| Teen EXECUTIONS permissible- yet not family spanking?

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 04:50:34 GMT, "bobb" wrote:


"Kane" wrote in message
. com...
(Fern5827) wrote in message news:20040126112845.1On 26
Jan 2004 16:28:45 GMT, (Fern5827) wrote:

22 such executions of teens have been carried out in recent years.

In 1989, The USSC affirmed the legality of such executions.

And where does the USSC or any other law, state or federal,
prohibit
spanking, as per:

" Teen EXECUTIONS permissible- yet not family spanking?"

You had to ask if spanking was permissible, when you know the laws
as
quoted endlessly in this ng?

You are a liar, Arctostaphylos uva ursi.

Plain and simple, and each family that comes here will be told
that,
every time I catch you trying to lead them into one of your
bloodbaths, as you recently did to the person that asked about
information on kinship placement and you suggested they begin with
and
continue an adversarial hostile encounter with the state.

You are a liar, a cheat, and sick in the head to do this to people
who
are vulnerable and in terrible pain from loss or are anxious from
the
thought of impending loss.

How DID you get so sick?

By the way, do you think prisoners facing execution, young or old,
weren't spanked for discipline when they were little? Got any data
at
all to support such a claim?

Or do you concur...they were most likely spanked in a society where
90% of the families do use corporal punishment?

Kane

Ninty percent of convicts chew gum.. or did chew gum. Do yOu see any
relationship?

None whatsoever. Do you think I do? Is so, why?

How many received traffic tickets? Is that indicative of a
flagrant desregard for the the law?

Depends. Circumstances like how many, what kind. Could be flagrant or
not.

How many masturbate? Is that a
suggestion they are perps, too?

Nope, circumstances aside. Why would you think I'd think the were
perps for the common habit of masturbation? If so, why?

Taking a common behavior and extending it to justify a means is not
real
science... just a twisted mind.

That's why I don't do that, bobb. Spanking isn't a "common" behavior
on the same level as the three things you mentioned. Now if you used a
metaphor that included physical and psychological pain and
damage...well...........

I think you should sort that out a bit, bobb. It's the claim very
often used by the spanking crowd, and apologists. I'm simply repeating
THEIR claim THEY use, that 90+% are spanked in the college and
professional population, as though that was justification. There logic
is flawed. Just as you think MINE is.

They want to use the "extending" and I'm obliging them. You don't
REALLY think I'd seriously use this as a valid argument, do you?

It isn't a valid argument.

However, I will point out to you that chewing gum, getting traffic
tickets, and the common habit of masturbation do NOT have the same
negative psychological impact on someone's life as being hit by their
parents, people bigger than them charged with their safety and
upbringing...or would you disagree?

bobb

Sit bobb, sit. Think bobb, think. Think about metaphors, bobb. Think.

Kane



http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap...y.asp?ID=28781
...
22 such executions of teens have been carried out in recent
years.

In 1989, The USSC affirmed the legality of such executions.

http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap...y.asp?ID=28781

"Kane" wrote in message
om...
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 04:50:34 GMT, "bobb" wrote:


"Kane" wrote in message
. com...
(Fern5827) wrote in message news:20040126112845.1On
26
Jan 2004 16:28:45 GMT, (Fern5827) wrote:

22 such executions of teens have been carried out in recent years.

In 1989, The USSC affirmed the legality of such executions.

And where does the USSC or any other law, state or federal,
prohibit
spanking, as per:

" Teen EXECUTIONS permissible- yet not family spanking?"

You had to ask if spanking was permissible, when you know the laws
as
quoted endlessly in this ng?

You are a liar, Arctostaphylos uva ursi.

Plain and simple, and each family that comes here will be told
that,
every time I catch you trying to lead them into one of your
bloodbaths, as you recently did to the person that asked about
information on kinship placement and you suggested they begin with
and
continue an adversarial hostile encounter with the state.

You are a liar, a cheat, and sick in the head to do this to people
who
are vulnerable and in terrible pain from loss or are anxious from
the
thought of impending loss.

How DID you get so sick?

By the way, do you think prisoners facing execution, young or old,
weren't spanked for discipline when they were little? Got any data
at
all to support such a claim?

Or do you concur...they were most likely spanked in a society where
90% of the families do use corporal punishment?

Kane

Ninty percent of convicts chew gum.. or did chew gum. Do yOu see any
relationship?

None whatsoever. Do you think I do? Is so, why?

How many received traffic tickets? Is that indicative of a
flagrant desregard for the the law?

Depends. Circumstances like how many, what kind. Could be flagrant or
not.

How many masturbate? Is that a
suggestion they are perps, too?

Nope, circumstances aside. Why would you think I'd think the were
perps for the common habit of masturbation? If so, why?

Taking a common behavior and extending it to justify a means is not
real
science... just a twisted mind.

That's why I don't do that, bobb. Spanking isn't a "common" behavior

Spanking is a common behavior... employed by most parents at one time or
another.


on the same level as the three things you mentioned. Now if you used a
metaphor that included physical and psychological pain and
damage...well...........

I think you should sort that out a bit, bobb. It's the claim very
often used by the spanking crowd, and apologists. I'm simply repeating
THEIR claim THEY use, that 90+% are spanked in the college and
professional population, as though that was justification. There logic
is flawed. Just as you think MINE is.

They want to use the "extending" and I'm obliging them. You don't
REALLY think I'd seriously use this as a valid argument, do you?

It isn't a valid argument.

However, I will point out to you that chewing gum, getting traffic
tickets, and the common habit of masturbation do NOT have the same
negative psychological impact on someone's life as being hit by their
parents, people bigger than them charged with their safety and
upbringing...or would you disagree?

Why not? In fact, a large accumulation of traffic tickets are attribute to
those in jail. Studies have shown a correlation to the disregard of social
conformance and the lack of respect for property and the rights of others.

Chewing gum... hmmm.. is interesting, too. It even has sexual connotations
but is really too general to discuss so I'll give that one to you... except
it is a common denominator.

Masturbation? For years.. and only until most recently..
there was a negative psychological impact. Even today, people feel guilty
about mastubation, often dont admit it, and who knows what fantasy
accompanies the act. Masturbation is used as an indicator of an
uncontrollable sex drive that may lead to overt acts relating to fantasy.

You see, to zero in on spanking for future behaviors just doesn't make
sense no matter how you want to twist it around. I'm not even ready to
admit that severe beatings, or an abusive childhood contribute to
anti-social behaviors in later life. There are too many studies that show
people tend to treat other much differently than they were treated. Hence,
we do see a lot of spoiled kids these days. I've personally seen kids who
were terribly abused turn out as great persons/parents/husbands. The excuse
of an abusive childhood is probably a lame excuse for anything and
everything.. especially personal responsibility.

bobb



bobb

Sit bobb, sit. Think bobb, think. Think about metaphors, bobb. Think.

Kane



http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap...y.asp?ID=28781
...
22 such executions of teens have been carried out in recent
years.

In 1989, The USSC affirmed the legality of such executions.

http://www.accessnorthga.com/news/ap...y.asp?ID=28781

bobb wrote:

"Kane" wrote in message

Taking a common behavior and extending it to justify a means is not
real
science... just a twisted mind.

That's why I don't do that, bobb. Spanking isn't a "common" behavior

Spanking is a common behavior... employed by most parents at one time or
another.
--------------------
Nope, not a bit of it in the majority of families. If it occurs, it
is still quite rare.


However, I will point out to you that chewing gum, getting traffic
tickets, and the common habit of masturbation do NOT have the same
negative psychological impact on someone's life as being hit by their
parents, people bigger than them charged with their safety and
upbringing...or would you disagree?

Why not? In fact, a large accumulation of traffic tickets are attribute to
those in jail. Studies have shown a correlation to the disregard of social
conformance and the lack of respect for property and the rights of others.
---------------------------------
People with poor impulse control and substance abuse classically
wind up in jail or on probation or in court alot.

But THEY aren't the ONLY bunch who get tickets, people who drive ALOT
professionally DO TOO!


Even today, people feel guilty
about mastubation, often dont admit it, and who knows what fantasy
accompanies the act. Masturbation is used as an indicator of an
uncontrollable sex drive that may lead to overt acts relating to fantasy.
--------------------------
You're an idiot, it has no such relation.


You see, to zero in on spanking for future behaviors just doesn't make
sense no matter how you want to twist it around. I'm not even ready to
admit that severe beatings, or an abusive childhood contribute to
anti-social behaviors in later life.
---------------------------
That's because you're an asshole in denial. When someone assaults me
all they do is set up the revenge process in my mind, and my mind is
not one bit different from anyone else's AND than any child's! If
their reluctance in the face of my anger and resistance doesn't modify
and moderate in some manner, then they will wind up HARMED!


There are too many studies that show
people tend to treat other much differently than they were treated.
----------------
Total Nonsense. People treat others as they were treated. Period.
it's virtually impossible to change without extendsive contrary
experience contradicting their upbringing.


Hence,
we do see a lot of spoiled kids these days. I've personally seen kids who
were terribly abused turn out as great persons/parents/husbands.
----------------
"great"? Hardly.
That's ONLY because the people who SAY such crap happen to BELIEVE
that THEIR abuse of THEIR children is GOOD!


The excuse
of an abusive childhood is probably a lame excuse for anything and
everything.. especially personal responsibility.

bobb
---------------------
No. People are formed by experiences. Nobody uses their childhood as
an excuse, they didn't even think to do so, because WHATEVER it does
it was the way things were, and they thought that was NORMAL! Maybe
their attorney does, but they are PAID to bring up such an issue as
an explanation that a person was formed badly and consequently
performs badly!

"Spoiling" is a MYTH, it doesn't happen. Even giving a child anything
they want does NOT make them greedy or cruel, it makes them thankful
and it makes them expect things wrongly, but that can change when
they have it explained to them and when the accumulated gratititude
they have toward those who gave them so much is given its own chance.
Steve

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 13:07:28 GMT, "bobb" wrote:


"Kane" wrote in message
. com...
On 28 Jan 2004 04:05:46 -0800, (Greg Hanson)
wrote:

I SUSPECT based on personal observation

Don't you find it difficult running about making all those
"personal
observations" with the couch growing out your ass?

that the
undermining of parental authority and discipline

Odd, I have been seeing you folks claim for years that CP is the
experience of 90+% of the population. What "undermining" would that
be
then?

resulting from CPS

CPS has zero control in setting standards of parenting.

leads to more kids out
of control

Actually it's the use of CP that does that. You, for instance, are
a
wonderful example of the breakdown of discipline. You lack the
discipline to do more than whine and sit on your ass, and you were
undoubtedly a spanked child.

and on death row.

When you have a count of the number of "undisciplined as kids"
folks
sitting on death row, give us a jingle.

I suspect, based on personal observation of the legislative process
that the people through their representatives (that IS how we do
things in this country, Whore) decided that they were tired of gang
and other underage wannabees makin' their mark with murder.

And your claim, from your "personal observation" about more teens
out
of control does not stand up to even the most perfuntory search of
the
data on junevile crime rates. That rate is down and has been going
down for decades. Check DOJ and FBI figures.

The OLD WAY didn't have so many teens on death row.

You know this how again? But I'll conceed there were just more dead
children before they got to their teens and parents not held
accountable back in the "OLD" days.

Fact is any logical mind would get that malicious and stupid
parents
are being given, as was happening around the time of CAPTA up to
the
time of ASFA (designed to STOP the slaughter and abuse) less chance
to
raise such dangerous people as was the case when more children were
being returned to unrehabilitated parents, hence they grew up to
become some of the most dangerous children we have today.

It's not rock solid proof,

It's not even marshmallow soft "proof."

It doesn't even take "rock solid proof," just the capacity to read
some simple and easily found data at the DOJ site.

but it's STILL
better proof than what SIR ROY used when he
perpetrated his fraud which harmed
THOUSANDS of families.

Which, of course is one of your many diversionary asides. You
really
DO have a bad habit, whore.

But Fern has hit on an interesting logical point.

R R R R ....oh yeah: A Plant with A Point. Asparagus are sooooo
wise.

Why haven't "Child Protection" agencies been
screaming about these teen executions?

Why aren't the screaming about The Girl Scouts?

Well, because they don't usually "scream" about anything they
aren't
mandated by law do be involved in. One of those things is, because
they are designated as "enforcement" hence an "executive government
function" they don't make law.

Yep.. the most certainly do make the law. They employ lobbiest to
get
favorable laws passed... laws that give them authority and control.

And they do so only within the confines of their own responsibilities.
If you know otherwise and have proof let me know. I've served on
legislative workgroups and I know exactly the kind of bills produced
from my and my collegues work.

Inevitably it's to codify something that has already been a part of
practice (not policy) based on proven social work principles right out
of the countries best schools of social work. Often, as in adoption,
practices that are decades old and need clarification and standing in
law.

I am directly responsible for one state's Open Adoption Laws...that in
fact adoption workers had been doing as good practice since the early
70's and in fact well back into the 1800's by charitable groups.

No child should lose her past out of some outmoded idea that the child
starts over "fresh" when adopted. I am proud of my part in that.

Other laws ... constituted in policy are on the same order....the need
to have in law what workers MUST have to do their jobs effectively.
It's not the least about power...in fact it often takes power away
from them, just as Open Adoption did.....it being a contract between
an adoptive family and the bio parent...and THE STATE MAY ONLY SIGN
OFF ON IT, NOT ADMINISTER OR IN ANY WAY FORMULATE THE LANGUAGE. In
other words, all they get to look at is if there is any inherent
danger someone overlooked and didn't allow for.

Typical of "lobbying" as well. Legislators get very nasty if state
agencies "lobby" as a special interest group. It would be seen, as
I've had legislators tell me to my face, the executive acting as the
legislative...just as they don't allow judges to lobby on matters
other than operational issues.

Laws
that equate to the Patriate Act by John Ashcroft and Bushy baby...
deny
basic freedoms and parental authority.

Bull****. The policies and practices are designed to try and give
authority BACK to the families in a timely and safe manner...that was
the point of both CAPTA and ASFA. If YOUR state is not doing it, or
you are too ignorant to understand the mechanics get yourself better
educated.

Or even teen incarceration? No enriching environment?

Actually most states DO serve adjudicated youth through CPS or an
affiliate agency. Your ignorance is showing yet again.

Not until most recently.. and it took a federal court appeal to
force CPS
to provide services to the juvenile system. This is but a single
instance
where you rant about how great CPS is.. but then lean with the wind
when
change is demanded outside of CPS.

States have split off CPS into two agencies. One for Protective
Services to all other children, and one to serve adjudicated JO's.
Special foster parents with specific training, and paid more for the
extreme need for higher levels of supervision and skill.....and less
punitive and controlling methods than most parents use that got the
kid adjudicated in the first place.

They run their OWN foster system and the point of contention is
deciding who is and isn't a high risk high needs kid in the population
of adjudicated youth that are out of lockup. The two sister agencies
fight about it a lot with the JO offender group insisting (since they
too are cronically short fostered) a child is safe when it turns out
they are not, for a regular home.

I get so damn weary of the stupid misinformed people on this ng. The
go by the media, by hearsay, by...and I really DO criticize fosters
when they do this, by projecting and overlay of their own needs on
some facet of the system instead of really thinking their way through.

My favorite is the "confidentiality" issue vs the foster's right to
information. Guess which HAS to have precedence for the progress of
the case? Think about the various steps taking place that a worker is
going to have to manage when they come to court.

I often wish I could have been in the courtroom and heard the
testemony and arguements when a child was returned only to be reabused
or even killed and the worker gets blamed.

I've followed a few cases like that were there was even an admission,
after canning a worker for negligence, that the media announced that
the worker was following proceedures ordered by the court, even naming
the specific judge, but the worker was fired anyway....and when I went
to the paper that printed it they could NOT find it in their
archives...even though I named the judge in the case to them and
quoted some of my notes.

Funny how that works.

If you think YOU are a victim, as a citizen, of politics, you should
see how government workers are fed to the croc for political reasons.

Just no money to be made in this venture perhaps?

Just not allowed to do more than lobby on such issues since it's
not
their area of mandate, and they don't get to lobby on much of
anything
but HOW to do what child welfare laws dictate they do.

How do they escape being called hypocrites on this?

Easy. They are not allowed to control the other two branches of
government.

Additionally, CPS also doesn't involve itself until an allegation
of
abuse is made. They are not allowed to go crawling about looking
for
abuse or neglect unless they are contacted first.

Technically you might be right.. at least that's what they want the
public
to beleive.

No, I am right in practice. They may NOT cruise for clients.

But, we all know that is not quite true. They actively search
out reports of any abuse or neglect... even suspected instances..

They do no such thing. If they happen to see or hear of such an act
the are MANDATED REPORTERS and they damn well can lose their jobs and
be fined if they do NOT report.

Give me some examples with some kind of access I can check.

They
lobbied for mandated reporting and annonymous reporting.

Dreamer. No such thing. That was straight out of various state
legislations...not by any fancied lobbying by CPS.

It's what the phony balogna CPS "reformers" want people to believe
because it hits a person in their OWN vulnerability.

They even inserted
themselves in schools where they could maximize contact with
children..

Few places have fulltime school liaisons for less than a dozen schools
or so. They are not there LOOKING, they are there for short periods
LISTENING to reports, if there are any.

They've done everything except hang wanted posters.

They educate the public as to what IS abuse. If you don't like it,
shove it. I've personally seen, and I remember if from my own youth,
children being abused and neglected with NO recourse and NO constraint
of their parents.

Was a time when community sanctions would be enough...like the
preacher taking a family aside and asking them what was up with all
the injuries of their children.

We are too isolated now for that to be effective.

This gets them blamed for a lot of things they have zero control
over,
and you ninnies get to crow and posture.

No, we complain about the control CPS excerts... often
inapporpriately.

Name the "inappropriately" please. Examples offered before seem to
amount to desires to have them NOT actually investigate child abuse
except from miles away.....kinda stupid.

There is a difference.

Between what and what? I am telling you that they get blamed for
things they have no control over and no mandate for.

They are ordered by the court, for instance, to do things even they
don't want to do and are then blamed for it when it goes ass up.
....and the judge, the asshole, ducks the puck and everyone pretends to
forget where the order came from.

Yah really should learn about something before yah make a total ass
of
yourself yakkin' about it.

Now tell me I'm an "apologist" for educating you.


Not much of an education when you do nothing more than blindly
support CPS
even in light of changes brought about because of groups like this.

What changes do you think "groups like this" have brought about? They
crow over things that were changed independently of them and take
credit where none is due.

And I don't blindly support CPS. I educate you to what is actually
going on.

If you understood it, instead of the stupid "Destroy CPS" mindset
you'd figure out how to use it to actually do some reform while
keeping systems in place to keep children from being abused and
neglected.

You are abuse and neglect apologists pretending that child
endangerment and injury is a small problem when it's gigantic and
getting moreso whenever CPS is underfunded and understaffed....you
WILL see the stats go UP for injury and death of chidlren in the next
few years as this year and the next are tabulated. Happens every damn
time. Remember, I've been watching this since 1976.

Ignoring my information after over 30 years of this is kind of like
sticking your head up your ass and counting your polyps instead of
learning what causes them.

Get with the program bobb and stop believing the propaganda from here
and from you foster friends. .. you don't seem to be hanging with the
smarter ones.


bobb

Yo, bobb.


When you stupid buttwipes stop lying and excreting your ignorance
real
reform can take place. But fact is you are nothing more than phony
balognas busy with your own agendas....in your case trying to avoid
the truth about yourself, whore.

Kane

Too bad you don't listen to what you say... cuz you certainly don't listen
to anyone else. It's all too easy to twist ideologies to suit your own
mindset.

It's absurd on it's face to deny CPS has not be doing the job expected. One
needs to be both blind and deaf not to see what states and the courts are
just now discovering... much of which has been discussed in these newsgroups
for years.

BTW... I've been involved in both the juvenile justice system and CPS since
1962.... well before DCFS was established in Illinois. Of course, what I
have to say is unimportant to you... I see no sense in engaging in long
winded explanations that is beyond your misplaced perception.

bobb

"bobb" wrote in message ...
Too bad you don't listen to what you say... cuz you certainly don't listen
to anyone else. It's all too easy to twist ideologies to suit your own
mindset.

If I wasn't listening I wouldn't reply, now would I?

It's absurd on it's face to deny CPS has not be doing the job expected.

I'm not. I'm saying again and again, especially as relates to you and
your cronies, that your expectations are not in consistent with
reality.

A good example: When the space program was funded and staffed properly
we made great strides in exploration. The first accident hurt the
program badly, and then the second...the Challenger. The program was
still there, but cut to the bone. Then we had the last explosion on
reentry....and finally, someone is looking at how the program was
crippled.

Basically that is what I am saying happens to CPS in various states.
It's impossible to be 100% perfect...and when an error takes place you
yahoos, instead of supporting real exploration of the problems and
stepping up to the bar want everything for free with it all nicely
tucked away were you don't have to see what parents do to their
children.

One
needs to be both blind and deaf not to see what states and the courts are
just now discovering... much of which has been discussed in these newsgroups
for years.

No one has been blind and deaf. The MEDIA simply ignored it and the
politicians were perfectly happy for a bloody nightmare of parental
abuse and neglect to go ignored until it make good copy to DO
SOMETHING...ANYTHING AT ALL...instead of what needed doing.

BTW... I've been involved in both the juvenile justice system and CPS since
1962....

That's nice. In what capacity? I've known doctors that practiced for
30 years and were still dangerous to patients. Proximity does not
equal intelligence or understanding.

well before DCFS was established in Illinois. Of course, what I
have to say is unimportant to you...

On the contrary. I need to know what the ignorant are peddling at any
given time, so as to understand how they are being used by the phony
balogna CPS "reform" crowd..

I see no sense in engaging in long
winded explanations that is beyond your misplaced perception.

Then don't bobb. Just don't. If you don't know how to use a newsreader
filter ask. There's plenty here who do.

bobb

Stop peddling your garbage, bobb, and admit your ignorance, (that'll
be the day), and you'll be less offended. Your post indicates I got to
you. Good, someone should. You need help and knowledge you are in
serious denial about.

Kane

bobb wrote:

Too bad you don't listen to what you say... cuz you certainly don't listen
to anyone else. It's all too easy to twist ideologies to suit your own
mindset.
----------------
All you got is abuser-puke propaganda.
Steve

Bobb:
I get what you say, technically Juv Court and
CPS are two different things. However, there
are even technical aspects that blur that
distinction. Funding of Juvenile Court here
while routed through other channels, is tied
directly to CPS activity. Partly because of
the Federal Grant structure.

Certainly, to a parent wrongly accused by
a STATE caseworker, along with contractors
paid using STATE funding, in a STATE court,
before a STATE Judge, prosecuted by a STATE
prosecutor, and defended by a STATE public
defender, the fine bureaucratic distinctions
are not noticeable.

Neal long ago brought this newsgroup info
where a Judge described a retiring caseworker
as a very good ALLIE. (Phoned in to a radio show.)

The practical functioning is more like
CPS is an investigational ARM of Juvenile
Court.

The old (intended) idea that the court is
to be adversarial and a Judge is a NEUTRAL
arbiter is the way it should be, but it's not.

Any parent/s accused today and going into
Juvenile Court will VERY RARELY see a situation
where CPS has to PROVE anything to the Judge,
and the Judge is, flat out, a rubber stamp for CPS.

To expect an IMPARTIAL Judge in Juvenile Court
is just plain naive and a pipedream in most
cases. Only where CPS botches up their
paperwork as bad as in Dan's "Chimp" case
will a Juvenile Court Judge turn the family loose.

See the comments about Hixson's background,
where she hired based on politics, took
personal insult to motions to reconsider,
and fired a good Judge 'cause he wouldn't
"take it to the next level".

CPS and Juvenile Court are politically inbred.
They are both corrupt.
They are both loaded with zealots with a cause.
To a parent up against them, inseparable.

Sure, I'm glad that CPS isn't necessarily
into all of the delinquency cases.

It's an interesting point that Child Protection
does not involve runaways. More hypocrisy
as part of their system. In a way, isn't
this bad situation another way that CPS
knowingly allows (encourages) undercutting
of parental authority?

While technically they can distance themselves
from runaways, how can they on a practical level?

The hypocrisy of "don't spank your kids"
versus "we don't get involved with runaways"?

Isn't CPS agency lack of "involvement" with
runaways a knowing "failure to protect"?
And neglect? These are underage kids.

"Greg Hanson" wrote in message
om...
Bobb:
I get what you say, technically Juv Court and
CPS are two different things. However, there
are even technical aspects that blur that
distinction. Funding of Juvenile Court here
while routed through other channels, is tied
directly to CPS activity. Partly because of
the Federal Grant structure.

Certainly, to a parent wrongly accused by
a STATE caseworker, along with contractors
paid using STATE funding, in a STATE court,
before a STATE Judge, prosecuted by a STATE
prosecutor, and defended by a STATE public
defender, the fine bureaucratic distinctions
are not noticeable.

Neal long ago brought this newsgroup info
where a Judge described a retiring caseworker
as a very good ALLIE. (Phoned in to a radio show.)

The practical functioning is more like
CPS is an investigational ARM of Juvenile
Court.

The old (intended) idea that the court is
to be adversarial and a Judge is a NEUTRAL
arbiter is the way it should be, but it's not.

Any parent/s accused today and going into
Juvenile Court will VERY RARELY see a situation
where CPS has to PROVE anything to the Judge,
and the Judge is, flat out, a rubber stamp for CPS.

The Juvenile Court Act (Illinois) deals solely with crimes or anti-social
behaviors committed by juveniles.. including running away. CPS does not, as
a rule, become involved in Juvenile Court. In fact, foster kids who commit
a crime or run away are emancipated as uncontrollable.


To expect an IMPARTIAL Judge in Juvenile Court
is just plain naive and a pipedream in most
cases. Only where CPS botches up their
paperwork as bad as in Dan's "Chimp" case
will a Juvenile Court Judge turn the family loose.

See the comments about Hixson's background,
where she hired based on politics, took
personal insult to motions to reconsider,
and fired a good Judge 'cause he wouldn't
"take it to the next level".

CPS and Juvenile Court are politically inbred.
They are both corrupt.
They are both loaded with zealots with a cause.
To a parent up against them, inseparable.

Sure, I'm glad that CPS isn't necessarily
into all of the delinquency cases.

It's an interesting point that Child Protection
does not involve runaways. More hypocrisy
as part of their system. In a way, isn't
this bad situation another way that CPS
knowingly allows (encourages) undercutting
of parental authority?


While technically they can distance themselves
from runaways, how can they on a practical level?

Good question and though I don['t have the answer I might presume that a kid
who runs away from a foster home is doing so to return home. CPS might well
have to justify removal if they remained involved.. and they might also be
questioned why reunification is not an immediate goal.

CPS views themselves as providing a service and expects their 'clients' to
be appreciative and compliant.


The hypocrisy of "don't spank your kids"
versus "we don't get involved with runaways"?

Isn't CPS agency lack of "involvement" with
runaways a knowing "failure to protect"?
And neglect? These are underage kids.

Failure to protect? Neglect? The state is the guardian and it hardly seems
likely they want to be accused of such behavior. Their out is to have the
foster parent (mandated) a police report. Upon apprehension of the child
it's not unusual for CPS to threaten the child with being placed in a
juvenle home. It's also not unusual to find fault with the foster home to
explain the child's behavior... forgetting, of course, the child is fighting
removal from his home and nothing more.


bobb