PDA

View Full Version : Police: Pa. couple hid 5 children from society




aGameOfThrones
11-29-2010, 12:18 AM
YORK, Pa. — They lived outside society, hidden from the world in a squalid row house with no heat, electricity or running water. They had no birth certificates, no schooling, no immunizations or evidence of medical care _ nothing whatsoever to prove their existence.

Police in this south-central Pennsylvania city are still piecing together how the parents of five children _ ranging in age from 2 to 13 _ managed to conceal them for so many years. And why.

"I don't know what would possess them at all," said detective Dana Ward Jr., who tracked down the children after a child welfare agency received an anonymous tip about the clandestine family.

Ward charged Louann Bowers, 33, and Sinhue Johnson, 45, with five felony counts of child endangerment. They are scheduled to be in court Friday, though Bowers' lawyer said she will waive her right to an arraignment. Both are locked up in York County Prison.

Years of isolation have taken their toll on the siblings. Now living in foster homes, "some of the children suffer health and vision issues," Ward wrote in an affidavit. "None of the children are at their expected education levels(AT the Government's approved expected Level), and there are possible mental health issues."

Since their discovery, the children have been vaccinated and the older ones have been enrolled in school.


http://www.rr.com/news/topic/article/rr/1110/27995005/Police_Pa_couple_hid_5_children_from_society?cmpid =RRWMHero

Anti Federalist
11-29-2010, 12:25 AM
Will, no doubt, be held up as a reason why CPS must be expanded, home schooling eliminated, vaccinations mandatory and family monitoring put in place.

Vessol
11-29-2010, 12:35 AM
Yes because to prove you exist you must have government identification :rolleyes:

JenH88
11-29-2010, 12:56 AM
pretty sure a couple generations ago this was the norm.. :rolleyes:

jclay2
11-29-2010, 12:57 AM
Years of isolation have taken their toll on the siblings. Now living in foster homes, "some of the children suffer health and vision issues," Ward wrote in an affidavit.

Let me guess: kid needs glasses and rejects government indoctrination, thus labeled mentally ill.

Slutter McGee
11-29-2010, 08:37 AM
I would need more details. If have actually seen a couple cases where I believe CPS was justified in their actions.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

BuddyRey
11-29-2010, 08:41 AM
With frivolous B.S. like this going on in our name and with our tax dollars, does the government really need to be told why some people might be a bit hesitant to put their kids on the radar?! I mean really...the whole reason they went to such lengths to conceal their children was so that something like THIS wouldn't happen. Congrats, CPS, for completely validating their fears.

oyarde
11-29-2010, 04:14 PM
Let me guess: kid needs glasses and rejects government indoctrination, thus labeled mentally ill.

Your interpretation may be right . Sounds that way .

Clairvoyant
11-29-2010, 04:20 PM
This makes me rage so hard.

roho76
11-29-2010, 04:25 PM
I'm jealous of the 13 year old. 13 years off the government radar? WOW! Must be nice.

Kludge
11-29-2010, 04:25 PM
"I don't know what would possess them at all," said detective Dana Ward Jr.

:rolleyes:

How about a life of servitude to an evil government which doesn't permit human dignity?

tangent4ronpaul
11-29-2010, 04:47 PM
Better put those kids on the terrorist watch list. Who knows what thoughts their parents brainwashing has done to them. You know, they might be inclined to open up a black market lemonade stand or something without the required permits... :rolleyes:

lucky kids!

-t

moostraks
11-29-2010, 05:44 PM
So instead of helping the family to find the necessary resources to provide the necessities such as heat they rip the children from all they have ever known and throw them to the wolves in government schools. Contrary to government opinion you can exist fine without running water and electricity. Birth certificates are a government necessity not a priority for a child. This article is filled with such crap. Any idea how many live in squalid rowhouses up north that aren't going to be a csb target all because the parents comply with government documentation. The government fears those that don't participate in their control grid and you will always find yourself a potential target as long as you are "different"....

oyarde
11-29-2010, 06:20 PM
So instead of helping the family to find the necessary resources to provide the necessities such as heat they rip the children from all they have ever known and throw them to the wolves in government schools. Contrary to government opinion you can exist fine without running water and electricity. Birth certificates are a government necessity not a priority for a child. This article is filled with such crap. Any idea how many live in squalid rowhouses up north that aren't going to be a csb target all because the parents comply with government documentation. The government fears those that don't participate in their control grid and you will always find yourself a potential target as long as you are "different"....

The people of Pennsylvannia should be ashamed for this to happen .

moostraks
11-29-2010, 06:22 PM
The people of Pennsylvannia should be ashamed for this to happen .

Most definately. From all the stories that come from PA re:social services they really are a parent's worst nightmare in this regard.

oyarde
11-29-2010, 06:24 PM
Most definately. From all the stories that come from PA re:social services they really are a parent's worst nightmare in this regard.

I have seen other stories from there as well , but kind of assumed it was everywhere .

LibForestPaul
11-29-2010, 06:25 PM
So instead of helping the family to find the necessary resources to provide the necessities such as heat they rip the children from all they have ever known and throw them to the wolves in government schools. Contrary to government opinion you can exist fine without running water and electricity. Birth certificates are a government necessity not a priority for a child. This article is filled with such crap. Any idea how many live in squalid rowhouses up north that aren't going to be a csb target all because the parents comply with government documentation. The government fears those that don't participate in their control grid and you will always find yourself a potential target as long as you are "different"....

BINGO!

No running water, outhouse, wood stove, down comforters, chickens in the back ... this was fun for me when I was little. Who knew I was supposed to call LEO's to come to my rescue. Can't believe how my young mind was so twisted by my elders.

pcosmar
11-29-2010, 06:39 PM
BINGO!

No running water, outhouse, wood stove, down comforters, chickens in the back ... this was fun for me when I was little. Who knew I was supposed to call LEO's to come to my rescue. Can't believe how my young mind was so twisted by my elders.

I remember that too, well we had well water. And a coal heater.
:cool:

Now I have wood heat.

XNavyNuke
06-23-2011, 07:53 AM
GUILTY! Sentenced to prison.

Mother who hid 5 kids for years gets prison time (http://www.ydr.com/crime/ci_18330393)


Bowers said she was proud of her children and missed them.

"It's been the hardest two years of my life," she said. "I missed being with them, I missed picking them up when they fell down. I missed Mother's Day, I missed Father's Day. I enjoyed working in the garden with them."

She said she was proud her children know how to pollinate tomato plants and that they were able to keep one plant alive for five years.

"I want to apologize to them," she said. "I want to apologize for everything I was selfish about."

Before sentencing, Renn said that while Bowers "was living quite a number of years outside of society, she apparently did it crime free."

Wow! A five year old tomato plant in a northern climate. Hand pollination no less. Clearly this woman was a subversive and a threat to those around her. Just imagine if she had put her horticultural super powers to work in growing drug plants. But alas, she maintained her hermit life in a "crime-free" manner.

XNN

Krugerrand
06-23-2011, 08:00 AM
I just hope CYS got those kids what they really need ... Social Security Numbers.

2young2vote
06-23-2011, 08:05 AM
If nothing had happened the children would have grown up and continued living there outside society and nobody would have known. I don't see a problem with what she did.

pcosmar
06-23-2011, 08:34 AM
Is Not Allowed

very sad all around.
:(

tropicangela
06-23-2011, 09:34 AM
Gross said the children were home-schooled, but Ward said he could find no evidence of it. Parents of home-schooled children are required by law to register with the district in which they live, provide evidence of immunizations and follow approved curricula.

Gross said Bowers has studied more than 70 religions and adheres to a faith related to Islam.

"She essentially doesn't show her face, except to her husband," Gross said. He said the family opposes vaccinations "based on some beliefs about impurity and pricks of the skin."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=12260726&page=2

Kludge
06-23-2011, 04:31 PM
GUILTY! Sentenced to prison.
That's so awful. Doesn't anyone understand that things can't get better with the primary caretaker being held? It costs the government scarce resources to do this, now the woman will resent the government even more, her kids probably will, too - and the family's going to go through a lot of strain, possibly breaking up and really messing up the kids' lives.

I was watching an early episode of a show called "Hoarders" where they look at people with chronic disorganization and strong emotional attachment to everything they collect so they have a lot of difficulty throwing it away. There was an older grandparent (who I'm not at all convinced was a true "hoarder" as many of the people on the show are) with a yard with a bunch of scrap metal in it. The metal prices were very low at the time and he wanted to use the proceeds of the metal sales to pay for his grandchildrens' education so they and their parents wouldn't have to worry about it so much. His neighbors complained to the police and he was sentenced to 5 days in jail. He seemed to become deeply resentful and continued collecting scrap after leaving. When the Hoarders crew (including a psychologist and the man's kids) came in, the man faces 90 days in jail for not clearing out the scrap on his property. At this point, he was extremely resentful toward the gov't and threatened to blow his brains out if he had to sell his scrap at 1/10 of the price he could have gotten - even when metal prices were relatively low when the show was being filmed. The crew told him the only reasonable way forward was to offer scrap dealers the whole lot to buy and haul. He was offered that 1/10 of what it was worth and was shocked and tearful because this was going to produce the wealth for his kids' higher education.

But just think about what the gov't was doing in that situation. What could they have been thinking? What would 90 days in jail solve? The scrap will still be there and the man will be way more resentful and probably enter a raging depression - and you've put a non-violent man filling his yard with junk for his grandchildren. Because he had to get rid of his scrap that day or face jail, he ended up selling a small amount for a relatively low sum of money -- at enough of a loss in future value that if he continued selling metals at that rate, would probably go from giving a couple grandkids a paid-for tuition to paying for maybe two years' tuition for one kid.

These are the kinds of incredible stupid and detrimental solutions which are implemented when government - first of all, claims control over peoples' property when no aggression is taking place - and when the justice system exists only for punitive justice and not reform - not productive solutions, but just punishing people who resist their unjust rules. The people who use the justice system for punishment are causing tremendous harm instead of finding solutions which move us forward. Fines, probation, and community service should always be an option for non-violent crimes if the crimes must exist at all.

madfoot
06-23-2011, 04:35 PM
Gross said the children were home-schooled, but Ward said he could find no evidence of it. Parents of home-schooled children are required by law to register with the district in which they live, provide evidence of immunizations and follow approved curricula.

Gross said Bowers has studied more than 70 religions and adheres to a faith related to Islam.

"She essentially doesn't show her face, except to her husband," Gross said. He said the family opposes vaccinations "based on some beliefs about impurity and pricks of the skin."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=12260726&page=2

I'm sorry, but there's a difference between living off the grid and denying your kids health care and an education. The way these kids were raised does not sound normal. Did they have friends? Did they go outside?

Teaser Rate
06-23-2011, 04:47 PM
I'm sorry, but there's a difference between living off the grid and denying your kids health care and an education. The way these kids were raised does not sound normal. Did they have friends? Did they go outside?

See, your rep is in the negatives because you don't understand the basic fact that keeping government out of people's lives is far more important than having a way to help children who are abused by their parents and/or denied life-saving medical care due to ideological reasons.

iGGz
06-23-2011, 04:54 PM
The way these kids were raised does not sound normal.

Normal ... lol

Brian4Liberty
06-23-2011, 04:59 PM
Translation: We are putting her in jail. We don't know why, but that's what we do, and we have to do our "job".


Before sentencing, Renn said that while Bowers "was living quite a number of years outside of society, she apparently did it crime free."

Renn said he needed to balance a number of "interests" in fashioning a sentence. He said society has an interest to make sure the crimes do not go unpunished.

"She does not pose a danger to society," he said. "Unfortunately, we can't say the same for her own children."

He said while he predicted there was little likelihood of her repeating this type of offense, "we believe there is a need for incarceration."

Slutter McGee
06-23-2011, 05:27 PM
I don't like CPS. But these rare cases of actual child neglect are why we have them around. I have no issue with the actions the state took. My problem is that the state uses legitimate situations like these to justify its continual harassment of good parents who raise raise their children slightly different that societal norms.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

enjerth
06-23-2011, 05:37 PM
They lived outside society, hidden from the world in a squalid row house with no heat, electricity or running water. They had no birth certificates, no schooling, no immunizations or evidence of medical care _ nothing whatsoever to prove their existence.

So, basically Amish? Is CPS going to get into the business of raiding Amish homes now?

libertybrewcity
06-23-2011, 08:44 PM
they probably locked them in a basement or something. if that is the case, more power to CPS

pcosmar
06-23-2011, 08:57 PM
I see this thread is bringing out the Statists.

heavenlyboy34
06-23-2011, 08:58 PM
I see this thread is bringing out the Statists.
It's always disappointing when that happens. :(

QueenB4Liberty
06-23-2011, 09:09 PM
they probably locked them in a basement or something. if that is the case, more power to CPS

this has got to be sarcasm.

libertybrewcity
06-23-2011, 10:41 PM
If a local community wants to have some form of child protective services, then they should be able to. I don't support it, but they can if they want.

tropicangela
06-24-2011, 09:17 AM
I'm sorry, but there's a difference between living off the grid and denying your kids health care and an education. The way these kids were raised does not sound normal. Did they have friends? Did they go outside?

Did the children have medical problems when they were hunted down and stolen? The children knew how to grow a garden and make their own food, and they enjoyed it and miss doing that with their mother. How many can sustain themselves who attend state schools?

enjerth
06-24-2011, 09:40 AM
If a local community wants to have some form of child protective services, then they should be able to. I don't support it, but they can if they want.

Group rights don't trump individual rights.

If you don't personally have the right to come into my house, by yourself, and take my children away from me because you're concerned that I'm not doing a good enough job as a parent, then neither does a community.

pcosmar
06-24-2011, 09:44 AM
http://www.whptv.com/news/local/story/York-woman-who-hid-her-children-may-soon-leave/j2Inpr4On0KXiX6hM6YJoQ.cspx
York woman who hid her children may soon leave jail

“By wanting to protect the children so much it caused them the harm of not being socialized,” commented her attorney, Ron Gross, “but at the end of it, according to Children and Youth these kids are nice, polite so obviously she did something right hiding them underground.”

She ran away and was declared dead. She lived free for 16 years.

She almost got away with Freedom.

jmdrake
06-24-2011, 10:30 AM
Did the children have medical problems when they were hunted down and stolen? The children knew how to grow a garden and make their own food, and they enjoyed it and miss doing that with their mother. How many can sustain themselves who attend state schools?

Shhhh..... You're attacking statist paranoia with logic an reason. You will be reported to CPS. ;)

jmdrake
06-24-2011, 10:33 AM
I'm sorry, but there's a difference between living off the grid and denying your kids health care and an education. The way these kids were raised does not sound normal. Did they have friends? Did they go outside?


See, your rep is in the negatives because you don't understand the basic fact that keeping government out of people's lives is far more important than having a way to help children who are abused by their parents and/or denied life-saving medical care due to ideological reasons.

:rolleyes: Let's see. I dare you to walk through any government funded housing project, do a survey and find out many children getting government care from cradle to grave don't have any medical problems and are testing a government approved educational levels. I double dare you. And "life saving medical care"? Give me a break! You've not given any evidence that any of child having any life threatening condition. As someone else pointed out, these sounded like inner city Amish. Are you ready to turn the Amish into the CPS?

Rothbardian Girl
06-24-2011, 10:33 AM
I always find cases like this difficult because I hate the thought of being isolated from society, but if the kids have been educated properly by their parents, are healthy physically and mentally, and don't want for anything (which seems to be the case here, as far as I can tell), I don't see a problem. I would feel sorry for the kids, however, if these kids haven't had proper socialization or missed out on friendships because their parents didn't want their lifestyle to be discovered. I do recognize that the state continually uses cases like these to justify their heinous actions with other families, though, like someone else mentioned earlier.

Anyway, looks like the kids are enjoying life - more power to them and their family!

e: I do find it interesting, moreover, that these kids were able to remain undiscovered in York of all places. I mean, York as far as I can tell (only been there once for a golf tournament) is a pretty substantial area of PA.

pcosmar
06-24-2011, 10:38 AM
Are you ready to turn the Amish into the CPS?

I would suspect so. Given post history and stated beliefs.

Brian4Liberty
06-24-2011, 10:43 AM
The government owns you. You are not allowed to be born without their involvement. And even worse, you better not die without their involvement.

libertybrewcity
06-24-2011, 11:17 AM
Group rights don't trump individual rights.

If you don't personally have the right to come into my house, by yourself, and take my children away from me because you're concerned that I'm not doing a good enough job as a parent, then neither does a community.

Of course not. But, groups can voluntarily form groups.

oyarde
06-24-2011, 11:21 AM
pretty sure a couple generations ago this was the norm.. :rolleyes:

Probably , maybe still in Appalachia ....

moostraks
06-24-2011, 11:40 AM
Of course not. But, groups can voluntarily form groups.

To voluntarily seize an individual's children????:confused::eek:

ghengis86
06-24-2011, 12:24 PM
She almost got away with Freedom.

That's the truth right there, as simply as can be stated.

Home of the free? Lolz

gls
06-24-2011, 12:42 PM
The ironic thing is if they had moved 25 miles down the road, put on funny hats and started calling themselves "Amish", then the government would have left them alone.

moostraks
06-24-2011, 12:55 PM
The ironic thing is if they had moved 25 miles down the road, put on funny hats and started calling themselves "Amish", then the government would have left them alone.

Not so...the Amish are constantly having run ins with government agencies which feel entitled to demand they mainstream their practices.

gls
06-24-2011, 01:14 PM
Not so...the Amish are constantly having run ins with government agencies which feel entitled to demand they mainstream their practices.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I do remember a big uproar years ago when the Pa state government demanded some Amish people put those "slow moving" orange triangle decals on their horse-drawn carts. Still, it seems like as a group they get more exemptions than normal individuals (like these people) who just decide to buck the system.

libertybrewcity
06-24-2011, 01:39 PM
To voluntarily seize an individual's children????:confused::eek:

If a group of people all voluntarily agree to it, then yes.

moostraks
06-24-2011, 01:40 PM
I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I do remember a big uproar years ago when the Pa state government demanded some Amish people put those "slow moving" orange triangle decals on their horse-drawn carts. Still, it seems like as a group they get more exemptions than normal individuals (like these people) who just decide to buck the system.

There is a small amount of power in numbers that occurs so they (gov't agencies) choose which battles the 'mainstream' public will likely back them on when it comes to interfering with them. We had cps harass us because we were not affiliated with a religious group which translates to not entitled to religious freedom. We heard quite a bit from cps that we "claimed to be Christian". If I would have looked the other way at the hypocrisy of the churches available to us we would not have been harassed over our spiritual views.

playboymommy
06-24-2011, 01:49 PM
As a parent this terrifies me. As a parent in PA this terrifies me even more, although we're not the only state that abuses the right of the individual. This also infuriates me. A family that chooses not to live by society's standards and they're punished for it. This story reminded me of what happened to a local mother here. She and her husband have 8 children all who have been removed from the home because according to CYF she smoked pot in her early pregnancy and then she did not take the last baby for its first well check up. My mother was the minister of their church. She would go to court and testify on their behalf. The mother obeyed all the judge's orders of parenting classes, drug classes, drug tests, etc. My mom said it was awful in court how the mother was never allowed to speak in her own defense yet the CYF staff report circumstances to the judge with no evidence. The children were the most well mannered and behaved group of kids in the church and now after 2 years in abusive foster homes the children have major behavorial issues. The parents divorced hoping that if the father was out of the picture she at least could get the kids back. The reasoning for this is because the father was in the witness protection program years back when he witnessed a little girl who was shot in a restaurant downtown. Apparently he upset the DA and they fear this is all backlash. All parental rights have been terminated by the judge and the older children remain in foster homes while the younger ones are up for adoption.

On a side note, my mother is no longer the minister at that church. Apparently it's racist to have a white minister and a black congregation.

jmdrake
06-24-2011, 01:54 PM
To voluntarily seize an individual's children????:confused::eek:


If a group of people all voluntarily agree to it, then yes.

I wonder if you realize the logical inconsistency of your assertion? If the group of people all voluntarily agree to it, that must mean the parents agree to it since "all" would include the parents. But if the parents agreed to it then there would be no need to "seize" the children in the first place. Now if what you mean is "If a majority of people agree to force a minority to give up their children it's okay" then that's a different matter altogether. I wouldn't agree with that position either, but at least it would be consistent.

Sam I am
06-24-2011, 02:00 PM
Riddle me this:

How can one be against some form of national identification, and at the same time be serious about preventing illegal immigration?

moostraks
06-24-2011, 02:39 PM
I wonder if you realize the logical inconsistency of your assertion? If the group of people all voluntarily agree to it, that must mean the parents agree to it since "all" would include the parents. But if the parents agreed to it then there would be no need to "seize" the children in the first place. Now if what you mean is "If a majority of people agree to force a minority to give up their children it's okay" then that's a different matter altogether. I wouldn't agree with that position either, but at least it would be consistent.

:D Thanks for pointing out what I thought was obviously inconsistent. I guess I needed to be more explanatory in my original retort as you hit the nail on the head...

jmdrake
06-24-2011, 02:39 PM
Riddle me this:

How can one be against some form of national identification, and at the same time be serious about preventing illegal immigration?

Simple. Get rid of the welfare state so that people have no reason to come here looking for a handout. Get rid of the warfare state so we're not worried about "Al Qaeda" sneaking across the border. (The warfare state causes the terrorism which justifies the warfare state). Get rid of the drug war so that people don't have such an incentive to cross the border to sell drugs.

osan
06-24-2011, 04:16 PM
If a local community wants to have some form of child protective services, then they should be able to. I don't support it, but they can if they want.

Depends on how one defines "community". If it means only those who choose to participate, then fine. If it means forcible application of whatever rule an arbitrary subset of the given population decides to make "law", that is a very different kettle of fish.

The only just "society" is one of manifoldly consensual cooperation. Force, when one strips away all non-essential elements tacked on to an argument and thereby reducing it to its barest face, is baldly ridiculous. But therein lies the problem for most people - a profound inability to strip an argument down to its bare essentials. They tend to get caught up in mainly irrelevant details. It is no wonder so many are completely incapable of drawing proper inferences and arriving at sound conclusions.

osan
06-24-2011, 04:32 PM
As a parent this terrifies me. As a parent in PA this terrifies me even more, although we're not the only state that abuses the right of the individual. This also infuriates me. A family that chooses not to live by society's standards and they're punished for it. This story reminded me of what happened to a local mother here. She and her husband have 8 children all who have been removed from the home because according to CYF she smoked pot in her early pregnancy and then she did not take the last baby for its first well check up. My mother was the minister of their church. She would go to court and testify on their behalf. The mother obeyed all the judge's orders of parenting classes, drug classes, drug tests, etc. My mom said it was awful in court how the mother was never allowed to speak in her own defense yet the CYF staff report circumstances to the judge with no evidence. The children were the most well mannered and behaved group of kids in the church and now after 2 years in abusive foster homes the children have major behavorial issues. The parents divorced hoping that if the father was out of the picture she at least could get the kids back. The reasoning for this is because the father was in the witness protection program years back when he witnessed a little girl who was shot in a restaurant downtown. Apparently he upset the DA and they fear this is all backlash. All parental rights have been terminated by the judge and the older children remain in foster homes while the younger ones are up for adoption.

On a side note, my mother is no longer the minister at that church. Apparently it's racist to have a white minister and a black congregation.

Key to understanding the game is the knowledge that homogeneity of behavioral compliance within an ever narrowing avenue of individual options is one of the key goals of those in power. Those failing to confine themselves to those channels and coming to the attention of "the state" will be destroyed rather than be allowed to continue. Such children are labeled as "mentally ill" of "maladjusted". Shortly thereafter, they are "corrected".

osan
06-24-2011, 05:54 PM
I always find cases like this difficult because I hate the thought of being isolated from society...

But you recognize that this is a matter of personal taste and not one of universal propriety.


I would feel sorry for the kids, however

This is a very insensitive and self-absorbed position. It would serve you well to dispense with it ASAP, though it may come from a place of compassion and good intentions. Recall the old-ish saying, "different strokes for different folks." What may be unimaginably awful for you is paradise for another.


if these kids haven't had proper socialization

Proper socialization? Given some of your other posts, I have to say that this statement is more than a little puzzling. First, who defines "proper" here? The statement reeks of OSFA (One Size Fits All) thinking. We are not clones. Even then...


or missed out on friendships because their parents didn't want their lifestyle to be discovered.

You presume far too much here. One can "what-if" oneself to death. What you describe is what in business we call "opportunity cost". Every choice of path that we make shuts us off from many others. This cannot be avoided as it is in the nature of things. It is as easily stated that by keeping the children away, the parents saved them from drugs, venereal disease, violence, and so forth. In fact, these are more likely and very arguably more significant concerns than that which you have cited.

newbitech
06-24-2011, 06:00 PM
With frivolous B.S. like this going on in our name and with our tax dollars, does the government really need to be told why some people might be a bit hesitant to put their kids on the radar?! I mean really...the whole reason they went to such lengths to conceal their children was so that something like THIS wouldn't happen. Congrats, CPS, for completely validating their fears.

http://static.igossip.com/photos_2/may_2011/yes.gif

newbitech
06-24-2011, 06:09 PM
Translation: We are putting her in jail. We don't know why, but that's what we do, and we have to do our "job".


"She does not pose a danger to society," he said. "Unfortunately, we can't say the same for her own children."

they came for the kids. that is the "why"

moostraks
06-24-2011, 06:13 PM
Key to understanding the game is the knowledge that homogeneity of behavioral compliance within an ever narrowing avenue of individual options is one of the key goals of those in power. Those failing to confine themselves to those channels and coming to the attention of "the state" will be destroyed rather than be allowed to continue. Such children are labeled as "mentally ill" of "maladjusted". Shortly thereafter, they are "corrected".

I don't know which of your last two posts tonight I love better here but you are dead on correct on your responses...

Dr.3D
06-24-2011, 06:33 PM
If a group of people all voluntarily agree to it, then yes.

When oh when is somebody going protect us from democracy?

Rothbardian Girl
06-24-2011, 07:05 PM
But you recognize that this is a matter of personal taste and not one of universal propriety.



This is a very insensitive and self-absorbed position. It would serve you well to dispense with it ASAP, though it may come from a place of compassion and good intentions. Recall the old-ish saying, "different strokes for different folks." What may be unimaginably awful for you is paradise for another.



Proper socialization? Given some of your other posts, I have to say that this statement is more than a little puzzling. First, who defines "proper" here? The statement reeks of OSFA (One Size Fits All) thinking. We are not clones. Even then...



You presume far too much here. One can "what-if" oneself to death. What you describe is what in business we call "opportunity cost". Every choice of path that we make shuts us off from many others. This cannot be avoided as it is in the nature of things. It is as easily stated that by keeping the children away, the parents saved them from drugs, venereal disease, violence, and so forth. In fact, these are more likely and very arguably more significant concerns than that which you have cited.

I understand your point(s), and agree that I may have been a little too emotionally vested in this case, but that leads me to a question: In a free society, if a situation ever would arise in where a child does not feel comfortable with the way his or her parents have raised him (in a case where there may be a child locked up, prevented from socializing, not educated by a parent, etc), what if any avenues would be available for the child to escape from such a situation? I realize that my scenario is most likely not anything close to what happened here from the evidence provided, but it is still a worrying question to me nonetheless.

Would the child essentially have to run away from home and hope to find a party interested in taking care of him? I would guess private charities could care for children affected by such neglect, but I am still not 100% clear on the financial viability of such a system. Of course, there has to be an alternative to governmental agencies taking away children and destroying families based on shoddy evidence (and often missing the genuine victims of abuse), but I am not quite sure what that is. I am sure it has already been discussed on this forum, but I think I missed out on those discussions. I probably should also stop with all the what-ifs, too, because I'm sitting here imagining elaborate scenarios. Maybe I'll save them for a later debate.

thasre
06-24-2011, 09:03 PM
You know, I can understand that CPS would be obligated to look into this. There was clearly the potential that the parents were serious lunatics who were molesting their kids out in the woods or whatever.

But once it was clear that the kids were basically healthy and moderately well educated, which is essentially no different than millions of urban government serfs, they should have given the parents a slap on the wrist, issued them the standard paperwork, and washed their hands of it.

But no.... it's clearly much more important to rip these kids away from everything they've ever known and loved and cared about so that they can be force-fed Ritalin so they can sit in a classroom for years on end to be told about how wonderful America is and how the almighty state is more important than their existence up to this point, which the state has magnanimously saved them from.

Or something like that.

PaulConventionWV
06-24-2011, 09:11 PM
I'm sorry, but there's a difference between living off the grid and denying your kids health care and an education. The way these kids were raised does not sound normal. Did they have friends? Did they go outside?

Yes, I believe they did. The question isn't whether their lives were "normal". The question is, what is the government's role in a family's home life, and why do the children need to be identified by the government. Beside, from what I've heard, they were taken care of by the parents, but just weren't put into the government system.

Rothbardian Girl
06-24-2011, 09:13 PM
You know, I can understand that CPS would be obligated to look into this. There was clearly the potential that the parents were serious lunatics who were molesting their kids out in the woods or whatever.

But once it was clear that the kids were basically healthy and moderately well educated, which is essentially no different than millions of urban government serfs, they should have given the parents a slap on the wrist, issued them the standard paperwork, and washed their hands of it.

But no.... it's clearly much more important to rip these kids away from everything they've ever known and loved and cared about so that they can be force-fed Ritalin so they can sit in a classroom for years on end to be told about how wonderful America is and how the almighty state is more important than their existence up to this point, which the state has magnanimously saved them from.

Or something like that.

Yes, I agree with this... or, I would even go further and state that these officials should have left the family to their own devices once they discovered nothing amiss (definitely idealistic, but still). You managed to say what I was thinking in a much more succinct manner, thank you.

PaulConventionWV
06-24-2011, 09:24 PM
The government owns you. You are not allowed to be born without their involvement. And even worse, you better not die without their involvement.

A discussion between CPS people and Barack Obama once it was discovered someone had died without their consent:

"They were just so... healthy. We didn't even have a chance to inject them with poison or put them in indoctrination camps, or... or get them addicted to pharmaceuticals! It was just so tragic, it was just so -- Oh, Barry!"

She sounds truly remorseful...

Schifference
06-25-2011, 09:11 AM
I guess I am a little late to the story. I searched and could find nothing regarding 5 year old tomato plants or children missing their parents. I am in agreement with keeping the government out of our families. Any links for updated info would be appreciated.

pcosmar
06-25-2011, 09:24 AM
I guess I am a little late to the story. I searched and could find nothing regarding 5 year old tomato plants or children missing their parents. I am in agreement with keeping the government out of our families. Any links for updated info would be appreciated.

Post#19 and I posted some Post#38.
You could also search news stories and blogs by using her name as a search.

Schifference
06-25-2011, 10:01 AM
Thank you! Seems like it would be difficult to get society to understand the principles that are expressed here. I agree there is nothing wrong with existing under the radar. All or most of the comments on all the web articles I have read label the parents as deranged, abusive, and unfit. I saw no mention that they were parasites of the taxpayer. Now the mother will be forced to live a life she does not choose. Because society knows best.

Dissent
06-23-2012, 09:26 AM
Any update on this?