Newborn baby seized?

[Gina B]

I learned from the last thread that I should trust that the government is doing the right thing and that we as citizens shouldn't make demands concerning decisions made by the police because we don't know the whole story, so we should just shut up and do nothing.

That said, here's another case of us not knowing the whole story and they probably were right in what they did.

But if there are any nut jobs out there like me who do think that citizens can voice their opinions, here's another case that screams for actions by us crazed, freedom loving citizens of this country who, for some insane reason, don't always believe law enforcement handles things properly:

http://www.hslda.org/hs/state/pa/201203270.asp

 

[Salty]

It appears the govt overstep their boundires - but - as Paul Harvey would say - (what is) the rest of the Story?

 

[Don]

I learned from the last thread that I should trust that the government is doing the right thing and that we as citizens shouldn't make demands concerning decisions made by the police because we don't know the whole story, so we should just shut up and do nothing.

That said, here's another case of us not knowing the whole story and they probably were right in what they did.

But if there are any nut jobs out there like me who do think that citizens can voice their opinions, here's another case that screams for actions by us crazed, freedom loving citizens of this country who, for some insane reason, don't always believe law enforcement handles things properly:

http://www.hslda.org/hs/state/pa/201203270.asp

Gina - I think you know I've been in the military for quite a few years; in FreeAtLast's mind/opinion, I'm a brainwashed government lackey who should never be allowed to be a policeman or other authority figure.

With that in mind, I have to say: I'll be the first one to tell you to *always* question the government. That's what makes our country great; it's how we became an independent nation whose basic principles are founded on the freedom to question authority.

HOWEVER - the difference between the Trayvon Martin case, and the story here? The story here has a lot of facts from beginning to end. The facts of the Trayvon Martin story are still coming out.

There is no rush to judgment in the case of the government illegally taking this child. There has been a HUGE rush to judgment -- by *all* sides -- in the Trayvon Martin case. And sadly, we may never know the whole truth of the matter.

Which is one of the reasons I've stayed out of the discussions about Trayvon. I'm just surprised that FreeAtLast didn't comment about Zimmerman probably being an ex-military wannabe cop.

Yep, I'm throwing some bitterness about FAL's hatred of military out there. Sorry to derail this thread; I'll get over it and ask for forgiveness soon, I promise.

 

[Arbo]

:thumbsup:. Good post, Don.

 

[targus]

I learned from the last thread that I should trust that the government is doing the right thing and that we as citizens shouldn't make demands concerning decisions made by the police because we don't know the whole story, so we should just shut up and do nothing.

That is a gross misrepresentation of the opinion voiced in that other thread.

Shame on you.

 

[Bobby Hamilton]

1. It seems to me that comparing this to the other thread is like comparing apples to cement trucks.
2. The law heard the case the next day and immediately gave the kid back. While it's horrible what happened to that mother, I can say from personal experience (my wife works at a Children's Hospital) that if the hospital thinks something is being done wrong, it's their job to report it.


Things don't add up here, but within a day the mom had her kid back. Like the article says, the issue here seemed to be more with one social worker and some power hungry issue. Those above her saw to it that within the next day the kid was given back to the parents. I don't see any personal motiviation on the side of the hospital here to do ill will just for the sake of doing ill will. Lots of miscommunication and a social worker who thought she was above the law.

 

[Salty]

I dint see the part where the child was returned the next day.

But glad it turned out okay.

Don mentioned that in this case all the facts were given - however, IMHO, all the facts were one-sided - which now apparently were true.

Again, I am glad that baby and parents are back together.

The reason I am always leery about one-sided "facts" is because in one job at a C-store, I was suspended because the manager had "proof" that I had stolen $300. Two days later, the real truth came out and I was exonerated.

Salty

 

[Bobby Hamilton]

I dint see the part where the child was returned the next day.

But glad it turned out okay.

Don mentioned that in this case all the facts were given - however, IMHO, all the facts were one-sided - which now apparently were true.

Again, I am glad that baby and parents are back together.

The reason I am always leery about one-sided "facts" is because in one job at a C-store, I was suspended because the manager had "proof" that I had stolen $300. Two days later, the real truth came out and I was exonerated.

Salty

Yeah, unless I didn't read this correctly

The next morning a judicial officer held a shelter care hearing. After hearing the evidence, the officer immediately returned custody of Annie to her parents.

The whole situation sucks for sure, but if the hospital reported one thing and the staff another and the social worker another, and the parents are a bit clueless, I can see why what happened...happened. Not saying it's right, but obviously there was something that led them to believe the parents were unfit for some reason.

The next day they got their kid back. Could this have been far worse? Oh absolutely. Could it have been better? Yes, it could have.

Should there be some disciplinary action? I think so, at least as far as that social worker is concerned. Not sure about hospital staff based on the info we have.