Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Parenting > General Kids > Re: the require...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 60 of 71 Topic 15785 of 16384
Post > Topic >>

Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education

by "Donna Metler" <dmmetler@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Jul 30, 2008 at 08:08 AM

-- 
Donna DeVore Metler
Orff Music Specialist/Kindermusik
Mother to Angel Brian Anthony 1/1/2002, 22 weeks, severe PE/HELLP
And Allison Joy, 11/25/04 (35 weeks, PIH, Pre-term labor)
"Sarah Vaughan" <nannyogg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:g6ovi2$5fg$1$8300dec7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Banty wrote:
>> In article <vaur84p9ve6ion5o7p8jebca0879k313kb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Nan says...
>>> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 08:40:17 -0700 (PDT), Beliavsky
>>> <beliavsky@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If parents are using illegal drugs but are not directly involving the
>>>> child in their activities (for example by having the child take drugs
>>>> or buy the drugs), I am uncomfortable with calling in the police
>>>> because of what a child says or because of his/her appearance.
>>> Why am I not surprised you'd say this....
>>>
>>
>> In my county we had a family of five, both parents and three elementary

>> and
>> junior high school aged boys, murdered one night in their home and
their 
>> house
>> burned down as a cover.  The culprits, who were both recently
convicted, 
>> were
>> drug dealers who had constant business with the father, who was also a 
>> dealer.
>>
>> Their parents were proud, we were told later by associates, that they 
>> "kept
>> their kids out of" their drug dealing by only doing deals after their 
>> bedtimes,
>> etc.
>>
>> So these boys were not directly involved in the drug dealing.  Would
you 
>> say
>> that were *affected*??!?
>
> Of course, and tragically so.  But they would also have been 'affected'
by 
> being whisked off into foster care.  And, based on what I've read about 
> the whole attitude to illicit drugs in the US (and I will accept 
> correction if I've picked up the wrong picture here), I do feel there's
a 
> real risk that this might happen even in cases where the parents *are* 
> providing a loving and decent home to the children despite their drug
use. 
> I think that sort of thing, rather than the situation re****ted in an 
> earlier post where a child came to school having actually *taken* a
drug, 
> is what Beliavsky may have been talking about.
>
If you can tell a child has been near a meth lab just by walking into the 
room, the child IS being affected neurologically and probably
behaviorally. 
And that's no one's definition of a "loving, decent" home. And, no, they
do 
not immediately swoop in and take the children, because it's entirely 
possible that the Meth lab is next door or the floor below in the housing 
project. What would happen is that a search warrant would be called to
check 
for presence of a lab, and CPS would talk to the parent or parents and any

other adults in residence. If the adults are producing meth, it will 
probably be pretty apparent in their behavior as well, especially if
they're 
also meth users. It would be very difficult for anyone to be near an
active 
meth lab without it affecting them. It's a nasty, nasty drug, in all
phases 
(and due to the behaviors on the drug, and the rapidness that users become

addicted, even if a parent starts out as a good parent, if they start
using, 
it's unlikely they'll be able to remain one for long).

In addition, the most common response here would be, if at all possible,
to 
place the children with a relative, or if foster care is needed, to place 
them in a foster home close to where they were living, so that the rest of

their life isn't disrupted. And foster homes are a shortage item, so no, 
it's not the case that a re****t to CPS automatically leads to the children

being taken. Usually it takes really, really definitive evidence before a 
child is removed from a home.

There are instances of illegal drug use that wouldn't meet the standard of

abuse needed for a mandated re****ter to have to re****t. A child re****ting 
that his parents smoke out on the ****ch, for example, isn't abusive, even
if 
the cigarette doesn't contain tobacco, if the parents are otherwise doing
a 
good job. Ditto for the parent who occasionally takes some pills that she 
gets from a friend (or, for that matter, from an internet pharmacy). Not 
legal, but probably not harming the child.
 




 71 Posts in Topic:
the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-23 16:35:54 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-23 13:58:40 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-23 17:09:09 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Nikki <skavanagh@[EMAI  2008-07-23 16:24:30 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-23 18:15:50 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-23 21:34:33 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Cailleach <cailleach@[  2008-07-23 14:56:06 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Donna Metler"   2008-07-23 18:34:48 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Chookie <ehrebeniuk@[E  2008-07-26 10:10:09 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Clisby <clisbyw@[EMAIL  2008-07-25 20:33:57 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Tai" <tainu  2008-07-24 13:11:53 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
hedgehog42 <LLG042@[EM  2008-07-23 17:06:19 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
NL <nlandau@[EMAIL PRO  2008-07-24 03:49:04 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-24 11:05:02 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
NL <nlandau@[EMAIL PRO  2008-07-24 17:23:50 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"MarieD" <ab  2008-07-24 12:09:42 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
NL <nlandau@[EMAIL PRO  2008-07-24 19:28:46 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"MarieD" <ab  2008-07-24 17:58:07 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Chookie <ehrebeniuk@[E  2008-07-26 10:02:35 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Tai" <tainu  2008-07-24 12:27:25 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-24 10:57:11 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-24 09:18:50 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-24 13:17:59 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Cailleach <cailleach@[  2008-07-24 01:36:34 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Pologirl <pologirl@[EM  2008-07-24 08:46:27 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-24 15:22:03 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-24 13:26:00 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-24 20:39:02 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Donna Metler"   2008-07-24 15:53:12 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Chookie <ehrebeniuk@[E  2008-07-26 09:52:00 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Cailleach <cailleach@[  2008-07-24 09:33:50 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Pologirl <pologirl@[EM  2008-07-24 13:58:01 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
hedgehog42 <LLG042@[EM  2008-07-24 16:10:43 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
hedgehog42 <LLG042@[EM  2008-07-24 19:11:27 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
hedgehog42 <LLG042@[EM  2008-07-24 19:49:40 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-25 08:17:26 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-25 05:41:53 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-25 05:33:45 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
toto <scarecrow@[EMAIL  2008-07-25 14:28:20 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Nan <Badmam@[EMAIL PRO  2008-07-25 15:31:17 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Clisby <clisbyw@[EMAIL  2008-07-25 13:13:22 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-25 12:21:11 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Donna Metler"   2008-07-25 17:08:04 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Chookie <ehrebeniuk@[E  2008-07-26 09:44:00 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-25 16:49:50 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Chookie <ehrebeniuk@[E  2008-07-27 13:01:45 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Pologirl <pologirl@[EM  2008-07-25 20:46:06 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
cnbottcher@[EMAIL PROTECT  2008-07-27 21:56:48 
OT spelling? (was: Re: the requirement that the state *provide*
NL <nlandau@[EMAIL PRO  2008-07-28 09:34:45 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-28 04:52:55 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Donna Metler"   2008-07-28 08:22:10 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-28 13:14:42 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Beliavsky <beliavsky@[  2008-07-28 08:40:17 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Nan <Badmam@[EMAIL PRO  2008-07-28 15:53:22 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-28 09:10:31 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Nan <Badmam@[EMAIL PRO  2008-07-28 16:18:17 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Sarah Vaughan <nannyog  2008-07-30 06:51:59 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-30 05:01:48 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Rosalie B. <gmbeasley@  2008-07-30 08:59:24 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Donna Metler"   2008-07-30 08:08:17 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-28 13:15:38 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Chookie <ehrebeniuk@[E  2008-07-30 13:50:03 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
toto <scarecrow@[EMAIL  2008-07-30 13:14:42 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Beliavsky <beliavsky@[  2008-07-28 09:30:27 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-07-28 09:46:16 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Stephanie" <  2008-07-28 13:18:17 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Beliavsky <beliavsky@[  2008-07-28 12:57:38 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
cnbottcher@[EMAIL PROTECT  2008-07-30 18:40:13 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
"Sarah V." <  2008-08-01 06:50:56 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Banty <Banty_member@[E  2008-08-01 07:44:41 
Re: the requirement that the state *provide* an education
Sarah Vaughan <nannyog  2008-08-10 00:14:21 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Mon Dec 1 9:55:43 CST 2008.