Federal judge should hear Arlington CPS case
This is the first (I can recall) ever hearing of this case, yet it so (if the article is accurate) so outrageous it’s almost unbelievable.
What I didn’t notice in the article was how did the baby come to the attention of CPS in the first place?
Ok, there MUST be something missing there. Because it just cannot be this outrageous.
Whenever I see a story like this, being covered by only one media outlet with a focus which doesn’t even begin to approach objectivity, I assume other journalists could not independently verify the claims being made in the original reporting.
Some more info can be found in the links here:
Given reports you hear all the time about CPS being understaffed and children being left in situations where there is actual, proveable abuse happening, it seems a little fishy that somehow a loss of 10oz of birth weight is cause for the child to be completely removed AND put up for adoption. Children have been sent back to homes where physical and/or sexual abuse has occurred either to them or other children with them, and this baby gets adopted out for normal post-partum weight loss?
I call shenanigans.
I agree with you. There has to be more to the story.
The thing that gets me, too, is that the incident happened in 2005. That baby is 6 yrs old now. The fact that the first article doesn’t mention the day or even year the incident happened seem suspicious to me.
Here is a video of the mother
Here is the final court decision to remove the child in 2007. It lays out the charges against the mother. The original article seems to imply these were all trumped out or ultimately disproved, so no idea as to the validity.
The gist is that the CPS (and the court) claim the mother has some flavor of autism called PDD NOS and is unable to respond to the needs of the child.
Reads to me in the report like a fairly typical case of someone not being able to recognise they’re not really in a position to safely parent their child. Its not news because it happens all the time.
The report outlines numerous attempts to try and make return work, and they all failed. Absent actual evidence of misconduct, I cant see the story here. Their own website shown in the video doesnt do much to help their case in my opinion.
Otara
I read the report, and I don’t understand why the judge put all the unimportant stuff first, acting like they were of supreme importance. The problem is keeping the baby in a crate with no air holes, and thinking that’s acceptable. The problem is in not bathing or changing the kids’ clothes. The problem is not recognizing dangerous situations, even after being taught.
The father also has an anger and drinking problem and has paranoid delusions. The grandmother is 80 and has ministrokes quite often, and has no plans in effect to deal with this if it happens while taking care of the child.
Everything else in the report is of secondary importance, yet is often stated as if it is of primary importance. Okay, perhaps you can also throw in the mother freezing when she gets scared, but that’s not even a PDD-NOS issue, really.
Having read the judgement, I think there is no case to answer. CPS is absolutely correct: they’re not fit to be parents. Their campaign is exaggeration and misrepresentation.
The public rightfully yells and screams when terrible cases of neglect are ‘allowed’ to happen; let’s hope that they don’t yell and scream when a potentially terrible case of neglect is clearly prevented.
Its more where the case is up to. The issue at this point is whether reunification attempts should be continued, rather than whether abuse/neglect has occurred in the past, which is basically taken as a given at that point. Issues like neglect alone are often not considered to be grounds for losing parental rights, unless they also demonstrate an inability to address the concerns identified.
So things like compliance, reported progress with services and likely effects on the child if reunification is attempted are the main focus.
Otara
CPS was right to save the child from that freakshow. (Sorry about her condition, though)
Speaking of freakshows, the Examiner (linked in OP) is owned by Philip Anschutz, a real piece of work, himself. Makes John Birch look like Dennis Kucinich. Oh, well, at least he’s not a Moonie; they own the Washington Times.
Reading that judgment, I can only be very relieved that the child was removed from those parents so quickly and has been raised in a good foster home.
For three years I worked for a children’s advocacy group, and we regularly got phone calls from people complaining that “Family Services stole my child.” (We told them all to call a lawyer.)
One thing I learned very quickly is that no parent in history has ever considered themselves neglectful, abusive or even just bad.
Notice that the writer says “After doing everything social workers and the Arlington Domestic and Juvenile Relations Court, or DJR, demanded of them – including home inspections, supervised visitation, and psychological testing” and that the family fought all the way to the state Supreme Court. Yet the writer insists that parental rights were terminated “without due process.” What kind of process would constitute “due process?”
I’m thinking they are talking about wanting an actual full jury trial.
Can anyone sum up what actually happened here? What was wrong with the mother? Why was she unfit? What started all this?
Read post #12 by BigT, which seems to sum it up nicely.