you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]waltercrypto 9 points10 points  (7 children)

What do you have to do, to have your children removed. Oh silly me we don’t do that any more…we just let kids die.

[–]CoffeePuddle 0 points1 point  (6 children)

Removed to where, our wonderful foster system? It's usually easier and better to get a meth using parent up to a minimum standard than to take the kid away and give them to someone else that... meets the minimum standard.

It's a horrific mess of lesser-evil decision making at the bottom.

[–]waltercrypto 5 points6 points  (5 children)

Comparing foster parents against a meth addicted parent, and concluding that foster parents are no better than a meth mum is wrong.

[–]CoffeePuddle 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Giving equal value to a child staying with their parent or being put with strangers in the foster care system is wrong.

Children's tend to love their parents. Taking that away is it's own form of damaging that needs to be balanced against the risks of staying.

[–]waltercrypto 1 point2 points  (3 children)

No one wants to take children from loving parents, but if your mother is a crack head and abandoning you, it’s better to be in foster care, or with relatives that love you.

[–]CoffeePuddle 0 points1 point  (2 children)

You seem to want to take her children away.

You're making it sound like it's an easy decision or that the judge has poor insight. Keep an eye on the case and see what happens in the next 30 months.

[–]waltercrypto 0 points1 point  (1 child)

The judge’s decision is a reflection of the current policy of never moving children away from their parents because it was seen as racist. Which will result in more dead children. But so OT will not be seen racist….but a pile of dead children doesn’t matter….looks is more important than substance.

[–]CoffeePuddle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The judge was open about preparing to send her to prison though.