It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


DCF wants my whole family to be tested for STD's

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 04:05 PM
reply to post by Soldier of God

You're wrong. I would not alienate a group of people like that. My primary concern would be my son, not the criminal. A criminal investigation should be done for the sake of public order, but for the sake of personal charity, my son is FIRST. If evidence even remotely, but reasonably, pointed to a clear suspect, then further investigation should continue with full strength by the blessing of a judge. Otherwise, why not a door-to-door HPV testing van? The Perp is "possibly" someone behind one of those doors. Likelihood?... If that's the case, then why are the men not singled out in this blind wave of testing? At least that would be more honest and direct. Nevertheless, that still does not address the possibilities I pointed to above. There may be two perps, and there may be no perp.

If they test the most likely suspects, it would be men with access to the little one. This would even include DCF agents. If they test broadly, to be "fair," it would be everyone with access to the little. This would even include DCF agents. Instead, they have a corrupted twist of reasoning defining their test subjects.
The lack of a contiguous flow of logic in commoners' reasoning skills is mind-numbing. Truly, we are getting the government we deserve.

A general conversation, and thorough reference to a background check (which should be normal when placing a state-protected child into someone's custody) should be enough to, at least, narrow down the list of possible perps. AND EVEN MORE SO, THERE MAY NOT BE A PERP. Based on the info I read, the child has HPV. That is not a test of a crime. What the heck is wrong with people's ability to reason these days? Sometimes I wonder if there actually is some sort of conspiracy causing people to be ignorant, or maybe we are simply still far less evolved than we think we are.

I'll stick to my second hypothesis until something is proven to be hindering us animals rather than most simply being not-quite-more-than-animals.

I'll conclude this post with; If I was investigated in the manner described by the OP, I would refuse and require a warrant first. If there was a "first round" of testing of men with immediate and enduring access to the little and I had even a slight "fudge" on my criminal record, I would submit to the testing without requiring a warrant. However, that is not the case described. I would not accept this sort of twisted logic to trample on my rights. It's just not reasonable. I can easily imagine cases in which it would be.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 04:07 PM
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

Here's the trick... it wouldn't rule him out. He could have abused the little one and the little one could have contracted HPV later. This test is not a test of criminality. Logic doesn't work like that.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 04:18 PM
reply to post by Dasher

The only person that would refuse helping to narrow down the suspect list would be someone with something to hide or such a jerk they care more about themselves than that little victim.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 04:22 PM
If this story is true....the fact is: a little girl in the care of others has a serious disease that a little girl should not have. It has been requested that all involved in this little girl's life should be tested. Who the heck would not be ok with this....for the sake of the little girl???
I would see red flags for anyone who refueses testing. That is just how it goes.....

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 04:35 PM
So there you have it, near unaanimous take the test mate and hope ya pass....
Truely the whole thing is a dicey situation considering the comonality of the disease and the lifstyle of the origonal mother.....
It could be very likely that this disease was contracted at birth or before she even came your way....
If you do have HPV unknowingly it would be best to be forewarned, and i would take the private test first.
if the test is clean, then ok go for the goverment one....
If it comes back that you have it well youll need a pretty good lawyer whether you are guilty or npot.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 04:41 PM
It's either someone close to you that deals with this little girl or the mother herself from her background of choice. You can't deny that, the faster you take the test, the faster they rule you out, and go to the mother. If the mother doesn't have it, then it may be someone she knows or someone you might know. Don't you want the truth, rather than the "My rights BS"? That would be the most important thing to think about as of right now.
edit on 2-7-2011 by Manhater because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 05:49 PM
reply to post by Soldier of God

Your first supposition is obviously not true in all cases, and your second is antagonistic and judgmental without graciousness or wise consideration.
Please consider possibilities other than those which shed a poor light on those who disagree with you.
More so, please address the definite cases that I have stated specifically in contrast to your limited viewpoint or I have no intention of considering your words further.

Any subject with an emotional edge tends to send sheep over the emotional ledge.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 05:51 PM
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

Explanation: Uhmmm?

Well, all I can say is if it was to protect MY five year old little girl, (or niece, Im not sure what relation she is to you,) and to help discover who had been messing with her, I would do anything.

Including but not limited to selling yours and everybody elses rights down the sewers!

OK ... Who is the monster here?

Personal Disclosure: Your post implies he is guilty by association ALONE! How would you feel if it were applied to you and the courts said because you shared membership with a one Erad3 [aka Jared Loughner] or even OmegaLogos [aka me
] on ATS that everything in YOUR LIFE should be investigated to the Nth degree including medical testing for possible abberant genes and or STD's!

Somebody think of the children ... won't someone think of the children???

How about Somebody think of our rights ... wont someone think of OUR rights???

Because if you flush yours and or the OPer's rights down the toilet ... then what chance does the little girl have in a future where rights are absent [without leave
] ???


posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 05:58 PM
reply to post by stirling

I think that you misunderstand the meaning of "unanimous."
Please hear clearly that I don't mind errors, but carelessness and lies are not high on my list of likes and they distract from threads. I have laid out very clear reasons as to why this situation should not be treated in such a blind "do anything for justice" sort of zombie-ness and also why justice is not served by such conduct.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 06:04 PM
reply to post by greeneyedleo

And I see giant red flags with yellow stars when our birth-rights are tossed out over something which will not necessarily bring true justice. I have stated this clearly: There may be no perp and there may be two perps. An HPV test cannot uncover the truth if the OPer's information is as complete as the situation really is. Although I can admit that it may help, it would only do so along with other evidence. If there were enough evidence for an HPV test to necessarily prove rape, then it would be a rare case and investigators would have already done their work instead of being lazy-butt Amerikans seeking instant gratification (read: comfort justice) rather than true justice.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 06:05 PM
reply to post by Dasher

True. You are correct. He could be HPV negative, and had abused the girl, and a third person could have infected her.

Good point.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 06:09 PM
There is a childs health and well being here -
help who did this get their punishment -
nothing else matters but the child, not
even your rights. You and everyone should
be tested! Simple as that!

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 06:11 PM
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

Thank you so much!
I felt like I was going a little nuts.
I would hate to see an HPV test put away an innocent person, or let free a guilty person.
Order should certainly be sought, but in an orderly AND charitable fashion.


Can we seek Order Charitably?
Can we seek Charity Orderly?
Not while we cower under the flags of Mankind.

Added note - I am not anti-government. I am anti-bad government. Any government that does not lead by order and charity is perverted and is false government. Most of the time it is large government which fits this description. EVERY empire falls, and that will always be the case. The big question is; How long will it take for the second step of our spiritual evolution to take hold of our conduct en masse? I often wonder if it will ever occur on a large scale.
edit on 7/2/2011 by Dasher because: a note

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 06:15 PM

Originally posted by jerryznv
This is not good...once DFS (Department of Family Services)...or in your case DCF, is involved it very rarely turns out least in my opinion.

I have never had any involvement with them but my 4 sisters have had some run in with them and in every case it was a nightmare for my sisters. I understand what they are supposed to do and why there is such a organization...but I think there is a lot of B.S. that they can bring to a family.

Your circumstance is odd...I would think that getting tested should be no big deal...but I do understand also what a violation of privacy it must seem like too.

I think your going to find you are left with little choice in the matter...and without sacrificing your own dignity and complying with them...your going to find yourself in a huge mess. My advice is just let them test the family and work it out from there...a lawyer would be nice...but not everyone can afford you do seem to have your hands tied.

I feel for you...good luck.
edit on 2-7-2011 by jerryznv because: ...

edit on 2-7-2011 by jerryznv because: ...mad spelling errors...sorry...

Its worse, if the girl has genital warts, and if the family likes to throw people they have disagreements with in jail or sue, and if anyone in the family she stayed with has gential warts, this can be spread on toilet seats though you would have controversy, one side of medical professionals saying one thing, and another side saying something else.

Can you imagine the dilemma? It could be an open door to being abused.

Just having warts is not enough, it can be circumstantial. Also in the drug use family, there could have been sexual abuse from one of their not so reputable friends, and there could be physical evidence within her, and the warts could be spread from a foster home, after the fact, and yet this could put the wrong people in trouble.

edit on 2-7-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 06:19 PM

Originally posted by OmegaLogos

Including but not limited to selling yours and everybody elses rights down the sewers!

Volunteering to take the test is NOT selling everyone elses rights down the sewers. How everyone elses rights end up down the sewers is when people dont behave in ways the majority would, willingly, and that tends to start some movement to make a law to compel them to, which then ends up with the result that now, no one has the right to refuse.

They can likely get a warrant. Remember they made Micheal Jackson go down and let them take pictures of his privates? I do. So its really not a matter of throwing anyones rights away in any sense of the word. Its just a matter of common sense. If it were a child I cared about, I would want them to find out who molested her. And I would do what it took to eliminate myself as a suspect. Even if I found it unpleasant or humiliating. My concern would be finding out who harmed my family member, and I would want them to eliminate me as quickly as possible, not fixate on me and potentially miss the real culprit.

Originally posted by OmegaLogos
Because if you flush yours and or the OPer's rights down the toilet ... then what chance does the little girl have in a future where rights are absent [without leave
] ???

I get that you are very emotional. But you arent very rational. And you arent very well informed about what they already can and cannot do. They already dont need his permission. They have the right to get a warrant if they can convince a judge he is a likely enough suspect. All they are doing is asking him to save themselves that trouble, and maybe for good reason. Maybe they think it is unlikely a judge will give them one. But, that goes back to my original point. I would want them to catch the person, and I would willingly do what was necessary for them to eliminate me as a suspect. If he is an activist, with nothing to hide, he should just tell them, "Its my political position to never allow searches without a warrant, so go get one and I will comply with it." Thats his right.

But he seems to be looking for ways out even if they do get a warrant. Which is, in my OPINION, suspicious. And its just an opinion. I would be suspicious of someone that desperate not to be tested.

Originally posted by OmegaLogos
Get your prioritories straight first ... Protect the rights of everybody 1st because without them [y]our children haven't got a chance in HELL!

Voluntarily complying with something doesnt endanger your rights, or the rights of others. Only if they have to go to court to fight for something they want are your "rights" endangered, because case law affects the way the courts interpret your "rights," and if you lose, you have just affected everyones rights.

edit on 2-7-2011 by Illusionsaregrander because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 06:22 PM

Originally posted by mishigas
Lots of sentiment in this thread.

My question is what if all family members are tested and come out clean? And the mother has a bunch of sketchy bf's in her past...can the bf's also be required to be tested?

AND…what if he (Op) already has it? Has in fact had it for years?
It is quite a common std and one that not everyone who has it, knows they actually have it
ie. a carrier. No visible symptoms.

Then his response is entirely appropriate to this situation.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 06:30 PM
reply to post by lspilot6946

Unlike the rest of the SHEEPLE I agree with you. They should have a COURT ORDER with reasonable cause per the Constitution. If you have NEVER been alone with the girl they do not have reasonable cause.

On the other hand cross your T's and dot your i's bu going to your OWN doctor, or better yet a cash only type Doctor who is not in any way connected to the government, and get the testing done PRIVATELY so you can protect yourself from a false positive if push comes to shove.

As a Quality Engineer I will tell you bad test results are common. Readers Digest did a study and found 20% of the medical testing was BAD!!!!

Heck bad test results is one of the reasons given by the USDA for blocking Creekstone from 100% BSE (Mad Cow) testing of its meat!

...JAMES ROBERTSON United States District Judge:

The government's additional argument, that private testing somehow would interfere with USDA's surveillance program, is unexplained and therefore rejected. Of greater concern is the possibility that private testing could produce a false positive result, which might trigger unnecessary public alarm. USDA has asserted this possibility as a reason to avoid private testing. Indeed, the Bio-Rad kits that Creekstone proposes using are used throughout the world, including as part of the USDA's own surveillance testing.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 06:30 PM
I also want to say in general;
The loss of freedoms is a punishment (as we understand things to be in our modern society).
Losing your rights for the sake of "comfort justice" is treating people as guilty (and punished!) until proven innocent.
Advocating such a mindset is anti-American and, more importantly, anti-truth/justice.
Injustice for the sake of justice is Machiavellian horse turd.
By the common sentiment on this thread, I say again: We are getting the government we deserve.

Remember, there may be no perp, there may be one perp, and there may be multiple perps.
They may be within homes she stayed in, schools she learned in, or public facilities she was served in during her transition away from her mother and towards other familial covering.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 06:38 PM
HPV is a very common virus. If someone that your niece was in the care of does test positive it wouldn't be an absolute indication of guilt, but would be worthy of further investigation. Your refusal to test however, seems very suspicious, and you only seem to be worried about your own rights. What about your wife and children? Most importantly- this little girl, your niece, who it seems has had to deal with a lot in her short little life, may have been sexually abused. Why not cooperate in every way you can? Maybe no one touched her. Maybe she was born with it. Maybe she contracted it from her mother and then it cleared up on it's own and can't be linked back to her. There are a lot of possibilities. You should do what you can to help eliminate some and get closer to the truth.

posted on Jul, 2 2011 @ 06:39 PM
reply to post by lspilot6946

Just do it. But make sure you bitch about everyone else getting tested to. In fact demand that the social worker get tested to. Since she's had access to the child also. Complain to her boss if you can.

That's messed up that you have to go through that. But there's a kid involved and you don't want to look like a raging pedo.

And document everything.

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in