Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish
Your scoop doesn't say anything different. The original case when the children were taken away found sufficient evidence of abuse or neglect. And the appeals court justified the original decision. Some of the reasoning included that the parents were victims of abuse themselves as children, they were unemployed, and suffering from psychological disabilities.
How is that questionable at all?
|
I assume you're joking here. The whole question I posed is, "did they break the law"? Putting aside for a moment that if we applied that standard to all parents, about 1/2 of us would lose our kids immediately.....what did the parents do to abuse the kids?
When you read the story closer you find out they didn't abuse the kids. The Stqate just didn't want them around the parents. Let's be honest what happened. Being dumb or poor or bigoted or a victim of abuse would, again, eliminate millions of folks from parenthood.