Damn CPS!!!! At it again!!

[Kirk Freeman]

Could you supply some real world examples of CHINS and TPR's? I am not familiar with these acronyms.

That is my fault, rambling on in jargon.

CHINS=>child in need of services

http://www.in.gov/dcs/files/6.B_Tool_-_Statutory_Definition_of_CHINS.pdf

http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/2010/title31/ar34/c

TPR=>termination of parental rights

Indiana Code 31-35-1

 

[steveh_131]

That is my fault, rambling on in jargon.

CHINS=>child in need of services

http://www.in.gov/dcs/files/6.B_Tool_-_Statutory_Definition_of_CHINS.pdf

http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/2010/title31/ar34/c

TPR=>termination of parental rights

Indiana Code 31-35-1

You still didn't offer any real-world examples...

However, I would say that CHINS should not be transferred. They should be done away with.

And TPR should be an assumed status when the parent is physically absent or imprisoned for abuse. What further bureaucracy is necessary?

 

[IndyDave1776]

You can deputize CPS workers if you like and call them police officers... because a rose by any other name is still a rose. Again, I won't argue that CPS is not run properly; I will only bring up the fact that there seems to be a place in our society for a mechanism to handle these unfortunate situations.

Leaving control solely in the hands of parents that are unfit does not seem to be the answer...this isn't Utopia. And the police force as it stands is not built to deal with this. CPS is far from perfect... but as far as I can see, they are the chosen mechanism. Its not a perfect mechanism and it needs fixed, but there seems to be a validation for its existence...

...well, unless someone else can give me a better way of handling these cases. And please... be realistic. Don't tell me we need to teach parents to be better.

OK, and a skunk by any other name still stinks. A deputized social worker is not a police officer and will likely still not have an adequate understanding of due process in law enforcement and likely will not care to understand better.

We have already discussed a better solution. Child abuse is a crime. Arrest violators. If necessary provide care for the children. A largely unaccountable group of people who operate at best under minimal due process by nature is not an acceptable solution.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

E.g. a child is found in a cockroach-infested home, dirty, without food or clothing. A CHINS petition is filed to establish court supervision over the child and parent(s). If parent does not clean up his or her act (or both), then termination of parental rights can be sought.

However, I would say that CHINS should not be transferred. They should be done away with.

Repeal the CHINS proceedings? And allow each judge to implement its own CHINS program via appointing guardian ad litems who would file guardianships?

You are right back at square one AND you have created 92 plus different CHINS statutes.

And TPR should be an assumed status when the parent is physically absent or imprisoned for abuse. What further bureaucracy is necessary?

Federal and State Constitution and due process, anyone?

No right to counsel? No right to a hearing? No right to present evidence or cross examine witnesses? Just an assumed status by a government official checking a box? Who knows what Rule of Man lurks in the heart of Libertarians? Only the Shadow.

Do the INGOtarians know about your impure thoughts?

 

[IndyDave1776]

It seems to me that, typical of government, this is deliberately made far more complicated than it needs to be.

 

[steveh_131]

E.g. a child is found in a cockroach-infested home, dirty, without food or clothing. A CHINS petition is filed to establish court supervision over the child and parent(s). If parent does not clean up his or her act (or both), then termination of parental rights can be sought.

Repeal the CHINS proceedings? And allow each judge to implement its own CHINS program via appointing guardian ad litems who would file guardianships?

You are right back at square one AND you have created 92 plus different CHINS statutes.

What on earth are you talking about?

There should be no proceedings. There should be no guardianships. If there is physical or sexual abuse, prosecute it. Otherwise, stay out of it.

Federal and State Constitution and due process, anyone?

No right to counsel? No right to a hearing? No right to present evidence or cross examine witnesses? Just an assumed status by a government official checking a box? Who knows what Rule of Man lurks in the heart of Libertarians? Only the Shadow.

Do the INGOtarians know about your impure thoughts?

All of these things would occur during the trial that would result in the imprisonment of the parent...

Are you high?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

What on earth are you talking about?

I am giving you the real world examples that you requested just above. You can act shocked and confused, but you requested them.

There should be no proceedings

Ah, yes no proceedings, no due process, no Constitution. Just checking a box on a form. Who gets to check the box?

If there is physical or sexual abuse, prosecute it.

If there is no abuse but the parents are unfit or incompetent, what is to be done with the children?

If there is physical/sexual abuse, what will you do with the children without guardianships or DCS or guardian ad litems?

State camps?

All of these things would occur during the trial that would result in the imprisonment of the parent...

I don't think you read through the termination of parental rights statute and understand how TPR hearings work.

Criminal proceedings are not TPR hearings. Evidence as to the parental-child relationship is immaterial and would not be allowed.

Why would you disallow a parent to have his day in court before ending his rights?

 

[steveh_131]

I am giving you the real world examples that you requested just above. You can act shocked and confused, but you requested them.

No, you didn't. You just gave me the same acronyms.

Ah, yes no proceedings, no due process, no Constitution. Just checking a box on a form. Who gets to check the box?

No box to be checked. Leave them alone.

If there is no abuse but the parents are unfit or incompetent, what is to be done with the children?

The government should leave them alone.

If there is physical/sexual abuse, what will you do with the children without guardianships or DCS or guardian ad litems?

State camps?

Like I said, this is the one legit purpose that you have given a real-world example of. I'm open to discussing the best way to handle it.

I don't think you read through the termination of parental rights statute and understand how TPR hearings work.

Criminal proceedings are not TPR hearings. Evidence as to the parental-child relationship is immaterial and would not be allowed.

Why would you disallow a parent to have his day in court before ending his rights?

His rights are ended when he is convicted and sent to prison for abuse or whatever other reason. This should not happen before his day in court.

 

[level.eleven]

Double tap. /10 char

 

[level.eleven]

You spank your kids? Could you be prosecuted for assault for spanking me?

THAT is the context of my children as chattel. Nothing more. If you can show I'm physically harming my kids within the context of the law when applied to adults (assault, murder, etc; I don't approve of separate laws for separate classes of people), then prosecute me.

Nope. You are getting spanked, Lucky. No separate laws for separate classes. Chattel is chattel.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

His rights are ended when he is convicted and sent to prison for abuse or whatever other reason.

You advocate that your parental rights should terminate upon one being sent to the Indiana Department of Correction? For Possessing more than 30 grams of Marijuana, a felony? For driving when not allowed?

Your position is duly noted. But your Libertarian position will be a tough sell in the General Assembly?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

No, you didn't. You just gave me the same acronyms.

I clearly defined them for you. Go back and read post #141 where I defined them for you.

 

[steveh_131]

You advocate that your parental rights should terminate upon one being sent to the Indiana Department of Correction? For Possessing more than 30 grams of Marijuana, a felony? For driving when not allowed?

Your position is duly noted. But your Libertarian position will be a tough sell in the General Assembly?

.... While you are in prison, you can not be a parent. None of those are good reasons for being in prison, but that is a different topic for discussion.

While someone is incarcerated, I think it is a legitimate function of the police to find a caretaker for their children.

How are you not getting this?

I clearly defined them for you. Go back and read post #141 where I defined them for you.

You think that providing a link to the code is a 'real world example'?

Regardless, I get the point and I answered the question.

 

[rambone]

Its clear to me that no matter what the ideal system looks like, it is absolutely imperative to get the Federal Government as far away from "child services" as possible.

How CPS evolved into a legal kidnapping business
[video=youtube;CKM0nRASkpg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKM0nRASkpg[/video]

 

[Kirk Freeman]

While you are in prison, you can not be a parent.

LOL, this will come as a shock to both the Department of Correction and the thousands of parents that are incarcerated in Indiana.

While someone is incarcerated, I think it is a legitimate function of the police to find a caretaker for their children.

You said you wanted to abolish guardianships but now you want to give the police the power of issuing guardianshiop orders. So police have the power of judges in LibertarianWorld? That should have time on warrants!

What do you call it when the police do everything in a society? Is it a Police State or something?

You think that providing a link to the code is a 'real world example'?

You think that providing a link to the code is a 'real world example'?

Yes, it is citing to the source. We have an on-going thread that inspired this thread. INGO has ongoing threads about children CHIN'd out of a cockroach-infested house.

 

[steveh_131]

LOL, this will come as a shock to both the Department of Correction and the thousands of parents that are incarcerated in Indiana.



You said you wanted to abolish guardianships but now you want to give the police the power of issuing guardianshiop orders. So police have the power of judges in LibertarianWorld? That should have time on warrants!

What do you call it when the police do everything in a society? Is it a Police State or something?

Yes, it is citing to the source. We have an on-going thread that inspired this thread. INGO has ongoing threads about children CHIN'd out of a cockroach-infested house.

I may not be using the correct legal jargon, but I think you get the gist. I have no interest in playing this game with you.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Fine. *kicks rocks*

Remember, the cure may be worse than the disease. However, there is plenty of room for improvement in DCS.

Before you get to "curing" DCS one must address the underlying Welfare State that creates the fodder for DCS. To drain the swamp, abolish the Welfare State. Cure the disease, don't treat the symptoms.

My $.02.

 

[steveh_131]

Fine. *kicks rocks*

Remember, the cure may be worse than the disease. However, there is plenty of room for improvement in DCS.

Before you get to "curing" DCS one must address the underlying Welfare State that creates the fodder for DCS. To drain the swamp, abolish the Welfare State. Cure the disease, don't treat the symptoms.

My $.02.

While I certainly agree with abolishing the Welfare State in every form, do you really think that would cure the problem of DCS?

There would still be a thriving nanny state that even affluent people would want to utilize to control each other.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

do you really think that would cure the problem of DCS?

Yes. The Welfare State creates the Life at the Bottom (the book) culture that creates the DCS actions. Re-establish the Lash of Poverty and you abolish unmarried child bearing, the drug culture, the sloth culture, inter alia.

You would still have a DCS of sorts but it would deal with emergencies (e.g. both parents dying in car wreck) but it would be much reduced.

You know the drill, the politicians create the problem and then create the "solutions" to the problems which only aggravates the problems that they attempt to cure.

Kill the Welfare State and stop subsidizing the bad behavior that DCS is involved in.

 

[CarmelHP]

Yes. The Welfare State creates the Life at the Bottom (the book) culture that creates the DCS actions. Re-establish the Lash of Poverty and you abolish unmarried child bearing, the drug culture, the sloth culture, inter alia.

You would still have a DCS of sorts but it would deal with emergencies (e.g. both parents dying in car wreck) but it would be much reduced.

You know the drill, the politicians create the problem and then create the "solutions" to the problems which only aggravates the problems that they attempt to cure.

Kill the Welfare State and stop subsidizing the bad behavior that DCS is involved in.

Absolutely agree.