I am The Kit Slitor Commander!

/free the monkeys.

kronicfeld: ArkAngel: A slightly higher level on information is required for me to form an opinion on the case presented

I practice family law in that and adjoining jurisdictions. There is a LOT more to that story than the article.

I guess we should take your word for it since there's no further info added or even links to further info... much less any solid indication you are what you claim to be. Heck, there's not even any indication as to which side's 'LOT more to that story' you're referring to. I did find this appeal ruling from 2007 though which upholds the lower court's custody orders (new window). Seems that there is more to the story for sure, and not to the benefit of the parent(s),

They've been fighting for numerous years and I find it highly unlikely, to impossible-to-believe, that there's some vast conspiracy from all the doctors, to all the nurses, to all the social workers, to all the child psychologists, to all the attorneys, to all the judges, to all the child advocates, to every single person involved in this entire process over 6-years running to disregard 'due process' and the US Constitution and deprive those parents of their child. Seems to me they've had 6-years worth of 'due process' and they're approaching 7-years worth.

DUE PROCESS MOFO!

DO YOU SPEAK IT?!

Seriously some of these child protection service people go wild and are INCREDIBLY stupid. More government involvement that should not be. It's time to re-inforce the intent of the declaration of independence.

SANITY, INTELLIGENCE!

Both which are long gone with our drawn out litigation system and government involvement setups. Some of these Child protection services and other government outfits are beyond reproach and this is wrong. Very wrong.

Watch "The Rabbit Fence"

Uh... If they've spent nearly a quarter of a million dollars and four years, it really doesn't sound to me like they haven't gotten "due process."

You have not been denied "due process" just because the decision you get isn't the one you want.

I worked in child protection for years. We nearly always placed kids with grandparents or other relatives.

I was a child so I am really getting a kick out of these replies.

It's not about size of government, it's about being able to hold the gov't accountable for their actions.

Yep, happens all the time. Link (new window)

another defender of what he imagines the constitution to be?

The thing is, social service government workers are well in the Democratic party coalition, so these abuses of power have been largely ignored. After all, it's the government intervening to "save" kids from their own parents, which is right in line with liberal philosophy.

The problem isn't that they can take away a kid without due process. You don't want to leave a kid who is being beaten with the parents while things spin through the courts. The problem is that they didn't have clear rules or ideas of what constitutes abuse or neglect. Losing 10 ounces after birth should not have been an automatic remove child situation. Maybe it might trigger a talk with the parents to see if they were doing anything nutty with feeding, but really anyone who works with newborns know that they lose weight for a few days before starting to gain it back.

kronicfeld: ArkAngel: A slightly higher level on information is required for me to form an opinion on the case presented

I practice family law in that and adjoining jurisdictions. There is a LOT more to that story than the article.


please feel free to add to TFA, if you can.

Wow. From the document you posted:

"There also were concerns that (the child) was put in a milk crate with a top that had no holes in it ..."

Also, Mom's a documented mental case whose disability prevents her from understanding an infant's verbal and nonverbal cues, such as "Feed me, I'm dying here," and "For God's sake, Mom, it's been three weeks -- change my freaking diaper already!"

Yes, there is more to this story. I feel bad for Mom's mental disorder, but the kid's life was at stake.

So, if they had just poked some holes in the crate, there would have been no issue?

kronicfeld: ArkAngel: A slightly higher level on information is required for me to form an opinion on the case presented

I practice family law in that and adjoining jurisdictions. There is a LOT more to that story than the article.

THIS. My spidey sense is on fire. CPS has better things to do and more urgent fires to fight. They don't have the manpower or budget to go off and steal babies from perfect parents.

Meatzilla: I did find this appeal ruling from 2007 though which upholds the lower court's custody orders (new window). Seems that there is more to the story for sure, and not to the benefit of the parent(s),

It looks like the Judge's main reason for not returning the child is that the child identifies the foster family as being her real family, a point the judge made numerous times through the ruling. A situation which only exists because of actions of Social Services.The judge then tacks on a heap of other things to justify the ruling - apparently if you ever have depression Social Services can use that as a reason to confiscate your children, and if you respond poorly to people taking your children from you then that is, apparently, evidence you are not fit to be a parent.

MadAzza: Meatzilla:

Wow. From the document you posted:

"There also were concerns that (the child) was put in a milk crate with a top that had no holes in it ..."

Also, Mom's a documented mental case whose disability prevents her from understanding an infant's verbal and nonverbal cues, such as "Feed me, I'm dying here," and "For God's sake, Mom, it's been three weeks -- change my freaking diaper already!"

Yes, there is more to this story. I feel bad for Mom's mental disorder, but the kid's life was at stake.

If the government can stop you from murdering someboy without due process, we all live in Fidel Castro's China!

Runs_With_Scissors_: Kit Slitor

Seriously?

Must be more to the story. ALL healthy kids lose some weight after birth. An immediate gain- fluid weight- is dangerous. It'll cause the fetal circulatory system to stay open. 10% loss is normal and expected.

If this would have been a weight loss issue alone, the parents could have lined up about a million expert witnesses to make CPS look like idiots. I'm not saying CPS is full of wonderful intelligent people but everyone in the system is not that stupid and a case built on weight alone wouldn't have gone anywhere.

Airportmatt: Wow. From the document you posted:

"There also were concerns that (the child) was put in a milk crate with a top that had no holes in it ..."

Also, Mom's a documented mental case whose disability prevents her from understanding an infant's verbal and nonverbal cues, such as "Feed me, I'm dying here," and "For God's sake, Mom, it's been three weeks -- change my freaking diaper already!"

Yes, there is more to this story. I feel bad for Mom's mental disorder, but the kid's life was at stake.

So, if they had just poked some holes in the crate, there would have been no issue?

Meh, that's really all a hospital bassinet is. farking plastic bin with hole. Mrs herrDr made me get a fancy wooden one tho.

If they took your kid w/o due process, have them arrested for kidnapping

ArkAngel: A slightly higher level on information is required for me to form an opinion on the case presented

This. I really, REALLY want to hope there is more to the story than is presented there. I really want to believe that in this modern day and age, we can't have such a crucial part of our system be so corrupt. I really, REALLY want to believe that.

But if what is alleged there is true......I weep for what we have become.

I'd like to make a modest proposal.

With no evidence or citations, i cannot say whether or not who is guilty and how is not. However, there are a few things i remember.

Link (new window)

and

Link (new window)

Both were cases in which "evidence was clear." We, as people looked upon them as guilty monsters, asking "how could humans do this?" Instead, we have found the opposite. The evidence was convoluted, filled with suppositions of "I am looking at this case, looking for rape. There is a red mark, so, there was rape."

It scares me because we have learned nothing, and the stories of the falsely accused build up every day. Yet, somehow, we are always better than the person on the stand, yet, no different.

I am henceforth, willing to give the article the benefit of the doubt, with the knowledge that prejudgement happens, and clouds the judgement of those who are supposed to be "independant."

rikkidoxx: Watch "The Rabbit Fence"

"The Rabbit-Proof Fence"

And the same thing happened here in the US, as MidnightSkulker so clearly pointed out.

//white man's burden, indeed...time to stop this crazy stuff.

video man: MidnightSkulker: My kids can legally be taken from me by the government, and any money intended for them (tax credits, band money, even child support if my husband and I weren't together) taken as well to pay for their education. They can give my kids to a religious institution to house and educate, using public money. All because my kids are Native. We didn't register them to the Indian Register because we thought it'd keep Indian Affairs from messing with them, but they don't have to be registered for the act to apply to them - the language used includes status eligible as well as registered kids.

The sections of the Indian Act that made the residential schools legal have never been repealed. Even though this isn't done now (at least in the same way it used to be. There is certainly an argument to be made about undue influence in the education if Native kids) doesn't make me any more comfortable about the fact that those laws are still on the books.

That's backwards as fark.

/Seriously, what the hell?

Never under estimate the level the government will stoop to when there is the ability to give children to those they feel more "deserving". The current fact that the laws exist and have not been repealed is scary as hell. Heck in some areas the laws used in America during the baby scoop era still exist that allows local government to simply take an infant and place it up for adoption without any courts or trials. Not to mention new B.S.ing laws on that have been passed in the last decade to undermine the parental rights of the father. Although I was adopted as an infant by an abusive and mentally unstable family - I'm not against adoption. Due to my past I have zero tolerance for anyone that would abuse, neglect or abandon a child whether they are adopted or biological guardians. But based on the past treatment that the government as shown to those in a weak position to fight off corruption of government officials engaging in social engineering though adoption one cannot ignore laws or current cases in the TFA that exist to steal an infant and place them with the person the government official finds to be more deserving without one hell of a good reason like true abuse or neglect.

MadAzza: Farking While Farking: Meatzilla: I did find this appeal ruling from 2007 though which upholds the lower court's custody orders (new window). Seems that there is more to the story for sure, and not to the benefit of the parent(s),

It looks like the Judge's main reason for not returning the child is that the child identifies the foster family as being her real family, a point the judge made numerous times through the ruling.

Yes, that's what it looks like if you read only the first few pages.

And that's what my post looks like if you only read the first sentence.

The Judge didn't start out with "the parents are obviously unfit", the Judge started with "the kid is happy with the foster family", and repeated that point numerous times. Only after the Judge had firmly established the reason for keeping the kid with the foster family was because the kid now identified the family as it's own did the Judge venture into looking at other reasons, a lot of which were the direct result of the CPS intervention.

Don't you care about children? I can do whatever I want or you don't care about children.