These kinds of stories are truly wild to me - my kids are pretty much free range and have been since they were 7 or 8. We've never had an issue.
That said though, it's easy to imagine how quickly things could become problematic if some busybody decided they wanted to make trouble. You do not want CPS involved with your family - full stop.
I don't really know what the right thing to do is if you do have CPS show up - at first blush it seems like a "never talk to the police" type of situation where hypothetically the right play is to absolutely refuse to play ball and involve a lawyer immediately.
It's a whole can of worms to take that stand though. Do you just let Umbridge into your house and hope that the quick look around is enough to close the case? Or do you recognize you're dealing with an Umbridge and not take the chance?
That kind of tough call for parents probably does mean that the right play is to try to ensure your state has reasonable legislation about these sorts of things.
> Do you just let Umbridge into your house and hope that the quick look around is enough to close the case? Or do you recognize you're dealing with an Umbridge and not take the chance?
In the US at least, you absolutely do not give consent for anyone from the government to come into your house. It can only hurt you. Call the police and tell them someone is trespassing. Call your lawyer and explain the situation.
Children should know it is inappropriate for adults they don't know to ask for details about their home life. Any adult acting in good faith will always make it easier for a child to contact their parents without negotiation. "Yes you can use my phone" is the only acceptable response. No "come over here first", no "let's talk about where your parents are".
What’s missing in this discussion is the neighbor. This isn’t just about CPS, it’s about there being someone in the neighborhood twisted enough to call down state authority on the parents for no particularly good reason. Most people don’t have this kind of interaction with CPS because most people don’t live next to informers. But some people do, and the informer makes things terrible for them.
Edit, which on second reading, you do mention. “Some busybody” is a big part of the problem.
There's a similar institution in Switzerland - the KESB - and it has its own horror stories. It's a matter of canton and of persons involved, but you get from their activity the whole range: from perfect and ideal support (which is of course the very reason KESB exists) to mafia-style trafficking (kids are systematically placed away by the same persons, to cash in government payments). Such an institution needs both professional and judiciary supervision in order to not depend on one individual's ethics - and KESB has neither.
You have to decide if you think that (in general) they're "good with some bad apples" or "the whole thing is rotten to the core".
If it's the first, on first contact you assume they're generally good-willed, and play the part of the concerned parent, and find something obvious and physical that can be added and verified (a fence, say, or a lock, or alarm, depending on what occurred). Try to sus out how the report occurred.
If it's the second, move. Move out of their district or out of their state. You're already fucked, so your best option is to run.
The correct path of action would be, if you have children, to have the correct kind of lawyer on retainer already. This is the unfortunately reality we have.
You do not speak with the police, you calmly but firmly inform them that they can return with a warrant if they think there is something actionable.
You then proceed legal action against the false reporter. Sometimes all you can get is a no contact order, sometimes you can get a stalking injunction, sometimes a full blown restraining order. This is why you want a lawyer ahead of time, they know how to deal with this.
That doesn't work as well in areas where people can make anonymous reports. Even where callers can't be anonymous, a lawyer would be needed to get the name of the caller; they don't just hand it out to the subject of the complaint. Couple that with frequent requirements that even obviously-bogus complaints be officially investigated, and it's a shitshow built for busybodies.
The fact that even good people with nothing to hide speaks volumes about these government institutions but what it says about the people who blindly peddle them could fill libraries.
This isn't just for CPS, for all sorts areas of government.
>During that visit, I was told that children could never be left alone, inside or outside the home—EVEN IN THEIR OWN BEDROOMS—until they were 13 years old. Social Services said specifically that I had to be in each room with them at all times until they were 13.
This must be a mistake from the CPS agent, surely? For one, it's obviously absurd (you'd get a CPS call if they found out you were "supervising" your 12 year old in the bathroom or while changing), but secondly (and I might be mistaken), in most places I've looked at/known people/lived in, you are allowed to privately babysit at the age of 12.
In any case, this whole thing is a bit too rage-inducing for a Monday morning read.
No it’s not a mistake. Search social media and you’ll find lots of reports like these. CPS will create absurd and unrealistic rules like the ones you name, specifically because they know no parent will meet those standards and it lets them get involved. If they bring police, the police will simply back up their rules even though they know it’s absurd. The type of people who work in CPS are often unhinged types already, and they do this to justify their existence on the taxpayer’s dime.
Just remember you don’t need to talk to them or let them into your home. Anything you say or they see is evidence they can use against you. Force them to go get a court order or warrant.
I was able to walk to the corner store and make purchases/transactions that my parents sent me for at the age of 8. These people are out of their minds if they want constant supervision inside the house until the age of 13.
She was immediately upset that they were talking back to her and asked if she was going to have to "call the police and get your parents in trouble." This obviously scared the children, and they began to walk home, in tears. Meanwhile, I was standing at the kitchen window watching the kids talk to a neighbor, not understanding what was happening until I saw one child visibly upset. I immediately walked out of the house, and the neighbor (who, coincidentally, is a social worker) drove off without speaking to me about her concerns.
At that point I'd be approaching both the police and this 'social worker's' employer and complaining about her threatening my children.
The part where CPS told this person that they have to be in the room supervising each of their kids at all times even in their own bedrooms is delightfully kafkaesque. It sounds an awful lot like permission to arrest any parent or guardian at any time for alleged failure to supervise because sending your kids to bed in separate bedrooms or going to bed yourself is now legally neglect.
Not saying this is the case, but sometimes, if CPS is involved in an inane-sounding investigation, it's because they were involved before in a less-inane investigation. A person with a history of neglect can _say_ they were adopting a free range parenting style, but if they had a kid die in a hot car two years ago, you can understand how CPS would watch more closely.
I saw an article floating around about a couple that were prosecuted for letting their child cross a street alone to go to a store, but it was actually a highway and one of their other kids had died on that highway a few years ago.
Having been involved in the foster care system before, I can tell you, no parent believes they were doing anything wrong, ever. They almost all exclusively believe they were being unfairly targeted for past transgressions or unfair accusations. That happens, but given how everyone says that, it's not a good signal.
Yes, this may not be the case in this article, or even in most cases, but it is something to consider about human nature.
Is that the fault of the parent, or is the state trying to cover up incredibly bad transportation and land use planning? Kids should just be able to walk to stores without getting hit by cars.
It is basically crazy how car obsession has turned America into such an unsafe place for children, and the statistics show it;
> In 1969, 48 percent of children 5 to 14 years of age usually walked or bicycled to school. In 2009, 13 percent of children 5 to 14 years of age usually walked or bicycled to school.
You can complain all you want about land allocation, but when there are 2 tons vehicles going 100+ Kmh/h somewhere and it's closed to pedestrian you don't let your kid got there. Period.
Similarly, if they are reintroducing wolves and grizzlis in a forest near you, and they close it off for trails etc, you don't organize a weekend camping trip there.
Sometimes it's about common sense, stop blaming "society and the government" for your inability to function as a reasonable human being.
> Kids should just be able to walk to stores without getting hit by cars.
The problem specifically for stores is, small classic mom'n'pop stores cannot compete with big retailers like Walmart, Costco and whatnot - they simply cannot get even close to the scale of purchase that the big ones do, and so people prefer to use cars to get to a big retailer because it is more economical.
I think CPS system is just broken: there are well intentioned people there but also busybodies that enjoy power but between the two, you end still end up with horrific cases of kids dying from neglect with multiple reports.
>"He would come and get a drink of water and then he would casually take his cup and throw it in the trash that was there where they dump their trays. And then you would see him digging through the garbage," Davis said. "At that point, if the little kid is hungry, I'm going to buy his lunch ticket."
>Davis said she and a co-worker started paying for Gavin's lunch, despite being "advised" by school officials not to do so because the school wanted to encourage families in hardship to fill out a form for reduced or free lunch.
Teachers and admin are mandatory reporters...
>Over the course of several months, Davis said she and other cafeteria workers made multiple calls to school officials and the Utah Division of Child and Family Services to report their concerns.
>"First we went through the channels. The head lunch lady knew what was going on. She said the principal had to take care of it. We reported it to the principal," Davis said, adding that later they also called DCFS directly.
I looked for follow up but aside for the parents being rightfully charged, what was done regarding the system? Anyone fired for not reporting? Not following up? From what I see, "It's a tragedy" and then same as before.
I'm a former foster-parent, so have interacted with my local CWS system pretty heavily.
Don't forget that the system is made up of humans. Which social worker investigates (and how well socialized the parent is) can make a huge difference in when an intervention happens, and what the intervention is.
We had child that was removed on the very first report to CWS, after the social worker interviewed the mother and was not satisfied.
We also had a child that was removed only after the 17th report, made by a total of about half a dozen people (including every single preschool teacher), with all the reports being consistent with each other. The child was only removed because the mother was smoking meth when the CWS worker showed up. The social worker had shown up several times previously, but was satisfied after interviewing the mother.
> I saw an article floating around about a couple that were prosecuted for letting their child cross a street alone to go to a store, but it was actually a highway and one of their other kids had died on that highway a few years ago.
Anyone that suggest agencies like CPS are overflowing with time and money to target random parents over minor things like letting a child cross a street isn't a serious person.
Sorry this is false. There are tons of reports of CPS investigating normal parenting practices or imposing invasive reporting plans and things like that. CPS in most jurisdictions is in fact overflowing with time and money, and is staffed with low intelligence nosy incompetent types that couldn’t get a better job. Search your social media of choice and you’ll find so many absurd examples.
CPS is legally obligated to investigate all reports of neglect. The targeting is done by the people reporting the children.
I'm not opposed to rare government intrusions into peoples lives, but there must be well-defined rules about when those intrusions happen, and what standards they are enforcing.
Nobody is making that strawman of an argument. Most states give CPS very little (or no) ability to simply ignore reported child abuse. They get reports and they have to investigate.
"The local law enforcement agency is required to investigate all reports. Cases may also be investigated by Child Welfare Services when allegations involve abuse or neglect within families." [0]
Just one example, but 27 states came up in my search for where CPS has little or no latitude in choosing which allegations to investigate.
Just takes one google search to see that there are entire YouTube channels dedicated to the exact problem you claim doesn’t exist. Do bad parents exist? Yes. Do bad CPS agents exist? Also yes. Overzealous power tripping people exists in all functions of society, all the way from the guy checking receipts at the door at Walmart to the people in the highest places in the government.
This isn’t the only such instance. There have been other people who were victims of invasive CPS for kids playing in their own yard, on their own street, walking to school, biking around town, or whatever.
Parents these days are fearful to an unhealthy degree to begin with, but having to deal with CPS, who may subject you to repeated visits and bureaucratic reports or at worst take your kids away, is making the parents have even more fear of giving kids the slightest independence or hint of a real childhood.
Remember if CPS shows up at your door, you don’t need to talk to them. You can tell them firmly to get off your property and to not return. If they insist, record them, tell them to identify themselves with ID, tell them they’re trespassing and you’ll press charges, and to leave. They have no legal right to be there or speak to you without a warrant and a police officer. The point of them making you talk to them is so they can make a big deal out of SOMETHING you say or SOMETHING they see so they can do paperwork that justifies their ability to invade your life. Don’t let them. There are videos on YouTube about how to deal with them.
You're not even allowed to bring your kids to school here in Switzerland. They have to get there on their own. Parents don't intervene in playground fights either - it's lord of the flies here.
in germany a couple just lost a lawsuit against their city where the they demanded to reinstate a bus service which was closed by the city that their 7 year old had been using. the judge ruled that a 7 year old can take a train alone to go to school.
Readit News
That said though, it's easy to imagine how quickly things could become problematic if some busybody decided they wanted to make trouble. You do not want CPS involved with your family - full stop.
I don't really know what the right thing to do is if you do have CPS show up - at first blush it seems like a "never talk to the police" type of situation where hypothetically the right play is to absolutely refuse to play ball and involve a lawyer immediately.
It's a whole can of worms to take that stand though. Do you just let Umbridge into your house and hope that the quick look around is enough to close the case? Or do you recognize you're dealing with an Umbridge and not take the chance?
That kind of tough call for parents probably does mean that the right play is to try to ensure your state has reasonable legislation about these sorts of things.
(what a drag!)
In the US at least, you absolutely do not give consent for anyone from the government to come into your house. It can only hurt you. Call the police and tell them someone is trespassing. Call your lawyer and explain the situation.
Children should know it is inappropriate for adults they don't know to ask for details about their home life. Any adult acting in good faith will always make it easier for a child to contact their parents without negotiation. "Yes you can use my phone" is the only acceptable response. No "come over here first", no "let's talk about where your parents are".
How many people 'have' a lawyer?
Edit, which on second reading, you do mention. “Some busybody” is a big part of the problem.
If it's the first, on first contact you assume they're generally good-willed, and play the part of the concerned parent, and find something obvious and physical that can be added and verified (a fence, say, or a lock, or alarm, depending on what occurred). Try to sus out how the report occurred.
If it's the second, move. Move out of their district or out of their state. You're already fucked, so your best option is to run.
You do not speak with the police, you calmly but firmly inform them that they can return with a warrant if they think there is something actionable.
You then proceed legal action against the false reporter. Sometimes all you can get is a no contact order, sometimes you can get a stalking injunction, sometimes a full blown restraining order. This is why you want a lawyer ahead of time, they know how to deal with this.
This isn't just for CPS, for all sorts areas of government.
This must be a mistake from the CPS agent, surely? For one, it's obviously absurd (you'd get a CPS call if they found out you were "supervising" your 12 year old in the bathroom or while changing), but secondly (and I might be mistaken), in most places I've looked at/known people/lived in, you are allowed to privately babysit at the age of 12.
In any case, this whole thing is a bit too rage-inducing for a Monday morning read.
Just remember you don’t need to talk to them or let them into your home. Anything you say or they see is evidence they can use against you. Force them to go get a court order or warrant.
Unfortunately, not in California: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40381801
The good ones are up and out.
At that point I'd be approaching both the police and this 'social worker's' employer and complaining about her threatening my children.
I saw an article floating around about a couple that were prosecuted for letting their child cross a street alone to go to a store, but it was actually a highway and one of their other kids had died on that highway a few years ago.
Having been involved in the foster care system before, I can tell you, no parent believes they were doing anything wrong, ever. They almost all exclusively believe they were being unfairly targeted for past transgressions or unfair accusations. That happens, but given how everyone says that, it's not a good signal.
Yes, this may not be the case in this article, or even in most cases, but it is something to consider about human nature.
It is basically crazy how car obsession has turned America into such an unsafe place for children, and the statistics show it;
> In 1969, 48 percent of children 5 to 14 years of age usually walked or bicycled to school. In 2009, 13 percent of children 5 to 14 years of age usually walked or bicycled to school.
http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/introduction/the_decline_of_...
Yes, it is.
You can complain all you want about land allocation, but when there are 2 tons vehicles going 100+ Kmh/h somewhere and it's closed to pedestrian you don't let your kid got there. Period.
Similarly, if they are reintroducing wolves and grizzlis in a forest near you, and they close it off for trails etc, you don't organize a weekend camping trip there.
Sometimes it's about common sense, stop blaming "society and the government" for your inability to function as a reasonable human being.
Yes, streets should be safer.
No, that does not mean we should just let everyone act like they are safe, when we all know they are not.
The problem specifically for stores is, small classic mom'n'pop stores cannot compete with big retailers like Walmart, Costco and whatnot - they simply cannot get even close to the scale of purchase that the big ones do, and so people prefer to use cars to get to a big retailer because it is more economical.
>"He would come and get a drink of water and then he would casually take his cup and throw it in the trash that was there where they dump their trays. And then you would see him digging through the garbage," Davis said. "At that point, if the little kid is hungry, I'm going to buy his lunch ticket."
>Davis said she and a co-worker started paying for Gavin's lunch, despite being "advised" by school officials not to do so because the school wanted to encourage families in hardship to fill out a form for reduced or free lunch.
Teachers and admin are mandatory reporters...
>Over the course of several months, Davis said she and other cafeteria workers made multiple calls to school officials and the Utah Division of Child and Family Services to report their concerns.
>"First we went through the channels. The head lunch lady knew what was going on. She said the principal had to take care of it. We reported it to the principal," Davis said, adding that later they also called DCFS directly.
https://www.ksl.com/article/51077343/the-system-is-broken-ca...
I looked for follow up but aside for the parents being rightfully charged, what was done regarding the system? Anyone fired for not reporting? Not following up? From what I see, "It's a tragedy" and then same as before.
Don't forget that the system is made up of humans. Which social worker investigates (and how well socialized the parent is) can make a huge difference in when an intervention happens, and what the intervention is.
We had child that was removed on the very first report to CWS, after the social worker interviewed the mother and was not satisfied.
We also had a child that was removed only after the 17th report, made by a total of about half a dozen people (including every single preschool teacher), with all the reports being consistent with each other. The child was only removed because the mother was smoking meth when the CWS worker showed up. The social worker had shown up several times previously, but was satisfied after interviewing the mother.
Anyone that suggest agencies like CPS are overflowing with time and money to target random parents over minor things like letting a child cross a street isn't a serious person.
I'm not opposed to rare government intrusions into peoples lives, but there must be well-defined rules about when those intrusions happen, and what standards they are enforcing.
"The local law enforcement agency is required to investigate all reports. Cases may also be investigated by Child Welfare Services when allegations involve abuse or neglect within families." [0]
Just one example, but 27 states came up in my search for where CPS has little or no latitude in choosing which allegations to investigate.
[0] https://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ss/ap/childabusereportingguide.asp
Parents these days are fearful to an unhealthy degree to begin with, but having to deal with CPS, who may subject you to repeated visits and bureaucratic reports or at worst take your kids away, is making the parents have even more fear of giving kids the slightest independence or hint of a real childhood.
Remember if CPS shows up at your door, you don’t need to talk to them. You can tell them firmly to get off your property and to not return. If they insist, record them, tell them to identify themselves with ID, tell them they’re trespassing and you’ll press charges, and to leave. They have no legal right to be there or speak to you without a warrant and a police officer. The point of them making you talk to them is so they can make a big deal out of SOMETHING you say or SOMETHING they see so they can do paperwork that justifies their ability to invade your life. Don’t let them. There are videos on YouTube about how to deal with them.