4 ms·

> Sure, there are horror stories about CPS being overzealous, but this isn't one of those stories. The parents were forced in to two weeks of supervision, requ

> Sure, there are horror stories about CPS being overzealous, but this isn't one of those stories. The parents were forced in to two weeks of supervision, requiring another adult around them 24/7. The innocent parents, who had not actually done anything wrong. How is that not "overzealous"? > I don't much like the "family safety plans", but it's a huge leap from there to 24/7 monitoring... "Wallace and her husband could not be alone with their kids for even a second." That sure sounds like 24/7 monitoring, even if it's not the government doing it.

cbsmith 4y ago
> The parents were forced in to two weeks of supervision, requiring another adult around them 24/7. The innocent parents, who had not actually done anything wrong. > How is that not "overzealous"? I didn't say it wasn't overzealous. I said it wasn't one of the horror stories about them being overzealous. I was specifically referring to the power to "destroy families". That didn't happen here. > "Wallace and her husband could not be alone with their kids for even a second." > > That sure sounds like 24/7 monitoring, even if it's not the government doing it. At best that's 24/7 for 14 days. In truth though, it's not monitoring at all, as there was no monitoring requirement, just that they couldn't be left alone with the kids. I mean, they literally considered a sleeping grandmother somewhere in the house to be sufficient. It's certainly intrusive and unpleasant, but it's not 24/7 monitoring, nor is it a slippery slope towards that.