Incest accusation

[Robert T McQuaid]

. October 29, 2004

Have you been following the Phillips case in Indiana?
She had ten children taken by child protectors, and
has had her rights to most terminated. Among other
outrages, Indiana social services contrived to get
her teenaged daughter to hold a sign in a picket line
denouncing her own mother. Here is the latest atrocious
act in the campaign to destroy this family.

Robert T McQuaid
Orangeville Ontario Canada
Decriminalize motherhood

--------------------------------------------------------


Dear Friends and Family,

Well, this is the latest in the Phillips Family Saga.
On Wednesday I went to the Team meeting with Danny, and
once again Danny will NOT be able to come home. The
reason this time is that a report came from Clinton
County DFC (where else?) that Danny fathered his last 3
siblings with me, his mother. I was so shocked I could
hardly function! I told Danny's counselor that it is a
good thing I was not a violent person, because he would
probably have to be holding me down.

This has got to be the straw that broke the camel's
back. I thought our lives were destroyed already, but
the DFC found a little speck of life, and now they are
stomping on that!

I need advice everyone. I would like to sue for
defamation of character (that's putting it mildly) and
for damages we have endure these last torturous 3 1/2
years, but I don't know how. I don't have this
accusation in writing. This has NEVER come up in court
EVER. How can they all of a sudden grab an accusation
like this out of thin air and use it to block Danny from
coming home? I am all for getting DNA testing, but the
3 they are claiming he fathered--Elisabeth, Joel and
Charity, have been TPR'd and I would not have any way of
getting DNA testing for them.

I have just been a basket case. My mother heart has
been crushed time and time again, but to be humiliated
like this is more than I can bear. Any suggestions will
be very helpful, and Please keep praying for us in this
new attack from these evil people.

Barely functional, Julie Phillips

[WitchWirsen]

Oh I think that lady can still get a DNA testing order even if she was TPR'd
because of criminal charges.
I'd damn sure get one.

Post by Robert T McQuaid
. October 29, 2004
Have you been following the Phillips case in Indiana?
She had ten children taken by child protectors, and
has had her rights to most terminated. Among other
outrages, Indiana social services contrived to get
her teenaged daughter to hold a sign in a picket line
denouncing her own mother. Here is the latest atrocious
act in the campaign to destroy this family.
Robert T McQuaid
Orangeville Ontario Canada
Decriminalize motherhood
--------------------------------------------------------
Dear Friends and Family,
Well, this is the latest in the Phillips Family Saga.
On Wednesday I went to the Team meeting with Danny, and
once again Danny will NOT be able to come home. The
reason this time is that a report came from Clinton
County DFC (where else?) that Danny fathered his last 3
siblings with me, his mother. I was so shocked I could
hardly function! I told Danny's counselor that it is a
good thing I was not a violent person, because he would
probably have to be holding me down.
This has got to be the straw that broke the camel's
back. I thought our lives were destroyed already, but
the DFC found a little speck of life, and now they are
stomping on that!
I need advice everyone. I would like to sue for
defamation of character (that's putting it mildly) and
for damages we have endure these last torturous 3 1/2
years, but I don't know how. I don't have this
accusation in writing. This has NEVER come up in court
EVER. How can they all of a sudden grab an accusation
like this out of thin air and use it to block Danny from
coming home? I am all for getting DNA testing, but the
3 they are claiming he fathered--Elisabeth, Joel and
Charity, have been TPR'd and I would not have any way of
getting DNA testing for them.
I have just been a basket case. My mother heart has
been crushed time and time again, but to be humiliated
like this is more than I can bear. Any suggestions will
be very helpful, and Please keep praying for us in this
new attack from these evil people.
Barely functional, Julie Phillips

[Rocky MoRahn]

Post by WitchWirsen
I'd damn sure get one.

In between, before or after your done poking yourself?
Rocky.

[Ron]

How quick you all are to jump on this, something completely without support,
even from the individual making the claim. Whatever happened to evidence?
She says that they have made this claim, but if it has not been brought into
the court room then CPS cant do anything with it. Ever think of that?

Since this is the first I have heard of this case, perhaps Robert will be
good enough to provide additional information, and links to the news
reports, concerning the case. There is obviously quite a bit more to the
story than this.

Sorry Robert, but without more information on the background of the case I
cannot even think about supporting your position that CPS is working to
"destroy this family". CPS usually need do nothing, the family does all the
destruction for them. I suspect that this case is no different, but will
wait for additional information (unlike rockhead and the other).

Ron

Post by Robert T McQuaid
. October 29, 2004
Have you been following the Phillips case in Indiana?
She had ten children taken by child protectors, and
has had her rights to most terminated. Among other
outrages, Indiana social services contrived to get
her teenaged daughter to hold a sign in a picket line
denouncing her own mother. Here is the latest atrocious
act in the campaign to destroy this family.
Robert T McQuaid
Orangeville Ontario Canada
Decriminalize motherhood
--------------------------------------------------------
Dear Friends and Family,
Well, this is the latest in the Phillips Family Saga.
On Wednesday I went to the Team meeting with Danny, and
once again Danny will NOT be able to come home. The
reason this time is that a report came from Clinton
County DFC (where else?) that Danny fathered his last 3
siblings with me, his mother. I was so shocked I could
hardly function! I told Danny's counselor that it is a
good thing I was not a violent person, because he would
probably have to be holding me down.
This has got to be the straw that broke the camel's
back. I thought our lives were destroyed already, but
the DFC found a little speck of life, and now they are
stomping on that!
I need advice everyone. I would like to sue for
defamation of character (that's putting it mildly) and
for damages we have endure these last torturous 3 1/2
years, but I don't know how. I don't have this
accusation in writing. This has NEVER come up in court
EVER. How can they all of a sudden grab an accusation
like this out of thin air and use it to block Danny from
coming home? I am all for getting DNA testing, but the
3 they are claiming he fathered--Elisabeth, Joel and
Charity, have been TPR'd and I would not have any way of
getting DNA testing for them.
I have just been a basket case. My mother heart has
been crushed time and time again, but to be humiliated
like this is more than I can bear. Any suggestions will
be very helpful, and Please keep praying for us in this
new attack from these evil people.
Barely functional, Julie Phillips

[Robert T McQuaid]

Post by Ron
How quick you all are to jump on this, something
completely without support, even from the individual
making the claim. Whatever happened to evidence? She
says that they have made this claim, but if it has not
been brought into the court room then CPS cant do
anything with it. Ever think of that?
Since this is the first I have heard of this case,
perhaps Robert will be good enough to provide additional
information, and links to the news reports, concerning
the case. There is obviously quite a bit more to the
story than this.
Sorry Robert, but without more information on the
background of the case I cannot even think about
supporting your position that CPS is working to "destroy
this family". CPS usually need do nothing, the family
does all the destruction for them. I suspect that this
case is no different, but will wait for additional
information (unlike rockhead and the other).
Ron

OK. Julie Phillips had ten children stolen by Indiana
child protectors. Among the lowlights of her story, not
mentioned below, is a street demonstration in which
Indiana child protectors got Julie's daughter to parade
in a street demonstration carrying a sign denouncing her
own mother. (How is that for protecting a child from
emotional harm?). Now she is accused of having her
three youngest children fathered not by her husband, but
by her oldest son, who was eleven years old when the
first of those children was conceived.

Here is her story in her own words:



Julie Phillips' Story

In May of 2001, all ten of my children were snatched
away by CPS. My baby was only 5 days old when she was
wrenched from my arms. The allegations were that my
house was too dirty, that I wasn't caring properly for
my 2 handicapped children, and that my oldest son had
sexually fondled some of his siblings. First of all,
when CPS entered my home, I had just been home from the
hospital after the birth of my baby 1 full day, and I
was sitting in a wheelchair because of a birthing injury
that left me totally helpless. Now, what would your
house look like after you'd been gone for 4 days and
there were 9 children to mess up the house? I'd say
you'd have dirty dishes and laundry piled up, right? I
had a very difficult pregnancy, and hadn't been able to
keep up very well, anyway, before the baby was born.

About my handicapped children: I was caring for them
the best I could during my pregnancy, and had reached
out for help. We had just recently moved from the state
of Washington, where I had all kinds of help for my
girls. I had 196 hours of respite care per month plus
all kinds of therapy, special ed, early intervention,
and etc. When we moved to Indiana I sought out the same
programs, being federally funded I assumed the programs
were the same all over the U.S. But when I checked into
the programs here in Indiana, there was a 3 to 6 YEAR
waiting list for help and respite care, because there
was not enough funding. So I struggled on with no help.
My older children were a great help, and so was my
wonderful husband, but we had a lot on our plates at the
time.

( What I feel is very interesting is that now it is
costing the state of Indiana over $20,000 per month to
keep our family apart. Wouldn't it have been cheaper to
give us the help we needed in the home instead of
ripping our family apart?)

As far as the fondling by my oldest son: We knew he had
messed with the girls, but we were dealing with it the
best we knew how. I had taken him to our family doctor
and gotten a referral for counseling and help for him.
Because of my difficult pregnancy, I wasn't able to get
him to that counseling before the baby was born. Also
he was on a waiting list to go to a home for at-risk
children. But because we had not turned him into the
POLICE, we were considered negligent and not able to
protect our children from sexual molest.

Well, even after our son was hauled away (he's now is
Boy's School), CPS would not let the other children come
home. They were on an all-out witchhunt, because their
philosophy is that because our son did what he did, then
my husband and I HAD to have molested him. So began the
counseling, psychiatric testing, parenting classes, more
counseling, sex perpetrator's counseling, polygraph
tests, and on and on. Unbeknowns to us, all this
"stuff" was just a way for CPS to dig up dirt on us. We
participated in it all, desperately trying to work
towards reunification.

It never worked for us. We got down and licked their
boots until our tongues were raw, but it all worked
against us. The more we cooperated, the worse our
situation got. We were accused of sexually molesting
our son because we bathed him when he was older.
(Anyone get sexual pleasure from washing a dirty, stinky
bottom?) I was accused because I nursed my babies in the
presence of my other children, and pumped my milk for my
handicapped child because she was totally tube fed and I
was giving her the best nutrition to keep her alive. My
son one time walked in on me while I was bathing, so I
was accused of molesting him. And this goes on and on.

I'm not saying our family was perfect, but anything that
we were doing "wrong" could have been corrected with the
children still in the home. We could have sent our son
to another location while he got therapy or something if
need be, but why did our family have to be ripped apart?
We believe our son is bipolar, thus explaining his
hypersexuality, but we didn't know about these symptoms
until he was already gone. (He was diagnosed with ADHD
when he was 10, but now that we look back, we feel it
was more that just ADHD.)

Because we wouldn't cooperate with the "system" and say
that we are pedophiles and sex addicts, our parental
rights have been severed. (We are in appeal right now,
however.) All our visitation rights were removed well
over a year ago, and our attorney told us that the judge
did that to punish us for not "cooperating." Even though
we don't get any kind of contact with our children, we
still have to pay child support. We have had to file
for bankruptcy because of the financial strain CPS has
put on us.

We have been fighting for over 2 years now to get our
children returned, but because the "system" thinks we
are so evil and uncooperative, we have lost. However,
through all of this my husband and I have not been
criminally charged with any molest, neglect or abuse.
In family court you are guilty until proven innocent,
and it is awfully hard to prove your innocence in this
corrupt system. Perhaps if we were tried in criminal
court, we could get our children back, because there
wouldn't be enough evidence to get us charged! Yet we
face so much heartache. I cry every day and feel that
I'm losing my mind because I can't have my babies. I am
a mother, and I will fight until there is no life left
in me to get my precious babies returned.

Thanks for listening.

Pertinent information.
Case is in Clinton County, Indiana
Case worker Karen Surber

If you need anything else or any more details, feel free
to contact me. Julie Phillips at
***@yahoo.com

[Ron]

Post by Robert T McQuaid

Post by Ron
How quick you all are to jump on this, something
completely without support, even from the individual
making the claim. Whatever happened to evidence? She
says that they have made this claim, but if it has not
been brought into the court room then CPS cant do
anything with it. Ever think of that?
Since this is the first I have heard of this case,
perhaps Robert will be good enough to provide additional
information, and links to the news reports, concerning
the case. There is obviously quite a bit more to the
story than this.
Sorry Robert, but without more information on the
background of the case I cannot even think about
supporting your position that CPS is working to "destroy
this family". CPS usually need do nothing, the family
does all the destruction for them. I suspect that this
case is no different, but will wait for additional
information (unlike rockhead and the other).
Ron

OK. Julie Phillips had ten children stolen by Indiana
child protectors. Among the lowlights of her story, not
mentioned below, is a street demonstration in which
Indiana child protectors got Julie's daughter to parade
in a street demonstration carrying a sign denouncing her
own mother. (How is that for protecting a child from
emotional harm?). Now she is accused of having her
three youngest children fathered not by her husband, but
by her oldest son, who was eleven years old when the
first of those children was conceived.

Ya see Robert, that's the problem I have here. Its HER story, in HER OWN
words. SHE can say anything SHE likes about HER case, anything at all, and
there is no one who can say different except CPS, and they can't because of
the privacy laws. No one to dispute HER story. What's to say that it is
not ALL a story? Take a look at greg's story. As he tells it, he is
completely innocent, and his actions were nothing more than what a real
parent would do. But that's HIS story, and we have all seen HIS motion to
the courts. If nothing else, that should have taught everyone here that
when reading what a parent tells about their story should be taken with a
grain of salt.

But not here. If its a story that is critical of CPS then every word is
taken as gospel by the majority of the posters here because this is the type
of story they want to read. Truth, fact, evidence, history, all only
confuse the matter for them and is all to often ignored.

Now, if there were some news articles about this case that we could read,
that would be a different thing all together. You see Robert, I have been
in court when these things take place, I have heard the "stories" that the
parents have, and I have also heard the evidence from the county attorneys,
seen their documentation, the police reports, that refute what parents
usually have to say. Do they refute all of it? No, but then again its only
the important parts that need to be.

News reporters don't often get the facts straight either, but at least they
take a swing at being impartial (as long as its not a political article).
With a professional all one needs do is learn to read critically, and the
story can tell one quite a bit. No doubt there is some accuracy to her
story. But as it is human nature to slant a story to make themselves look
as good as possible, or at least look as "not bad" as possible. It is our
job as readers to acknowledge this human quirk and keep it in mind when
reading the story and look for those things that must be there, but are not.

Few here pass that test, because this is the type of story they want to
read. They read the story with their own personal bias' proudly out front
leading the way, ignoring what should be there, and is not.

Anyway, got any news paper links there Robert?

Ron

Post by Robert T McQuaid
Julie Phillips' Story
In May of 2001, all ten of my children were snatched
away by CPS. My baby was only 5 days old when she was
wrenched from my arms. The allegations were that my
house was too dirty, that I wasn't caring properly for
my 2 handicapped children, and that my oldest son had
sexually fondled some of his siblings. First of all,
when CPS entered my home, I had just been home from the
hospital after the birth of my baby 1 full day, and I
was sitting in a wheelchair because of a birthing injury
that left me totally helpless. Now, what would your
house look like after you'd been gone for 4 days and
there were 9 children to mess up the house? I'd say
you'd have dirty dishes and laundry piled up, right? I
had a very difficult pregnancy, and hadn't been able to
keep up very well, anyway, before the baby was born.
About my handicapped children: I was caring for them
the best I could during my pregnancy, and had reached
out for help. We had just recently moved from the state
of Washington, where I had all kinds of help for my
girls. I had 196 hours of respite care per month plus
all kinds of therapy, special ed, early intervention,
and etc. When we moved to Indiana I sought out the same
programs, being federally funded I assumed the programs
were the same all over the U.S. But when I checked into
the programs here in Indiana, there was a 3 to 6 YEAR
waiting list for help and respite care, because there
was not enough funding. So I struggled on with no help.
My older children were a great help, and so was my
wonderful husband, but we had a lot on our plates at the
time.
( What I feel is very interesting is that now it is
costing the state of Indiana over $20,000 per month to
keep our family apart. Wouldn't it have been cheaper to
give us the help we needed in the home instead of
ripping our family apart?)
As far as the fondling by my oldest son: We knew he had
messed with the girls, but we were dealing with it the
best we knew how. I had taken him to our family doctor
and gotten a referral for counseling and help for him.
Because of my difficult pregnancy, I wasn't able to get
him to that counseling before the baby was born. Also
he was on a waiting list to go to a home for at-risk
children. But because we had not turned him into the
POLICE, we were considered negligent and not able to
protect our children from sexual molest.
Well, even after our son was hauled away (he's now is
Boy's School), CPS would not let the other children come
home. They were on an all-out witchhunt, because their
philosophy is that because our son did what he did, then
my husband and I HAD to have molested him. So began the
counseling, psychiatric testing, parenting classes, more
counseling, sex perpetrator's counseling, polygraph
tests, and on and on. Unbeknowns to us, all this
"stuff" was just a way for CPS to dig up dirt on us. We
participated in it all, desperately trying to work
towards reunification.
It never worked for us. We got down and licked their
boots until our tongues were raw, but it all worked
against us. The more we cooperated, the worse our
situation got. We were accused of sexually molesting
our son because we bathed him when he was older.
(Anyone get sexual pleasure from washing a dirty, stinky
bottom?) I was accused because I nursed my babies in the
presence of my other children, and pumped my milk for my
handicapped child because she was totally tube fed and I
was giving her the best nutrition to keep her alive. My
son one time walked in on me while I was bathing, so I
was accused of molesting him. And this goes on and on.
I'm not saying our family was perfect, but anything that
we were doing "wrong" could have been corrected with the
children still in the home. We could have sent our son
to another location while he got therapy or something if
need be, but why did our family have to be ripped apart?
We believe our son is bipolar, thus explaining his
hypersexuality, but we didn't know about these symptoms
until he was already gone. (He was diagnosed with ADHD
when he was 10, but now that we look back, we feel it
was more that just ADHD.)
Because we wouldn't cooperate with the "system" and say
that we are pedophiles and sex addicts, our parental
rights have been severed. (We are in appeal right now,
however.) All our visitation rights were removed well
over a year ago, and our attorney told us that the judge
did that to punish us for not "cooperating." Even though
we don't get any kind of contact with our children, we
still have to pay child support. We have had to file
for bankruptcy because of the financial strain CPS has
put on us.
We have been fighting for over 2 years now to get our
children returned, but because the "system" thinks we
are so evil and uncooperative, we have lost. However,
through all of this my husband and I have not been
criminally charged with any molest, neglect or abuse.
In family court you are guilty until proven innocent,
and it is awfully hard to prove your innocence in this
corrupt system. Perhaps if we were tried in criminal
court, we could get our children back, because there
wouldn't be enough evidence to get us charged! Yet we
face so much heartache. I cry every day and feel that
I'm losing my mind because I can't have my babies. I am
a mother, and I will fight until there is no life left
in me to get my precious babies returned.
Thanks for listening.
Pertinent information.
Case is in Clinton County, Indiana
Case worker Karen Surber
If you need anything else or any more details, feel free
to contact me. Julie Phillips at

[kane]

Post by AdoptaDad

Subject: Re: Incest accusation
Date: 11/2/2004 2:14 PM Eastern Standard Time

Post by Ron
How quick you all are to jump on this, something
completely without support, even from the individual
making the claim. Whatever happened to evidence? She
says that they have made this claim, but if it has not
been brought into the court room then CPS cant do
anything with it. Ever think of that?
Since this is the first I have heard of this case,
perhaps Robert will be good enough to provide additional
information, and links to the news reports, concerning
the case. There is obviously quite a bit more to the
story than this.
Sorry Robert, but without more information on the
background of the case I cannot even think about
supporting your position that CPS is working to "destroy
this family". CPS usually need do nothing, the family
does all the destruction for them. I suspect that this
case is no different, but will wait for additional
information (unlike rockhead and the other).
Ron

OK. Julie Phillips had ten children stolen by Indiana
child protectors. Among the lowlights of her story, not
mentioned below, is a street demonstration in which
Indiana child protectors got Julie's daughter to parade
in a street demonstration carrying a sign denouncing her
own mother. (How is that for protecting a child from
emotional harm?).

That's truly pathetic.

Well, the claim that CPS "got" the child to so something is just that,
a claim. Most likely a lie. More than one older kid finally gets it
about their bio production unit's treatment of them and is PISSED.

Not many, but a few.

Post by AdoptaDad

Now she is accused of having her
three youngest children fathered not by her husband, but
by her oldest son, who was eleven years old when the
first of those children was conceived.

I read her story and I find it quite tragic, but at the same time I have to
With all the problems she described in her family (mental illness, sibling
sexual abuse, emotional and physical disabilities, etc. ad nauseum),

what is

Post by AdoptaDad
she doing with TEN CHILDREN?

Lifestyle is not supposed to be a factor in child protection...only
those portions that endanger a child. In this case it's pretty obvious
that reasons to remove, if they were proven, were more than enough.

Number of kids is irrelevant.

Post by AdoptaDad
Some kind soul needs to take this woman for birth control.

She obviously isn't interested.

Post by AdoptaDad
Don't give me a lecture on reproductive rights, I don't buy it for a minute.

Hokay, but it is a right. It may not be right, but consider the
alternative.....someone dictating what you can do with your body about
one issue might well want more control.

Post by AdoptaDad
If you can't take proper care of the kids you already have, having

more just

Post by AdoptaDad
adds to the problem.

Ah, the key to the dilema, "take proper care." Some folks with large
families do it very well indeed. Others with one kid can't manage to
keep from injurying the child. Somethings even before birth.

Post by AdoptaDad
There's a family in our area who sounds a lot like the Phillips' family.
Eight kids, mom's preggers with #9, the house is an absolute friggin'

mess, the

Post by AdoptaDad
kids don't get anywhear near the attention they need, financial

resources are

Post by AdoptaDad
inadequate, the father is a lazy slob collecting disability checks,

the kids

Post by AdoptaDad
come to school in dirty clothes, personal hygiene is a big issue...

I could

Post by AdoptaDad
go on and on.
Yet, they're still pumping out a new kid every 12 to 14 months.
Unfrigginbelievable!

Yep. Most communities have got'em. Still, lifestyle is not an
adequate reason for removing children. Risk of harm and harm, are. 9
kids isn't harmful. Nor is a messy house. Nor is, sadly, lack of
attention as long as it doesn't exceed community standards for
developmental needs. And who shall set what the finances must be to
determine if a child is removed or not?

Lazy? Hmmmm....now that's an interesting one. Like going on a three
year sabbatical, maybe? Naw. Laziness should not be a question. Again,
where would we set the line? How much and for how long?

Dirty clothes and personal hygiene, barring dangerous bacteria should
not be a concern. Until about WWII we were one filthy nation anyway.
Bathing more than once a week was looked on by most as effette, and
only for the idle rich.

Though I'm called a CPS apologist here, it's mainly because I won't
tolerate the excesses of stupidity and ignorance of the anti CPS crowd
and their constant and obvious lies.

On the other hand I won't tolerate CPS interfering in a families life
for nothing more then squalor .. a lifestyle choice much of the time,
and a cultural one at other times, with economics playing a large role
in most cases.

Post by AdoptaDad
Reproductive rights be damned... don't have more kids if you're overwhelmed
and can't take proper care of the ones in you already have in your

home.

Thankfully that's not codified into law. Are you sure you'd like it if
it were? What if you or yours fell on hard times for awhile?

Hard times could be economic, or even temporary mental incapacity,
illness, or just the poor judgement of youth.

Usually I support your contributions, but this time I'll pass on your
main point.

What get's lied about here so often in such cases is the extraordinary
lengths CPS and caseworkers go to to rehab and educate and support
families in just such circumstances. That's why I'm quite suspicious
of the babbling one and his cut and past and nonsense commentary.

There are times when such families absolutely refuse to voluntarily
respond to an offering of services. It may be a mental problem, or a
cultural problem, or a social problem, but if it actually puts
children at risk then CPS is the agency this society has chosen as a
last boundary that may not be crossed.

I believe that was the case in the example...once again...and attempt
to go over the top in blaming CPS....plainly stated, a misleading lie,
by way of interpreting events, instead of reporting facts...the truth.

Not hard to spot when one notices the heavy reliance on emotion laden
words and excessively negative claims in the post.

Post by AdoptaDad
Dad

Best wishes.

Kane

[AdoptaDad]

Subject: Re: Incest accusation
Date: 11/3/2004 1:42 PM Eastern Standard Time

< snipped some >

Ah, the key to the dilema, "take proper care." Some folks with large
families do it very well indeed. Others with one kid can't manage to
keep from injurying the child. Somethings even before birth.

Post by AdoptaDad
There's a family in our area who sounds a lot like the Phillips' family.
Eight kids, mom's preggers with #9, the house is an absolute friggin'

mess, the

Post by AdoptaDad
kids don't get anywhear near the attention they need, financial

resources are

Post by AdoptaDad
inadequate, the father is a lazy slob collecting disability checks,

the kids

Post by AdoptaDad
come to school in dirty clothes, personal hygiene is a big issue...

I could

Post by AdoptaDad
go on and on.
Yet, they're still pumping out a new kid every 12 to 14 months.
Unfrigginbelievable!

Yep. Most communities have got'em. Still, lifestyle is not an
adequate reason for removing children. Risk of harm and harm, are. 9
kids isn't harmful. Nor is a messy house. Nor is, sadly, lack of
attention as long as it doesn't exceed community standards for
developmental needs. And who shall set what the finances must be to
determine if a child is removed or not?

Excuse me, but I never once called for the *removal* of the children in the
family I described above. I simply stated that if having 8+ children is
overwhelming to parents, it would be a great idea to stop sprogging them.

Also, I don't pretend to have any authority on how many kids parents can
have. It's simply my opinion.

If I felt these kids were in real danger, I know the phone number for CPS.

Dad

[Robert T McQuaid]

Post by Ron
Ya see Robert, that's the problem I have here. Its HER
story, in HER OWN words. SHE can say anything SHE likes
about HER case, anything at all, and there is no one who
can say different except CPS, and they can't because of
the privacy laws. No one to dispute HER story. What's
to say that it is not ALL a story? Take a look at
greg's story. As he tells it, he is completely
innocent, and his actions were nothing more than what a
real parent would do. But that's HIS story, and we have
all seen HIS motion to the courts. If nothing else,
that should have taught everyone here that when reading
what a parent tells about their story should be taken
with a grain of salt.
But not here. If its a story that is critical of CPS
then every word is taken as gospel by the majority of
the posters here because this is the type of story they
want to read. Truth, fact, evidence, history, all only
confuse the matter for them and is all to often ignored.
Now, if there were some news articles about this case
that we could read, that would be a different thing all
together. You see Robert, I have been in court when
these things take place, I have heard the "stories" that
the parents have, and I have also heard the evidence
from the county attorneys, seen their documentation, the
police reports, that refute what parents usually have to
say. Do they refute all of it? No, but then again its
only the important parts that need to be.
News reporters don't often get the facts straight
either, but at least they take a swing at being
impartial (as long as its not a political article).
With a professional all one needs do is learn to read
critically, and the story can tell one quite a bit. No
doubt there is some accuracy to her story. But as it is
human nature to slant a story to make themselves look as
good as possible, or at least look as "not bad" as
possible. It is our job as readers to acknowledge this
human quirk and keep it in mind when reading the story
and look for those things that must be there, but are
not.
Few here pass that test, because this is the type of
story they want to read. They read the story with their
own personal bias' proudly out front leading the way,
ignoring what should be there, and is not.
Anyway, got any news paper links there Robert?
Ron

Ron:

I have seen several cases in which I have been able to
compare the parent's story to the story from the child
protectors, and the parents tell the more dependable
version.

But since you insist, here are two articles from the
Frankfort Times of Indiana. The webpages omit the
original publication dates, but they both seem to be
from October 2003. The second is followed by twelve
pages of commentary from readers including me. The two
urls are:

http://www.ftimes.com/Main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=18155
http://www.ftimes.com/main.asp?FromHome=1&TypeID=1&ArticleID=18606&SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1




Woman takes frustration with CPS to the streets


A Hillisburg woman, armed with a placard and a sandwich
board, took her battle with Clinton County's Child
Protection Service to a busy Frankfort street corner
Wednesday afternoon.

Julia Phillips, whose 10 children CPS removed from her
home in May 2001, stood at the corner of Walnut and
Jackson streets displaying a homemade sign that read,
"Clinton County Division of Family and Children Destroys
Families." Some of the passers-by shouted support, she
said. But mostly they just stared.

"People have no idea what's going on," Phillips said,
insisting the state-run child protection system is
flawed. "It's a problem that's going on worldwide."

All but one of Julie and Jonathan Phillips' children,
ranging in age from 17 to 3, have been placed in foster
care. The oldest, a son, was placed in a juvenile
center, where he still resides.

Phillips claims she and her husband have abided with
every order CPS has issued, including moving to a more
suitable home and undergoing counseling.

Still, in January the court severed the Phillipses'
parental rights.

"It's a money-making thing," Phillips said. "How else
can you explain them not giving back our kids?"

The severance of parental rights has been appealed, she
said, and the Phillipses now await a decision by an
Indiana court of appeals.

Last week, she said, she and her husband traveled to
Xenia, Ohio, to meet with an advocate for parents in
situations such as hers. The advocate agreed to help
the Phillips, she said, and gave her "a lot of
homework."

Demonstrating along a busy street was first on the list,
she said, pointing out that months of research on the
child protection system has strengthened her
self-confidence.

Ultimately, in taking her case to the streets, Phillips
hopes it will help her get her children back home.

"I'm doing this not just for my kids," she said, "but
for my grandkids. I want my kids to know and I don't
want them to ever have to go through what I have gone
through."

She would return to the corner today, she said.

Clinton County Child Protection Service was contacted
for comment this morning, but no one authorized to speak
on the matter could be reached.

The Times, Frankfort, Indiana











Competing Sides Conduct Own Protests

By Dan Shaw


A group supporting the Clinton County Child Protective
Services and its decision to remove 10 children from a
Frankfort home picketed in the city's downtown Friday
afternoon.

A few of the very children taken away, along with a
couple of foster parents and supporters, were among
them.

Another person - she not part of this group - was there,
too: the children's mother. Julia Phillips, along with
husband Jon, are trying to regain custody of their
children.

The two sides displayed competing signs for roughly two
hours on Walnut Street near the Jackson Street
intersection. The demonstrators remained peaceful
throughout.

Foster parent Janet Pillion said the group's rally
stemmed from a four-part Times series last spring
detailing perceived problems within the Clinton County
Child Protective Services. A local minister who had
been involved in a foster situation took the CPS to
task, and a state legislator who vowed to introduce
legislation in the Indiana General Assembly to produce
changes in the system had prompted the series.

Pillion said Friday her foster children wanted the
public to know their support of CPS. She said the
children felt CPS had been treated unfairly.

"I don't think you've given a fair chance to CPS," she
told The Times reporter. "They (CPS) want to talk to
you, but they can't. But I can defend CPS. They're not
perfect. But on a whole they truly do want to help
these kids."

While CPS officials could not go into any specific case
because of state laws, the series included responses to
the complaints from both the agency's county and state
levels. Clinton County CPS director Mary Simpson told
the series writer she thought the stories were balanced.

The Phillipses' 10 children were removed from their home
in May 2001. Since then, the couple has had all
visitation rights removed.

In September, a protesting Julia Phillips took to a
downtown Frankfort street corner with a sandwich board
displaying a family photo.

The Times ran a story on Phillips' protest, not getting
into any specifics of her case, but reporting why she
was there.

Immediately after, Pillion told The Times that the
children in her care, all minors, wanted to speak out
through The Times. The newspaper declined.

"Nobody put them up to anything," she said. "They
wanted to come out here because their mother had said
the kids are unhappy. But the kids don't want to leave
me or any of the others."

Julia Phillips again wore the sandwich board with the
photo on Friday.

"They're out here opposing us so I felt I should be out
here doing everything I could to get my kids back," she
said.

CPS is prohibited by law to discuss why the kids were
removed from the home. But Phillips said that had not
prevented the foster parents from spreading rumors.

"They're saying we abused our kids," she said. "But
they don't have a leg to stand on. If we had been
abusing our kids then we'd be in jail"

Pillion said one of the children has been
institutionalized in Boys Town and another has been
removed from her custody to learn to control her temper.

Pillion characterized herself as a strict but caring
foster parent.

"I produce good kids," she said. "I always say, ‘I'd
love to have me for a mother, but I'd hate to grow up
under me.'"

The Times, Frankfort, Indiana

[Ron]

Post by Robert T McQuaid

Post by Ron
Ya see Robert, that's the problem I have here. Its HER
story, in HER OWN words. SHE can say anything SHE likes
about HER case, anything at all, and there is no one who
can say different except CPS, and they can't because of
the privacy laws. No one to dispute HER story. What's
to say that it is not ALL a story? Take a look at
greg's story. As he tells it, he is completely
innocent, and his actions were nothing more than what a
real parent would do. But that's HIS story, and we have
all seen HIS motion to the courts. If nothing else,
that should have taught everyone here that when reading
what a parent tells about their story should be taken
with a grain of salt.
But not here. If its a story that is critical of CPS
then every word is taken as gospel by the majority of
the posters here because this is the type of story they
want to read. Truth, fact, evidence, history, all only
confuse the matter for them and is all to often ignored.
Now, if there were some news articles about this case
that we could read, that would be a different thing all
together. You see Robert, I have been in court when
these things take place, I have heard the "stories" that
the parents have, and I have also heard the evidence
from the county attorneys, seen their documentation, the
police reports, that refute what parents usually have to
say. Do they refute all of it? No, but then again its
only the important parts that need to be.
News reporters don't often get the facts straight
either, but at least they take a swing at being
impartial (as long as its not a political article).
With a professional all one needs do is learn to read
critically, and the story can tell one quite a bit. No
doubt there is some accuracy to her story. But as it is
human nature to slant a story to make themselves look as
good as possible, or at least look as "not bad" as
possible. It is our job as readers to acknowledge this
human quirk and keep it in mind when reading the story
and look for those things that must be there, but are
not.
Few here pass that test, because this is the type of
story they want to read. They read the story with their
own personal bias' proudly out front leading the way,
ignoring what should be there, and is not.
Anyway, got any news paper links there Robert?
Ron

I have seen several cases in which I have been able to
compare the parent's story to the story from the child
protectors, and the parents tell the more dependable
version.
But since you insist, here are two articles from the
Frankfort Times of Indiana. The webpages omit the
original publication dates, but they both seem to be
from October 2003. The second is followed by twelve
pages of commentary from readers including me. The two

http://www.ftimes.com/Main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=18155
http://www.ftimes.com/main.asp?FromHome=1&TypeID=1&ArticleID=18606&SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1

Thanks Robert. I appreciate the links.

But I note that there is nothing in either story to indicate that these kids
were either removed inappropriately, or coerced into protesting against
their mothers actions. In fact, it seems that the story says quite clearly
that the children choose to protest of their own volition. If indeed there
was coercion of any kind in this, it is most likely that it was done by the
foster parents.

There are also several passages that indicate the reasons for these kids
being removed. Anger control (usually a sign of one or more parent that is
unable to control their own anger, or have perpetrated some form of abuse
against the child that has made it difficult for them to learn how to manage
their own anger), and a stay at Boys Town here in Omaha. Boys Town deals
with a wide range of issues for kids, not just run away's. So making an
assumption on this one would be folly.

The full story, or even a bit of fact, is not available. Only the
statements of the parent, and even she does not provide detail on why the
children were initially removed. The incest accusation came after removal
and does not seem to be a part of the original concern.

Sure seems to me that you are on the wrong side of this one Robert. Without
DNA evidence there is no way that accusations of incest can be proven or
disproven. But then again the report of incest has never made it into a
court, so its a moot point. She has no proof that the accusation was made,
nothing documenting it, and without it being made in a court or writing then
she has no avenue to approach it. She could be making this up to gather
support from the fringe crowd of those predisposed to believe anything
negative about CPS.

From what has been provided here Robert, it seems that you are supporting a
parent that disagrees with what has happened to her. There is still way to
much missing for a reasonable person to support her cause. It is my
experience that those who argue against the system rarely are reasonable
people. It is also my experience that once the facts come out, that support
fades rapidly, leaving only the fanatics to scream about injustice.

Ron

Post by Robert T McQuaid
Woman takes frustration with CPS to the streets
A Hillisburg woman, armed with a placard and a sandwich
board, took her battle with Clinton County's Child
Protection Service to a busy Frankfort street corner
Wednesday afternoon.
Julia Phillips, whose 10 children CPS removed from her
home in May 2001, stood at the corner of Walnut and
Jackson streets displaying a homemade sign that read,
"Clinton County Division of Family and Children Destroys
Families." Some of the passers-by shouted support, she
said. But mostly they just stared.
"People have no idea what's going on," Phillips said,
insisting the state-run child protection system is
flawed. "It's a problem that's going on worldwide."
All but one of Julie and Jonathan Phillips' children,
ranging in age from 17 to 3, have been placed in foster
care. The oldest, a son, was placed in a juvenile
center, where he still resides.
Phillips claims she and her husband have abided with
every order CPS has issued, including moving to a more
suitable home and undergoing counseling.
Still, in January the court severed the Phillipses'
parental rights.
"It's a money-making thing," Phillips said. "How else
can you explain them not giving back our kids?"
The severance of parental rights has been appealed, she
said, and the Phillipses now await a decision by an
Indiana court of appeals.
Last week, she said, she and her husband traveled to
Xenia, Ohio, to meet with an advocate for parents in
situations such as hers. The advocate agreed to help
the Phillips, she said, and gave her "a lot of
homework."
Demonstrating along a busy street was first on the list,
she said, pointing out that months of research on the
child protection system has strengthened her
self-confidence.
Ultimately, in taking her case to the streets, Phillips
hopes it will help her get her children back home.
"I'm doing this not just for my kids," she said, "but
for my grandkids. I want my kids to know and I don't
want them to ever have to go through what I have gone
through."
She would return to the corner today, she said.
Clinton County Child Protection Service was contacted
for comment this morning, but no one authorized to speak
on the matter could be reached.
The Times, Frankfort, Indiana
Competing Sides Conduct Own Protests
By Dan Shaw
A group supporting the Clinton County Child Protective
Services and its decision to remove 10 children from a
Frankfort home picketed in the city's downtown Friday
afternoon.
A few of the very children taken away, along with a
couple of foster parents and supporters, were among
them.
Another person - she not part of this group - was there,
too: the children's mother. Julia Phillips, along with
husband Jon, are trying to regain custody of their
children.
The two sides displayed competing signs for roughly two
hours on Walnut Street near the Jackson Street
intersection. The demonstrators remained peaceful
throughout.
Foster parent Janet Pillion said the group's rally
stemmed from a four-part Times series last spring
detailing perceived problems within the Clinton County
Child Protective Services. A local minister who had
been involved in a foster situation took the CPS to
task, and a state legislator who vowed to introduce
legislation in the Indiana General Assembly to produce
changes in the system had prompted the series.
Pillion said Friday her foster children wanted the
public to know their support of CPS. She said the
children felt CPS had been treated unfairly.
"I don't think you've given a fair chance to CPS," she
told The Times reporter. "They (CPS) want to talk to
you, but they can't. But I can defend CPS. They're not
perfect. But on a whole they truly do want to help
these kids."
While CPS officials could not go into any specific case
because of state laws, the series included responses to
the complaints from both the agency's county and state
levels. Clinton County CPS director Mary Simpson told
the series writer she thought the stories were balanced.
The Phillipses' 10 children were removed from their home
in May 2001. Since then, the couple has had all
visitation rights removed.
In September, a protesting Julia Phillips took to a
downtown Frankfort street corner with a sandwich board
displaying a family photo.
The Times ran a story on Phillips' protest, not getting
into any specifics of her case, but reporting why she
was there.
Immediately after, Pillion told The Times that the
children in her care, all minors, wanted to speak out
through The Times. The newspaper declined.
"Nobody put them up to anything," she said. "They
wanted to come out here because their mother had said
the kids are unhappy. But the kids don't want to leave
me or any of the others."
Julia Phillips again wore the sandwich board with the
photo on Friday.
"They're out here opposing us so I felt I should be out
here doing everything I could to get my kids back," she
said.
CPS is prohibited by law to discuss why the kids were
removed from the home. But Phillips said that had not
prevented the foster parents from spreading rumors.
"They're saying we abused our kids," she said. "But
they don't have a leg to stand on. If we had been
abusing our kids then we'd be in jail"
Pillion said one of the children has been
institutionalized in Boys Town and another has been
removed from her custody to learn to control her temper.
Pillion characterized herself as a strict but caring
foster parent.
"I produce good kids," she said. "I always say, 'I'd
love to have me for a mother, but I'd hate to grow up
under me.'"
The Times, Frankfort, Indiana

[b***@gmail.com]

This blows my mind!!!
I love you Julie

Your family were so good to me when we went to christian school and I was having the dorm...
Even though your Mom and Daddy weren't wealthy, they gave the shirt off their backs to anyone who walked through that door with your generous sweet good heart!
I am so sorry this happened top you and your husband and kids

Love and Prayers to you even now

Mimii

[AdoptaDad]

Subject: Re: Incest accusation
Date: 11/2/2004 2:14 PM Eastern Standard Time

Post by Ron
How quick you all are to jump on this, something
completely without support, even from the individual
making the claim. Whatever happened to evidence? She
says that they have made this claim, but if it has not
been brought into the court room then CPS cant do
anything with it. Ever think of that?
Since this is the first I have heard of this case,
perhaps Robert will be good enough to provide additional
information, and links to the news reports, concerning
the case. There is obviously quite a bit more to the
story than this.
Sorry Robert, but without more information on the
background of the case I cannot even think about
supporting your position that CPS is working to "destroy
this family". CPS usually need do nothing, the family
does all the destruction for them. I suspect that this
case is no different, but will wait for additional
information (unlike rockhead and the other).
Ron

OK. Julie Phillips had ten children stolen by Indiana
child protectors. Among the lowlights of her story, not
mentioned below, is a street demonstration in which
Indiana child protectors got Julie's daughter to parade
in a street demonstration carrying a sign denouncing her
own mother. (How is that for protecting a child from
emotional harm?).

That's truly pathetic.

Now she is accused of having her
three youngest children fathered not by her husband, but
by her oldest son, who was eleven years old when the
first of those children was conceived.

I read her story and I find it quite tragic, but at the same time I have to
ask:

With all the problems she described in her family (mental illness, sibling
sexual abuse, emotional and physical disabilities, etc. ad nauseum), what is
she doing with TEN CHILDREN?

Some kind soul needs to take this woman for birth control.

Don't give me a lecture on reproductive rights, I don't buy it for a minute.
If you can't take proper care of the kids you already have, having more just
adds to the problem.

There's a family in our area who sounds a lot like the Phillips' family.
Eight kids, mom's preggers with #9, the house is an absolute friggin' mess, the
kids don't get anywhear near the attention they need, financial resources are
inadequate, the father is a lazy slob collecting disability checks, the kids
come to school in dirty clothes, personal hygiene is a big issue... I could
go on and on.

Yet, they're still pumping out a new kid every 12 to 14 months.
Unfrigginbelievable!

Reproductive rights be damned... don't have more kids if you're overwhelmed
and can't take proper care of the ones in you already have in your home.

Dad

[Greg Hanson]

AdoptaDad:
I am not really for OR against large families.
I agree with some of your criticisms, but my
big concern is whether you think those
DIFFERENCES OF OPINION and CHOICE should
be used by Child Protection to remove kids.

Do you think it is right, fair or Constitutional
that CPS agencies use an "indicator list" cheat
sheet that scores parents badly for more kids??
And that ""likelyhood"" factor is used IN COURT?

You find it amaazing or troubling that a home
with 8 kids looks like a tornado went through?
I partly take your point, but on the other hand
doesn't that show that the parents are letting
their kids be kids? If you had 8 kids and
wanted the place to look like "House Beautiful"
magazine photographs or some furniture showroom,
shouldn't people be wondering if you aren't a bit
controlling or anal retentive?

Antiseptic personal hygiene is a fairly recent
phenomena. Into the 1950's, people STUNK!
The ADVERTISING industry changed that.

I guess what I'm trying to point out is that
large numbers of our older citizens literally
grew up happier than pigs in wallows.

Isn't this set of PERSONAL VIEWS that you posted
really just a reflection of 50 years of
MADISON AVENUE?

I'm all for good hygiene, and neat homes, but
don't you worry just a little bit that we
may have become a bit too PROGRAMMED to need
what the media peddlers SELL?

Madison Avenue pushes people in two different
directions, really. Parents are pushed by the
programming of kids to NEED various items, and
yuppie or childless people are pushed to make
their home look like a New York Times fashion
plate photo, somewhat STERILE for kids.

If a person compares mobile home parks (trailer parks)
you will see some that are very neat, and others
that look pretty slobby. But if you actually look
and compare, you will see that the BIGGEST difference
between them is whether the court/park tolerates
KID STUFF in the yard/driveway. I mean things like
SWING SETS, Basketball hoops, wagons, swimming pools,
and a whole assortment of various crap that is all
about KIDS.

There's even a Madison Avenue connection to the
needs for that kiddy crap as well.

On the other hand, if you check out the yard
where a single, old maid, childless, bitter
Child Protection Caseworker lives, you will
probably see nothing in the yard to entertain kids.

What have you got against the fact that kids tend
to mark their territory with these items?

What parts of your OPINION that you posted do
you think should relate to CHILD PROTECTION?

Are 9 kids a luxury only to be allowed for
the wealthier families of America? Should
poor people have kids REMOVED after they
hit a certain number or have a toy cluttered
yard or house?

Where do you draw the line between your
PERSONAL OPINION or ATTITUDE and things that
should get kids REMOVED by CHILD PROTECTION?

I actually agree with you on many of your
complaints, but I put that in CHECK because
I feel it would be UNETHICAL to IMPOSE that
upon people using Child Protection.

You sound like you'd be in favor of forced sterilization.

That would solve the problems of what parents
call ""toybox pukage"" that annoys you so much.

What next? Sterilize all of those poor suckers
who were injured on the job or in the service?

That would solve the problem with those lazy
parents collecting disability checks! :)

Where DO you draw the line?

PS- Do you REALLY believe that the woman
had a buncha those kids by her own 11 Y.O. son?
When the DNA proves otherwise, would you
support REVERSING the destruction that CPS
has begun BASED on that little gem, among
others?

Post by AdoptaDad
If you can't take proper care of the kids you
already have, having more just
adds to the problem.
There's a family in our area who sounds a
lot like the Phillips' family.
Eight kids, mom's preggers with #9, the house
is an absolute friggin' mess, the
kids don't get anywhear near the attention
they need, financial resources are
inadequate, the father is a lazy slob
collecting disability checks, the kids
come to school in dirty clothes, personal
hygiene is a big issue... I could
go on and on.
Yet, they're still pumping out a new kid
every 12 to 14 months. Unfrigginbelievable!
Reproductive rights be damned... don't
have more kids if you're overwhelmed
and can't take proper care of the ones in
you already have in your home.
Dad

[AdoptaDad]

Subject: Re: Incest accusation
Date: 11/4/2004 12:18 AM Eastern Standard Time
I am not really for OR against large families.
I agree with some of your criticisms, but my
big concern is whether you think those
DIFFERENCES OF OPINION and CHOICE should
be used by Child Protection to remove kids.

If you can't take adequate care of the children you already have, don't have
any more.

Do you think it is right, fair or Constitutional
that CPS agencies use an "indicator list" cheat
sheet that scores parents badly for more kids??
And that ""likelyhood"" factor is used IN COURT?

Let me help you focus, Greg. If you can't take adequate care of the
children you already have, don't have any more.

You find it amaazing or troubling that a home
with 8 kids looks like a tornado went through?

If that tornado dumped dogshit on the floor, cat piss in the corners, sour
milk and moldy bread in the fridge, and half empty pizza boxes under the couch,
I would expect the owners to clean it up once in a while.

I partly take your point, but on the other hand
doesn't that show that the parents are letting
their kids be kids?

I happen to live near several large Amish families. I bought organic peanut
butter from such a family less than 24 hours ago - their house looks better
than mine.

If you had 8 kids and wanted the place to look like "House
"Beautiful" magazine photographs or some furniture showroom,
shouldn't people be wondering if you aren't a bit controlling or
anal retentive?"

I'm not asking for them to be included in the Parade of Homes, Greg.

Antiseptic personal hygiene is a fairly recent
phenomena. Into the 1950's, people STUNK!
The ADVERTISING industry changed that.

Oh brother.

I guess what I'm trying to point out is that
large numbers of our older citizens literally
grew up happier than pigs in wallows.

If you aspire to be a happy stinky pig, I guess that's OK.

Isn't this set of PERSONAL VIEWS that you posted
really just a reflection of 50 years of
MADISON AVENUE?

No, Greg. What I posted was as true 50 years ago as it is today. If you
can't take adequate care of the children you already have, don't have more.

I'm all for good hygiene, and neat homes, but
don't you worry just a little bit that we
may have become a bit too PROGRAMMED to need
what the media peddlers SELL?

Greg, my Amish neighbors don't have electricity, much less TV. They probably
don't use deodorant, either. But somehow they manage to keep their children
adequately fed, clothed, educated, and otherwise cared for.

< snipped more of the same "it's Madison Avenue's fault" BS >

On the other hand, if you check out the yard
where a single, old maid, childless, bitter
Child Protection Caseworker lives, you will
probably see nothing in the yard to entertain kids.

Well, I would imagine that if any home had no children, there would be less
"kid's stuff" around the place. Duh.

What have you got against the fact that kids tend
to mark their territory with these items?

Greg, you really have a problem with focus, don't you? Do you think kids who
leave their toys around a house is the same thing as kids who grow up in a home
with inadequate food, unsanitary living conditions, and siblings who are sexual
predators? Please tell me you can tell the difference.

What parts of your OPINION that you posted do
you think should relate to CHILD PROTECTION?

If you can't take adequate care of the children you already have, don't have
more.

Are 9 kids a luxury only to be allowed for
the wealthier families of America?

What part of "If you can't take adequate care of the children you already
have, don't have more" do you not understand?

Should poor people have kids REMOVED after they
hit a certain number or have a toy cluttered
yard or house?

Good grief.. I think you should be spanked for being incredibly obtuse, Greg.

Where do you draw the line between your
PERSONAL OPINION or ATTITUDE and things that
should get kids REMOVED by CHILD PROTECTION?

Is this how you form your arguments? With endless inuendos, specious
arguments way off topic, and various other forms of weapons of mass
distraction? It seems as if you will use any argument to distract from the
original message.

I actually agree with you on many of your
complaints, but I put that in CHECK because
I feel it would be UNETHICAL to IMPOSE that
upon people using Child Protection.

Got it. 8 kids, 10 kids, 20 kids, what's the difference. It matters not if
these kids grow up in filth and squalor with unattentive or neglectful parents.
It's all about reproductive and parental rights. What about the kids?

You sound like you'd be in favor of forced sterilization.

And you sound like you have absolutely no standards for responsible
parenting. I'm glad I wasn't your kid, Greg.

That would solve the problems of what parents
call ""toybox pukage"" that annoys you so much.

If you can't take adequate care of the children you already have, don't have
more.

What next? Sterilize all of those poor suckers
who were injured on the job or in the service?

Did I mention anything remotely resembling the above? You're really
pathetic, Greg.

That would solve the problem with those lazy
parents collecting disability checks! :)

It would sure get your arse off the couch.

Where DO you draw the line?

I already told you, repeatedly. Now, where do you draw the line, Greg?

Dad

[Dan Sullivan]

Post by AdoptaDad

Subject: Re: Incest accusation
Date: 11/4/2004 12:18 AM Eastern Standard Time
I am not really for OR against large families.
I agree with some of your criticisms, but my
big concern is whether you think those
DIFFERENCES OF OPINION and CHOICE should
be used by Child Protection to remove kids.

If you can't take adequate care of the children you already have, don't have
any more.

Do you think it is right, fair or Constitutional
that CPS agencies use an "indicator list" cheat
sheet that scores parents badly for more kids??
And that ""likelyhood"" factor is used IN COURT?

Let me help you focus, Greg. If you can't take adequate care of the
children you already have, don't have any more.

You find it amaazing or troubling that a home
with 8 kids looks like a tornado went through?

If that tornado dumped dogshit on the floor, cat piss in the corners, sour
milk and moldy bread in the fridge, and half empty pizza boxes under the couch,
I would expect the owners to clean it up once in a while.

I partly take your point, but on the other hand
doesn't that show that the parents are letting
their kids be kids?

I happen to live near several large Amish families. I bought organic peanut
butter from such a family less than 24 hours ago - their house looks better
than mine.

If you had 8 kids and wanted the place to look like "House
"Beautiful" magazine photographs or some furniture showroom,
shouldn't people be wondering if you aren't a bit controlling or
anal retentive?"

I'm not asking for them to be included in the Parade of Homes, Greg.

Antiseptic personal hygiene is a fairly recent
phenomena. Into the 1950's, people STUNK!
The ADVERTISING industry changed that.

Oh brother.

Well said! :-))))))

Post by AdoptaDad

I guess what I'm trying to point out is that
large numbers of our older citizens literally
grew up happier than pigs in wallows.

If you aspire to be a happy stinky pig, I guess that's OK.

Isn't this set of PERSONAL VIEWS that you posted
really just a reflection of 50 years of
MADISON AVENUE?

No, Greg. What I posted was as true 50 years ago as it is today. If you
can't take adequate care of the children you already have, don't have more.

I'm all for good hygiene, and neat homes, but
don't you worry just a little bit that we
may have become a bit too PROGRAMMED to need
what the media peddlers SELL?

Greg, my Amish neighbors don't have electricity, much less TV. They probably
don't use deodorant, either. But somehow they manage to keep their children
adequately fed, clothed, educated, and otherwise cared for.
< snipped more of the same "it's Madison Avenue's fault" BS >

On the other hand, if you check out the yard
where a single, old maid, childless, bitter
Child Protection Caseworker lives, you will
probably see nothing in the yard to entertain kids.

Well, I would imagine that if any home had no children, there would be less
"kid's stuff" around the place. Duh.

What have you got against the fact that kids tend
to mark their territory with these items?

Greg, you really have a problem with focus, don't you? Do you think kids who
leave their toys around a house is the same thing as kids who grow up in a home
with inadequate food, unsanitary living conditions, and siblings who are sexual
predators? Please tell me you can tell the difference.

What parts of your OPINION that you posted do
you think should relate to CHILD PROTECTION?

If you can't take adequate care of the children you already have, don't have
more.

Are 9 kids a luxury only to be allowed for
the wealthier families of America?

What part of "If you can't take adequate care of the children you already
have, don't have more" do you not understand?

Should poor people have kids REMOVED after they
hit a certain number or have a toy cluttered
yard or house?

Good grief.. I think you should be spanked for being incredibly obtuse, Greg.

Where do you draw the line between your
PERSONAL OPINION or ATTITUDE and things that
should get kids REMOVED by CHILD PROTECTION?

Is this how you form your arguments? With endless inuendos, specious
arguments way off topic, and various other forms of weapons of mass
distraction? It seems as if you will use any argument to distract from the
original message.

That's Greg!

Post by AdoptaDad

I actually agree with you on many of your
complaints, but I put that in CHECK because
I feel it would be UNETHICAL to IMPOSE that
upon people using Child Protection.

Got it. 8 kids, 10 kids, 20 kids, what's the difference. It matters not if
these kids grow up in filth and squalor with unattentive or neglectful parents.
It's all about reproductive and parental rights. What about the kids?

You sound like you'd be in favor of forced sterilization.

And you sound like you have absolutely no standards for responsible
parenting.

Greg doesn'r have standards for anything.

Post by AdoptaDad
I'm glad I wasn't your kid, Greg.

You and Greg's girlfriend's daughter.

Post by AdoptaDad

That would solve the problems of what parents
call ""toybox pukage"" that annoys you so much.

If you can't take adequate care of the children you already have, don't have
more.

What next? Sterilize all of those poor suckers
who were injured on the job or in the service?

Did I mention anything remotely resembling the above? You're really
pathetic, Greg.

That would solve the problem with those lazy
parents collecting disability checks! :)

It would sure get your arse off the couch.

Where DO you draw the line?

I already told you, repeatedly. Now, where do you draw the line, Greg?

I can't wait to read Greg's answer.

But chances are ther won't be a response from Greg!!!!

[Sherman]

Post by AdoptaDad

Post by AdoptaDad

Subject: Re: Incest accusation
Date: 11/4/2004 12:18 AM Eastern Standard Time
I am not really for OR against large families.
I agree with some of your criticisms, but my
big concern is whether you think those
DIFFERENCES OF OPINION and CHOICE should
be used by Child Protection to remove kids.

If you can't take adequate care of the children you already have,

don't

Post by AdoptaDad
have

Post by AdoptaDad
any more.

Do you think it is right, fair or Constitutional
that CPS agencies use an "indicator list" cheat
sheet that scores parents badly for more kids??
And that ""likelyhood"" factor is used IN COURT?

Let me help you focus, Greg. If you can't take adequate care of the
children you already have, don't have any more.

You find it amaazing or troubling that a home
with 8 kids looks like a tornado went through?

If that tornado dumped dogshit on the floor, cat piss in the corners,

sour

Post by AdoptaDad
milk and moldy bread in the fridge, and half empty pizza boxes under the

couch,

Post by AdoptaDad
I would expect the owners to clean it up once in a while.

I partly take your point, but on the other hand
doesn't that show that the parents are letting
their kids be kids?

I happen to live near several large Amish families. I bought organic

peanut

Post by AdoptaDad
butter from such a family less than 24 hours ago - their house looks

better

Post by AdoptaDad
than mine.

If you had 8 kids and wanted the place to look like "House
"Beautiful" magazine photographs or some furniture showroom,
shouldn't people be wondering if you aren't a bit controlling or
anal retentive?"

I'm not asking for them to be included in the Parade of Homes, Greg.

Antiseptic personal hygiene is a fairly recent
phenomena. Into the 1950's, people STUNK!
The ADVERTISING industry changed that.

Oh brother.

Well said! :-))))))

Post by AdoptaDad

I guess what I'm trying to point out is that
large numbers of our older citizens literally
grew up happier than pigs in wallows.

If you aspire to be a happy stinky pig, I guess that's OK.

Isn't this set of PERSONAL VIEWS that you posted
really just a reflection of 50 years of
MADISON AVENUE?

No, Greg. What I posted was as true 50 years ago as it is today. If

you

Post by AdoptaDad
can't take adequate care of the children you already have, don't have

more.

Post by AdoptaDad

I'm all for good hygiene, and neat homes, but
don't you worry just a little bit that we
may have become a bit too PROGRAMMED to need
what the media peddlers SELL?

Greg, my Amish neighbors don't have electricity, much less TV. They

probably

Post by AdoptaDad
don't use deodorant, either. But somehow they manage to keep their

children

Post by AdoptaDad
adequately fed, clothed, educated, and otherwise cared for.
< snipped more of the same "it's Madison Avenue's fault" BS >

On the other hand, if you check out the yard
where a single, old maid, childless, bitter
Child Protection Caseworker lives, you will
probably see nothing in the yard to entertain kids.

Well, I would imagine that if any home had no children, there would be

less

Post by AdoptaDad
"kid's stuff" around the place. Duh.

What have you got against the fact that kids tend
to mark their territory with these items?

Greg, you really have a problem with focus, don't you? Do you think

kids who

Post by AdoptaDad
leave their toys around a house is the same thing as kids who grow up in

a

Post by AdoptaDad
home

Post by AdoptaDad
with inadequate food, unsanitary living conditions, and siblings who are

sexual

Post by AdoptaDad
predators? Please tell me you can tell the difference.

What parts of your OPINION that you posted do
you think should relate to CHILD PROTECTION?

If you can't take adequate care of the children you already have, don't

have

Post by AdoptaDad
more.

Are 9 kids a luxury only to be allowed for
the wealthier families of America?

What part of "If you can't take adequate care of the children you

already

Post by AdoptaDad
have, don't have more" do you not understand?

Should poor people have kids REMOVED after they
hit a certain number or have a toy cluttered
yard or house?

Good grief.. I think you should be spanked for being incredibly

obtuse,

Post by AdoptaDad
Greg.

Post by AdoptaDad

Where do you draw the line between your
PERSONAL OPINION or ATTITUDE and things that
should get kids REMOVED by CHILD PROTECTION?

Is this how you form your arguments? With endless inuendos, specious
arguments way off topic, and various other forms of weapons of mass
distraction? It seems as if you will use any argument to distract from

the

Post by AdoptaDad
original message.

That's Greg!

Post by AdoptaDad

I actually agree with you on many of your
complaints, but I put that in CHECK because
I feel it would be UNETHICAL to IMPOSE that
upon people using Child Protection.

Got it. 8 kids, 10 kids, 20 kids, what's the difference. It matters

not

Post by AdoptaDad
if

Post by AdoptaDad
these kids grow up in filth and squalor with unattentive or neglectful

parents.

Post by AdoptaDad
It's all about reproductive and parental rights. What about the kids?

You sound like you'd be in favor of forced sterilization.

And you sound like you have absolutely no standards for responsible
parenting.

Greg doesn'r have standards for anything.

Post by AdoptaDad
I'm glad I wasn't your kid, Greg.

You and Greg's girlfriend's daughter.

Post by AdoptaDad

That would solve the problems of what parents
call ""toybox pukage"" that annoys you so much.

If you can't take adequate care of the children you already have,

don't

Post by AdoptaDad
have

Post by AdoptaDad
more.

What next? Sterilize all of those poor suckers
who were injured on the job or in the service?

Did I mention anything remotely resembling the above? You're really
pathetic, Greg.

That would solve the problem with those lazy
parents collecting disability checks! :)

It would sure get your arse off the couch.

Where DO you draw the line?

I already told you, repeatedly. Now, where do you draw the line, Greg?

I can't wait to read Greg's answer.
But chances are ther won't be a response from Greg!!!!

Yep. And it's STILL about the children.

My grandmother was one of fifteen children in her home. It was tidy. It
was a long time ago. They were clean. She had a dozen children. Her home
was clean. Her children were well cared for. My Mother used to clean her
bedsprings, as did the other older children, with a feather dipped in a
kerosene solution to keep from having "bed bugs". Of course, the women who
bore so many children, some of whom would become victims of childhood
diseases which no longer plague our families, more often than not, dropped
dead from exhaustion early on. None of her seven daughters had more than
three children - at the most.

If you cannot care for them, exercise caution and practice birth control.
My Grandmother and her Mother did not have this option. Living on farms, it
behooved the parents to have enough children born to assist the family with
the work as well. Back then.

It was about the family, about the children. It still is.

Sherman.

[Greg Hanson]

Post by Greg Hanson
I am not really for OR against large families.
I agree with some of your criticisms, but my
big concern is whether you think those
DIFFERENCES OF OPINION and CHOICE should
be used by Child Protection to remove kids.
If you can't take adequate care of the children
you already have, don't have any more.

Do you REALLY think that you answered my concerns?
You said NOTHING about the enforcement part
that I asked about several times.

The problem with "adequate" is that different
people have different standards. It is a
spectrum. The "standards" vary from one case
worker to the next. One may have grown up
like a hillbilly in a cluttered farm house,
while aanother might be a yuppie.
I already pointed that out.

I saw your references to EXTREMES, but that's
not the question and you know it is not.

The real question pertains to caseworkers
acting upon personal prejudices that fall
somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.

The LAW, by the way, allows for clutter, as
long as it is not severe enough to present
IMMINENT DANGER. Whining about spilt milk
is not an issue unless it reaches the level
where it becomes a BIOHAZARD to the kids.

The sad fact is that kids ARE being removed
from homes that are ADEQUATE yet not up to
sterile yuppie standards for BEAUTIFUL.

Sometimes they are even FOSTER HOMES, although
Child Protection cuts them some slack that
parents don't get.

It a bit like the old adage about
"too many cooks spoiling the broth".

Often the standards to judge parents seem to
spring from the GOSSIP MILL and some sort
of COMMITTEE. Both are famous for their ills.

[kane]

Post by Greg Hanson
Isn't it interesting that even KANE agrees with
these particular points I made?
Kane posted

Post by kane
Yep. Most communities have got'em. Still, lifestyle is not an
adequate reason for removing children. Risk of harm and harm,

are. 9

Post by Greg Hanson

Post by kane
kids isn't harmful. Nor is a messy house. Nor is, sadly, lack of
attention as long as it doesn't exceed community standards for
developmental needs. And who shall set what the finances must be

to

Post by Greg Hanson

Post by kane
determine if a child is removed or not?

-----

I wasn't agreeing with you. Those weren't the points you made. You
claimed that CPS removes children for "clutter," or for being poor.
CPS does neither. It determines when conditions, those two among
others, are sufficient to have caused harm or to be a risk of causing
harm.

As usual you snipped my post to fit your agenda instead of to reflect
what I actually said...which of course would leave an honest
intelligent person bereft of the argument you tried to put forward.

Post by Greg Hanson
You say you're not talking about removals of children
from their parents?

No, actually he wasn't. He was talking about them not making them.
Haven't learned the facts of life yet, greegor?

Post by Greg Hanson
Do you know what newsgroup this is?

Do you know where the little girl is?

Kane

[WitchWirsen]

You bitch about it here but jump on the bandwagon and do it yourself in
other NG's.
Go figure.
At least my opinion of you is based on your OWN words, where your opinion of
me is based on the words of someone else.
Reality check time...never mind, it seems they have been trying to give you
a reality check for about four years now and you just aren't having any of
it.

Post by Greg Hanson

Post by Greg Hanson
I am not really for OR against large families.
I agree with some of your criticisms, but my
big concern is whether you think those
DIFFERENCES OF OPINION and CHOICE should
be used by Child Protection to remove kids.
If you can't take adequate care of the children
you already have, don't have any more.

Do you REALLY think that you answered my concerns?
You said NOTHING about the enforcement part
that I asked about several times.
The problem with "adequate" is that different
people have different standards. It is a
spectrum. The "standards" vary from one case
worker to the next. One may have grown up
like a hillbilly in a cluttered farm house,
while aanother might be a yuppie.
I already pointed that out.
I saw your references to EXTREMES, but that's
not the question and you know it is not.
The real question pertains to caseworkers
acting upon personal prejudices that fall
somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.
The LAW, by the way, allows for clutter, as
long as it is not severe enough to present
IMMINENT DANGER. Whining about spilt milk
is not an issue unless it reaches the level
where it becomes a BIOHAZARD to the kids.
The sad fact is that kids ARE being removed
from homes that are ADEQUATE yet not up to
sterile yuppie standards for BEAUTIFUL.
Sometimes they are even FOSTER HOMES, although
Child Protection cuts them some slack that
parents don't get.
It a bit like the old adage about
"too many cooks spoiling the broth".
Often the standards to judge parents seem to
spring from the GOSSIP MILL and some sort
of COMMITTEE. Both are famous for their ills.

[kane]

Post by AdoptaDad

Subject: Re: Incest accusation
Date: 11/3/2004 1:42 PM Eastern Standard Time

< snipped some >

Ah, the key to the dilema, "take proper care." Some folks with large
families do it very well indeed. Others with one kid can't manage to
keep from injurying the child. Somethings even before birth.

Post by AdoptaDad
There's a family in our area who sounds a lot like the Phillips'

family.

Post by AdoptaDad

Post by AdoptaDad
Eight kids, mom's preggers with #9, the house is an absolute

friggin'

Post by AdoptaDad

mess, the

Post by AdoptaDad
kids don't get anywhear near the attention they need, financial

resources are

Post by AdoptaDad
inadequate, the father is a lazy slob collecting disability checks,

the kids

Post by AdoptaDad
come to school in dirty clothes, personal hygiene is a big issue...

I could

Post by AdoptaDad
go on and on.
Yet, they're still pumping out a new kid every 12 to 14 months.
Unfrigginbelievable!

Yep. Most communities have got'em. Still, lifestyle is not an
adequate reason for removing children. Risk of harm and harm, are. 9
kids isn't harmful. Nor is a messy house. Nor is, sadly, lack of
attention as long as it doesn't exceed community standards for
developmental needs. And who shall set what the finances must be to
determine if a child is removed or not?

Excuse me, but I never once called for the *removal* of the children in the
family I described above. I simply stated that if having 8+ children

is

Post by AdoptaDad
overwhelming to parents, it would be a great idea to stop sprogging

them.

Post by AdoptaDad
Also, I don't pretend to have any authority on how many kids parents can
have. It's simply my opinion.
If I felt these kids were in real danger, I know the phone number for CPS.

My apologies. My post was more for the benefit of the twits....and
they know who they are. Greegor was pissin' and moanin' as usual,
about "removal."

Post by AdoptaDad
Dad

Kane

[Greg Hanson]

AdoptaDad:
Isn't it interesting that even KANE agrees with
these particular points I made?

Kane posted

Post by kane
Yep. Most communities have got'em. Still, lifestyle is not an
adequate reason for removing children. Risk of harm and harm, are. 9
kids isn't harmful. Nor is a messy house. Nor is, sadly, lack of
attention as long as it doesn't exceed community standards for
developmental needs. And who shall set what the finances must be to
determine if a child is removed or not?

-----
You say you're not talking about removals of children
from their parents?

Do you know what newsgroup this is?

[AdoptaDad]

Subject: Re: Incest accusation
Date: 11/7/2004 5:23 AM Eastern Standard Time
Isn't it interesting that even KANE agrees with
these particular points I made?
Kane posted

Post by kane
Yep. Most communities have got'em. Still, lifestyle is not an
adequate reason for removing children. Risk of harm and harm, are. 9
kids isn't harmful. Nor is a messy house. Nor is, sadly, lack of
attention as long as it doesn't exceed community standards for
developmental needs. And who shall set what the finances must be to
determine if a child is removed or not?

-----
You say you're not talking about removals of children
from their parents?
Do you know what newsgroup this is?

Yes, it's about Madison Avenue.. Duh.

Dad

[kane]

Post by Greg Hanson

Post by Greg Hanson
I am not really for OR against large families.
I agree with some of your criticisms, but my
big concern is whether you think those
DIFFERENCES OF OPINION and CHOICE should
be used by Child Protection to remove kids.
If you can't take adequate care of the children
you already have, don't have any more.

Do you REALLY think that you answered my concerns?
You said NOTHING about the enforcement part
that I asked about several times.
The problem with "adequate" is that different
people have different standards. It is a
spectrum. The "standards" vary from one case
worker to the next. One may have grown up
like a hillbilly in a cluttered farm house,
while aanother might be a yuppie.
I already pointed that out.
I saw your references to EXTREMES, but that's
not the question and you know it is not.
The real question pertains to caseworkers
acting upon personal prejudices that fall
somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.
The LAW, by the way, allows for clutter, as
long as it is not severe enough to present
IMMINENT DANGER. Whining about spilt milk
is not an issue unless it reaches the level
where it becomes a BIOHAZARD to the kids.
The sad fact is that kids ARE being removed
from homes that are ADEQUATE yet not up to
sterile yuppie standards for BEAUTIFUL.
Sometimes they are even FOSTER HOMES, although
Child Protection cuts them some slack that
parents don't get.
It a bit like the old adage about
"too many cooks spoiling the broth".
Often the standards to judge parents seem to
spring from the GOSSIP MILL and some sort
of COMMITTEE. Both are famous for their ills.

Claims without proof. Many like you make similar claims, greegor but
come up short on proof. How many cases can you document where the only
reason for removal was the family not being up to "sterile yuppie
standards for BEAUTIFUL?"

Clutter is considered a factor, not a cause, part of a whole, a
pattern. By itself it means nothing to a worker. By the way, Adoptadad
said "sour milk" not "spilled milk," if I recall correctly..but then
he seem short on hyperbole....should he follow your lead and DTSMD a
couple of three times a day?

The case under consideration had a good deal more going for it than
clutter, now didn't it, little boy? So if you wish to prove your claim
you'll have to find yet another story. One that actually does prove
your claim.

In all the years I've watched CPS, and my time lurking and posting to
various ngs on child protection, I've yet to come across a credible
case where clutter was the only reason for removing a child.

Possibly it has something to do with CPS and Madison Avenue....one
being responsible for or in collusion with the other. Help me
understand this better.

You know me...I'm always a seeker of truth and fact. Enlighten me.

Kane