We have another bizarre case of child welfare overreach on the same week as a story where child welfare officials appear to have ignored one of the worst cases of child abuse in recent memory in Washington state. In Winnipeg, Jacqui Kendrick, a stay-at-home mom, was called out by Child and Family Services because she let her children play in her fenced-in backyard. That’s right, a neighbor called to complain that children were playing on their own in their own fenced-in backyard.
Kendrick has three children ages two, five and 10, and was home watching them through the living room window. She said that the interrogation by the CFS, including an inspection of her home and questioning of her children left her in tears.
She was even questioned on whether she was feeding her children properly. What is astonishing is that the original call would seem frivolous if it were based only on children playing alone in their backyard. Yet, that call appeared enough to warrant a visit and inspection.
Source: Calgary Herald
The same questions can just as easily be asked when, and if, the social worker personally observes children who do not appear, outwardly, as though they have been eating regularly or consistently. Yes, I’m sure that there exists some basic laundry list of questions, but some questions are based specifically upon actual observations and prior information supplied to the agency at the time of the complaint. I am not so quick to dismiss either of those two factors in this particular situation.
The whole notion of CPS, as it is currently realized, is flawed. Two cases need to be handled. Either a there is evidence that a child has been harmed or that a child is in some clear and present danger. If a third party is giving evidence of either, then that party is willing to give the statement in a police report and sign his name to it. Under those circumstances some law enforcement person has authority to act to mitigate the threat and possibly investigate whether the threat is ongoing. If no such evidence or clear and present threat exists, then the government has no authority and stays the hell out of it. No more of this “I have a vague feeling that my neighbors aren’t raising their kids in a way that meets with my approval, so I am calling CPS to make an anonymous complaint” nonsense.
And, BTW, no more thuggery from CPS under the threat that, “If you don’t answer a series of humiliating questions about your private life and allow us unrestricted and warrantless access to all of your property, we will take your kids away from you.”
And, yes, I realize that a stricter standard would allow some heartrending cases to slip past. But, 1) that happens anyway, as professor Turley notes in the earlier post, and 2) we can’t have a society that respects people’s rights when it has huge areas of law where the government basically ignores them under the sophisticated rubric of “but we are only thinking of the children”, or “OMG terrorism!”, or whatever the bogeyman of the day happens to be.
A social worker investigating allegations of neglect will almost always ask about available food and where the children sleep as the answers provide significant information as to whether the children’s needs are being taken into consideration within the household. These are also areas where social workers can typically offer immediate resources when a lack is due to economic hardship.
Let’s have people with too many fingers in too many pies foot the bill that the tax payers normally would if this were a warranted case.
Misuse of the government’s system should also be accompanied with warnings of extreme fines payable to the government and the accused.
The area I come from is probably no worse or no better than any other in regards to its Cps services. In some instances they over react and in some they under react. I pray for the children in every case regardless. I would never want to be the one to judge the Cps because I have seen them at work. The challenges they face at trying to interpret the facts as they see them is overwhelming. People involved can be masters of deceit. That includes all the actors involved in a case. I would prefer the Cps lean towards over reacting for the children’s sakes than under reacting. Every one of us have heard the horror stories of what happens to the children when action comes to late. Then of course, well blame the Cps for not doing more.
Olly,
“Perhaps the neighbor reported the children playing at a time when they should have been in school.”
Homeschool recess and vacation can happen at unexpected times. Though, in this family’s case, the kids were playing in their backyard after school.
Bam bam,
From the news article, the complaint was about unsupervised children in the backyard. The CPS worker asked about food, which is likely a standard question on a checklist.
Perhaps the neighbor reported the children playing at a time when they should have been in school. Good thing they weren’t Arabic or they could have been droned. Oh wait Canada…arrest the neighbor.
CPS, like most unelected bureaucracies, has too much power.
Face it, we are serfs.
Sheep for the government to shear, cows to be milked.
But no more than that.
And we wonder why kids today are so screwed.
The “fenced in yard” was seven feet by seven feet and it held seven children captive along with a rattlesnake.
Justice Holmes
Far from making unwarranted assumptions, I merely suggested that we consider any number of reasons as to why this neighbor may have, in fact, reacted in the manner in which she did in this particular situation. As usual, Turley puts out these stories, which are infamously short on details and facts, where the typical ensuing move is for all to rail against the supposed guilty party. Sorry for not going along with the party. Absent the supporting facts, we are clueless as to the grounds for this report. Clueless. That’s not making an unwarranted assumption–that’s stating a fact. Perhaps the reporting call was the result of a long-standing feud or grudge between the two individuals, but, perhaps it wasn’t. Lecturing me about fenced-in yards proves nothing and adds less than that to the story at hand. Without more details, unlike many here, I am unwilling to write the neighbor off as having no basis, whatsoever, to make this call to the authorities. I found it quite interesting that the person investigating this matter chose to ask the mother about whether she was feeding the children properly. Think about it. Children, who outwardly appear to be well-fed and well-nourished, would not cause someone, who was trained in this specific field, to question whether the children were receiving adequate nutrition. The fact that the question was even posed tells me that the person observing this case had his or her doubts about that. I wonder why?
Once more – where else but the FASCIST PHONEY ANGLOPHONE – UK/US/CA/OZ/NZ/SA/IE ?
Perversely posed as ‘Best’ while DAMNED by all leading agencies as ‘Worst In The Modern West For Family & Child Welfare’ !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXcntrn29jA
‘And still all over Europe stood the horrible nurses itching to boil their children. Only his verses perhaps could stop them .” I thought of those lines last Monday night, as I watched Panorama’s television account of the Orkney ‘Satanic abuse’ scandal. They come from W H Auden’s poem ‘Voltaire at Ferney’, which is about the defence of humanity against superstitious madness. Panorama played an audiotape: a 6 yr old girl screaming tearful denials to three adult interrogators.
“He did so put his dickie in your fanny” they insisted.
She screamed again… ” NO ! ”
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/damn-the-children-when-the-devil-must-be-found-1563398.html
http://www.inquisition21.com/index.php?
BamBam you have made a lot of unwarranted assumptions. Did you know that some people actually shop for houses with fenced in gardens so that their children can play in them?
I feel a grudge about noisy children playing. But as you say we might not have all of the facts but I’m guessing it is much less than meets the eye.
@sgtsabai
What you describe in Thailand is very similar to my childhood in the 1960s in small-town Calif. We rode our bikes anywhere and everywhere until dusk. Hunted Indian arrowheads in the caves above the ocean. Fished in the stream and picked blackberries all day which we then sold to the bakery. Sold boxes of greeting cards and flower/vegetable seeds door-to-door to make money. My brother sold newspapers and shined shoes downtown. We snuck our grandfather’s .22 rifle into the woods and shot up the stumps. In all, we had enormous freedom and turned out fine. I wonder how kids raised today will hold up if they ever face any challenges in their lives.
Just yesterday I read an appeal in a criminal case where a young man was asked by the police to provide a DNA sample. He reportedly said that he wanted to call his mother and ask what he should do. The cops refused his request. On appeal, the court scoffed at the idea that a 28-year-old man in police custody would want to call mommy. The court didn’t believe it. I do. I think we have several freakishly childlike generations who have never developed independence or the ability to think on their own.
It is often the case, though I have no information if applicable here, where individuals having anger or antagonism toward a particular parent will sometimes call CPS and lodge either baseless or highly exaggerated complains against parents hoping to cause an upheaval in their lives. Unfortunately, CPS who are not necessarily experienced criminal investigators, buy into these stories and assume everything the complainant proffers is true. Some of these investigators have very little sense of discretion and will place undue burdens on families by throwing unnecessary process against them.
Generally the best thing a family can have is for a police of sheriff’s department handle the case before CPS becomes involved if actual abuse or neglect is reported. LEOs know when something is real or not. When I worked the road, If I received such a call I would have asked if the only issue was that children were playing in a fenced back yard, I would have had dispatch close the call as unfounded and not even responded.
There must be a legal basis, such as a violation of the law, before the government can legitimately investigate a person. If the initial report by someone does not involve a breach in criminal or civil law, in my view the government should be precluded from contacting the “suspect” for the purpose of investigation.
In fact in WA, the courts have been very strict on when the government (peace officers) can make contact with a person unless they can articulate reasonable suspicion. Otherwise it can only be for the purpose of a “social contact”. Under this doctrine, if it is a social contact and the citizen says they don’t want to talk with the police, the police may not detain them. In fact, some officers have lost otherwise good arrests because they initiated contact under what they claimed were social contacts but a court ruled that the person was effectively detained against their wishes and the exclusionary rule gutted the case from the beginning.
Unfortunately this is not the case with CPS here, the workers have in my view too little discretionary authority upon processing initial reports of child abuse/neglect. But in practice this often goes out the window and workers and the bureaucracy tatter procedures in their own self interest.
As I have often mentioned previously, whenever I’ve been called to deal with CPS I literally cringe because every time (well except for twice all my years) it has been either a disaster or at the very least a complete waste of everyone’s time. Fortunately I don’t have to deal with this anymore.
Personally, I wouldn’t talk with CPS about anything without an attorney present if it concerned my own family. But I know full well that it would cause a storm with some of the workers and I could expect a lot of trouble from them if I did.
CFS/CPS would have a heart attack if they saw how kids grow up here in Thailand. They play, unattended except by maybe a year or so older sibling. They go places, wander around, play soccer in the street. Visit neighbors, in most places people still know who their neighbors are, not so much in the newer subdivisions. They climb trees, and yes fall out. By the age of 10 most drive the family motorbike. Most of their wrecks come in the teenage/early 20’s and I’ve yet to met a Thai lady without the scars. It is not unusual to see a 6 yr. (usually girl) with a younger sibling in hand crossing the street and intersections going wherever. Yes, responsibility is learned at a very young age also. Much of the time my kids, now in early/mid teens stay in the village and take care of ailing grandparents and great grandfather. Village is only 20 kilometers away and the wife has noodle shop there. I will admit, much of the burden falls on the young girls as the boys are basically spoiled rotten…lol. Except for that part, their childhood is much like mine in the 50’s. They ride bicycles, walk, run play, they are allowed to be children. Early on often running to the local mom & pop store, no not Big C, Tesco etc. for food, drinks and too often these days junk. Why, gasp, they even go get a beer or 2 for dad. Mine have been doing it for years, still do and they are now in their teens. Seems like the majority grow up pretty much intact. Times are changing, not for the better with the Ipads, cell phones, computers, “selfies” etc. their society is being torn apart. Walk into a bar these days and half the time the young ladies can’t bother to look up from whatever they are doing with their damn cell phones,……lol. I will add, that yes, like everywhere, child abuse/molestation is a problem here also, not any more so, not any less. I will say that in general, Thai mothers and Thai women in general are very nurturing and loving of children. I think much more so than farang (western) women.
More Turley tabloid cra$
Why do I suspect that there’s far more to this story than what we have read? While it’s possible that the neighbor simply had some unresolved grudge against the mother, I don’t doubt that perhaps the neighbor suspected neglect, for any array of reasons. Do we really want to discourage those, who truly suspect that something may be amiss with regard to the care of children, from speaking up? I know that I don’t. If the neighbor erred, then she erred on the side of safety and caution. No harm, no foul. Perhaps the children appeared to remain unsupervised for extended periods of time outside, with no adult figures ever present? Perhaps the mother was questioned whether she was feeding her children properly because the kids appeared disheveled, dirty and exceedingly thin? Maybe the kids were in the habit of asking the reporting neighbor for food, on a consistent basis, triggering the neighbor’s doubts that the children were being well-fed and nourished? Perhaps the mother needs to get off of her lazy @$$, sitting on the living room sofa, smoking cigarettes and watching Jerry Springer, and go outside to watch her young children?
Government intrusiveness – what’s not to love? Of COURSE it does not stay within reasonable, sane boundaries. This is what happens when you think government can fix all of your problems, instead of restricting it to infrastructure, or in this case, actual child abuse.
We read about this all the time – CPS being called if kids play in their front or back yards. Perhaps there would not be such a backlog, where kids get beaten to death under CPS’ very nose, if they didn’t get involved in frivolous pursuits such as the above.