5 ms·
Wait... I think you've got cause & effect backwards here. The police arrested the mom, not CPS. There was no interaction between the family and CPS prior to th
by cbsmith 4y ago
Wait... I think you've got cause & effect backwards here.
The police arrested the mom, not CPS. There was no interaction between the family and CPS prior to the arrest. The arrest is what brings CPS in to the picture. Just by virtue of arresting a parent, CPS should to get involved, because arresting the parent potentially puts the kids at risk... and then you double down on that because they've been arrested for endangering the kids. CPS then needs to figure out the lay of the land, so that they can establish that the kids are NOT at risk and they can step out of the picture.
- emodendroket 4y agoWhat I’m objecting to is the imposition of the “no unsupervised time with your children” rule, which, to my mind, is a punishment just as much as a precaution.
- cbsmith 4y ago> What I’m objecting to is the imposition of the “no unsupervised time with your children” rule, which, to my mind, is a punishment just as much as a precaution. Which is another way of saying that it is just as much a precaution as it is a punishment. CPS responsibilities are to the children and their safety. The police & courts deal with the parents, collect any evidence, mete out any punishment, etc.
- emodendroket 4y agoWell then that brings me back to the other point. We could do this with far more suspected crimes. Just to be safe.
- cbsmith 4y agoWe do do this for other crimes. Again, CPS isn't focused on the crime.