Separating immigrants from their children is child abuse.

[Banquet_Bear]

@Bricker

But to my mind, if the claim under discussion is that “no parent” is ever seen to be jailed for shoplifting, then it seems that even 1-3 cases per week, and perhaps one per month getting a jail sentence, is enough to suggest that maybe NO CASES in 23 YEARS is a bit exaggerated.

…you are arguing with an anecdote. Its an argument from incredulity. A fallacy. I think its perfectly possible for a social worker to not see any cases in 23 years. Why is that unreasonable?

Naturally, not all my cases involved parents. But equally naturally, not all of them involved childless people either. I can’t claim to have any kind of perfect recollection on this point, but a best-guess, highly rough estimate? One-fifth of my shoplifters were parents.

So just ball-parking from your figures here: if one-fifth of your shoplifters were parents, and if there were 1-3 shoplifting cases a week, that would be about a parent every couple-of-weeks to a month, would you say? So can you quantify “fairly often” now? When you said

“resulted in jail (pre-trial detention but unable to make bail) and/or jail (sentence following conviction) fairly often”

would “fairly often” be 50% of the time, or 80% of the time, or 20% of the time?

Because at the moment (based on the numbers you have supplied) we are looking at a fraction of between 12 and 24 cases a year that fit the criteria, and in my, most humblest of opinions, would struggle to characterize that as “fairly often.” And based on your numbers I could easily imagine a small town where a case-worker wouldn’t see anyone that fit that criteria at all.

And do you think that the incarceration rate of first time offenders being jailed is comparable to the detention rate happening at the borders right now? Because that really is the only thing that matters, because this is why shoplifting was introduced into this thread.

The claim was that what is happening at the borders is comparable to what happens to parents when they are arrested for shoplifting. Based on your experiences is that remotely a fair comparison? Because that’s all we really need to know. That was the entire point of Ellecram’s anecdote. Lets pretend it was exaggerated for a minute. Lets say they saw two cases a year that resulted in a few weeks in jail. Does that materially change the point?

That’s a fair objection, but . . . 23 YEARS?? Not one case in 23 years??

Seriously: what do you want me to say that I haven’t already said?

Tell you what: I aver that for every state in the United States, I can cite at least one case of a parent jailed for shoplifting in the past 23 years. Pick a state. I’ll do the research.

What part of “lets stop playing games” did you really not understand?

Ellecram took the time to share an anecdote of their time in social work. You’ve shared an anecdote that put Ellecram’s observations in perspective. It is entirely possible that what Ellecram said was accurate for the place that they live, and for what you have said to be accurate as well, and that your anecdote and your experiences are perhaps more relevant to the topic at hand.

If you really want to “win this” then don’t wait for me to “pick a state.” I have no interest in playing games with you. Just provide the data already. But I don’t think that “picking a state” would really matter anyway, because Ellecram’s personal experiences may well have been in a small town or city, so State data really wouldn’t necessarily contradict the personal observations and perception.

But you don’t need to “win this.” There is nothing to win. This is an extraordinarily hard subject to understand, especially when we are on the other side of the world. We honest-to-goodness need people like you to fight-this-fight. But you gotta let stuff like this go. Just lay out the facts.

[Broomstick]

@Ellecram

I have worked in child welfare for 23 years and have never seen a parent placed in jail for shoplifting.

@Bricker

So in your 23 years of experience, you’ve seen numerous shoplifters jailed, but they were all childless?

Or you could read that as shoplifters are not routinely imprisoned until trial, but trust you to put the worst possible spin on Ellecram’s statement.

[Broomstick]

@Bricker

I oppose it. I think it’s cruel and unnecessary.

So what are YOU doing to stop it?

@Bricker

I don’t see my question as a gotcha word game. “I have worked in child welfare for 23 years and have never seen a parent placed in jail for shoplifting,” seems like an improbable factual claim to me, to the extent it suggests that parents are never, or rarely, jailed for shoplifting… Does it ring true to you?

Yep, because, based on where I work in a big box store, most shop lifters don’t get caught for some time, so MOST incidents never get as far as a social worker or lawyer.

Here’s the thing: There’s a whole bunch of shoplifting.
Some portion of those incidents result in the offender being caught
Some portion of those (usually kids) are let off with a warning to them or their parents or both.
Some portion make restitution to the store on their own and the store drops the matter because taking legal action is expensive and a hassle.
Some portion are charged with misdemeanors and may not require a public defender and mention the problem to their social worker, who then gets the perception that shop lifters rarely go to jail (parents or not).
A public defender sees only those cases serious enough that the store presses charges and a lawyer needs to get involved.

So, in essence, both your statements and Ellecram’s can be true at the same time because you’re seeing different parts of the whole.

@Bricker

Quite a few people who went to jail were parents.

And then you have people like Jesse Jackson, Jr. and his wife, both convincted of felonies, who were allowed to serve time in an alternate manner - first one went to jail, then the other - so the kids could have one parent at home while the other was in jail.

Yes, parents and children are often separated on conviction but it’s not mandated and clearly it is possible to make arrangements… IF the parents are US citizens (and the child of a prominent celebrity)… but if you’re not a US citizen screw you, let’s treat you and yours like stray dogs.

@Bricker

But since “first offense,” was not part of Ellecram’s observation, I had to disagree.

Wow, anyone else flashing on a TV or movie lawyer standing up and saying “Your honor, I protest!” as a dramatic point? Yeah, I know, lawyer do say things like that but** Bricker,** this isn’t a trial or a court of law, it’s a message board and nitpicking Ellecram’s post like that just makes you look petty. At best.

@Czarcasm

“Yeah, I guess taking babies from mothers is bad. Now let’s get back to what I want to talk about-the minute legal details about shoplifting penalties…”
Holy Deflection, Batman!

^ This.

@Warm_blood

To everyone rationalising this grotesque policy: the practice of unduly separating parents from their children has been a cornerstone of slavery, residential schooling and concentration camps. So when you’re making excuses for the abhorrent decision-making of this morally bankrupt administration, know which side of history you’re placing yourself on.

Oh, it’s not just separating parents… boys and girls are housed completely separately, so they’re splitting up siblings, too. They aren’t just splitting families, they’re shattering them.

@Bricker

They lose some rights. They don’t lose all rights. They lose the right to live with their children.

Unless your daddy or father-in-law is Jess Jackson - which just highlights how there’s a chasm between those with fame/privilege and the rest of us.

[bobot]

As if this action by my government wasn’t sickening enough, I wonder how careless those administrating this practice are being. How many of these kids will be mis- or non- identified and will not be reunited with their parents at all?

[RTFirefly]

@Bricker

In my experience as a public defender, shoplifting was an extremely common charge, and resulted in jail (pre-trial detention but unable to make bail) and/or jail (sentence following conviction) fairly often when prior convictions were extant. In Virginia the shoplifting of goods valued at over $200 was a felony, although we’ve just this past year upped it to $500.

For first offenders, jail would be extremely unlikely.

Quite a few people who went to jail were parents.

As I said to UltraVires yesterday, “So basically, you are using one immoral procedure to justify another.”

He was using our widespread practice of imprisoning people due to poverty to justify this abomination. You’ve chosen to use Virginia’s appallingly low bar for felonious conduct to defend it.

I repeat what I said to UV: Excuse my language, but that reasoning is pretty fucked.

[RTFirefly]

@Bricker

I don’t see my question as a gotcha word game. “I have worked in child welfare for 23 years and have never seen a parent placed in jail for shoplifting,” seems like an improbable factual claim to me, to the extent it suggests that parents are never, or rarely, jailed for shoplifting… Does it ring true to you?

It’s possible that Ellecram doesn’t work in Virginia. She may work in a state where you have to shoplift something expensive to be charged with a felony.

You are an attorney. You know that crimes like shoplifting are covered by state, not Federal, law. You know that such laws and the manner in which they are enforced can vary a great deal from state to state.

You know all this. Yet here you are, pretending that if her experience of what happens to shoplifters doesn’t jibe with yours, it doesn’t pass the smell test.

[Delicious]

@Czarcasm

AP reveals that there are three shelters in Southern Texas…for babies and toddlers.
Who here has the unmitigated gall to defend this?

Let it never be said that my gall was mitigated!

[ol]
[li]There may be a finite amount of freedom in the world, by imprisoning babies, Trump is saving the freedom for real Americans.[/li]
[li]This may cause the spontaneous emergence of a real-life superhero to counterbalance this cartoonish supervillainy, then once Trump is deposed, there’s a free superhero, net gain.[/li]
[li]Packing similar sized humans together makes for more efficient use of space?[/li]
[li]Maybe all the gangs/cartels that these people are fleeing from will see, realise that they don’t want to be responsible for this kind of thing and all decide to get along.[/li][/ol]

[Czarcasm]

@Bricker

Trump is a venal, petty leader, and nothing so far particularly surprises me.

But if I wanted to talk about it, and not debate points in disagreement between the participants, that sounds like MPSIMS or BBQ.

Here in GD I see little point in assuring each other just how much we agree with each other.

(bolding mine)I checked.
Apparently you don’t want to talk about it, period.

So be it.

[doreen]

@Bricker

I oppose it. I think it’s cruel and unnecessary.

I don’t see my question as a gotcha word game. “I have worked in child welfare for 23 years and have never seen a parent placed in jail for shoplifting,” seems like an improbable factual claim to me, to the extent it suggests that parents are never, or rarely, jailed for shoplifting… Does it ring true to you?

It doesn’t suggest that actually, although you it’s possible you need some specialized knowledge of how law enforcement/CPS works in the jurisdiction in order to know that. In order for **Ellecram *to have seen a parent placed in jail for shoplifting , CPS would have had to have been called in. And in my jurisdiction, ( where I have worked in both CPS and a law enforcement agency) CPS would only be called in under certain circumstances, primarily where the child was present at the time of arrest and the other parent wasn’t available. So if I arrest someone today, and he or she does not have any children with them , no call to CPS. If he or she does have the child with them , and the other parent can come get the child - no call to CPS. Because the mere fact that a parent was arrested and jailed would not in itself be sufficient reason for a report to CPS in my jurisdiction.

• If the arrestee claimed that his/her children were home alone and they in fact were found at home alone, CPS would be called, but I have literally never seen that in 30 years. Which doesn’t mean it never happened, but does suggest it’s not terribly common. I’ve heard the claim , but it was never true- it was just a ploy to attempt to avoid arrest.

[septimus]

@Bricker

I see.
… but a best-guess, highly rough estimate? One-fifth of my shoplifters were parents.

How many of the shoplifting cases were father-mother teams in which a child was immediately deprived of TWO parents?

When a family attempts to report as refugees at the border but instead all adults are arrested and the children separated from them, how many of the child’s parents are then available to stay with the child?

@Bricker

Trump is a venal, petty leader, and nothing so far particularly surprises me.

But Clinton is venal and petty also, no? UIAM you almost voted for Trump, even needing a new ballot after you’d checked his name. IIRC your biggest concern with Trump was the risk of nuclear war. Yet now he has returned from Singapore with “Peace for our time.” He has also eliminated oppressive taxes and regulations, placed a constructionist on the Supreme Court, is strengthening our borders so we can be a country again, and is dismantling Obama’s socialist legacy. With the threat of nuclear war now eliminated by his famous negotiation skills, do you now regret your earlier support for Clinton?

[chappachula]

@doreen

• If the arrestee claimed that his/her children were home alone and they in fact were found at home alone, CPS would be called, but** I have literally never seen that in 30 years.** I’ve heard the claim , but it was never true- it was just a ploy to attempt to avoid arrest.

[Off topic, and I I dont want to hijack the thread, but could I get a quick reply, please?]
Why is this so rare?
Many, many children these days live with only one parent. If a person gets arrested before 2:00 pm, (and if he or she has children) then it seems very,very likely that there could be a 7 year old child in school waiting to be picked up. Or if the arrest is after 3:00 pm, it seems very,very likely that there could be a 12 year old child at home alone. Doesn’t CPS need to be involved?
[/hijack]

[UltraVires]

@RTFirefly

As I said to UltraVires yesterday, “So basically, you are using one immoral procedure to justify another.”

He was using our widespread practice of imprisoning people due to poverty to justify this abomination. You’ve chosen to use Virginia’s appallingly low bar for felonious conduct to defend it.

I repeat what I said to UV: Excuse my language, but that reasoning is pretty fucked.

Which is it? I’m hearing that this policy is outrageous because parents are NOT separated from their children based on criminal behavior.

When I and now Bricker illustrate that it is very common, you respond with “two wrongs don’t make a right” .

So what is the issue that we are fighting? Is it:

1. This policy is terrible because nobody else has to endure it! or
2. We need a global solution so that neither these parents nor any other are jailed and/or separated from their children prior to trial and conviction
   ?

[Richard_Parker]

There is no contradiction. Both of the following are true:

(1) Our criminal justice system too often separates adults from their children for petty crimes and that is a problem;

(2) It is a much bigger problem to remove parents from children when (a) the administration is coercing people into committing the petty crime by closing ports of entry to them; (b) the children are separated in totally unfamiliar circumstances after having made a long and perilous journey from danger; © the separation is occurring in a system not at all prepared for the scale of it, leading to kids not getting reunited, unable to contact parents, and worse; and (d) the scale of it has been intentionally ramped up in order to use the cruelty to deter others.

[El_Kabong]

@Czarcasm

AP reveals that there are three shelters in Southern Texas…for babies and toddlers.
Who here has the unmitigated gall to defend this?

No one should take what I’m about say as condoning this reprehensible practice, in any way, shape or form, but at least they’re not just leaving the kids by the side of the road.

[doreen]

@chappachula

[Off topic, and I I dont want to hijack the thread, but could I get a quick reply, please?]
Why is this so rare?
Many, many children these days live with only one parent. If a person gets arrested before 2:00 pm, (and if he or she has children) then it seems very,very likely that there could be a 7 year old child in school waiting to be picked up. Or if the arrest is after 3:00 pm, it seems very,very likely that there could be a 12 year old child at home alone. Doesn’t CPS need to be involved?
[/hijack]

CPS doesn’t need to be involved unless there are children home alone under circumstances where leaving them home alone would be a reason to call CPS even if there wasn’t an arrest, like leaving a 2 year old home alone for any length of time. For the 7 year old who needs to be picked up from school, or the 12 year old who is capable of being home alone after school for a couple of hours , CPS doesn’t need to be involved if the parent who is arrested can make arrangements for the other parent or a grandparent etc to pick them up/care for them. In my experience (which is of course not universal) , the arrestee was permitted to and able to make such arrangements- because nobody wants CPS involved unless it’s absolutely necessary.

[John_Mace]

@UltraVires

Which is it? I’m hearing that this policy is outrageous because parents are NOT separated from their children based on criminal behavior.

When I and now Bricker illustrate that it is very common, you respond with “two wrongs don’t make a right” .

So what is the issue that we are fighting? Is it:

1. This policy is terrible because nobody else has to endure it! or
2. We need a global solution so that neither these parents nor any other are jailed and/or separated from their children prior to trial and conviction
   ?

I think a big issue that you are missing is that the current administration is doing this not to protect the children but to punish the parents. There are always going to be times when children need to be taken from their parents in order to protect the children. But we should not set up a system where we do that in order to punish the parents because it ends up punishing the children more.

[RitterSport]

@John_Mace

I think a big issue that you are missing is that the current administration is doing this not to protect the children but to punish the parents. There are always going to be times when children need to be taken from their parents in order to protect the children. But we should not set up a system where we do that in order to punish the parents because it ends up punishing the children more.

Also, as hostages to get wall funding as ransom. Let’s not forget that angle as well, as pretty much stated by the administration.

I guess Mexico is paying for the wall in tears and trauma for some of the kids being detained (I don’t know what percentage of the children in camps is Mexican vs. Central American vs. Other). Their paying in the sense of “Oh, you’ll pay for this! Believe me, I’ll make you pay!”, and then you rip apart some families.

[elucidator]

@bobot

As if this action by my government wasn’t sickening enough, I wonder how careless those administrating this practice are being. How many of these kids will be mis- or non- identified and will not be reunited with their parents at all?

Identification numbers for each individual. Of course, they must be more or less permanent, so perhaps a tattoo on the forearm where it can easily be seen. Bonus: this method has been “field tested” and proven.

[RTFirefly]

@UltraVires

Which is it? I’m hearing that this policy is outrageous because parents are NOT separated from their children based on criminal behavior.

When I and now Bricker illustrate that it is very common, you respond with “two wrongs don’t make a right” .

If you want to rebut my statements, go ahead. If you’re going to throw my posts into a blender with others’ posts and expect me to explain and defend what you pour out of the blender, forget it. That’s on you.

[UltraVires]

@John_Mace

I think a big issue that you are missing is that the current administration is doing this not to protect the children but to punish the parents. There are always going to be times when children need to be taken from their parents in order to protect the children. But we should not set up a system where we do that in order to punish the parents because it ends up punishing the children more.

Children are “punished” in every instance where a parent engages in criminal activity in their presence. After a domestic battery incident, children are further traumatized by having to see one or both parents placed into handcuffs and taken away.

People in the system use that as a “deterrent” all of the time. We tell them to remember the look on the child’s face when you think about smacking your girlfriend again.

I feel terrible for these children, but it is not our fault that they are in the situation that they are in. Yes, we could choose not to prosecute their parents, but they are undoubtedly committing crimes. We might as well say that we shouldn’t prosecute domestic battery because the children will have to see their parents handcuffed.