As for George, it’s also unfairness that one mistake has such deep ramifications - particularly when drugs are so widely used and accepted in Australia. But also, I feel George may have failed to price in the risk of being caught.
The question of how to handle children who lose their sole caretaker to prison is a real issue without easy answers: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2018/12/03/how-incarcerat...
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/children-residing-with-parents-...
It's a small world and not all curiosity is good, the basic story does not change and the whereabouts of the child are about as private a piece of information that I possess.
There are better ways to try to publicly discuss such things. If someone actually cares about the welfare of the children, they shouldn't have a problem with being told "this is not a good question to ask." If they have a problem with it, that tends to say something about their actual priorities.
(also responding to jacquesm)
I think there are ways to answer the question that don't compromise the privacy of the child. And I mostly disagree with jacquesm's that the outcome of the child is "nobody's business".
This is a touching anecdote that humanizes a drug trafficker. There are lots of valid questions on how the laws around drugs should be structured and enforced. While anecdotal, being told "the father lost legal custody and the child is now a ward of the state living in a foster home" may impact how people think about long-term incarceration as a solution. And if this answer is "the child is living with his loving grandparents and doing well", while still anecdotal, this may have a different but equally valid impact.
But while 'jacquesm' is under no obligation to answer, I don't think it's wrong or necessarily impolite for 'orthoxerox' to ask about the outcome for the child.
George ran a (very) successful business here in NL and in Belgium, made a lot of money and was doing just fine. Then in a short period of time his wife died and his business took a hit both from competition, regulation and because he wasn't paying as much attention to it as he did in the past.
One thing leading to another the business failed. George panicked a bit being left behind with a child to take care of and a huge drop in income so he figured what's the harm in taking a boat filled with pills into Australia. That didn't work out too well and George is now on an extended visit to Australia, I don't think we'll meet again in this lifetime, that's how long his sentence was.
Now, before you judge: George was in every sense of the word a start-up type, serial entrepreneur with a lot of hustle and in general doing just fine. All it took was a couple of cards dealt from the bottom of the pack to turn him into a criminal.
So no big balls, no small brains, just plain old desperation and momentary lapse of judgement. If not for that you'd all be proud to swap places with him. The really sad person in that story is the kid, first to lose mom and then dad effectively too.