Monday, October 5, 2009
Law and Order The Question No One Has Answered
Posted by Liz Garrigan on Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 3:14 PM
Department of Children's Services spokesman Rob Johnson declined to talk specifically about the Gurrolla case but said taking children into custody after a kidnapping is not necessarily standard procedure.Update: Kyle Swenson with some fresh copy.
He said the caseworkers saw something in this situation that made them concerned enough that they felt the safest thing to do was find a foster home for the children. He declined to say what caseworkers were concerned about or whether complaints had been filed against the family.
He said most of the time when DCS takes children, they are eventually returned and the agency always explains to the family what they can do to regain custody.
"DCS is acting with an abundance of caution," he said.
Comments (1)
Showing 1-1 of 1
So now the "baby selling" allegations are all over the media, as a justification for the removal of the children by DCS. People who read these stories should keep a couple of facts in mind:
1. There's a gaping hole in all these stories. WHO SAYS the child was being sold? You won't know from reading the stories, because DCS, by law, can't say who the initial report came from. So this family is now being tar-brushed by an anonymous source who may never be identified.
2. I can tell you from personal experience, as a lawyer who represents parents in D & N cases, DCS isn't always right when it removes a child. Allegations of dependency, neglect, and abuse are sometimes justified, but they are sometimes bullshit propagated by someone with an agenda. That's why the law requires a two-part hearing process, with DCS ultimately being required to prove dependency by "clear and convincing evidence."
I don't know anything about the facts of this case, but we should all be careful about drawing conclusions until the facts are in.
like
dislike
