Police: Pa. couple hid 5 children from society

[newbitech]

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.

 

[newbitech]

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]

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]

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

When oh when is somebody going protect us from democracy?

 

[Rothbardian Girl]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Any update on this?