4 ms·

> Yes it is annoying, but I rather live in a world where the police or CPS chase every frivolous compliant than them unable to do anything without a court order

> Yes it is annoying, but I rather live in a world where the police or CPS chase every frivolous compliant than them unable to do anything without a court order or not stopping abuse enough. This is what everybody always says. There's a serious problem with that however. Unfortunately CPS makes the situation of children worse, when they interfere, rather than better. Everybody is always in favour of detecting abuse (never mind that there isn't any reliable method to do that, and most kids get placed effectively randomly, according to research). But when it comes to footing the bill of decently caring for the children ... nothing of that favour seems to be left. CPS is terrible for kids, and of course this raises the question: are they better than abuse at home? Or ... worse? https://sci-hub.se/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 https://sci-hub.se/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 Or, more dramatic: https://www.kansascity.com/news/special-reports/article238206754.html https://www.kansascity.com/news/special-reports/article23820... The biggest investigation ever into CPS had to come to the conclusion: a kid is better off abused at home than helped by CPS, even in the "average" case of actual serious physical abuse. Worse: most placements are effectively random, depending more on the CPS investigator than on the kid or their circumstances, so most kids in CPS haven't actually been abused. There's all sorts of extra investigations equally bad, for example one concluding that the violence in the life of a child increases when CPS intervenes to protect a child, rather than decreasing. And that's ignoring the many CPS scandals where CPS employees get caught abusing kids themselves, even renting out children for sex, using them as drugrunners, ... > Depends, if a person is really abusing a child which unfortunately happens more frequently than we all want to believe, then you would rather have the government intervene without complicated red-tape as soon as possible. NO, I would not want the government to be enabled to do this. I would want the government to provide options for those children to escape such an environment IF AND ONLY IF they have the "durable" agreement of the child (meaning if the child wants to go back, they can immediately do so).

purplerabbit 4y ago
This is an opinion that’s risky to have because at a superficial level it’s not oriented enough around “save the children”. But there’s some good evidence for it. There’s some great analysis in “The Future of Capitalism” by Paul Collier if anyone is interested in a deeper look
aeneasmackenzie 4y ago
Wow, this is terrible. Obviously we need increased CPS funding to resolve this :^)
manquer 4y ago
Solution to bad government is not less government. If the CPS is terrible we should figure out how to fix it not throw in the towel. Basically you are saying that it is not possible for government to be competent no matter what we do, so we are better of without it interfering in our lives ?
- candiodari 4y ago
  Why does everybody always that that offering children the choice of CPS or not is effectively "throwing in the towel"? Yes, CPS will have to offer something meaningful (ie. a reasonable path to a decent future) to children, or not have any children. That's a good thing. It does not mean CPS ceases to be, just that the (many) really bad parts will get into serious trouble. That will be a very good thing. I want the power of government to FORCE themselves into 99% of the life of a child to cease. If that doesn't improve the lot of the child (the outcome), it's an abuse of power. I do not even imply it's their intention to abuse power (although clearly that exists), it just needs to stop. So I must say I see your position as something you often see when it's about CPS: that they are about guaranteeing jobs/organisations' existence for existing employees/organisations (and subcontractors and ...), and absolutely not about children. That it's about guaranteeing punishment for "bad parenting", whether that means vaccinating children or NOT vaccinating children. About destroying lives of undesirable groups. The large majority of people working in CPS have zero interest in caring for children. That's fundamentally what needs to change: CPS needs to fundamentally be about caring for children. Not about fixing society. Not about punishing whatever some people consider bad. Not about forcing people to live a certain way by means of threats and punishments.

purplerabbit 4y ago

This is an opinion that’s risky to have because at a superficial level it’s not oriented enough around “save the children”. But there’s some good evidence for it. There’s some great analysis in “The Future of Capitalism” by Paul Collier if anyone is interested in a deeper look

aeneasmackenzie 4y ago

Wow, this is terrible. Obviously we need increased CPS funding to resolve this :^)

manquer 4y ago

Solution to bad government is not less government. If the CPS is terrible we should figure out how to fix it not throw in the towel. Basically you are saying that it is not possible for government to be competent no matter what we do, so we are better of without it interfering in our lives ?

candiodari 4y ago
Why does everybody always that that offering children the choice of CPS or not is effectively "throwing in the towel"? Yes, CPS will have to offer something meaningful (ie. a reasonable path to a decent future) to children, or not have any children. That's a good thing. It does not mean CPS ceases to be, just that the (many) really bad parts will get into serious trouble. That will be a very good thing. I want the power of government to FORCE themselves into 99% of the life of a child to cease. If that doesn't improve the lot of the child (the outcome), it's an abuse of power. I do not even imply it's their intention to abuse power (although clearly that exists), it just needs to stop. So I must say I see your position as something you often see when it's about CPS: that they are about guaranteeing jobs/organisations' existence for existing employees/organisations (and subcontractors and ...), and absolutely not about children. That it's about guaranteeing punishment for "bad parenting", whether that means vaccinating children or NOT vaccinating children. About destroying lives of undesirable groups. The large majority of people working in CPS have zero interest in caring for children. That's fundamentally what needs to change: CPS needs to fundamentally be about caring for children. Not about fixing society. Not about punishing whatever some people consider bad. Not about forcing people to live a certain way by means of threats and punishments.