PDA

View Full Version : Abandon your child in Nebraska!!!




forsmant
10-23-2008, 05:46 PM
The Nebraska legislature passed a safe haven law that allows parents to drop off their unwanted children at hospitals in Nebraska. There is no age restriction on the law and 19 children varying from ages 1 to 17 have been dropped at local hospitals. Parents from Iowa and Michigan have dropped off their children as well. No child under the age of one has been dropped off. The original intent of the law was to provide a safe haven for babies. As you can see the law is being abused and lawmakers and local radio show hosts are in a tizzy.

This is a perfect example of the unintended consequences of legislation. The law was passed quickly before last year's session ended and some people saw this coming. This failed legislation shines a light on the myriad of other problems state regulations of custody laws and family structure have caused.

Marriage law plays favorites with a preferred family structure. Divorce laws are biased against fathers. There may be a financial incentive to get divorced when children are involved. The courts decide who gets custody and custody is not easily transferable. If custody was easily transferable to fathers, mothers, grandparents and even church charities instead of state sponsored foster care the safe haven law would be unnecessary.

The law will probably be changed in January to limit the age to three days after birth.

Does any one else have thoughts on family law or Nebraska's state sponsored abandonment program?

forsmant
10-23-2008, 05:56 PM
bump

phixion
10-23-2008, 06:02 PM
Any parents who wish to drop off their children at a hospital is exactly the type of parent that needs to hand over their child to the care of someone else.

What's the problem?

Pete

forsmant
10-23-2008, 06:04 PM
That is a simplistic interpretation of the events that have unfolded here in Nebraska.

phixion
10-23-2008, 06:06 PM
That is a simplistic interpretation of the events that have unfolded here in Nebraska.

You would rather a child be raised in the care of an unstable, erratic, possibly quite mental, unfit parent?

If people want to hand over their kids, let 'em. They're unfit. Plenty wish to adopt.

Pete

v00513
10-23-2008, 06:07 PM
Not a bad idea. This way, you don't even have to sign any papers for someone to adopt them. Better yet, you don't have to find someone to adopt them. Besides, it's only right that if you can't take care of your own children, you should give them up. Horrible parents lead to horrible children, usually.

Dr.3D
10-23-2008, 06:08 PM
Ever since they have made it harder and harder to discipline a child, people have been at a loss as to how to raise them. Perhaps the state has a better idea on how to raise a child.

An uncontrollable child can be as worthless as tits on a bore hog and a lot harder to deal with than a wild hog. I can see why some parents don't know what else to do with their uncontrollable, undisciplined child.

Myself, I will discipline as necessary and if the state wants to step in and make trouble about it, then they are free to do the job they don't want to let me do. Let's see who can do a better job at raising a child.

Deborah K
10-23-2008, 06:12 PM
Wanna bet orphanages will re-appear? Only now, instead of being privately owned, they will be state-run.

forsmant
10-23-2008, 06:13 PM
You are over simplifying the problem. The state does not allow custody to be transfered easily between family or charity. The only group allowed to take your unwanted children is the state. The state then puts them in foster care because no one wants to adopt a 14 year old (for the most part). Foster parents have a negative reputation and suspect parenting skills. They are often seen as parasites of the state only taking on children for the monetary benefit.

If adoption really was as prevalent as you say why are so many children still being cared for by the state? Instead of sponsoring abandonment, the state should allow charities to care for children and custody to be transfered more easily between non state entities such as family and church.

Dr.3D
10-23-2008, 06:16 PM
Okay, you are talking about the state run business of taking children away from people and giving them to foster care facilities. There is a lot of money to be made doing that and the state should be ashamed of what it is doing.

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
10-23-2008, 06:18 PM
Wanna bet orphanages will re-appear? Only now, instead of being privately owned, they will be state-run.

I'm pretty sure the prison privatization crowd will be salivating at the thought of running orphanages. And states I'm familiar with love making money off of children.

forsmant
10-23-2008, 06:20 PM
That is another area of the problem. These kids that are abandoned end up in foster homes. I am not talking about babies which are the children that are primarily adopted. Teenagers and tweens, if you will, are the ones that are being abandoned. The parents have no other alternative to give up bad children. No boot camp, orphanage, church, or other family members can take on unwanted children without massive state involvement.

forsmant
10-23-2008, 06:42 PM
bump

forsmant
10-23-2008, 07:08 PM
bump

forsmant
10-23-2008, 07:28 PM
ij

nodope0695
10-23-2008, 07:37 PM
Unbelievable...that a law like that even was considered in the first place is staggering. What, now people can drop of their unwanted children like they would unwanted clothing a a Goowill? Giminey Christmas!!

forsmant
10-23-2008, 07:39 PM
Many states have a safe haven law. There is usually an age limit of 14 days or so.

Mini-Me
10-23-2008, 07:47 PM
You are over simplifying the problem. The state does not allow custody to be transfered easily between family or charity. The only group allowed to take your unwanted children is the state. The state then puts them in foster care because no one wants to adopt a 14 year old (for the most part). Foster parents have a negative reputation and suspect parenting skills. They are often seen as parasites of the state only taking on children for the monetary benefit.

If adoption really was as prevalent as you say why are so many children still being cared for by the state? Instead of sponsoring abandonment, the state should allow charities to care for children and custody to be transfered more easily between non state entities such as family and church.

I'm with you on this one. It's horrible that parents would abandon their kids, but the kind that would are the kind that should give them to someone more responsible in the first place. In that way, I'm totally for legalizing voluntary transfer of custody...but giving custody to the state? That's just asking for trouble.

forsmant
10-23-2008, 09:12 PM
bump

Deborah K
10-23-2008, 09:22 PM
I'm pretty sure the prison privatization crowd will be salivating at the thought of running orphanages. And states I'm familiar with love making money off of children.


Assuming the state would allow it, of course. And if they did....voila! You can be sure the two would merge into yet another form of corporatism. :(

nodope0695
10-23-2008, 09:24 PM
Assuming the state would allow it, of course. And if they did....voila! You can be sure the two would merge into yet another form of corporatism. :(

I wouldn't put it past them at all...

Mini-Me
10-23-2008, 09:28 PM
Assuming the state would allow it, of course. And if they did....voila! You can be sure the two would merge into yet another form of corporatism. :(

Just like in The Truman Show, we can have corporations adopting babies, courtesy of corporate personhood! Yayyyy... ;)

yongrel
10-23-2008, 09:30 PM
The only problem I have with safehavens is that they are totally anonymous. There is nothing stopping me, in reality, from getting pissed off with my neighbor and anonymously giving his kids up for adoption.

If Safehavens can work around that, then I'm a happy camper.

forsmant
10-23-2008, 09:33 PM
I suppose we should allow the state to raise children. Heck they do a great job at everything else!

yongrel
10-23-2008, 09:34 PM
I suppose we should allow the state to raise children. Heck they do a great job at everything else!

Raise children? No. Provide an alternative to 13 year old girls drowning their babies in middle school toilets? Yes.

nickcoons
10-24-2008, 09:00 AM
If adoption really was as prevalent as you say why are so many children still being cared for by the state? Instead of sponsoring abandonment, the state should allow charities to care for children and custody to be transfered more easily between non state entities such as family and church.

It is specifically because the transfer is so difficult that there are unadopted children.

My wife and I began looking into adoption a few months ago (presumably, we can have kids, but we thought why make new ones when there are already kids in existence that need parents). The amount of regulatory hoops and costs we have to jump through in order to adopt a child is astounding. It will take several months to several years as agencies put us through state-mandated testing, psychological overviews, fingerprinting and background checks, etc. And of course we must pay for all of these things. No wonder people who might otherwise adopt are turned off by the idea. We're now back on the fence as to whether to adopt or have a child that is biologically ours.

As controversial as it may sound, custody of a child should be easily transferable, and it should be between the one who has custody and the one who wishes to have custody without the state taking any role; other than to perhaps enforce the contract that the two parties agreed upon if there is a dispute.

Dieseler
10-24-2008, 09:53 AM
I seem to remember a video I run across on Google made by Ted Gunderson. This thread jogged my memory and by some chance I saw a similar thread as this one on GLP last night.
On that thread the following videos have been posted. It seems there are and have been some extremely nefarious things going on in Nebraska, namely Omaha.
The fellow walking with video camera here was a victim of these evil deeds. Take the time to watch this if you can.
I will also post the Ted Gunderson stuff when find it again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlfUa0pj9Oo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGJMLywvp0k&feature=related

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=1782900

My intent in this post is not to slander the people of Nebraska or Omaha but to warn the unknowing and stuff like this must be brought to light to further protect the innocent, our children from the evil that would hide under the guise of helping unwanted children.
Point to make is, Nebraska, in my mind, is no place for unguarded children and after seeing this and the OP of this thread it isn't hard at all to smell a big fat corrupt political rat that would love nothing more than to use abandoned children to satisfy their wicked desires, anonymously and then toss them into a pit somewhere never to be heard from again.

Conspiracy of Silence, concerning Boys Town of Omaha Nebraska.

Conspiracy of Silence, a documentary listed for viewing in TV Guide Magazine was to be aired on the Discovery Channel, on May 3, 1994. This documentary exposed a network of religious leaders and Washington politicians who flew children to Washington D.C. for sex orgies. Many children suffered the indignity of wearing nothing but their underwear and a number displayed on a piece of cardboard hanging from their necks when being auctioned off to foreigners in Las Vegas, Nevada and Toronto, Canada. At the last minute before airing, unknown congressmen threatened the TV Cable industry with restrictive legislation if this documentary was aired. Almost immediately, the rights to the documentary were purchased by unknown persons who had ordered all copies destroyed. A copy of this videotape was furnished anonymously to former Nebraska state senator and attorney John De Camp who made it available to retired FBI Agent Ted L. Gunderson. While the video quality is not top grade, this tape is a blockbuster in what is revealed by the participants involved. See for yourself...
The link below contains some harsh shit. Tread carefully if you're squeamish.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggxiBWv4xYE&eurl=http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=ted+gunderson&emb=0&aq=f

I will post Gunderson's stuff when I find it.
Edit: That didn't take long.
Ted Gunderson.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=ted+gunderson&emb=0&aq=f#q=ted%20gunderson&emb=0&aq=f&start=20
Lets put the pieces together.
I am right now watching this, when I find the point I am talking about I will list the time.
At 5:30 so far, it gets interesting. Goes a bit everywhere after that. Still listening.
At 19:00 Satanic Cults.
22:00 child sacrifice.
25:00 Expose children to sex at birth.
50:00 Pretty intense stuff. Mother of Satanic Ritual Abuse victims?children.
This is not the video I was looking for.

I explicitly remember something about flights to and from Nebraska on this video, Thats what I'm looking for.

Better yet, there are far more links than I care to copy and paste in this thread right here.
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message645433/pg1

DAFTEK
10-24-2008, 10:01 AM
Just wait until they ban abortion like the communist did...

forsmant
10-24-2008, 03:43 PM
Raise children? No. Provide an alternative to 13 year old girls drowning their babies in middle school toilets? Yes.

The was the original intent of the law but without age restrictions on the children it is 13 year olds that are being dropped off. There is a clear need to revamp custody laws and marriage laws while they are at it.

forsmant
10-28-2008, 04:44 PM
A 12 year old boy from Georgia was dropped off yesterday by his mother at a hospital in Nebraska. The boy is on probation for theft and other charges. Nebraska's new state motto: bring us your unwanted criminal children, we have plenty for them to steal!

RockEnds
10-28-2008, 04:50 PM
As controversial as it may sound, custody of a child should be easily transferable, and it should be between the one who has custody and the one who wishes to have custody without the state taking any role; other than to perhaps enforce the contract that the two parties agreed upon if there is a dispute.

It doesn't sound at all controversial to me. I applaud you for beginning to see through the farce of adoption industry. :)

A. Havnes
10-28-2008, 06:51 PM
Wanna bet orphanages will re-appear? Only now, instead of being privately owned, they will be state-run.

This means free antidepressants to all the orphaned kids over three years of age! ;)

Just a quick question, but what if runaway kids start showing up at these hospitals and say they were abandoned there? I'm assuming hospitals need parental consent, right? :confused:

nickcoons
10-28-2008, 10:57 PM
It doesn't sound at all controversial to me.

No, I suppose it wouldn't sound controversial to most people here.


I applaud you for beginning to see through the farce of adoption industry. :)

Haha.. beginning to? :D

I've known it was a farce for a long time. I just wasn't aware of the details as I'm quickly learning.

forsmant
10-29-2008, 03:22 PM
Two more teenagers aged 15 and 17 were dropped off overnight. Our governor has called a special secession to fix this can of worms. A patch job is still a patch job! The goal is to get an age limit of three days! The mother isn't even allowed to leave the hospital until three days. Legislators need to address this law along with any other law that deals with custody since the beginning of the legislature in order to solve the problem.

forsmant
10-29-2008, 07:52 PM
ok

forsmant
11-18-2008, 08:48 PM
bump

heavenlyboy34
11-18-2008, 09:14 PM
There have been "safe haven" laws in AZ for years now. Anyone (legal or illegal) can drop off their baby at a gov'ment building (police, fire, etc..) and the baby will be cared for. :eek:

forsmant
11-18-2008, 09:16 PM
In Nebraska you can drop of your teenager and her baby!

bojo68
11-18-2008, 09:40 PM
Just want to put in that I don't have any kids(they taught me in high school what causes them) if I did, and there were discipline problems, it's quite probable that I'd end up in jail. There are multitudes of laws about what can and can't be done to children, many of which involve some govt. inspector, which is intolerable to me. So, it is possible that if I had kid(s) sooner than end up in jail I can see where dropping off the miscreant that the state won't let you cure might be the best option.(When my dogs act up, they get caged, try that with a kid and see what happens.)