Ignoring ‘best interest of the child’ - maybe we are wrong?
April 7th, 2007 by jmurtari
Good People & People of Faith,
Sometimes an experience makes you re-think your beliefs. I believed
our goal, briefly:
Good, average, and poor are all equal & fit parents.
When I hear a case, I try to apply that and see if I can accept the
result. So far, I’ve always felt confident we were on the right
track, we had a Civil Right that was worth sacrificing for….
Well, I heard one a few days ago that made me think. It should make us
all think. Maybe we are not succeeding because we are just plain
wrong? Sacrificing for a goal that just isn’t right?
Sometimes the facts are vague, a lot of ‘he said’ and ’she said’ –
but I’ve got this one on a good record. Pardon the disjointed list,
but here are the UN-CONTROVERTED FACTS:
1. Aging man marries foreign woman 24 years his junior in an arranged
marriage and brings her to the United States. She has no family here.
She doesn’t speak English.
2. The man, an earlier immigrant, never completed any schooling. The
woman only elementary training in her home country.
3. They live in a small rural town. The man is a manual laborer. They
do not drive a car, no phone, no bathtub or shower.
4. The woman conceives at the age of 38 and doesn’t know she is
pregnant. Gets no prenatal care, miscarriages. Becomes pregnant from
the man again and the child dies in delivery.
5. At the age of 40, becomes pregnant again! Only through a C-Section
is the child delivered. They are kept in the hospital for over a week
before being sent home. Neighbors report the child is ‘occasionally’
bathed in the kitchen sink.
6. Father is proud, does not want any ’social services’ help.
7. The child is ‘hyperactive’. The mother, on advice of her husband’s
sister, tried tying the toddler to a table with a rope to keep him
from roaming.
8. The child starts elementary school and neither parent ever makes an
attempt to talk to a teacher or come to a school event. Teachers
report he has clean clothes, but smells bad due to limited/no bathing.
9. Discipline is still a problem at home. The mother hits the child
almost weekly with a razor strap until he cries. However; there are
no long-term marks, never a doctor visit required.
10. The child does not recall his father every saying, “I love you.”
11. With no car, the child, at about age 7, is given money and rides
his bicycle into town for quick grocery trips. He is given money to
buy his father cigars and a local merchant supplies them.
12. The father goes to a local bar almost every Sunday and walks
home drunk.
13. On other weekend outings they are driven by the child’s Uncle to
another relatives homes where all the men play cards and get drunk.
It is about an 8 mile drive, and when coming home the child, mother &
father, drive back with the Uncle who is clearly DWI — but has never
yet been caught by police.
DO I NEED TO GO ON HERE? HAVE YOU HAD ENOUGH?
SHOULDN’T WE STEP IN AND HELP THIS POOR
SEVEN YEAR OLD KID?
I went back to the goal we have ‘promoted’ for reform:
http://www.AKidsRight.Org/approach.htm
That you and your spouse are both considered Fit & Equal parents
(equal in terms of both physical and legal custody). If anyone (a
spouse, relative, social services) wishes to challenge that, you have:
1) The right to counsel.
2) The right to be presumed a fit parent, innocent, and deserving of
an equal relationship with your kids.
3) The right to protection of a jury. The “state” needs to prove you
were a demonstrated serious and intentional threat to your child’s
safety.
—————————————————
I try to apply that here. A lot of stuff bothers me, the razor strap
and the DWI — but there is no ‘malintent’ here. No one is trying to
hurt the kid, just doing what they think is right….
I know we all hate ‘the best interest of the child’ — but what about
this poor kid. He’s got a mother who is 47 and a father at 71!
Shouldn’t we ‘force’ and get a Social Worker in there? Tell the
parents what to do — give them a plan and also support services.
Finally, if they don’t comply, shouldn’t we move this child before his
life is ruined? If the child does make it to be a teenager, when he
is 16, his dad will be 80! Not going to play a lot of baseball there!
Let’s be real. You know I want Congressional Hearings, if
Sen. Clinton were to review the facts above and then ask you — “Do
you want this committee to believe these are fit parents, that social
services does not have the right to intervene to help this child?”
What would you say?
Well, this case is actually a few years old. There was no intervention
by Social Services, no court order. Here is what happened to that
innocent 7 year old boy that has made me stop and think:
MORE UN-CONTROVERTED FACTS:
14. The child loves both his mother and father dearly. When asked,
both mother and father say they love their child very much. That he
means the world to them.
15. The child is President of his Senior Class in High School.
16. On his own initiative he completes an application for a
Congressional appointment to the USAF Academy — he is accepted.
17. He is an Honor (Cum Laude) Graduate of the Academy with a degree
in Astronautical Engineering (real ‘rocket science’). When the caps
are thrown in the sky during graduation, both his mother (age 62) and
his father (age 86) are in the stadium.
18. He completes Pilot Training, flies an Air Force jet at supersonic
speeds. Becomes a jet instructor pilot.
19. On his own initiative, with no pressure from his aging parents, he
abandons his AF career (and dreams of becoming a Space Shuttle Pilot)
to care for them.
The ‘rest of the story’
That former 7 year old boy, who smelled bad, is the one typing this
email message. My uncle was never caught DWI by the cops and I have
since improved my bathing habits! Please don’t be afraid to stand
next to me at our rally in May!
To those ‘uncontested’ facts, I can obviously add many more instances
of love & caring from friends and relatives, but especially both my
father, Domenico, and my mother, Caterina. You can guess, they are on
the home page of my family web site, http://www.murtari.org/
Closing
I would not hesitate to tell Sen. Clinton, or anyone else who asked,
‘NO, the government has no right to intervene in my families life.’
At times I count myself lucky that I was born 50 years ago. I don’t
think I would have survived with my family today. I worked off my
ADHD by running around fields — I would have probably been medicated,
psycho analyzed, and with great sadness, separated from my parents.
What a terrible tragedy.
Many of you wonder why I go to such risks for reform? I knew what
great love is from my parents, my dad never had to say it, because he
showed it EVERY DAY of my childhood. Many of you know the same
torture I have been through all these years since my contact with my
son, Domenic, was limited by a court deciding ‘best interest’. All
the love I wanted to show him — and was not able to.
It is only in ‘action’ and more specifically, NonViolent sacrifice,
that I have found peace of heart and converted that anger & hatred
toward the ’system’ into powerful actions based on love.
http://www.AKidsRight.Org/civil.htm
When more of us really BELIEVE, perhaps we will become ready to
sacrifice some of our future and comforts to guarantee our children
never experience this type of treatment.
Today is ‘Good Friday’ — little bit of an oxymoron? They nail a
living man to a cross and we call it a good day! Whether you believe
he was the Son of God or not, we all should admire Jesus of Nazareth.
He did more than just ’say’ the right things. It was a ‘Good’ day for
all of us when he had the courage to convert those great words into
loving self-sacrifice.
Happy Easter!
–
John Murtari
____________________________________________________________________
Coordinator AKidsRight.Org
jmurtari@AKidsRight.Org “A Kid’s Right to BOTH parents”
Toll Free (877) 635-1968(x-211) http://www.AKidsRight.Org/
2 Responses to “Ignoring ‘best interest of the child’ - maybe we are wrong?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The industry of the White Elephant seems to be built upon the chief Corner Stone of Ambiguity.
And again, “our” society (our society this time) appears to be using children as pawns for fostering “political ideology.”
In other words, “self-licensed enlightened nationalist” stepping forward as thee self-authorized ventriloquists for those having no ability to speak for themselves. Now, “best interest of the child” perhaps risks kidnapping the “better interest of Children.”
Some suggest that the great White Elephant which stands boldly before us today may represent nothing other than exactly what we have been paying for — i.e., socialist foot-soldiers.
Marxism in theory may be quite beautiful and pure; yet, it has more classically been regarded by more traditional western philosophy (at least by my present understanding) as being vulnerable to various limitations of humanity – e.g., an inability to address ignorance of our ignorance.
In the socialist realm, perhaps, members be seen ever migrating “to be as THEE ‘authoritarian’ comrade” within the Adult Babysitting Empire. Yes, everybody worth ultimate entrustment as self-qualified as THEE “adult babysitter wantonobe.”
So, by such, the simple dynamics of “little red hen” may be seen to play-out in quite comic reality. Likewise, we may similarly flash scenes from Doctor Zhivago. (Consider our recent book banning in Mass. relative to the “Hooker Boot Camp” business of “Air Force Amy, Inc.” in NV)
In deed, we may ultimately find (no duh) that a value of parental love is priceless.
Every individual needs recognition of worth. Further, we benefit greatly by feelings of being loved — regardless of known faults. Such surely may be seen as more truly lending of foundations from which our full potentials may ultimately be achieved. And certainly, no socialist, governor, congress, judge or like may be as capable of fulfilling such natural provisions.
So rather than invigorating hate under umbrella of Health and Welfare by which to feed and further enable insatiable appetites of socialist foot-soldiers addicted the Federal Dole; might we do better to respect, honor and value virtues relative to dignity of all children of an almighty and more especially relative to charishable attributes of loving parent-to-child relations?
Based on material of Robert N Bella of April 1962, as also recited in Robert N. Bella, “Beyond Belief: Essays on Religion in a Post-Traditionalist Word,” pp. 58-59, “[l]ooking at economic growth as our sole criterion, Japan appears as a rather unambiguous success story. But to Japanese intellectuals, who feel as acutely as [Max] Weber did the failure of modern Japan to carry through certain critical structural transformations, that are associated with modern society, the evaluation of Japan’s modern history is much more problematic. It would be convenient for social scientists and policymakers if economic growth were an automatic index to successful structural transformation. This does not, however, seem to be the case. Indeed, where economic growth is rapid and structural change is blocked or, as in the Communist cases, distorted, social instabilities result that under present world conditions are serious enough to have potentially fatal consequences for us all.”
From this, might one sense that perhaps America is being duped (as have other realms before us over the global stage) by various interests relative to the Federal Dole? Consider, for a moment, an era of the late 1800’s to early 1900’s within another region of the globe. Some allude to the apparent need for disintegration of basic familial relationships by which to chip-away at various “undermining” Capitalistic or Democratic doctrines.
“Up to the present the position of women has been such that it is called a position of slavery. Women are crushed by their domestic drudgery, and only socialism can relieve them from this drudgery, when we shall pass on from small household economy to social economy and to social tilling of the soil.” Lenin, “Speech at First All-Russian Congress of Women Workers”, November 19, 1918, as portrayed in “Women and Communism: Selections from the Writings of Marx - Engels - Lenin – Stalin,” Three Shillings and Sixpence – London Lawrence & Wishart 1950.
Lenin went on to express that “only then will women be fully free and emancipated . . . Up to the present not a single Republic has been capable of emancipating the women. The Soviet government will help them.”
Earlier in the speech he bragged about how “for nearly a year now our completely free divorce laws have been in force . . . In no other country have the toiling women achieved such complete freedom and equality.”
And even a bit earlier in the speech, he suggested that “the Soviet Government has completely abolished the source of bourgeois filth, repression and humiliation — divorce proceedings.” Id.
“Our law wiped out, for the first time in history all that made women inferior. . . . In our cities and factory settlements this law on the complete freedom of marriage is taking root, but in the countryside it very frequently exists only on paper. There, church marriage still predominates. This is due to the influence of the priests, and it is more difficult to fight this evil than the old laws.” Id.
—-
Some suggest, therefore, that perhaps again we are witness merely to another duping of Dignified Accountable Democracy. Again, perhaps women are being used, and again men and children being duped cumulatively with them in the process. In other words, all of us being used and duped to sustain merely the invigoration of ill-will by which to leverage various influences for infiltrating provisions for the “Adult Babysitting Business.”
Yesterday, we may have appreciated the whistle of Steve Douglas in “My Three Sons.” Today, such ventures with children to uncharted waters in pursuit of “fish” might be utilized and/or twisted into material effective for allegations of child abuse. For sure, even “Little House on the Prairie” today might NOW look more promising as plunder unto the greed of the “Adult Babysitter Wantonobes.” Accordingly, children as mere commodity unto the entrusted for servicing their next fix from the Federal Dole.
As suggested by Frank Church, “that capability [i.e., monitoring capability] at any time could be turned around on the American people and no American would have any privacy left, such [is] the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, . . . ” Senator Frank Church, as quoted in: ECHELON: America’s Secret Global Surveillance Network (see at http://www.hermetic.ch/crypto/echelon/echelon.htm)
- - - -
So while we may feel compelled to monitor splinters of all about us, perhaps we should refrain and choose instead to examine logs of our own eyes more carefully.
Finally, from another favorite citation, Socrates has been characterized with an apparent calling to “demonstrate to all others who thought they possessed knowledge of moral virtues that they were actually as ignorant as he. This activity he defends as essential to the well-being of the state on the basis that those who act in the belief that they possess knowledge that in actuality they lack are likely to steer the ship of state aground. The larger implication is that Socrates believes this is not only what has occurred in recent Athenian history, it is the natural trajectory of human governments.” See the introduction by David Taffel relative to Plato, “The Trials and Death of Socrates,” circa 365 BC, and as republished with the introduction of David Taffel by Barnes & Noble Books 2004.
So in my view, our need for free speech and free and open public debate has never been more compelling. By such, various provisions of the Separate and Equal Branches of Dignified American Democracy may lend appropriate “checks and Balances” by which to keep this vessel of civil society in an upright and forward journey through unchartered waters for furthering our mature bequests of responsibility to our children, families, sisters, brothers and all children of the Almighty.
With sincerity of expression and good will,
- just adad
This message consists of just your FEEDBACK on the story of an alleged
‘awful home environment’ of a poor seven year old (actually my story)
– and what it says about any Court/Law using “the child’s best
interest” as a standard in Family Law; whether that be from divorce,
separation, or child ‘protective’ services.
I feel it does not provide a sound moral or philosophical basis for
our reform efforts. It is something we need to discuss among
ourselves — many people mourn the fact that ‘our movement’ is not
more united, a real common understanding and goal may help. We are
not there yet…. Do we have a goal that will motivate people to the
level of loving personal sacrifice, to protect a great Civil Right?
I’m sorry, but I can’t get excited about reform that starts with a
rebuttable presumption of ’shared parenting’, or that in high-conflict
situations still let’s a single Judge or ‘counselors’ decide what’s in
my child’s best interest?
If you missed reading the original message, you will find it here:
http://www.AKidsRight.Org/wordpress
YOUR FEEDBACK and thoughts on this are below. There were some very
good points made and questions asked. For those new to the list, I
collect FEEDBACK to prior messages and send it out as one message. If
you reply with a followup, you get the last word. We can learn a lot
from respectful disagreement in dialog.
— Cinemade@aol.com
> Very moving story.
— Joani
> Great Story, John.
— Jan
>> DO I NEED TO GO ON HERE? HAVE YOU HAD ENOUGH? SHOULDN’T WE STEP IN AND
>> HELP THIS POOR SEVEN YEAR OLD KID?
> NOT by calling child “protective” services!!!!!!!!! Sure we should
> try to help the family, but CPS isn’t going to do jack for them!!!
> Well, except of course to snatch the kid!
— thomas.d.curry@verizon.net
> i read your story as a child i also grew up with no bath room as you
> well know love doesn’t grow in dirt love grows in the heart cps is
> heartless they took my 4 grandkids and i cant see them but while
> they were with me they knew love and had love it’s a shame cps is
> all about the money
— Colleen
> I enjoyed your story so very much. While reading it, I thought of
> all the times I was at my grandparents or aunts and uncles and I
> know my parents had been drinking. BUT- we were a family enjoying
> each other.
> I went back to school for Social Work. I am doing a paper on family
> preservation services. I believe that services should be
> implemented or at least offered before any other intervention, by
> strangers.
> The best interest of the child is allowing the child to remain in
> their family, and helping that family.
… I like the idea the community should ‘offer’ help to a family –
but also not force their will… my story could have had a very tragic
ending. But family is a very private thing, a very dynamic
relationship between parents and children (as you well know). Perhaps
that is the price we sometimes pay for freedom.
I don’t mind the ‘law of averages’ being applied to government setting
food standards or speed limits, but it is quite another thing when it
is forced upon family life. This Easter morning I can’t help but
remember all the good times we had together. The DWI bothers a lot of
people, but in reality, the actual serious accident is very rare –
but to avoid that, some would have cut me off from my parents — real
abuse (as you say) to avoid something that ‘might’ happen.
— Simon Dorey
> … The best interests of the child are not represented by a lawyer
> for the child - merely by a poorly educated and informed judge -
> with a whole bag of presumptions and assumptions on his shoulders.
> We should change this to the best interest of the family and
> children should automatically be appointed court counsel if the
> matter appears in a court situation.
This is quite a bit different from this type of goal:
That you and your spouse are both considered Fit & Equal parents
(equal in terms of both physical and legal custody). If anyone (a
spouse, relative, social services) wishes to challenge that, you have:
1) The right to counsel.
2) The right to be presumed a fit parent, innocent, and deserving of
an equal relationship with your kids.
3) The right to protection of a jury. The “state” needs to prove you
were a demonstrated serious and intentional threat to your child’s
safety.
Not sure if that is what you meant? When there is conflict, you would
like a Judge to decide what is in the best interest of your family? A
child should immediately be appointed a lawyer while they still are
presumed to have two fit parents? If you could explain a bit more
that would help me and others understand better.
NO RESPONSE
— Janet
> Many times I as a teen had to seek the help of police, neighbors,
> priests, to protect us from my dad’s forms of discipline. Just
> because you turned out ok doesn’t mean all children will. There is
> no need to use violence against children and parents that do need to
> learn new ways to deal with their children without violence. Too
> many children are dying while their parents use violence because
> they either don’t know any better and think its ok. You were one of
> the lucky ones… Please don’t promote violence against children
> just because you turned out ok. Violence is always wrong!
Thanks for writing and sorry to hear about what happened… Family is
a very private and special thing… I acknowledge that in my case,
things could have also turned out very badly — but that is an
inseparable part of having Life & Freedom.
About ‘violence’, by which I assume you mean physical force of one
against another? The interactions of ‘matter’ have no moral value in
and of themselves, they are just physical events - not something with
intrinsic good or evil. A razor strap hitting my butt has no
morality? It is the intent of the rational being who puts the process
in motion, were they acting from love, from the dictates of a
well-formed conscience:
http://www.AKidsRight.Org/archive/archive2006/0007.html
My mom loved me very deeply — you focus on one physical act and
would condemn her. I dare say, if you were a social worker, and she
would have refused to stop spanking me in that matter — would you
have separated us? FORCED your moral decision onto another? That is
the very problem with our present system. You want to set Speed
Limits, fine, but Gov’t should not invade Family.
— Brad Smith
> Your “story” today was, of course, very moving … part of the
> problem we are dealing with is that the legal system cannot measure
> or judge the value of Love. They can’t even measure or objectively
> judge the value of any other factor of parenting, for that
> matter. That is one reason why “the best interests of the child” is
> a wholly inadequate and unconstitutional standard.
— Bob Allen
> Hey John, thanks for the story. Every day I see and hear horror
> stories of “CPS” and other government intervention. The USA was
> once a free country. Now its a police state. From cradle to grave
> the police state, including CPS, watches over and CONTROLS
> everything we do. And most of the time they do far more harm than
> good.
— Paul Fisher
> I was beginning to get upset that you might be suggesting this young
> man should be taken from his parents… I was beginning to think
> how I would phrase my disappointment. Then I continued reading. I
> believe my initial reaction is not uncommon, get just enough
> information to formulate an opinion instead of reading the entire
> thing, much like the family courts.
— Tess
> this is definitely a case where social services should be taking
> this child out of the home and placing him in foster care, or with a
> healthy family member. These parents should then be required to go
> to parenting classes, etc and if the child is let back in after some
> time, ss should make frequent unannounced visits and notify the
> school that they are to report any signs of abuse or hear anything
> bad from the boy.
… before I respond in full I wanted to make sure you read the entire
message all the way to end — there was a bit of twist
NO RESPONSE
— Stephen Metzger
> What an extraordinary story. I was wondering where you were going
> with it early on, because my answer was very much along the lines of
> yours. But that it turned out to be your story–well, it’s one I
> will surely pass on to others.
— “Head, Timothy”
> Nice input John…. I often wonder myself if all of these
> organizations (child protective , etc ) are counter productive for
> all of the reasons listed here … I couldn’t agree more with the
> statement to keep big brother out of family matters completely
> …. They just screw everything up anyway…Government can’t do
> anything right , so why am I not surprised..?.
— “B. A. Townley”
> Is the child happy? Does the child feel loved and secure? Has he
> complained to anyone? Is his situation worst than children born on
> wagon trains, going west? Without children, the west would not have
> been won. And could social services be trusted to go in and help
> rather than earning their federal money and bonuses?
> I think some adversity makes people stronger. If the DHS/CPS could
> take all the people they victimize and put them in the magazine
> picture perfect life they try to demand with nothing ever goes
> wrong, I think it would ruin the children. I read a story once where
> a man saw a butterfly struggling out of its cocoon. He felt sorry
> for it and helped cut away the cocoon. But without that struggle,
> the butterfly could not strengthen its wings so it could never fly
> and have the normal life of a butterfly…
— “Conrad Orcheski”
> Thank you John. That was an inspiring letter.
Thanks for writing. I had been thinking about it for a while.
Whatever we experience as a child we see as ‘normal’. I always
thought everybody had old parents, I can still remember being
surprised that some of my friends had parents were so young — what
inexperience!
Family is special and private. Gov’t can’t step in based on the law of
averages. You wanna set Speed Limits, fine, but don’t dictate family
life.
— “Barbara C. Johnson”
> Interesting email, John. Pleased you split it into sections. I was
> about to write you about famous people who had survived those
> conditions and had achieved personal success, and tell you not to
> call the authorities. We simply do not need them to interfere with
> families.
> Naturally there are some situations that might be extraordinary, but
> there are probably other resources to turn to before the
> governmental authorities.
— “David Arseneau”
> We have Constitutional Rights, not Civil rights; Our rights are
> guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution, and not given to us by any
> Civil Authority. Your story “made” my Good Friday, and that’s what
> Good Friday IS all about….
Thanks for a kind message, perhaps it is time for a new right to be
protected.
— Phil Father
> I have been following your experiences for years now. Your own
> story is, as written in the context of what the government does
> today, is chilling. Government interference would have ruined your
> life as it is now doing to so many of our children.
— Rev. Brewer
> Thank you John. Your story is beautifully written. It makes one
> stop and really think about all aspects of our work and what must be
> considered when intervening, or choosing to not intervene and the
> definition of “in the best interest of the child”. Times have
> changed as you so beautifully pointed out.
— Sandra Carroll
> John there has always been 2 sides to the coin. We know that social
> services are needed in some cases. The question here is, is it in
> the best interest of the child to be removed from the home? We know
> this is what will happen. Or should there be programs implemented
> that will keep the child in home and retrain the parents,thereby
> encouraging them to provide a better atmosphere for the
> child. Perhaps this would not help and in the end the child would
> need other placement. But shouldn’t there at least be a real chance
> for this family to grow and learn together.
Like you say, I think the community/Gov’t should ‘offer’ help and
services to a family — but they have no ‘right’ to force it unless
real harm has occurred.
In my story, things could have also turned out quite badly. I was
fortunate. But family is a very special and private experience that
lasts our entire life. Gov’t can step in based on the ‘law of
average’ or what ‘might happen.’ I could have been really hurt, but
that is the price of Life & Freedom.
— Mark
> That is a wonderful letter. I also have a story somewhat similar,
> as I’m sure many people do. However, in my case, as a 6-year-old
> child I called the police on my father (that where our stories
> differ on a fundamental level, my father wasn’t around after I was
> 7). The police refused to come out, call anyone, etc. A few weeks
> later, as a 6-year old boy, I talked my mother into leaving my
> father.
> Now, aside from that, since kindergarten I was left to get myself
> off to school, and home safely from school. There are many, many
> other instances that I can parallel to your story on a fundamental
> level. And I agree, if social services had stepped in, I wouldn’t
> be where I am today. I would probably be on government assistance,
> definitely not a university grad, etc, etc, etc. I did have some
> difficult situations growing up, but with my mother’s love and
> guidance, I was able to learn how to cope. Something that would
> have been stolen from me by DHS if they decide to “help”.
> The term “children’s best interests” is nothing more than a shield
> the government uses when trying to intervene, because as soon as
> they hide behind that phrase, anyone who opposes them automatically
> comes of looking like the bad guy. People do not bother to delve
> into the government’s definitions of what a child’s “best interests”
> are. No, it is not about children’s best interests at all. That
> phrase is like America’s rallying cry “Remember the Maine” during
> the Spanish-American war (for those who may read this, the Maine was
> supposedly sunk by a Spanish mine, and the government used that as
> the motivating phrase… all based upon a lie… I myself have been
> the target of the “children’s best interest” phrase… and it now
> makes me sick every time I hear that phrase.
— xavier lane
> The best interest is that the child has both parents. The law is
> there to protect us all and it has not. The Constitution is here for
> a reason and I intend on using it. It’s true every child cannot be
> saved and it’s not their fault because of their parents right to
> have a child. If we could just save the world in just one swoop.
> I’m a father and I intend to prosecute the very vultures that are
> praying on innocent children and parents. If judges and whomever
> else think that the decisions they are making are for the better
> ment of anyone:I have some ocean front property in Arizona. If
> children and parents need help then help them. Do not make laws the
> implicate parents on lies and no DUE PROCESS. Prove your case with
> direct evidence not hearsay and false allegations.
— “Ramon Collins”
> Congrats on surviving the things that make men strong, and women
> good mothers. I am sure that when we give too much from the outside
> of the family we do the same thing as when you add too many neutrons
> to the nucleus of a uranium atom, as in e=mc squared. The family can
> be destroyed in a hot flash of light, and many other things get
> destroyed as a result.
> Sometimes all it takes is a rope to keep you within loves’ reach,
> and space to let the energy do some good. If you had been drugged as
> a child, you would never have visited the Academy, except to work as
> a gardener or floor sweeper.
— Biggles
> John, that was great. As I was reading I was already formulating my
> answer - ‘bad cases make for bad case law’ or something like that.
> Then the great twist!
— “Jackie Unitt”
> We are having our struggle here in Canada with our Children’s Aid
> service. You may have read about it. We have children taken from
> their parents and placed with other families and simply forgotten.
> There is very little followup. There are records of these children
> being abused.
> Well now they are saying they will revamp the system. No more
> expensive vans and junkets to other countries on funds taken from
> the pot that is supposed to be for the support of the children. I
> hope something will change but I fear it will not.
> I like your story. Children need to feel their parent’s love. I’m
> listening to men who have lost contact with their children through
> divorce. I hear their current pain and I hear their own pain that
> goes back over the years. There is so much to change and the years
> go by too quickly. Thank you for what you have done. I admire your
> courage.
— Kriz Maxwell
> I am speechless…….in a good way. Congratulations and you deserve
> alot of credit for what you have gone through in your life.
— Luke
> Just think, if the state had stepped in and put you in foster care
> you may not have survived like too many foster care children don’t
> or you could have turned to a life of crime like too many children
> reared by the state do. And if Abe Lincoln were a small child today
> and living in the same home environment he grew up in on the
> frontier of his day the state definitely would put him in foster
> care protecting his best interests of course.
I really am very lucky, and at the same time I admit that things could
also have turned out quite badly for me — put that is the price we
pay for freedom.
Family is special and private, the gov’t can’t apply the law of
averages and saying we are going to interfere — that is fine for
setting speed limits, but not taking a child from parents.