When Child Protective Services becomes Child Abductive Services

When Child Protective Services becomes Child Abductive Services
Tue, 03/03/2015 - 9:36am
posted by Matthew DesOrmeaux

It’s generally agreed that playing outside is good for kids. Fresh air, sunlight, exercise, social interaction are all vital for proper childhood development. However, a growing herd of nanny-statists within the government, specifically state Child Protective Services agencies, have decided that playing outside without direct supervision is so dangerous that it would be better if children weren’t raised by their own parents. They risk turning our children into a generation of physically stunted, psychologically addled wards of the state. But for their own good!

The latest example of this trend is a case out of Maryland. The only report of it is a first-hand email from the parents, so the usual caveats apply, but given the many, many other examples of similar government threats, we’ll assume it to be true for now. In November a neighborhood busybody called authorities ahbout two kids, ages 10 and 6, at a park (which happened to be two blocks from their home) alone. The local Child Welfare Services office cited the parents for leaving them unattended outside, using a statute that actually prohibits the opposite, leaving a child “locked or confiined” inside unattended.

After the mother smartly researched the statute and protested the absurd interpretation, CWS dropped the case. However, someone again reported the horrifying scenario of children walking outside, and a police officer picked up the kids on their way home from a different park about a mile away. After threatening to shoot him in front of his children if he didn’t produce identification, the officer left. CWS agents arrived two hours later and threatened to take the children immediately if he didn’t sign a document agreeing not to leave them unsupervised until the next week when another CWS agent would return.

As the update at the top of this article notes, this “unconfirmed” story has since been confirmed. Maybe if CPS would cease pursuing and harassing decent parents like these they would have the resources to prevent the tragedies that happen when known abusers “slip through the cracks” and beat, starve, and poison their children!

1 Like

Yeah, we hear of so many case where CYS (that’s the PA acronym) abuses parents for no good reason, then we have the exact opposite, where a real problem is repeatedly reported, and is ignored. The small town near where I live had a child die, after the parents/step-parents, whatever, had been repeatedly reported as abusing the child, and the CYS just ignored it. On the other hand, I have a friend who was fostering a very young troubled child; she had made great progress with him, but the CYS took him from her saying he needed “therapeutic parents.” The therapeutic parents (probably using a one-size-fits-all program in dealing with such children) gave up on him, after undoing all the good my friend had done. The mother was about worthless, but CYS decided to abide by her request that my friend would never get the child back. Someone (I don’t know who) wanted to adopt the child. Our pastor tried many times to get hold of CYS to discuss it with them. When he finally got hold of them, they said, “you’ll have to talk to a supervisor.” He said, “Then get me a supervisor.” The person went (presumably) to call a supervisor, then returned, saying, “He doesn’t have time to talk to you.”

What about all the kids that walk to and from school? Are they going to pass a law prohibiting that too?

[Sarcasm] My kids walked to school every day. The hall from their bedrooms to our kitchen is quite safe. [/Sarcasm]

There is no such thing in life as zero risk, though this points to one easily reducible risk - nosy busybodies! And to another, less easily reducible, risk - lazy bureaucrats that pick easy targets rather than more difficult worthwhile targets.

1 Like

LOL…what kind of at-risk activities did they partake in?

Not sure what you mean by “at-risk activities”. We weren’t “free-range” parents, and I don’t remember any incident that was particularly worrisome. Our youngest just turned 27, so it’s been a while since our kids were preteens or teens. We homeschooled - hence my comment about our hallway being quite safe - and our kids participated in activities in large parks, among dozens of other children, often in different places in the parks, often 100-200 yards away from Mrs. S in CA, who would have been accompanying them. Depending on sports leagues and such, such activities could be weekly or monthly, and we homeschooled K-12, so there would have been hundreds of such park visits.

In regard to that last sentence in my post, there are DSS (the acronym of such agencies in CA), etc., social workers who, at the time, would have regarded the facts that we homeschool and were active church-goers as indicators - or even evidence - that we were abusive parents.

[quote=“PeteS_in_CA, post:1, topic:46208”]

As the update at the top of this article notes, this “unconfirmed” story has since been confirmed. Maybe if CPS would cease pursuing and harassing decent parents like these they would have the resources to prevent the tragedies that happen when known abusers “slip through the cracks” and beat, starve, and poison their children!
[/quote]reason.com is following a couple of cases like this, one where children were playing on the local school playground (maybe this is the same one), something many of us did regularly when we were children (and crime rates were higher than today), and in the front yard.

[MENTION=15856]Cruella[/MENTION] has a point. My school district only picks up children who live more than a mile from school. After banning children playing in the front yard alone and from visiting local parks, I wouldn’t be surprised to find that children are not allowed to walk to school alone, even if they live next door.

Our society is growing more and more ridiculous.

1 Like

Yeah, I used to walk about a mile and a half to my grandmother’s house when I was 6.
I used to talk to strangers all the time. Rather than teaching me to be afraid of people, my mother taught me to be friendly, and only be cautious when warranted. Nothing bad ever happened to me. And I always functioned well in social settings.

I’m convinced that “social anxiety” is caused by bad parenting. "Be afraid of everyone! Everyone is trying to molest or kill you! OMG!!!"
Gosh, I wonder why Billy doesn’t seem to make friends? He must just be shy.
Yeah, that’s it. Not because you taught him to be terrified of humanity.

Stranger danger is a myth.