Re: LOL-ita

"Right to leave implies she can leave at any moment, for any reason. Without being retrieved back to the parents nor taken into foster care. She would not have had to put up with Humbert since the first moment she felt wrong about it; either by choosing to leave or by threatening to leave and demanding her conditions. Same with Quilty. In neither case implying that she would have to report them to police or go into foster care, but simply that she could go to anyone who would take her (as first Quilty then Schiller did, but without the possibility of the takers themselves being subjected to legal penalties for it, which would make shopping for takers far easier and safer.) Even before Quilty and before entering into a relationship with Humbert, upon the chance of being sent by Charlotte to a boarding school she didn't want, with a right to leave Dolores would have the chance to shop for takers who wouldn't send her there."

Legal impunity for takers of runaway children like Quilty or Schiller would make shopping for takers safer and easier, yes. But this still does not ensure that each and every child who wants to be taken actually finds anyone who wants to take her.

So, how about children who legally shop around for takers and find no takers? Does "right to leave" have any value for them?