Damn CPS!!!! At it again!!

[level.eleven]

Steve, I wouldn't defend the humans as property statement as well. We agree. This is a response to #178. I fudged the new forum layout.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I wonder why they went to a back-cracker for information on newborn nutritional needs?

Because if you go to an MD, the MD will tell you that you are a moron for letting your property starve to death . . . oh, and he'll call the cops.

 

[level.eleven]

Because if you go to an MD, the MD will tell you that you are a moron for letting your property starve to death . . . oh, and he'll call the cops.

Shut up Mr. Nofun McRipple Coffee.

Oopps...I meant doctor.

 

[rambone]

Unaccountable cash seizure meets unaccountable child seizure. Give us your cash or lose your kids.



Sarah Stillman: The Use and Abuse of Civil Forfeiture : The New Yorker

The county’s district attorney, a fifty-seven-year-old woman with feathered Charlie’s Angels hair named Lynda K. Russell, arrived an hour later. Russell, who moonlighted locally as a country singer, told Henderson and Boatright that they had two options. They could face felony charges for “money laundering” and “child endangerment,” in which case they would go to jail and their children would be handed over to foster care. Or they could sign over their cash to the city of Tenaha, and get back on the road. “No criminal charges shall be filed,” a waiver she drafted read, “and our children shall not be turned over to CPS,” or Child Protective Services.

“Where are we?” Boatright remembers thinking. “Is this some kind of foreign country, where they’re selling people’s kids off?” Holding her sixteen-month-old on her hip, she broke down in tears.

Later, she learned that cash-for-freedom deals had become a point of pride for Tenaha, and that versions of the tactic were used across the country. “Be safe and keep up the good work,” the city marshal wrote to Washington, following a raft of complaints from out-of-town drivers who claimed that they had been stopped in Tenaha and stripped of cash, valuables, and, in at least one case, an infant child, without clear evidence of contraband.

 

[evsnova74]

Saw this this morning, thought of this thread: Missing: 78 children from Oklahoma Department of Human Services custody | News OK

 

[88GT]

I think that you and I are both well aware of the various logical fallacies and actual dishonesty contained in this paragraph.

I don't even feel the urge to discuss it.

This paragraph? His entire argument has been utterly dependent on manipulation and twisting truth. He has accomplished nothing but delivering insults and maligning others for their different choices. Probably because somewhere deep down he recognizes he does believe in ownership. He's not arguing against children being owned, just who is qualified to be the owner. It's not okay for parents to do it, but the state? That's perfectly acceptable.

 

[level.eleven]

This paragraph? His entire argument has been utterly dependent on manipulation and twisting truth. He has accomplished nothing but delivering insults and maligning others for their different choices. Probably because somewhere deep down he recognizes he does believe in ownership. He's not arguing against children being owned, just who is qualified to be the owner. It's not okay for parents to do it, but the state? That's perfectly acceptable.

Parental authority is the one right I believe is absolute 100% completely up to the parents and no one else. And as unsettling as it is to some, I give a lot of leeway to use of force that most people today in America find intolerable. Think of me what you will, but children as chattel is how I view parental authority from a legal standpoint.

Could you tell us more about the use of force that most of society finds unacceptable?

Are we talking To Train Up a Child style force?

To Train Up a Child: Michael Pearl, Debi Pearl: 9781892112002: Amazon.com: Books

The HSDLA referred to a client as a "hero" even though he kept his chattel in cages made of chicken wire with alarms on the door so they couldn't get out. The chattel began defecating in their cages because tripping the alarm meant the use of force. Can human chattel be kept in cages? Or is that too much leeway?

 

[steveh_131]

Neither of us have anywhere near enough information to even form an opinion about this case. It is really tough being a social worker when medical records are in play. There is no legal avenue for you defend your actions. Only the court and the doctor know what is in those medical records.

One of many great reasons to leave people the **** alone.

Because if you go to an MD, the MD will tell you that you are a moron for letting your property starve to death . . . oh, and he'll call the cops.

I've got a healthy little girl who was starving to death until we decided to ignore a top ranked pediatrician and give her home-made goat milk formula. You'll have to forgive me for not trusting you or your beloved medical interventionists to make decisions for my family. If you had your way, I'd probably be in jail and my little girl would probably be dead. Who would have thought that following doctor's orders and adding some extra corn syrup to her corn syrup formula wasn't a good solution?

This paragraph? His entire argument has been utterly dependent on manipulation and twisting truth. He has accomplished nothing but delivering insults and maligning others for their different choices.

Yeah, I know. At least they were sort of coherent, up until that point.

Probably because somewhere deep down he recognizes he does believe in ownership. He's not arguing against children being owned, just who is qualified to be the owner. It's not okay for parents to do it, but the state? That's perfectly acceptable.

Exactly. Because if the state owns them then he feels like he has some sort of control over other people's parenting decisions. He can make sure that they do it his way. He knows what is best.

It's easy to look at this handful of extreme cases and say 'this is wrong'. Ok, maybe we all agree that it is wrong. Simple, right? We can draw this line.

No. We can't. Every responsibility that is handed to the government results in over-reach. They will decide where the line is. They will decide who decides where the line is.

Are we talking To Train Up a Child style force?

To Train Up a Child: Michael Pearl, Debi Pearl: 9781892112002: Amazon.com: Books

The HSDLA referred to a client as a "hero" even though he kept his chattel in cages made of chicken wire with alarms on the door so they couldn't get out. The chattel began defecating in their cages because tripping the alarm meant the use of force. Can human chattel be kept in cages? Or is that too much leeway?

Surely that never happened. There are laws against it. We have an entire government agency tasked with preventing this. It couldn't have happened. There's just no way.

 

[level.eleven]

With CPS shut down and children given the legal status of chattel, how are the children going to be freed from their cages? Who is going to free them? So many questions go unanswered from the 100% parental rights crowd.

 

[steveh_131]

With CPS shut down and children given the legal status of chattel, how are the children going to be freed from their cages? Who is going to free them? So many questions go unanswered from the 100% parental rights crowd.

Good question. I'll ask you the same, since CPS is already failing to protect these children.

With CPS currently in place and actively abusing parents' rights, how are the children going to be freed from their cages? Who is going to free them? So many questions go unanswered from the 0% parental rights crowd.

What are you doing to help these children, while CPS fails at it?

 

[level.eleven]

Good question. I'll ask you the same, since CPS is already failing to protect these children.

With CPS currently in place and actively abusing parents' rights, how are the children going to be freed from their cages? Who is going to free them? So many questions go unanswered from the 0% parental rights crowd.

What are you doing to help these children, while CPS fails at it?

Nope. The children were removed and put into safer homes. The mother violated rule #1 of the paranoid homeschool crowd - she let a stranger in the house. In this case, it was an insurance salesman. He called up CPS and reported the conditions. An investigation occurred. A trial was conducted. Humans aren't chattel, you can't keep them in cages just because you gave birth to them or adopted them.

 

[steveh_131]

Nope. The children were removed and put into safer homes. The mother violated rule #1 of the paranoid homeschool crowd - she let a stranger in the house. In this case, it was an insurance salesman. He called up CPS and reported the conditions. An investigation occurred. A trial was conducted. Humans aren't chattel, you can't keep them in cages just because you gave birth to them or adopted them.

I'm not playing this game.

We all know families with children who are abused and neglected, reported to CPS, and nothing is done.

What are you doing about this?

ETA: And what are you doing to prevent it from happening in the first place? Those children were still locked in cages, right? They still endured it. What next government atrocity would you recommend to keep it from happening at all?

 

[Bunnykid68]

House to house searches if there are kids inside

 

[steveh_131]

House to house searches if there are kids inside

This sounds like the only possible next step.

So, level.eleven? What of it? House to house searches?

You are operating under the principle of sacrificing parental rights for the sake of preventing any and all bad things from happening to children. What rights shouldn't be sacrificed in pursuit of this goal?

 

[level.eleven]

I'm not playing this game.

We all know families with children who are abused and neglected, reported to CPS, and nothing is done.

What are you doing about this?

ETA: And what are you doing to prevent it from happening in the first place? Those children were still locked in cages, right? They still endured it. What next government atrocity would you recommend to keep it from happening at all?

I don't know any families who abuse and neglect their children. If I did I would make sure that information was passed on to the appropriate authorities. Yes, I would be that nosey neighbor and alert the authorities that you are keeping your kids in cages.

I don't understand your reasoning. Since it can't be prevented it shouldn't be pursued at all? Is this like your DWI argument? If so we don't really need to rehash the anarchists tango for the 50th time.

 

[steveh_131]

I don't know any families who abuse and neglect their children. If I did I would make sure that information was passed on to the appropriate authorities. Yes, I would be that nosey neighbor and alert the authorities that you are keeping your kids in cages.

I know plenty. Information was already passed on to 'appropriate authorities' and nothing was done.

I don't understand your reasoning. Since it can't be prevented it shouldn't be pursued at all? Is this like your DWI argument? If so we don't really need to rehash the anarchists tango for the 50th time.

And I don't understand yours. Parental rights can and should be sacrificed for the safety of the children. Bad things happen and government intervention is the correct solution. Right?

So...why not house to house searches?

 

[level.eleven]

This sounds like the only possible next step.

So, level.eleven? What of it? House to house searches?

You are operating under the principle of sacrificing parental rights for the sake of preventing any and all bad things from happening to children. What rights shouldn't be sacrificed in pursuit of this goal?

House to house searches? Why? A home can be searched if an investigation is underway. A court will provide the details.

 

[partyboy6686]

CPS/DCS is a crappy government organization IMO. But thats because of the 4 occasions I have had to deal with them. But most of it is because CPS/DCS workers have to jump through so many hoops to be able to remove a child/children from parent/parents. They have to prove to the CPS/DCS supervisor or a judge that removing the child/children is necessary.

My oldest sons mother was investigated 4 times by CPS/DCS. And they would never remove my son or her other child from her because her mother would step in and say the children lived with her. My sons mother is Bi-polar and a confirmed drug user. One time she quit taking her bi-polar medication and took off with her children. Me and her mother aka my sons grandma went down to CPS/DCS headquarters and they refused to help us. So instead of dealing with them and not seeing any positive results I hired a well know family practice lawyer. It took a year in court and thousands of dollars but I finally proved her unfit in court and won custody of my son. But in that year I was terrified that my son was gonna be one of these news stories were CPS/DCS failed to remove a child and something bad happened to that child.

 

[steveh_131]

House to house searches? Why? A home can be searched if an investigation is underway. A court will provide the details.

Because there are children being abused with nobody to see it or report it. A house to house search could reveal this.

 

[level.eleven]

Because there are children being abused with nobody to see it or report it. A house to house search could reveal this.

A court isn't going to sign off on a home search without justification. We operate under the rule of law. The advocate in the other thread was trying to explain the process, but the paranoid/conspiracy crowd ran him off. Kirk was doing the same, but you didn't want to "play". You have all of the answers.