Thank you, I will be here all week - please remember to tip your waitress...
Actually, 117 is more profound. The TX SC really treated the DNA argument like a stinky fart at a black-tie dinner.
A week ago, I was wondering where that would go myself.
But...I did some reading on it.
It seems that there is very little burden of proof required for parents to estabish parenthood in law. You ask the kid, “Is the your mommy?” - and if the kid says yes, done. Case proven.
So for CPS to argue that they cannot return the kids without DNA proof was the legal equivalent of a stinky fart during a black-tie dinner.
Interesting.
My thoughts have centered around the individual hearings and the lack there of. If this was not the law, why did the state appoint attorneys for the mothers, even those that weren’t minors, AND an attorney ad litem for EACH child?
Obviously they knew what was required and chose to ignore it.
I tried humor a couple of times on these threads. Either mine was no understood or I had tried to lighten up some of those that refuse to lighten up.
Anyway, I gave up and at times gave up completely on posting.