A leftist defending the state. Who'd a thunk?

(04-29-2013 04:13 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 04:08 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(04-29-2013 03:35 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Sounds to me like the hospital is making the call. CPS doesn't appear to be acting alone here...someone at the hospital had to give them some type of information to warrant the removal.

It will be interesting to hear what the judge has to say.

Doctor at the hospital told police *THERE WAS NO RISK* in having the kid at home. No imminent danger what so ever, no accusation of abuse or neglect.

This is all beyond the fact that staff at hospitals have should not be adjudicating legal matters

I believe that was the second hospital that said that.

And under the CA law, the first hospital is required to report any perceived abuse to CPS.

That's why it looks to me like CPS is working on information from the first hospital.

This should all come out when the judge hears the case.

Was the second hospital a legit medical facility? So you had two reports from two hospitals we know that one said Kid is fine, we don't get the see the details of the second.

Because CPS pretty much gets to do whatever they want without consequence....




Then they can do whatever and schmucks and statists will say "well whats the big deal let the court handle it"..

In the mean time two parents who's biggest sin was taking their kid to a second hospital without properly signing out of the first had the police raid their home and take their baby.

Why in the hell is the kid not back with the parents tom? Even if this was an "honest" mistake by CPS made because they did not consult the second doctor they now have that opinion. And for the freakin record the police talked to the doctors and staff at the second hospital the day before they raided the parents home!

--

Why is this scarey? Because the federal government has made it their mission over the past few years to get more and more involved with our health care. Now if the prescribe a procedure for your kid and won't check you out to get a second opinion then they can take your kids..

BTW, to all the people questioning the parents who got asylum from Germany this is not all that different from what they were fleeing..

Why the Leftist, self proclaimed progressives, want the government in ALL facets of our lives is beyond me. They are now, literally, in our baby's Nurseries.

So if the state has information that children are in danger, you don't want them to act. Gotcha!

<end hyperbole>

Look, all I'm saying is that we wait until the court rules before we condemn anybody, okay?

If the state is wrong, then I'll gladly condemn their actions. And as I admitted above, I would have preferred that the law be written with an immediate oversight process in place. Of course that also calls for more government bureaucracy which I KNOW you all would love

How about with the absents of evidence they restrain themselves.

(04-29-2013 05:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Look, all I'm saying is that we wait until the court rules before we condemn anybody, okay?

And in the meantime while this works it's way through family court an infant is taken from the parents and made a ward of the sate when there is no evidence of abuse or neglect..

Quote:If the state is wrong, then I'll gladly condemn their actions.

Wow thats a toothless criticism if ever I heard one..
It's wrong to deprive people of due process without real cause tom, it does not matter how things pan out in the courts.

Quote:And as I admitted above, I would have preferred that the law be written with an immediate oversight process in place. Of course that also calls for more government bureaucracy which I KNOW you all would love

Or... and here is a funny thought... let's just make CPS workers criminally accountable for gross professional misconduct... These gestapo tactics would stop the minute there would be consequence for them.

Too little or much government bureaucracy is not the problem... Too much power and too little accountability is!

1) Fact - There was no records or indication sof abuse or an unhealthy environment before the visit

2) Fact - The doctors recommended heart surgery on an infant and dissuaded the parents from getting a second opinion

3) Fact - The parents took *their* kid from the hospital without being properly checked out... Remind me whose kid it is?

4) Fact - When the police caught up with the parents later that day, at a second hospital, getting a second opinion they were told the kid ws fine and in no danger

What part of this reeks of a situation worthy to tackle the dad, take his keys, enter his house, and take the kid based on CPS policy alone?

If CPS has this much power to do things without a warrant then clearly we have gone too far.

(04-29-2013 05:05 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So if the state has information that children are in danger, you don't want them to act. Gotcha!

<end hyperbole>

Look, all I'm saying is that we wait until the court rules before we condemn anybody, okay?

No, it's not ok. dumb***. The rule of law is that you have the evidence first.

Quote:If the state is wrong, then I'll gladly condemn their actions.

No you won't, you'll defend them w/ some twisted excuse. Now run along toby.

Quote: And as I admitted above, I would have preferred that the law be written with an immediate oversight process in place. Of course that also calls for more government bureaucracy which I KNOW you all would love

Wow, couldn't even finish your post before you started making excuses.

Shame everything can't be put back as it was.

(04-30-2013 07:54 AM)smudge12 Wrote:  Just an update, but the judge ordered the child's return and all charges have been dropped.

Sent from the Alpha Quadrant using my Communicator.

Good news, but I want to see charges brought against everyone involved in this kidnapping.

(04-30-2013 07:54 AM)smudge12 Wrote:  Just an update, but the judge ordered the child's return and all charges have been dropped.

Sent from the Alpha Quadrant using my Communicator.

Haven't seen where he has been returned yet. Latest story I can find says he will be transferred to a hospital, which begs the question where has the baby been since 4/24? If his medical condition was so dire shouldn't CPS have placed the child in a hospital as soon as they stole him from his parents?

Quote:The 5-month-old baby boy who was seized by authorities in Sacramento, Calif. will be transferred to a Bay Area hospital for further medical evaluation, a court ruled Monday. However, the baby’s parents are celebrating a victory as they can now see him whenever they want and will be in charge of all the child’s medical decisions moving forward.

A detainment order has been lifted, but Child Protective Services (CPS) will continue to monitor the case, KXTV reports. The court also ruled that the parents must follow all future medical advice, including not removing their child from Stanford Medical Center without proper discharge.

“A county social worker will make regular house visits to check on Sammy once he is returned home,” the report adds.

“It’s like a special day for us. It’s like we’re in a unit with our son again,” the baby’s mother, Anna Nikolayev, said. “We’re just not going to let go anymore.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/...by-police/

Note the two bolded sections. They can see him whenever they want. To me that implies they don't have custody of their child. "Must follow all future medical advice" How in the hell is that being in charge of medical decisions? They tried that once before and the hospital wouldn't discharge him so they could get a second opinion.

This still reeks. CPS should be severely punished, as should the initial hospital that refused a discharge knowing the parents wanted a second opinion from another hospital.

(04-30-2013 07:54 AM)smudge12 Wrote:  Just an update, but the judge ordered the child's return and all charges have been dropped.

Sent from the Alpha Quadrant using my Communicator.

And the state workers were sentenced to stand in front of a mirror and quietly say "My bad" when they were alone this morning.

Wonder how long this is dragged out if not for the press coverage..

(04-30-2013 07:54 AM)smudge12 Wrote:  Just an update, but the judge ordered the child's return and all charges have been dropped.

Sent from the Alpha Quadrant using my Communicator.

So a court order was needed to return the baby but none was needed to take it.

(04-30-2013 08:35 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  “A county social worker will make regular house visits to check on Sammy once he is returned home,”

So Tom, two questions

1) Was CPS remotely justified in taking the kid solely because the parents removed them from a hospital without discharge (whos kid is it)

2) Is it right that they will continue to harass the family solely because the parents removed them from a hospital without discharge

(04-30-2013 08:48 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 07:54 AM)smudge12 Wrote:  Just an update, but the judge ordered the child's return and all charges have been dropped.

Sent from the Alpha Quadrant using my Communicator.

So a court order was needed to return the baby but none was needed to take it.

I still don't see where the baby has been returned to the parent's custody. It just says the baby has been transferred to a hospital and the parent's can visit whenever they want.

(04-30-2013 08:51 AM)smudge12 Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 08:35 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Note the two bolded sections. They can see him whenever they want. To me that implies they don't have custody of their child. "Must follow all future medical advice" How in the hell is that being in charge of medical decisions? They tried that once before and the hospital wouldn't discharge him so they could get a second opinion.

This still reeks. CPS should be severely punished, as should the initial hospital that refused a discharge knowing the parents wanted a second opinion from another hospital.

I read this story: http://rt.com/usa/us-court-russia-child-594/

Quote:“After five hours of deliberation and analysis of factual information presented by both sides, the judge decided to dismiss all charges against the parents”, the Russian Consul in San Francisco, Evgeny Avdoshin, told RIA Novosti.

“In line with the verdict, the baby will remain with his parents”, he added.

My apologies if I posted the wrong information.

Sent from the Alpha Quadrant using my Communicator.

I don't see anything wrong in that story, just slightly different information. Either way glad the baby is going to be back with his parents soon if he isn't already.

Now it's just time to punish CPS.

(04-30-2013 08:49 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  1) Was CPS remotely justified in taking the kid solely because the parents removed them from a hospital without discharge (whos kid is it)

2) Is it right that they will continue to harass the family solely because the parents removed them from a hospital without discharge

it looks like its possible that the doctors at the first hospital might not have permitted a discharge since they thought surgery was needed. What's a parent supposed to do? I think they did the right thing.

Also regarding the first hospital, how do you go from needing heart surgery to not needing it at all? If the kid really didn't need heart surgery then those doctors need to be looked at very closely.

What's the ACLU saying about this?

(04-30-2013 08:48 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 07:54 AM)smudge12 Wrote:  Just an update, but the judge ordered the child's return and all charges have been dropped.

Sent from the Alpha Quadrant using my Communicator.

So a court order was needed to return the baby but none was needed to take it.

+1

(04-30-2013 08:57 AM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(04-30-2013 08:49 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  1) Was CPS remotely justified in taking the kid solely because the parents removed them from a hospital without discharge (whos kid is it)

2) Is it right that they will continue to harass the family solely because the parents removed them from a hospital without discharge

it looks like its possible that the doctors at the first hospital might not have permitted a discharge since they thought surgery was needed. What's a parent supposed to do? I think they did the right thing.

Also regarding the first hospital, how do you go from needing heart surgery to not needing it at all? If the kid really didn't need heart surgery then those doctors need to be looked at very closely.

What's the ACLU saying about this?

I agree. The parents were trying to be in charge of their child's medical decisions, but it appears the first hospital wasn't letting them do so.

Another lesson to learn. NEVER answer the door for a cop unless you call them. NOTHING good is going to come from engaging them. Ignore them. Make them go get a GD warrant if they want to enter your home and fully videotape ALL interactions with them on your property or in public if possible.

It must really suck to be the CPS broad that had this child kidnapped from their parents.