Posted on 03/30/2019 5:35:09 AM PDT by Lazamataz
The scene looks like something from a middle-of-the-night drug raid. Guns drawn, police officers in tactical vests surround a beige ranch house in a subdivision. With a single decisive kick, one busts down the door. “Come out with your hands up!” an officer yells, as a flashlight’s blinding beams begin sweeping the room.
But police in Chandler, Ariz., weren’t seeking out a trove of illegal narcotics when they showed up at the modest home in the Phoenix suburbs on Feb. 25. Instead, they were searching for a 2-year-old who had come down with a dangerously high fever. The boy’s mother, Sarah Beck, had allegedly ignored doctors’ orders and refused to take him to the emergency room, fearing that she would get in trouble because he wasn’t vaccinated. When officials showed up to do a welfare check hours later, the child’s father refused to let them in, saying that everything was fine and the fever had passed. Eventually, police decided to take matters into their own hands.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
And yet if she killed her child by abortion, it’s all good.
But nowhere in this article is it mentioned the child had any symptoms other than a high fever. The doctor and the police were way out of line. Especially since the fever had lowered.
Read my reply above this. I think I’ve struck the perfect balance between — to quote my favorite Vulcan — the needs of the many and the needs of the few.
The point is that isn’t what a “no-knock raid” is.
You're not looking very hard. Prior to the measles epidemic that is happening in NY right now, it had been eradicated for so long that many of the doctors there had never even seen measles, and didn't know what they were looking at when they started to see the first cases erupt.
However, for this post, the first doctor made the mistake of not immediately having the child transported to the ER if he/she really thought there was a danger to the child.
Mother may i have this medicine? NO! We will shoot you if you dare!
Mom decided child was better, called doc, said all better.
Later that evening, doc called mother to check on child. Mom did not answer phone.
What could possibly go wrong ......
It sounds like not all of the details are in this article. Knowing what we know about the press, I wouldn’t pass judgement yet.
I am a Mugwump on this.
I think there is no scientific foundation for being against the usual vaccines for typical childhood diseases that can be critical for some kids (not all, but some).
On the other hand, I don’t like the state treating anyone as if they are the state’s property that the state can do with as they wish, regardless of how they think their intentions are good.
On the other hand, people, especially kids, mixing with the public when they are at an infectious stage of any disease, as marked by certain symptoms, is a public health matter, not just a personal matter (yes, we always angrily told employees to go home when they came to work sick).
On the other hand, other than a fever the doctors did not know just what the child’s ailment was.
I think what the authorities should have done is not to have sent the police to the kid’s house, but to have sent a medical team of a doctor and a nurse, and to have politely ASKED if they could HELP, by just examining the child to see if there was anything else they could do. They could have added that they were not charging for that service. Medicine, even for adults, goes down better with a little “sugar” on it.
“Prior to the measles epidemic that is happening in NY right now, it had been eradicated for so long that many of the doctors there had never even seen measles, and didn’t know what they were looking at when they started to see the first cases erupt.”
None of that is a study, which I stated I’ve yet to see.
You are conflating the doctors experience in anY with exposure that hadn’t existed before the invasion from down south.
All three children were seized, and placed in different foster homes. The first hearing was 10 days later. The authorities tried to close the court. Then tried to keep the press out. Kids are still in foster homes. If they tried this with a muslim he would say, keep the kids, we will make more.
To each, from each.
While the family reacted poorly, I still do not see the need for a SWAT-style raid. This is just more of the military-mentality of the police.
And for that matter, if the child WAS in jeopardy, would it not have been simple enough to state, through the door, that because of the situation and the awareness of law enforcement, that if the child dies or is injured, that the parents WILL be prosecuted for Manslaughter or Child Abuse, respectively? Then just leave it be.
In fact, you could simply state that failure to allow the child to be looked at could violate Child Endangerment laws, also resulting in a warrant and prosecution.
Anyone reasonable would give in under that legal threat, and anyone unreasonable needs to be charged anyways.
The SWAT-raid is unreasonable on society’s part, and thus, my issue.
Hammers/Nails.
Reno89519, you were pinged because I reviewed last night's thread and you were firmly on the side of the State. I think this is a reasonable compromise, don't you?
Excellent point.
ESPECIALLY from the WashingCIA Post.
I'm not sure that much has changed in the past two decades. A large element of government turns into thugs when they feel that their primacy has been challenged. That is one of the core reasons why I believe government must be kept small - too small to flex serious muscle over this sort of absurdity.
I’ll be fine with it when they SWAT the single moms raising their sons to be girls.
That is a dishonest summary, by omission.
Is there any particular reason you have chosen to lie about the debate?
That is a dishonest summary, by omission.
Is there any particular reason you have chosen to lie about the debate?
EXACTLY.
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.