It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Child Welfare used as a Guise for Probable Cause

page: 1
11

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Bus stop chit-chat is how this topic came up this morning.

A residing neighbor a few blocks down, had been relocated to a rental home due to Super storm Sandy, informed me of a problem they are having at the moment. She has a 2, 4, twin 7, 12 and 14 year old in her home with her husband. She has a job as a driver and in many cases must leave the twins home alone, before and after school, due to her schedule. Well as you can figure, someone called DYFS setting off a train-wreck series of events that I could discuss for hours on here, but she did not break ANY NJ laws. I have no love for this agency DYFS(Division of Youth and Family Services), for their track record has them creating more problems then they fix at times, much to the trouble of the children. The agency blankets the country, though the name may change from state to state and anyone who has dealt with these 'stuper-nannies' knows just how incompetent and misappropriated their actions can be.
But the question came up, that there is no law(in NJ) regarding when a parent can or should leave a child home alone. The age at which a child can be left home alone is only legislated in four states: North Carolina, Illinois, Maryland and Oregon. North Carolina & Maryland the age is 8, Oregon is 10 and Illinois it is 14. There are many suggestions as to the right age, depending on state, as defined in the 'Latchkey' program. A program that has been adopted by many schools throughout the US and is also at my daughters school here in NJ.

Link to Latchkey Kids

The National SAFEKIDS Campaign recommends that no child under the age of 12 be left at home alone.
However, consider a child's age and maturity level. For example, if a child is extremely impulsive, it might be best to wait until he or she is older than 12.

Latchkey Children Age Restrictions By State

Alabama - None
Alaska - Unknown
Arizona - None
Arkansas - None
California - Unknown
Colorado - 12 *
Connecticut - None
Delaware - 12 *
Florida - 18 *
Georgia - 8 *
Hawaii - None
Idaho - None
Illinois - 14
Indiana - None
Iowa - None
Kansas - 12 *
Kentucky - Unknown
Louisiana - None
Maine - None
Maryland - 8
Massachusetts - None
Michigan - 11 *
Minnesota - None
Mississippi - None
Missouri - None
Montana - None
Nebraska - None
Nevada - Unknown
New Hampshire - None
New Jersey - None
New Mexico - None
New York - None
North Carolina - 8
North Dakota - 9 *
Ohio - None
Oklahoma - None
Oregon - 10
Pennsylvania - None
Rhode Island - Unknown
South Carolina - Unknown
South Dakota - None
Tennessee - 10 *
Texas - None
Utah - None
Vermont - Unknown
Virginia - None
Washington - 10 *
West Virginia - Unknown
Wisconsin - None
Wyoming - None

* Guideline ONLY: These states do not set a specific age after which a child legally can stay home alone but do provide recommendations.

That's all fine and great but as I dug deeper into this I could not find the information regarding how they came up with these specific age standards to begin with. Was it just a group of bureaucrats relying on some advice from another antiquated agency? Seriously it seems odd to me that there is such discrepancy between states. For example, North Carolina's legal requirement is 8, yet South Carolina is 'Unknown'!


(I am going to be deliberately vague here as to not offend any one race or group)
Now, as I spoke of earlier, my 'bus stop buddy'(who her and her husband are of a very specific race and religion) live in what is a very old, closed community, except for the main street rentals. In her case this agency used these laws(guidelines) as a vehicle of probable cause. Forcing entry into her home under the guise of child welfare to gain access. Access that would NOT have been allowed by law otherwise. Much of this spurred on by bigotous, old, religious(different from their own) neighbors. It has happened on many occasions to her family now, she feels targeted and threatened by them. I found it ironic, for I was there watching the other night, just a minute as the mass of police cars came screaming down the street, I thought it was a robbery - 6 police cars!

Maybe it was an isolated case. Maybe my buddy wasn't telling me the entire story either. Either way an alarm has gone off in my head alerting me to yet another loophole in our already corrupt system.

In closing, this thread/situation took me in a couple directions, all of which I find important.
In summary, Do you think it's fair that our government can set standards for our children?
(What age a child can be left alone?)
(How much a child should weigh?)
(How fast a child should learn?)

These examples are listed specifically by me, many others have been left out. Ultimately, they all can lead to someone removing your children from your home or having your rights violated.

What do you think ATS?

AB




posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


I think this is a great topic for ATS. There is simply no clear answer but it's a topic that people should noodle over before they ever encounter it. It's my belief that venues like ATS help people do that.

Do parents essentially "own" children like property?
They do under any Islamic based system. Christian systems too, if you go back far enough. Is that the simple answer?

Anything with the State involved is flawed at least half the time.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 10:46 AM
link   
I would suggest that Government recommendations should be in place to assist those who are less capable of making sensible informed decisions relating to the welfare of children. It really is all about common sense IMO, and unfortunately there are people who are fortunate to have children, but do not have much of a higher learning ability than a child.

We have a social responsibility to protect the vulnerable in society and children certainly fit into this category, but in general most folk do an excellent job of bringing their children up, ensuring they are well balanced individuals and prepared to make their own way in this mad mad world.

On the flip side, there are parents who lack any parental skills and their children are at a disadvantage from day one. These are the children we need to be protecting, but of course in this overly Politically correct world, we are not allowed to target the individuals who need assistance and every child then becomes part of this nannying state.

Government recommendations are fine, but common sense is the real key, most people have it, some do not.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


In my state (Washington) you'd think they would be all over this nanny state for kids stuff but surprisingly they're not. They use guidelines and in my experience common sense. I say experience because my wife and I adopted two kids through the state and had extensive experience with these social workers, foster kids and the state bureaucracy (over a period of a dozen years.)

IMO these folks were overworked and stretched pretty thin in caseloads and I'm not one to cut any government workers any slack. Never saw a single case here where they were acting in anything other than the best interest of the child.

Not sure what the difference is here but it might be an idea to review these laws or maybe poach some of the social workers.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Bassago
 





IMO these folks were overworked and stretched pretty thin in caseloads and I'm not one to cut any government workers any slack. Never saw a single case here where they were acting in anything other than the best interest of the child.


I completely agree, I'm one of those that believe there is conspiracies within our government and officials but they are just innocent bystanders also. Everyday working people doing there best for the most part, not all though, always exceptions. Somehow the system breaks down in poor, overcrowded, crime ridden areas and things go awry. My area is not one of these though and for someone who lives a few blocks away it seems odd that this is happening here.
I spoke to her again when the kids got home from school and she feels she needs to take DYFS to court now over illegal search and wrongfully accused. It upset her children very much and their attempted 'raid' was unfounded in the end.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 06:18 AM
link   


I spoke to her again when the kids got home from school and she feels she needs to take DYFS to court now over illegal search and wrongfully accused. It upset her children very much and their attempted 'raid' was unfounded in the end. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...


As far as the statute of illegal search she is dreaming. Trying to take DYFS to court would be eternally stupid. I am not sure what you mean by 'wrongfully accused'. For the life of me I can't understand what legal basis any of this would be built on.

As far as the safety and welfare of children the courts don't want to hear excuses because you have taken on more than you can handle.

As far as that list of states there is no statue that there is a legal age to which a child can be left alone. I have never heard of such a thing since almost all parents are responsible enough that this never occurs, or becomes a legal question.



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


I think it depends on the child, not the age.

My youngest tells me than we he was 3 he was more responsible i am! I have little doubt that he isn't too far off the mark. some 15 year olds are capable of caring for a younger sibling, some 15 year olds are not to be trusted with themselves.

From what you have said, i would think the lady is making the wrong call. on the other hand, it is often a catch 22 situation. without work your family doesn't eat, paying for childcare means there is no money for food either.

I am shocked she hasn't found someone to sit with the kids, in exchange for her sitting with their kids. if that makes sense. there are many possible solutions that don't have to cost



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by spooky24
 





As far as the statute of illegal search she is dreaming. Trying to take DYFS to court would be eternally stupid. I am not sure what you mean by 'wrongfully accused'. For the life of me I can't understand what legal basis any of this would be built on.


I couldn't agree with you more, I just didn't have the heart to tell her. I only know her through standing at a bus stop and she feels very passionate about 'making them all pay'. I didn't want to burst her bubble.

I found out a long time ago trying to beat agencies in these matters is futile, they will bury you in costs, time and travel.


reply to post by eccentriclady
 


I agree I wouldn't/couldn't leave my 3 yr old alone especially for 20 minutes. Daycare is an issue here in central Jersey it is about minimum $600 mth and when you have more then 1 kid it gets to be too much. She was relocated away from everyone she knew in Keansburg during the storm, so now she is up here all alone. She knows nobody and access to nannies and babysitters is a joke here, I tried it once and gave up on that idea real fast. We all have to rely on people we know for the most part.
edit on 4/16/2014 by AnteBellum because: add




top topics



 
11

log in

join