The state can’t snatch away a child simply because the parents’ belief system, might at some time in the distant future, lead the child into some bad situation. If that were the standard, it would be sufficient to snatch away probably every child in every housing project in the state. The odds of those kids getting into criminal activity or underage sex are astronomical.
But that’s what Texas has done, then tried to cobble together legal justifiction after the fact.
The only children even arguably in imminent physical danger — and that is the standard — were the pubescent girls.
see #19 - CPS was citing the wrong law, re emotional endangerment.
What about the pubescent boys? If there is a pattern of abandonment/neglect of pubescent boys, would they be considered in imminent danger?
You're kidding, right?