6-y.o. Who Walked Alone to Post Office May be Removed from Her Home

I’m not usually a fan of the term many state, but this is such a literal example.

It strikes me that neglect (at least in the non-legal sense) connotes a lack of proper thought, care and attention. It sounds to me like family has done the exact opposite; they’ve put a lot of thought, care and attention into their parenting approach, and the same thoughtfulness, care and attentiveness into implementing that approach.

Please keep us up to date, and we are all pulling for you.

Oh gosh, this makes me sick to my stomach. I allow my six year old to walk between her school and the church that houses her dance class. It’s is exactly the same kind of walk– all residential with one T stop crossing.

This family has done nothing wrong and I wish them all the best. Shame on CPC and the police in this case.

Thanks for writing about these, Lenore. You wrote about my similar experience and the parallels here are eerie- ex parte movements, weekend removals… dollars to donuts they won’t be able to “find” kin care if they try to take this kid.

I may have little to offer but if this man wants to get in touch I’d be happy to compare notes.

This is me:

https://www.freerangekids.com/cps-took-my-kids-because-i-dont-hover/

As a parent in OH who’s about to start homeschooling a child next year, I have this sinking feeling that the authorities wouldn’t be quite THIS concerned if the child in question was enrolled in public school. I am saddened and sickened that something like this is going on in my state and desperately hoping it’s not in central OH?!

OP, I sincerely hope that everything works out just as it should–in your favor.

I am not a lawyer. But I would be willing to write a letter of support for the parents, sign a petition and do whatever else I can to defend Emily and her parents. I will email one to you Lenore, and ask that you pass it on since there is no contact info.

“Our world is not a safe place and children go missing each day and are raped or killed, so parents may want to exercise appropriate caution.

If we lived in a Utopian world, this caution would not be necessary; unfortunately, we live in a world where some individuals can and do hurt children.”

Yes, children do have real dangers as pedestrians- car accidents. My 6yo went to school today on bike with her siblings. Each day the go I remind them of REAL dangers- watch out for the cars, always assume they don’t see you. Her bike ride to school wakes her up and prepares her to learn, not to mention responsibility.

As for predators, my kids know they are more likely to get struck by lightning than have a rare encounter with a predator. They know most of the homes on their route and the families that live there. They’re schooled in “what would you do” scenerios.

Also, “While we don’t want to instill fear in our children”-STOP. You are perpetuating a myth. That of a child predator lurking in the bushes trying to pluck 6yo’s off when the predator is more likely to be in their own home, someone they know, who takes advantage of them.

Our world is not a safe place.
You can fall out of bed, down your stairs and slip in the bathtub and drown even before you step into this great big bad world. If “Parents may want to exercise appropriate caution” there would be a less driving everywhere and more walking.

That would save a lot of kids.

I let my 11 year old roam all over our Ohio town. Luckily our police are looking for.real crime. Kids do not go out after dark on their own. And every kid has a cell phone, yeah I know, but we ditched our $150 u verse home phones to keep them. Kids a hundred years ago went everywhere, heck so did my age group, 40 and under. We have only most people.who think they are do gooders and the media to blame. I do not need Hilary’s village, back off former VP, only YOU actually HAD a village to watch your kid as you were too busy too.

I have worked with our equivalent of cps several times in the past year bc they have been called in on my ex a few times. First of all I can’t help but wonder if your uncooperation is giving them the impression of guilt so they are pushing harder. This is not to blame the victim, but considering the populations they typically deal with, avoiding them is probably common and never a good thing from their perspective. It also seems they are either overworked in certain areas and can’t accomplish anything or underworked in others, such as yours so they go into an overkill mode. I would call the ACLU in your area, but would also begin to cooperate. They have the authority to take your kid, right or wrong, and maybe meeting them part way will appease them enough to back off. Mind you, I am not responding this way because I think what they are doing is ok. I am merely giving you suggestions about how to function in an incredibly messed up system.

While this father seems to be perfectly capable at raising a child, the real problem is that he is being purposefully uncooperative.

Anytime someone justifies uncooperative behavior with “I am doing what is required by the law”, I have to look at them funny.

Why wouldn’t you just answer the door? Is it possible that by having a conversation with the HUMAN working for CPS that maybe this entire issue could have been resolved? A simple misunderstanding?

Instead, by your account, it sounds as if you are remaining tight lipped and refusing to explain yourself. Should you be required to explain yourself? No, the law says you do now. And yet, you have no problem providing a valid explanation for your parenting choices on a public website!

The world hasn’t gone crazy. The world is filled with people, whom, given the same account you just gave us, would likely have let this whole thing go. Stop treating the police and CPS as evil organizations, and realize that a person was knocking at your door, not a robot.

Reason above all else!

Every CPS organisation around the World must be shut down and illegalised. They stop at nothing to destroy the emotional stability of every child. They are run by some of the most evil people around.

“…and we view it as a threat to our homeschooling her, our parental rights, and both my and Emily’s civil liberties.”

Amen to that. The part that bothers me most about the cops harassing my 6yo daughter for walking outside alone, is that they are trying to take away her right to freely move about. She’s done nothing wrong; she’s not breaking any law. Why should she be forced to take a chaperone with her everywhere, when all of her older siblings were allowed to go off on their own at the same age? 🙁

“Stop treating the police and CPS as evil organizations”

Maybe they should stop acting as evil organizations.

First rule of dealing with any agent of the state is to not volunteer anything. Yes, be polite and answer what you must, but they do NOT have your interests in mind, and anything you volunteer can only be used against you.

I’m not going to feel cooperative towards someone who desires to take my children away.

I know a woman who is a drug addict. She has five kids, but she does not take care of them at all. She drops them off with friends or relatives “for an hour,” and disappears for days or weeks. Her kids cry whenever she tries to leave them somewhere, because they know she will not “be right back.” They never go to school unless a relative takes it upon themselves to get them there — or the older kids arrange to get themselves to school, if they feel like it. She’s always either in court on truancy charges, or missing her court dates. She has not had a stable place to live since I met her more than a decade ago.

I know for a fact that CPS has investigated her more than once. She has been brought to the attention of the authorities multiple times. But never have they taken the slightest action against her. I guess they were busy saving children from being allowed to walk to the post office all alone.

About Hillary’s village: Free range for me goes completely hand in hand with “it takes a village to raise a child”. Calling the cops, detaining the child, and attacking the parents is not how a village should behave. The village consists of the people that the child could ask to help him if he ever needed it. Right now, the police are teaching Emily that they are the bad guys, instead of the good guys. In the event that she does need police assistance is Emily going to feel comfortable going to a guy in blue? No. They are destroying community.

But the helping in case of an emergency is only one example of why it takes a village. It takes a village because a child’s parents are two (or one) persons with their own unique sets of strengths and weaknesses. Kids need to be around people who are different from their parents. My children learn independence from me, they learn kindness, yoga, how to get along, how to make a point, because I am good at these things. But I’m not so good at organization, I can’t play the trumpet and I don’t get calculus, to name just a few things I don’t know, and so it takes the people of the community to share these talents and skills with my kids, to take an interest in them. But the fear of predators has led to a fear of neighbors, and neighbors are also afraid of looking like predators, and this comes at a great cost to our children, who do not get the benefit of other members of the community from whom they could learn. It also comes at a great cost to the members of our community who could benefit from being useful to our society by educating our children, not in a big institution but simply within the neighborhood, as the need arises in a natural and organic way. This is especially damaging to retirees who, in another time, were greatly valued for their time to teach what it takes a lifetime of work to learn.

Unfortunately we hear most often about the misses and the false alarms. I don’t think it’s fair to state that “CPS is the greatest source of evil there is” — this fails to take account of their hits, which considerably outnumber the misses and false alarms, distressing though those are. Many children’s lives are saved from abusive and neglectful parents by necessary state intervention.

Something to think about: If CPS takes Emily away from her parents, it will be reported that she was “saved from…neglectful parents”. So how does that make you feel about all the other reports about CPS “saving” children?

Perhaps if we had no CPS, family and neighbors would respond more quickly to situations like the one Anonymous 9:28 talked about, where children really are neglected. Instead, people call CPS and leave decisions up to a bureaucracy.

There isn’t much good that comes from bureaucracy.

@Brian, that’s exactly the point… we live in America, the land of the free. No one should be giving up any rights… What you said means we’re no longer free, which unfortunately, is very true.

@Elizabeth
“I’d be curious to see some numbers regarding how many actual cases of abuse are dealt with by CPS each year, vs. incidents where they are simply harassing responsible parents.”

The problem is, CPS itself would determine which is which.

More than most agencies, the CPS has the expectation that you entirely self-surrender yourself to its “benevolent” system. Big Brother stuff and they don’t see it, because it’s them.

It IS a civil rights issue of the greatest magnitude: the freedom to move about.

Next, of course, will be “fun” children’s “passports” and ID papers, that you’ll be pressured to get in order to pass muster as a “good” parent. 🙂

I don’t know…something about this story is tripping my radar. I think there’s more to this story than what we’re hearing. And to all you people demonizing CPS? Really? Yes, they make mistakes. But I can guarantee that it’s because they’re overworked human beings who genuinely care about kids not jack-booted thugs. It’s an incredibly thankless job and deserving of much more respect than most people give it. CPS is a **safety net** exactly because friends, family, and neighbors don’t get involved and have no legal authority to protect children from abuse. I support the Free Range movement with all my heart but let’s not make a joke of ourselves by spouting flat-earth, everyone’s out to get us conspiracy theories, ok??

Look, if you want to live somewhere that you can walk to a library and post office, then you give up certain rights. One of those is that you have to cooperate with police and help them do their jobs.

Cooperating with police does not mean giving up certain rights. The police are supposed to protect our rights.

I think that CPS workers have a hard time overcoming their own desire to ‘save’ kids, and this saviour mentality actually contributes to both ‘misses’ (cases where CPS fails to prevent abuse) and ‘false positives’ (cases like this where CPS harasses innocent families.

Several people here have stated that the father in question is ‘acting guilty’ when he refuses to cooperate. Except that this is an incorrect assumption (though it is probably the assumption CPS is also making). Guilty people in CPS cases don’t tend to argue, stonewall, or cite the law – guilty people tend to flatter, cry, tell sob stories, and ask for help. It is innocent people who are most likely to react in anger and fear at having their care of their own children questioned and threatened.

But because CPS workers go into the field out of a desire to save kids and families, they react much more favorably to the individuals that will let them ‘save’ them than they do to the outraged innocents who resent their interference. So…addicts who throw themselves on the mercy of their case worker, vow to do better, take whatever parenting courses they are told to…will be treated with more kindness and consideration than this family will be. Not because CPS has a policy of persecuting homeschoolers and others who are well-educated and independent, but because individual CPS workers distrust people who don’t want their well-meaning ‘help’.

To all the people saying he should just cooperate with CPS, you have to realize that both cooperating and not cooperating have risks and benefits.

If you refuse to cooperate, you risk being seen as “probably guilty.” You risk alienating someone who might have seen that you did nothing wrong and dismissed the investigation. You give up explaining yourself. However, you protect rights that our Founding Fathers felt were important enough to include in the Constitution — rights intended to protect the innocent from abuse at the hands of the government. And you protect yourself from having your cooperation used against you.

A lot of people see cooperating as trading “small rights” to protect “larger” ones. But they forget that anything you say can be used against you! What if you let CPS into your house, and they don’t like what they see? It doesn’t even have to be something wrong — evidence of your religion might unfairly bias a social worker of a different religion against you. What if you let them speak to your children, and they take something innocent the wrong way? Think of that big scare in the 80s when therapists convinced dozens of children that they’d been molested — and it all turned out to be untrue.

I’ve also read cases where the authorities insisted on cooperation that went far beyond answering questions or checking out the house. Homeschooling parents have been forced to submit to burdensome paperwork and inspection of curriculum in states where it isn’t required by law. They go along because they don’t want to cause trouble, but that gives the authorities an edge to force even more families to comply. CPS also has a tendency to force “cooperation” in the form of parenting classes and even temporarily taking the kids away. They justify it by saying the parents agreed, when the parents felt they had no choice — it was cooperate or risk losing their kids forever.

Personally, I don’t think it’s wise to “cooperate” with the authorities without an attorney to help protect your rights and protect you from having your cooperation turned against you.

As someone involved in foster care in a number of different ways, I think it is important for each of you deciding that CPS is evil to check your privilege and perception.

This story seems silly. However, there are a number of other stories of children in dangerous and neglectful situations where the intervening of CPS and affiliated organizations literally saves lives.

I suspect there’s more to this than the story. They guy seems itching for a fight, insisting on “rights” and generally being uncooperative.

I got a letter once from the City claiming that I had a building permit that needed to be closed. Turns out it was issued to the previous owner. A phone call and a letter and it was cleared up. But if I had mailed it back and generally been hostile it would have probably resulted in fines and fees.

Another time I got a summons to a state for an outstanding traffic violation – for a car that I have not had in years. Again, I could have ignored it but instead I called them and explained the situation – and got it cleared up.

This guy seems to want to provoke a situation to prove a point, rather than solve the problem. I’m not sure I’m on his side in this.

I am astonished – an average 6year girl is not considered old enough to walk 3 blocks by herself? What a shame for the child to not be able to roam free, without parents/adults. What a shame for the parents to have to hover at all times. What a shame for the town to eliminate children from daily life.

I grew up (in Europe) 30 years ago. I was 4 years old, when I was allowed to buy bread for breakfast all by myself (a good 10min walk away along a relatively busy street, crossing several smaller streets). I was 6.5 years old, when I visited my aunt by train (changing twice, and having 2 younger siblings in toe).

Isn’t it more dangerous if kids cannot do these things by themselves?

This situation scares me for my young children.

PS, you might look at my “what ifs” — regarding what could happen if you cooperate — and scoff, “Please, the government doesn’t just harass innocent families for no reason.” But you’d be forgetting that this whole story started with the government harassing this family for no reason. That’s what it is when the police detain and interrogate you for nothing other than walking down the street with your own daughter. Harassment. Once he gave his name and verified that the little girl was his daughter, there was no legitimate reason to detain him, even if he refused to answer any further questions.

This guy seems to want to provoke a situation to prove a point, rather than solve the problem. I’m not sure I’m on his side in this.

This guy didn’t provoke anything. He let his little girl walk to the post office. The police and CPS are the ones trying to
“prove a point.”

So you asked about lawyers. Two legal blogs I read regularly:

“The Volokh Conspiracy”, http://www.volokh.com/
“Popehat: A Group Complaint about Law, Liberty, and Leisure”, http://www.popehat.com/

They are both generally libertarian/liberty oriented and likely would be sympathetic to parents who just want to be left alone by the government; you might want to get in touch with the authors of one or both of them to see if they could recommend someone.

Her’s what he says on his first encounter with the cops:

“in accordance with my 5th amendment rights, I refuse to answer any questions.”

Now IANAL but the way I read it, the 5th amendment does not apply here at all. So he starts off by being hostile to the cops, who are trying to do their job. Which probably raises all sorts of flags with them, and leads to escalation – which he feeds by his hostile behavior to both the cops and CPS.

This whole thing could be avoided by being polite and by treating others with respect. He seems to have authority issues.

The dad says a call was made to the pd that a “strange man” was talking to a child. Obviously, this family has been reported more than once. The cops and CPS is doing their jobs and following up after a complaint was received. If a child is in danger,and they didn’t do their job of following up, then that as just as neglectful for the child’s protection as the dad in this story.

Wow! This story really bums me out. It saddens me that the father is being treated like a criminal and that he has to even prove his rights. He did nothing wrong here, he didn’t break the law.

I have two disabled brothers, and my family has had to deal with our share of social workers. I have friends that currently work as social works for those parents who actually do put their children in harm’s way (i.e. abuse, drug use, actual neglect). It’s a tough, tough job, and there are plenty of problems with the system. Our family was investigated by CPS because my younger brother had trouble gaining weight, and a women in the grocery store saw the 3 of us with our mom, and assume my mom was starving the youngest based on his weight. I was young, maybe 8 or 9, but clearly remember my mom’s embarrassment and anger of the situation for being treated like a horrible mother by CPS. With 2 disabled children, she had enough to worry about and our parents did their damn best raising us.

So disappointing to hear how police handled this situation. He allowed his kid to walk on their own (legal), and then was treated like a criminal? The police really need to give law-abiding citizens the benefit of the doubt.

I wonder if this was a mom instead of a dad, if someone would have called in the first place? We always associate men as being “suspicious” with children, but not women? This is not the first time we’ve seen this issue.

I wonder where CPS actually fits in our system of law and order? I admit to being ignorant on this matter. It sounds like they have more leeway than the cops (the cops don’t demand to come in your house without a warrant).

Do they really have the right to take away a child just because the parent chooses not to answer the door? When there have been no allegations of actual bodily harm (abuse, starvation)? What could the imminent threat be? To suggest taking away a child, wouldn’t there have to be more than just a difference in philosophy on how old a child should be to do xyz?

Is anyone here “in the know” about the place and powers of CPS?

All of those saying that the father should have just cooperated are preaching a dangerous ideal. You are saying the father should teach his daughter that it’s alright to give up your rights, voluntarily in this case, to make life easier and that a government agency can, in essence, demand you give them up if you assert them.

Let’s be perfectly clear here: There was no evidence of wrongdoing whatsoever. The only evidence being used against this man and his family is the fact he asserted his rights. He is not being charged with any sort of obstruction at all. He has done nothing wrong and shouldn’t be forced by a government agency to give up his rights to prove it to them. The concept of innocent until proven guilty seems to be lost of a bunch of the folks commenting. It doesn’t matter one single bit how he is acting as long as it a legal manner in which to act, he is innocent until proven guilty.

When it becomes suspicious to assert your rights then we’ve taken a wrong turn in this country. Every person who values their rights should be rallying behind this dad and supporting him. He did nothing wrong, at all, and the burden of proof isn’t on him but rather the agencies harassing him.

I disagree with every comment saying he is putting his rights above his daughter’s needs. (And the double quotes in the original makes me sick to my stomach as what he is asserting are actually his rights) His daughter needs to know what are her rights and how to assert them against a representative of the government overstepping their bounds. I would rather my children know and understand their rights and how to stand up for them than I would they know the capital of Argentina. He is standing up for his rights, period, full stop. It is these very rights on which our country was founded. Every weak minded milquetoast individual suggesting he relinquish his rights in the face of governmental interference needs to take American History 101 again because they have obviously forgotten why we have the bill of rights to begin with.

SKL, in Texas CPS does not have the right to enter your home without a warrant. However, they routinely get around this by implying that you have to let them in, and then claiming that you gave them permission. Which, technically, unless they physically force their way inside, you did.

CPS can legally take your children on a temporary basis without you even getting to appear in court. This is supposed to be for emergency removals. I’m pretty sure they can’t do this on a permanent basis without a hearing where you get to present your side.

However, they can convince you to give up your children willingly, temporarily or permanently. CPS commonly convinces parents to give up their children on a temporary basis, convincing them that this is what they must do to “cooperate” and ensure that they don’t lose custody permanently. Since it’s voluntary, no judge has to sign off on it, and you have no right to a hearing. Once your kids are in the system it is *much* harder to get them back. They can even use the fact that you voluntarily gave up your kids as evidence against you.

Essentially, since CPS is part of the government, they can’t legally do anything that the government can’t do. But they can imply that you “have to” let them in, let them interview your kids, submit to a parenting class, or turn over your children, and then justify themselves by saying that you cooperated voluntarily.

I agree that in principal he should stand up for his rights, bla bla bla. But more importantly, he should know how the local CPS treats people who cooperate vs. those who don’t. There are lots of good people who have been through this and advise cooperating because things have come out fine when they did. Yes it’s humiliating and unfair etc., but so are a lot of things in life. If, in his area, the CPS has a history of bugging off when told to bug off, then fine. If CPS has a history of taking children when told to bug off, not fine! I’ve heard of people having their kids raised in foster care for years over stuff like this. Principles be damned, I want my kid home with me. I’ve seen what disruption does to kids. My kids are 6 and I am sorry, but I would not risk losing them in a pissing contest. No. After the fact, when my kids are safe, I’d look for avenues to push for reform. Call me a wuss, I don’t care.

Carol,

“I’m no conspiracy nut,but for four years or so there most definitely was a concerted effort at harassment by local law-enforcement, school, and child-protection workers.”

This is similar to the situation I am currently facing. I have twice had my 6yo daughter brought home for being out alone. The second time, CPS got involved. The sheriff’s office, the social worker assigned to our case, and her boss all told me the same thing. That it is not illegal to let my daughter walk to her friend’s house or play at the park. That she is probably perfectly safe, and I am not doing anything wrong by allowing it. But that I must stop anyway, because if I keep letting her out alone, the police will keep bringing her home, and keep calling CPS, and if CPS comes out too many times they will be forced to conclude that I am neglectful. That’s right. They have told me that they will find me neglectful for no reason other than the police complaining about me too often over something that CPS has already determined I have every right to do.

Maybe that’s why I am so up-in-arms about all of this call to “cooperate,” especially those who said it was a bad decision for this dad to continue letting hid daughter out alone. All that “cooperating” has gotten me is an ultimatum. Either break my promise to my daughter (that she could go out alone when she turned 6) and punish my daughter when she has done nothing wrong, or risk losing all of my children to the state.

I agree that in principal he should stand up for his rights, bla bla bla.

That says it all. That’s basically lying down and giving up. There is no bla, bla, bla when it comes to our rights. We either assert them or lose them. It doesn’t matter if CPS is nice when you cooperate, in fact if that’s the basis of them being nice then they are de facto coercing people in to cooperating with a threat of taking your children if you don’t. That makes it even more important to stand up for your rights so you don’t lose them. Of course you may want to teach your children that their rights don’t matter and that’s your decision as a parent but your take on the situation is a dangerous one for everyone involved.

No homeschool association recommends cooperation. At least not one that I’ve ever seen. They recommend not cooperating and having CPS deal with the attorney they provide for you. As in don’t answer any questions, don’t let them in, don’t talk to them, don’t answer the door to do more than hand them a phone with an attorney on the other end. I’ll take advice from actual lawyers long before I accept anecdotal advice to lay down my rights and allow my family to be run through the ringer that is our system. We have these rights for a reason.

While paraphrased I think this quote applies very well: He who sacrifices his rights for security deserves neither.

Yes someone called in a strange male following a little girl, and the dad DID identify himself, and confirm he is the girl’s father. The police still detained them. Under those conditions, yes shut the hell up, and demand your rights be respected.

For all of you that seem to forget…………..these rights were written, to protect the innocent. If the innocent are not going to invoke those rights, what is the sense in having them? Why not just trash them all?

CPS is doing everything they can to gain access to the home, without a warrant. They are not returning calls, dropping off letters, and just showing up at the door. This is there method of operation. And this family is smart to not let them in. CPS can prove themselves to the courts, get the warrant, and then enter the home.

This at least allows a judge to make what is supposed to be an unbiased ruling.

For all of you that think invoking your rights is a sign of guilt, you should be ashamed of yourselves. Just remember this when the day comes and you invoke your rights.
Good luck to this family, and let us know where to send letters of support.

Actualy V that percentage is a good ballpark figure.

A certain amount of cooperation is required in our society for things to work. If stop by a cop answer questions politely. They stopped cause someone called and they are doing their job. CPS wants to meet with you, do so and be polite and friendly. No reason to ask “what law was violated” cause none was. They are merely looking to see if help for the child is needed. The main concern is for the child not for you or your comfort. If when you’ve been polite and answered reasonable questions. They still question you I say you have a case,

I know a family that CPS got involved and it was a good thing. But the process is traumatic and why wouldn’t it be. You have people stepping into your life telling you what to do. They have the power to take away your most precious thing in life…its scary but honestly the kids that get the help are safer and happier.

“I’ll believe you when you say it’s the majority of cases, but “90%” sounds made up. If it is, please don’t make up percentages. If it isn’t, link to the data/research please.”

According to the link below, 90% are either are family members or fairly well-known people. Only 10% are actual strangers.

http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/pages/child-sexual-abuse.asp

And to the point, most children who “go missing” are abducted by non-custodial family members, not molesters/murderers. Children “go missing” every day, but children are abducted for the purpose of harming them only very, very rarely.

@SKL, there are such movements. I’m a member of one organization fighting the good fight, the Texas Home School Coalition. They started by protecting homeschoolers, but have recently ventured into protecting parental rights in a broader sense. They offer services ranging from free legal help to lobbying to change the laws.

(Oh, and HSLDA, mentioned by other posters and the OP, is also a non-profit offering free legal services, and also advises against cooperating with CPS.)

Thanks, pentamom

@Warren, I totally agree with you, but you officially lose the argument on account of invoking the Nazis. 😛

Seriously, though, around the same time in Italy, my great-grandfather said, “Fuck this,” and moved to the US. I don’t want to let him down. 😉

I don’t agree with HSLDA on a ton of things. That’s beside the point. The point is that they, and the ACLU, and THSC, and every other non-profit organization I have ever heard of that works to protect citizens from government abuses advises minimal cooperation when the government investigates you. ACLU even has a video on how to speak to the police if you are pulled over, which is mostly about NOT speaking to the police.

None of these organizations has a financial interest in dragging things out. All are founded specifically to protect citizens, and their donations would dry up if they regularly failed to do so.

@Michelle,

I wasn’t comparing CPS to the Nazi’s, more making the point that we are supposed to be past taking it up the wahoo, by those in authority. That was almost a hundred years ago. You would think in that time, we are passed being afraid of those in authority.

You have to really wonder about a country that has personal rights put into law to protect the innocent, but as soon as an innocent person invokes those rights, society figures he is guilty. GOD BLESS THE USA

SKL

There are plenty of other homeschool organizations that offer legal defense. I am not a member of HSLDA but every one I have belonged to offers the same advice. You flip from the actual lawyers to homeschoolers who don’t agree with the legal advice, and you don’t practice in this area of law, so you stating that you are a lawyer and offering legal advice is pretty thin ice for you, at least as I read the law. Again IANAL but you are offering advice on what to do in a situation when interacting with either the police or CPS and stating you are a lawyer which opens you up to legal remedy should someone follow your advice and it turn out badly for them. I’m not entirely sure about that but I think I’m pretty close.

In the present case the dad needs legal representation, absolutely, but it’s wrong that he should need said representation for merely asserting his rights. If you’re alright with that then you’re part of the problem. The point is that this has been handled wrongly, by the government officials, from the outset. Luckily for the father there’s a lot of lawyers willing to work pro bono on cases like this, and since it’s been reported on reason and Popehat is tweeting about it I’m sure he’ll get one, that will defend him for doing nothing more than asserting his rights.

Again my problem is with him needing a lawyer to begin with. I don’t accept that that’s reality and that’s the world we live in now. He’s being coerced by the government and it needs to end. Period. Full stop. He doesn’t need to change a single thing as he’s done nothing wrong.

SKL

And if you follow the case you’ll probably see what happens when the good guys win. At least I hope so. I’d rather spend every dime I have fighting CPS than give up my rights. He did communicate. He gave them his name, verified he was the child’s father. That’s the end of what he needed to do from a legal standpoint. The rest of this is pure, unadulterated harassment. If you’re alright with government harassment that’s you right, personally I’ll never support it.

@Warren, just teasing, hence the smiley faces. 😉

Oh and in case I did say anything that you would like to twist into “legal advice,” I also posted a disclaimer stating that I do not practice law in that area, and also stated that I am ignorant about how CPS works. Sheesh. I’m feeling coerced into shutting up here.

I would have invoked Miranda rather than the 5th, I guess, if I were detained and questioned on the street. I might say, “Since anything I say could be held against me in a court of law, I refuse to answer any questions without legal representation, just to be completely sure that I do not inadvertently incriminate myself. I’m sure you understand, officer.” I’d say it with a smile!

I’m a communication coach. I believe a lot in the power of empathy. I also believe in the protective use of force. Keeping the door between myself and those who would intend to seize my children would definitely be the protective use of force. In addition to this, I would add some empathy for the law enforcement. What are they after? Maybe safety, and that’s a big maybe. Perhaps it’s power. We all want a sense of power and influence.

Anyway, it’s easy to “take sides,” to “demonize” and label the “other,” and this is definitely what escalates conflict. Our system is set up on judgement and evaluation, and this is incredibly painful for us all. However, it is possible, within one’s self, to conjure non-judgement, objectivity, and empathy. This may not change the whole world at once, but it will change you, and the way you see your “oppressors.”

I recommend reading Viktor Frankel’s “Man’s Search for Meaning.” If someone held prisoner could see the humanity in the Nazi officers at Dachau, we can start to see the humanity of each person involved in the systems we deem “fascist” or “oppressive,” and begin to make positive steps toward creating a world we do want to live in.

@Donna, I like and agree with everything you just said. It sounds like a very reasonable way to assert your rights without being a jerk.

@Sid Vicious – The father doesn’t require legal representaion because he asserted his rights. He requires legal representation because he is being investigated by the government. EVERYONE being investigated by the government should have legal representation. We can argue until we’re blue in the face that the there should be no investigation but that is completely irrelevant. There is an investigation and, because of that fact and that fact alone, legal representation is needed.

SKL

By no means am I saying you should shut up. You’re the lawyer, not me. For the record I in IT, have no legal degree but take a great interest in family law and IP law as a hobby. The lawyers I know are very careful about identifying themselves as such in a forum where someone might construe their opinions as legal advice. That’s the extent of my knowledge on the subject. I am sorry if you feel you like I am trying to shut you down, that’s not my intent. Forget I said anything on the subject please. It’s obvious I am not anywhere near an expert on the rules lawyers have to follow. It’s quite possible the folks to whom I refer are going way beyond what’s necessary to cover their butts. I’ll just respond to your opinions on this article from this point on. Please accept my apology.

I agree with Donna (this is not legal advice, though). I would much rather do things without hiring lawyers, and personally I probably would, just because of who I am. And that might be a mistake, just like eating a whole chocolate bunny this morning was probably a mistake ;). Either way this person needs to deal with the realities of the world even if the realities are not as they should be.

Sid, yes there is a lot of CYA in the legal world. That’s how a lot of lawyers make their living in the first place. How unfortunate. Yes, I have seen the advisory to include that disclaimer every time I might write anything, anywhere that some idiot might claim he followed as “legal advice.” And I do add that disclaimer any time I’m actually giving assvice to an individual regarding legal matters. But I guess anyone could construe anything as “legal advice” if they were looking to sue someone. Oh well, at least this kind of thinking keeps many of my colleagues off the welfare rolls.

SKL

Thanks for being reasonable and understanding. I spoke out of turn. I don’t agree with you on what this father should have done but you see to be decent folk. 😉

Considering that this is the same girl that was abducted by the police, for going to the store not too long ago. That this is the same Dad that was refused access to his daughter at the police station not too long ago. When you take into consideration that the police now twice have not respected the rights of this family. First by detaining the girl at the police station, and detaining them on the sidewalk for the second event.

Take all that into consideration, and I do not blame this man for saying enough is enough. He is not being beligerant or combative. He is being guarded, and cautious.
Look at it this way. The first time the police took the daughter, they refused to let her see her dad, and for what? Walking to the store. They eventually let her go because no law was broken. Why then is there an investigation, for walking to the post office? No other reason than a second kick at the can for CPS and the cops. So no, assert your rights, keep the door closed, get legal rep, and then the authorities can deal with your attorney.

Hold the wall Dad, and get that lawyer.

I though the story said it was in Ohio.

Donna

I’m offended there is an investigation beyond the cops finding out he was her dad, that they refused to release her another time, that CPS is looking in to this at all. Of course he needs an attorney at this point. My offense is that it got to this point to begin with.

Why not get the cops and bus drivers on your side? Cops are supposed to be the good guys. Maybe if they know Emily, where she lives, her family, they can keep an eye out for her on her travels. That would be more in line with the “village” community idea.

Why do some people keep talking as if the predator suspicion (which has been proven wrong and disposed of) is part of why this guy is getting investigated by CPS? I see them as two completely separate issues.

Oh, also because the person who originally called the cops reported a “strange man” talking to a little girl. IE, if people weren’t terrified of imaginary predators, the cops would never have been called in the first place.

I thought the walking alone incident was completely separate from the “predator” one. I guess I could be wrong about that.

>Personal liberties, in a country where they can make soda pop >illegal, force Catholic schools to pay for abortions, and declare the >2nd Amendment irrelevant? What country are you guys talking >about?

I agree with (most of) this point. But I might add that, as it turns out, a court stopped them from making soda pop illegal. Furthermore, it’s a good point that small, silly loss of freedoms like this one occur only in an environment of complete disrespect for rights. We should expect government to take away rights and enhance its own power whenever a compliant citizenry makes it easy. That’s why the citizenry needs to regard government as the enemy of their freedoms, and act accordingly. Listing other losses of freedom make it only that much more important that we not lay down and hand over our rights, or eagerly submit for unwarranted intrusion X simply because it’s less than the Y we’re otherwise offered. The answer to the loss of liberty is not giving up.

I also doubt the idea that being more compliant would get him better results. He was compliant for quite some time, and the intrusions only continued and got worse. Every time he’s been in contact with these minions of evil, things have gotten worse. Why would he invite them in now? Further, why don’t these people simply get a warrant? When they start behaving honorably, and with respect for the rule of law, then maybe he can respect them as representatives of the rule of law. Until then, they are illegal interlopers and should be regarded as the uninvited thugs that they are.

There’s this very abusive tactic whereby a person can act very cruelly to others, then when responded to, begin to shriek about incivility. So too, this agency acts utterly lawlessly, yet then responds when he attempts to defend himself (within the letter of the law) that they are only seeking to work together and he is refusing to compromise.

Finally, for all who think he is pushing a political agenda at the expense of his children – at the moment, his children are the target of the political agenda of others.

And in a few years, the father will ask himself if all this Martydom was worth it. It might have been better to just answer the questions and not start a war.

What is the bigger lesson he’s teaching his daughter? Good free range skills or Cops = bad. CPS = bad. I think it’s the latter. He should have been the bigger person. This was the wrong battle to fight I’m sorry to say.

IMHO, the guy is an idiot for maintaining his behavior without an apparent rational response this long. 41 days of ignoring repeated requests, and letting it go to the point where there is now a court order, all to prove a point just confirms my suspicion that there really is something going on in this guy’s head that’s not quite right.

Two sides to every story, I know. But when you take THIS side, you are saying that the police and CPS are justified in what they are doing. If this man’s story is as he says it is, why didn’t the police/CPS quit bothering him long ago? Why let law enforcement continue to act unreasonably and expect the citizen to accommodate them? Why not the other way around?

I agree with Yan, Brad, SKL and some others. A very wise person once said “Don’t attack the problem, Support the solution”. In my opinion, the solution would have been co-operation. As Free-rangers we’re trying to teach our kids to trust that most people are good. And that includes CPS and cops – they are people!! Have some faith in them! When I read the dad’s story, I (as a mere reader) was irritated by his refusal to answer any questions like a reasonable person. I can only imagine how irritated CPS must be!!

@marie: One possible “rational response” would have been to contact an elected official, talk to the public defender’s office or the AG, hire a lawyer, or take some other action to insure that one was fairly represented. He did none of these. This, combined with his earlier behavior, raises the suspicion that he’s not quite all there.

What possible benefit could have come from the family talking to the authorities? What precisely could he have said that would convince the authorities that he was innocent? Remember, the job of the police is to get information that leads to a conviction.

And I think that some comments seem to be losing sight of the real issue: is letting a six-year-old walk down the sidewalk is neglectful?

Under what circumstances is letting a six-year-old walk down the sidewalk neglect?

Is it neglect when she opens the door? When she’s in front of the house? Turns the corner? Crosses the street? Where’s the neglect?

Brad – what exactly are 5th amendment rights doing in quotation marks? The rights you’re referring to are among the most basic and important civil rights people have. Yet there you sit, in a once-free country, asserting in a superior tone that, well, he had no reason to invoke his rights. After all, nothing wrong, nothing to hide, and all the rest of the dance of freedom lost, right?

Furthermore, your claim of suspicion being raised simply by asserting rights is absurd and backwards. We ought to be suspicious of people who bend over and give away their rights at any excuse – they are the ones who will cost us our freedom. We ought to thank those who insist that unelected bureaucrats follow the law.

How about you explain to me why we ought to be accommodating to those who, living on our tax dollars, decide to ignore laws and repeatedly harass this father – for behaviors that are completely legal? Why accommodate people whose goal is to keep your child from walking the streets freely? Furthermore, you claim they are within their rights to bully him and his family because they feel they are not accommodated enough? Reminder – they work for him, not the other way around. If they feel he’s not being polite, they can go home and cry into their pillows, it does not entitle them to assault him. Is this really the level our country has sunk to in appreciation for basic liberty?

Regarding those who fret that he’s teaching his kids that cops and CPS are bad – don’t worry, the cops and CPS are doing a fine job of that themselves, and it is very important for children to learn that the government is not their friend. No friend of mine demands half my income, answers to no demand, and insists on investigating and judging intimate details of my life.

And Yan

What arm of the gov’t is he supposed to use?

And no the checks and balances do not work remarkably well, unless you are remarkably well off.

Niether the police or CPS has started a formal procedure in which this father can take part in. All they want him to do right now is aid in their investigation. That is not his responsibility, and as a matter of fact it is his right not to aid in their investigation.

It really makes me sick to think that you people want this man to roll over and kiss the ass of those harassing him.

If a kid was pushing your kids around, you would all be screaming BULLY BULLY BULLY!!!!!!!!!!

What the hell do you think is going on here?

Thank God it the revolution happened all those years ago. Because as it looks now, you all would roll over and let the British rule.

It is so pathetic that someone with a backbone is considered guilty or unreasonable. And the weak cowardly sheep are the ones considered up standing.

You know many of your ancestors fought and died for the rights you all want to just ignore, give up or trample into the ground. They fought and died, so that you would have these rights that would protect you from the gov’t.
Wonder what they would think of you?

@Zgirl

He did try to be nice, the first time the police abducted his daughter off the street.

So why the hell would he help them do it a second time?

LAND OF THE FREE AND HOME OF THE BRAVE?
Not anymore, by the comments in here. The pride is gone, the freedom being eroded and the brave are fewer and fewer.

“He did try to be nice, the first time the police abducted his daughter off the street.”

Were you there. Abducted??? Really?

Boy there sure are lots of people with tin foil hats on this board as well….

Well Brad,
According to the article a few weeks back, had you cared to read it, would have told you that Emily was taken by the police to the police station, while on a trip to the corner store.

Whether it be police, a stranger or the Easter Bunny if someone takes my child and holds them against their will and does not inform me……………..you are damn right I call that abduction.
So you can take your tinfoil hat………..shine it up real nice,,,,,,,turn that sum b—– sideways and stick it right up your candya–!
And with the actions of the police lately, no they are not Emily’s friends. Friends do not tell them they are doing something wrong by walking down the street.
So Brad, anything else you what cleared up?

“While I don’t think letting a six year old to walk alone to the post office is neglect, it does seem rather young to allow that. Why does she need to walk to the post office to mail a letter anyway? Doesn’t the house have it’s own mail box?”

This is completely, 100%, beside the point and irrelevant. When I was six years old, I sometimes walked home from school myself — about the same three blocks.

It doesn’t matter “why” she walks to the post office to mail a letter. It doesn’t matter if she walks right past the mailman picking up letters from their mailbox to do it. It doesn’t matter if she does it because someone in the family believes that the Internet will give them money every time she walks to the post office. She wants to do it, her parents wish to allow her to do it, and there is nothing wrong with it.

My husband sometimes walks to the post office in the evening, after the last pickup, when he knows that if we put it the letter in our box in the morning with the flag up, it would go out just as soon. Because he wants to. That is the only reason. That is the only reason needed.

Here’s the thing. I 100% agree that it is ridiculous that the cops got involved in this so many times. I think it is ridiculous that CPS got involved.

BUT. It sounds like the OP has not been cooperative. And no, he was never cooperative. He refused to answer any questions in the very first encounter. When you refuse to answer questions, respond to letters, return phone calls, or answer your door–and when you do, you stonewall the other person–of course it provokes a negative reaction. You catch more flies with honey, and vinegar just makes people angry. The fact that the police’s initial interest was over the top is kind of beside the point. If the guy had just been nice and pleasant to begin with, laughed it off and said, “I’m glad you guys are watching out for my little girl, but she’s so proud of herself for being so responsible and capable, and I want to encourage that,” I can almost guarantee nothing would have gotten to this point.

The thing with CPS is that they really do see some HORRIBLE things that happen with kids, things that would chill you to the bone, at the hands of their own parents, and if you refuse to talk to them, they have no way of knowing whether your kid will be one of the horror stories that they fail to help because you are trying to hide something or whether you’re just a nice, normal family in a weird situation. BEING NICE is the fastest way to convince people that you’re nice.

I’m a free range parent, but I think part of being free range is teaching your kids how to be successful in that great big world with lots of people in it, and part of that is knowing when to put on a happy face and be nice to people, even when you’re rolling your eyes on the inside.

@Warren: “For all of you who think the dad is making a stupid stand for his rights, are all narrow minded, weak sheep.”

Not even close to the mark. He’s making a stand in a stupid, asinine, idiotic, counter-productive, and and ultimately self-destructive way.

This in no way helps him, his family, or any of us who truly believe kids should be able to walk unimpeded in our towns.

This idiot’s actions simply reinforce the all too widely held belief that parents who let their kids free-range are irresponsible anti-social and potentially dangerous kooks.

Okay, okay fine have it your way.

Instead of telling the authorities to play by the rules. This dad should just roll over and kiss their ass.

Then he can do it again next week, and the week after that and the week after that.

To avoid having his daughter taken away, he has already agreed to not let her go outside again by herself.

That is nothing more than state sponsored extortion.

Unless he invokes his rights he is screwed, because apparently CPS can just make up the rules and laws as they go along.
@Katie
He was cooperative the very first time, some weeks ago when the police snatched Emily off the street and detained her against her will.
If a private citizen were to do that, they would be doing major prison time, but it is ok for a cop?
No wonder the states are going to hell, look at the people.

@Z-girl

Your ad hominem attack on those of us who believe standing up for our rights shouldn’t take a backseat to having an easy time of things shows that you have no valid arguments to refute the points made. It doesn’t matter if you get more flies with honey, it doesn’t matter if you’re perceived as nice, it doesn’t matter if some CPS worker has a hard time doing their job. Our rights are being eroded in this country and at some point a stand has to be made. This father did nothing illegal at all and yet he is being harassed by the government. He doesn’t have to prove anything and by law the burden of proof is on the government. CPS has methods of coercion that they use to force parents in to compliance that they shouldn’t have to begin with. The police shouldn’t pick up a six year old and detain her, refusing to give her to her father for walking alone. The government is the bad actor here and not this father.

You can dislike the father all you want because his methods don’t agree with your naive world view, and that’s your right, but to call him a kook and say he’s giving free rangers a bad name is uncalled for. It’s obvious that a large bunch of us free range parents agree with this father’s actions. In my opinion it’s the bend-over-and-give-up-your-rights crowd that would give this parenting style a bad name. The world isn’t always easy and teaching your children to ignore their own rights to grease the rails is damaging in my opinion. The ACLU has a video out talking about why an innocent person should never talk to the police.

My only problem with this father is that he should have employed a lawyer a lot earlier in the process. It makes me sick that a father can completely abide by the law, do nothing wrong from a legal standpoint, and still have CPS threaten to take his children. That isn’t right nor should CPS have that power. It’s disgusting that law enforcement and CPS have the ability to make this man’s life a living hell and put him in fear for his family. That’s the problem not the fact the father wasn’t the most polite person he could have been. Saying it’s his own fault, having done nothing legally wrong, is like blaming a woman for being raped. His rights are being violated by the government, multiple times, on multiple fronts and your answer is to be polite? Not an answer, not a solution, and not even the best option. He should have lawyered up at the first sign of CPS and let his attorney handle it from there on out. That was his only mistake.

I lived in Ohio for 16 years and can sympathize 100%…CPS is staffed mostly with ignorant nosy prigs just hoping they can *f-bomb* a family over and the happier the family the better. Personally, when the cops refused to return my child to me…I guarantee they would have had to arrest me for what would have happened and what would have been left of the cops. I don’t let anyone screw with my family…I sincerely hope you can kick them where it hurts…*wallet* or *paycheck*

1)Get a lawyer-now. Get in front of a judge-that is all that will shut them down.

2)Get a donation portal setup.

3)Absent 1 and 2-leave town and never return to the state.

Choose your poison.

The state is obviously being abusive. However, the parents are also being abusive because they are not protecting the child from the state. Instead they are using her to assert their civil liberties and get into a conflict with the state. Being detained 3 times as a 6 year-old is far more traumatic than not being allowed to walk outside alone.

That the parents let the child go outside alone even after being detained twice and contacted by CPS sends a very strong message to the child that their own ideals matter more to them than the threat of their child being taken away. If CPS does take the child away, the parents are just as much at fault.

The parent’s behavior here is exactly the kind of thing that will transfer the parents’ mistrust of authority to the child – she’ll trust neither her own parents nor the state.

There is no need to be “cooperative” with these “people” at all. There is no need to be rude, just state that you will not answer any questions or make a statement concerning this matter. Hire a good lawyer and sue, sue, sue. I don’t feel sorry for these “poor, overworked bureaucrats” at all. It is beyond absurd that they are even allowed to intervene in the manner mentioned in this post. Remember that they work for the government and you pay their salary.

@Sid

We’ve evolved as humans with complex social structures, including morals and ethics. Just because something is not illegal, doesn’t mean it is socially smart, or even ethical or moral. I agree with you that this dad “did nothing wrong from a legal standpoint”. I just don’t think he did much RIGHT from a social or moral standpoint, in his interactions with the cops and CPS in this case. I still think that how he chose to react to the situation made it worse for him and his family. And I still strongly believe that a less antagonistic reaction MAY have resulted in resolution of this whole thing. I could be wrong, though. In which case, as you suggest, he should get a lawyer and go from there. I don’t think that he should at any point accept that what the cops did initially as OK. We are in agreement (I think) about that.

You’re right, I probably should not have called him a kook. I don’t know that he is. What I DO know is that the series of choices he’s made indicate (in my opinion) some social ineptness, or possibly paranoia. And a total lack of any kind of initiative to take steps to fix this situation. All he’s done up until this point, is ignore CPS and hope the whole thing goes away. That position/choice wasn’t forced on him in any way: it was totally his own doing. CPS isn’t going to close an unresolved file (so I’m told). So, yes, what started as a problem initiated by the nosy neighbor, and perpetuated by the cops and CPS, has been AMPLIFIED by this guy’s choices. So he is totally part of the problem. He didn’t start it, but he’s taken no steps to end it either. Not the same as blaming a rape victim who has limited choices. This guy had many opportunities to take steps to try to resolve this whole thing, but instead chose actions that antagonized the cops and CPS, and prolonged the situation.

He did nothing to deserve the initial involvement by cops and CPS. Not his fault. But what IS his fault is his series of choices that have made the whole situation WAY worse. That’s my opinion.

(In response to Maggie above)

I didn’t read all the responses so I apologize if this is a repeat. If by ” not enrolled in public school” they mean they homeschool then they should call HSLDA. They are not pro bono, although they may ( it doesn’t hurt to ask), they usually charge a yearly membership fee and that covers all court fees. They may allow them to just pay that. It’s very affordable and something every homeschooling family should do, in my opinion.

Thanks Christine

I think that there is more to this story than what the dad is reporting. What concerns me about this story is that the dad appears to be more concerned about ‘fighting the power’ than looking out for his daughter’s response to these confrontations. On two occasions he was detained with his daughter (day two- half an hour and again on day six), and several times the police show up at their home (while they ignore the knocks at the door). These must be playing in his daughter’s mind and worry her. I know my own children would be frightened by these ordeals. Personally, I would not want to have my child detained by the police or have them wonder why the police are at our door. As much as I agree that the child should be allowed to walk to the post office, I think that the parents need to do what they can to make the problem smaller, not instigate further problems. I think that if the father was a little more compliant on Day 2 by answering a few questions, the issue may have gone away a lot sooner. Yes, you have your rights, but you may want to consider protecting your child’s right to a peace of mind!

CPS wasn’t in the story until day 7. Day 2, he talked to the cops, on the street, with the child present. Answer the questions, and move on. By refusing to answer questions (according to the fifth amendment), HE raised suspicions with the police, who then did some investigating. I bet there was something (other than a `wandering’ child) that prompted the continuing saga.

I am 55 years old and was very much a “free range” child when I was young…but…not at 6. My free range at 6 was much more limited than this child’s. My younger brothers and sisters had more of a free range than I did, but only if they were with me.

I do believe that today, its not safe for a child of 6 to have that much free range. If the child was 9 or 10 I would be a bit more in agreement with most of the other responders here.

Laura

Why are children not safe today?

What a wonderful country you live in. Where parents not only have to worry about the law, but about the personal beliefs of each officer and CPS agent, as well.

The first occassion was when Emily went to the store, and was taken into custody by the police. After the dad cooperating and not being able to be with Emily, and some time later……….the dad was told no law was broken, and he and his daughter went home.

So why the hell not let her go out if she wants? They were told that no law was broken.
Since no law has been broken, any further involvement for the same activity is harassment and nothing but harassment. When the authorities are on a witch hunt, such as this, you do not cooperate, you do not invite them in, you do not say a word. You wait for them to do their job, and go before a judge, to gain access.

In exchange for not losing his daughter, he had to agree to not let her outside alone. How is that even legal? Oh wait it isn’t legal, because isn’t that called extortion. CPS is no better than the mob, comply or pay, comply or we take your kid.

Thank god for Canada. Nowhere near the nightmare of the states.

“The first occassion was when Emily went to the store, and was taken into custody by the police. After the dad cooperating and not being able to be with Emily”

No it wasn’t, Warren. Read the facts given. The first encounter with the police was the strange man following the girl on the street complaint. He identified himself as Emily’s father and refused to answer any further questions. The store thing came several days later and there has been absolutely no statement that says that he cooperated then.

I don’t argue that the father should have done anything different in either of those situations. But let’s not cloud this situation with allegations that this man has ever been cooperative with the investigation and stopped cooperating at some point. That is patently untrue.

“In exchange for not losing his daughter, he had to agree to not let her outside alone.”

Nobody asked for such a thing. Our comments are that he did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING after his daughter was detained for going out by herself to defend his choice and continued to send her out knowing that she was very likely to be detained again and again. He clearly has an agenda here and is using his daughter as a pawn in that agenda.

You can defend yourself from these allegations without waiving a single right. He choose not to do so but continued to do something he KNEW would raise controversy.

Brad – If you look through the comments on other articles, you’ll find numerous comments from me referencing my teaching style, my efforts to focus more on critical thinking in math teaching, etc. Oddly enough, when I was hired to teach, then to run my department, no one mentioned that one of the qualifications to teach was thinking that the government was your friend.

Here’s the really crazy thing, though – I don’t mind if there are teachers out there who disagree with me. I don’t mind if there are teachers out there who think things I consider dangerous and crazy, like that it is a good idea to have blind faith in people with the power to tax and imprison you – or that you can consider people your friend solely by virtue of their taking your money away, micromanaging your affairs, murdering people with funny-sounding names in other countries, and saving you from the perils of certain plants, while subsidizing the production of drugs domestically. I am not a control freak, and I do not demand that the world bend to my will.

I also do not consider schools indoctrination centers. If ever student that I came in contact with came away agreeing with me, I would need to seriously reconsider my teaching style. I do not think the role of the teacher is to tell the student what to think. I think the role of a (good) teacher is to force students to think, and, more importantly, to make students want to think, to care enough to think. I think a good teacher inspires a student to engage with the world, and to think through the positions they will take on various issues – from politics to science – rather than demanding faith and obedience and drilling facts into them.

I don’t even think that good teaching is allowing students, through a process of discovery, to find out the things that you want them to believe. Rather, I think it is about them discovering what they will believe. You will know a good teacher when their students disagree with them thoughtfully, and they are delighted.

So, you need not worry that I will produce a generation of graduates mindlessly repeating my words.

You, on the other hand, have now apparently decided that I am unqualified to teach, solely by virtue of my disagreeing with you. Since I will not force my students to believe that armed men who will attack them for, as in this example, letting their children walk to the Post Office, are their friends, I am a bad teacher. This is a perfectly logical outgrowth of government-centered political beliefs, but I shudder at what it shows me about your views on education.

“The thing with CPS is that they really do see some HORRIBLE things that happen with kids, things that would chill you to the bone, at the hands of their own parents, and if you refuse to talk to them, they have no way of knowing whether your kid will be one of the horror stories that they fail to help because you are trying to hide something or whether you’re just a nice, normal family in a weird situation. BEING NICE is the fastest way to convince people that you’re nice.”

Katie, this is like saying that if you’re a CPS worker, you’d be tormented just walking down the street and seeing children with their parents, since there’s just no way of knowing whether those kids will be one of the horror stories if the social workers “fail to help.”

At least that’s how it strikes me.

I, too, was in the middle of my parents’ battle with authority, similar to the uniform example above. I got right into with them. I trusted them. I found it awkward to be the child on the front lines, taking the heat, while my parents encouraged “bucking the system,” but I identified with the struggle for equality and integrity.

So my guess is that this 6-year-old is actually right there on board with Dad, awkward as it may be for her.

What comes to mind to me now is Rosa Parks, riding the bus. How dare that uppity lady sit in the front? Why did she insist on stirring the pot? So many people got their heads bashed in, just because black people started insisting on equal rights. Wouldn’t it have been easier to shut up and go along?

I guess the difference here is if we are insisting on the right to parent in a mindful, caring, and conscious way, our kids get caught in the middle, since the way the “authorities” exert their control is to take the kids out of the home. Part of the Civil Rights movement did involve kids, though, at school, and my guess is that there were many young kids who got harassed for showing up where they weren’t supposed to… anyone got info on that?

Here’s the deal: I like the idea of advocating for things like freedom, nurturing, choice, autonomy, and integrity. I like a little civil disobedience, and I get the sense that Dad sent his kid out on an errand after being accosted for that the previous day to say, “Hey, this is not against the law, so we’re carrying on as per usual,” even though he was likely aware that the “authorities” might take some sort of “action” against the family.

Going “by the book,” and insisting on adhering to the laws as the Bill of Rights describes it, is not always a popular thing to do, and there can be loads of pain involved. I can relate to this Dad’s choice, and though I do imagine some empathy injected into this scenario could go a long way toward uniting all parties involved, I see him as doing the best he knows how given the resources and consciousness he’s got.

I find it suspicious that the police have been contacted so many times about the same father & child. To me it sounds like neglect if people are constantly reporting this act. I mean, we have concerned citizens reporting neglect, school bus drivers and city employees who have all shown concern for this child who obviously isn’t getting supervision from her parents. It really is a sad world that the community has to look after a child who is being neglected by their parents.

I sure hope the nuts on here that are more concerned about fighting the government than protecting children DON’T live in my neighborhood. Lord knows there is child anise and neglect everywhere, and this dad is more concerned about his rights than his child? Very suspicious!

“…and city employees who have all shown concern for this child who obviously isn’t getting supervision from her parents. ”

Where are you getting THAT? They let her walk THREE BLOCKS to the post office! In what world is that “obviously not getting supervision from her parents”?

Technically, I think HSLDA is pro bono. Yes, there is a membership fee, but it is less than $150 a year. Any legal services they provide obviously FAR exceed that amount very quickly, except for the kind of thing where they just write a letter to your school officials explaining why you, not the school, are following the law in a given situation. (That actually forms a pretty large percentage of their work.)

The kind of legal representation you are entitled to from your <$150/year membership can hardly be called fee for service — it's more of a collective.

“She home schools her kids and her husband is a police officer. She piped in how Dad likely fit the `home school stereotype’ of being a `hippie’ (and that, in turn, leads to the druggie stereotype). Her husband said that since Dad had stated his name, then his name would have been run through the computer to check that there was nothing already there on the family, which looks like there wasn’t BUT there was likely something there on the dad, which is why the further detention.”

So for those not familiar with the history of homeschooling, in the early days it was almost entirely practiced by those on the far right and the far left. In fact, it’s rather humorous now to look back and see how some of these people worked together towards a common goal.

I hope most homeschooling parents never have to meet your friend’s husband in an official capacity. I’m not sure which assumption of guilt by association is worse: that towards the right or the left. On the left, it seems unfair to assume that all liberals are stoners. On the right, it seems illogical to think that those baptists and pentecostals won’t touch liquor can’t get enough Mary Jane.

“So my guess is that this 6-year-old is actually right there on board with Dad, awkward as it may be for her.”

Since a 6 year old cannot possibly comprehend the potential consequences, she can’t be considered right there on board with dad in this situation. A 6 year old can understand “if I don’t wear my uniform, I will not get recess” and can be on board with that situation (although I don’t think most parents who put their children in these situations really care whether the child is on board or not). A 6 year old cannot possibly understand forced removal from the home, foster care, supervised visitations, possible criminal charges and jail for mom and dad, etc.. Even if they can define those terms, they can’t really understand what going into foster care for months would really be.

“What comes to mind to me now is Rosa Parks, riding the bus. How dare that uppity lady sit in the front? Why did she insist on stirring the pot?”

The difference is that Rosa Parks was an adult who made her own choices while completely understanding the ramifications to those choices. And the ramifications were largely just to her and those who chose to join her. SHE was on the front line. She wasn’t sending a child too young to understand what is going on to be on the front line while she stayed home.

“‘Hey, this is not against the law, so we’re carrying on as per usual,’ even though he was likely aware that the ‘authorities’ might take some sort of ‘action’ against the family.”

And the times they continued to do it AFTER they already KNEW the authorities WERE taking action?

No Donna you are in error.

The first incident happened awhile ago. Click on the story at the top of this one. This Emily is the same Emily that was at the corner store, and taken into custody. Held and her dad denied access. Finally sent home after being told no laws were broken.

Then the strange man incident, and then the post office incident. So check your facts.

Let’s face it, this is a vendetta by the local cops. They couldn’t do anything about Emily walking around, because it isn’t against the law. They don’t like it so they are on a witchhunt.

And Donna, reread it please. He had legal reps help, and in exchange for not letting Emily outside by herself, CPS dropped the ex parte procedures. You know for a lawyer, you tend to skip facts.

@Rachel

By your logic, you need to be investigated for abuse and neglect as well. Because until you have been investigated, how does CPS know?

I cannot believe even in here, all the people that have this man guilty untill proven innocent.

I think everyone should take a back seat. Debate is fine but what some of you not involved in the legal process may not know is that—CPS investigations for the simplest things can result in termination of parental rights and jail time, long jail time.

It is a lot to go into now but once they have you, for a simple matter like a child crossing a street, or a young child working out the locks on the door to rush into the neighborhood unattended, or a disgruntled teen who makes false accusations, or a disgruntled neighbor or ex spouse etc.

This is the worse sort of nightmare that a parent may find him or herself in.

pentamom

I agree

A parent has a conflict of some kind with an abusive authority. Fine. If the parent involves a child in that conflict, it is passive-aggressive abuse of the child. The parent is supposed to protect the child from abusive authorities.

How bad does it have to get before a parent decides to protect their child from an abusive state? Do the police have to be shooting at children for that to happen?

In this instance, the threat of state kidnapping was not enough for the parent to put his child’s safety first. If it was, he would have completely backed off and let things cool down at the first mention of this threat.

Hopefully the father learns a lesson from this about provoking an abusive authority, and hopefully in time the child learns that her father is also an abusive authority. If not, she’ll probably do something comparable to her children.

The OP indicates that there were a bunch of other allegations that weren’t described here because the dad doesn’t want to include allegations he isn’t willing to admit. We don’t know what these are, but we do know that CPS is required to investigate allegations. So I don’t think it’s quite fair to insist this is all about CPS meddling with *legal* parenting choices. Perhaps some of the “false allegations” involved things that are not legal.

I just want to say a few things. I am not an attorney but I am a professional paralegal who has worked in areas of social service law on behalf of parents.

CPS can cite a parent for neglect for such little things as: having a sink full of dishes, a family cat sleeping on a child’s bed, the children having beds but the parents sleeping on the floor, the pantry having only rice and beans (Hispanic families), too many books!!! (intellectual families), too little books! No pictures on the walls, too many pictures on the wall.
It is very subjective and again, only credible evidence is employed. That is the lowest form of the rules of evidence, i.e., I am the Cps investigating social worker and I think so.

There are times when these matters get way out of hand when a parent being investigated does not seek able counsel at the get go.

It can be a witch hunt.

My wife is an intake investigator for cps in Ohio. There is definately more to this story. Cps workers are so over burdened that they would love to get a case like this (if true). My wife may have five cases in a single day. Any case she can knock on a door and say “nothing happening here” is a blessing which means she might be home for dinner. Stop being paranoid. My wife does not want you on her caseload any more than you want her on your stoop. Generally, if it goes to court, there is much more to the case than what is being told. An ex parte is a HUGE hassle that is only used in extreme situations.

@Rachel
No that is not part of the village. Because the village isn’t populated by judgemental, self righteous rats. That will call the cops and cps at the drop of a hat.

The village is populated by people who will watch out for the local kids, step in and reprimand poor behaviour, and speak to the parents before they would ever think of calling the cops. And for the most part the village would mutter under their breath but still keep their mouth shut if they had differing opinions on parenting.

“But is it preferable, in the interest of avoiding wrongful accusations, to sit by and allow children to be beaten to death because their parents didn’t want to answer questions?” Your words.” Because the only way those parents get away with such things is because no one else know what they’re doing, and by restricting CPS access, it would be impossible for someone who can help to become aware of the situation.” Again your words Rachel.
Taken in context, you feel that CPS should be above the law, and not have to respect peoples rights, as laid out in the constitution. So you have no problem with innocent parents being treated as criminals? Nice.
@Taradlion
I would argue you are comparing apples to oranges. Choosing to not exercise your right to own a gun is not giving up that right. Yes I agree.
Allowing the police or other gov’t agency to search your home without a warrant, is giving up you right.
One is you choosing not to do something, the other is giving up power to the gov’t, and that is what these rights were written to protect you against.

I’m glad to see some folks discussing how this dad seems to be using his child as a pawn to try to make the world more like he thinks it should be.

I think we’ve seen lots of examples on this blog about ways to promote free-range thinking / tolerance in communities. Usually it involves baby steps and often compromise. I think the biggest problem in this case is the parties’ all-or-nothing attitude. A child suffers on one side, resources are wasted on the other side, and I doubt that FRK progress is going to be the outcome.

This was posted on the FB page for FRK and I loved it. Recommended viewing!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

From Wikipedia, about Birmingham in the early 60s. The last line of this excerpt has me wondering if the dad OP shares this sort of sentiment about “education” of his daughter. Like I say, he is doing the best he knows how with the consciousness he’s got, as are we all.

On May 2, more than a thousand students skipped school and gathered at the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church. The principal of Parker High School attempted to lock the gates to keep students in, but they scrambled over the walls to get to the church.[58] Demonstrators were given instructions to march to the downtown area, to meet with the Mayor, and integrate the chosen buildings. They were to leave in smaller groups and continue on their courses until arrested. Marching in disciplined ranks, some of them using walkie-talkies, they were sent at timed intervals from various churches to the downtown business area.[59] More than 600 students were arrested; the youngest of these was reported to be eight years old. Children left the churches while singing hymns and “freedom songs” such as “We Shall Overcome”. They clapped and laughed while being arrested and awaiting transport to jail. The mood was compared to that of a school picnic.[60] Although Bevel informed Connor that the march was to take place, Connor and the police were dumbfounded by the numbers and behavior of the children.[61][62] They assembled paddy wagons and school buses to take the children to jail. When no squad cars were left to block the city streets, Connor, whose authority extended to the fire department, used fire trucks. The day’s arrests brought the total number of jailed protesters to 1,200 in the 900-capacity Birmingham jail.

The use of children proved very controversial. Incoming mayor Albert Boutwell and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy condemned the decision to use children in the protests.[63] Kennedy was reported in The New York Times as saying, “an injured, maimed, or dead child is a price that none of us can afford to pay,” although adding, “I believe that everyone understands their just grievances must be resolved.”[64] Malcolm X criticized the decision, saying, “Real men don’t put their children on the firing line.”[65]

King, who had been silent and then out of town while Bevel was organizing the children, was impressed by the success of using them in the protests. That evening he declared at a mass meeting, “I have been inspired and moved by today. I have never seen anything like it.”[66] Although Wyatt Tee Walker was initially against the use of children in the demonstrations, he responded to criticism by saying, “Negro children will get a better education in five days in jail than in five months in a segregated school.”[53]

@ Really Bad Mum
“My response after I finished laughing was to tell them if I caught her doing that then they would have been called due to me belting the crap out of them both.”

I’m glad that this worked out for you, and that it sounds like the whole thing just blew over.

But please consider what danger you may have placed yourself and your family in. The report by the CPS worker could have easily read:
“Mother publicly threatened to beat her daughter for disobeying. The mother also threatened to beat the daughter’s boyfriend. The mother admits to not supervising her child. The mother was flippant and uncooperative in responding to questions.”

(A few days later you get served with notice that CPS wants your kids. You ask Lenore to post about it on FRK and people castigate you, moaning that if you had been more cooperative then this wouldn’t have happened.)

The CPS agent is allowed to testify against you in court. Please watch the video. Please learn to protect yourself and your family by exercising your 5th amendment right to keep your mouth shut.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

@George… Most child welfare workers in Australia are pretty clued on and considering it isn’t illegal to smack your k

George- way to go reinforcing stereotypes that cops are right wing! My homeschooling cop is (oh, my goodness!) a stoner himself! Albeit, it’s legal here, but he is nevertheless.

My point was that there is more to the story. I just found it interesting that dad shared his story but not the whole story. I’d like to know what questions he’s refusing to answer. Didn’t say that he should answer but that I could see why the cops escalated things if he was being difficult just for the sake of being difficult.

Jenn- I am very honestly curious in what way my comment indicated that I think cops are right wing. This thought had never occurred to me, and I’d like to learn from your perspective.

If I were the dad, I would do exactly as he did, which is to refuse to answer every and all questions, no matter what they were, other than the ones that are (depending on the state) essentially obligatory like “What’s your name,” “Are you carrying any weapons,” etc.

At least in this story the writer gives us the benefit of hindsight, via the comment that the ranking officer on the scene wants to “‘hook this guy’ for child endangerment.” Remember, “everything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.”

Please note that a typical question at a traffic stop does not fall into this category. “Do you know why I pulled you over” is simply an invitation to incriminate yourself.

It makes me very sad that someone exercising the protections enshrined in the Bill of Rights is assumed to be guilty or, even less, even considered to be “difficult.” The courts have said over and over again that the 4th and 5th amendments are for the protection of the innocent, not the guilty.

I hope that if you haven’t that you’ll take a few minutes to watch this video, which will at least help to better explain this perspective:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

. . . heck, it’s important to point out that males are simply going to be more protective of their rights and have greater concern for their liberties than women do, and that men are less likely to go by gut emotion or intuition, and second-guess things to pieces.

I didn’t get the impression that many here think the dad was guilty because he didn’t answer the questions. In fact, I found it odd that so many people are so ready to be outraged, assuming it impossible that he did anything wrong. He did leave out a lot of information, and this is only his side of the story. We don’t even know exactly what they are accusing him of, and we certainly weren’t there to get an unbiased view of the situations.

I just think that being all or nothing about things like this is asking for trouble. People I know who are like this have many problems in their lives, and it hurts their kids as well. Even if you’re as straight as an arrow, if you’re an asshole about it, you’re going to be treated like a general overall asshole.

The range of comments on here are interesting.

We have lawyers suggesting he speak with the authorities, which is something I have never heard of before. I have always known lawyers to tell people to keep their mouths shut.

We have people that assume he is hiding something becuase he has invoked his right to remain silent and not allowed an illegal search of his home.

There are those that feel he is just using his daughter as a pawn, for his own agenda.

Then you have people in here that feel CPS should be above the law, and not have to respect people’s rights. No matter how many innocent people are destroyed.

And so on and so on.

If you take the time to go back over like stories in FRKs, and look at people’s comments, one thing becomes painfully clear.

If this was a story of a mother and not a father, everyone would be screaming foul, willing to fight, completely outraged, and yelling you go mom. Even in here, men are treated differently, and that not only is a shame, but it is bull—- too!

When I had DCF (CPS equivalent) called on me for having a messy house and for “educational neglect” due to home schooling, the lawyer from NHELD (home school advocacy group) advised me to not let DCF into the house without a warrant, and to speak to the social worker (and/ or cop) through a window or cracked door politely and respectfully– and briefly– asking if they have a warrant, and if not asking for the allegations to be put in writing “so there is no misunderstanding of the concerns”, ask them to mail it to you, and then say either you or your lawyer will respond to those concerns.

P.S. If I remember correctly, I believe the lawyer said the response to DCF should be in writing.

However, if the allegations are regarding child abuse or serious neglect, the way of handling that would likely be done somewhat differently in the response, but the allegations should still first be put in writing and mailed to you.

If there were major concerns about immediate danger to the child, police wouldn’t need a warrant to enter.

@Tsu

Thank you, this is something that got blown over.

The bus driver and city worker are quite lucky. For two reasons.
1. My daughter would have started screaming and these two would more than likely been arrested, as they should have been.
2. If it had been my daughter, detained by two strangers, these two would more than likely need medical attention, after I arrived.

And Donna before you lecture me on the law, I really don’t give a rat’s ass. They are holding my daughter against her will. Good luck in getting a conviction.

Look, the family is in the right but they’re handling it in a legally questionable manner that dramatically increases the risk the child.

You can NOT simply ignore all attempts that CPS makes to speak with you.

Are you obligated to answer your door?
No.

Are they now allowed to claim high risk based on “we made repeated attempts to speak with the parents, and despite good reason to believe they were home on many of these attempts, they refused to speak with us”.
YES.

Same as when a cop knocks, people, open the door just enough to slide outside closing it behind you in the process.
If need be, get a lawyer on the phone and hand the phone to officer or social worker.
After the first attempt, they had time to prep with legal help for the next visit.

You have rights. But you must also comply with the law.
Refusal to comply is simply going to ratchet up the system’s methods of investigation – something they MUST do.

It doesn’t matter if YOU know you are in the right, once it’s in the hands of CPS they MUST investigate.

If you home school, if you believe in Free Range parenting – please, read this link – and use common sense in your dealings with the authorities before making your CHILD a political football.

http://www.iche-idaho.org/files/social_worker_at_your_door.pdf

>>In exchange for not losing his daughter, he had to agree to not let her outside alone. How is that even legal? Oh wait it isn’t legal, because isn’t that called extortion. CPS is no better than the mob, comply or pay, comply or we take your kid.<<

Nailed it. My first instinct, if I were the father, would have been to politely explain to the CPS officers, "Oh, we've walked this route with our daughter many times, taught her the rules of the road, and she knows her address and phone number, and how to ask for help if she gets into trouble, so we're letting her walk to the post office/store/park/library/swimming pool by herself." However, from reading everyone's responses (it took a while), I learned that sometimes CPS twists people's words to incriminate them, even if they try to be polite and nice. So, it seems like a lose-lose situation. I still think the father in the story should stand up for his and his daughter's rights, but I can't think of a good way to do it without causing even more trouble. However, I think the "Free Range Kids" I.D. card is a good start.

Oh and by the way Donna, I have held back for your delicate senses.
You see if I were that Dad, everytime they knocked on my door, I would pursue charges of trespassing, and release the dogs on them.

The bus driver and city worker holding my daughter against her will, would probably be hospitalized.

And before you get all high and mighty, I would be within my rights as laid out by the laws here. I do have the right to use physical force to protect my daughter. I do have the right to release my dogs on trespassers, as long as my signs, which are up, are still up, about trespassing, and guard dogs on premises. Those signs are more for insurance, but they do cover my ass should I need to use them.

Warren–If you don’t mind me asking, why did the Children’s Aid Society come to your house?

That should be “two wrongs make a right.”

@Emily,

False allegations made by my wife’s ex husband. We cooperated the first time, which was a nightmare, including having my 5 yr old step daughter having to submit to an internal exam.

@SKL

First off I really do not give a rat’s ass what they think, feel or want or what their intentions are. If as in this story, they hold her, she calls me on a cellphone because they won’t let her go…………well sucks to be them. Also hurts to be them. You see SKL, I am one of the nicest neighbors and friends you could have, and that is how my family and friends describe me. But mess with my family, and I change into one of the nastiest sons a b—– you never want to cross. And no I do not think or want you to cheer me on, because it is not a display or exhibition, and personally none of your damn business. The only thing I will say, is stay out of it.

And yes, if they do not have a warrant, and I do not want them on my property, I will let the dogs out. And only a moron would assume that a well trained dog is viscous. My dogs sleep with the girls, love the girls, and will protect the girls. They will also scare the crap out of anyone I tell them to.

SKL get off you selfrigheous high horse. People like you make me sick. Thinking you know who I am or what I am like. I play hockey with many provincial and local police. Many of my friends and customers are cops and emergency workers.

>Some people REALLY don’t understand their “rights.” I can forgive >Warren as he is not a US citizen but I am always appalled by the lack of >knowledge in this country about rights. Most people think they have far >more rights than they do.

Correction: Most people have many more rights than the government will recognize or protect. Rights are not a component of law, they are a component of morality. Laws are supposed to respect rights. When they do not, they are unjust. Rights do not come from the Constitution, the Constitution enumerates existing rights.

@Donna

Brush up on your law, Darlin, more so the laws in Ontario. If I perceive a threat to my child, I am within my legal right to use physical force to protect her.

Now I do not know where you come from, or what law school you attended, but 2 grown men holding my daughter against her will, is not a perceived threat, it is an actual threat.

Let us get something straight, two men detaining my daughter is one wrong. Me coming up and dropping each one is not wrong. To you maybe, to me no. So do not make you personal opinion fact.

Maybe where you are, you actually have to wait until someone physical assaults you, but up here you do not have to wait. If there is a perceived threat, you are good to go.

The state of Missouri, USA, in ’98 took our baby, Blaze Sergheyev, permanently. There was no good reason, and the state doesn’t legally need a particular reason. No crime needs to be committed, and none was.

I’m the father. I don’t write about it anymore because I need to preserve my sanity. It’s a totally consuming event when someone takes your kid.

`~- Nehmo

Warren, you said if that happened to your kid, those guys would be hospitalized. If that isn’t savage, you give me a better word for it.

So you think every kid who can push “Daddy” on speed dial is safe crossing the street every time? You may be in the minority on that.

And if reading my words makes you sick, screw you, and go find a shrink, because I think you need one.

I’m not a free range parent. I don’t thionk I ever could be. but I find this deeply, fdeeply wrong. It’s your RIGHT to let your child explore her world if you find it appropriate. You’re not abandinign her. You are nearby, she can get in contact with you – this is wrong.

Why would you want to cooperate with CPS? They are legislated kidnappers. You do not want to invite them in because they will do searches of your home and more. They form opinions and falsify documents. And they can use hearsay evidence as factual in cases against you, and you can not rebut them.

Do not let them in your house. Do not let them interview your children alone. If they are there, whip out the recording devices – your cel phone, mp3 player with digital record, video camera, whatever you have and record them. Chances are they will flee being recorded. If they have nothing to fear, why would they flee? Could they actually have ulterior motives and do not want to be caught in a lie?

Never trust Child Services. They are not there to help you.

@George Wells – go back into your hole.

@Donna and SKL – when Warren gets into his ridiculous Rambo mode, no amount of common sense is going to sway him. Personally I would go and have a coffee and ignore him until he returns to planet Earth.

I too have ‘detained’ kids, SKL, and I’m sure Donna and other sensible citizens have too, if said child looks very young/is very young, is walking out onto the road in a dangerous manner, or, in one spectacular case, was riding their little plastic trike down the middle of a traffic island. Fortunately the parents of these kids have been very grateful to have their children ‘detained’, and I have never been threatened by slobbering Neanderthal hulks for my troubles. If the six year old in this story is small for her age, as you pointed out SKL, then good on the bus driver. It is annoying at times to have members of the public interfere with your children’s perceived ‘liberties’ (Midge got ‘detained’ a number of times before she was eleven, due to height and general ‘age’ issues) but it should be looked at as a sign of a caring community.

CPS and the police are an entirely different matter, and I hope this family get good legal advice and have the matter cleared up as soon as possible.

@hineata

Where in any of this story does it say that Emily was dangerously crossing the road, or running into traffic, or any of the other fantasy stuff you and SKL are making up?

Two grown men stopped her on the sidewalk, detained her even after she called her dad. This is not caring or concern this is imposing their values on someone else.

And I feel for some people’s kids, you know how bad it looks to your child to have two men hold her against her will, and then you thank them for their concern, or play nice with them. Tells you kid that you are not willing to stand up for them. Nice job.

@Warren –

“Where in any of this story does it say that Emily was dangerously crossing the road, or running into traffic, or any of the other fantasy stuff you and SKL are making up?”

Maybe the same place you are seeing a threat.

We don’t know why these men stopped Emily. Dad doesn’t say. I highly doubt dad bothered to ask. He just assumed it was because they didn’t like Emily walking alone.

If my child had been stopped by two men, I’d ask why. I would not just assume that my child did nothing wrong and that they were being big bullies.

@Warren – Donna already pointed out to you that, as the bus driver et al released the child to the dad immediately on his arrival, there was no threat, and therefore no legal recourse to do whatever ridiculous smacks to the head or other silly behaviour you consider ‘necessary’.

Also in NZ ‘assault on a woman’ (by a man) is considered to be a special case, and while the bus driver in question here is a man (or so I think I read), even threatening a woman here in a public arena like the street could land you in, at the very least, a ‘difficult’ conversation with the police, and probably time in a jail cell until you calmed down. Punching or in other ways physically assaulting a woman will land you in jail or home detention. I can’t imagine that the situation is that much different in Canada, as it is also a Commonwealth country, so back off the stupidity…Were I to ‘detain’ your child in the street, your assaulting me would ultimately be a problem for you, not me. So stop the stupidity…

Well that is a sad way to look at things, Donna. Give to complete strangers the benefit of the doubt that your child was doing something wrong.

You do not trust your kid, then that would be the assumption you make.

I trust my girls, and would automatically assume the strangers are in the wrong.

Actually, when I think about it, even if it wasn’t my kid, and I happen to be there and heard what was going on, I would have confronted the two goofs. Unlike most in here, I do have a backbone and am not afraid to get involved beyond the keyboard.

Warren- I think you’re presenting a story that has many holes in it. You claim to be in Ontario and your step-daughter had to submit to an internal exam. In Ontario, internal exams are not performed on children, even if they have been sexually assaulted. It’s considered a gross violation of their body and is extremely traumatic for a child to go through. The medical officers who are assisting with the allegation will do an external exam to preserve evidence, but that has to be with the consent of the child and BOTH parents (exception being where one parent has court approved sole custody). Keep in mind that it is rare for a child to report a sexual assault within the hours needed to preserve physical evidence so it is extremely rare for even an external exam of the child. Handling the sexual assault of a child is very different from that of an adult, which is why an internal exam is not required. Even with an adult, an internal exam is only done with permission.

@Warren –

Where did I say that I would give complete strangers the benefit of anything over my child? I said that I would ask them why they stopped my child. Not that I would believe them over my child.

See my daughter is a wonderful, delightful child who is largely compliant and responsible … for 7. She is a CHILD. If children could be expected to act in fully responsible, reasonable ways all the time, they wouldn’t need parents for 18 years. And she is smart enough to keep her mouth shut when she does something she knows that she is not supposed to do.

I should have imagined that you are one of those parents whose little darlings can do nothing wrong.

@Warren – your general knowledge is obviously fairly poor, which given prior discussions you’ve been involved in here in the past shouldn’t surprise me. New Zealand was the first country in the world to grant women the vote, in 1893. And as for the ‘pacifist’ nonsense, do you have any knowledge at all of the two major Western conflicts of the 20th century, WW1 and WW2? New Zealand lost more fighting men per head of population than any other nation in the First World War. We are not a pacifist nation – we do have a ban of nuclear ships and armaments, as is our right as a sovereign nation.

As for myself as an individual, I certainly don’t need someone of your ilk to ‘stand up’ for me. In most situations I am more than capable of standing up for myself. In the tiny minority of situations where some difficulty might occur, I have real men, possessed of common sense and diplomacy first, and then of sufficient physical strength and presence in the second to allay any problems, to provide such ‘defence’ as you refer to. You and your kind of ‘hit first. slobber and guffaw second, wonder why you’re in jail third’ type of moron have no place in my society, so please come nowhere near it.

Have to speak out again. How many of you posters have had to endure a CPS investigation?

I venture to say that many have not have to have endured same.

I ask you all to wake up. Once the authorities are involved, your life might become a living hell

They do not follow the rules. This in my experience in working in law.

They, CPS, do not follow the rules (statutes) until they are challenged to do so. Caveat –as an individual, do not challenge them. Have your attorney do so.

@Donna
“If my child had been stopped by two men, I’d ask why. I would not just assume that my child did nothing wrong and that they were being big bullies.”
That is where you give strangers the benefit of the doubt over your kids.
And no my kids are not perfect, they like to think they are from time to time, but who doesn’t. lol

Oh, Warren, once again your lack of a mind shows you up. Donna has explained that her child is seven years of age. You have obviously had little actual experience with seven year olds, or you would understand that the word of a seven year old should be examined carefully before one takes it as ‘gospel’. I, on the other hand, have had extansive experience with seven year olds, and they do not always understand what the ‘lay of the land is’ – they misinterpret the actions of others, they do not always understand right from wrong, and occasionally they downright lie. And sometimes what they are saying IS completely correct.

Of course, your children, if you actually have any biological children, wouldn’t lie, because they are unlikely to possess the IQ to make that a possibility.

As for your comments about New Zealand – wow! I suppose you consider yourself clever. Coming from someone such as yourself, being refered to as a raving lunatic is a compliment – you’ve consistently demonstrated in the past your inability to comprehend basic vocabulary, and I doubt that you actually understand the term ‘ravings of a lunatic’.

And, please, don’t pollute our beautiful country by visiting. Your comments on previous posts have amply demonstrated your ignorance of any culture, or indeed idea, outside of your limited life experience, and we are a proudly diverse nation. We do not need such as yourself visiting. We have plenty of wonderful, enlightened people quite willing to grace our shores – we don’t need the dregs.

Well, as my father used to say, it’s a waste of time having a battle of wits with an unarmed man. Time to go and get on with more important stuff. Have fun changing tires – the saddest thing about you, Warren, is that in the past all the ‘blue collar’ types I have associated with have been intelligent people. Maybe Canada is different, and tradies are actually thick. Tragic, really.

@ Warren –

How exactly is my willingness to listen to the guys’ version of what happened giving strangers the benefit of the doubt over my child? Now if my child was adamant about one story, the men told another and I believed them for no reason (ie I can totally tell when my child is lying), then I would be giving them the benefit of the doubt over her. Simply listening takes nothing away from anyone.

I wasn’t aware that I had to take my child’s word as irrefutable fact and could never so much as ask if their is another side of the story. I certainly would have loved to have you as a father as a teen. I could have done anything I wanted. Afterall you wouldn’t even think of questioning my veracity regardless of what anyone else told you. A stranger calls and tells you that I am drunk at a bar? You can’t even check that out because I told you I was going to Meg’s house and I must always be believed over anyone else.

@hineata

Is there room in NZ for visitors, because you ego must take up alot of room.

Please tell me you are not responsible for the education of kids, because if you do not understand the simple difference between “gospel” and “benefit of the doubt”, then you are one dense woman.

In my opinion, any parent that will ask complete strangers what their kid did wrong, before talking to their child is a poor example of support and family. But then again these are people that have stated they wouldn’t defend their kids against assault, for fear of offending someone’s culture. I fogot the type of people I was dealing with.

@SKL
Never assumed I was speaking for Canada, and never want to. Not my job. And you would be surprised at how many Dad’s would do exactly what I would do. You see we are all not like you SKL, who would wait for harm to come to our kids, and then go running for help. We don’t wait for something to happen, we make sure it doesn’t. The difference between a man and a coward.

Again, where did anyone say they would ask a stranger what their kid did wrong? I said that I would ask the strangers why they stopped my child. I want their explanation of their actions, not their explanation of my kid’s actions, although one may be part of the other.

But this conversation has yet again dipped into Warren’s typical realm of “I am out of legitimate arguments so I am just going to insult everyone and tell them how great I am and how much they suck” so there is nothing more to be gained here.

@ Warren –

It seems that we have very different pictures of what went on with the bus driver. Neither of us were there so neither of us really know which, if either version, is correct.

If your version is correct – which appears to be something along the lines of a frantic call from Emily begging her dad to save her from the crazed bus driver – you may have a perceived threat.

If my much less dramatic version is true – as I suspect it is since the father did not seem too frantic in the situation – there is no perceived threat.

” She calls me on the cell phone since the bus driver is preventing her from leaving, so I go get her.”

You take that as the bus driver giving her a phone to call her dad? She called because the bus driver wouln’t let her leave. If your child calls you because some strange adult won’t let her leave, do you think she is calling to shoot the shit about the weather? If that isn’t calling for assistance from a parent, then please oh all knowing Donna, please enlighten us as to what constitutes assistance and what doesn’t.

“If I saw a strange kid doing something dangerous, I might do the same thing.” Walking down the sidewalk is doing something dangerous?

Your exact words, from your comment
“”If my child had been stopped by two men, I’d ask why. I would not just assume that my child did nothing wrong and that they were being big bullies.”
That statement is one side of the coin, the other side is, I will ask the men, because my child probably did somehting wrong.

As for your comments on insulting others, I do not mean to insult you. You are quite the advesary at times, with my respect.

SKL and hineata, I have no time nor respect for. Kinda up there with that white sludge that forms in the corner of your mouth on a hot day.

@Donna

Good enough, maybe we’ll get updates in the future and one of us or both of us will have to wash the egg off our face. Until then we are both just taking the little facts and assuming from them.

@SKL – you and I are soul sisters now, girl, LOL! Feel like getting together and being froth in a few mouths? I vote for inhabiting Eric Schweig’s mouth, but then I’m a sucker for tall, swarthy and non-white men.

Some of the white men appear to have completely lost their minds, after all…..:-)

And whose cellphone is he even referencing when he says “she called me on the cellphone?” Maybe he means that she called him on HIS cellphone, as opposed to the landline. But she used a store phone and was sitting content in the store with the bus driver and other guy when dad came. Dad certainly doesn’t relay this story like it was a big, horrible ordeal to him or Emily.

In other words, as you said, there are very few facts in this small paragraph and anyone of these interpretations could be the truth. And dad could be laughing at how far off the mark we both are.

Warren, over the past few months you have consistently expected people here to respect your viewpoint, and yet you have shown no respect for anyone that thinks differently from yourself. You have also demonstrated a consistent inability to comprehend fairly simple concepts that others have conveyed. THAT is the basis of my lack of respect for you, and my disregard of your opinion.

I personally don’t care if you own your own business, though I am surprised that you have made a success of it. Not because you can’t change a tyre – most of us can do that – but because your basic lack of respect for people shines through in your posts here. A disregard for people is poor business practice.

I WAS completely wrong to put down ‘tyre technicians’. It is you I have a problem with, not because you are a tyre technician, but because you consistently write foolish nonsense. As I stated before, most tradies I know are intelligent people. Just because you have actively demonstrated on this site – and that is the only way that I know you, fortunately – that you are not is no reason to demean other tyre technicians, so to them I apologise.

Hineata, do you understand graphs? In 2009 Canada scored higher on the PISA than NZ:
http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/46619703.pdf

“She called me on the cell phone” could mean many things, as has been noted, but unless it said “she called me frantically” it does not mean the child was in danger of any harm. If someone wanted to harm her, they would not have let her call her dad on anybody’s cell phone. The only “harm” here was that her attempt to run an errand alone was aborted. She is 6. She will get over it.

Warren, if you knew me you would be red in the face after that ridiculous tirade over why I should respect you. I could care less if you were the President of the USA. I would not respect you because you think it is appropriate to put someone in the hospital for taking a very small measure to keep your child safe. For giving a damn whether your kid got run over by a truck. Respect was the farthest word from my mind when I read that, and all of your “you make me sick” etc. etc. isn’t helping matters. Go change a tire.

As stated earlier, at hockey this morning I discussed the story with my teammates who are OPP officers.

Asked what the police response would be if I called and told them, my 6 yr old daughter was stopped on the street by two men, and they won’t let her leave?

Without hesitation, their response included the deployment of a min. of 4 units. They would not approach the men. They would have their sidearms drawn, the men would be told to place their hands on their heads and back towards the units. They would be thrown to the ground, cuffed, and searched. Taken into custody, with charges to be laid out by the Crown.

When asked what would happen to me, if I went in physically, and took them down. As long as I didn’t kill them, I would be considered protecting my child.

@Warren

“Told them my 6 year old daughter was stopped on the street by two men and they won’t let her leave”….this sounds like something perhaps other than what happened (even if the facts, it sounds perhaps worse than than the actual situation). The girl had a card that said , “feel free to call my parents”…perhaps they just called (or had Emily call) to make sure her parents knew where she was? If you asked your cop friends, “what would happen if two members of the community stopped my 6 year old and asked her to wait and called me to see if I knew she was out on her own” do you still think they would send four units and approach with guns drawn?

Warren, considering that you think such extreme measures justified to protect your child from the slightest possibility of harm, I assume you won’t be letting her walk down the street alone until she is 35.

Warren, are you in possession of the exact quote from the guys who “were preventing her from leaving”?

Just for the record things would have been different, had it been my kid. If they prevented her from going home, she would have screamed her head off for help.

Same result, two grown men in custody.

LOL Warren, had she screamed her head off for help, you would have had even more unwanted contact with the police. The police are not going to give those guys a hard time for looking out for a little child. They are going to assume by your child’s screaming over nothing that she is way too immature to be out alone.

The two guys were not acting in concert, they were going about their separate jobs when both separately saw something that concerned them. Cops are going to take their side, I guarantee it.

@SKL

You need some help, and you best get it soon.

You live in your little fantasy world, I am done with pulling quotes from the story, to dispute your moronic made up facts.
I have had trained experienced police officers read the stories, and give their opinions. The fact that they see the acts of these men, as illegal, and threatening, is all I need. Motive is not a factor. The simple fact is they stopped her from leaving. End of story. That act in itself is illegal, and taken seriously.

So go back to sleep and dream up some more facts not in evidence, and try again. I on the other hand have based my opinions and my evaluations on what is presented here. Not what might have been, not what they might have seen or not seen, or anything.

Emily was on her way home, stopped by to adult men, detained and prevented from leaving. Those are the facts we are presented. Now if you want to risk your child on fantasy, or dreams go ahead. Myself, I will deal with the facts at hand, and act as my values and beliefs dictate. They have always served me well, in the past, and never given me cause to second guess myself.
If the cops you know would take the side of the two men preventing a child from going home, then they are not men I would want enforcing the law.

Warren – You seem to miss the point that the father – THE PERSON WHO WHO ACTUALLY KNOWS THE FACTS AS TO WHAT WAS DONE AND SAID BY EMILY- is not panicked by this situation. He is not frantic. He is not upset. He is annoyed for having people interfere again his Emimy’s jaunt to the post office but nothing more. Maybe you and your cop friends need to dial back your reaction a little here. It is based on a few, very awkwardly worded sentences and doesn’t match the reaction of the actual people involved at all.

Warren, I thought the whole point of this article is that the dad does not want the cops involved in his daughter’s free-range activities. But lemme go check with my shrink just in case.

By the way, it is possible that the school bus driver is not allowed to let kids under a certain age go off without a parent. The parent indicates that his kid is homeschooled, but homeschooled kids are still part of the school district in most places I know of.

@Sally, Canada scored one above New Zealand in reading, one below in science and three places above in mathematics. Hardly significant differences, which was my point to Warren regarding ‘teacher quality’.Though not relevent to this post, of course, and I was silly to engage in any form of ‘discussion’ with the man. Still, it was definitely more interesting at the time than ‘analysing qualitative data’ which absolutely no one is interested in knowing is a compulsory part of the course I am doing at the moment, and something (again no one, even myself, is interested in knowing) I would rather eat my own gall bladder than attempt…..

Once again, hope the OP gets his stuff sorted soon, and I do almost wish that New Zealand had enough cops and CPS people that they could waste time engaged in nonsense like this. Sadly, ours seem to have to engage themselves in real issues, like physical assaults on children (not smacking – bruise-leaving, broken-bone assaults). In that way, maybe we are well behind the US, anyway.

Warren –

It doesn’t matter whether your comment is in response to SKL or me. The point is that if you believe that your child’s life is threatened YOU CALL THE POLICE. If for no other reason than to get the people threatening her arrested. You don’t calmly walk there yourself, calmly walk home and ignore the police when they come to talk to you about what happened. Hence, there was no perceived threat here.

But okay, you take the word of people – I don’t care how much experience they have in anything – who were not present and have absolutely no knowledge of the actual facts beyond 2 sentences (which I am guessing that you told them so they didn’t even read themselves) – over the actions of the people WHO WERE PRESENT and reacted very calmly to and unthreatened by the whole thing.

In other words, what some unknown cops, in some place far away from the incident with absolutely no facts whatsoever, think about anything could not possibly be more irrelevant to my interpretation or understanding of this situation. Or my belief that in THIS situation you are 100% right for beating these guys into the hospital.

And I have very little faith in your cop friends if they can actually tell you for certain what they would do in a situation with absolutely no facts whatsoever since all hostage situations call for different tactics depending on the nature of the particular situation. If they react blindly – X is happening so we must do Y – to every incident they encounter, they are piss poor cops.

I hope we get the whole story at some point! After reading all these opposing viewpoints, it would be nice to get the real story from both sides. But, that’s probably not going to happen…..

I don’t think the dad in the story is Warren, but most likely someone with a similar mindset and viewpoint, and probably operating from the same motivations, whatever those may be. It has been eye-opening (and rather scary to me) to see this discussion play out. How do you reason with people like this? Is it even possible?

As for your step daughter up all night crying about the alleged internal exam (perhaps similar to the alleged sexual assault that you say didn’t happen?)- maybe she was crying about how her stepfather beat up her father? Or because her parents are fighting over her and she feels torn between the two? Or maybe she doesn’t want to live with you but wants to see her mother? There is a plethora of reasons why she could be crying and considering how quick to anger you’ve told us you are, I can assume that your version of your story is truth challenged.

@Jenn

You are one piece of work Lady.
You see bullshit like you just wrote doesn’t do a thing for me.
I am very secure in my relationship with my oldest daughter. As she is very secure in her relationship with me.

You see Jenn this is where you lost the battle. You make remarks to try and raise my anger, to provoke me, and you cannot. The words of a fool mean nothing to me, and you have proved yourself a fool. Insinuating sexual assault, or other abuses is the weapon of a weak pathetic mind.
Oh and for the record, she just read your comment over my shoulder. LMAO, at her reaction.

Straight out of her mouth,”What a Bitch!”, and now she is laughing at you.

You see my kids and I are closer than most, and we do alot of things together. As a side note, to maybe embarass her a little.
I AM DAMN PROUD OF MY DAUGHTER WHO GRADUATES WITH HER BSc, in a couple of weeks.Then onto teachers college.

@Warren –

Clearly it does do something for you since you responded, defended yourself and insulted Jenn. Just saying.

“I AM DAMN PROUD OF MY DAUGHTER WHO GRADUATES WITH HER BSc, in a couple of weeks.Then onto teachers college.”

Congratulations to your daughter. You have every right to be proud.

Oh, and if my father was writing online about someone examining my genitals (along with my emotional response and lots of other personal details) and I saw it, I know whom I would be angry with, and it wouldn’t be Jenn.

Thanks Donna, she has worked extremely hard and will make a fantastic teacher. Any school is going to be lucky to have her on staff. She chose this path because of her love for kids, and not for the career itself.

An awesome lady in every sense and every way. Everyone that comes into contact with her is that much richer, just for the experience.

@SKL

That shows just how dense you are. Before I ever mention a personal experience, I ask my girls for their opinion and consent. It is called respect. Something you, hineata and Jenn are sorely lacking.

@Jenn

Gonna let my daughter handle this one……………

Jenn,
For your information, we still refer to it as Teacher’s College in casual conversation. Not all of us are as anal, as you.

Warren’s (alleged) step daughter: Why can’t you log on as yourself to address people? Name calling is not a way to prove a point. Good luck with your teaching career and perhaps learn a little about how to conduct yourself appropriately online as the College of Teachers has policies on how to interact online so you won’t be charged with professional misconduct (you can read all about it in the `blue’ pages). There is a lot of edu-babble you’ll have to familiarize yourself with- thought I was helping clarify with by explaining to SKL what “Teacher’s College’ is referred to in Ontario.

Just out of curiousity Jenn, where did you receive your education?

My daughter did not call you a name. She accurately described your attitude. tsk tsk, an educated woman that cannot tell the difference between name calling and characterization.

Not a teacher myself but have a family full of them.

@Warren, that’s fantastic about your stepdaughter. We teachers love it when our students overcome violent home lives and bad situations and go on to make positive life choices for themselves.

@SKL – the doctors in your facility sound nicer than mine. I am having to type this with my nose. Still, the meds are kind of nice…..

Wait a second, Warren, your alleged stepdaughter allegedly called Jenn a “b!tch” as well as “anal.”

Gotta go now folks, the meds are wearing off and I’m starting to attract attention over here. Catch y’all later.

Good Morning Canadian Emily,

I just deleted a long winded response to hineata, SKL and Jenn. As I was writing it your comment kept staring me in the face, and I got to thinking what the hell am I doing?

I realized that I was letting their comments get to me. So thank you Emily, sort of brought me back to ground.

The comments of morally weak people, such as them, are not worthy of the time or effort. These three women, specifically, by their comments are not willing to stand up and defend their children, and that just proves how morally weak and cowardly they really are. It is a shame in this day and age, that there are still people like them around. People who are only brave behind a keyboard and a screen name. But such is life online.
One has to wonder what emotional or mental issues they have, that makes them incapable of defending a child, but so ready and willing to make online attacks. I can only assume that their lives are lacking some of their fundamental needs.
I honestly do hope that they find what they need, or get the help they need. To live life as they do cannot be easy. Living with that much hatred and envy would be exhausting, wouldn’t you think?

So SKL, Jenn and hineata, I am sorry for any insults or hurtful comments that I made. I know you cannot help yourselves, and that means your attacks are not personal towards me. I realize that you just are that way with everyone, it is who you are, and that deep down you all wish you could be better people. So good luck in finding your peace, you could really use some in your lives.

People react differently. I am described as someone with a long fuse. However, people will also say, “G-d help you if you get to the end of it.” I am not easily intimidated, I am not fearful (heck I gave birth to 2 babies, on almost 11 lbs without medication and I would protect myself and my children). In most circumstances, I do not act or react aggressively. If I were to be mugged (I live in NYC) I would not hesitate for a second to fight back. Given the “facts” we have here, neither “watered down” nor hyped up, I don’t think I would imediately have reacted as if my child were being kidnapped by the community members who stopped her and let her call me. That’s it.

My husband, tends to perceive all unpleasant situations as a fight, probably would have acted aggressively. I often say to him, ” you were right, they were wrong, but when you respond ‘like that’ people think you’re an asshole and couldn’t care less that they are wronging you.” It tends to escalate the situation.

People deal with things differently. People parent differently. They don’t love their children less. It becomes the argument of the helicopter parent who claims, with total resolve, that those of us (like the Dad above) that encourage competence in our children by giving them freedom are risking their lives by letting them out of our sight.

Let’s look at some questions:

Is it legal for a 6-year-old to walk 3 blocks alone in Ohio?
AND
Is it safe for a 6-year-old to walk 3 blocks alone in Ohio?

Two entirely different questions, and that’s where one of the big problems that this dad has.

If I’m interpreting correctly, this is taking place in southwestern Ohio. I know the area, have friends who live there, and understand the mindset. To really understand Dad’s problem, you need to know the (probable) setting.

Picture rolling hills, 50s and 60s era ranch houses in subdivisions among old farmhouses, lots of churches with names like “The Church of the Most Holy Council of the Lamb of God (Southern Convention)”, very Republican, very right-wing, 4-wheel drive trucks with gun racks outnumber minivans, and every other house has a self-righteous neighbor with more initiative than sense. When one of these citizens feels, like some of the commenters upstream, that a little girl-child is just a walking target for all the evil out there, they’re going to call in a complaint.

When complaints come in, they have to be investigated, and the case is either acted on or closed. Pending cases are a nightmare, and supervisors are often bureaucrats who never worked the streets demand that they be cleared.

And as to the utility worker and bus driver – if a kid is out and about on a school day during school hours, the first thought isn’t “oh, there’s a free-range, homeschooled kid.” No, to the average citizen in Ohio, the first thought is, “why isn”t that kid in school? I’m going to find out and do what I need to,” which for most people would include calling the police, especially if said kid refused to give up any info needed to contact parents.

I admire Dad’s stand. Back in the 80s, when my daughter was growing up, she was able to go places by herself, starting with 2 doors up to her girlfriend’s house, and by age 10, to the shopping center a half-mile away. Of course, most of the kids then were free-range, because society hadn’t gotten quite so paranoid. I firmly believe that a parent’s duty is to raise their child to be a responsible adult, and that includes many of the ideals of the free-range kids movement.
But-
Dad’s got to take into consideration the immediate world he lives in, with CPS caseworkers who will close his damned case no matter what, with cops that generally regard anything but immediate acquiescence “suspicious behavior”, with neighbors who probably find homeschooling itself suspicious behavior. In this kind of atmosphere, refusal to cooperate is seen as a sign of guilt – of what, they don’t know, but they’ll be on the lookout for something from now on.

(Oh, Ohio! 10 years of working for the county and 3 years for working for the state have made me bitter and cynical and pragmatic)

@Z

Their differing opinions do not anger me. I admit that their childish accusations on implications of me lying, almost made me angry…………but then I just took into consideration who or what was making them, and it became funny.

I am very proud of my record as a husband, father, friend, and businessman. I am the first one to lend a hand to anyone, will be there for anyone, and am a helluva nice guy. Everyone also knows that if you mess with my family, you best hope the police get to you first. Now that last statement seems to offend the sensibitlies of some people…………….and personally I don’t give a rat’s ass if they like it, me or anything.

Sort of like the song says,”I don’t give a damn what other people thing. What do ya think about that?”

I’m so glad I found this site.

I grew up in the 80’s and remember walking to and from kindergarten at 5 years old. The school was 6 blocks from our house. I was also a ‘latch-key’ kid, raised by a single dad who oftentimes worked 10-12-hour (sometimes longer) days as a union carpenter. I am now working on a Double Master’s in Teaching (Math) and English Literature, and I’m not afraid of going outside of my house, unlike some of the paranoid people I’ve met in my life.

I also have a 10 year old son, and unknowingly have been raising him as a “free range kid”. I trust my son, and he trusts me… The problem is other parents who are overprotective and what I’ve now seen described as “Helicopter” parents. Eeeew.

I would not be half as curious about the world and increasing my intellect if I had been hovered over. And neither would my son.

This is the truest form of nanny state.

I also lived with my mother as a teenager when my father died. Her side of my family is riddled with drug addiction and horrible, truly neglectful parenting.

I’ve seen both sides of the argument, up close and personal. Neither one is pretty, and it rather denotes a lack of actual concern for the child’s best interest: They’re both (at worst) a selfish means to an end; as either a parent in the throws of addiction or uncaring, or the opposite end of the spectrum – where hovering parents set their children back emotionally and physically because the parent is afraid, paranoid and unwilling to allow their child a chance to navigate the world in small, successful steps… That, too, is very selfish.

@Dawn

The problem is that any remaining suspicion is completely unreasonable. Dad’s demonstration to the police that he is the girl’s father should have been enough to resolve the matter. Anything further is an oppressive intrusion by the state into this family’s personal business. He shouldn’t be forced to engage in an unlawful process like this.

I haven’t read all the posts but has anyone asked themselves what the attitude of the cops were when they spoke to the Father? A lot (obviously not all ) cops have the ” I’m a cop and can do/say as I please ” attitude. No I’m not anti-police, It’s reality. If I was confronted with that attitude by the police when out for a walk with my child? damn right my back would go up! In this day and age of people over-riding their authority, whether it be the police, cps or any other ” Authority” figure; you have to protect your rights because if you don’t, who will?. My point being as a parent we do the best of our ability to bring up healthy, happy, independent and well adjusted children and when the state interferes with that because of unbiased claims it’s time for all of us to stand up and take back ‘ Our’ rights and freedoms. Yes cps should check out claims of neglect etc, but when it is shown that there is none, it should be the end of the story, unfortunately as too many know it usually is not the case.

Excellent excited analytical vision for the purpose of details and can foresee complications prior
to they will take place.

CPS workers are not out to steal kids from parents! As a social worker who worked in foster care as a parent aide, the goal is to keep families together when possible and protect our children. As a parent aide, I had some abusive and neglegient parents who needed help in learning to parent in an appropriate manner. Sometimes the kids were placed with family or foster care for some time.
I also had some cases where I questioned why CPS were involved. For instance, I was given a family and instructed to teach appropriate monitoring of her 3 year old and 1.5 year old. Why? The younger one had his arm broken when the older kid jumped on him while rough housing! No need for CPS involvement.
The system may not be perfect-far from it-but we honestly (at least the front line workers) want to keep families intact.
As a side note, I stopped watching news programs in 2008 because of the real life horrors I saw every day at work. I am blissfully unaware of fires, murders, kidnappings, and rapes because I saw too much working in foster care!
Ceasing media frenzy was one of the best decisions I made!