Meck. Co., North Carolina DSS Parental Rights Abuses

“I have concluded that this case was mismanaged if viewed from the perspective of the family and their philosophical views,” Puckett wrote in a prepared statement. “I find it increasingly frustrating, and for me unacceptable, that our society, and more specifically our government, goes out of its way to be inclusive of harmful and often deviant lifestyles, but stands rigid against those families who have a solid Christian lifestyle or are unwilling to accept dependency on the government for subsistence. I hope that in the future the director of Social Services will take a more active role in ensuring that case workers and social workers share compatible values of those who they are trying to serve. Government is charged to serve the public as opposed to changing the public.”

Some more on this case

A Clash Of Worldviews

Want To Hug Your Children? Better Check With The Department Of Social Services First

Warren Smith

COMMENTARY—An amazing scenario unfolded in civil courtroom 210 of the Mecklenburg County courthouse last week. Jack and Kathy Stratton, whose story we have reported here before, was attempting to get custody of one of their 10 children.

They had been taken from him and his wife by the Department of Social Services (DSS), and after a process that has now taken more than a year, he was having his day in court. Because Spencer Stratton had recently turned 18, these proceedings, unlike several previous hearings involving this family, aired in open court. For the first time, the media and the public were allowed to see how the court system and how DSS had behaved in this most unusual situation.

And it was high drama. For the most part, such hearings are monumentally boring. Questions and answers that for the most part establish the facts of the case. Not the kind of thing you see on Court TV.

But soon after the 10 am start time, things became interesting. It quickly became obvious that what was really happening was a case of clashing worldviews.

DSS attorney Tyrone Wade had established that the Strattons were poor. They had very little food in their refrigerator when DSS visited their home on various occasions. “Poverty conditions,” was what one report said. Wade’s questioning also insinuated that the homeschooling Strattons had not properly attended to their children’s education.

But under Schmidt’s cross-examination of witnesses, another picture of the Strattons emerged. A picture of a couple that had been married and stable for many years, but who were ferociously self-sufficient. A family who refused Medicaid and food stamps. A family that -- despite economic setbacks -- chose to look after themselves. And never mind the fact that when the children were put into the public schools, two of them made the honor roll. A fact that would never have emerged had not Schmidt (an attorney affiliated with the Christian-based Alliance Defense Fund) not pressed DSS witnesses for evidence that that the Strattons had neglected their children's education. A fact that the Stratton's previous attorney -- a court-appointed attorney -- had failed to uncover.

Another dimension also emerged. DSS and their attorney Tyrone Wade painted a picture of the Strattons as uncooperative, saying that the Strattons were “very suspicious of agency involvement.” But Schmidt’s line of questioning -- and the answers that reluctantly came from the DSS employees -- suggested that the Strattons had plenty of reasons to be suspicious. Quite aside from the fact that DSS had taken their ten children -- reason enough to cause parents to be “suspicious of agency involvement” -- were the allegations that two of the Stratton had been abused in foster care. And that DSS social workers were going to send the children right back into the same foster home!

Then came the telling moment, when Schmidt began questioning DSS employee Susan Miller about the parents’ visitation rights. Only “therapeutic” visits were allowed, which meant -- in this case -- that the parents were closely monitored during visits. All contact was supervised. No conversations could be taped or held in private. Indeed, under ADF attorney Schmidt's relentless cross-examination, it became apparent that Jack and Kathy couldn’t even hug their own children and tell them “I love you” without permission from the DSS workers supervising the visit. Jack Stratton's repeated assurances to his children that he was working diligently so that "they would be home soon" was cited by the DSS social worker as an example of how the Stratton's were traumatizing their children.

And though there was absolutely no evidence introduced to suggest that the parents were any threat at all to the children, Miller said, “I believe the children felt safer when there were professionals in the room.”

To my way of thinking, that was the key moment and this is the key question: Who should be raising these children? Their parents or “professionals”?

In fairness, DSS handles some pretty awful cases, cases in which parents do abuse their children in most despicable ways. The community should intervene in these cases. But poverty is not a crime. And self-sufficiency -- the refusal to accept services from the government, especially a government agency that you have reason to believe doesn’t have your best interests at heart -- is (I would suggest) a virtue. Instead, DSS asserted that the Stratton's unwillingness to accept food stamps was an example that they were not doing all they could and should to care for their children.

In the end, Jack and Kathy Stratton got their oldest child, 18-year-old Spencer, back under their roof. As attorney Schmidt said after the hearing, "One down, nine to go." That's the good news. The "other news," is that it took a year and the intervention of a Christian legal defense organization to bring about this simple bit of justice. This reuniting of two loving parents and their child.

It was indeed a clash of worldviews. On the one side were two parents who wanted to raise their own children in the way they best could, represented by a Christian lawyer -- Mike Schmidt -- who saw an injustice and wanted to see it remedied. On the other was a roomful of "professionals" who thought they knew better than the parents what was best for the children, and who based their thinking almost entirely on the fact that the parents would not bow to the Leviathan they served.

This good day, justice was indeed served. But in another courtroom, on another day...who knows? It was a civics lesson I will never forget

And some more

Shattered Dreams

A year ago, Mecklenburg County Department of Youth and Family Services took the ten children of Jack And Kathy Stratton from them. What happened over the next twelve months included allegations of sexual abuse in a foster home, gag orders to keep the Strattons from talking to the media, and serious questions about whether DYFS can follow its own policies.

Angie Vineyard

Charlotte—If you’ve phoned the home of the Strattons in the past several months, chances are, their poignant message made you pause.

“Hello, you’ve reached Jack and Kathy Stratton. We’re not here right now. We’re out fighting for our children. We love you children, more than anything in the world. You’ll be home soon.”

Why the unusual message? Because they’ve been forbidden from having any contact with their children, but they believe that their children might be calling just to hear their voices, and they want to make sure that their children – at least – know they love them.

And the “soon” of the voice mail is a relative term – and a word that the Strattons hope is not just wishful thinking, though it has been more than a year since their children have lived under their roof.

The saga that the Strattons describe as a “nightmare” began on Jan. 30, 2001, when the Mecklenburg Department of Youth and Family Services took the Stratton’s ten children, alleging that “the juveniles are neglected…they do not receive adequate care, supervision and discipline and reside in an environment injurious to their welfare.”

But the Strattons reject those claims, and they and their attorney Mike Schmidt, a North Carolina lawyer affiliated with the Christian-based Alliance Defense Fund, are fighting for custody.

The latest round in this battle occurred this week, on Jan. 8, when the Strattons appeared once again before Judge Libby Miller to answer the charges of neglect. And even if the Strattons get their children back, what has transpired in the past year raises questions about the procedures of the Department of Social Services, as well as basic constitutional questions that arise when a family with limited resources goes up against the legal system.

Poor, But Not Deprived

The couple, who regularly attend Central Church of God, admits their family doesn’t have a lot of money, but they also say they’ve never deprived their children of basic necessities. They had been living in both sides of a duplex on Eastway Drive for six years. They think that their problems began when it became obvious that repairs were needed and Jack moved his family to the smaller unit of the building until he could complete the repairs.

The scene was understandably chaotic, with a dozen people living in one-half of a duplex. But the Strattons say it was safe. Nonetheless, the scene must have aroused scrutiny from neighbors, because someone placed an anonymous phone call to the Department of Youth and Family Services, and DYFS officials visited the Stratton home on Dec. 19, 2000. In Kathy Stratton’s words, it was a nightmare.

“It was at the worst possible time,” she lamented. “It’s like when your hair is up in rollers and company comes to visit!”

DYFS reported that the children were “extremely dirty, unkempt, inappropriately dressed for the conditions. One child appeared to be blind or otherwise physically handicapped. One child also has diabetes. Some of the children appear to have some speech impediments.”

But that isn’t the way Kathy Stratton remembers tells the story.

Kathy Stratton said that when DYFS came to visit, the children were still in their pajamas. She instructed them to dress quickly and run next door to their grandmother’s house. Her six girls and four boys, between the ages of one and 16, scrambled to pull on clothes. But as children sometimes do, they grabbed the first thing available, thinking nothing of the weather. The result was a hodgepodge of spring and winter clothing.

Explanations for the children’s clothing and the duplex’s ongoing repairs went unheard.

The report further stated: “there was nothing in the home to indicate the children were being educated at home.” But Kathy homeschooled her children and kept all her school supplies stored in a cabinet the social workers never bothered to look in.

DYFS officials did get one thing right in their report. One child does suffer from diabetes. But none of the children is blind and only one child has a speech impediment. The Strattons believe that these allegations were made to make it easier for their children to be taken from them, and because the DYFS’s ability to place “special needs” children in permanent adoptive homes could ultimately result in significant financial incentives for the state. (See sidebar.)

Regardless of the inaccuracies, the report was written and, as Kathy Stratton says, “rubber-stamped” in court.

The DYFS report made another allegation that the Strattons deny: “[T]here appeared to be an extraordinary control by the father over the family” and “due to the father’s demeanor and the workers’ concern for their safety, the police were called.”

Again, Jack Stratton’s version of the story is very different.

“I came out the door. It was real cold and it was sleeting. I told them I was afraid because I knew of [the Department of Social Services] and they have a lot of power,” he said.

According to Jack Stratton, the DYFS supervisor grew hostile because the Strattons wouldn’t let her see their children. The police were called and once they arrived, Jack agreed to let his children meet the social workers, but only as a group. Jack said the social workers asked to interview the children individually behind closed doors but he refused, fearing they would be strip-searched.

But in spite of the scene that day – the sleet, the ongoing construction, and the presence of the police -- DYFS officials didn’t take the children that day, something Jack feels supports his case.

“If it was a dangerous situation they would have taken them that night,” he said.

The family moved to a log cabin in Gaston County and lived there six weeks, with Jack going to work every day and Kathy teaching their children at home. But according to Jack, DYFS officials tapped his cousin’s telephone line and eventually found the Strattons. On Jan. 30, 2001, despite the inaccuracies in the original report, all ten Stratton children were taken from their parents and placed in foster homes.

That was the beginning of their nightmare. Since then, the Strattons and their children have been subjected to numerous psychological and medical evaluations and home visits. At first the couple was eager to comply with DYFS officials and any of Judge Miller’s orders, thinking it would be one step closer to having their children returned home. But when DYFS began canceling the last examination in a series of tests and even prescribing new rounds of testing, the couple grew suspicious and soon began thinking that DYFS spoke with empty promises.

“They weren’t going to give us our children back,” said Kathy.

Jack’s worst fears were realized in mid-June when one of his sons told him he’d been attacked in a foster home and sexually assaulted. According to Jack, he reported the incident immediately to DYFS official Sherry Glenn but only after threatening a lawsuit was his son redirected to another home. According to Jake Jacobsen, Jr., Director of DYFS, the law requires that a child abuse case be screened and investigated within 24 hours after it is first reported. But DYFS officials waited eight days before taking the boy in for a medical examination.

Glenn refused to speak about this case and referred questions to DYFS attorney Tyrone Wade, who could not be reached by press time.

The more the Strattons fought to protect their children, the more resistance they met. On June 27, the couple saw their children in a supervised visit for the last time. They have not been allowed to see them since then and have had to rely on the children calling them sporadically at their home for any contact – which motivated them to record the unusual phone greeting on their answering machine.

Another roadblock for the Strattons is the couples’ religious conviction against immunizing their children. When they discovered that DYFS officials had begun vaccinating their children, they cried foul. According to Jack, his oldest son, after resisting a shot was chased down and vaccinated against his will. Jack attempted to seek redress in court, but he soon learned that DYFS officials weren’t all that stood between he and his children.

Jack stated his religious exemption on June 28 before Judge Miller, but five days later, the judge ordered that the vaccinations should continue. Jack appealed, which should have stopped the vaccinations temporarily, but they continued. Without the knowledge of their court-appointed attorney, whose help they feel was useless, the Strattons filed an appeal in Raleigh on July 16. Less than three weeks later, the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Strattons and Judge Miller was forced to stop the vaccinations.

While all of this was going on, the Strattons were taking steps to comply with the court’s requirements to get their children back. They have moved into a bigger house to accommodate their children, procured a home school certificate (something Kathy lacked), and both have maintained steady employment. But still, no children.

As the Strattons continued to fight, their struggle was becoming known to more people at Central Church of God, some of whom encouraged the family to contact the media. In August, The Charlotte World first reported on the situation, but when a reporter from The Charlotte World attended a Sept. 13 hearing, the hearing was postponed and Judge Miller placed a gag order on the Strattons, others associated with the case, and – for a short time – on The Charlotte World. Charlotte World publisher Warren Smith, believing that the gag order was unconstitutional, contacted the Alliance Defense Fund to seek legal representation in the matter. The gag order on The Charlotte World was ultimately rescinded, but remains in effect on the Strattons. Laurinburg attorney Mike Schmidt, who was recommended to The Charlotte World by the ADF, now represents the Strattons.

And while all of this was going on, the human costs continue to mount. Jack and Kathy Stratton have missed nine of their children’s birthdays and are soon to miss a tenth as their oldest son celebrates his eighteenth birthday in mid-January.

For now, the hearings, as well as the pain of separation, continues.

If you ask Kathy what the past few months have taught her, she’ll tell you two things.

“Knowledge is power,” she says matter-of-factly.

She then tearfully adds, “And I can empathize with anyone going through pain.”

Six DYFS officials were contacted for this article, but only two returned phone calls.

Our Tax Dollars At Work

Here's a disgusting little story unfolding locally:

The Stratton nightmare began more than a year ago, when the Mecklenburg County DSS took custody of all ten of the Stratton’s natural-born children, alleging that the children did not receive adequate care, supervision and discipline and their environment was injurious to their welfare. The Strattons have appeared numerous times before Judge Libby Miller to answer those charges in juvenile court. But not until Spencer (the Strattons' oldest kid - ed) aged out of the the juvenile court jurisdiction in January and his case went before a different judge, have the Strattons seen any progress in trying to get custody of their children.

“This is the most bizarre thing I’ve ever seen in my life,” said Whatley, who works with DSS on occasion through her non-profit law firm. “Most of the time when DSS is involved, there is drug abuse, alcohol abuse (or) domestic violence. But when you have an intact family with a long-term marriage and loving parents, we’ve never seen this situation where they’re trying to take the children away from their parents.”

Whatley is convinced that because the Strattons are an interracial couple with little money, they’ve been unfairly judged. Kathy is African-American and Jack is Caucasian.

“They’re being discriminated against because they’re poor,” said Whatley. “This is a family that does not want to take government assistance (and) that is being held against them. This is ludicrous!”

Whatley said that one example of either DSS’s obvious bias or their lack of professionalism involved the condition of the Strattons’ home. After DSS made an initial visit in December 2000, the Strattons moved their children to a log cabin in Gaston County, where they stayed for six weeks before social workers found them. When DSS came to take the children away, they noted in their report that an extension cord ran from the house next door into the Strattons’ window and therefore the Strattons had no electricity. In reality, the Strattons did have electricity. A neighbor had asked to use the Stratton’s electricity to plug up his power saw.

“I thought that was just horrible,” said Whatley. “They had electricity. Yet this entire time, it has stayed in the (court) record that they had no electricity. They never investigated to find out that they did have (it). It was taking facts that fit what they wanted to believe. They didn’t want to hear the truth.”

There's a lot more to this story, too. The whole thing seems to turn on two things: 1) the Strattons have refused to take any government assistance (Jack Stratton insists that feeding and caring for his kids is his responsibility, not the government's - what a bizarre idea, eh?) and 2) the Strattons home-school their children.

Allegations of sexual abuse have been made and then abandoned in one of many transparent attempts by DSS to demonize the Strattons. At bottom this case is really about a government agency drunk with its own power and refusing to acknowledge the fact:

But under Schmidt’s cross-examination of witnesses, another picture of the Strattons emerged. A picture of a couple that had been married and stable for many years, but who were ferociously self-sufficient. A family who refused Medicaid and food stamps. A family that - despite economic setbacks - chose to look after themselves. And never mind the fact that when the children were put into the public schools, two of them made the honor roll...

Another dimension also emerged. DSS and their attorney Tyrone Wade painted a picture of the Strattons as uncooperative, saying that the Strattons were “very suspicious of agency involvement.” But Schmidt’s line of questioning - and the answers that reluctantly came from the DSS employees - suggested that the Strattons had plenty of reasons to be suspicious. Quite aside from the fact that DSS had taken their ten children - reason enough to cause parents to be “suspicious of agency involvement” - were the allegations that two of the Stratton had been abused in foster care. And that DSS social workers were going to send the children right back into the same foster home!

Then came the telling moment, when Schmidt began questioning DSS employee Susan Miller about the parents’ visitation rights. Only “therapeutic” visits were allowed, which meant - in this case - that the parents were closely monitored during visits. All contact was supervised. No conversations could be taped or held in private. Indeed, under ADF attorney Schmidt's relentless cross-examination, it became apparent that Jack and Kathy couldn’t even hug their own children and tell them “I love you” without permission from the DSS workers supervising the visit. Jack Stratton's repeated assurances to his children that he was working diligently so that "they would be home soon" was cited by the DSS social worker as an example of how the Stratton's were traumatizing their children.

There's been a small ripple of controversy over this case around here, but not near enough as far as I'm concerned. I heard about it on a local talk radio show, and I haven't heard a word mentioned anywhere else. The local fishwrapper has ignored it, as has local TV news. I had to do a fair spot of digging to find the stories linked above, in the local edition of an obscure Christian-oriented paper. The Strattons themselves are currently under a gag order, although DSS is not. The Strattons' attorney summed it all up pretty well, I think:

But he added that the fight for the other nine children was an uphill battle “because it’s a fight aligned against an entire system of government employees that essentially work together and who have lost their objectivity because of their hostility toward the parents.”

It certainly looks that way from where I sit. Isn't it odd that when a child really is endangered the DSS sits on its hands and claims that there's nothing it can do (and I know this to be true from close personal observation in recent years), but in a case like this that is plainly politically-motivated, they all of a sudden develop a pretty long reach and an exceedingly tight grasp?

Like I said: disgusting.

Posted by Mike on October 01, 2002 10:10 AM • TrackBack

Comments
Yeah, Mike, it's disgusting. My wife and I have been foster parents for over 12 years (thankfully not in the Charlotte area, but up here in Wake County), and it sounds like Mecklenburg DSS has their respective heads up their asses. We adopted a black child eight years ago, and Wake DSS hasn't had word one to say to us since then. Hey, maybe all DSS agencies are prejudiced, even though the law says they can't be. There's a thought! I'd love to get into this more, but I don't want to take up all your comment space, because I'm good for a couple of hours on this topic. Keep up the digging, buddy!

Posted by: Steve Sledge on October 1, 2002 05:59 PM
I don't think it's so much a racial issue as a peculiar mindset that's fairly common in agencies of this sort; the reasoning, if you can call it that, is "If they're not taking advantage of all our available programs, well, obviously they don't care anything about their children."

The good and loving parent, they figure, is on the dole.

I believe I speak for most everyone here when I say "Sheesh." Or worse.

Posted by: CGHill on October 1, 2002 07:14 PM
CG, I hadn't considered that point of view, but it makes a lot of sense. It seems like if you try to make it on your own without a government handout, you're almost labeled subversive.

Posted by: Steve Sledge on October 2, 2002 08:13 AM
The race angle is definitely not of much concern to anybody, or so it appears. I didn't even know they were an interracial couple until I researched the story a little yesterday. What seems to perturb the DSS the most here is indeed the fact that the Strattons don't want government assistance, coupled with the home-schooling thing. At least, that's what's getting talked about the most around here - when the story is even mentioned at all. It's been going on for a year now, and I only found out about it last week - and I'm not one who routinely ignores current events.

Posted by: Mike on October 2, 2002 09:33 AM
The Strattons are victims of a government sponsored KIDNAPPING! Everyone needs to get involved. The DSS could be knocking on your door next! This whole mess is over conflicting worldviews. Please write to your state representative and senator in Raleigh and ask for their intervention. The Strattons' constitutional rights to free speech and a public trial have been violated. They have been separated from their children for two years against their will, but have never been charged with a crime!

Posted by: on October 10, 2002 02:36 PM
Why would you "not want government assistance"? Government assistance, which is not just food and clothing vouchers, or a dole or whatever, but also includes such things as a standing army and police force, is why people in a society pay tax. It's what you get back as a member of society. You give when you're doing well, you receive when you're doing badly. It's Hobbes' social contract - you are a citizen of a nation, you are expected to abide by the laws of that nation and contribute to its success, and in return you receive the protection of the nation, by right of citizenry. Turning your back on society is just foolish. Do these people want to, for instance, waive their right to police investigation if their house is robbed? Do they want to forgo the right to drive on the roads, which are paid for by public funds? It's even more foolish when it affects kids, who are not the exclusive property of their parents, but are members of society in their own right.

If the Strattons could provide adequately for their extraordinarily large family without government assistance, they shouldn't qualify for it. That's what means testing is for. If they can 'get by' feeding their kids home-grown food and dressing them in home-made clothes, then surely they can make use of government money somewhere else, like buying the kids a computer, subscribing to educational magazines, taking them to museums and concerts and so on. That would be wise. I don't know these people, but their apparent adherence to a nineteenth-century fantasy of 'self-reliance' and social atomism, coupled with an inability to live up to the kind of ambitious pursuit of wealth that that lifestyle requires, indicates a distinct lack of wisdom.

If he wants his kids back, he should be spending his energies getting himself an income that enables him to provide for them properly. In other words, some kind of job or business that pays enough that he wouldn't meet the means test. If he doesn't like his station in life, he has the absolute right to change it. That's what the capitalist system is all about. It is not about pretending to be other than what one is, and making one's family suffer for one's pride.

Posted by: Ash on October 12, 2002 02:16 AM
When you take gov't assistance, you suddenly find the government is interested in many aspects of your life: many scheduled appointments with case workers, many forms and documents, etc. It is understandable that many people hesitate to go that direction.

Posted by: Kate on October 12, 2002 03:40 PM
Does anyone know of grassroots efforts to help the Strattons? I believe is in jail, for contempt of court re. the gag order. He had bail set at $1000. Did he get that $1000?

Posted by: on October 12, 2002 03:42 PM
It is so sad to know that we live in a society where criminals have more rights that us citizens who work hard at taking care of our own or supporting ourselves. I think it is quite horrible that some are judging Mr. Stratton for his economic status. I believe people forget that we have a right not given by man but by God to raise our families with or without assistance have as many or as little amount of children as you and your spouse decides. Before DSS got involved this family was happy and intact. Their crime ,I believe is they upset one neighbor who thought they did not have the right to have that many children. A judge who felt the same way. Then they have continuously been bullied by a rotten system. The way DSS is set up you should be nervous if you are an honest hard working citizen. If you are a criminal you have nothing to worry about. DSS will bend over backwards to reunite you with your family, as quickly as they can. :( Watch Out!

Posted by: AWar on October 12, 2002 04:33 PM
I didn't realize until I read the above that this is an inter-racial couple. So what? ::shrug::

What bothers me to no end, having just read the appellate decision in this case, is no one else is apparently upset that when Mr. Stratton told DSS to leave, they called the police and barged in on them ANYWAY, without a warrant.

Sounds like Ruby Ridge to me. A governmental agency upset that someone doesn't *like* them or want them. These agents (and the appellate panel of judges) need to read the US Constitution. What an education these children are getting.

And, that crap about taking what is offered? That's just plain stupid. Why put yourself though all the intensive scrunity that receiving any assistance entails, why bother? If they are not neglecting their children, and to all appearances to me, here in Florida, they were NOT (and in fact maybe should be held up as a shining lodestar! of responsible parenting) DSS has *no* business, none whatsoever, involving themselves with this family. Go get a truly abused child instead!

Posted by: Tere on October 15, 2002 03:22 PM
Reply to Ash,

Maybe Mr. Stratton is opposed to socialism, That is what you are describing. A father and mother teaching their children personal responsibility should be applauded.

Teaching their children how to better themselves and "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" is much better than leading them to a government "teet" any time things do not go their way.

Sorry if this seems harsh, but the ideals you spout here seemmisguided at best.

Posted by: Shannon on October 16, 2002 10:10 PM
Shannon: My question to you is, is Mr Stratton teaching his children personal responsibility? The family is poor. There are twelve of them. He is refusing to take charitable aid, which would provide food or money for education. It is apparent that he is unable to provide an income for his family that would meet even the 'acceptable poverty' standard in which Americans are prepared to allow their fellows to live. His pride is writing checks that his ambition cannot cash. If he got a job, or started a business, that paid enough to support his family, the Social Services department would leave them alone, as it seems the only problems here are financial. Perhaps some of you people who live in his area and feel so sorry for Mr Stratton might like to help by offering him such a job?

Shannon, are you advocating the idea that children are the property of their parents, to use, abuse, or educate as they see fit? If not, if perhaps you recognize that children might have a right to, say, a decent standard of living and healthy food and useful education, where do you draw the line between those parents who are adequately providing it, and those who are not? How do you draw that line? Is the agency in charge of investigation of parenting standards (the line-drawing) supposed to just take the word of a parent that "Sure, the kids are OK"?

I see on this site a lot of 'spouting' of sob stories about how terrible the gummint is and how 'prisoners have it better than decent folk' (Sure, right ... if you think that, buddy, why don't you go rob a bank, turn yourself in, and find out what it's really like to be in prison?) and how disgusting and terrible it all is, but I do not see any kind of credible alternative to the Social Services model of child welfare. Give me one of those, someone?

Posted by: Ash on October 19, 2002 07:33 PM
There are tons of families here in America that have lots of money but they are some of the POOREST people I've ever met. Our country is not about teaching our children to climb the corporate ladder to make something of yourself it is about FREEDOM. The problem in this case is something lots of people will never understand. They have a different master. Lots of people feel you should have a certain amount of money to have children. Hey even though one children of the Strattons is a diabetic, all of them were healthy prior to their removal from their family home. None of them were malnurished. This was a case of conflicting lifestyles. Despite what most people think...God helps those who helps themselves is not in the bible.Low income God has always met the Strattons needs.His children have learned from their father what a REAL man is.They have learned that family is more important than stuff. Their family will always be there for each other.Those children can work as a team. After being put in public school 2 are on the A Honor roll. Do you know what that means??

Reply to Ash: I see on this site a lot of 'spouting' of sob stories about how terrible the gummint is and how 'prisoners have it better than decent folk' (Sure, right ... if you think that, buddy, why don't you go rob a bank, turn yourself in, and find out what it's really like to be in prison?) and how disgusting and terrible it all is, but I do not see any kind of credible alternative to the Social Services model of child welfare. Give me one of those, someone

-----Go check the records yourself. How many times can you go and intentionally mess up and take others down with you and get a second,third fourth chance. So many slaps on the wrist. People sue for stupid reaons and win? Most criminals are not in jail. They are too full.There is a revolving door. The Strattons family would have prevented that. Not sure now with all of the garbage they been exposed to at these foster families and public schools and the way DSS treated them. They may have just formed some future criminals by the scars they have created in the minds of theses children. Or maybe their parents had them long enough to have a great effect on their lives. What about that poor baby probably 2 yo now. HE won't remember his parents but will feel a loss forever. This family will never recover what they have lots these past two years even when their children are returned. Think about that!

For those who care there is a 9am EST.Prayer time Set aside to pray for this family to be reunited. It doesn't have to be a long prayer so you cant pray at work just a few minutes. God can move where men can't! He can also direct those in authority to do thr right thing.

Posted by: AWar on November 11, 2002 12:17 AM
I don't have all the details on this case, and like Mike said, can't find any. I heard that a Center in Laurinburg is helping the family with legal costs. Does anyone know what agency that is and/or perhaps the phone number?

I can't believe that DSS would do something like this. Why the heck didn't they just give them a voucher for groceries and leave them alone? I'm sure they would have used it sooner or later.

Posted by: Pat Pate on November 26, 2002 09:28 AM
Why should they take DSS assistance..? I know for sure I wouldnt, they practically want to know everytime you go to the bathroom...It is nothing more than DSS LEGAL KIDNAPPING and I hope they fire every one of the DSS workers.. I have been following the story and my heart goes out to these people..DSS needs to spend its time going finding the kids are are really being abused instead of bothering good christian people who are raising their kids with morals and values..something most kids in the USA know nothing about it. Sad sad country we live in Lisa

Posted by: Lisa on November 30, 2002 01:04 AM

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.