"The sky is falling!
Posted on 05/10/2008 7:06:46 AM PDT by greyfoxx39
Texas child welfare attorneys say children were removed from the YFZ Ranch and should not return there because its residents live as one big family and all have the same dangerous belief system. The agency that has taken legal custody of 464 children sent its response Thursday to a petition from dozens of Fundamentalist LDS Church mothers. The petition asks the Texas 3rd Court of Appeals to order Judge Barbara Walther to return the children to their mothers.
"The community has one common belief system that young girls are called on to be wives and no age is too young to be married," wrote Texas Department of Family and Protective Services attorney Michael Shulman. Some adults and children at the ranch described it as "one large community," even though there are several houses at the complex.
"All of the women are called mothers to all of the children in the home, and the children call each other brothers and sisters," the response states.
When a victim of abuse is found inside a home, child welfare investigators have concerns for all of the children in that home. The court filing also states that a polygamous environment "would make a 15- or 16-year-old child highly vulnerable to individuals who are willing to exploit them and take advantage of their child-like qualities."
Previous court rulings have determined that it isn't necessary to prove that a parent personally abused their own child in order to show that a child is in danger, the court documents state.
Texas officials say several teens at the ranch were either pregnant or had children when they were underage. As for the boys and younger children, the agency argues says they are still in danger if allowed to continue living in that environment.
The new filing refers the appeals court to testimony from child psychiatrist Bruce Perry, who described an "unhealthy" belief that it's OK to have sex with and marry young women. "This pervasive practice and belief creates an environment that develops people who have a high potential of replicating sexual abuse of young children as a part of their belief system," the court document states.
"Part of the danger to the boys is that their belief system requires that they follow the prophet," it also stated.
The original petition, filed on behalf of 38 women by Texas RioGrande Legal Aid, also argued that an April 17-18 adversary hearing for the children was improperly held "en masse" instead of holding hearings for each individual child. But the agency says the actions of the parents forced the judge to hold the single hearing.
"It is the department's contention that (the mothers), by their conspiracy of silence, purposefully confused the identity of the children, which forced Judge Walther to conduct the proceedings as she did."
The new court papers claim the FLDS women have no legal standing to have the judge reverse her ruling because they have "repeatedly declined" to even identify their children and the fathers.
The document says neither the court nor the child welfare agency should "be forced to play guessing games when the safety and well-being of these children are at stake."
The agency argued in the court filing that all the mothers had an opportunity, through their attorneys, to confront and cross-examine the witnesses during the April 17-18 hearing. To hold individual hearings would have taken weeks or even months and would have been an "extraordinary waste of judicial resources."
In removing the children, attorneys for the mothers say the judge failed to consider less restrictive options such as ordering the men ("the alleged perpetrators of abuse") to leave the ranch or ordering mothers and their children to live elsewhere during the investigation.
The agency argues that if the state does not have physical custody of the children, what's to prevent the mothers from leaving the state with them? It also asks how the court could know for certain which child legally belongs to whom.
As "the largest child protection case documented in the history of the United States," DFPS or, CPS as it is commonly called, said the sheer numbers of FLDS children prevented them from pursuing other options it might have considered in a more typical case.
As for possible temporary restraining orders against men at the ranch, DCFS says that wasn't practical. "How could the department have identified the alleged perpetrator or perpetrators when the evidence demonstrated that the entire male and female population at the YFZ Ranch had been enculturated into the belief that underage marriage was sacrosanct?"
The Court of Appeals could rule on the issues in the petition or may hold a hearing to consider arguments.
On that basis, all Muslims also endanger their children, with a culture that denies women full rights, worships a pedophile, and often practices forced marriage and wife beating and suicide bombings.
Does it preach to it’s adherents to ignore common and established state law to protect minor females?
Does it create a belief that these laws should be ignored?
Does it ‘program’ young people to be sexual objects for the delight of old perverts?
Sounds like Planned Parenthood’s mantra to me.
Love your tagline :-)
Blanket forensic pelvis exams on hundreds of girls is in and of itself an invasion of privacy. The state is doing it’s own exploiting.
They should’ve at least conducted interviews to determine who should be examined.
You wouldn’t want children to raised by homosexuals would you?
What exam can differentiate between a 16-yo girl, and a 17-yo girl?
Please enlighten me.
Des·er·et –noun
1. a territory established by the Mormons in 1849 as a proposed state of the Union: was refused admission to the Union by Congress and incorporated in the newly organized Territory of Utah 1850.
2. Informal. the state of Utah
Eugene Volokh, a UCLA law professor, said courts have generally held that a parent's belief system cannot, in itself, justify a child's removal. He said, for example, that a parent might teach his child that smoking marijuana is acceptable, but only when he helps the child buy pot does he cross the line.
"The general view of the legal system is until there is an imminent risk of harm or actual harm, you can't" take the children, Volokh said.
Amazing! There’s another group with a dangerous belief system. That group is given a free pass and allowed to recruit and train murderers.
Hint - that other group is not a Christian group.
Bingo, good catch!
"The sky is falling!
“Our government can now take people away based on their “belief system”?
I think the title is misleading. Texas thinks there is a danger because all the adults believe in pedophilia, not that they believe in something strange.
PING!!
FReepmail to be added to the FLDS Eldorado Legal Case Ping List
That's a problem with net fishing.
From the article:
*It is the department's contention that (the mothers), by their conspiracy of silence, purposefully confused the identity of the children, which forced Judge Walther to conduct the proceedings as she did.”
The new court papers claim the FLDS women have no legal standing to have the judge reverse her ruling because they have “repeatedly declined” to even identify their children and the fathers.
The document says neither the court nor the child welfare agency should “be forced to play guessing games when the safety and well-being of these children are at stake.”*
They attempted to get to the bottom of a lot of this before hand. The Sect members are their own worst enemies.
Stupid question.
Determination of indications of ruptured hymen and other indicators of physical sexual abuse in girls well under the age of consent would indicate that a propensity for ephebophilc or pedophilic abuse practices was typical of the "belief system/environment" -- if such were the case.
“Stupid question. “
The answer ignored the question - how do you establish age, without records?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.