18 ms·

Arizona Mom Fights Abusive Prosecution by Department of Child Safety

204 points by tomohawk 4y ago

RappingBoomer 4y ago
I used to work for the govt...govt bureaucrats are always looking for new things to do...software is cutting down on their work... and those new things entail controlling our lives...and I don't see any solution for this problem
- plasticchris 4y ago
  Why not let the govt people find other work? It isn’t a law of nature that the public sector must never shrink, though it does feel that way sometimes.
  - happyopossum 4y ago
    Look at California - the biggest lobbyists in the state are govt employee unions. Care to guess how’d theyd respond to cutting government jobs?
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
anigbrowl 4y ago
There's a lot of context missing, starting with the age of the kids.
- happyopossum 4y ago
  7. (1) https://www.12news.com/article/news/local/arizona/arizona-mom-left-son-at-park-to-buy-groceries-now-shes-fighting-to-stay-off-department-of-child-safety-watch-list/75-d3791ff4-184e-44b0-86b4-f399caa208d2 https://www.12news.com/article/news/local/arizona/arizona-mo...
- phyzome 4y ago
  Right? How could you possibly write a story like this without mentioning whether the kids were 2, 7, or 14? Those would be very different stories from each other...
ciguy 4y ago
Totally insane that you can be prosecuted now for letting your kids play in a park. If this is truly the whole story, I hope she gets a nice fat settlement and the agency that did this gets gutted. Unfortunately that's almost never how it works out in real life. The beaurocratic idiots that decided to ruin her life to boost their stats will get promoted and replaced by more idiots.
- TeeMassive 4y ago
  IME the people working at CPS tend to lack judgment and have have a controlling and abusive mindset. I would never let a child near a CPS worker.
  - dr_dshiv 4y ago
    Yeah, there should be some measurement tool to evaluate how awful people are in different branches of the government.
  - marcinzm 4y ago
    I assume very few people who deal with actually abusive parents and their kids (as CPS often does) would come out the other end without severe mental trauma.
endisneigh 4y ago
This is terrible. And to think there are people out there who want to get the government involved in more things, hah.
- dr_dshiv 4y ago
  Yeah, I want to get the government involved in changing this situation. Through a democratic process. And nuanced, non-black/white thinking.
  - darkerside 4y ago
    Just pointing out that in today's world, representative democracy and nuanced thinking are almost mutually exclusive.
    - Tao3300 4y ago
      Are you saying that there are places without representative democracy that do have nuanced thought?
      - darkerside 4y ago
        No
        Tao3300 4y ago
        Then you don't know what "mutually exclusive" means.
        darkerside 4y ago
        Right back atcha buddy
      - ALittleLight 4y ago
        Yes. What place lacks nuanced thought? How does democracy promote it?
proxyon 4y ago
The bureaucratic machine always comes up with more laws in order to justify its own existence.
- noasaservice 4y ago
  That's the thing. If they were laws proper, then we'd get a proper defense. Its the worst of all possible worlds: its a "bureaucratic policy" that was made without oversight, lawmakers, or anything. And it was powered because of some line "bureau will conduct appropriately the $thing" And then, you start getting law/notlaws, lilliputian 'courts' that follow their own rules, fines and punishments that are expressly criminal but for some strained definition aren't defined as criminal.
  - Tao3300 4y ago
    And it all seems fine until people you don't like from the other side get elected. I'm not some ultra-crunchy libertarian, but I sure wish people would stop to imagine "what if an asshole has the keys?" when they think about what they want their government to be able to do.
revscat 4y ago
The cynic in me reads this and thinks: “Well of course. America is not safe for children. It’s only truly safe for capitalists and cops.” Then I wonder how much of that is cynicism, and how much of it is the infuriating reality. That the Arizona Department of Child Safety chose to prosecute this woman is an unstated recognition of this.
wincy 4y ago
We live in an upper middle class neighborhood and the only people who drive through are other people who live here. Our daughter is seven now but we’ve let her go to her friends house of her own volition since she was five. This wasn’t a problem until a woman with several foster children (I know this because she told me? I assume she was trying to virtue signal to me what a great person she was) moved into our neighborhood. One day she came to our house with our daughter in tow, telling us “it isn’t safe” and other nonsense. Most of the people on the blocks are parents and we have each other’s numbers! The next time our daughter was out, then came home, a short time later we got a knock on the door by a police officer. He was friendly and asked to see our daughter to make sure she was okay, but said he’d gotten a call and he had to report it to CPS. So the man from CPS came and inspected our house to make sure we weren’t abusing our child. Luckily nothing came from it but it was really annoying and I really hate that neighbor now. We bought our daughter an Apple Watch so she can call us and we can GPS track her so she’s not “being neglected”. It’s frustrating because I lived in a much less safe neighborhood than we do now and was allowed to range much further when I was her age. It just takes one busybody to ruin your life, though.
- 9991 4y ago
  > So the man from CPS came and inspected our house to make sure we weren’t abusing our child. Were you legally obligated to let him into your house?
  - 1123581321 4y ago
    Typically the first visit is a request to be voluntarily let in. If denied they will return with a police officer and a warrant to enter, and will be more likely to try to hurt your family rather than do a cursory walkthrough. It’s a bit of game theory but it’s best to let them in the first time.
  - zargon 4y ago
    As the story demonstrates, there could be extra-legal consequences whether one allows them in or not. For average people without very deep pockets, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.
noasaservice 4y ago
This kind of bureaucratic law/not-law is because it's a bureaucratic determination and not a "law" proper. It's the same kind of "its not really criminal until it is" regarding speeding and not wearing a seatbelt. Traffic court is a farce, and has been long used as a bypass of proper defense by saying "driving is a privileged and not a right".. when the very body punishing you is the state. That conveniently is thrown out the window as things move up the chain. Sure looks criminal at all phases, even if it is "minor crimes". Naturally, other quazi-"not really criminal until it is" bureaucracies need destroyed. Like utterly, completely; until they start complying with proper courts for finding of fact and acting only upon punishment phase if found guilty.
Tao3300 4y ago
More details if you click through a bit: > she dropped off her seven-year-old son and his five-year-old friend at a park about five blocks from the store... a friend was teaching a Tai Chi class at the park and was watching the kids while Sarra went to buy groceries. The friend called her when she saw the kids talking to the police, so it would indeed seem that said friend was indeed keeping an eye on them.
Ekaros 4y ago
So just how many kidnappings of children by total strangers there are on average? Must be quite a lot if it is so feared? How many vans are driving around blocks and looking to abduct kids with or without candy each day?
- pliftkl 4y ago
  There are many bad outcomes to unattended children that don't involve kidnapping (think uncommon but normal childhood injuries of kids on playgrounds). That being said, none of the facts presented here indicate that CPS action would have been warranted.
  - Gordonjcp 4y ago
    > think uncommon but normal childhood injuries of kids on playgrounds Which is how (and why) I learned first aid, when I was - I can't even remember how old, single digits anyway. Right-wingers in the US would give their children guns before they gave them basic life skills.
    - CapricornNoble 4y ago
      Is self-defense not a basic life skill? A blade might be a better choice than a firearm for a young child though. Either a karambit or maybe a Fairbarn-Sykes Fighting Knife.
      - Gordonjcp 4y ago
        Maybe if you live in a shithole third-world country where they might reasonably expect to be shot at school or something.
        CapricornNoble 4y ago
        Have you considered the possibility that there are physical security threats to children besides school shooters? Kidnappers, bullies, gangs, thieves, etc... How many of them would still want to put hands on a 7 year old if it means possibly getting their guts ripped open by the tool-wielding equivalent of a velociraptor claw? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WckWFmgi8Fg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WckWFmgi8Fg
SteveGerencser 4y ago
I have had multiple experiences with CPS over the years through friends and family. Over time I have developed a pretty dramatic hatred of them. We took in our niece for a few months years ago and the way they ran their 'system' was mind blowing. The rules that make their life hard were freely broken whenever they wanted and the rules that made our lives hard were written on stone tablets. I'm involved in a case now where they took a 5 year old boy from the family and refused all contact for over 3 months. All with never filing a charge against the family or even telling anyone WHY they took him. It wasn't until we started writing large checks to good lawyers that we got their attention.
lbrito 4y ago
Some time ago I watched a Not Just Bikes (bear with me) video where Jason mentioned how ridiculous the oversight expectations were in US/Canada. He mentioned a Vancouver parent that was "fighting police for the right to send his kids to school alone on public transit" or something. I thought that was ridiculous, it can't possibly be true. I guess its not ridiculous after all.
- jbay808 4y ago
  > a Vancouver parent that was "fighting police for the right to send his kids to school alone on public transit" or something. It's true (although it wasn't the police but rather the Ministry of Children & Family Development). It was a big local story. Fortunately he won. http://5kids1condo.com/we-won-common-sense-prevails-in-bus-dad-case/ http://5kids1condo.com/we-won-common-sense-prevails-in-bus-d...
SeanLuke 4y ago
CPS could well be the spawn of Satan. But with the exception of a minor (Breitbart-like rag) Tennessee Star article, 100% of the references I can find on the Google appear to be postings and promotions from Pacific Legal and its partner, the Goldwater Institute. There does not appear to be a single non-ultra-biased source reporting this story. Which means, as far as we know, it could be entirely nonsense.
- Cupertino95014 4y ago
  You have a closed loop there: no media outlet I like is reporting on it, so it must not be true. So if Big Media ignores the story, by definition it never happened?
  - SeanLuke 4y ago
    Hmmm, did i use the words "must" or "never"? Essentially no media outlet is reporting on it. At all. Heck, the link provided to HN is directly from the PR of the legal firm itself: that would be the definition of an ultra biased source. They haven't even gone to court yet. In short: we have zero evidence that these events occurred the way being claimed.
    - Cupertino95014 4y ago
      > Essentially no media outlet is reporting on it Shall I compile a list of stories that major media outlets have buried? Maybe reported once, and then forgotten about? Supposing they do go to court, but major media outlets still don't cover it?
      - SeanLuke 4y ago
        > Shall I compile a list of stories that major media outlets have buried? This is relevant how? You do understand the logical error you just made, right? > Supposing they do go to court, but major media outlets still don't cover it? Then we will have some evidence of the truthfulness (or falsehood) of the plaintiff's case.
wawjgreen 4y ago
bloody 1984
jokoon 4y ago
unrelated to technology, and as the comments show, this buys into the libertarian agenda of this website
- lbrito 4y ago
  HN sure has a strong libertarian presence, but I guarantee you its not here. This is more the urbanism, liveability and anti-NIMBY crowd. I don't have data but I very strongly sense intersection between both is nil.
UIUC_06 4y ago
There's a SCOTUS decision, nickname Chevron deference which is due to be overturned, and I think most of the posters here should be in favor of overturning it. In AZ, I'm pretty sure the Legislature and Governor never intended that parents like this should be prosecuted, but DCS is interpreting their broad statutory authority that way. IANAL, but I believe it says that an administrative agency's interpretation of the law, if it considers the law ambiguous, should govern. Overturning it will mean that the Legislature and Governor make the laws, not the agencies. Yeah, that probably will mean that either nothing or the wrong thing (from your perspective) happens, but that's another problem.
- Gormo 4y ago
  Chevron deference is a federal doctrine related to self-interpretation of statutory powers by federal agencies. It has no direct relevance to state agencies operating under state law. Some states do/did have equivalent doctrines, but many have explicitly forbidden judicial deference to administrative agencies either via statute law or via binding precedent created by their own supreme courts. Everything being discussed in this thread is a matter of state-level policy that varies drastically among states, and has no direct relation to federal agencies or the way they apply federal statutes.
- manquer 4y ago
  Hardly, overturning chevron especially in the polarized grid locked congress of today would be chaos. Also practically the legislative branch cannot reasonably dictate laws about every single thing . Neither are they experts nor are is there remotely enough staff in all of Capitol Hill to do that. Overturning chevron would take away force of law from regulation and make governing more legislative and judicial rather than executive. Government cannot function with regulators unable to do anything unless congress or court saying so explicitly. That doesn’t mean we don’t have a ton of over regulation or bad ones, removing Chevron is not a solution for that though. PS : Arizona where this story is from already overturned chevron at the state level
  - yieldcrv 4y ago
    The roles that the federal legislative branch has assumed over the past 100 years are misguided and mostly based under an interpretation of the interstate commerce clause and how much power can be delegated away from the legislature. I can hold that observation and also realize that it will be wildly disruptive to make an adverse ruling on that power. I can also see there are other ways to reach the same result, its really not rogue or illegitimate for a court to simply say "leave that to your elected representatives", and thats what the court is going to do. Its extremely predictable and does not require any circular logic to do so. I don't think the disruptive nature is a reason to avoid doing it, as a consensus bridging solution would be resilient as well, antifragile.
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago
happyopossum 4y ago
The Pacific Legal Foundation is an amazing organization, and has fought this kind of battle over and over again for people that would never be able to afford attorneys of that caliber.
- diydsp 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - gnicholas 4y ago
    They’re libertarian, not left-leaning. John Yoo should be a giveaway that it’s not left-leaning… https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Legal_Foundation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Legal_Foundation
  - purplerabbit 4y ago
    Why would you assume that conservatives are the ones spooked about unattended children?
lbrito 4y ago
Being from one of the unsafest countries in America, and having also lived in the US, specifically in Phoenix area, this story has a really surrealist tone. Phoenix metro is pretty safe. It seems safety is just varnish over the real issue here, which is some kind of bizarre neuroticism I can't fathom. It seems like a story that a big American newspaper would smugly write about some backwater, unsophisticated Eastern European police state.
- greenonions 4y ago
  Americans? Varnishing neuroticism? Couldn't be.
googlryas 4y ago
What federal or state law could the child be breaking for her to get charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Is there a law that kids a certain age can't be alone in public?
- IncRnd 4y ago
  This is the overreach of a foster parent who had good intentions. Unfortunately, as the saying goes, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." This foster parent, who may have had first-hand experience of what can happen to unsupervised children, caused an issue where none had previously existed. Regarding the other aspect to your comment, in all US states there is a division or department for the welfare of children. Those are all staffed with people who can make immediate administrative decisions for what they believe to be the welfare of a child. They can immediately take a child away from parents, who they believe to be abusive. When the person makes the right decision, they and this system are hailed are wonderful. Unfortunately, things like this often happen far too often - administrators turn the life of a family upside down, due to their own beliefs, biases, and power over others.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
blooalien 4y ago
As a child I was basically forcibly kidnapped from an excellent home by child "protective" services, and spent several years bouncing from one psychotic abusive "foster" home to another, entirely on the word of one screwed up middle school principal who shouldn't have ever been allowed within a hundred miles of any child, while one of my best friends just down the street from me couldn't beg for or receive any help from those same scumbags regarding being literally beaten nightly by his drunken asshole of a father, despite multiple reports and evidence from many people (including myself and my mother). My family tried to fight it and was basically given the middle finger by every agency they contacted. How is it so very rare that these sorts of abusive agencies ever get investigated or held responsible for these destructive actions?
exotree 4y ago
CPS is very often put in a “damned if you do; damned if you don’t.” Miss _one_ case, and the state is on the hook for millions, a case manager who makes $47k a year at 60 hrs a week with an oversized case load takes on an incredible amount of liability. My wife worked as a case manager and I worked in a group home from 19-21. It was appalling how cruel and terrible parents (or other relatives) could be. No matter what socioeconomic class you’re in, child abuse is not as uncommon as one would think. And we haven’t even touched on vulnerable adults…. This particular experience is not an ideal situation. But also, I am concerned by how many commenters believe CPS and their related agencies are completely incompetent or unnecessary.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  >Miss _one_ case, and the state is on the hook for millions, Doesn't the state and its agents have qualified immunity?
  - exotree 4y ago
    It gets a lot murkier for CPS and its varying contractors unlike law enforcement. https://www.kare11.com/amp/article/news/investigations/mn-supreme-court-says-child-protection-can-be-held-responsible-for-4-year-olds-death/89-51c0c728-3929-4bd6-ab51-742e2ef4b303 https://www.kare11.com/amp/article/news/investigations/mn-su...
- joe_the_user 4y ago
  Miss _one_ case, and the state is on the hook for millions, a case manager who makes $47k a year at 60 hrs a week with an oversized case load takes on an incredible amount of liability. Yes that's insane but such insanity is hardly an argument for CPS making sane, reasonable decisions. It seems to point in the opposite direction. But also, I am concerned by how many commenters believe CPS and their related agencies are completely incompetent or unnecessary. Something like CPS seems necessary but that need doesn't imply that current CPS is competent. It seems like you have a grossly incompetent and abusive system that continuously defends itself by pointing to how necessary it is.
- 4y ago
egberts1 4y ago
I am so old that I used to ride a bike across town past the social worker’s house to a park to play all day (and swim the raging American River) at the age of 10. Yeah, it is all about proper conditioning of your kids to these wild, wild nest of anti-social works. If I were a city kid, I’d probably should not be doing that given the danger of kid-related crimes which are commonly prevalent in urban settings (not only by frequency, but by density).
- nobody9999 4y ago
  >If I were a city kid, I’d probably should not be doing that given the danger of kid-related crimes which are commonly prevalent in urban settings (not only by frequency, but by density). I was a city kid and I rode my bike all over the place, played with other kids without adult supervision, rode the subway by myself, took myself (whether walking, biking or subway) to various activities all while around the same age. And by the way, NYC was a tough place back then (mid 1970s) and we were generally just fine. None of my friends/schoolmates were kidnapped, tortured or killed. And cities (especially NYC) is much, much safer now than it was back then. I think you have some misconceptions about cities friend. I invite you to come visit us. It's really a wonderful place and not just to visit. Growing up in NYC was a great experience!
  - egberts1 4y ago
    as one who actually grew up over 11 different states, rural, suburban, cities, which is easy to do as a military brat. No misconception there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Etan_Patz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Etan_Patz
    - nobody9999 4y ago
      The vast majority of child murders and stranger abductions occur in suburban and rural areas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_murdered_American_children https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_murdered_American_chil... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_in_the_United_States#Children https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_in_the_United_State...
torstenvl 4y ago
"Where a person's good name, reputation, honor, or integrity is at stake because of what the government is doing to him, notice and an opportunity to be heard are essential." Wisconsin v. Constantineau, 400 U.S. 433, 437, 91 S. Ct. 507, 510 (1971). This case and similar sound in federal employment law. I cite them frequently in the context of military discharges. But the government publishing stigmatizing material about someone is odious, and I see no reason why it implicates less of a liberty interest here than it does in an employment context. It's my personal opinion that this reasoning should extend beyond federal employment -- stigmatizing material published by the government should require a hearing.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

204 points by tomohawk 4y ago

I used to work for the govt...govt bureaucrats are always looking for new things to do...software is cutting down on their work... and those new things entail controlling our lives...and I don't see any solution for this problem

plasticchris 4y ago
Why not let the govt people find other work? It isn’t a law of nature that the public sector must never shrink, though it does feel that way sometimes.
- happyopossum 4y ago
  Look at California - the biggest lobbyists in the state are govt employee unions. Care to guess how’d theyd respond to cutting government jobs?

jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago

anigbrowl 4y ago

There's a lot of context missing, starting with the age of the kids.

happyopossum 4y ago
7. (1) https://www.12news.com/article/news/local/arizona/arizona-mom-left-son-at-park-to-buy-groceries-now-shes-fighting-to-stay-off-department-of-child-safety-watch-list/75-d3791ff4-184e-44b0-86b4-f399caa208d2 https://www.12news.com/article/news/local/arizona/arizona-mo...
phyzome 4y ago
Right? How could you possibly write a story like this without mentioning whether the kids were 2, 7, or 14? Those would be very different stories from each other...

ciguy 4y ago

Totally insane that you can be prosecuted now for letting your kids play in a park. If this is truly the whole story, I hope she gets a nice fat settlement and the agency that did this gets gutted. Unfortunately that's almost never how it works out in real life. The beaurocratic idiots that decided to ruin her life to boost their stats will get promoted and replaced by more idiots.

TeeMassive 4y ago
IME the people working at CPS tend to lack judgment and have have a controlling and abusive mindset. I would never let a child near a CPS worker.
- dr_dshiv 4y ago
  Yeah, there should be some measurement tool to evaluate how awful people are in different branches of the government.
- marcinzm 4y ago
  I assume very few people who deal with actually abusive parents and their kids (as CPS often does) would come out the other end without severe mental trauma.

endisneigh 4y ago

This is terrible. And to think there are people out there who want to get the government involved in more things, hah.

dr_dshiv 4y ago
Yeah, I want to get the government involved in changing this situation. Through a democratic process. And nuanced, non-black/white thinking.
- darkerside 4y ago
  Just pointing out that in today's world, representative democracy and nuanced thinking are almost mutually exclusive.
  - Tao3300 4y ago
    Are you saying that there are places without representative democracy that do have nuanced thought?
    - darkerside 4y ago
      No
      - Tao3300 4y ago
        Then you don't know what "mutually exclusive" means.
        darkerside 4y ago
        Right back atcha buddy
    - ALittleLight 4y ago
      Yes. What place lacks nuanced thought? How does democracy promote it?

proxyon 4y ago

The bureaucratic machine always comes up with more laws in order to justify its own existence.

noasaservice 4y ago
That's the thing. If they were laws proper, then we'd get a proper defense. Its the worst of all possible worlds: its a "bureaucratic policy" that was made without oversight, lawmakers, or anything. And it was powered because of some line "bureau will conduct appropriately the $thing" And then, you start getting law/notlaws, lilliputian 'courts' that follow their own rules, fines and punishments that are expressly criminal but for some strained definition aren't defined as criminal.
- Tao3300 4y ago
  And it all seems fine until people you don't like from the other side get elected. I'm not some ultra-crunchy libertarian, but I sure wish people would stop to imagine "what if an asshole has the keys?" when they think about what they want their government to be able to do.

revscat 4y ago

The cynic in me reads this and thinks: “Well of course. America is not safe for children. It’s only truly safe for capitalists and cops.” Then I wonder how much of that is cynicism, and how much of it is the infuriating reality. That the Arizona Department of Child Safety chose to prosecute this woman is an unstated recognition of this.

wincy 4y ago

We live in an upper middle class neighborhood and the only people who drive through are other people who live here. Our daughter is seven now but we’ve let her go to her friends house of her own volition since she was five. This wasn’t a problem until a woman with several foster children (I know this because she told me? I assume she was trying to virtue signal to me what a great person she was) moved into our neighborhood. One day she came to our house with our daughter in tow, telling us “it isn’t safe” and other nonsense. Most of the people on the blocks are parents and we have each other’s numbers! The next time our daughter was out, then came home, a short time later we got a knock on the door by a police officer. He was friendly and asked to see our daughter to make sure she was okay, but said he’d gotten a call and he had to report it to CPS. So the man from CPS came and inspected our house to make sure we weren’t abusing our child. Luckily nothing came from it but it was really annoying and I really hate that neighbor now. We bought our daughter an Apple Watch so she can call us and we can GPS track her so she’s not “being neglected”. It’s frustrating because I lived in a much less safe neighborhood than we do now and was allowed to range much further when I was her age. It just takes one busybody to ruin your life, though.

9991 4y ago
> So the man from CPS came and inspected our house to make sure we weren’t abusing our child. Were you legally obligated to let him into your house?
- 1123581321 4y ago
  Typically the first visit is a request to be voluntarily let in. If denied they will return with a police officer and a warrant to enter, and will be more likely to try to hurt your family rather than do a cursory walkthrough. It’s a bit of game theory but it’s best to let them in the first time.
- zargon 4y ago
  As the story demonstrates, there could be extra-legal consequences whether one allows them in or not. For average people without very deep pockets, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

noasaservice 4y ago

This kind of bureaucratic law/not-law is because it's a bureaucratic determination and not a "law" proper. It's the same kind of "its not really criminal until it is" regarding speeding and not wearing a seatbelt. Traffic court is a farce, and has been long used as a bypass of proper defense by saying "driving is a privileged and not a right".. when the very body punishing you is the state. That conveniently is thrown out the window as things move up the chain. Sure looks criminal at all phases, even if it is "minor crimes". Naturally, other quazi-"not really criminal until it is" bureaucracies need destroyed. Like utterly, completely; until they start complying with proper courts for finding of fact and acting only upon punishment phase if found guilty.

Tao3300 4y ago

More details if you click through a bit: > she dropped off her seven-year-old son and his five-year-old friend at a park about five blocks from the store... a friend was teaching a Tai Chi class at the park and was watching the kids while Sarra went to buy groceries. The friend called her when she saw the kids talking to the police, so it would indeed seem that said friend was indeed keeping an eye on them.

Ekaros 4y ago

So just how many kidnappings of children by total strangers there are on average? Must be quite a lot if it is so feared? How many vans are driving around blocks and looking to abduct kids with or without candy each day?

pliftkl 4y ago
There are many bad outcomes to unattended children that don't involve kidnapping (think uncommon but normal childhood injuries of kids on playgrounds). That being said, none of the facts presented here indicate that CPS action would have been warranted.
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  > think uncommon but normal childhood injuries of kids on playgrounds Which is how (and why) I learned first aid, when I was - I can't even remember how old, single digits anyway. Right-wingers in the US would give their children guns before they gave them basic life skills.
  - CapricornNoble 4y ago
    Is self-defense not a basic life skill? A blade might be a better choice than a firearm for a young child though. Either a karambit or maybe a Fairbarn-Sykes Fighting Knife.
    - Gordonjcp 4y ago
      Maybe if you live in a shithole third-world country where they might reasonably expect to be shot at school or something.
      - CapricornNoble 4y ago
        Have you considered the possibility that there are physical security threats to children besides school shooters? Kidnappers, bullies, gangs, thieves, etc... How many of them would still want to put hands on a 7 year old if it means possibly getting their guts ripped open by the tool-wielding equivalent of a velociraptor claw? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WckWFmgi8Fg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WckWFmgi8Fg

SteveGerencser 4y ago

I have had multiple experiences with CPS over the years through friends and family. Over time I have developed a pretty dramatic hatred of them. We took in our niece for a few months years ago and the way they ran their 'system' was mind blowing. The rules that make their life hard were freely broken whenever they wanted and the rules that made our lives hard were written on stone tablets. I'm involved in a case now where they took a 5 year old boy from the family and refused all contact for over 3 months. All with never filing a charge against the family or even telling anyone WHY they took him. It wasn't until we started writing large checks to good lawyers that we got their attention.

lbrito 4y ago

Some time ago I watched a Not Just Bikes (bear with me) video where Jason mentioned how ridiculous the oversight expectations were in US/Canada. He mentioned a Vancouver parent that was "fighting police for the right to send his kids to school alone on public transit" or something. I thought that was ridiculous, it can't possibly be true. I guess its not ridiculous after all.

jbay808 4y ago
> a Vancouver parent that was "fighting police for the right to send his kids to school alone on public transit" or something. It's true (although it wasn't the police but rather the Ministry of Children & Family Development). It was a big local story. Fortunately he won. http://5kids1condo.com/we-won-common-sense-prevails-in-bus-dad-case/ http://5kids1condo.com/we-won-common-sense-prevails-in-bus-d...

SeanLuke 4y ago

CPS could well be the spawn of Satan. But with the exception of a minor (Breitbart-like rag) Tennessee Star article, 100% of the references I can find on the Google appear to be postings and promotions from Pacific Legal and its partner, the Goldwater Institute. There does not appear to be a single non-ultra-biased source reporting this story. Which means, as far as we know, it could be entirely nonsense.

Cupertino95014 4y ago
You have a closed loop there: no media outlet I like is reporting on it, so it must not be true. So if Big Media ignores the story, by definition it never happened?
- SeanLuke 4y ago
  Hmmm, did i use the words "must" or "never"? Essentially no media outlet is reporting on it. At all. Heck, the link provided to HN is directly from the PR of the legal firm itself: that would be the definition of an ultra biased source. They haven't even gone to court yet. In short: we have zero evidence that these events occurred the way being claimed.
  - Cupertino95014 4y ago
    > Essentially no media outlet is reporting on it Shall I compile a list of stories that major media outlets have buried? Maybe reported once, and then forgotten about? Supposing they do go to court, but major media outlets still don't cover it?
    - SeanLuke 4y ago
      > Shall I compile a list of stories that major media outlets have buried? This is relevant how? You do understand the logical error you just made, right? > Supposing they do go to court, but major media outlets still don't cover it? Then we will have some evidence of the truthfulness (or falsehood) of the plaintiff's case.

wawjgreen 4y ago

bloody 1984

jokoon 4y ago

unrelated to technology, and as the comments show, this buys into the libertarian agenda of this website

lbrito 4y ago
HN sure has a strong libertarian presence, but I guarantee you its not here. This is more the urbanism, liveability and anti-NIMBY crowd. I don't have data but I very strongly sense intersection between both is nil.

UIUC_06 4y ago

There's a SCOTUS decision, nickname Chevron deference which is due to be overturned, and I think most of the posters here should be in favor of overturning it. In AZ, I'm pretty sure the Legislature and Governor never intended that parents like this should be prosecuted, but DCS is interpreting their broad statutory authority that way. IANAL, but I believe it says that an administrative agency's interpretation of the law, if it considers the law ambiguous, should govern. Overturning it will mean that the Legislature and Governor make the laws, not the agencies. Yeah, that probably will mean that either nothing or the wrong thing (from your perspective) happens, but that's another problem.

Gormo 4y ago
Chevron deference is a federal doctrine related to self-interpretation of statutory powers by federal agencies. It has no direct relevance to state agencies operating under state law. Some states do/did have equivalent doctrines, but many have explicitly forbidden judicial deference to administrative agencies either via statute law or via binding precedent created by their own supreme courts. Everything being discussed in this thread is a matter of state-level policy that varies drastically among states, and has no direct relation to federal agencies or the way they apply federal statutes.
manquer 4y ago
Hardly, overturning chevron especially in the polarized grid locked congress of today would be chaos. Also practically the legislative branch cannot reasonably dictate laws about every single thing . Neither are they experts nor are is there remotely enough staff in all of Capitol Hill to do that. Overturning chevron would take away force of law from regulation and make governing more legislative and judicial rather than executive. Government cannot function with regulators unable to do anything unless congress or court saying so explicitly. That doesn’t mean we don’t have a ton of over regulation or bad ones, removing Chevron is not a solution for that though. PS : Arizona where this story is from already overturned chevron at the state level
- yieldcrv 4y ago
  The roles that the federal legislative branch has assumed over the past 100 years are misguided and mostly based under an interpretation of the interstate commerce clause and how much power can be delegated away from the legislature. I can hold that observation and also realize that it will be wildly disruptive to make an adverse ruling on that power. I can also see there are other ways to reach the same result, its really not rogue or illegitimate for a court to simply say "leave that to your elected representatives", and thats what the court is going to do. Its extremely predictable and does not require any circular logic to do so. I don't think the disruptive nature is a reason to avoid doing it, as a consensus bridging solution would be resilient as well, antifragile.

jsiaajdsdaa 4y ago

happyopossum 4y ago

The Pacific Legal Foundation is an amazing organization, and has fought this kind of battle over and over again for people that would never be able to afford attorneys of that caliber.

diydsp 4y ago
[flagged]
- gnicholas 4y ago
  They’re libertarian, not left-leaning. John Yoo should be a giveaway that it’s not left-leaning… https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Legal_Foundation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Legal_Foundation
- purplerabbit 4y ago
  Why would you assume that conservatives are the ones spooked about unattended children?

lbrito 4y ago

Being from one of the unsafest countries in America, and having also lived in the US, specifically in Phoenix area, this story has a really surrealist tone. Phoenix metro is pretty safe. It seems safety is just varnish over the real issue here, which is some kind of bizarre neuroticism I can't fathom. It seems like a story that a big American newspaper would smugly write about some backwater, unsophisticated Eastern European police state.

greenonions 4y ago
Americans? Varnishing neuroticism? Couldn't be.

googlryas 4y ago

What federal or state law could the child be breaking for her to get charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Is there a law that kids a certain age can't be alone in public?

IncRnd 4y ago
This is the overreach of a foster parent who had good intentions. Unfortunately, as the saying goes, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." This foster parent, who may have had first-hand experience of what can happen to unsupervised children, caused an issue where none had previously existed. Regarding the other aspect to your comment, in all US states there is a division or department for the welfare of children. Those are all staffed with people who can make immediate administrative decisions for what they believe to be the welfare of a child. They can immediately take a child away from parents, who they believe to be abusive. When the person makes the right decision, they and this system are hailed are wonderful. Unfortunately, things like this often happen far too often - administrators turn the life of a family upside down, due to their own beliefs, biases, and power over others.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

blooalien 4y ago

As a child I was basically forcibly kidnapped from an excellent home by child "protective" services, and spent several years bouncing from one psychotic abusive "foster" home to another, entirely on the word of one screwed up middle school principal who shouldn't have ever been allowed within a hundred miles of any child, while one of my best friends just down the street from me couldn't beg for or receive any help from those same scumbags regarding being literally beaten nightly by his drunken asshole of a father, despite multiple reports and evidence from many people (including myself and my mother). My family tried to fight it and was basically given the middle finger by every agency they contacted. How is it so very rare that these sorts of abusive agencies ever get investigated or held responsible for these destructive actions?

exotree 4y ago

CPS is very often put in a “damned if you do; damned if you don’t.” Miss _one_ case, and the state is on the hook for millions, a case manager who makes $47k a year at 60 hrs a week with an oversized case load takes on an incredible amount of liability. My wife worked as a case manager and I worked in a group home from 19-21. It was appalling how cruel and terrible parents (or other relatives) could be. No matter what socioeconomic class you’re in, child abuse is not as uncommon as one would think. And we haven’t even touched on vulnerable adults…. This particular experience is not an ideal situation. But also, I am concerned by how many commenters believe CPS and their related agencies are completely incompetent or unnecessary.

s1artibartfast 4y ago
>Miss _one_ case, and the state is on the hook for millions, Doesn't the state and its agents have qualified immunity?
- exotree 4y ago
  It gets a lot murkier for CPS and its varying contractors unlike law enforcement. https://www.kare11.com/amp/article/news/investigations/mn-supreme-court-says-child-protection-can-be-held-responsible-for-4-year-olds-death/89-51c0c728-3929-4bd6-ab51-742e2ef4b303 https://www.kare11.com/amp/article/news/investigations/mn-su...
joe_the_user 4y ago
Miss _one_ case, and the state is on the hook for millions, a case manager who makes $47k a year at 60 hrs a week with an oversized case load takes on an incredible amount of liability. Yes that's insane but such insanity is hardly an argument for CPS making sane, reasonable decisions. It seems to point in the opposite direction. But also, I am concerned by how many commenters believe CPS and their related agencies are completely incompetent or unnecessary. Something like CPS seems necessary but that need doesn't imply that current CPS is competent. It seems like you have a grossly incompetent and abusive system that continuously defends itself by pointing to how necessary it is.
4y ago

egberts1 4y ago

I am so old that I used to ride a bike across town past the social worker’s house to a park to play all day (and swim the raging American River) at the age of 10. Yeah, it is all about proper conditioning of your kids to these wild, wild nest of anti-social works. If I were a city kid, I’d probably should not be doing that given the danger of kid-related crimes which are commonly prevalent in urban settings (not only by frequency, but by density).

nobody9999 4y ago
>If I were a city kid, I’d probably should not be doing that given the danger of kid-related crimes which are commonly prevalent in urban settings (not only by frequency, but by density). I was a city kid and I rode my bike all over the place, played with other kids without adult supervision, rode the subway by myself, took myself (whether walking, biking or subway) to various activities all while around the same age. And by the way, NYC was a tough place back then (mid 1970s) and we were generally just fine. None of my friends/schoolmates were kidnapped, tortured or killed. And cities (especially NYC) is much, much safer now than it was back then. I think you have some misconceptions about cities friend. I invite you to come visit us. It's really a wonderful place and not just to visit. Growing up in NYC was a great experience!
- egberts1 4y ago
  as one who actually grew up over 11 different states, rural, suburban, cities, which is easy to do as a military brat. No misconception there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Etan_Patz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Etan_Patz
  - nobody9999 4y ago
    The vast majority of child murders and stranger abductions occur in suburban and rural areas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_murdered_American_children https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_murdered_American_chil... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_in_the_United_States#Children https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_in_the_United_State...

torstenvl 4y ago

"Where a person's good name, reputation, honor, or integrity is at stake because of what the government is doing to him, notice and an opportunity to be heard are essential." Wisconsin v. Constantineau, 400 U.S. 433, 437, 91 S. Ct. 507, 510 (1971). This case and similar sound in federal employment law. I cite them frequently in the context of military discharges. But the government publishing stigmatizing material about someone is odious, and I see no reason why it implicates less of a liberty interest here than it does in an employment context. It's my personal opinion that this reasoning should extend beyond federal employment -- stigmatizing material published by the government should require a hearing.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]