http://www2.kyw1060.com/news_story_detail.cfm?newsitemid=5376

Couple Tries to Get Daughter Back

By KYW's Amy Kaplan A Palymyra, New Jersey, woman charged with neglect Sunday meets with Youth and Family Service caseworkers Monday in an attempt to get her four-year-old daughter back.

Four-year-old Jessica Small was placed with a foster family early Sunday morning. She'd wandered away from the family's new home around 2 a.m. Police found her wandering the streets and couldn't determine where she lived.

When her mother called police at daybreak to report her daughter missing, she was jailed and charged with neglect.

Joann Small's husband bailed her out, but their daughter remains in the custody of Burlington County Youth and Family Services. The couple is to meet with the agency.

Related story

-- Markus Archus (apxov@mail.com), February 28, 2000

Answers

Mr Archus--

If the story is true as written, nothing will happen; the kid will go back to her parents, and your title will be the usual idiotic panic- mongering nonsense pandering to rumor and exaggeration, so frequently posted here. Keep us updated, and don't forget to apologize for the title of your post in connection with this story.

-- Imso (lame@prepped.com), February 28, 2000.

Soon it will be illegal in the UK to slap your kids.

-- Sir Richard (richard.dale@unum.co.uk), February 28, 2000.

Imso, I beg to differ. Something has already happened. The mother has already been arrested and had to be bailed out. The child has already been placed in foster care. If the mother is never jailed, and ultimately cleared of all charges, and the child is ultimately returned, that will be much better than the alternative, but it doesn't erase the trauma that this family has been unnecessarily put through.

-- Markus Archus (apxov@mail.com), February 28, 2000.

Excuse me "Imso Lame", have you read the article? The mother was charged with child neglect, had to pay $1,000. to be released on bail, and her kids taken away until "they" decide if she's fit to keep her kids or not. That could be weeks. All this nightmare because her 4 year old wakes up in the middle of the night, finds herself in a new strange home and walks out the back door and wanders. (And what's so wrong with having doorknobs that lock from outside but opens from the inside? That's how all my doors work, it's now illegal and neglect to have them??)

It was called "an accident" by the police report, so why all this misery the family has to be put through? You'd be happy to just take it all if that happened to you, Imsolame?

I find it outrageous. We're being trapped by bureaucratic "procedures" and redtape. Common sense and judgement from police is out and un-PC. Don't sneeze the wrong way or have an incident or it'll cost you dearly.

PALMYRA - The state Division of Youth and Family Services is expected to decide today whether a 4-year-old girl who was found wandering alone early yesterday should be released back into her parents' custody.

Police, who called the situation an accident, said they found Jessica Small about 1:45 a.m. yesterday on Broad Street near Delaware Street. The girl had been reported walking around town wearing a light shirt, jeans and socks while temperatures were in the 40s.

The girl's mother, Joanne Small, 40, was charged with child neglect, a fourth-degree indictable crime, and released on $1,000 bail, said Lt. Howard Norcross of the Palmyra Police Department.

The state child-protection agency took the girl into custody, and she was staying in a foster home yesterday. The agency is investigating the case to determine whether more charges are called for and the future placement of the girl and her two older brothers, police said.

Small, her daughter and two sons, ages 6 and 8, were spending the night in a new home on the 400 block of Delaware Avenue. Her husband, Steven Small, 37, was staying at their home in Beverly City. They had begun moving into the Palmyra home Saturday.

It was the girl's first night in her new room, the Smalls said.

The police and the Smalls said they thought the girl woke up in the middle of the night, noticed that she was in a strange place, and let herself out the back door.

Although the door was locked, the knob opens when turned from the inside. Steven Small said that he had not noticed that feature before. He said he installed a chain lock yesterday and said he would replace the doorknob.

Norcross said that he thought the incident was an accident and that he saw no reason why the girl would not be returned to her parents. The arrest was made in accordance with procedure, he said.

Joanne Small said yesterday that she had put her daughter to bed at 6:30 p.m Saturday after a day of unpacking and playing. When she awoke at 8 a.m., she said, she noticed her daughter was missing and called 911.

By then, police had tried to find the girl's home in the five-block neighborhood but were unsuccessful, Norcross said.

When police questioned the girl, they learned only her first name, he said.

Joanne Small said that her daughter had a speech impediment and was scheduled to begin class today at a special-services preschool, the Cooperative Christian Nursery School, across the street from their new home.

"I'm worried," Steven Small said yesterday as he raked leaves and sorted boxed toys at his new home. "We've never had to deal with DYFS before."

The Smalls said that they had moved to Palmyra from Beverly City to escape neighborhood crime.

They said that they had called the police in Beverly City on numerous occasions to report delinquent youths or suspicious children in the neighborhood.

-- Chris (#$%^&@pond.com), February 28, 2000.

F**KING CHILD GESTAPO, pure and simple. She'll NEVER be rid of them.

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), February 28, 2000.

For any who are interested, the link to the article Chris posted is the "Related story" link in my original posting.

-- Markus Archus (apxov@mail.com), February 28, 2000.

IMSO - Apparently you haven't been around very much or socialize very little. If you don't know anybody that has been arrested for a trivial reason or a reason that they had little control like this one then you lack experience, meaning your ignorant.

IMSO, listen and think carefully - What has been reported here is the degradation of common sense via the usurping of our basic rights. After a simple conversation with the parents it should have been apparent an ARREST wasn't necessary. Slowly but surely we have more and more extremism and laws on the books to jail you and extract money and basically destroy your life in the short term over some trivial accident or misunderstanding. Getting arrested is an extremely traumatic affair when you're taken to jail. The worse part is being ripped off by lawyers.

Make no mistake, when we employ armies of policemen they pick up lots of innocents in the process and you Mr. IMSO, could very easily be one of them.

-- Guy Daley (guydaley@bwn.net), February 28, 2000.

"Excuse me "Imso Lame", have you read the article? The mother was charged with child neglect, had to pay $1,000. to be released on bail, and her kids taken away until "they" decide if she's fit to keep her kids or not. That could be weeks. All this nightmare because her 4 year old wakes up in the middle of the night, finds herself in a new strange home and walks out the back door and wanders. (And what's so wrong with having doorknobs that lock from outside but opens from the inside? That's how all my doors work, it's now illegal and neglect to have them??)"

Yes, I read the related story.

I'm not going to win this argument, I know, but...

I would be extremely annoyed with the police. I am a responsible parent, and if this happened to me, it would be clear to ME that it was just an accident.

Now try to see it from the big, bad government's perspective. The police do not know the Smalls from Adam. What they know is this: a 4- year-old was found wandering around alone in the middle of the nite. I suspect they charged the parent(s) with neglect as a formal mechanism to ensure an investigation into the situation. I further suspect the investigation will turn up nothing, and I would be surprised (indeed, outraged) if it took longer than a few hours as opposed to weeks, before the kid is returned today, unless something else is uncovered.

In this situation the police are screwed. If they return the kid to an unknown situation, and something happens, they find themselves in Bob Greene's next column about authorities letting a kid slip through the cracks. If they follow procedures and it turns out to be face value benign, they look like idiots. They are not social workers. In this litigious society, they most commonly follow "the book" and the book says a 4-year old wandering the streets at nite doesn't have enough supervision until proved otherwise. "The book" says it is prima facie evidence of negligence, intentional or accidental.

To me the larger question is this: Was the decision by police to book mom just stupid, or was it malignant? And in any case is it representative of some kind of larger issue with "the government" trying to take kids away? I've met a lot of police in my work, and a lot of social workers. Many are witless. Some are nasty. Most are parents, and have families also. Few are interested in finding themselves in the business of ripping apart families. None are part of a larger conspiracy.

I just don't read the malicious intent you do into this story, and I think you have grossly over-sold its sinister potential in your presentation of it. "Norcross said that he thought the incident was an accident and that he saw no reason why the girl would not be returned to her parents. The arrest was made in accordance with procedure, he said."

-- Imso (lame@prepped.com), February 28, 2000.

Imso, you have never dealt with NJ DYFS -- and until you do your opinion is, once again, lame and worthless.

Moreover, you are ignoring the fact that the family in this case has been subject to a great deal of stress (arrest, posting bond, threat of having their child taken from them) by a government agency.

Finally, you seem to refuse to recognize that this is all a part of the "Village" that hillary advocates -- more and deeper infringement by the governments into everyday life.'

Yes, sir, you are very lame, and you show it with continued posts of this nature.

-- (-@-.-), February 28, 2000.

-- Imso

You are lame and you are a troll. Government child protection services is just another oxymoron for a Democratic National Socialist agenda. Get a clue!

-- justwondering (justwondering@youarelame.com), February 28, 2000.

Why wasen't dad arrested also?

-- Johnny (jljtm@bellsouth.net), February 28, 2000.

IMSO,

Since we're all piling on, I'll toss in my two bits worth.

First, I understand your point. Almost certainly nothing will come of it, long term. The government is just "doing it's job", the truth will eventually come out and the daughter will be back home with mom and dad. Mom will get over being arrested and the trama of losing her child to the state, eventually.

The bigger issue is: Who made it the goverment's job to decide on the worthiness of a parent?

When did we lose our children to the state? When did we decide that as soon as THEY decide the mother is worthy, she can have HER children back? When did we decide that any right was more important that the right to keep your family together?

We did it to ourselves.

We decided that spanking was bad. We decided that if a dad came home drunk, then the state could break up the family. If mom and dad didn't want deviant sexual practices TAUGHT to their 10 year old, they were out of luck.

The governments inital intended purpose was to defend from outside forces and deliver the mail.

Year after year, we vote in representitives that raise our taxes, make THEM stronger and US weaker. The government uses this cash to turn us against each other. We fight over who should get this "government" money rather than fighting the government that has us all duped. We spend more and more hours working to pay taxes rather than spending it with our families. We put our kids in day care and our parents into homes.

Wanna change it?

Cut the size of government to 10% of what it is now. Without funds they cannot stick their nose in your business. With reduced taxes, mom can stay home with grandma & grandpa. Junior comes home to a family rather than taxpayer-funded after school care. Dad comes home to a wife and family that love and missed him.

It used to work. It worked for 150 years. Income tax didn't even begin until 1950 for most Americans. That one move doomed us. Money is power. We're giving away our power to parent with every check we send to Washington. The goverment IS the enemy of the family.

-- ElCoyote (ElCoyote@Wasteland.com), February 28, 2000.

Any hope of waiting to see how it all turns out in the end and what all the facts were? Or, like Y2K, have you kids drawn the inferences in advance for the rest of us to save anyone the bother of making conclusions based on what actually happened? I'm not defending the cops who booked Mom and made her post bond. I'm saying labeling this story, "Don't go to bed for the night after you put your kids to bed. It's negligence. The government can take your kids away." reflects the Weekly World News writing style, aka fear-mongering.

I think Billary is way off base when (s)he promotes the village raising the child. The notion is from Africa--anyone ever think to ask Bilary how the Africans are doing with child mortality/child welfare/child education/child promiscuity/child labor/etc etc.? OTOH, there ARE negligent parents, and a society which seeks to protect children is not going to be able to do it perfectly. Any system contains a few boneheads, and their individual failures is not a harbinger of doom.

But say, off topic (but so is this whole debate) can I post the story of the stolen truckload of Viagra?

The police are looking for a group of hardened criminals right now.

-- Imso (lame@prepped.com), February 28, 2000.

BTW Mr ElCoyote,

Amen to less taxes. Amen to less centralized government. I get very annoyed when I hear people ask, "Why doesn't the government do something?" I more or less want (Federal) government to do less. But I notice a lot of people just want the OTHER guy's benefits cut, and not their own. So I'm just mostly a pragmatic mainline right- wing conservative republican, probably far to the left of most of you. Another 100K about to go out the door in April, and I miss it already.

-- Imso (lame@prepped.com), February 28, 2000.

This very same thing happened in Iowa a few years ago and the mother's name was placed on the Iowa Registry for Abuse - which means that her name would show up if she applied for any job with children or that would require checking of the Abuse Registry. This mother sued the state of Iowa because there was no way to clear her name and that resulted in the state implementing a way for people to have their cases re-evaluated.

Personally, this is BS. My kids have wandered out of the house during the night (one of our daughters walked in her sleep). It is a normal "kid" thing.

-- just me (none@thistime.com), February 28, 2000.

El Coyote for President!!! =)

-- cin (cinlooo@aol.com), February 28, 2000.

CPS is PIGs with a capital "P".And most of those miserable B...... d are SOWS.Your handle suits you well isolame.

-- Dan Newsome (BOONSTAR1@webtv.net), February 28, 2000.

"In this situation the police are screwed. If they return the kid to an unknown situation, and something happens, they find themselves in Bob Greene's next column about authorities letting a kid slip through the cracks"

It wasn't the police who made the decision not to take the kid back. The police investigated and labeled the whole thing an "accident." It was the social service bureaucrats who decided to ignore the conclusions of the police investigation and label this a case of negligence.

"I'm saying labeling this story, "Don't go to bed for the night after you put your kids to bed. It's negligence. The government can take your kids away." reflects the Weekly World News writing style, aka fear-mongering."

You can call it fear-mongering. I call it valid concern. If it were my four-year-old, and she were returned to my wife TODAY, I would consider what has already happened an outrage. The trauma to my daughter, the trauma for my wife being put in jail however briefly, the lost time from my job to get my wife out of jail and arrange for care for my other children - all because my daughter happened get out of bed in the middle of the night and my wife didn't wake up? I mean, when that little girl fell into a hole in the back yard a while back and the whole community got together to rescue her, and the whole thing was on national TV, the first thing they did was reunite her with her parents, not take her away because they were negligent. They should have done the same thing here - a child traumatized because she's in a new place and can't find her parents, the mother at wits' end because here daughter is missing - it's a no-brainer. No, I make no apologies for either posting this story or for the label.

-- Markus Archus (apxov@mail.com), February 28, 2000.

just a guess, but I think here's a clue: The girl:

"was scheduled to begin class today at a special-services preschool, the Cooperative Christian Nursery School,"

Doing anything out of the mainstream, whether it is connected with something christian or not, will certainly bring you closer scrutiny from the police.

Imsolame:

When mom called at 8AM in a panic to say "Help me, my baby is lost", normal procedure is to say "Relax, Ma'am, we've already found her, aren't we heroes?" I suspect that they were already watching a family that would do something out of the usual (like seek special help for their daughter, even if it meant going out of the mainstream.)

-- walt (walt@lcs.k12.ne.us), February 28, 2000.

Markus, you're right. Child Services wanted to get their hands on this kid. Did she show any signs of abuse or neglect?? Starving, no clothes, bruises, beating?? I think not

Social service bureaucrat with an agenda where most of us have a brain? I think so

-- walt (walt@lcs.k12.ne.us), February 28, 2000.

CPS workers are not the problem. They are normal, everyday, individuals just as you and I are. I can assure you that they don't have a hidden agenda and the last thing they really want to do is rip a family apart.

Policy requires that certain steps be taken to ensure the safety of children. CPS workers are also open to liable suits in the event that a child dies from neglect, in this case lack of supervision, or abuse.

Funding for CPS in every state mainly comes from the federal government. Each state must meet certain standards in order to qualify for the money. Most of the laws regarding CPS are federally mandated and each state has policy on how to best meet the obligatins set forth in the law..

It is a problem, but if there is any conspiracy it comes from much higher up... Your average, everyday CPS worker is not aware of it.

-- Somebody (someone@someplace.com), February 28, 2000.

listen guys, lots of kids (and adults too) get up in the middle of the night and walk around without even waking up. it's called sleepwalking. when my daughter was a kid (she's 24 now) she would get up most nights around 11 pm and head for the bathroom without waking up. usually she would use the bathroom and go back to bed, no problem.

but sometimes she would get up and and just walk around the apartment where we lived, or even open the door and go out. I caught her several times after she had already gone out the front door, and once she was stark naked. in every case, she was still fast asleep. i had to stay up every night until past 11:30. i seriously contemplated putting a lock on the top of the door where she could not reach, and that is what i would recommend to anyone whose kid has that problem. as an adult, she sometimes still walks in her sleep. talks in her sleep too.

i feel sorry for the poor woman who lost her kid. i can relate.

-- jocelyne slough (jonslough@tln.net), February 28, 2000.

IMSO, I'm ashamed of you for being so logical. Haven't you learned by now that this forum is really a Hate and Loathing Forum against liberals: people who believe the Government is planning the NWO and is planning on putting us in concentration camps, yada yada yada yada yada.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), February 28, 2000.

Just for the record (again).

I'm not agreeing with what the authorities did.

I'M SAYING ONE BONEHEAD AUTHORITY IS NOT A TREND!!!

ONE ODD CONTRAIL IS NOT A MASS POISONING!!!

ONE STOCK DOWNTURN IS NOT A FINANCIAL RUIN!!!

ONE SPIKE IN OIL PRICES IS NOT AN ENERGY CRISIS!!!

ONE Y2K COMPUTER GLITCH IS NOT TEOTWAWKI!!!

UNLESS YOU WORK FOR THE WEEKLY WORLD NEWS!!!

oops; i think i was yelling.

-- I'mSo (lame@prepped.com), February 28, 2000.

I think the country as a whole has gone way overboard in some area's. If there is a case where a child is truly abused then something should be done for the child.

Think if this happened back in the 50's; the sherrif would search for the child and tell the child when found now you don't go wandering off anymore you stay inside unless your mom tells you, you can go outside now we lock up the parents- boom, not a good thing I think. We as a society have gotten jailem crazy I think.

I always had a fear that my children would open the door and let themselves out or someone in or open the basement door and fall down the steps when they were young. I installed extra locks on the inside of each exterior door. The locks needed a key to get out of the house. When I have grandchildren someday who stay over with me I will do the same to my doors then. obo

-- Obo (susanwater@excite.com), February 28, 2000.

Have to come in on this one. I had a case once involving a four year old who loved to explore. We nicknamed him "Runaway Mikey". Mikey was the child that could drive a parent to securing him with ropes to the bedpost, but his folks were good people and tried to keep a close- very close- eye on him. This was in a rural county and everyone knew everyone else. Anyway, one day Mikey eluded his keepers and set out on a journey. A good samaritan called the Sheriff's Department, and Mikey wound up in our custody. We notified his frantic parents who came to the office. BUT-there was no Court Order for remanding custody. The ensuing scene was truly terrible. The parents kept a stiff upper lip and honored the "system" but Mikey had hysterics. After Mom and Dad left it took hours to calm him down. In desperation, we called our family court chief judge, explained the situation and were able to get an emergency order for return of custody, DISPOSITION PENDING A FORMAL HEARING. Mikey's parents were cleared of neglect, but Mikey was never quite the same. I know that what happended was far better than having him disappear, but the point is that we had him, we knew the circumstances and trauma was inflicted. This family was lucky-very lucky. No deviant seized their child, the Court was compassionate and considered his welfare. But as a veteran of the system, I can tell you this was a unique case. I saw enough abuse to last a lifetime on both sides. Children always lost, but the repercussions are more terrible when the abuse comes from the System that is supposed to defend the child. To close: in dealing with a runaway teen-ager I tried to argue the rationale of law- that child smiled and said perfectly calmly, You know there's no law in ******* County". A lot to consider on this thread.

-- old worker (cps@cps.com), February 28, 2000.

Gilda, how dare you pollute this forum with logic and reasoning. BTW, I always look for your name on a post as you are one of the balanced bunch to be sure. Thanks for helping to keep the scales even.

-- Sifting (through@the.rubble), February 28, 2000.

Don't blame the locks - and think before rejecting the idea of "safety" locks that allow exit without a key. Like this door, twisting the handle allows the door to open.

All hotel locks are this design - it's the only way to make sure a person isn't trapped inside during a fire.

Yes - "keyed" only locks can be used - if you have a "glass panel" door - a door with regular glass panels that a person could kick the glass in from outside, then reach through and open the handle - "keyed only" locks might be essential. But in the case of a fire, you've GOT to be sure a key is available near the door, at a known place and at a height that a person can reach while crawling (low down) to avoid smoke and fumes.

Hang the key up high - you will likely die when you stand to reach it. Hang it away from the door - you may likely die as you try to search the house in the dark on your stomach trying to crawl around and find it.

If the door is solid - a "twist" safety bolt is adequate. If the paneled glass is "safety glass" or "tempered" glass - it will more likely resist kicking.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), February 28, 2000.

Many of you have mentioned different locks on the doors and Robert mentioned the problem of not being able to get out in case of fire. Keyed inside locks are illegal in many places for that very reason. Do you leave the windows open for air in the summer? My kids used to sneak out the screened windows (I'll admit that they were teen-agers when they did that) and it takes nothing for a small child to push one out.

Reality is that you simply cannot protect against everything - you just do the best you can. Unfortunately, child protective services are out of control in some areas as are the police and the judges. Common sense should prevail, but it doesn't.

-- just me (none@thistime.com), February 29, 2000.

A few months ago, my burgular alarm went off at 3:00 a.m.

Scared the Dickens out of me...The house was dark, and I had been in a sound sleep. I heard my 5 yr old daughter crying downstairs, and rushed to her.

Amazing what was going through my mind...Did someone break in and try to snatch her......I turned on all the lights and checked the house. Brinks called, of course, and asked if they should dispatch the police.

Ends up, my daughter woke in the middle of the night, and half sleepwalking, had gone out the back door to the screened porch to find my wife and me. We had been out there when she went to sleep. In her semi-awake state, she didn't even think to look in our bed, for some reason.

If we hadn't had an alarm, who knows where she may have ended up?!

I can certainly understand how this could have happened. I've noticed with both of my children from 3-5 or 6 that they tended to sleep walk.

The only really curious part of this story, is the little girl putting on her jeans in the middle of the night (unless she was sleeping in them because her PJ's hadn't been unpacked)

Hard to tell what goes on in the mind of a 4 yr old!

-- Duke1983 (Duke1983@aol.com), February 29, 2000.

Sifting, what a nice surprise. I'm quite giddy after your kind words. I too hunt out logical posts.

IMSO I hope you didn't take my post wrong.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), February 29, 2000.

From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr (pic), near Monterey, California

I once had a Certified Nurse Midwife [CNM] (the ones Michel prenatal Odent calls Flames i.e. female labor assistants who are medically enamored). She wanted me to take prenatal RhoGam because I am Rh-negative. When I put up some resistance, in that I wanted to find out how it was manufactured and if it presented any risks to the fetus, she threatened me that if I did not take it she would turn me in for child abuse.

For those who don't know, RhoGam is a blood product manufactured by combining antibodies from thousands of people into one shot. It is given to Rh-negative mothers who carry an Rh-positive child. The antibodies in the serum destroy any of the baby's cells that may leak into the mother's blood stream. This helps to prevent the mother from forming antibodies to Rh-positive cells. There is no danger to the current fetus from failure to administer RhoGam, but only to subsequent infants if BOTH are infants are Rh-positive. Even if multiple babies are Rh-positive, the mother will not have necessarily developed these antibodies. (If this does turn out to be the case, there are other treatments available, albeit expensive ones involving frequent blood transfusions during the second pregnancy.)

Standard practice until that time had been to wait until the current baby is born and administer the shot only if the baby is Rh-positive. There had been some trouble with women refusing the shot for fear of contracting AIDS. Women seeing a midwife as their primary care physician for their pregnancy were considered to be at particular "flight risk" since they tended more than other patients to never show up at the hospital, or to leave soon after the birth and thereby "surprise" the protocol and miss their shot. The then-new solution to the problem was to require the shot to be given to ALL Rh-negative women prenatally... without knowing what the blood type is of the fetus.

Since I was what is known as an 'elderly primapara' (then age 35) my thinking was that it was quite likely that I would not want to have any more children at all. I thought it was reasonable to question whether there might be some danger of AIDS from this innovative practice. There was, at that time, a scandal about tainted blood at the Red Cross and in the medicine given to hemophiliacs. I also wanted to consider the possibility that one might contract some other as yet unknown disease from the shot.

I was told that the only way I would be allowed to not accept the RhoGam shot would be if I would agree to accept sterilization should it turn out that the "first" baby is Rh-positive. Again, outrageous! I was late in my pregnancy and not in a position to go looking for another caregiver. My strategy was to say, "Well, let me think about it," with the hope that she would forget and I could possibly cross that bridge when I came to it.

In the end, I wound up accepting the shot because I was under a great deal of stress just after the birth, and my son was hostage in intensive care at the time. I did read the package insert thoroughly, and was "informed" about a long list of potential adverse effects, including rheumatoid arthritis, each with supposedly low probability. I have been suffering a debilitating arthritis ever since shortly after receiving the shot, but I was told that this is not related.

Later, the same threat was trotted out again when I indicated that I was researching the question of whether I should vaccinate my son against various childhood diseases. To have the threat of child abuse hurled at me for merely wanting to investigate these issues really shocked me. You may not have had a chance to learn this if you merely accepted these treatments without question, but this kind of behavior on the part of medical professionals is very common practice, and is phenomenally intimidating.

One other time that comes to mind, when I brought my baby in for a checkup after he had been home for a week in January. I had him in a diaper and a little T-shirt, and then loosely wrapped in soft blankets, because he was about to be examined by the doctor. He was lying in a fully government approved new-fangled "lay down" car seat (Cosco Deramride, I think it was called). It was basically a day of average weather in central California, where I have rarely worn a coat to this day (perhaps 10 times in 10 years --- I'm formerly from Minnesota).

My midwife's partner, an ObGyn/Pediatrician, happened to be passing by just as I was pulling my son out of the car, and had never seen this type of carseat before. He started telling me off about how it was unsafe, and then noticed that my son wasn't dressed as warmly as he thought was necessary. Actually, he was dressed equally as warmly as I was, with extra blankets available if necessary). The pediatrician really lost his cool and started SCREAMING at me there in the parking lot. He said he had half a mind to go call the police right NOW!

I believe that the real reason he was giving me such grief is that he was upset to have recently learned that I had selected a different doctor to be our pediatrician. I had found someone else months earlier, who wasn't going to nag me too much about vaccinations (among other things). It was an embarrassment to him that he had a small pediatric practice even though his popular midwife/partner funneled most of her customers to him. Ironically, according to the local newspapers, this man is now serving a long prison term for trafficking in child pornography! (He apparently accidentally left the wrong roll of film with a commercial development service and they turned him in. Was that stupid of him, or what?)

As a result of these frightening experiences, I began looking into medical literature relating to child abuse. While studying what was widely recognized as one of the definitive authorities in the field, I was amazed to see some of the things for which it was recommended that parents be turned in. Most memorably to me, it was recommended that parents be turned in for suspected abuse if their child should fall below the fifth (!) percentile in weight. While reading this, I was well aware that my own son fell well below the ONE percentile on weight. This is a genetic thing. Both my husband and I were the same way as babies, as were all of our siblings. There was no mention in the text about any such mitigating factors.

There were enough professionally recognized standard "signs" of abuse that every family would easily qualify for at least one of them. Your trip up could be co-sleeping, extended breastfeeding, educational neglect, or whatever your own family's idiosyncrasy may happen to be. Are your preparations hurting your kids' psyche? If somebody has it in for you, it would be quite easy to put your life on the living-hell track by "reporting you."

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), February 29, 2000.

Right on Dancr:

I have done the DHS several times in my life, as well as my children, they have even gone to the school and talked to my kids without notifing me. To me that was an infringement as a right as a parent, but I was poor and helpless. My kids defended me, but in MHO it is not the governments right to mess with people.

Weird thing is the child abuser lived next door, told the agent about it but they needed proof for that, weird they did not need proof to intimidate me... Oh I was poor He was rich, ha what a difference. I wish we could all get back our rights to our children and raising them poor or rich you can instill the important values... may keep the country from having a sicko as prez.

t

-- Salene (salene814@hotmail.com), March 01, 2000.

I think the title is absolutely perfect. That is essentially what the woman is being charged with; "Falling asleep on the job". How dare she!

-- Frustrated American Seeking Change (edandriva@usadatanet.net), June 27, 2004.