Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How about co-sleeping? Most parents who bedshare have a crib set up nearby just in case someone comes to look at the house. When the investigator did a run through of the house, sure enough they checked to make sure there was a crib and that we weren't co sleeping. That's the govt trying to butt in too. :/ sure, there are instances where babies get hurt after unsafe sleeping practices by their parents, but they don't take into consideration if the parents are educated about how to do it safely. It's just a red mark against you. But really, can't parents choose where their child sleeps?? Apparently not according to these people.
Great example!
What about bottle feeding? Breast is best, right? Should we start forcing women to breast feed their children or hire a wet nurse for those who can't?
Babies get hurt in cribs too. Their legs get stuck, they bang their heads, they can climb out, etc.
Ridiculous! And good for the parents for vowing to continue to raise their kids without gub-ment interference, despite this murky, meaningless ruling.
What would these hand-wringing, busybody, nervous hens be doing with themselves if they weren't peering out the window and sticking their beaks into everyone else's business?
Funny you should use breast vs bottle as an example. I've heard (from reliable sources, personally) that their doctor threatened to call CPS if they didn't supplement with formula. And it couldn't be just any formula, it had to be xyz formula.
I personally had a bit of a struggle when a doctor took a look at my healthy one year old and said, "Oh, she's low on the growth charts. Failure to thrive. If you don't supplement and get her weight up, I'll refer her for [invasive] testing in the hospital [two hours away]." I said I hardly thought that was necessary, given the fact that she had the identical growth pattern as my older daughter, was obviously meeting milestones and not a day sick in her life. She said if I refused the testing, she would "have to call someone". I went home, really upset, and did some research. Lo and behold - the doctor was using the wrong growth chart. There's a different growth pattern for exclusively breastfed children vs. children who are supplemented with formula. My daughter was indeed not on the charts for the formula fed one, but her growth (and my older daughter's, also EBF) mirrored the breastfed baby chart perfectly, and she was like 25% on that one, which is smallish but perfectly fine. I took the chart (from the CDC) back to the doctor. She said, "huh, I'll look into this." Turns out, at the next visit there was no more "failure to thrive" on my daughter's chart anymore. No need for invasive testing, no need to "call someone" on me.
But this was a DOCTOR. A mandated reporter. Can you imagine what sort of damage that might have done to our family? Yes, I guess I could have just gone along with the various invasive testing done at the hospital. BTW from what I read, usually if a child is referred for FTT to a regional facility, they automatically start doing parental observations, sometimes separating the child from the parents just to make sure the parents aren't interfering with the studies, etc. - assuming that in an otherwise healthy child, the parent must be sabotaging the feeding in some way if the child isn't growing. And had they started supplementing with formula, the weight probably WOULD have shot up - which would then "prove" parental "guilt". Just makes me sick. I had the access to research, I knew HOW to do proper research, etc. etc. so I was able to ward that confrontation off. But if I had no knowledge of statistics or healthy feeding practices or even that there were different growth rates, etc., I could have been screwed.
Funny you should use breast vs bottle as an example. I've heard (from reliable sources, personally) that their doctor threatened to call CPS if they didn't supplement with formula. And it couldn't be just any formula, it had to be xyz formula.
I've heard from sources, that your sources are fictional and in your head.
The only reason a doctor would have to make that threat is if your STARVING the bady
I don't think parents should be allowed to starve babies
children under a certain age must be accompanied by a 13 year or older
OMG the end of the world. My rights have been destroyed by common sense!!
You're wrong. When parents lose the ability to judge for themselves when their children are capable of being out unsupervised, it is an erosion of parental rights. Your right to use your own judgment and common sense as a parent is being eroded. OMG.
children under a certain age must be accompanied by a 13 year or older
OMG the end of the world. My rights have been destroyed by common sense!!
This sense may be "common", but it is not one I share. I have never limited my children based on the number of years that they have been alive. They are only limited by what their OWN responsibility can handle. If I lived in a place that had a law like that, and I may for all I know, I would have to tell them you cannot walk despite your clear responsibility to be able to do that because of this stupid law.
I think it's worth noting that these parents were not charged with breaking a law. There was no trial or arrest.
This is simply an overzealous CPS agent going after easy prey and finding he messed with the wrong family this time.
A CPS agent who should in no way still be employed. Google W. Don Thorne and learn about the child that died under his refusal to even follow up on an actual case of abuse. Frankly I think HE should be in prison.
People are stupid, at least in general. They are poor decision makers. They tend to overestimate their abilities and underestimate others. They tend to overestimate their kids (for example).
Most kids don't have the depth perception skills, due to brain development, to judge when an oncoming car would allow you to safely cross the street. They don't develop this until age 10 or so.. and we are talking about 8 year olds here.
Now i'm sure Somebodynew kids are 8 going on 24 (when the brain finishes development) are some bastian of light in a somehow underdeveloped society.
Yet you belong to . . a society. And the society has laws and rules for behavior within that society based on the average, and issues that have resulted in the past. Different states have different rules.
12 or 13 is a very common law/requirement in the united states. Now not every 12 year old or 13 year old can be home alone. Some are impulsive, and you can be more conservative than your state's law/regulation.
I'm sorry, but you don't have full rights, power, and control over your kids. You must treat these kids within the societal compact (or move to Afghanistan where you can beat your wife and daughters to death on a whim, if you want full control).
If you don't respect the compact, that society can (and have) take your kids away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodynew
This sense may be "common", but it is not one I share. I have never limited my children based on the number of years that they have been alive. They are only limited by what their OWN responsibility can handle. If I lived in a place that had a law like that, and I may for all I know, I would have to tell them you cannot walk despite your clear responsibility to be able to do that because of this stupid law.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
