AA: I appreciate your POV!
I appreciate you keeping an open mind about it. And the responses. Thank you. Again, consider the below 'devil's advocate' questions:
Again, it's difficult to explain to someone how a crazy person thinks, unless they have been through it! I was fully prepared for a divorce and restraining order. I had them legally ready to go. In her crazy state (I apologize if this word offends anyone, not sure of how to explain her state, manic does do it justice) she would not have cared about a divorce. She was completely lost in her crazy paranoia. Her mother, daughters, and sisters tried to talk sense to her. It did no good. No amount of reasoning would have done any good. Believe me, we tried.
I don't doubt the veracity of your reasoning, but was this a real 'ultimatum' or a bluff that she called? It sounds a bit like she got to exercise her free will, but you and your (and her) family got backed into a corner where your choices were limited. That situation sounds horrendous, btw, but if it was a bluff she still never had to make a choice. [/observation]
AA question #1: "Why do you suppose the law is crafted that way in the first place" To answer your question, I agree with Keith in post #4 of this thread that the law was probably tightened to prevent people from forcibly committing someone simply to gain an advantage over them.
Fair. Do you think the intent behind the law is morally justified? Given that some exceptions are warranted - probably yours - could it be better designed? If so - How? If not, how do you justify lying to circumvent a morally justified law, vs challenging it directly?
AA question #2: "would you generally condone this type of behavior in others - in other situations?" I don't know how to answer this! Again, I think that my wife would be homeless if I had left her and taken our family away.
And thankfully your decisions worked out. But the 'ends justify the means' isn't a true "moral" argument. Had she ended up homeless it would have been her choice to do so. You saved her by taking that choice away. Which is more important - having choice or salvation? (have no idea what the answer is, just positing it for consideration).
Furthermore,
What if this didn't work out at all?
What if she hated you and her family and remained comitted to an institution for the rest of her life?
What if the results were even more dire, fatally even?
I don't question that you had the best of motives in your heart, and again I cannot express my awe and inspiration for how successfully your decisions worked out, but had they a completely different outcome would you still be here seeking judgement? Should we rest our laurels on the results? If so, do we trod down a dangerous path of circumventing laws and/or inconvenience to achieve ends morally victorious to us?
Sorry to be so intrusive with my questioning, and I intuit that you've answered them already for yourself several times over before proceeding down the path you've chosen.
aa