Site I just found very interesting..

Post links to other websites here. One thread for each website please, so we can discuss them.

Moderators: family_man, LindaJM

debbiescalese
Posts: 460
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:55 am
Location: WV

Site I just found very interesting..

Postby debbiescalese » Sun Feb 10, 2008 5:28 am

http://www.parentalrights.org/
don't know if it has been posted here before but it was some interesting reading Just thought I'd share if you havent seen it before.

Workingmom
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 4:05 pm

Thanks

Postby Workingmom » Sun Feb 10, 2008 9:53 pm

I went to this website and found that there is a ralley against cps in Dallas, Tx March 1st. I am so there.

debbiescalese
Posts: 460
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:55 am
Location: WV

Postby debbiescalese » Mon Feb 11, 2008 3:58 am

The whole site really got me thinking, I don't think there even is a such thing as parental rights anymore. There use to be but somewhere between the time I was a kid and now so the 70's and 80's the rights of a parent got pushed aside and seem to have disappeared. Think about it say you child got cancer (god forbid) the doctor says your child will die in 6 mos if no treatment is given but if we do chemo or radiation the child will be very sick but it might possibly prolong the childs life a few years. No your feelings are I rather have the quality of life and enjoy the next 6 months with her, maybe take trips ...make it memorable than watch the child suffer for that time to maybe get an extra amount of time out of it. The old quality vs quanity debate. So you tell the doctor no we are going home and going to enjoy the time we have. Doctor disagrees and by the time you get home if you even get that far CPS is there with a removal order because you are denying medical treatment for you child. Now isn't that suppose to be a parents decision? Okay that was an obvious one but stuff like this happens all the time. You as a parent really have not a say. In my cps case the therapist for my daughter wanted to give her therapy eow she didn't feel the child needed more than that her problems werent what cps said they were and they really were minor. CPS got a court order saying she had to go every week. I as the parent had no say, the treating therapist had no say. A single person who doesn't know my child, who has spent very little time with her, has no training in psychology got to make that call just simply because of her job title. Think about it parental rights What is that?

Momoffor
Moderator
Posts: 1307
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:17 pm

Postby Momoffor » Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:41 pm

It wasnt the 70's or the 80's where the rights of the parent got pushed aside. It was in the 90's with Clintons reforms to child protection. It was Hilary and her 'it takes a village to raise a child' that was the clencher.

Remember that on election day when you are pondering the 'great' things the Clintons have done for this country.

debbiescalese
Posts: 460
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:55 am
Location: WV

Postby debbiescalese » Tue Feb 12, 2008 5:46 am

No I think it started before the Clintons but it was slow the Clintons just sped things up and made what was happening even worse when they jumped on the band wagon. It started with Mondale then it just all went in the crapper.
Anyway yes economiclly 90's were wonderful and people remember that but it would be a cold day in hell before I voted for another clinton! I'd love to see a woman president inoffice but not that one. That family has been more of a danger to children than the drunken basterd that beats his kids for giggles could ever be at least an abusive parent only abuses thier kids (still not good ) but it is better than thousands upon thousands of children being abused by a system that fails to protect them when they are paid to do so.

Workingmom
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 4:05 pm

Me Neither

Postby Workingmom » Tue Feb 12, 2008 8:44 am

Bill Clinton is the one who created the bill for case workers to receive an incentive when they pull a child from their home. I sure as hell don't want his wife to be the president!!

When I think about the term, "parental rights", all I can vision is a big dark could with a huge question mark in it. Mostly because these people try to hide what your rights are so that they can violate them.

Gary Shaw
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 2:16 pm
Location: SE Georgia
Contact:

Postby Gary Shaw » Tue Feb 12, 2008 1:55 pm

The first meaningful legislation on Child Welfare was the "Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act" CAPTA, 1977 sponsored by Walter Mondale.

There are a total of 18 Federal Laws on the topic. Most of them are to renew the funding for CAPTA which has a sunset time of five years. The most significant was the "Adoption and Safe Families Act" of 1997 (during Clinton's second term). It is the legislation that provided cash bonus incentives to the States for increasing their number of adoptions over their base line number. Pres. Clinton did not propose nor pass the legislation, the Democrat Congress did, he signed it into law.

The next and last rewrite of CAPTA was the "Safe Families and Children Act" of 2003, that was in President Bush's first year. Again he did not propose it nor pass it, he signed it into law. CAPTA is due for renewal this session of Congress. Good time for all of us to email our wishes to our U.S. Senators and our U.S. Representatives, they are in session already. Everytime they renew the financing they tag a little something on the Law that is crippling to families, under the guise of "In the best interest of the Child".

We need a break, politically, this country has been under Clinton/Bush leadership for twenty years. We can't bear up to twenty four or twenty eight. That would be ten percent of the lifetime of this country. Think Huckabee, what we really do not need is a career Politician that has had very little private sector work experience or another Attorney. We really need the Fair Tax, talk about economic stimulus.

I emailed Gov. Huckabee's campaign office and asked for his take and stand on the illegal and unconstitutional manner CPS operates. I have not received a reply. If I do I will share it.
The two enemies of the people are criminals and the government, so let us tie the second down with the Constitution so the second will not become a legalized version of the first.
Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
littleplanet
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 10:31 am
Location: Toronto Canada
Contact:

Re: Site I just found very interesting..

Postby littleplanet » Thu Oct 20, 2011 11:04 am

What makes the parental rights issue so critical - is the legislation that "child protectors" hide behind, that essentially waives these rights, while at the same time preserving civil rights and basic human rights.
In a weird sort of way, this has come to mean that parents, as such, have no "human" rights.
I take this to mean that the labelling of someone as a parent literally dehumanizes them, and strips them of basic rights.

Anyone old enough to remember, knows that over the passage of 4 decades, parenting in our society (in the eyes of the law) has taken a massive shift.
We can look at changes in attitudes toward the drugging of children - often state-mandated, the restricting of children, in terms of their freedom of independent mobility (oftentimes, this just doesn't exist anymore) attitudes toward disciplining, whether that includes corporal punishment or not...
and the big one:

Within our economic system, but especially at the top, exists a growth model that is fundamental to its health.
I remember reading an author one time who explained this wonderfully: Think of the motion of a bicycle - if it moves, it remains upright. The minute it stops, comes to a halt...it falls over.

So too, in the child protection racket - growth is mandatory. In order to maintain funding, the numbers must increase.
This of course, is why the industry, and popular opinion promotes so strongly the idea that abuse is rampant, and they want us to believe that they are only uncovering the tip of an iceberg. This is essential to their vested interest.
If one looks at any statistical overview it is easy to find that for many years, the numbers have never gone down, only up.

Big Pharma operates in much the same way. Viewed on a global scale, America and especially its children are the most drugged people on the planet. The incentive is obvious: the profit margin is sacred.

My dark thought for the day:
Why is it that Foster "caregiver" abusers are so often unpunished, and remain beneath the radar?
Could it be because at that stage of the game, they are not a source of profit? They do not have the same incentive to fight for "their" children as biological parents possess. As such, they do not represent to the industry a profit source.

I do believe though, that over the past 15 years, if one examines the growth models of every single bubble, ponzi scheme and financial debacle that has brought us to the economic tipping point we now face....the child protective "industrial complex" reflects these realities all too well.
Revenue comes from two main sources: Government transfers (parents' taxes pay into this!) and service providers.
It is a beautifully criminial system....much like mobster extortion: the client/customer is perfectly trapped.
Parents will pay anything to get their loved ones back. This brings on the endless string of neverending fees to be paid, in which a child is not looked upon as priceless, but indeed, most "priceful."

Though this can appear too horrific to believe, consider that if a Government is willing to bail out criminal banksters, and let endless corporate gansters off the hook, why would they not legislate into law the protections that allow this child protection industry to thrive?

The more I study this, and I've only just started...the more I'm starting to see a picture of a society devouring itself.
If children are the hope of the future, we have implemented a system that allows us to borrow from that future.
As a society, from the top down, we will not consider reform of the existing bodies of legislation on moral grounds, because on economic grounds, there is simply too much at stake. In this manner - economic trumps moral, which is the basic tenet of all corporate thought and belief, which history proves to us is true.

Through the same time period we were de-regulating much of the protections set in place to guard against financial disaster (historically, since the Great Depression) we have also de-regulated much of the protection of the citizen-parent.
I do NOT believe that these two things aren't related.
just let me laugh when it's funny
but when it's sad, let me cry


Return to “Websites”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests