Sacrameto Police Seize Child From Parents (OT)

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 181 - 200 of total 281 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

John M

climber

May 12, 2013 - 01:10pm PT

The next day her baby was seized FOR NO REASON!

umm.. no. I'm sorry that you can't seem to understand that there was a reason. I'm also sorry that you can't seem to understand that there are fine points and that just because a point may be thin, or tricky, doesn't make it illegitimate.

Please let me know when you have to make decisions about a childs welfare when it isn't your child.

5.12 climbing versus 5.9 climbing. The holds get finer and harder to recognize.

bluering

Trad climber

Santa Clara, CA

Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2013 - 01:12pm PT

Why did they seize the child? Under what reasons?

John M

climber

May 12, 2013 - 01:17pm PT

They seized the child because a doctor warned them. Try rereading my earlier post about how doctors can have opposite opinions. The judge wants the child to be seen at Stanford, so that would make it appear that he/she agrees that there is something wrong with the child.

You simply don't have all the facts, so you can't know what was going on in the first doctors mind that made him/her decide to call CPS. Nor does the second doctor know. So its entirely possible the second doctor was wrong. Thats why CPS has to get involved and why a judge then makes the determination of what is to happen next.

Could the second doctor be correct? yes.. but CPS can't go off of that once the first doctor makes the call. The courts have to be involved. The court heard enough from the first doctor to order the child to be seen at Stanford.

bluering

Trad climber

Santa Clara, CA

Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2013 - 01:21pm PT

John, shouldn't CPS err on the side of caution and the family? The only reason for the initial complaint was improper procedure in checking out. That was cleared up at the 2nd doc. Everybody agreed.

Why did CPS go after her again? The next day. They never stated why.

Chaz

Trad climber

greater Boss Angeles area

May 12, 2013 - 01:26pm PT

The courts have to be involved?

A parent can't decide for themselves which doctor to see? Why not?

John M

climber

May 12, 2013 - 01:33pm PT

John, shouldn't CPS err on the side of caution and the family?

No.. CPS should err on the side of the safety of the child. They learned the hard way that parents can be good at fooling doctors and them. There are tons of stories where CPS thought everything was okay with the parents and it wasn't. The problem is that its hard to strike the right balance. Its a brutally difficult task that CPS has. I don't believe that you appreciate just how hard it is. Thats why I would like you to volunteer as a child advocate. Once you have some experience, then I believe it will be easier for you to understand my position.

John M

climber

May 12, 2013 - 01:36pm PT

Chaz, the courts get involved when a doctor makes a report to CPS. Until then, yes, the parents can make whatever decision about doctors that they want. Once a report is made, then there is a procedure which involves the courts. Its for the protection of everyones rights. Its not perfect, but then nothing is.

The case at Penn state is a prime example of why we made certain reporting procedures the law. Once the law is involved, then the courts have to be involved.

bluering

Trad climber

Santa Clara, CA

Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2013 - 01:52pm PT

So you're assuming that CPS knows better than parents and a physician?

Your knee-jerk advocacy of CPS is apparent. Sometimes they do wrong.

John M

climber

May 12, 2013 - 01:53pm PT

Which is worse?

The parents are scared and upset because the child is mistakenly taken by CPS.

The child is abused because CPS mistakenly leaves the child with CPS.

And yes its true, the child can suffer trauma in the first case also.
.
So which is worse? Most peoples answer depends on how much child abuse they have seen. The more child abuse you see, the more likely you are to err on the side of trying to keep the child safe and worry less about the parents needs.

John M

climber

May 12, 2013 - 01:56pm PT

So you're assuming that CPS knows better than parents and a physician?

Once again you fail to acknowledge the first physician. You also fail to acknowledge that to a point the courts agree with the first doctors opinion. Thats why the child is being taken to Stanford.

The courts gave back control to the parents, with some stipulations. One of which was to require th child to go to Stanford.

Chaz

Trad climber

greater Boss Angeles area

May 12, 2013 - 01:59pm PT

"You also fail to acknowledge that to a point the courts agree with the first doctors opinion."

Shouldn't it be up to the parents to decide which doctor to trust?

John M

climber

May 12, 2013 - 02:13pm PT

Shouldn't it be up to the parents to decide which doctor to trust?

Yes..... right up to the point someone with the ability to recognize abuse states that there might be abuse, such as the first doctor. Then the courts get involved.

bluering

Trad climber

Santa Clara, CA

Topic Author's Reply - May 12, 2013 - 02:18pm PT

Yes..... right up to the point someone with the ability to recognize abuse states that there might be abuse, such as the first doctor. Then the courts get involved.

THERE WERE NO SIGNS OF ABUSE OR NEGLECT!

Why did CPS barge into their house after they agreed the doc cleared them?

Answer that!

Sierra Ledge Rat

Mountain climber

Old and Broken Down in Appalachia

May 12, 2013 - 02:50pm PT

^^^ A judge thought that there was enough evidence of parental neglect that he ordered them to obey the doctor's advice.

A parent can't decide for themselves which doctor to see? Why not?

Because you don't need a license to breed.

"The meek shall inherit the earth." In order words, the retarded will breed like wabbits and have retarded children and they will take over the planet.

Studly

Trad climber

May 12, 2013 - 04:27pm PT

Bluey has a good point on this whole issue. CPS is knd of a screwed up mess, they throw their weight around when its not neccessary allot and f*#k with people who they have no business messing with. A great example of an agency that perhaps has spiraled out of control with no oversight or accountability.

Ken M

Mountain climber

Los Angeles, Ca

May 12, 2013 - 04:51pm PT

Studly, you sound like an idiot who has no experience with children, much less abused children.

A parent can't decide for themselves which doctor to see? Why not?

That was never the issue, Chaz, as your trolling pea-brain knows.

The child was scheduled for heart surgery in 3-4 months. He was admitted with POSSIBLE pneumonia.....but guess what, boys and girls, the symptoms of pneumonia are about the SAME as severe decompensated heart failure. They can be difficult to distinguish.

If it is the latter, the treatment is EMERGENCY heart surgery, without which, the child dies. This is not trivial stuff....and happens ALL THE TIME.

While awaiting the tests to be done, the parents WALK OUT with the child.

Is the child about to die without emergency surgery? WHO KNOWS?

So the child is removed from SPECIALISTS, who are expert in evaluating this, and taken to an ER doctor....and having been one, I'll tell you authoritatively, LESS expert at such evaluations. But they can get the technology involved, and answer the question, and did.

But it doesn't change the issue of the parents removing a potentially life-threateningly sick child from medical care. They could have ASKED, and they'd have gotten another opinion. From an expert.

Taking a very ill person out of a hospital to get a second opinion from an ER doctor is among the stupidest things imaginable. In the ER's we refer to such folks as GOMERS.

gomer

1. a stupid oaf, a social reject

2. a patient unwelcome in a hospital(supposedly standing for get out of my emergency room)

"That's the third time in a week that this gomer has come here."

So NO, a parent CAN NOT take a child to see the provider of their choice if it PUTS THAT CHILDS LIFE AT RISK. They are children, not property.

mechrist

Gym climber

South of Heaven

May 12, 2013 - 09:18pm PT

I love it when idiots who know nothing about anything, yet believe the actions of CPS is a precursor to Obama taking our guns, argue with rational people who work in the field and deal with the situations in question daily. That's what makes stupidtaco so special.