fishin wrote:There is a lot more to it than loyalty. An abused child knows their "position in the pack" within the abusive environment. That's not ideal by any means but removing them from their home is completely disorienting.
I disagree, and obviously most states do so too!
Quote:The fallacy here is that foster care is no safer than where they were. Everyone would like to think that it is but if you read through the numerous studies from each state you'll find that on average, 1 in 4 children is sexually abused while in the State's care after being removed from their home and as many as 60% can expect to be mentally or physically abused while in foster care.
I will research your claim that 1 in 4 children are sexually abused in
foster care. Other countries have orphanages, why where they abolished in the US?
Quote:IMO, the difference isn't so much in the definition of what is or isn't abuse but in whether the State can (or should) remove children form their homes while they are trying to figure out if there is any abuse at all.
How do you figure out abuse while the children are still at home?
Quote:The State of TX standard requires the threat of imminent physical harm before removing the child. While I think sexual and physical abuse would certianly count in that I don't see how "they have weird religious beliefs" or "they repress women!" does.
The State of TX has not removed the children due to their mothers being repressed or due to their religious beliefs.
Quote:Those other issues may very well fall under the category of neglect or be considered abusive but they don't rise to the legal standard that State has set for removal at this point. If those allegations are founded then the State can remove the children from their homes when they've proven the charges - not just alledged them.
This goes back to Squinney's earlier comments about whether or not "we" have a say. The people of the State of Texas created the law that creates the breakpoint for when "we" have a say in how someone else's child is raised. That standard applies to State agencies as well as parents.
It is not so much of how someone else's child is raised, as it is that
there is a norm, a standard of what children should learn during their
educational years. As far as I know, it is against the law to not educate
your children through either home schooling or public venues.
All the children at the TX ranch were taught the "bible" only. They have
no knowledge of the grade appropriate education that is required by
law. Even home schooled children are subject to state testing in various
subjects. I highly doubt that these children were included in such testings.
And yes, it is a form of child abuse if you neglect resp. deny your children a decent education that is accredited by a public education board.
One of the dilemmas is that people are saying the kids ought not to have been removed while the investigation was done.....and the media tells me the authorities attempted to investigate without doing so.
However, how is a child living with their alleged abuser going to feel freely able to talk about what has been happening in their lives?
Another issue seems to me to be a cost/benefit thing. Not to mention all the reasonable concerns expressed here re how we balance state vs parental vs children's rights in all this. Guess what? I don't believe we'll EVER be able to do that perfectly.....again we can only humbly and mindfully do our best to do what is least worst.
I am wondering if a lot of the expertise re what would be helpful might lie with the adults who experienced abuse in cults as kids.
I am also wondering if there IS a body of knowledge developing re intervention in these situations? Do you guys have any "experts" coming out of the woodwork and discussing what has occurred in what seems to be a rational and reasonable way?
fishin wrote:There is a lot more to it than loyalty. An abused child knows their "position in the pack" within the abusive environment. That's not ideal by any means but removing them from their home is completely disorienting.
I disagree, and obviously most states do so too!
Quote:The fallacy here is that foster care is no safer than where they were. Everyone would like to think that it is but if you read through the numerous studies from each state you'll find that on average, 1 in 4 children is sexually abused while in the State's care after being removed from their home and as many as 60% can expect to be mentally or physically abused while in foster care.
I will research your claim that 1 in 4 children are sexually abused in
foster care. Other countries have orphanages, why where they abolished in the US?
Quote:IMO, the difference isn't so much in the definition of what is or isn't abuse but in whether the State can (or should) remove children form their homes while they are trying to figure out if there is any abuse at all.
How do you figure out abuse while the children are still at home?
Quote:The State of TX standard requires the threat of imminent physical harm before removing the child. While I think sexual and physical abuse would certianly count in that I don't see how "they have weird religious beliefs" or "they repress women!" does.
The State of TX has not removed the children due to their mothers being repressed or due to their religious beliefs.
Quote:Those other issues may very well fall under the category of neglect or be considered abusive but they don't rise to the legal standard that State has set for removal at this point. If those allegations are founded then the State can remove the children from their homes when they've proven the charges - not just alledged them.
This goes back to Squinney's earlier comments about whether or not "we" have a say. The people of the State of Texas created the law that creates the breakpoint for when "we" have a say in how someone else's child is raised. That standard applies to State agencies as well as parents.
It is not so much of how someone else's child is raised, as it is that
there is a norm, a standard of what children should learn during their
educational years. As far as I know, it is against the law to not educate
your children through either home schooling or public venues.
All the children at the TX ranch were taught the "bible" only. They have
no knowledge of the grade appropriate education that is required by
law. Even home schooled children are subject to state testing in various
subjects. I highly doubt that these children were included in such testings.
And yes, it is a form of child abuse if you neglect resp. deny your children a decent education that is accredited by a public education board.
''There was a systematic process going on to groom these young girls to become brides,'' said CPS spokesman Darrell Azar, noting that the state had no way to protect from possible future abuse if they stayed on the ranch.
''Removal is always the last option,'' he said. ''In this case, there was no other choice.''
Adult mothers who have been allowed to stay with their young children since they were taken from a polygamous sect will be separated from them after DNA sampling is completed next week, a child welfare official said Saturday.
I have found this figures from childwelfare.gov - statistics
http://www.firststar.org/research/profiles2.asp
The national average of maltreatment in foster care is by 0.5 % per
1000 children.
dlowan wrote:One of the dilemmas is that people are saying the kids ought not to have been removed while the investigation was done.....and the media tells me the authorities attempted to investigate without doing so.
However, how is a child living with their alleged abuser going to feel freely able to talk about what has been happening in their lives?
Right. The children were taught to fear the outside world and not to
trust anyone outside their compound. They fear everyone and everything.
It would have been impossible to investigate while the children remained at the ranch.
Quote:Another issue seems to me to be a cost/benefit thing. Not to mention all the reasonable concerns expressed here re how we balance state vs parental vs children's rights in all this. Guess what? I don't believe we'll EVER be able to do that perfectly.....again we can only humbly and mindfully do our best to do what is least worst.
Agreed!
Quote:I am wondering if a lot of the expertise re what would be helpful might lie with the adults who experienced abuse in cults as kids.
It would indeed be interesting to hear from them. I have read a number
of documentaries from adults who were in cults as children, and it is very
disheartening to read.
Quote:I am also wondering if there IS a body of knowledge developing re intervention in these situations? Do you guys have any "experts" coming out of the woodwork and discussing what has occurred in what seems to be a rational and reasonable way?
CNN has "experts" on TV talking about the case, nothing concrete though,
mainly due to the absence of information from the authorities in TX.
fishin' this is from your report
Quote:''There was a systematic process going on to groom these young girls to become brides,'' said CPS spokesman Darrell Azar, noting that the state had no way to protect from possible future abuse if they stayed on the ranch.
''Removal is always the last option,'' he said. ''In this case, there was no other choice.''
The younger children, under the age of 5, have been allowed to return
to the ranch with their mothers.
That is, the will be separated too
Quote:Adult mothers who have been allowed to stay with their young children since they were taken from a polygamous sect will be separated from them after DNA sampling is completed next week, a child welfare official said Saturday.
Anyhoo, I guess my point is that, even if systemic abuse is occurring in this cult, I wouldn't be holding my breath that it will come out.
I have found this figures from childwelfare.gov - statistics
http://www.firststar.org/research/profiles2.asp
The national average of maltreatment in foster care is by 0.5 % per
1000 children.
In a sweeping indictment of the raid on a secretive polygamist compound in Texas, Aspen attorney Gerry Goldstein is accusing law enforcement there of reckless disregard, unlawful taking of DNA and he is demanding a review of their actions.
At the crux of the 39-page motion Goldstein filed Thursday in the Texas 51st Judicial District Court on behalf of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is a revelation that the man authorities were looking for, Dale Evans Barlow, was in Arizona at the time of the April 3 raid. Texas Rangers searched the polygamist sect's Yearning For Zion Ranch near Eldorado, Texas, for a week after receiving reports from a woman claiming to be a 16-year-old named Sarah Jessop who alleged that Barlow was sexually abusing her. Police, however, now suspect the reports were a prank engineered by a woman in Colorado Springs with a history of false reporting.
"Those officers could have and should have exercised greater diligence in verifying and determining the true whereabouts of a known convicted felon, serving a probated sentence in another state. At the very least, alleging that Dale Barlow was located on the YFZ Ranch without checking with the Arizona Probation Office, these officers knew to be supervising him, constituted a reckless disregard for either standard law enforcement protocol or common sense," reads Goldstein's request for a hearing to investigate the issuance of the search-and-arrest warrants.
The Aspen Daily News obtained the request in advance of its filing.
"Moreover, prior to executing the initial warrant, (Schleicher County Sheriff David Doran) was advised that Dale Barlow was in Arizona and not on the premises sought to be searched. In fact, prior to entering the premises Sheriff Doran actually spoke to Dale Barlow in Arizona by cell phone, confirming his driver license number and the fact that he was in Arizona."
dlowan wrote:Anyhoo, I guess my point is that, even if systemic abuse is occurring in this cult, I wouldn't be holding my breath that it will come out.
You're probably right. It is absolutely sickening regardless.
I have adopted my child from social services and was for about a year
involved in seminars and lectures about child abuse, and what comes
with it. Very disheartening, very....
I found the answer to why the number shown on that site is so low. The label they used isn't quite complete...
The complete title from the chart where that data is taken from is "Children in Foster Care Maltreated by Foster Care Provider".
The 2003 chart can be found here:
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm03/table3_15.htm
The 2003 copy of the original report mentions "A State meets the national standard for this indicator if, of all children in foster care in the State during the period under review, the percentage of children who were the subject of substantiated or indicated maltreatment by a foster parent or facility staff is 0.57% or less"
That 0.57% standard is the same carried over from the 2002 data used in the chart you linked.
So the chart doesn't include any abuse/maltreatment by someone who wasn't a foster parent or facility staff member (i.e. other foster children, natural children of foster parents, siblings of the foster parents, neighbors, etc...)
Quote:The Aspen Daily News obtained the request in advance of its filing
http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/breaking-news-aspen--0
The Aspen Daily News? Well, let's see what my "national Pennysaver" paper is saying to all of this.
hawkeye10 wrote:Quote:The Aspen Daily News obtained the request in advance of its filing
http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/breaking-news-aspen--0
The Aspen Daily News? Well, let's see what my "national Pennysaver" paper is saying to all of this.
fishin wrote:I found the answer to why the number shown on that site is so low. The label they used isn't quite complete...
The complete title from the chart where that data is taken from is "Children in Foster Care Maltreated by Foster Care Provider".
The 2003 chart can be found here:
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm03/table3_15.htm
The 2003 copy of the original report mentions "A State meets the national standard for this indicator if, of all children in foster care in the State during the period under review, the percentage of children who were the subject of substantiated or indicated maltreatment by a foster parent or facility staff is 0.57% or less"
That 0.57% standard is the same carried over from the 2002 data used in the chart you linked.
So the chart doesn't include any abuse/maltreatment by someone who wasn't a foster parent or facility staff member (i.e. other foster children, natural children of foster parents, siblings of the foster parents, neighbors, etc...)
fishin, so you think that the abuse stemming from other members living in the household makes up for the difference (1 in 4 abused)?
I am sorry, I might be naive here, but it's not that easy to a) go through the foster care system to become a foster parent, and b) to raise a "special need" child. I want to think that the majority of foster parents are in it for the goodness of their heart.
I sincerely doubt that the difference from 0.57 % to your numbers,
are inflicted by either natural or other foster care children.