Who is she?
Some pictures are worth a thousand words. This is one of them.
Photo: Scott Sommerdorf, The Salt Lake Tribune
Friday, April 25, 2008
Some pictures are worth a thousand words. This is one of them.
Photo: Scott Sommerdorf, The Salt Lake Tribune
28 Comments:
Wow. Ms. Adams isn't even trying to fake being unbiased anymore, is she?
From someone who has as much experience covering polygamy as she does, I'd love to hear her insights on what she thinks might actually have occurred at the YfZ ranch - if she believes there's any truth to the allegations about underage "spiritual marriages", what "keeping sweet" actually means for the women involved, and to what extent it crosses the line between fervent religious belief and outright brainwashing.
Heck, I'd like to see her actually write a post on whether she personally feels the Texas CPS actions were warranted or not, and why - regardless of what her belief in the matter is, I'm sure it would be interesting reading.
But instead, what we get is a series of posts that pretty plainly convey that she thinks a great injustice is being perpetrated here, without actually making the argument as to why it's kosher to put up sad images of kids being sent away without discussing the very real tradeoffs between religious liberty, state sovereignty, and child welfare.
Feel bad for the little girl in that photo, by all means. And yes, I'm aware that Texas CPS has major flaws, and the life she's currently headed off to may have more than its share of dangers. But I can't honestly say that it's obviously a worse fate than to be raised in - I can't think of a better word for it - a cult, which would marry her off to a man twice her age in a decade, after having indoctrinated her for her whole life to suppress every personal emotion and spark of independence. I can't say what she faces in a foster home is worse than being raised to bear six, seven, eight kids, only to see at least some of her sons discarded on random city streets to keep skewed sex ratios in place, and all her daughters raised to essentially be chattel.
There's far more than one side to this problem, and I'd like to see Ms. Adams do a better job of acknowledging that.
I pray that someone is comforting this little girl and all the other hurting children tonight.
Personally, I think Ms. Adams is the only reporter on this beat who is acknowledging that there is more than one side to this issue.
"Some pictures are worth a thousand words. This is one of them."
Picture ARE worth a thousand words. Please note that in this one the little girl appears happy.
Perhaps she's just been stripped of the ability to have emotions by abusers who accept nothing beyond the controlling state of Stepford "being sweet".
Or, perhaps she understands that she may have options in life besides being someone's personal sex slave and baby factory. And real choices as to what she thinks and believes.
Oh yes, I'm sure this four year old girl is thinking "that she may have options in life besides being someone's personal sex slave and baby factory."
My guess is she just misses her mom.
Your guess, Joni, may be made as one who knows the ability to have and express emotions. If you had been systematically stripped of that ability by constant admonitions to "Keep sweet", and beatings when you didn't comply, you might not feel like you wanted your mother. You might not feel ANYTHING, because you learned well that it wasn't allowed.
Incidentally, there have been children raised in FLDS camps, who claim that a four-year-old child may well know the meaning of sex slavery. I know of at least one individual who claims that as a young boy, he was sexually abused by the leader, "Prophet" Warren Jeffs.
Wow, some of the sheeple out there will believe anything. I'm not FLDS but I do have the ability to use my critical thinking skills and analyze all facts, rather than parroting what Dr. Phil says about the matter.
I hear Sasquatch and the Loch Ness monster also live at the YFZ Ranch. We better go in and rescue them, too.
I have looked and looked at this picture and I cannot see how anybody can think this little girl looks happy. She doesn't look at all happy to me.
But then, unlike womankine, I have seen great grief and anguish on the faces of some of the FLDS mothers.
Happiness? I see longing in the girl's face. Maybe a bit of anguish and perhaps a tad bit of wonderment at what harm will befall her as she is bussed off into the wilds of the CPS foster system.
Happiness. None present in that little girl's expression. To even suggest that shows me that some people are trying too hard to justify what is turning out to be a texas-sized boondoggle.
Ben, does "using your critical thinking skills" mean "innate and automatic distrust of the government," or what?
I don't watch Dr. Phil, and I don't believe in fairy tales. I do think there are real problems with a religious group - ANY religious group - basically trying to set up their own little kingdom where children are used or discarded as they see fit. And MY critical thinking skills tell me there's plenty of reason to suspect the FLDS of doing just that, both in Texas and in Utah, regardless of the validity of the initial phone call.
Brooke Adams has taken an unpopular position and I hope it pays off for her in the long run. The upside of striping these people of their constitution rights may be that the rumors can confronted once and for all and people will have to get back to living their monotonous lives.
The fear and ignorance that governs the prejudice that has ripped this child from her life and family is more terrifying than words but this child’s face begs for a true heroine. One who will preserve the truth and give this child a pebble trail home to her family.
Chris, on the scale of editorializing, The headline "Who is she?" and an 11 word post hardly qualifies. By contrast, compare that to actual unapologetic editorializing. Big difference.
There are many aspects to this story to cover, and Brooke's been johnny on the spot for all of them. E.g., the allegations of forcible rape and family violence turned out to be bogus. She broke the story a week before the Texas Rangers figured it out! In fact, the Rangers from the beginning were oddly disinterested in finding identifying the "victim," who we now know never existed. No wonder she's skeptical.
Another important aspect to the story is what happens to the kids, and whether they're better or worse off under care of the Texas foster care system. This photo and its neutral, non-editorializing headline convey the import of that subplot as powerfully as anything she could write. What's wrong with that?
If I thought that little girl were being physically or sexually abused I'd feel differently. The Washington Post says today that "The state will argue that the sect's children are at risk at the compound, but not because every one of them has been physically or sexually abused." IOW, the state doesn't allege most FLDS kids (or any specific FLDS kid) were abused, but seized kids because of their parents' religious beliefs.
So the abuse allegations were phony, the state found few pregnant minors, but Texas says FLDS theology is inherently abusive, even if they can't demonstrate abuse occurred. In that context, it's not editorializing to focus attention on the anguish of a seized toddler - its using photojournalism (good job, Mr. Sommerdorf!) to capture the essence of a complex and emotional story.
Hey Grits for Breakfast there are more forms of abuse than sexual or physical. Far worse is mental abuse when you rob a human being of that which makes us different from animals, freedom of choice. This group is screaming about their religious freedom being violated when they consistently violate personal freedom through mind control and financial control. How is a woman going to ever have the power to leave a man who is abusing her and her children if she has no money, no education and doesn't even know she is being abused? Tying this to religious freedom is wrong, this group practices polygamy which is against the law, they practice slavery which is against the law, welfare fraud which is against the law, statutory rape which is against the law. How many laws should they be allowed to break in the name of religious freedom? If they want to live in the United States then they need to abide by the laws of the land which by the way is Biblical principle. If you choose to disobey the law then YOU choose the consequences. It is not the fault of the legal system that enforces the law. Ladies it was YOUR choice!
Due process can be a bitch sometimes. It is much easy to yell accusations and break down gates and and intimate the little children and rip open than heart of mothers who you already feel are helpless and too stupid to defend themselves and mock them everytime they speak.
If there was evidence to prove everything say, why not arrest the men who committed these crimes and gently support the women into a healthier lifestyle. What about the 300,000 kids that are already in protective custody? Everytime, I turn on the news, I hear a story about children who have been kidnapped or mothers killed by the children's father or something on this line. Does it ever get blamed on monogamy? Legal does mean a whole alot in a world where teenage girls can get an abortion without giving DNA or reporting who the father maybe. Having the child is now what people are yelling about.
These people tend to stand out. If the state doesn't want to give them welfare benefit,they can say no.
I don't know why I am even talking this way. Why did state of Texas take children into custody and destory their lives without an investiagion? The parents rights were violated and children's right's were violated. The criminal case that the state is trying to build against the alleged crimial is still hanging in balance. There are laws in America it seem to protect crimials. Children it seems are open season. Still, all we have say when we impose our will on them is say: It is for your own good and you will thank me later.
Grits, it's hardly unreasonable to say Adams is taking a side by posting emotionally affecting pictures which dramatize what the FLDS children are going through without providing any context as to why they're going through it. It's also enlightening to compare the depth of her posts covering the FLDS mothers' perspective with her bare-bones recitation of what CPS says.
As for the allegations of rape and violence, I don't think Ms. Adams has disproven anything, in part because those allegations aren't really at the heart of why CPS acted. As txbluesman has ably demonstrated elsewhere on this blog, the majority of the actual charges in the court filings basically allege that there were numerous underage pregnancies, which is morally, ethically, and legally all CPS needs to remove at least the older girls from the compound. (It's not surprising that the FLDS lawyer in the article you cite argues to the contrary, but he doesn't do a very good job at countering the allegations of at least 20 underage pregnancies at the ranch over the past decade.)
I agree that it's arguable whether the other children should have been removed - although I believe what CPS is doing is consistent with their previously established policies - but, again, I'd like to see Ms. Adams at least acknowledge that the question is debatable.
Chris,
Thank you for the kind words.
As to the bias of Ms. Adams, I think that it is self-apparent - how many other columnists do you know of that focus entirely on a lifestyle, that if acted on and lived out, is a crime in every state of the Union?
It is just like her support of W. John Walsh to 'help' CPS - he has been an apologist for polygamous beliefs for a long time, with numerous articles in support of that doctrine. Obviously someone who appeared as a defense expert and who has consistently supported polygamy is questionable at best for use as a resource for CPS.
She did not mention any of this in her comments, but left the distinct impression that CPS should have used him as a resource.
To me at least, that indicates a strong bias for the polygamists, and could violate journalistic ethics (see the Society of Professional Journalists, Code of Ethics, Section on Seek the Truth and Report It, bullets 11 & 15).
I could be wrong of course, but that is how it appears to me, and I would love to hear her thoughts on the matter.
Brooke Adams may not demostrate the shocking lack of consideration for these children and their mothers and the basic civil rights that have been violated in this raid that Nancy Grace and others have. It is possible that she doesn't support the position voiced on this board that a few dead or misplaced babies is a small price to pay for "morality" because these "pligs" multiply like rabbits.
I am sure that there are those in the media that do. Read their articles. Choices, choices, you can still choose at least in somethings in this country. If you don't like one side of the story you can choose to only look at the other. I am biased too. I don't have any interest in debating whether people's rights should be violated becauses of the ignorance and prejudice of their neighbors.
Heaven forbid that someone show this sweet little face to try and reconnect our senses back to our humanity.
jennie,
No one's rights have been violated, nor is this about their religious beliefs.
It is about their actions.
Since the founding days of the United States, there has been a separation between what one can believe and what one can do.
If they (or you, or anyone else) wants to believe in polygamy, they are free to do so and I'll support their right to do so, including their right to attempt to get laws changed, etc.
If they (or you, or anyone else) want to violate the law that prohibits polygamy, that is fine also - as long as they are willing to be accountable for violating the law.
I'll post two quotes that deal with this, one from a Founding Father of this country, another from the turn of the last century.
Thomas Jefferson said in 1776:
"Whatsoever is lawful in the Commonwealth or permitted to the subject in the ordinary way cannot be forbidden to him for religious uses; and whatsoever is prejudicial to the Commonwealth in their ordinary uses and, therefore, prohibited by the laws, ought not to be permitted to churches in their sacred rites. For instance, it is unlawful in the ordinary course of things or in a private house to murder a child; it should not be permitted any sect then to sacrifice children. It is ordinarily lawful (or temporarily lawful) to kill calves or lambs; they may, therefore, be religiously sacrificed. But if the good of the State required a temporary suspension of killing lambs, as during a siege, sacrifices of them may then be rightfully suspended also. This is the true extent of toleration."
Basically Jefferson said one could believe what they wanted, but they could not act on it if it were against the law.
Teddy Roosevelt said in 1903:
"No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we require him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor."
We do not ask that the polygamist obey our laws - we require it. If they chose not to, then it is they who are responsible, not us. It is they that will face the consequences, not us.
If you have a concrete example where rights have been violated, then by all means, share it with us. Thus far, from what I have seen, everything has been both Constitutional and legal, but if I am in error, please enlighten me.
"Heaven forbid that someone show this sweet little face to try and reconnect our senses back to our humanity."
And just what is "our humanity", jennie? Is it to ignore what amounts to slavery in our midst? Is it to allow a cruel totalitarian state to exist walled off from our community, merely because it claims to be religious?
Everyone on this blog who is screaming about individual rights vs. state rights should remember that these women and children have had their individual rights completely denied them by Warren Jeffs and his merry band of Harem-Builders.
What law did these children break?
Whatever beef the state of Texas had with their parents could been worked out and investigated without violating their home.
If the state wants to take on polygamy that is another matter, why not just say so and be out with it. Instead, we hear it is about abuse. No, because abuse is everywhere or could be anywhere.
The crimes that Texas claims they are investigating could not have been committed by the children and the mothers deserve due process if not a little compassion as they were the ones everyone claims are the victims and now they are convicted in the media because they have not hearld the CPS as their saviors with the adoration expected. All for their own good so everyone says.
Not one man has even been called a person of interest. Why? Because our laws requires more to convict a criminal than to pull a child out of their home.
I keep hearing the saying "You can't have it both ways". If it is about religion then let it be about religion. If it is about abuse then investigate but not at the expense of doing more harm.
Rights have been violated. Not yours, but those of these children to live without fear of being molested by the goverment and taken away from their parents who even in the worst case senerio these children should have supervised visitation because children are better off with contact with parent and left in their homes with supervision whenever possible.
You can quote Thomas Jefferson very well and for a slave owner and a closet agnostic, he is not bad for a Founding Father but if he were alive today I imagine I would take him on too if he wanted to promote this travesty of justice for anything but sham that is. BTW Worshiping God means more to some than others and believing doesn't work everyone. Some of us actually believe we must serve (this means works not just sentiments)God and keep his commandments not just believe in him and declare him our Lord and Savior and tell everyone we meet on message boards that they are going to hell if they don't declare Jesus, our Lord and Savior with born again twist and shout, copy and paste regimen forever and ever amen.
womankine,
Slavery hmmm where to begin or where to stop... the world still has much to learn...
Texas or Warren
I know some of the people personally that have been deprived of their children. I am sure they feel like they're Eqypt right now but it would be hard to convince them that Texas is Moses. :0
Please when I say humanity. I mean the wisdom to respect others and their rights to live and breathe on this earth that we all share. We all have differences and some have had to work hard for those rights which Lincoln claims we all share. Still, is it too hard a concept to grasp that we the people would not want our goverment to use to force to persuade others to our point of veiw because we respect our freedom and therefore the freedom of others. It is important to seek our common thread of humanity to see way to the golden rule.
Anyway as far as the long list a gievance that are spouted out everytime anyone questions the holy Texas inquistion, I say rumors don't or shouldn't fly in court with the same weight as they do on message boards. A lawful process would discourage a witch hunt and someday children.
Little things to note...human sacrifice prehaps was the ancient world's answer to population control and since the goverment in most case also determined the religious practices it would follow that they used the stupidity or superitions of the people to get away with all of crap.
Abortion would be my modern day equilant to human sacrifice and it given daily in honor in the great goddess of pro-choice. It as we both know is legal. Even 13 year old girls in this country can get one and in some circumstance without parental permission without supplying the name or DNA or the father nor the age for that matter, would we want to know if she was raped, molested, abused and who might have been responsible for imposing this on one so young. No, it too many cases, she is just a tramp or prostitute that has been forced to be runaway to excape her mother's boyfriend, her uncle, in terrible cases her own father.
How many children are in on the streets of New York or even Dallas?
It didn't take me longer after I left my hometown to learn that I had good growning up as little "plig kid". Shoot me or leave me alone. I was born naked and stupid into this world just like you were and if you have more right to be here than I do, I suppose you have got big Texas gun to prove it. This is little me say well k but I have I will choose to live and to speak up for those I feel could use my help as long as I do breathe. It is still legal to post on message boards isn't it? Or do you have to have certain opinion to be allowed?
jennie,
You are certainly free to post your opinion.
I disagree with it.
When the teenage pregnancy rate (as reported by Fox News) at the FLDS compound is 58.4%, while the Texas statewide rate is 4.6%, it appears to me to be a problem. You speak of the tramps of the Texas cities, but a young girl at the FLDS compound is more than 12 times as likely to become pregnant. The only way that this can occur is by Sexual Assault - there was no legal marriage, and she is too young by law to consent.
When sworn affidavits show that underage girls are being illegally wed to 30-49 year old men as second, third, and fourth wives, it appears to me to be a problem.
You ask what law the children broke - but you are asking the wrong question. The children are being protected from abuse, where there is a 3 out of 5 chance that they will be sexually abused.
The question that you should be asking is what kind of parent would allow such abuse?
As for your comment about piety, and some having more than others? That is your opinion - and since you do not know about my religious beliefs, you are making an assumption that you cannot support.
I keep hearing the saying "You can't have it both ways". If it is about religion then let it be about religion. If it is about abuse then investigate but not at the expense of doing more harm.
Indeed, you can have it both ways when a group claiming to be religious builds slavery and sexual abuse into its tenets and practices.
You blame the state for not being able to investigate without doing more harm and yet it is the PARENTS AND THEIR CULT that sought to cover-up the abuse and rape and instruct the children to lie or invoke silence. The parents made it impossible for investigations to proceed without removal from the home.
"Rights have been violated. Not yours, but those of these children to live without fear of being molested by the government....."
There is plenty of indication that there are children being molested by the cult. There is no indication that that the government has done anything beyond remove the children from that abusive cult. Parents can blame themselves. They chose to flaunt the laws.
"Please when I say humanity. I mean the wisdom to respect others and their rights to live and breathe on this earth that we all share."
Respecting humanity doesn't mean that we respect or protect the rights of a privileged group of self-appointed cult leaders to control others through the use of abuse, isolation, and manipulation. It is BECAUSE WE ARE A HUMANE SOCIETY that we do not allow children to be so enslaved and abused.
Jennie-
Actually, I appreciate you posting on this board - without trying to read too much into what you've said, it appears to me that you're from a polygamous background yourself, and further down below you allude to knowing some of the mothers who have had their children removed personally.
That is definitely not a background that I or anyone I know comes from, and it very much helps to better appreciate the perspective some people are bringing to this discussion.
That said, as alien as your background is, this sentiment you allude to is even more alien:
It is possible that she doesn't support the position voiced on this board that a few dead or misplaced babies is a small price to pay for "morality" because these "pligs" multiply like rabbits.
I DO NOT think this way, and I don't see any evidence that anyone else on these comments feels this way either. I know many polygamists feel persecuted by society at large - with more than a little justification, from a historical perspective. In fact, I freely admit that I find the FLDS and other polygamous beliefs personally distasteful - I disagree with their theology, think their approach to life is a chokehold on the human spirit, and think the lifestyle would clearly be disastrous for society if it was adopted by more than a tiny fraction of people.
However, there's a VAST difference between disliking what polygamists believe and actually wanting them dead - or considering them to somehow be sub-human, as you seem to see it. You may well hate what the state has done in this instance, but it is not the pogrom you allude to above, and you will have a very hard time convincing anyone of your case if you continue to blur the distinction between the two.
The picture of the beautiful little girl on the bus isn't nearly as sad as the day she'll become part of their breeding stock program.
This isn't a religion. It's a sect of child rapists. Hopefully we'll see prosecution for all the offenders, both men,women and underaged people who've joined in this activity.
Some of these children may have a chance for a future. The others may be damaged their whole lives as a result of this brainwashing. How different is this than the bunker the Austrian children were released from this week? Same sick thing. A Rapist's Agenda! In the name of religion? Christians have the Bible, others have items which they hold as truth. What is truthful about this mess?
This little sweet heart looks like she is the child of my sister who I have not seen for seven years. When my sister had this look on her face as a child, happiness was the last thing she was feeling.
First my sister looses her dear husband over a bulls**t offense, being cut off without a church trial, then my sister looses her children. She is such a sweet person. She married the man of her choosing, being a plural wife, marrying after finishing college and well established in her career. It makes me sad that with Warren an educated people is something he is not willing to permit on a more regular basis.
May God grant peace to those who suffer and my God continue to encourage Brooke to report what she is seeing with eyes untainted by hatred and prejudice.
When the teenage pregnancy rate (as reported by Fox News) at the FLDS compound is 58.4%, while the Texas statewide rate is 4.6%, it appears to me to be a problem.
The teenage pregnancy rate since when? The latest numbers I read at Fox News said there were only a handful of teenagers who had ever been pregnant. No indication how old they were (meaning they could be above the age of consent).
"Although caseworkers said when they took custody of all the children that the sect was forcing underage girls into marriage and sex and training boys to be adult perpetrators, only a few dozen of the children swept into custody turned out to be teenage girls, and only a handful had children or were pregnant. Of 31 mothers CPS said were minors, at least half turned out to be adults."
From Fox News.
That hardly sounds like a 50% pregnancy rate. A few dozen - that's at least 36 - teenagers, and only a handful (maybe 5?) have ever had babies. As I see it, the highest the teen pregnancy rate could be is 15%. Until a few years ago, the age of consent to marriage in Texas was 14, was it not? I wonder how many of those babies were born in legal marriages before the law changed? How many were conceived after their mothers were above the age of consent? The story doesn't say. It could be all of them, or it could be none.
Now, if those teens were raped, statutory or otherwise, the men responsible should be tried. I believe that 100%. But my goodness! Removing more than 400 children because 5 girls might have been abused? That's like pulling an entire elementary school into State custody because 5 of the kids might be abused. CPS should not be able to remove children because of guilt by association.
I don't care how you slice it. The rights of the parents who were not abusing their children was violated.
Hmm, it is a picture of a child in a vehicle with their hand on the window. Except that it is on Brooke's blog, it has no context.
What does "keep sweet" mean? Is it like my "be good"?
When my children go out of my parenting space I look straight into their eyes and say "Be Good." I am telling them that I have rules and you will keep my rules and laws even though you are out of my sight. If someone comes and tells me you didn't keep my rules you will be held accountable. I don't have a "do as Romans do" mentality.
I believe in the long run I am teaching them to set limits on their behavior and to say "NO". Is CPS now saying I don't have this right and it is a "pervasive belief system" - PC: religion?
Thank you, Harmony, for pointing out the reality of the situation. There have been a lot of accusations made, both by CPS in Texas and by people on this blog, about what these people were doing to their children. But the truth is that CPS can't PROVE any of it, in spite of having seized thousands of documents from the FLDS compound, and having had custody of the children for several weeks. The reason the Texas Supreme Court required the judge to return these kids to their homes is that CPS could not prove the majority of the children were in ANY danger whatsoever.
It is certainly true that the sect violated the law against polygamy. It is also apparently true that there were a couple of teenagers who had children of an age that suggested they might have been underage when their babies were born - but it was a COUPLE of teenagers. There simply was no evidence of widespread forced marriages of children under 16 (the legal age for marriage in Texas if the parents consent). Nor was there evidence of beatings, slavery, welfare fraud (eventually the state welfare office came out with a clear statement on this issue), or most of the other things they've been accused of.
Chris, as for the "at least 20 underage pregnancies at the ranch over the past decade" - I could be wrong here, but it seems to me if there were 460 children seized (and some of those were over 16 and could have been legally married), 20 underage pregnancies would amount to approximately a 4% pregnancy rate. Is this rate so high as to demand an explanation from the FLDS lawyer?
Not only is their underage pregnancy rate not all that high, but even if it WERE high, that's no excuse for taking ALL their children - babies, toddlers, preschoolers; nor would it justify taking boys, unless there were some evidence that they were being abused. Due process REQUIRES that if children are taken from their parents, there be solid evidence presented. "Sworn affidavits" from CPS workers, without documentary evidence, are not enough.
A number of people have messed up BIG TIME in this case. There's no PROOF that these kids have in fact been abused. It's as if your neighbor called in with an anonymous phone call saying you were running a s-x shop from your home and using your children as slaves, citing the fact that your teenage daughter was pregnant, and CPS swooped in and took them on no more evidence than that - and then kept them for weeks, refusing to tell you where they were or to allow you to visit them, making you move out of your home, and requiring you to take medication for bipolar disorder when you seemed reasonably happy for a few minutes and then burst into tears as you remembered your children. Sure, someone reading about you in the paper might say, "But it's terrible what they did to those kids!" - but if in fact you DIDN'T do what they say you did, and CPS has no evidence that you did, then what has happened to you is a terrible tragedy.
And as nearly as I've been able to figure out (and apparently the Texas Supreme Court agrees), that's exactly what happened to these families. Quite frankly, if it's true that they took these kids with no more evidence than they apparently had, it's my opinion that CPS is STILL violating their rights by requiring them to take parenting classes, to advise CPS if they are traveling more than 100 miles, and to stay in the state.
If CPS can produce evidence that in fact the children WERE being abused, that's a different issue. But so far, their "evidence" seems to evaporate when exposed to the light. Good grief - they've had these kids for several weeks, and exposed them to all sorts of physical and psychological testing, "debriefing," "treatments" by experts in detecting and helping kids recover from abuse, monitoring by foster parents - and they don't have enough evidence to convince the appeals courts that they should be held? Just because we think someone might be abused in the future does NOT give us the right to swoop in and take them, and that's what CPS has done here.
Post a Comment
<< Home