# I don't like this kind of thing! \[Baby Snatch Victim Loses Kids to State Custody\] **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 4, 2009, 8:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533 "2009-10-04T08:24:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/21 "2009-10-04T19:33:49Z")
And I’m going to pipe up to say that whether CPS can act without judicial order, and if so when, is almost certainly a state-by-state policy deciision, with what **treis** said apparently being the common (but hardly universal) standard. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/22 "2009-10-04T19:56:05Z")
> [@treis](#): > > This is wrong. If CPS thinks there is an immediate danger to the kids they can take them without a court order. It is true that they will have to go in front of a judge pretty quickly to justify their actions. This is wrong. If there is an emergent situation, CPS will call the police and the police will do the removal. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/23 "2009-10-04T19:59:17Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > The norm is to requrie a warrant, but if the child is at substantial risk, then a warrant is not required, but a warrantless apprehension must later be approved by a judge. Laws differ by jurisdiction, so never say never, but here in Ontario we have [this](http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90c11_e.htm#s40s7): > > Dio, would you please provide a solid cite for your statement? Married to a social worker. If it’s not an emergency, they have to get a court order. If it’s an emergency, they call the cops. They never just grab the kids themselves. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/24 "2009-10-04T20:01:36Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > This is wrong. If there is an emergent situation, CPS will call the police and the police will do the removal. Look you just don’t know what you are talking about: > [@](#): > > CPS is allowed by law to remove children for abuse and neglect or for being at risk of abuse or neglect only after a court orders it or when there is no time consistent with the health and safety of the child to obtain a court order and the person taking possession of the child has sufficient knowledge or reason to believe: > > ``` > * there is an immediate danger to the physical health or safety of the child; > * the child has been the victim of sexual abuse; > * the person with possession of the child is currently using a controlled substance and the use constitutes an immediate danger to the physical health or safety of the child; or > * the person with possession of the child has permitted the child to remain on premises used for the manufacture of methamphetamines. > > ``` > > If your child is removed from your care without a court order, the court will schedule a hearing for the next working day. [From Texas](http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/child_protection/About_Child_Protective_Services/parentguide.asp#willCPStake) CPS are the ones that have the legal power to remove children, not the police. While it may be true that the police will accompany CPS workers for safety reasons, the police aren’t the ones doing the removal. There is no requirement for CPS to get the police involved. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/25 "2009-10-04T20:02:31Z")
They always call the police. You don’t know what you’re talking about. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/26 "2009-10-04T20:04:14Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > They always call the police. You don’t know what you’re talking about. Show me the legal requirement for police involvement. Not what your wife says, the actual law or statement from CPS. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/27 "2009-10-04T20:07:36Z")
By the way, if it’s an emergency, it’s an emergency that everyone would agree was an emergency, and it’s very temporary (and the physical removal is done by the cops). What I’m fighting here is the popular image of CPS workers as evil child stealers who go around snatching kids at the drop of a hat because they see a parent smoking a cigarette or swatting a kid on the butt. The hostility expressed towards CPS in the OP is misplaced and ignorant. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/28 "2009-10-04T20:11:35Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Show me the legal requirement for police involvement. Not what your wife says, the actual law or statement from CPS. Show me an example of CPS physically removing a child without the participation of the police. They are mandated reporters. If they encounter an emergent situation, they are mandated by law to call the police. I can’t be assed to find every individual statute, but if you know anything at all about this stuff, then you should already know what a mandated reporter is. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/29 "2009-10-04T20:35:05Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Show me an example of CPS physically removing a child without the participation of the police. > > They are mandated reporters. If they encounter an emergent situation, they are mandated by law to call the police. I can’t be assed to find every individual statute, but if you know anything at all about this stuff, then you should already know what a mandated reporter is. I’ve provided a cite showing that CPS has the power to seize children, which is sufficient to prove my point. You, on the other hand, have refused to provide anything to substantiate the contention that they don’t have this power. Now you ask me to prove a negative, which is essentially impossible to do. I’m not going to play this game any longer. You’re contention is wrong and you don’t know what you’re talking about. Either pony up a cite that supports your case or STFU. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/30 "2009-10-04T20:45:28Z")
I’m not asking you to prove a negative. I’m asking you to show me a single example of CPS workers unilaterally seizing children from a household without either a court order or the participation of the police. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/31 "2009-10-04T20:52:39Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The hostility expressed towards CPS in the OP is misplaced and ignorant. What hostility toward CPS in the OP? I clearly acknowledged that they may have had good reasons for taking the kids. My purpose, as should be obvious, was to question the ever-increasing practice of both the police and CPS agencies around the country to withhold information about what they’re doing and excusing it by citing vague “privacy concerns.” In the case of the police, it’s gotten to the point that all we are often told is something along the line of “Five people dead in Indiana trailer park.” The police refuse to disclose who died, their ages, family relationships, what they think happened, etc., even when there is nothing to be accomplished by doing so. Surely the murderer, if he hasn’t been captured, is aware of the ages and relationships of his victims, so why is such recalcitrance on the part of law officials necessary? I’m aware of the need to contact family first so that they don’t first hear about it on the news, but the police will keep up this kind of secrecy for days, even when the murderer has been arrested or found dead at the scene. And in the case of CPS, yes, they do have an image of overzealousness (or in other cases of not being zealous enough) and swooping in and taking kids under circumstances where most people would not agree that it was necessary. (I happen to think that it is very traumatic for a kid to be taken away from the only parents and home he or she has ever known and stuck with strangers in a completely foreign environment, especially when they don’t know how long it will last or if the separation is permanent.) So this hiding behind privacy concerns is where my objection lies, not in the fact that CPS took the kids. When the police and CPS agencies do this kind of thing and refuse to divulge details, it smacks to me of two things: One, that the agencies in question simply don’t want to have their judgement and actions questioned; and two, that it makes their job easier when they don’t have to deal with the press, so they claim privacy concerns to wall themselves off from the press and not have to deal with it. Neither of these are good reasons in my opinion, and it is the fact that I’ve seen information withheld so many times when there is no apparent good reason for it, and where the reasons for it are not disclosed even when the details of the actual incident finally are, that make me suspicious and feel that the authorities are merely using concerns over privacy to stonewall the press and make their jobs easier…which of course sets up a situation that eventually becomes a danger to our rights. Law enforcement and CPS agencies should not be allowed to operate in secrecy. There are instances where legitimate concerns, like those mentioned upthread where unwarranted attention or publicity would be visited upon the victims, or where it would put them in danger, justify the authorities taking such a stance. Still, there have been far too many instances over the past few years where there appears to be no understandable reason for witholding these kinds of information and where it appears to be done solely for the convenience and protection of the police and CPS agencies involved, and it’s becoming more and more common all the time. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/32 "2009-10-04T20:54:50Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I’m not asking you to prove a negative. I’m asking you to show me a single example of CPS workers unilaterally seizing children from a household without either a court order or the participation of the police. Like I said, pony up a cite or STFU. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/33 "2009-10-04T21:04:27Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > And in the case of CPS, yes, they do have an image of overzealousness (or in other cases of not being zealous enough) and swooping in and taking kids under circumstances where most people would not agree that it was necessary. (I happen to think that it is very traumatic for a kid to be taken away from the only parents and home he or she has ever known and stuck with strangers in a completely foreign environment, especially when they don’t know how long it will last or if the separation is permanent.) And this image is completely unsupported by reality. CPS does not have the authority to “swoop in and take kids.” It doesn’t happen. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/34 "2009-10-04T21:06:06Z")
> [@treis](#): > > Like I said, pony up a cite or STFU. A cite for what? That CPS has to call the cops if they encounter an emergency? Are you serious? Let’s see an example of CPS taking kids without a court oder and without the cops. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/35 "2009-10-04T21:14:29Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > A cite for what? That CPS has to call the cops if they encounter an emergency? Are you serious? If it is so obvious then you shouldn’t have a problem coming up with a cite. Any rule, regulation, or law that requires that CPS call the police before seizing a child on an emergency basis. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/36 "2009-10-04T21:18:26Z")
I can’t be assed. ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/37 "2009-10-04T22:13:27Z")
In a local article, the alleged perp cellphoned _somebody_ after stabbing the mom. Somebody else is involved, & those kids are quite possibly in a great deal of physical danger. If the mom refused to take precautions, this may have been done to protect the kids from extraordinary risk. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/38 "2009-10-04T22:24:13Z")
This from the article cited in the OP: Joel Siskovic, an FBI special agent in the Memphis division, said he could not say why the children were put into state custody. “As of now, there’s no indication that there’s an ongoing threat to the family,” he said. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/39 "2009-10-04T22:36:03Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > I think this is a very troubling development in a country that is supposed to be free of unreasonable search and seizure and committed to due process and the public’s right to know. It seems that our freedoms and our protection from overzealous police and child care services are being eroded by the day. What say you? I say that a person’s and his/her minor children’s right to privacy should trump the “right to know” of a bunch of nosy drama queens. And, honestly, it surprises me that someone would think otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![tumbleddown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@tumbleddown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tumbleddown)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533/40 "2009-10-04T22:43:24Z")
> [@Aspidistra](#): > > If it turns out she’s a victim of official heavy-handedness, she can shout about it to the rooftops. If not … why exactly do we need to know again? She likely cannot, not without facing contempt of court charges. And since the judge will be the ultimate decider of whether or not her children will be returned, getting on the judge’s bad side by violating the gag rule that’s imposed in these cases will not be in her best interests or conducive toward the reunion of her family. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-like-this-kind-of-thing-baby-snatch-victim-loses-kids-to-state-custody/512533.md?page=3)