8 ms·

"If a person who has the lawful care or charge of a child under 12 years, leaves the child for an unreasonable time without making reasonable provision for the

"If a person who has the lawful care or charge of a child under 12 years, leaves the child for an unreasonable time without making reasonable provision for the supervision and care of the child commits a misdemeanour. Maximum penalty – 3 years imprisonment." Legislation: Queensland Criminal Code Act 1899 (QLD) - Section 364A

Sharlin 7y ago
A misdemeanour may net you a maximum 3 years imprisonment? That's harsh. Of course, the salient part is …unreasonable time without making reasonable provision… Is there precedent on what "unreasonable time" might constitute? In general, of course, it depends entirely on the child and their mental and emotional maturity.
- kingkawn 7y ago
  legal terminology has understood definitions within the particular system’s historical precedent
  - pteraspidomorph 7y ago
    Only in common law countries. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law (Obviously, you're still correct if we're talking about Queensland.)
  - Sharlin 7y ago
    Yes, this is why I was wondering about precedent. And what the sibling commenter said.
- candiodari 7y ago
  And there's the detail that of course any such punishment will make the problem infinitely worse. Why are laws always written from the point of view that the state is all-powerful, that it can and will solve whatever problem such a law creates ? It just won't. This sounds, on the surface like it will improve kids' lives, but it will make quite a few kids' lives a LOT worse once you take into account that there's nothing the the state can do here. It cannot replace parents it takes away (nor would kids accept those new parents). (Before you say "but child services/adoption/foster care", read about how well kids are supervised there. Foster care is a LOT worse for kids than being ignored at home)
  - whatshisface 7y ago
    Ideally, no punishment would ever need to be laid upon anyone because they would all obey the law after weighing the effects of the punishment against what they would gain from breaking the law.
    - jandrese 7y ago
      Also assumes the laws are perfect and fair.
    - GrinningFool 7y ago
      This makes sense on the surface, but when the choice is "risk getting caught" vs "put food on my table for this week by working and leaving my kid at home", it's a lot muddier.
  - JustSomeNobody 7y ago
    I’m a foster parent and I make it a point to be trauma informed and educated. How exactly is being in foster care worse than being subject to ongoing trauma by the bios? It sounds like you’re making a generalization with this point and not being specific to leaving kids home at 12 and thus being removed from the home.
    - candiodari 7y ago
      Nope: https://sci-hub.tw/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 https://sci-hub.tw/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 Scientific research consistently finds that kids are consistently a lot worse of in foster care, and a LOT worse of in institutions compared to at home. EVEN when those kids get abused at home the results of foster care and youth services are negative for the children involved. This is the largest study on the subject by far. And the results are very clear, very thorough and damning for the idea of foster care. It just does not work. And, frankly, if you look at "attachment theory", the very basis of behavioral theory for children, and then take into account that most kids get placed into foster care again and again (average 4.7 times in 6 years of foster care) you certainly understand why foster care is worse than ongoing trauma by biological parents. The ongoing trauma by biological parents is a fixed, constant factor that the kids adapt to. Foster parents only last for a year at a time. Being in foster care means having serious doubts that you're still going to the same house tomorrow, the same school. It means being told that both your natural parents, an institution, and foster parents reject you as a person, and this happens when you're like 12-14 year old. It means knowing that you (or your foster parents for that matter) have zero control and re-placement. It's even realistic that they'll be collected by the police TONIGHT and have to sleep in a jail cell, if people they don't know make this decision. Under this stress, and that's stress that you as a foster parent cannot take away and have zero control over the continued trauma (so any promises you make are VERY dangerous: if they get taken away (60-80% of those kids), you are actually making a VERY bad trauma worse). Under such stress normal development is not possible. Attachment theory is the basis of behavioral theory and it says 2 factors are more important than any other in child development: 1) constancy: same environment, same people, SAME RULES tomorrow 2) ability to affect their environment: they must systematically get more control over their environment. What they DO must influence their life. You will immediately realize that the whole POINT of foster care and child services is to take away BOTH of these. The problem is that these factors matter MORE than whether the child is abused. They matter MORE than whether violence (real or psychological) is used against the child.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

Sharlin 7y ago

A misdemeanour may net you a maximum 3 years imprisonment? That's harsh. Of course, the salient part is …unreasonable time without making reasonable provision… Is there precedent on what "unreasonable time" might constitute? In general, of course, it depends entirely on the child and their mental and emotional maturity.

kingkawn 7y ago
legal terminology has understood definitions within the particular system’s historical precedent
- pteraspidomorph 7y ago
  Only in common law countries. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law (Obviously, you're still correct if we're talking about Queensland.)
- Sharlin 7y ago
  Yes, this is why I was wondering about precedent. And what the sibling commenter said.
candiodari 7y ago
And there's the detail that of course any such punishment will make the problem infinitely worse. Why are laws always written from the point of view that the state is all-powerful, that it can and will solve whatever problem such a law creates ? It just won't. This sounds, on the surface like it will improve kids' lives, but it will make quite a few kids' lives a LOT worse once you take into account that there's nothing the the state can do here. It cannot replace parents it takes away (nor would kids accept those new parents). (Before you say "but child services/adoption/foster care", read about how well kids are supervised there. Foster care is a LOT worse for kids than being ignored at home)
- whatshisface 7y ago
  Ideally, no punishment would ever need to be laid upon anyone because they would all obey the law after weighing the effects of the punishment against what they would gain from breaking the law.
  - jandrese 7y ago
    Also assumes the laws are perfect and fair.
  - GrinningFool 7y ago
    This makes sense on the surface, but when the choice is "risk getting caught" vs "put food on my table for this week by working and leaving my kid at home", it's a lot muddier.
- JustSomeNobody 7y ago
  I’m a foster parent and I make it a point to be trauma informed and educated. How exactly is being in foster care worse than being subject to ongoing trauma by the bios? It sounds like you’re making a generalization with this point and not being specific to leaving kids home at 12 and thus being removed from the home.
  - candiodari 7y ago
    Nope: https://sci-hub.tw/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 https://sci-hub.tw/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 Scientific research consistently finds that kids are consistently a lot worse of in foster care, and a LOT worse of in institutions compared to at home. EVEN when those kids get abused at home the results of foster care and youth services are negative for the children involved. This is the largest study on the subject by far. And the results are very clear, very thorough and damning for the idea of foster care. It just does not work. And, frankly, if you look at "attachment theory", the very basis of behavioral theory for children, and then take into account that most kids get placed into foster care again and again (average 4.7 times in 6 years of foster care) you certainly understand why foster care is worse than ongoing trauma by biological parents. The ongoing trauma by biological parents is a fixed, constant factor that the kids adapt to. Foster parents only last for a year at a time. Being in foster care means having serious doubts that you're still going to the same house tomorrow, the same school. It means being told that both your natural parents, an institution, and foster parents reject you as a person, and this happens when you're like 12-14 year old. It means knowing that you (or your foster parents for that matter) have zero control and re-placement. It's even realistic that they'll be collected by the police TONIGHT and have to sleep in a jail cell, if people they don't know make this decision. Under this stress, and that's stress that you as a foster parent cannot take away and have zero control over the continued trauma (so any promises you make are VERY dangerous: if they get taken away (60-80% of those kids), you are actually making a VERY bad trauma worse). Under such stress normal development is not possible. Attachment theory is the basis of behavioral theory and it says 2 factors are more important than any other in child development: 1) constancy: same environment, same people, SAME RULES tomorrow 2) ability to affect their environment: they must systematically get more control over their environment. What they DO must influence their life. You will immediately realize that the whole POINT of foster care and child services is to take away BOTH of these. The problem is that these factors matter MORE than whether the child is abused. They matter MORE than whether violence (real or psychological) is used against the child.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]