FLDS children, fostering, and SAH/WOH

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-22-2005
FLDS children, fostering, and SAH/WOH
89
Fri, 04-18-2008 - 10:53pm

It has been ruled that the state will retain custody of the FLDS children and that they will begin placement in foster homes. How do you feel about (among the many things to consider) the work status of potential foster parents? If both parents WOH, then the children will be in either daycare or school for part of the day. I don't think that these children are emotionally equipped to deal with that environment. If one parent can SAH however, I think a smoother transition could be made from the seclusion of the ranch to the introduction of the outside world through homeschooling. Can you imagine sending an 11-year-old FLDS girl into a public school classroom? She'd be eaten alive!

Thoughts?

Renaissance Siggy







Photobucket




Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-05-2007
Tue, 04-22-2008 - 5:39pm
DNA samples.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-14-2006
Tue, 04-22-2008 - 6:09pm

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-05-2007
Tue, 04-22-2008 - 8:34pm
Not exactly what is going on in this case. In your second and third examples, a definite crime has been committed. There is no evidence that a crime has been committed against all of these 400+ children. In your third example, the child is dead. I'm sure you're aware that the civil rights of a dead person cannot be violated. Paternity tests rarely happen without permission of one of the parents. And honestly, I cannot even think of a case of kidnapping where DNA testing without parental permission would even be necessary. Do you all really believe that civil rights only belong to those you agree with?


Edited 4/22/2008 8:38 pm ET by campbelllover
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-14-2006
Tue, 04-22-2008 - 10:25pm

"Do you all really believe that civil rights only belong to those you agree with? "


Where any of my posts did I say or imply that?


I just do not see this as a ciivil rights issue.


The only rights that I think that matter here are the rights of the children to be protected.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-23-2007
Tue, 04-22-2008 - 10:50pm
Yes.

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-23-2007
Tue, 04-22-2008 - 10:53pm

<<There is no evidence that a crime has been committed against all of these 400+ children.>>


You are right.

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-05-2007
Wed, 04-23-2008 - 12:31am

>>Apparently this is not an uncommon occurance, and this is considered normal within this cult.<<

Really? Because everything I have read has indicated that it was pretty *uncommon* within this community. On top of that, the legal age of marriage in Texas was only recently changed from 14 to 16. Everything I have read has indicated that this "problem" consists of 3 or 4 15 year olds. Hardly makes it right to take *babies* from their 30 year old mothers and stick em in a stadium, but hey, maybe I'm weird.

>> Those children do not deserve that life.<<

Ahh. So condemning the whole community for the actions of a few.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-05-2007
Wed, 04-23-2008 - 12:40am

>>Where any of my posts did I say or imply that?<<

When you stated that it's A-OK to take DNA from children who were taken away from their parents with no legal reason.

>>The only rights that I think that matter here are the rights of the children to be protected. In order to do that they first have to have all of the facts. One of the most important facts is who is the parent of each and every child. DNA is the only way of finding that out. <<

Protected *from what*? No one here has shown that there was anything universally ILLEGAL that every one of those children needed to be protected from. Why is the government owed the knowledge of the parentage of every single one of those children? I'm sorry, but as much as you or I may not like it, it's just not right. I don't want to live in a world where the government is allowed to do whatever it pleases when popular opinion agrees with it.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-05-2007
Wed, 04-23-2008 - 12:42am
Knowledge of a crime does not make one an accessory, sorry. This is really amounting to feelings, not legality. No matter how much anyone *doesn't like it* it's not freaking legal.
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-15-2006
Wed, 04-23-2008 - 9:09am

there's enough probable cause for authorities to have taken the action they did.

 

Pages