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.
None of the religions you mentioned teach their children it’s ok to be ‘fake married’ and ok to have sex and bear children, no matter what your age, except FLDS.
“If you know which children are suspected of being abused, you take them.”
AUDIENCE? Wasn’t the answer to that already given in the article?
Yes. The answer was all of them were ‘suspected’ of being abused, and that’s why they took all of them.
It just doesn’t get any easier.
“This stuff needs to stop.”
Yes. That’s a pretty broad statement, but I think it’s safe to agree with you.
As to why the AG of UTAH doesn’t just step down and get someone else.... first...what politician or appointed official have you seen step down from office, admitting he can’t uphold the law?
Second, wouldn’t that be like a naked 7 year old child trying to climb Mt. Everest?
Look at how much trouble the FLDS issue has caused on FR.
The FLDS case has stirred up ‘public support’ for eliminating polygamy, and where relevant, child brides, even in Utah.
Only expect politicians and appointed officials to ‘step up’ after they see the ‘public’ leading the way.
Our government can now take people away based on their “belief system”?
Yes, when the belief system involves committing illegal acts.
______________________________________________________
And when that government is not anchored on the bedrock of Judeao-Christian values, like we don’t have now, who decides what is illegal, hmmmm?
It’s just dandy to be trapped in a legal system that allows not knowing what the charges are, or being allowed to face your accuser, or even having a lower level of evidence being used against you, than what is needed to convict a criminal?
Do the ends justify the means?
And....?
And that question is the bottom line: "Do ya thinks little girls should be _________" Yes or No?
Every thing else is pure smokescreen :^(
Excellent post!
Unfortunately, this government intervention was tainted from the get-go in that it was initiated by a fraudulent telephone call. I don’t disagree at all that these children were removed from an insane and dangerous situation. One must wonder, though, as to where the line might be drawn in future actions of this sort. Might a future event occur wherein some government bureaucrat (or bureaucrats), falsely pretending to be consumed by the fires or righteous zealotry but, in reality, having a political agenda, look to this event and its precedent as cause for intervention?
How would you want to adjust our or especially Texas’s sex laws, and what about our laws about sex in other countries?
Unfortunately, this government intervention was tainted from the get-go in that it was initiated by a fraudulent telephone call.
Isn’t that how most tips to a hot line come in via a call or unknown tipster? Investigating the allegation to see if it is valid is the only way to really know. Thus the call may have been tainted as to it’s direct quote as to who was being abused but in investigating the info other things were found to make the case. So Sarah didn’t exist as we think we know it today but others did. Do you just ignore those children?
Thought I covered that.
Unproven allegation! please separate fact from fiction.
Cough -cough - BullSH-T.
“Do you know how to read and use a search engine. Education is a wonderful thing.”
For a hint, you may start with teeth growth.”
You want to saw the girls teeth in half, and count the tree rings?
ScienceDaily (Nov. 7, 2007) — University of Granada (UGR) researchers at the Laboratory of Anthropology have devised a new technique to determine the age of living subjects using chest and dental x-rays. This is of special interest in the case of alleged illegal minors, since this technique will make it possible to determine the age of an individual by analysing the x-rays of their bones, when used in legal medicine.
“And....?”
And, If you will vote for me, I promise to free the slaves, and institute complete weather guarantees.
I will kiss the little babies, but not if they are girls.
And I won’t raise your taxes. (what...........really?...ok)
Sorry, I mean, I will live for free off your taxes, and raise them whenever I need more ‘walking around hooker bars’ money.
“You want to saw the girls teeth in half, and count the tree rings?”
I saw a magician on TV do it.
Oh gee, I am SO surprised by this expected turn of events.
I would tear that analysis up in a court of law, and IANAL.
I am a mathematician.
And you answer is again, cough cough, BULLSH$T.
Try harder, you might make a complete fool of yourself.
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.