Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Risk
Mountain climber
Olympia, WA
|
|
|
May 11, 2013 - 03:43pm PT
|
The judge ruled that a CPS social worker will make regular house visits to check on the infant when he is returned home.
Sounds as if the couple agreed to either a "service plan" or an "in-home dependency." Either way, here's a sample of the sorts of things they likely agreed to so they can get their baby back:
1. CPS can come over and enter their home anytime without notice and perform an inspection. CPS may also contract these inspections to other providers who will come over and look around and ask questions ($80/hr).
2. All medical records must be furnished to CPS.
3. Both parents will attend a series of performance-based parenting classes and group sessions with other parents, most of which have their children in foster homes. These classes take 12 weeks to 18 months to complete.
4. If parents undergo any counseling, the records must be furnished to CPS.
5. Parents must agree to substance abuse screening. Regardless of outcome, no alcohol may be in the home.
6. Parents must undergo a psychological evaluation by CPS-controlled psychologists, and the records are property of CPS for their use.
7. No overnight travel is permitted without prior approval from CPS; if staying with friends, the hosts must undergo CPS background investigations beforehand.
8. Overnight guests or family must undergo CPS background investigations prior to staying overnight.
9. The parents agree to not discuss or disclose any matter regarding their case with anyone, including the media, without court approval.
It's in the best interest of these parents to agree to absolutely everything, no matter how intrusive or Orwellian they are. Because, if they are, or even appear uncooperative in any way, the child will be removed from them immediately. After 6-months to 2-years or more of oversight by CPS, the "case" can be dropped by the judge.
In close to all cases, such an arrangement is likely good and proper. But it is overdoing it in many cases. It costs the government and the parents a lot of money. Plus, all the time it takes away from the parents from being parents.
This particular story merits looking at to see what could have been done better and following it to see what it takes for this family to be left alone to heal.
|
|
squishy
Mountain climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2013 - 05:28pm PT
|
The cps is underfunded because it is one of the 1st things that get the chop when the republicans go on a spending cut temper tantrum. I personally believe the 1st thing to get cut should be fire departments in rich republican neighborhoods, but who am I to say that starving and uncared for children need the funds more...maybe less tax cuts for big business will help fund that which requires F'ing funding..
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
May 11, 2013 - 05:38pm PT
|
god
sometimes I believe that that people who constantly seek out and embrace any reason at all to criticize people who work for any level of "government", assume the worst of them, bash them for being represented by a union, etc etc...
probably are still pissed off now many years later because they had to wait a little too long in line at the DMV for their first drivers license at age 15
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
May 11, 2013 - 09:08pm PT
|
This particular story merits looking at to see what could have been done better...
NO it doesn't. We already know what could have been done better... don't take a child with a heart condition out of a hospital without fuking checking out.
|
|
Risk
Mountain climber
Olympia, WA
|
|
|
May 11, 2013 - 09:46pm PT
|
You sound angry.
|
|
Jingy
climber
Somewhere out there
|
|
|
May 11, 2013 - 10:04pm PT
|
Is this the first in what you see as the beginning of the surge for CPS to take American's babies from them?
How did your rally turn out?
Were you stimulated by the discourse of your fellow rallyers?
This is a non-issue.
I'll wait until I hear about 10…. 50….. 100 kids being taken from their parents before I stand up and take notice.
Juts consider yourself lucky that you were not born outside the US and had only moved to the US with the hopes of raising your family…. like all the other Americans…. and all the other people in the world.
you need help
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2013 - 05:22am PT
|
So Bluey - how'd the big tea party go down at the cop shop?
A video is pending...
And weschrist? The baby had pending heart-surgery already, it was in the hospital for suspected pneumonia.
And again, the second doc cleared them all as healthy before CPS attacked the family.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2013 - 05:27am PT
|
I'll wait until I hear about 10…. 50….. 100 kids being taken from their parents before I stand up and take notice.
Juts consider yourself lucky that you were not born outside the US and had only moved to the US with the hopes of raising your family…. like all the other Americans…. and all the other people in the world.
Alright, so 10 or 50 is your threshold for seized babies? At least you have a bar for measurement. I applaud that, you're on record.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2013 - 05:31am PT
|
NO it doesn't. We already know what could have been done better... don't take a child with a heart condition out of a hospital without fuking checking out.
How does seizing the baby from it's loving parents make this better? The parents had scheduled heart surgery already. The 2nd doc said the baby was clear to go. WTF?
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
May 12, 2013 - 11:10am PT
|
And again, the second doc cleared them all as healthy before CPS attacked the family.
AFTER the report was made to CPS. AFTER CPS was required, by law, to ensure the child's safety during a full investigation.
How does seizing the baby from it's loving parents make this better?
Nobody ever said it did. You honestly must be the dumbest motherfuker alive.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2013 - 11:12am PT
|
edit: Man, reading the source material for this outrage leaves mostly questions. Very one-sided. But I guess if you're mining moral outrage and knee jerk responses, you will take whatever you can get.
Yeah, I guess it's akin to "mining moral outrage" about 4 dead Americans in Benghazi. Let it go, huh? Nothing to see here.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2013 - 11:20am PT
|
AFTER the report was made to CPS. AFTER CPS was required, by law, to ensure the child's safety during a full investigation.
What were they being investigated for? Leaving the hospital w/o checking out properly.
The second doc cleared them.
Next day CPS goes in for the attack again, for no reason! No legit reason anyway.
Kid is at Stanford and is pending surgery in 4-6 weeks. That was the original plan. CPS just waded in and made their health worse.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
May 12, 2013 - 11:45am PT
|
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Nobody's 4th amendment rights were violated. The courts agree. If you don't like our political system feel free to fuk off to some other country that embraces your irrational right wing bullsh#t.
The second doc cleared them.
AFTER THE FACT YOU GAWDAMN FUKING MORAN!
Kid is at Stanford and is pending surgery in 4-6 weeks. That was the original plan.
Why back to the original plan. I thought the 2nd Dr said the kid was fine.
Funny that a little personal responsibility from the parents (checking out properly) could have avoided this whole mess... but CPS is to blame for everything. What's that about PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY and ACCOUNTABILITY again?
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
May 12, 2013 - 11:48am PT
|
It's been determined that siezing the kid was unnecessary. Unnecessary = unreasonable.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
|
May 12, 2013 - 11:50am PT
|
It was determined that CPS did nothing wrong.
You need a new Thesaurus. Unnecessary does not equal unreasonable.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
May 12, 2013 - 11:53am PT
|
They didn't need to take the kid. That was doing something wrong.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2013 - 12:10pm PT
|
It was determined that CPS did nothing wrong.
You need a new Thesaurus. Unnecessary does not equal unreasonable.
The courts haven't ruled yet on whether their 4Th Amendment rights were violated. Case is pending. They are rightfully lawyered-up.
EDIT:
Why back to the original plan. I thought the 2nd Dr said the kid was fine.
Do you idiots read the story? The surgery was in the works, the kid went in for suspected pneumonia.
The parents were planning on the surgery but it wasn't deemed to be critical.
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
May 12, 2013 - 12:39pm PT
|
Blue, do you know how often doctors contradict each other? Do you know that sometimes a doctor will say nothing is wrong, when in fact something is wrong. Do you have any idea how often that happens? And can you see the position this puts CPS in? What happens if the doctor that says something is wrong is the one that is actually right? And then add in crazy diseases like Manchausen by proxy and most people could start to see the difficult position CPS is in. Thats why they added a judge to the system. And I'm not saying that the system is perfect. No system is because humans are involved. But hopefully we try to do the best that we can.
But oh well, you have your cause. Let me know when you get on the sharp end of making critical care decisions for a child not your own. Then let me know when you make a mistake. We will then get to see you learn just how hard it is and we will see which side of the equation you come down on. Will you be more lenient in leaning towards trusting the parents, or will you be more cautious. Everyone I know who has had to do this kind of thing becomes more cautious. Including me. But who knows... maybe you will be the exception.
Carry on.
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
May 12, 2013 - 12:45pm PT
|
well sure.. LOL. that makes it all clear now. Just choose which doc you want to trust.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2013 - 12:58pm PT
|
well sure.. LOL. that makes it all clear now. Just choose which doc you want to trust.
You guys are splitting really fine hairs here and are failing to see the major point.
A mother was uncomfortable with one doc, went to another to be comforted. The next day her baby was seized FOR NO REASON!
The cops, CPS, and the 2nd doc agreed to let her go home and everything was kosher. Next day, seize the baby.
F*#ked up.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!