a judge spends the average day, he will. And he has an odd sort of way of making it fascinating. Here we follow a high-powered judge in the family division as she presides over various cases, at a time when she is undergoing upheaval in her own home life. The central case being considered concerns a family of Jehovah's Witnesses and a blood transfusion, but the novel touches on other cases, all of which are gripping in their own way. I was surprised that so much had been packed into such a thin book. The ending left me a bit cold, but then I can't think of a single one of his books whose ending I would have described as perfect - the best thing about his writing is the intelligence and the insight and there is plenty here.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    This reminded me of On Chesil Beach, in that it is well-written but very slight, a short story blown up into a short novel. There's nothing really wrong here but nothing terribly memorable either.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    A short book, but packed with discussion-worthy material!
    The protagonist is a judge in Family Division and a few challenging cases are referenced -- these alone make for interesting pondering ("What is the right judgement?"). Obviously the main case she addresses, ie the one we get the most detail on, is worth discussing -- should courts go around religious observances to order life-saving treatment for a minor? And how the judge responds to the case and the young man involved -- also really interesting. Then there's the whole thing about her own marriage -- the husband wants permission to have a racy affair, she doesn't want to grant it but also refuses to discuss what has been bothering her. By shutting him out, is she as liable for the marriage trouble as he is for wanting an affair? Interesting to think about. Behind the drama is the detail of their child-less-ness. The author brings it up too often to be just a minor detail and convenient character development. What role does this component play in the story, and what message might the reader glean from this role?

    McEwan does not disappoint.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Brilliant.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Ms McEwan is growing on me. The characters in his novels have a distinctly British approach to life. Nonetheless, I'm beginning to really appreciate the concise writing style. I also like the way this author uses exactly the right word to precisely detail a situation and describe the reactions of those involved. So much of what happens in his novels seems pre-ordained or inevitable given who the people are and how they react, but the plots are still fascinating in their unrelenting progress toward disaster.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    The book started very slowly, and made this reader feel that the effort could be in vain. I perseveres, and the book gathers momentum. A judge, Fiona, must rule on whether a seventeen-year-old Seven Day Adventist boy should be given a blood transfusion. Fiona goes to the hospital and meets the boy, and bases her decision on the meeting. McEwan interweaves Fiona's tale of boredom and despair with the story of Adam, the sick youth while relating the regulations that Fiona must obey in her decision. Fiona reaches her decision, and the story escalates and just as quickly ends. The novel does not develop the characters, but attempts to explain Adam and Fiona's psyche.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    On the surface, this novel is about a Family Court judge, Fiona, navigating an especially difficult case while her marriage is in crisis. But, as with almost every Ian McEwan book, this novel is so, so much more. McEwan places a microscope on people's lives and brings the nearly invisible to the surface. Every small moment and gesture between Fiona and the other main characters has mammoth meaning that echoes throughout the rest of the story, creating this intricate web of cause and effect. The meaning of duty and obligation (how much do we really owe another person?), of work and family, of how much we allow ourselves to truly open up to someone and the consequences of doing that--or not--is examined and tested in excruciating ways. I loved this book.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Gripping, thoughtful story of the responsibility of making life and death decisions for others when one's own life is falling apart...or at least that's one way to read it. It's first and foremost a story, but also holds thoughtful musings on religion, marriage, love, medical and legal ethics, a sheltered vs. a "free" life, etc. Would give this 3 1/2 stars, if Goodreads allowed that. Well done, Mr. McEwan. Makes me want to read some more...
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    I devoured this book in one delicious sitting.

    I loved the main character, Judge Fiona. The subject matter of the competency of a 17 year old boy that is refusing the blood transfusion that would help his leukemia go into remission because of his religion, was thought-provoking.

    I loved also the little snippets of the details of other morally weighty cases that Judge Fiona had come across in family court. It was all so interesting.

    It was a good fly on the wall type of book, where the reader gets swept up into the personal stories of the characters.

    I would have rated it higher, but I was underwhelmed by the ending. Just seemed odd to me what happened in the end.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    The author overflows with words. I liked the way it worked in Atonement with beautiful wordiness, overly analytical, so detailed and specific I really felt like I was watching a movie in my head. Maybe I wasn’t in the mood for that in this novel.The Children Act of 1989 calls for the welfare of the minor in question to be the first thing taken into consideration when judging over life saving treatment. Minor ‘A’ is a 17 year old Jehovah’s Witness who has adamantly refused a life saving blood transfusion. Judge Fiona Maye, the main character of the novel, has to rule in favor of the family’s wishes that the hospital respect his son’s decision or with the doctors who believe him to be too young to make such a decision and give him the treatment. There are many things that come into question when reading this novel. For me as a young person I felt outraged at the court scene for this in particular. Though I felt the same slight irritation when reading the first case Fiona had to rule on about the custody of two girls to go with a father with strong orthodox jewish ties who would leave them little education of the world or their mother a woman who wanted to take that part of their spiritual education away from them and introduce them to the one found in universities. Funnily enough it wasn’t because of the fact in both cases faith was questioned, it was because it brought me back to a time not so long ago when my own desires were overruled 90% of the time because I wasn’t mature enough to make my own choices. I understood that the first set of sisters couldn’t possibly know what they wanted but I felt it was an extreme to take either thing away from them. On the other hand Adam Henry was not a child. Three months shy from turning 18 this decision still had to be made for him. I was impressed with the way McEwan painted this character: smart, articulate, knowledgeable, mature but there was something else that I couldn’t quite get behind. He thought Fiona was going to side with him and that didn’t happen but I felt that he was trying to manipulate her into seeing him being obedient and take the blame for choosing the transfusion herself. My suspicions were because: 1) He practically begged her to stay perhaps a stalling tactic so she wouldn’t have to go back and rule right away, ie. give her time to change her mind 2) He played a specific piece on his violin that just happened to have the right lyrics to change any person’s mind which I feel did influence her after having made up her mind that he was competent enough to make his own choices 3) in his Thanks-for-choosing-the-transfusion letter he demonstrates a lack of maturity that made me groan in frustration. You can’t have your cake and eat it. He just proved it by saying he was going to separate himself from his family’s beliefs. Ironically in the eyes of ‘the world’ Adam was saved but in the eyes of his parents after his recovery he was lost to them and his congregation. I did notice a small anecdote when Adam accused his parents of loving him more than God he mentioned that his parents never mentioned the joys of heaven but of course they wouldn’t being Jehovah’s Witnesses because they don’t believe everyone is going to heaven let alone an immature 17 year old not a big deal of course since McEwan put a note in the end that he knew there would probably be some inaccuracies.Needless to say by the end I realized it’s adolescents like him that make adults much older and wiser think we’re not mature. There’s a difference between maturity and manipulation (the fakey pretend you know what you’re doing with fancy words and gestures but deep down knowing what to show them so they side with you), it’s a tactic I see in many children a move more obvious when they’re young. A subtle move I perfected by the time I was 13 but oh well. That ending is what makes me feel sadder for Fiona because there was no way she could have seen that coming since she was childless.Fiona’s life outside the court was fascinating and I enjoyed replaying that part of the movie in my head but the court cases were very long and like I said I wasn’t in the mood for it I guess. A nice narrative but only for when you feel like reading wordy descriptions.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    An interesting premise but somehow the relationship between the judge and the young Jehovah's Witness whose life she intervenes in never rings true. Everything is just a bit too contrived and I kept waiting for Ian McEwan to let go just a jot.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    I'm not exactly sure how I feel about "The Children Act." I didn't particularly like it or dislike it. In the beginning, the novel seems to be the story of Fiona, a high up respected family court judge in London, and her husband, Jack, who comes to her, asking for an open marriage.

    However, the story quickly drifts away from that thread and is pulled abruptly toward Fiona and her cases, particularly a 17-year-old boy, Adam, a Jehovah's Witness, who has leukemia. He needs a blood transfusion, which goes against his religion (and that of his parents). It's an interesting case, and Adam makes for an intriguing character (via the snippets we learn of him), but we never really get to understand quite why Adam grows to have such power over Fiona.

    By the end of the novel, without revealing the ending, I felt a bit deflated, and left wondering why I'd read the story to begin with. It was certainly well written, but it seemed a bit pointless at times, and I didn't find Fiona or her husband that likable, and didn't get to learn enough about Adam or anyone in her other cases.

Book preview

La ley del menor - Jaime Zulaika

Índice

Portada

1

2

3

4

5

Agradecimientos

Créditos

Notas

A Ray Dolan

Cuando un tribunal se pronuncia sobre cualquier cuestión relativa a [...] la educación de un niño [...] el bienestar del menor será la consideración primordial del juez.

Sección I (a), Ley del Menor (1989)

1

Londres. Una semana después de iniciado el Trinity Term.¹ Clima implacable de junio. Fiona Maye, magistrada del Tribunal Superior de Justicia, tumbada de espaldas una noche de domingo en un diván de su domicilio, miraba por encima de sus pies, enfundados en unas medias, hacia el fondo de la habitación, hacia unas estanterías empotradas, parcialmente visibles junto a la chimenea y, a un costado, al lado de una ventana alta, a una litografía de Renoir de una bañista, comprada treinta años antes por cincuenta libras. Probablemente falsa. Debajo, en el centro de una mesa redonda de nogal, un jarrón azul. No recordaba de dónde lo había sacado. Ni cuándo fue la última vez que lo llenó de flores. La chimenea llevaba un año sin encenderse. Gotas de lluvia ennegrecidas caían con un sonido de tictac en la rejilla a intervalos irregulares, sobre un papel de periódico hecho una bola. Una alfombra de Bujará cubría los anchos tablones encerados del suelo. En el borde de la visión periférica, un piano de media cola con fotos de familia enmarcadas en plata sobre el brillo del mueble, de un negro muy oscuro. En el suelo, junto al diván, al alcance de su mano, el borrador de una sentencia. Y Fiona, tumbada de espaldas, deseaba que todas aquellas hojas estuviesen en el fondo del mar.

Tenía en la mano su segundo whisky escocés con agua. Estaba temblorosa, todavía reponiéndose de un mal momento con su marido. Rara vez bebía, pero el Talisker con agua del grifo era un bálsamo, y pensó que quizá cruzaría la habitación hasta el aparador en busca de un tercero. Menos whisky y más agua, porque al día siguiente trabajaba en la audiencia y ahora estaba de guardia, disponible para cualquier exigencia repentina, aunque estuviera tendida para recuperarse. Él había declarado algo horrible y le había impuesto una carga intolerable. Por primera vez en años ella había gritado, y un débil eco resonaba todavía en sus oídos. «¡Idiota! ¡Puto idiota!» No había jurado en voz alta desde sus visitas a Newcastle, cuando era una despreocupada adolescente, aunque se le colaba una palabrota en el pensamiento alguna vez en que oía un testimonio exculpatorio o una improcedente exposición jurídica.

Y después, no mucho después del exabrupto, jadeante de indignación, había dicho en voz alta, por lo menos dos veces:

–¿Cómo te atreves?

Apenas era una pregunta, pero él contestó con calma.

–Lo necesito. Tengo cincuenta y nueve años. Es mi último cartucho. Todavía no he visto pruebas de que exista otra vida después de ésta.

Era una observación pretenciosa y ella no había encontrado una réplica. Se limitó a mirarle fijamente y quizá boquiabierta. Entonces no había sabido qué decir y ahora, en el diván, se le ocurrió una respuesta: «¿Cincuenta y nueve? ¡Jack, tienes sesenta! Es lastimoso, es banal.»

Lo que en realidad había dicho fue muy pobre:

–Es demasiado ridículo.

–Fiona, ¿cuándo fue la última vez que hicimos el amor?

¿Cuándo? Él ya lo había preguntado antes, con un tono que iba desde lastimero a quejumbroso. Pero puede ser difícil recordar el embrollo formado por el pasado reciente. En el Tribunal de Familia abundaban las discrepancias extrañas, las argucias, las medias verdades íntimas, las acusaciones exóticas. Como en todas las ramas del Derecho, había que asimilar rápidamente las sutiles circunstancias particulares. La semana anterior había oído las alegaciones definitivas de unos padres judíos, con distinto grado de ortodoxia, que al divorciarse se disputaban la educación de sus hijas. Tenía a su lado, en el suelo, el borrador terminado de la sentencia. Al día siguiente comparecería de nuevo ante ella una inglesa desesperada, pálida, demacrada, que poseía una titulación superior y que era madre de una niña de cinco años y estaba convencida, a pesar de las garantías dadas al tribunal de lo contrario, de que el padre de su hija, un hombre de negocios marroquí, musulmán estricto, estaba a punto de sustraerla a la jurisdicción inglesa para llevársela a una nueva vida en Rabat, donde tenía intención de afincarse. Por lo demás, altercados rutinarios por el lugar de residencia de unos niños, litigios motivados por viviendas, pensiones, ingresos, herencias. Eran los patrimonios más grandes los que llegaban al Tribunal Superior. En general, la riqueza no deparaba una felicidad duradera. Los padres pronto aprendían el nuevo vocabulario y los lentos procedimientos legales, y les aturdía encontrarse enzarzados en feroces combates con la persona a la que habían amado. Y aguardando entre bastidores, niños y niñas designados por su nombre de pila en los documentos judiciales, pequeños Bens y Sarahs atribulados, acurrucados juntos mientras los dioses por encima de ellos luchaban hasta el final, desde el juzgado de Familia hasta el Tribunal Superior y el Tribunal de Apelación.

Toda esta tristeza presentaba temas comunes, había en ellos una semejanza humana, pero seguía fascinándola. Creía que aportaba soluciones razonables a situaciones sin salida. En conjunto, creía en las disposiciones del derecho de familia. En sus momentos de optimismo lo consideraba un indicador importante del progreso de la civilización, porque prevalecían en las leyes las necesidades de los niños sobre las de sus padres. Sus jornadas de trabajo eran completas, y por la noche, últimamente, figuraban en su agenda cenas diversas, algún acto en Middle Temple por un colega que se jubilaba, un concierto en Kings Place (Schubert, Scriabin), y taxis, metro, pasar a recoger ropa de la tintorería, redactar una carta para una escuela especial recomendando al hijo autista de la asistenta, y por último dormir. ¿Dónde quedaba el sexo? En aquel momento, no lo recordaba.

–No llevo la cuenta.

Jack abrió las manos, como demostración de lo que había dicho.

Fiona le había observado mientras él cruzaba la habitación y se servía un trago de whisky, el Talisker que ahora ella estaba bebiendo. En los últimos tiempos él parecía más alto, más desenvuelto. Mientras le daba la espalda ella tuvo un frío presentimiento de rechazo, de la humillación de que la abandonaran por una mujer más joven, de que la relegasen, inservible y sola. Se preguntó si debería acceder simplemente a lo que él quisiera, y luego rechazó la idea.

Él se había vuelto hacia ella con el vaso. No le ofrecía un Sancerre, como solía hacer hacia esa hora.

–¿Qué quieres, Jack?

–Voy a vivir esta aventura.

–Quieres el divorcio.

–No. Quiero que todo siga igual. Sin engaños.

–No lo entiendo.

–Sí lo entiendes. ¿No me dijiste una vez que los matrimonios que llevan muchos años casados aspiran a ser como hermanos? Hemos llegado a ese punto, Fiona. Me he convertido en tu hermano. Es agradable y bonito y te quiero, pero antes de caerme muerto quiero vivir una gran relación apasionada.

Confundiendo el grito ahogado de asombro, quizá de burla, que lanzó Fiona, dijo ásperamente:

–Un éxtasis cuya emoción casi te ciega. ¿Te acuerdas? Quiero un último intento, aunque tú no quieras. O quizá quieres.

Ella le miró, incrédula.

–O sea que ya está.

Fue entonces cuando ella recuperó la voz y le dijo lo idiota que era. Tenía un concepto rígido de lo que era convencionalmente correcto. Que él siempre le hubiera sido fiel, que ella supiera, hacía que su propuesta fuera aún más indignante. O si la había engañado en el pasado lo había hecho de maravilla. Fiona ya conocía el nombre de la mujer. Melanie. No tan lejano del nombre de una forma mortal de cáncer de piel. Sabía que el idilio de Jack con aquella especialista en estadística que tenía veintiocho años podría destruirla.

–Si lo haces habremos terminado. Así de claro.

–¿Es una amenaza?

–Una solemne promesa.

Para entonces ella ya había recobrado la compostura. Y parecía sencillo. El momento de proponer un matrimonio abierto era antes de la boda, no treinta y cinco años más tarde. ¡Arriesgar todo lo que tenían para que él pudiese revivir una vivencia sensual pasajera! Cuando trataba de imaginarse deseando algo semejante para sí misma –su «última aventura» sería la primera– sólo se le ocurría pensar en trastornos, citas, decepción, llamadas telefónicas a deshoras. Toda aquella falacia, el trance de aprender a compartir la cama con otra persona, de inventar nuevas expresiones de cariño. Por último el esclarecimiento necesario, el esfuerzo que exigía ser franco y sincero. Y que nada fuese exactamente lo mismo cuando la intrusa se marchara. No, prefería una existencia imperfecta, la que tenía ahora.

Pero en el diván se alzó ante ella el auténtico alcance del insulto, el hecho de que él estuviese dispuesto a pagar por sus placeres con la desdicha de su esposa. Despiadado. Había visto la determinación de Jack frente a otras personas, casi siempre por una buena causa. Esto era nuevo. ¿Qué había cambiado? Él se había mantenido erguido, con los pies muy separados mientras se servía su whisky de malta, moviendo los dedos de la mano libre al compás de una melodía que escuchaba mentalmente, quizá de alguna canción que había oído con Melanie, no con ella. Herirla sin que le importase: eso era lo nuevo. Siempre había sido un hombre afable, bueno y leal, y la bondad, como demostraba a diario el Tribunal de Familia, era el ingrediente humano esencial. Ella tenía el poder de retirar a un niño de la tutela maligna de un padre o una madre y en ocasiones lo hacía. Pero ¿arrancarse a sí misma de un marido malvado? ¿Cuando estaba débil y desolada? ¿Dónde estaba la protección de su juez?

Le avergonzaba la compasión que otros sentían por ellos mismos, y ahora no iba a sucumbir a ella. Optó por tomarse un tercer whisky. Pero sólo se sirvió una cantidad simbólica, añadió mucha agua y se volvió al diván. Sí, había sido una conversación de la que debería haber tomado notas. Era importante recordar, medir el insulto meticulosamente. Cuando le amenazó con poner fin al matrimonio si él seguía adelante, él se había limitado a repetirse, le había repetido lo mucho que la amaba, que siempre la amaría, que no había otra vida que la que estaban viviendo, que su insatisfacción sexual le hacía muy infeliz, que tenía aquella oportunidad y quería aprovecharla con su conocimiento y, confiaba, su consentimiento. Le hablaba abiertamente. Podría haberlo hecho «a sus espaldas». Sus flacas, implacables espaldas.

–Oh –murmuró Fiona–. Muy decente por tu parte, Jack.

–Bueno, en realidad... –dijo, y no terminó.

Ella adivinó que estaba a punto de decirle que la aventura ya había empezado y no soportó oírlo. No le hacía falta. Lo veía. Una estadística bonita que contaba con la probabilidad cada vez menor de que un hombre volviera con una cónyuge amargada. Vio una mañana soleada, un cuarto de baño desconocido y a Jack, todavía pasablemente musculoso, sacándose por la cabeza, con su típica impaciencia, una camisa blanca de lino limpia, abotonada a medias, y arrojándola al cesto de la ropa sucia, donde quedaba colgada de un brazo antes de deslizarse al suelo. Perdición. Sucedería, con o sin su consentimiento.

–La respuesta es no. –Había ido elevando la voz, como una maestra severa. Añadió–: ¿Qué otra cosa esperabas que dijera?

Se sintió indefensa y quiso poner fin a la conversación. Tenía que aprobar una sentencia antes del día siguiente para su publicación en los Informes del derecho de familia. El fallo que había emitido en el tribunal había ya decidido la suerte de dos colegialas judías, pero había que pulir la prosa, así como mostrar el respeto debido a la piedad con el fin de que constituyese una prueba contra una apelación. Fuera, una lluvia estival repiqueteaba contra las ventanas; a lo lejos, más allá de Gray’s Inn Square, unos neumáticos silbaban sobre el asfalto empapado. Él la abandonaría y el mundo seguiría su curso.

Jack había tensado la cara mientras se encogía de hombros y se volvía para salir de la habitación. Al verle retirarse de espaldas ella experimentó el mismo miedo intenso. Le habría llamado, de no ser por el temor de que él la ignorase. ¿Y qué podía decirle? Abrázame, bésame, ve con esa chica. Había oído sus pasos en el pasillo, cómo se cerraba firmemente la puerta del dormitorio conyugal, y después el silencio que se instauraba en la vivienda, el silencio y la lluvia que llevaba un mes sin escampar.

Primero los hechos. Ambas partes procedían de los segmentos más herméticos de la ultraortodoxa comunidad jaredí del norte de Londres. El matrimonio de los Bernstein fue concertado por sus padres sin ninguna expectativa de disensión. Concertado, no forzado, insistían ambas partes, en un raro acuerdo. Durante trece años todos convinieron, incluidos el mediador, la asistenta social y el juez, en que se trataba de un matrimonio irreparable. La pareja estaba ya separada. Entre los dos, con dificultades, cuidaban de las dos niñas, Rachel y Nora, que vivían con la madre y tenían un frecuente contacto con el padre. La ruptura conyugal había empezado en los primeros años. Tras el parto difícil de la segunda hija, la madre ya no podía concebir a causa de una intervención quirúrgica radical. La dolorosa desavenencia comenzó porque al padre le ilusionaba la idea de tener una familia numerosa. Al cabo de un período de depresión (prolongada, dijo el padre; breve, dijo la madre), ella estudió en la universidad a distancia, obtuvo buenas calificaciones y emprendió una carrera docente en la enseñanza primaria en cuanto la hija más pequeña empezó la escuela. Este arreglo no satisfizo al padre ni a los muchos parientes. Entre los jaredíes, cuyas tradiciones se mantuvieron intactas durante siglos, se suponía que las mujeres debían tener hijos, cuantos más mejor, y ocuparse de la casa. Un título universitario y un trabajo eran dos cosas sumamente infrecuentes. El padre convocó como testigo a una persona respetada, bien situada en la comunidad, que corroboró este criterio.

Tampoco los hombres recibían mucha instrucción. A partir de los doce o trece años se esperaba que dedicasen la mayor parte del tiempo a estudiar la Torá. Por lo general no iban a la universidad. En parte por este motivo, muchos jaredíes eran de recursos modestos. Pero no los Bernstein, aunque lo serían cuando abonasen los honorarios de sus abogadas. Un abuelo copropietario de la patente de una máquina deshuesadora de aceitunas había puesto dinero para un acuerdo conjunto de la pareja. Esperaban gastar todo lo que tenían en sus letradas respectivas, y la juez conocía bien a las dos. En la superficie, la disputa concernía a la escolarización de Rachel y Nora. Sin embargo, lo que estaba en juego era el contexto entero de su educación. Era una pelea por sus almas.

Los niños y las niñas jaredíes se educaban por separado para preservar su pureza. Tenían prohibidas la ropa de moda, la televisión e Internet, así como relacionarse con niños a los que se les permitían estas distracciones. Les vetaban los hogares donde no se observaban las estrictas normas kosher. Costumbres establecidas regulaban todos los aspectos de la vida cotidiana. El problema había empezado con la madre, que estaba rompiendo con la comunidad, aunque no con el judaísmo. No obstante las objeciones del padre, ya había enviado a las niñas a una escuela judía mixta de enseñanza secundaria donde permitían la televisión, la música pop, Internet y el trato con niños no judíos. Quería que sus hijas siguieran en la escuela hasta después de los dieciséis años y que fueran a la universidad si lo deseaban. En su alegato escrito declaraba que quería que sus hijas supieran más cosas sobre cómo vivían otras personas, que fueran socialmente tolerantes y que tuvieran las oportunidades laborales que ella no había tenido, y que al llegar a adultas fuesen económicamente autosuficientes y pudieran encontrar la clase de marido con cualificación profesional que las ayudara a mantener una familia. A diferencia del suyo, que consagraba todo su tiempo al estudio de la Torá y a difundir su enseñanza gratuitamente ocho horas por semana.

Por muy razonable que fuera su caso, Judith Bernstein –una mujer pelirroja de cara angulosa y el pelo crespo, sin cubrir y sujeto por un enorme pasador azul– no era una presencia fácil en el juicio. Sus dedos agitados y pecosos pasaban continuamente notas a su abogada, lanzaba muchos suspiros mudos, ponía los ojos en blanco y fruncía los labios cada vez que hablaba la letrada de su marido, rebuscaba y removía inoportunamente dentro de un bolso desmesurado de piel de camello y sacaba de él, en un momento de desánimo de una larga tarde, un paquete de tabaco y un mechero –objetos sin duda provocativos en el ideario de su marido– y los colocaba uno junto a otro para tenerlos a mano cuando se levantara la sesión. Fiona veía todo esto

Enjoying the preview?
Page 1 of 1