[woodbutcher]

If the mother is of age, if there is absolutely no indication of abuse on the baby in question or another of the same woman's children (I believe this was her first), then the state has no right to interfere with the mother's wishes.

If she wishes to return to the group, so be it. If she wishes to live in the outside world, so be it.

But the state has absolutely no grounds for holding her or her baby against her will in the absence of proved child abuse.

What others in that sect are doing has no bearing on her rights.

If she is guilty of polygamy, prosecute her for that. But that alone is no reason to hold her in what amounts to imprisonment.

[Saundra Duffy]

“But the state has absolutely no grounds for holding her or her baby against her will in the absence of proved child abuse.”

Stop it; you’re making sense; can’t have that here; but thanks anyway.

I have been blown away by people defending what TX CPS has done.

[Saundra Duffy]

I was wondering what it would feel like to have your entire community labeled as unfit to bear children and have your space invaded by law enforcement and other authorities - take your children away - examine, strip search, probe and poke your little daughters’ vagina's and inspect your little sons’ private parts, interrogate them - all away from their parents. We're talking little children, even babies. It's just the weirdest, most horrible thing I can imagine. Yet people here on this site think it's OK, in fact they are happy about it. Meanwhile, the men who supposedly are guilty of child abuse, pedophilia, bigamy. . . the state leaves them alone, preferring to punish women and children. Meanwhile, underage girls are getting pregnant all across America by old men - then abortion destroys the evidence and no one seems to care. At least these FLDS folk were not having abortions!

[CindyDawg]

It isn’t a polygamy issue. It’s about the kids. CPS must have some really good bases of concern since the judge kept the kids in state custody. Actually I hope it goes well in the future for this couple. They are young and probably have the best chance of understanding what is acceptable with children and what isn’t.

[CharlesWayneCT]

I believe she will have a 14-day hearing on Friday (actually, her newborn has the hearing, but she and the father are allowed to be represented and to present their case). At the hearing, the state is required to present evidence of abuse, and the child gets a lawyer to argue for the child’s best interests, and the parents get to refute the charges.

I am wondering if this “agreement” will preempt the hearing. There have been some news accounts that the parents are afraid of making any claims against the CPS because of retaliation. The mother may feel that getting to stay with her children (most weren’t allowed to stay with their older children, only the infants), is worth not rocking the boat.

And the CPS may have done this to avoid having to stand up real evidence against an individual. It would be much harder for them than the group “hearing” they ran before.

[William Tell]

woodbutcher said: "If she is guilty of polygamy, prosecute her for that. "

She might be guilty of thinking about attempting to advocate polygamy to her newborn. That could very well be a crime. At least a thought crime.

She may not even have had the criminal thought yet, but it may be possible to prove that she WILL EVENTUALLY commit that thought crime. It is the job of the police to prevent crime, isn't it? She's obviously a very dangerous person. Had she simply aborted the baby, we wouldn't have to worry about her hurting it.

[El Gato]

If she is guilty of polygamy, prosecute her for that.

I don't think she can be, she is married to only one husband, even if he has other wives, which in her case apparently does not.

(I believe this was her first),

Story says it's her third.