Tuesday, October 6, 2009
By the Way Morning Roundup
Posted by Tracy Moore on Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Comments (5)
Showing 1-5 of 5
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
Mark -- you're absolutely right. I was merely rounding up the reports as I came across them, but I couldn't agree more with you about the need for treading more cautiously in these matters.
And James, thanks for the note. Entry is corrected.
Reports that a family member was trying to sell this infant were wrong. We're not sure where the competition got that information, but our sources called it "a lie." The competition has since corrected their online reports.
