btw whose baby have you duct taped to the wall? lol
Oh, that was me at my first birthday. My parents had it digitally enhanced and framed for my last birthday. lolol. jk. Really, I am just kidding.It does bear a striking resemblance though. Fortysummin years ago...
well its a very adorable pix. back in the day tho your mom and dad woulda had to sew suction cups on your onesie. i dont think theyd discovered all the good uses for duct tape back then. remember those things that you had to throw at the wall and then they sorta moved on down? my dad was big on those things. well, those and slinkys.
btw whose baby have you duct taped to the wall? lol
Oh, that was me at my first birthday. My parents had it digitally enhanced and framed for my last birthday. lolol. jk. Really, I am just kidding.It does bear a striking resemblance though. Fortysummin years ago...
I have alot of love to give! I would never turn on Misty, especially after that Xena outfit she sported the other night on DWTS.
i missed that:) i hear kim k got the boot tho. she gets on my nerves.
Locked your clothes up and forgot the key? But you don't recall if you got your clothes back before you left? What a pickup move that was. ;) Didja get the girl? Venetian Isle or Island, I haven't been there in about 6 years or so. But I love Coral Gables.
lol, if only. yeah it was the venetian. i had been to the miami international book event and had friends in mia so i stopped to visit one and she took me to the venetian. she got called into work and i wanted to stay at the pool till she got back so we put my clothes into a locker so i could swim without watching them, she gave me the key and said something like dont lose it. i distinctly remember putting it in my towel but when she came to pick me up no key:) and as far as i remember nobody could figger out how to get those antique lockers open without the key so i was s.o.l:)
It is like that, like South America. Little dictators or elected "Presidents" all sharing a continent. I wanna be King of Florida. Charlie can remain Queen if he likes, but he has to vacate the mansion, move to Coral Gables and take his tiara with him. I really want to be King. Or meet Tina Fey. Either is fine. I've just now taken the antidote for the ginseng, hope it works quickly. :)
what? youve traded in misty for tina? hey, i saw somewhere tonight that misty has a new blog. i meant to bookmark it for you and apparently that didnt work. if i find it again ill pass it on. do they still have that very cool swimming place in coral gables? i locked my clothes in the lockers there once and lost the keys. i dont think i ever got them back. lol
I have alot of love to give! I would never turn on Misty, especially after that Xena outfit she sported the other night on DWTS.
Locked your clothes up and forgot the key? But you don't recall if you got your clothes back before you left? What a pickup move that was. ;) Didja get the girl? Venetian Isle or Island, I haven't been there in about 6 years or so. But I love Coral Gables.
Nightowlhoot3 wrote: See ... I have a sort of ... well, I guess "reverence" for the US Constitution. For me, it is almost "divinely inspired." I know that sounds dramatic, but my feelings about it are that firm.
I believe the framers were speaking, yes, to them, their time, but I also believe Jefferson, et. al. also were looking into the future ... to us, and perhaps beyond, and somehow knowing that this little document they were creating with their quills would somehow still "work" for us now. It is, I think, a true work of genius, and should not be sullied by the whim of vindictive power mad moralists. Those who propose a US constitutional ban on GLBT marriage seek to add to that fine cornerstone of our entire political being, the very first addition which would deny, rather than extend rights to anyone. The first time ever. My Gawd. What a dreadful legacy that would be for us, our generation.
I agree.
I am sick of how people manage to twist straight forward speak into a tool to suit their agenda. I think we should be covered under, all men (human kind) are created equal. Change man to human kind and that's all we need.
Vote for me, the first thing I will do is go back and erase every thing Bush has done in the last 8 years that is FREAKIN illegal.
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
I was interested in listening to Sarah Palin discuss with Katie Couric her views on Roe -- how she side stepped a direct answer to the question about a thirteen year old girl being raped, and becoming pregnant, but yeah -- she'd make an abortion illegal for that child, if it was up to her. She launched into a whole rap about "counseling" the kid ... as if it was an "either/or" thing. Of course the child should also have access to counseling! Duh!
im watching the daily show and they just did a bit on that clip. they showed her saying shed counsel the child toward life and couric says something like even if shes 13 and has been raped? and she says id counsel her toward life then cut away to jon stewart who says tough break with the dad rape so have you picked out any names yet? this debate tomorrow is going to be frightening. in a way i feel sorry for the woman. i honestly dont think that she doesnt know many of these answers. i do think shes very nervous and that when shes nervous she has those brain freezes where youre trying really hard under pressure to come up with an example and NOTHING comes to mind. usually this is about not being really confident in your abilities or subject and that seems to be a big problem with her. shes not had to speak on these issues in public and she doenst have a comfort level discussing them. this woman cant speak off the cuff since that might get her into trouble like it did last week when she was discussing pakistan and when pressed to do this her brain just scrambles. i mean look at the softball questions like what magazines do you read? what supreme court decisions, aside from roe v wade, do you not agree with? she couldnt organize or process in time to make any kind of coherent statement. while this is not a big deal in most occupations its rather scary when you consider that she might be called upon to make split second decisions under pressure after being quickly briefed by others and if shes going to freeze up or not be able to recall things then she isnt ready.
Two things here. I suspect she has been befriended in some manner, or is being nurtured in a way, by a reasonable voice from the fringe of the political elite. Laura Bush. If she were to stay on track, which I think she is far better suited to do than Biden, she may be able to reasonably address most questions in an on the job training manner. I am not stating any opinion of this. I am simply saying that's a possibility. As I've said before, the one that knows how to control their mouth will come out ahead. Also, there is now a tainted cloud hovering over Gwen Iffils stature as a non-partisan moderator. Well, really, she has NONE any longer. And, as a decent and devoted woman who has worked her butt off to be in the position she is, I suspect that "shame" or doubt, will deeply affect her. Really, I have always respected her. Up until now.
I was interested in listening to Sarah Palin discuss with Katie Couric her views on Roe -- how she side stepped a direct answer to the question about a thirteen year old girl being raped, and becoming pregnant, but yeah -- she'd make an abortion illegal for that child, if it was up to her. She launched into a whole rap about "counseling" the kid ... as if it was an "either/or" thing. Of course the child should also have access to counseling! Duh!
im watching the daily show and they just did a bit on that clip. they showed her saying shed counsel the child toward life and couric says something like even if shes 13 and has been raped? and she says id counsel her toward life then cut away to jon stewart who says tough break with the dad rape so have you picked out any names yet? this debate tomorrow is going to be frightening. in a way i feel sorry for the woman. i honestly dont think that she doesnt know many of these answers. i do think shes very nervous and that when shes nervous she has those brain freezes where youre trying really hard under pressure to come up with an example and NOTHING comes to mind. usually this is about not being really confident in your abilities or subject and that seems to be a big problem with her. shes not had to speak on these issues in public and she doenst have a comfort level discussing them. this woman cant speak off the cuff since that might get her into trouble like it did last week when she was discussing pakistan and when pressed to do this her brain just scrambles. i mean look at the softball questions like what magazines do you read? what supreme court decisions, aside from roe v wade, do you not agree with? she couldnt organize or process in time to make any kind of coherent statement. while this is not a big deal in most occupations its rather scary when you consider that she might be called upon to make split second decisions under pressure after being quickly briefed by others and if shes going to freeze up or not be able to recall things then she isnt ready.
It is like that, like South America. Little dictators or elected "Presidents" all sharing a continent. I wanna be King of Florida. Charlie can remain Queen if he likes, but he has to vacate the mansion, move to Coral Gables and take his tiara with him. I really want to be King. Or meet Tina Fey. Either is fine. I've just now taken the antidote for the ginseng, hope it works quickly. :)
what? youve traded in misty for tina? hey, i saw somewhere tonight that misty has a new blog. i meant to bookmark it for you and apparently that didnt work. if i find it again ill pass it on. do they still have that very cool swimming place in coral gables? i locked my clothes in the lockers there once and lost the keys. i dont think i ever got them back. lol
Schools pass out thousands of Masters in Social Work every single year. These grads are, in part, the folks that participate in such children being "lost in the system", "fallen through the cracks"...These caseworlers are adults that often can't reasonably tend to their own lives, health, finances, families, extended families etc., There is no wonder to me, nor do I find it a cynical view, having seen door to door community Social Work in action that children are at risk with their parents, strangers and at times the state case workers assigned to protect them. We should be scared for the children. We should be scared for all of us.
im gonna try and do a better job with this than the fox idea of fair and balanced. lol. i have issues with the social work perspective and that informs my answer here. from its beginnings in the 19th c "friendly visitors" program there has, in my view, been a bias toward a particular mind frame, usually an upper class white women mind frame that approaches those of different cultures and classes as needing to be fixed. fixed being a taking on of the norms of the white upper class. now any particular social worker may not be an upper class white woman but that, in my opinion only, is the framework upon which these programs build their house and ther framework from which these workers do their work no matter what their "class" or culture may be. that is my issue with them.
to be fair, i think these caseworkers go into social work with an expectation of making a difference and sincerely wanting to help but the notion of how one helps is a loaded one which within this class and culture bound framework cannot lose its political base. i dont think they go into this to become rich (understatement here) and id hope they dont go into it to push people around. i dont think they are any more or less likely to be poor students. most, but not all, reputable social work schools are highly competitive and attract very qualified candidates.
but look at what we task them with once they graduate. we say that we should try and keep families together if at all possible and then we overload these people with so many cases that they cannot possibly do justice to them all or even minimally check up on people to see how they are doing and if they are complying with whatever interventions have been set up for them. and when the ball inevitably drops its them who take the fall, not the system. my understanding is that turnover is very high in these jobs as is burnout.
like any helping profession there will be those who enter it to sort out their own "stuff" this is where supervision becomes a must.
i tend to think social problems are complex and require complex solutions. unfortunately, most social programs are end stage programs. the damage has already been done and any possible solutions are more bandaid than cure.
This really is the United States of just about not a damned thing anymore.Really though, right now, I am so perplexed by how laws differ from state to state.The current laws of this land change with the "Welcome to...." sign. And the "You Are Now Leaving..."sign. -- Edited by BoxDog at 19:24, 2008-10-01
This has been an enigmatic thing for me for decades now -- the whole "flexibility" of morality according to artificially applied lines on a map.
People on this side of the line are within their legal and "moral" right to end their own life if they are terminally ill and suffering, but people on this side can't.
People on this side of the line can walk down the street with an ounce or less of pot, and it's fine, but people on this side can be sentenced to prison if a highway patrolman wants to rip apart their van and finds a marijuana seed under the back seat.
People on this side of the line can legally marry the person they love, regardless of gender. People on this, side ...
It's not about "right" and "wrong" -- not really. It's about where you live.
That said ... I do support state's rights. I'm grateful for them, actually. Can you imagine an entire nation run according to George W. Bush's idea of the way thing should be?
It is like that, like South America. Little dictators or elected "Presidents" all sharing a continent. I wanna be King of Florida. Charlie can remain Queen if he likes, but he has to vacate the mansion, move to Coral Gables and take his tiara with him. I really want to be King. Or meet Tina Fey. Either is fine. I've just now taken the antidote for the ginseng, hope it works quickly. :)
The "majority" of the people are not even included in the Constitution. We are afterthoughts referred to as "amendments". I don't know. I get the "it aint broke" thing. But I think it just may be. Doesn't matter, I'll be dead before they even know I'm here. Me and my Florida 1/2 vote. What's that word? pfft?
See ... I have a sort of ... well, I guess "reverence" for the US Constitution. For me, it is almost "divinely inspired." I know that sounds dramatic, but my feelings about it are that firm.
I believe the framers were speaking, yes, to them, their time, but I also believe Jefferson, et. al. also were looking into the future ... to us, and perhaps beyond, and somehow knowing that this little document they were creating with their quills would somehow still "work" for us now. It is, I think, a true work of genius, and should not be sullied by the whim of vindictive power mad moralists. Those who propose a US constitutional ban on GLBT marriage seek to add to that fine cornerstone of our entire political being, the very first addition which would deny, rather than extend rights to anyone. The first time ever. My Gawd. What a dreadful legacy that would be for us, our generation.
This really is the United States of just about not a damned thing anymore. But, I'm willing to discuss anything. Hell, I look forward to it. I was born to complicate. And yak.... ;)
Hey, I'm all about "balance" I'm not sure how you mean it, in this specific instance, though, exactly.
I happen to believe, very strongly, that we need to abolish political parties and find a new way to do this stuff, or make certain that neither (there's no real 3rd or 4th contender in the wings) party has an outrageously tilted majority in power. All three branches of the Feds need to be balanced. I am equally frightened by the possible damage that Reid, Pelosi and O*ama is capable of, given similar power as Reagan and Dubya, for example.Really though, right now, I am so perplexed by how laws differ from state to state.It's almost like we live in South America. But speak English, actually we don't. Like the country of Florida, or the country of Alaska ;) If I don't like the death penalty, I can just move somewhere that doesn't have it? Makes NO sense. None. And possession? Or pornography? All of those definitions are determined by the states. And the Feds like it that way. Soooo, unless a person is able to "make a federal case" and have it approved by the S.C. to even "hear", states actually trump the Constitution. If the Catholic church can finally accept allowing newborns into heaven...elected officials and common residents should be able to sit down and modernize the US Constitution. Is that so terrible an idea? The current laws of this land change with the "Welcome to...." sign. And the "You Are Now Leaving..."sign. That's all I mean by balance. Hell, maybe we should all secede. Just kinda duke it out on the state level. That would take foreign War off the table, wouldn't it? This is that damned ginseng Pepsi again.
-- Edited by BoxDog at 19:24, 2008-10-01
This has been an enigmatic thing for me for decades now -- the whole "flexibility" of morality according to artificially applied lines on a map.
People on this side of the line are within their legal and "moral" right to end their own life if they are terminally ill and suffering, but people on this side can't.
People on this side of the line can walk down the street with an ounce or less of pot, and it's fine, but people on this side can be sentenced to prison if a highway patrolman wants to rip apart their van and finds a marijuana seed under the back seat.
People on this side of the line can legally marry the person they love, regardless of gender. People on this, side ...
It's not about "right" and "wrong" -- not really. It's about where you live.
That said ... I do support state's rights. I'm grateful for them, actually. Can you imagine an entire nation run according to George W. Bush's idea of the way thing should be?
I was interested in listening to Sarah Palin discuss with Katie Couric her views on Roe -- how she side stepped a direct answer to the question about a thirteen year old girl being raped, and becoming pregnant, but yeah -- she'd make an abortion illegal for that child, if it was up to her. She launched into a whole rap about "counseling" the kid ... as if it was an "either/or" thing. Of course the child should also have access to counseling! Duh!
The "majority" of the people are not even included in the Constitution. We are afterthoughts referred to as "amendments". I don't know. I get the "it aint broke" thing. But I think it just may be. Doesn't matter, I'll be dead before they even know I'm here. Me and my Florida 1/2 vote. What's that word? pfft?
This really is the United States of just about not a damned thing anymore. But, I'm willing to discuss anything. Hell, I look forward to it. I was born to complicate. And yak.... ;)
Hey, I'm all about "balance" I'm not sure how you mean it, in this specific instance, though, exactly.
I happen to believe, very strongly, that we need to abolish political parties and find a new way to do this stuff, or make certain that neither (there's no real 3rd or 4th contender in the wings) party has an outrageously tilted majority in power. All three branches of the Feds need to be balanced. I am equally frightened by the possible damage that Reid, Pelosi and O*ama is capable of, given similar power as Reagan and Dubya, for example. Really though, right now, I am so perplexed by how laws differ from state to state. It's almost like we live in South America. But speak English, actually we don't. Like the country of Florida, or the country of Alaska ;) If I don't like the death penalty, I can just move somewhere that doesn't have it? Makes NO sense. None. And possession? Or pornography? All of those definitions are determined by the states. And the Feds like it that way. Soooo, unless a person is able to "make a federal case" and have it approved by the S.C. to even "hear", states actually trump the Constitution. If the Catholic church can finally accept allowing newborns into heaven...elected officials and common residents should be able to sit down and modernize the US Constitution. Is that so terrible an idea?The current laws of this land change with the "Welcome to...." sign. And the "You Are Now Leaving..."sign. That's all I mean by balance. Hell, maybe we should all secede. Just kinda duke it out on the state level. That would take foreign War off the table, wouldn't it? This is that damned ginseng Pepsi again.
-- Edited by BoxDog at 19:24, 2008-10-01
Yes.
Think about it for a minute. With whom would you entrust such awesome power and responsibility? The present legislators? There are a whole slew of people out there right now ... organized... big bucks behind them ... trying to do that very thing. Wanna task them with that responsibility? They'd no doubt be on it like brown on rice.
What? This isn't a lesbian board??
The "problem" in "rewriting" the constitution is intrinsic: it would take a "majority" consensus to affirm the changes, and the most valuable part of that great document is that it affirms equal representation and treatment of the "minority." Yeah, we're a relatively "young" nation, and maybe in our "terrible twos" right now (or two hundreds) but friction is inevitable in a political structure which specifically allows for, and affirms dissention. It is, ironically, our screwing up -- our ability to screw up, which may well be our most splendid greatness.
This really is the United States of just about not a damned thing anymore. But, I'm willing to discuss anything. Hell, I look forward to it. I was born to complicate. And yak.... ;)
Hey, I'm all about "balance" I'm not sure how you mean it, in this specific instance, though, exactly.
I happen to believe, very strongly, that we need to abolish political parties and find a new way to do this stuff, or make certain that neither (there's no real 3rd or 4th contender in the wings) party has an outrageously tilted majority in power. All three branches of the Feds need to be balanced. I am equally frightened by the possible damage that Reid, Pelosi and O*ama is capable of, given similar power as Reagan and Dubya, for example. Really though, right now, I am so perplexed by how laws differ from state to state. It's almost like we live in South America. But speak English, actually we don't. Like the country of Florida, or the country of Alaska ;) If I don't like the death penalty, I can just move somewhere that doesn't have it? Makes NO sense. None. And possession? Or pornography? All of those definitions are determined by the states. And the Feds like it that way. Soooo, unless a person is able to "make a federal case" and have it approved by the S.C. to even "hear", states actually trump the Constitution. If the Catholic church can finally accept allowing newborns into heaven...elected officials and common residents should be able to sit down and modernize the US Constitution. Is that so terrible an idea? The current laws of this land change with the "Welcome to...." sign. And the "You Are Now Leaving..."sign. That's all I mean by balance. Hell, maybe we should all secede. Just kinda duke it out on the state level. That would take foreign War off the table, wouldn't it? This is that damned ginseng Pepsi again.
and apparently the surviving kid was often beaten with a high heel shoe. these kids were apparently high risk kids placed with her for adoption. cant imagine that home study can you? and prolly because they were high risk, the adoptive parent probably received some funding for the kids each month. id say the freezer served two purposes, one to prevent the smell of death from ratting her out and two to keep the checks rolling in. thats unfortunately my cynical take on this. id rather her see first hand what that might feel like.
if this were an accident id feel very differently and i agree with owl about being careful when leaving any kind of appliance outside for pickup. one of my childhood friends died this way. i can still remember when they found her like it was yesterday.
Schools pass out thousands of Masters in Social Work every single year. These grads are, in part, the folks that participate in such children being "lost in the system", "fallen through the cracks"...These caseworlers are adults that often can't reasonably tend to their own lives, health, finances, families, extended families etc., There is no wonder to me, nor do I find it a cynical view, having seen door to door community Social Work in action that children are at risk with their parents, strangers and at times the state case workers assigned to protect them. We should be scared for the children. We should be scared for all of us.
No, I don't think any of us here are probably going to change their minds about this issue, and I'm not about to try, at this point in my career. Not, at least, with people in my age group. Maybe the younger ones though...
I think mercy is often in direct proportion to experiences.
My daddy was murdered, shot five times in the back.
I once knew a girl who was raped and beaten so badly when her own father got to the bust stop to pick her up he had no idea it was his daughter. She was a runway model for I. Magnins, well on her way to being a super star cover girl. Not only was her face forever scared, so was her spirit. The perp got 7 years in San Quinton, was released and killed his next victim.
Nothing short of the death penalty stops these sick psycho bastards. I don't want to understand, I don't care how badly they were abused themselves. I want them put where we are safe from their psychopathic asses. I want our children safe from them, I want elders, women and the disabled safe from them.
<grin> Well, BD, Owlie and Psych have their work cut out for them if they want to change your or my mind.
Me: Imagine the terror before the wind and life is sucked out in this type of situation.
I have a dear friend in Lauderdale that's a psychologist. She was gang raped by 5 or 6 of her "outpatient" clients. They didn't stop at that, they continued to then beat her dog blind. I don't have a whole lot of mercy left in me anymore.
Nightowlhoot3 wrote: Well, if you "don't want to understand" then I don't see any work to be done, which makes it more than simple for me.
Me Again:
I doubt there's ever going to be much mind changing in this area. What I do hope we all agree on, everywhere, is balance. Specifically how crucial it is that balance is used when interpreting state and federal laws. The Constitution, Amendments, the Bill of Rights. It's somewhat unsettling, and difficult to comprehend, how or why laws vary from state to state. What's illegal in one, may not be in another. This really is the United States of just about not a damned thing anymore. But, I'm willing to discuss anything. Hell, I look forward to it. I was born to complicate. And yak.... ;)
Hey, I'm all about "balance" I'm not sure how you mean it, in this specific instance, though, exactly.
IMO, capital punishment is, as most of the rest of the civilized world agrees, a barbaric, immoral practice. If you're dead, there's not much to balance... no "sorta" dead. That's it, kaput, you're outta here, buh bye. Where one life has ended, now two are gone. For me, the nature of the crime doesn't make any difference -- apples and oranges, IMO. Either murder is immoral, or it isn't. IMO, it is. That the practice persists in the most savage nations is, I think, a testament to our unwillingness to evolve to a higher plane ruled by reason, logic and compassion, and so as we doggedly repeat the pattern, and consequently find ourselves grouped with nations otherwise abhorrent to us, for their criminal human rights practices, the beat goes on, and the larger, war-mongering pattern repeats, time and time again. Why end war if state sanctioned assassination is an "OK" thing?
No, I don't think any of us here are probably going to change their minds about this issue, and I'm not about to try, at this point in my career. Not, at least, with people in my age group. Maybe the younger ones though...
How can the person who did such a thing not be mentally ill? (Is the term "criminally insane" still in favor?) Seriously: you bear children. You dress them and feed them for years. Then one day you put them in the freezer and close the lid and that's it, with no thought as to better hiding your crime?
I would think, just from that skeleton of information, a more likely scenario would be that the kids climbed in there to play or hide and closed the lid on themselves.
In this particular case the children had been missing several months. Not reported. They were found because a 7 YO "runaway" escaped the womans abuse thru a window. This was no accident, it was pure and simple abuse. I don't want to hear about mental ilness, I don't care why she did it, I want her in a place that never again can she abuse a child, and six foot under is a nice safe place.
and apparently the surviving kid was often beaten with a high heel shoe. these kids were apparently high risk kids placed with her for adoption. cant imagine that home study can you? and prolly because they were high risk, the adoptive parent probably received some funding for the kids each month. id say the freezer served two purposes, one to prevent the smell of death from ratting her out and two to keep the checks rolling in. thats unfortunately my cynical take on this. id rather her see first hand what that might feel like.
if this were an accident id feel very differently and i agree with owl about being careful when leaving any kind of appliance outside for pickup. one of my childhood friends died this way. i can still remember when they found her like it was yesterday.
The perp got 7 years in San Quinton, was released and killed his next victim.
Nothing short of the death penalty stops these sick psycho bastards. I don't want to understand, I don't care how badly they were abused themselves. I want them put where we are safe from their psychopathic asses. I want our children safe from them, I want elders, women and the disabled safe from them.
<grin> Well, BD, Owlie and Psych have their work cut out for them if they want to change your or my mind.
i think people are fairly entrenched in their opinons on this and that few if any minds are ever changed. one of the things i enjoy about these kinds of exchanges are that often people can say things that make me think. i may not change my mind, today or ever, or perhaps i will who knows? lol but at least if taken out my thoughts and dusted them off.
as Bd points out below...at least i think its below, i keep having to get up to deal with the cat so i may have lost track, its the lack of continuity between states that is most troubling. if we are going to have a death penalty i think it should not be left to the states to decide. i would think this would be unconstitutional and yet apparently its not been found to be so. i am troubled by the demographics of prisons, by race and gender characteristics in who gets fried and who doesnt. and as horrid as the crimes youve described are, and they are horrid, will killing someone change the situation or will it serve only to bloody your own hands?
Me Again:
I doubt there's ever going to be much mind changing in this area. What I do hope we all agree on, everywhere, is balance. Specifically how crucial it is that balance is used when interpreting state and federal laws. The Constitution, Amendments, the Bill of Rights. It's somewhat unsettling, and difficult to comprehend, how or why laws vary from state to state. What's illegal in one, may not be in another. This really is the United States of just about not a damned thing anymore. But, I'm willing to discuss anything. Hell, I look forward to it. I was born to complicate. And yak.... ;)
In this instance, if, as a hypothetical we take the position that the children were killed by their mother, I would think incarceration in a woman's prison would also prevent her from having, and then killing her children if she was still prone to doing that.
How can the person who did such a thing not be mentally ill? (Is the term "criminally insane" still in favor?) Seriously: you bear children. You dress them and feed them for years. Then one day you put them in the freezer and close the lid and that's it, with no thought as to better hiding your crime?
she may indeed be mentally ill. however that in itself is not something that might work in her favor here. there is a difference between mentally ill and legal insanity. most states still use the mcnaughton rule which basically says that you have to know the difference between right and wrong when you committed the act. the other things that go into this would be the ability to form intent. no intent no crime and irresistable impulse being the last. so you could be believing, for instance, that the kids were making noise to piss you off and so you killed them. the attributuion that they were acting in a way to piss you off might be a delusional thought but could you still understand right from wrong? the person might be asked, if someone makes you angry is it ok to kill them? and most of the time the answer to that is no. however, if you say the voices in your head told you that you must kill the kids because god wants you to and your belief is that you cannot disobey god then you meet the standard. not that any of this happens much because it doesnt and when it does, usually its a high profile case where everybody is watching. susan smith and andrea yates are good examples of this. susan smith did it because the kids were in the way of her being with a lover. andrea yates suffered from a post partum psychosis and could not appreciate the act as wrong or form intent. sometimes people can be mentally ill at the time of arrest and still not meet the legal definition of insane at the time of the crime and in those cases they are sent to a hospital to get help and then tried.
Psych Lit wrote: im thinking the death penalty might be too merciful for this woman. why not leave her in the general prison population where the other inmates can share with her what they think about child killers?
I have two friends here in TX that are involved with the prison system, both psycologist who deal with sexual preditors. I have no idea where they put child molseters in your state but here they are housed in segeration.
we have to make the distinction between child molester and child killer. those are two different animals. child killers, which this woman is, are generally housed in the general population. to do otherwise would create the situation youve described tho. people in segregated populations can go crazy from the lack of contact with others over extended periods of time. hulk hogans kid recently used that isolation from the general population as cruel and unusual punishment and i believe he was eventually moved to the regular population tho in his case it initially had to do with his age.
child molesters, which this woman is not, especially first time offenders, dont do all that much time while child killers can go away for a very long time. the good news for ya tho is that child molesters cannot be executed nor can rapists btw,thats by supreme court decision. women and children are not vauled in this society and the "innocence" of either is not considered extreme enough to warrant the most extreme punishment. not so child killers. they can be fried. this woman was a child killer and not, as i understand it, a child molester.
It seems putting them in the general population where they might be "harmed" is a violation of their civil rights.
that might be true for any inmate in the us prison system today. in prisons people can be exposed to aids, drug resistant tb and i suppose the good ole fashioned shanking, all of which might result in death, tho that hasnt stopped anyone from putting people in prison. in fact dont we lead the world in per capita incarcerations? we might also say the racial makeup of most prisons is also evidence of a voilation of civil rights but that hasnt stopped it either. not that id want those folks on the street but i do think its time we thought about how they got to that place and tried to intervene at an earlier stage.
Housing these creeps cost us twice what it cost for any other prisioner. So you see, we reward them with special treatment, so we don't violate their civil rights.
in terms of cost its cheaper to give em life than to go thru all of the motions for implementing the death penalty. it can take 20-25 years to exhaust all of those appeals which are picked up by the taxpayer, then too there is the special housing that death row inmates get. in either case, one could probably send a child thru private school and harvard grad for the same cost.
I say hang 'em, it isn't a deterent to crime but by gawd it prevents that bastard from ever offending again.
yep thats a fact, theyd never do it again. tho honestly i do think thats too merciful. living with it is far worse than a quicka nd painless death.
I think mercy is often in direct proportion to experiences.
My daddy was murdered, shot five times in the back.
I once knew a girl who was raped and beaten so badly when her own father got to the bust stop to pick her up he had no idea it was his daughter. She was a runway model for I. Magnins, well on her way to being a super star cover girl. Not only was her face forever scared, so was her spirit. The perp got 7 years in San Quinton, was released and killed his next victim.
Nothing short of the death penalty stops these sick psycho bastards. I don't want to understand, I don't care how badly they were abused themselves. I want them put where we are safe from their psychopathic asses. I want our children safe from them, I want elders, women and the disabled safe from them.
<grin> Well, BD, Owlie and Psych have their work cut out for them if they want to change your or my mind.
Me: Imagine the terror before the wind and life is sucked out in this type of situation.
I have a dear friend in Lauderdale that's a psychologist. She was gang raped by 5 or 6 of her "outpatient" clients. They didn't stop at that, they continued to then beat her dog blind. I don't have a whole lot of mercy left in me anymore.
Nightowlhoot3 wrote: Well, if you "don't want to understand" then I don't see any work to be done, which makes it more than simple for me.
Me Again:
I doubt there's ever going to be much mind changing in this area. What I do hope we all agree on, everywhere, is balance. Specifically how crucial it is that balance is used when interpreting state and federal laws. The Constitution, Amendments, the Bill of Rights. It's somewhat unsettling, and difficult to comprehend, how or why laws vary from state to state. What's illegal in one, may not be in another. This really is the United States of just about not a damned thing anymore. But, I'm willing to discuss anything. Hell, I look forward to it. I was born to complicate. And yak.... ;)
I think mercy is often in direct proportion to experiences.
My daddy was murdered, shot five times in the back.
I once knew a girl who was raped and beaten so badly when her own father got to the bust stop to pick her up he had no idea it was his daughter. She was a runway model for I. Magnins, well on her way to being a super star cover girl. Not only was her face forever scared, so was her spirit. The perp got 7 years in San Quinton, was released and killed his next victim.
Nothing short of the death penalty stops these sick psycho bastards. I don't want to understand, I don't care how badly they were abused themselves. I want them put where we are safe from their psychopathic asses. I want our children safe from them, I want elders, women and the disabled safe from them.
<grin> Well, BD, Owlie and Psych have their work cut out for them if they want to change your or my mind.
Imagine the terror before the wind and life is sucked out in this type of situation.
I have a dear friend in Lauderdale that's a psychologist. She was gang raped by 5 or 6 of her "outpatient" clients. They didn't stop at that, they continued to then beat her dog blind. I don't have a whole lot of mercy left in me anymore.
Well, if you "don't want to understand" then I don't see any work to be done, which makes it more than simple for me.
BoxDog wrote:Two things, there is ongoing consensual sex and rape between male guards and female prisoners. Pregnancy is not an "off the table" issue in female prisons. The other thing that jumps out is that poor six year old midwest boy that managed to get trapped in a damn microwave and die about a year ago. While playing hide and seek? Who knew. Fridges? I've seen them "as is" in local alleys. I call the cops and sanitation, they do seem to move these things quicker from the genpop when called on. Time was there was a fool born every second, seems now there's an idiot on every block. Well, you know my feelings on the (d.p.). I'll leave it at that. Poor child, I can't imagine the terror. As if growing older and facing mortality as an adult isn't bad enough.
I think mercy is often in direct proportion to experiences.
My daddy was murdered, shot five times in the back.
I once knew a girl who was raped and beaten so badly when her own father got to the bus stop to pick her up he had no idea it was his daughter. She was a runway model for I. Magnins, well on her way to being a super star cover girl. Not only was her face forever scared, so was her spirit. The perp got 7 years in San Quinton, was released and killed his next victim.
Nothing short of the death penalty stops these sick psycho bastards. I don't want to understand, I don't care how badly they were abused themselves. I want them put where we are safe from their psychopathic asses. I want our children safe from them, I want elders, women and the disabled safe from them.
<grin> Well, BD, Owlie and Psych have their work cut out for them if they want to change your or my mind.
Imagine the terror before the wind and life is sucked out in this type of situation.
I have a dear friend in Lauderdale that's a psychologist. She was gang raped by 5 or 6 of her "outpatient" clients. They didn't stop at that, they continued to then beat her dog blind. I don't have a whole lot of mercy left in me anymore.
-- Edited by milo at 15:37, 2008-10-01
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
How can the person who did such a thing not be mentally ill? (Is the term "criminally insane" still in favor?) Seriously: you bear children. You dress them and feed them for years. Then one day you put them in the freezer and close the lid and that's it, with no thought as to better hiding your crime?
I would think, just from that skeleton of information, a more likely scenario would be that the kids climbed in there to play or hide and closed the lid on themselves.
In this particular case the children had been missing several months. Not reported. They were found because a 7 YO "runaway" escaped the womans abuse thru a window. This was no accident, it was pure and simple abuse. I don't want to hear about mental ilness, I don't care why she did it, I want her in a place that never again can she abuse a child, and six foot under is a nice safe place.
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
Psych Lit wrote: im thinking the death penalty might be too merciful for this woman. why not leave her in the general prison population where the other inmates can share with her what they think about child killers?
I have two friends here in TX that are involved with the prison system, both psycologist who deal with sexual preditors. I have no idea where they put child molseters in your state but here they are housed in segeration. It seems putting them in the general population where they might be "harmed" is a violation of their civil rights. Housing these creeps cost us twice what it cost for any other prisioner. So you see, we reward them with special treatment, so we don't violate their civil rights.This woman would also be put into segeration where she will be safe from justice.
I say hang 'em, it isn't a deterent to crime but by gawd it prevents that bastard from ever offending again.
In this instance, if, as a hypothetical we take the position that the children were killed by their mother, I would think incarceration in a woman's prison would also prevent her from having, and then killing her children if she was still prone to doing that.
How can the person who did such a thing not be mentally ill? (Is the term "criminally insane" still in favor?) Seriously: you bear children. You dress them and feed them for years. Then one day you put them in the freezer and close the lid and that's it, with no thought as to better hiding your crime?
I would think, just from that skeleton of information, a more likely scenario would be that the kids climbed in there to play or hide and closed the lid on themselves.
When I replaced my last fridge, I double duct taped (or quadruple) the door closed. I used practically half a roll of duct take securing it before taking it out to the curb for pick up. Then, after that was all done, I came in, and started feeling a growing sense of nervous concern which culminated in my going out in the middle of the night with a flashlight and screw driver, and removing the doors altogether. Car trunks and fridges seem to have an almost unbeatable appeal for some little ones.
Two things, there is ongoing consensual sex and rape between male guards and female prisoners. Pregnancy is not an "off the table" issue in female prisons. The other thing that jumps out is that poor six year old midwest boy that managed to get trapped in a damn microwave and die about a year ago. While playing hide and seek? Who knew. Fridges? I've seen them "as is" in local alleys. I call the cops and sanitation, they do seem to move these things quicker from the genpop when called on. Time was there was a fool born every second, seems now there's an idiot on every block. Well, you know my feelings on the (d.p.). I'll leave it at that. Poor child, I can't imagine the terror. As if growing older and facing mortality as an adult isn't bad enough. Imagine the terror before the wind and life is sucked out in this type of situation.
I have a dear friend in Lauderdale that's a psychologist. She was gang raped by 5 or 6 of her "outpatient" clients. They didn't stop at that, they continued to then beat her dog blind. I don't have a whole lot of mercy left in me anymore.
Psych Lit wrote: im thinking the death penalty might be too merciful for this woman. why not leave her in the general prison population where the other inmates can share with her what they think about child killers?
I have two friends here in TX that are involved with the prison system, both psycologist who deal with sexual preditors. I have no idea where they put child molseters in your state but here they are housed in segeration. It seems putting them in the general population where they might be "harmed" is a violation of their civil rights. Housing these creeps cost us twice what it cost for any other prisioner. So you see, we reward them with special treatment, so we don't violate their civil rights.This woman would also be put into segeration where she will be safe from justice.
I say hang 'em, it isn't a deterent to crime but by gawd it prevents that bastard from ever offending again.
In this instance, if, as a hypothetical we take the position that the children were killed by their mother, I would think incarceration in a woman's prison would also prevent her from having, and then killing her children if she was still prone to doing that.
How can the person who did such a thing not be mentally ill? (Is the term "criminally insane" still in favor?) Seriously: you bear children. You dress them and feed them for years. Then one day you put them in the freezer and close the lid and that's it, with no thought as to better hiding your crime?
I would think, just from that skeleton of information, a more likely scenario would be that the kids climbed in there to play or hide and closed the lid on themselves.
When I replaced my last fridge, I double duct taped (or quadruple) the door closed. I used practically half a roll of duct take securing it before taking it out to the curb for pick up. Then, after that was all done, I came in, and started feeling a growing sense of nervous concern which culminated in my going out in the middle of the night with a flashlight and screw driver, and removing the doors altogether. Car trunks and fridges seem to have an almost unbeatable appeal for some little ones.
Psych Lit wrote: im thinking the death penalty might be too merciful for this woman. why not leave her in the general prison population where the other inmates can share with her what they think about child killers?
I have two friends here in TX that are involved with the prison system, both psycologist who deal with sexual preditors. I have no idea where they put child molseters in your state but here they are housed in segeration. It seems putting them in the general population where they might be "harmed" is a violation of their civil rights. Housing these creeps cost us twice what it cost for any other prisioner. So you see, we reward them with special treatment, so we don't violate their civil rights.This woman would also be put into segeration where she will be safe from justice.
I say hang 'em, it isn't a deterent to crime but by gawd it prevents that bastard from ever offending again.
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
I read today where they found two children stuffed in a freezer. I know my opinion of the death penalty isn't popular BUT dammit this is just another case where I don't want to know why, nor do I care, hang the bitch at sunrise on town square!
im thinking the death penalty might be too merciful for this woman. why not leave her in the general prison population where the other inmates can share with her what they think about child killers?
i think its an unfortunate possibility anywhere, even in nebraska. im glad that he didnt go that route. heres another thing i wonder. the depositing of kids at these safe places is supposed to be a no questions asked kind of thing. do you think the publicity that has been generated by this story will prevent people from acting in a similar fashion the next time? id hate to see some baby dumped in a dumpster because some parent didnt want the neighbors to know.
It's newborn to two years in Florida. Includes every hospital, Fire Station, Police Department and a couple of other orgs. Walk in and hand the child over, no q's, just not over two years of age. Otherwise DCF gets called in, with the "dropper offer" present. Dammit, I'm anonymous again!
ok that makes sense. i would think that abandoning children at any age would be traumatic for the child but perhaps more so when they have many active memories of their parents. which gets me to thinking that it wasnt only the dad who lost someone here. it was also the kids. losing a mom and then losing a dad. its like every kids worst nightmare. kinda like going to summer camp and coming home on the bus to find out everybody is all gone. has anyone seen any followup on this?
i think its an unfortunate possibility anywhere, even in nebraska. im glad that he didnt go that route. heres another thing i wonder. the depositing of kids at these safe places is supposed to be a no questions asked kind of thing. do you think the publicity that has been generated by this story will prevent people from acting in a similar fashion the next time? id hate to see some baby dumped in a dumpster because some parent didnt want the neighbors to know.
It's newborn to two years in Florida. Includes every hospital, Fire Station, Police Department and a couple of other orgs. Walk in and hand the child over, no q's, just not over two years of age. Otherwise DCF gets called in, with the "dropper offer" present. Dammit, I'm anonymous again!
I read today where they found two children stuffed in a freezer. I know my opinion of the death penalty isn't popular BUT dammit this is just another case where I don't want to know why, nor do I care, hang the bitch at sunrise on town square!
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
I am tired as a dog but I am going to try to make this readable.
something that chaps am azz, always has, those who honestly need the welfare system can never get the needed help. several reasons for this, one being there are way tooooooooooo many people milking the system for all it is worth. This is the something that makes me furious. Another reason is those new to the system don't know the "game". The old pros who are generational recipents know exactly the right cards to play.
i am wondering too, if there are differences between states. welfare doesnt exist up here. people can get food stamps, use the food bank, get some energy assistence and insurance for minor kids but little else. there are some section 8 vouchers given to low income folks but there is a lottery system that determines who gets them. they place a notice in the paper when there are openings, not a common occurance btw, someone has to not need them anymore in order for someone else to get them, and people sign up for the lottery that hands out these to the lucky few who had their name pulled. to even know when this happens requires buying a paper every day to look i guess. aside from that youre on your own or you can go to a shelter. there are few family shelters so families get separated. if people are disabled there is social security but from what i hear, that can take years to get and that is like 700 a month total. it would be nearly impossible to get any kind of housing for that amount of money up here. the average apartment goes for like 1200 a month with some slum dwellings in the 900 a month range without utilities. they also require good credit and 2 months security deposit. for people who have lost jobs and fallen behind or the unemployment has run out those can be mighty high walls to housing. none of this is advertised and the people who work in social services are not allowed to tell you about it. you have to ask. if you dont know to ask youre not going to find out which is where youre generational folks may come in to play.
I am NOT against welfare if it were used as a hand up when people really need it. I know I often sound harsh about welfare, but I am not and I am all for a hand up. I want the very young, the elders and disabled, to have the assistance they need. I want affordable child care so mommie or daddy can go to work. I want the welfare system, I just want it FARE. I want to know there isn't homeless children freezing to death, because some lay about is hogging the covers, so to speak.
i think thats pretty much what everyone wants, isnt it? i know id be pissed if i were to find out my tax dollars were supporting someone who could work but chose not to. id caution tho that some disabilities are not visible to the naked eye. i had to bite my tongue in wally worlds parking lot last week when an apparently able bodied woman drove her suv into the handicapped space and emerged with high heels on toting 2 kids and pulling a shopping cart. she didnt appear to be unable to walk another 50 feet to me but who knows? truth be told tho i almost said something to her. i was imagining some senior citizen not being able to get parking because she took the space.
My cousins first wife died and left 3 kids (one wasn't my cousins but he kept him) all of us stepped up, my uncle took the baby during the week, my mom fed the two oldest an after school snack, either me or my lover stopped by after work to check on the ones who were in school up here. My cousin told his boss he had to cut out over time and out of area work. Was it a hard road for my cousin, you bet your sweet azz it was.
and this is admirable and the way things should work. i wonder tho what he might have done if he didnt have that kind of family support? people should step up but do they always? and is it consistent? kids need consistent.
I know this guy had nine not 3 kids but times like this you have a family meeting and explain to the older ones they will have to step up, I know that isn't easy as it seems/sounds but that is what family does.
it is and id hope that most families are like this and would step up and deal.
I don't think this man could possibly have expected his wife to die, or have had any decent amount of grieving. He just seems to have fallen through the cracks and his whole family fell with him. The one daughter, 19? Wasn't taken, obviously. But, this is a simple man from "Nowhere" Nebraska. We have no idea what all this entails. I can tell you there is probably a stark contrast to the welfare of South Chicago and of the abuses in the food stamp and sliding scale child care. There's even a class difference in this country between geographical regions. Had these nine kids been born of born to a poor single parent in Chicago, they would probably have been found in shallow graves or the back of a submerged mini van had they been left to a "deadbeat" dad in S. Chicago. That is factual. That is Obamas town. That, is a disgrace.<----anon
i think its an unfortunate possibility anywhere, even in nebraska. im glad that he didnt go that route. heres another thing i wonder. the depositing of kids at these safe places is supposed to be a no questions asked kind of thing. do you think the publicity that has been generated by this story will prevent people from acting in a similar fashion the next time? id hate to see some baby dumped in a dumpster because some parent didnt want the neighbors to know.
I think, for this poor man, the "help" never started, so the absence of "enabling" is likely what helped spare these young lives. Again, I am just so happy to hear that he didn't take the "easy" way out in this horrible situation and mercy kill everyone. I think the court should have allowed for a 30 day period for immediate family and maybe community leaders to step up and help without putting them through a process of fostering, or adoption or court appointed visits. Just a chance for them all to settle down from the trauma and regroup.
I am tired as a dog but I am going to try to make this readable.
something that chaps am azz, always has, those who honestly need the welfare system can never get the needed help. several reasons for this, one being there are way tooooooooooo many people milking the system for all it is worth. This is the something that makes me furious. Another reason is those new to the system don't know the "game". The old pros who are generational recipents know exactly the right cards to play.
I am NOT against welfare if it were used as a hand up when people really need it. I know I often sound harsh about welfare, but I am not and I am all for a hand up. I want the very young, the elders and disabled, to have the assistance they need. I want affordable child care so mommie or daddy can go to work. I want the welfare system, I just want it FARE. I want to know there isn't homeless children freezing to death, because some lay about is hogging the covers, so to speak.
The system as it is is broken, the social workers are to lazy or scared to make a fuss and boot the abusers off the rolls.
On some levels I feel so sorry for this guy,,,,,, then there is that voice in the back of my mind saying,,,,,,, you quit your d ammed job, what the 'ell were you thinking! Where was his family when he was overwhelmed?
My cousins first wife died and left 3 kids (one wasn't my cousins but he kept him) all of us stepped up, my uncle took the baby during the week, my mom fed the two oldest an after school snack, either me or my lover stopped by after work to check on the ones who were in school up here. My cousin told his boss he had to cut out over time and out of area work. Was it a hard road for my cousin, you bet your sweet azz it was.
I know this guy had nine not 3 kids but times like this you have a family meeting and explain to the older ones they will have to step up, I know that isn't easy as it seems/sounds but that is what family does.
I don't think this man could possibly have expected his wife to die, or have had any decent amount of grieving. He just seems to have fallen through the cracks and his whole family fell with him. The one daughter, 19? Wasn't taken, obviously. But, this is a simple man from "Nowhere" Nebraska. We have no idea what all this entails. I can tell you there is probably a stark contrast to the welfare of South Chicago and of the abuses in the food stamp and sliding scale child care. There's even a class difference in this country between geographical regions. Had these nine kids been born of born to a poor single parent in Chicago, they would probably have been found in shallow graves or the back of a submerged mini van had they been left to a "deadbeat" dad in S. Chicago. That is factual. That is Obamas town. That, is a disgrace.
I think, for this poor man, the "help" never started, so the absence of "enabling" is likely what helped spare these young lives. Again, I am just so happy to hear that he didn't take the "easy" way out in this horrible situation and mercy kill everyone. I think the court should have allowed for a 30 day period for immediate family and maybe community leaders to step up and help without putting them through a process of fostering, or adoption or court appointed visits. Just a chance for them all to settle down from the trauma and regroup.
I am tired as a dog but I am going to try to make this readable.
something that chaps am azz, always has, those who honestly need the welfare system can never get the needed help. several reasons for this, one being there are way tooooooooooo many people milking the system for all it is worth. This is the something that makes me furious. Another reason is those new to the system don't know the "game". The old pros who are generational recipents know exactly the right cards to play.
I am NOT against welfare if it were used as a hand up when people really need it. I know I often sound harsh about welfare, but I am not and I am all for a hand up. I want the very young, the elders and disabled, to have the assistance they need. I want affordable child care so mommie or daddy can go to work. I want the welfare system, I just want it FARE. I want to know there isn't homeless children freezing to death, because some lay about is hogging the covers, so to speak.
The system as it is is broken, the social workers are to lazy or scared to make a fuss and boot the abusers off the rolls.
On some levels I feel so sorry for this guy,,,,,, then there is that voice in the back of my mind saying,,,,,,, you quit your d ammed job, what the 'ell were you thinking! Where was his family when he was overwhelmed?
My cousins first wife died and left 3 kids (one wasn't my cousins but he kept him) all of us stepped up, my uncle took the baby during the week, my mom fed the two oldest an after school snack, either me or my lover stopped by after work to check on the ones who were in school up here. My cousin told his boss he had to cut out over time and out of area work. Was it a hard road for my cousin, you bet your sweet azz it was.
I know this guy had nine not 3 kids but times like this you have a family meeting and explain to the older ones they will have to step up, I know that isn't easy as it seems/sounds but that is what family does.
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
when does it stop being help and start being enabling?
also a good question. i dunno i guess when it becomes pointless. there will always be a certain segment of society that, for whatever reason, is unable to work. for the rest removing the obstacles to work should be enough? one of the big problems now is that there isnt enough help for those who cannot either thru disability or illness work. for those who can and choose not to, a situation i cannnot fathom btw and really wonder about whether that happens or not, i suppose since its a choice they can live with the consequences.
i do think this is one fundamental difference between those who say they are republican and those who say they are democratic. there are more of course but this is a big one. whether to have this kind of assistance be a governmental kind of assistance or whether it should come from non profits or the private sector whether is funded by tax dollars or private contributions to charity. id agree that govenment doesnt do a very good job in carrying out these kinds of programs, the charities seem to do a far better job with less money but if its all funded by private donation then coverage will be spotty with some areas of the country getting more than others since there is no centralized authority behind it. many of those charities are religious and that sort of blurs the line between religion and state or makes religious groups quasi state agencies.
speaking of blurring that line i was listening to npr over the weekend and there was a speaker on who was the legal counsel for a particular church organization that is taking on one aspect of separation between church and state. apparently what they want is to be able to tell the flock how to vote and not lose their tax exempt status. heres the part of that which caught my eye. he said the johnson amendment, which is what causes the exemption to be lost, is based on a faulty reading of the first amendment. his contention is that the founding fathers never meant to keep religion out of the legislature but it was to keep legislators out of religion. i hadnt heard that before so i looked it up and apparently there is a colorful history to that rule and as much as i disagree with the outcome of any proposed changes to it, there does seem to be some good legal argument in favor of overturning it. the plot thickens tho since this church who is trying to get the rule overturned is apparently sort of a non mainstream church and its efforts are being opposed by most of the mainstream religions.
I think, for this poor man, the "help" never started, so the absence of "enabling" is likely what helped spare these young lives. Again, I am just so happy to hear that he didn't take the "easy" way out in this horrible situation and mercy kill everyone. I think the court should have allowed for a 30 day period for immediate family and maybe community leaders to step up and help without putting them through a process of fostering, or adoption or court appointed visits. Just a chance for them all to settle down from the trauma and regroup.
when does it stop being help and start being enabling?
also a good question. i dunno i guess when it becomes pointless. there will always be a certain segment of society that, for whatever reason, is unable to work. for the rest removing the obstacles to work should be enough? one of the big problems now is that there isnt enough help for those who cannot either thru disability or illness work. for those who can and choose not to, a situation i cannnot fathom btw and really wonder about whether that happens or not, i suppose since its a choice they can live with the consequences.
i do think this is one fundamental difference between those who say they are republican and those who say they are democratic. there are more of course but this is a big one. whether to have this kind of assistance be a governmental kind of assistance or whether it should come from non profits or the private sector whether is funded by tax dollars or private contributions to charity. id agree that govenment doesnt do a very good job in carrying out these kinds of programs, the charities seem to do a far better job with less money but if its all funded by private donation then coverage will be spotty with some areas of the country getting more than others since there is no centralized authority behind it. many of those charities are religious and that sort of blurs the line between religion and state or makes religious groups quasi state agencies.
speaking of blurring that line i was listening to npr over the weekend and there was a speaker on who was the legal counsel for a particular church organization that is taking on one aspect of separation between church and state. apparently what they want is to be able to tell the flock how to vote and not lose their tax exempt status. heres the part of that which caught my eye. he said the johnson amendment, which is what causes the exemption to be lost, is based on a faulty reading of the first amendment. his contention is that the founding fathers never meant to keep religion out of the legislature but it was to keep legislators out of religion. i hadnt heard that before so i looked it up and apparently there is a colorful history to that rule and as much as i disagree with the outcome of any proposed changes to it, there does seem to be some good legal argument in favor of overturning it. the plot thickens tho since this church who is trying to get the rule overturned is apparently sort of a non mainstream church and its efforts are being opposed by most of the mainstream religions.
when does it stop being help and start being enabling?
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
no one wants to see this happen, not even me. I do have some issues with the whole thing. Nine kids, NINE? He and his wife had 10 one was over the age limit. What did he expect when he quit his job? What would have he done in say 1950?
thats a good question. probably go on welfare if it existed in 1950? the article didnt say what kind of job he had tho presumably it must have been a good one if his wife had been able to stay home with all of those kids. but was it good enough to support them and pay for childcare? i dunno. im all in favor of low cost quality child care tho low cost and quality are not often used in the same sentence when it comes to kids needs.
I am solidly against people having more than two children. Limiting population is the answer to our pollution crisis. I won't even go into the social services strain of over population. I don't want to hear civil rights, when my civil rights violates yours I need to lose mine. Simple.
in theory thats a good idea. prolly a bit hard to put into practice. like in china where there is a one child limit and everyone wants boys so they murder the girl children. hard to regulate sexual behavior or the children that result from these sexual behaviors.
I don't like the term breeder, but, this is a case of a breeder. Beyond the ability to feed so danged many kids how the hell do you give them the love and teaching a child requires? I would like to know what his wife died from, my guess is her body was over stressed from being a baby machine.
lol thats what i was thinking. at some point death became an attractive alternative. prolly somewhere between the 40th dirty diaper and the he hit me and i didnt do it heard for the 1000th time in one day.
Now the family steps up? eye roll When my cousins wife died (cancer), my uncle stepped up and took the baby during the week, the oldest watched the middle, until my cousin could get home from work. Was it hard on my cousin? D amned straight it was, he missed a lot of sleep but his kids didn't miss any meals. It isn't easy being both parents. If a woman had done this the news coverage and public opinion would have been slanted in a whole different direction.
interesting observation. there are a lot of things in the news of late that have to do with ways of thinking about women. i read the other day that lynn spears was discussing the differences in the ways people took up sarah palins teenaged daughters pregnancy and the way people took up her kids pregnancy.
The main issue here is that these children are here already. How or why anyone may think it reasonable, as a common person, to raise all these little people is beyond me. But, the fact that they are here is the point. I have One question, where the hell were the extended family members that are now willing to (now that the courts involved) step in and try to help their nieces and nephews? The other thing, one I think is the redemption that this poor man deserves acknowledgement for is that he took the "right" of two paths. We've almost become numb to stories of murder suicides. This man could easily have "mercy killed" these children in a moment of hopeless frustration and turned the gun on himself. He didn't. When the dust settles I hope everyone involved in this gets some support and love from the community and extended family that, apparently, turned their backs to them over the year passed.
and maybe this is a part of the general alienation from others that has happened in these past two decades. people, even extended families, are so removed from one another. i cannot fathom how those family members didnt step up until the story became public either tho who knows, maybe the man was embarrassed to ask for help or didnt have a close enough relationship with those family members to ask.
with this latest economic downturn i wonder how many other intact families will have to make this choice and with that in mind i was surprised to read the reaction of the town to the whole familys abandonment. the statement, if another family shows up well have to look at the law again, suggests to me that there is no problem with leaving cute adorable infants on the steps of the hospital but a whole nuther thing to leave half grown children or nearly grown as in the case of one of these kids.
It sort of reminds me of those folks who are against abortion but dont want to participate in the lives of the children who are born as a result of their actions. mebbe it should be like the chinese proverb if you save a life you are responsible for it forever. instead of retracting the law if it happens again, they might look at whats missing in the social service sector that would have allowed this family to stay together.
while i can understand the idea that this mans choice to have those kids put him in the position he is in today, really, nobody knows what the future will hold and whether he had 1 kid or 10, it might have come to this place after the death of his wife. hard enough to raise a kid but add recovery from his wifes death and the loss of a job in there and perhaps it could have happened to anyone.
so i guess my thinking is what kind of safety net do we all think should be in existence? my personal choice for this kind of a system would be supported assistance, aimed at getting people to their goals and then perhaps some followup to make sure there is no regression. i do think systems like the former welfare system disabled people and locked them in generational poverty but i also think that this sink or swim mentality that has replaced it can lead to those situations where one or the other parent poisons the cocoa or leaves their kids in the er. maybe its a question of what kind of society we want to have?
Many states have laws that allow a child to be left off at a hospital or police station no questions asked. There are a variety of reasons for parents to choose this option but for the most part the reasons for doing so certainly beat the alternative. Recently tho, a man left his 9 children off at a hospital citing his inability to care for them after the death of their mother and the loss of his job. the childrens ages range from 1 to 17 and since the abandonment has become public other family members have stepped forward to care for the children.
I can understand the feelings of those who work hard and do not want to pick up the tab for those who dont. i get that. but life sometimes throws some serious curve balls. The papa of the 9 children for instance had to give up his job to care for the children after his wife died. anyone who has priced the cost of day care can understand the math involved there. Sure, there are those who would say that he shouldnt have had 9 kids and id prolly be among them but the kids are already here and mom has died. what should happen now?
in the past 18 months ive become quite aware of the lack of a safety net for the poorest among us. there really is no welfare anymore. at most there is a lottery for section 8 housing vouchers and some food stamps and medical in some states for the kids and thats about it. and even the section 8 housing is at risk at the moment. a new law will allow landlords who have been accepting these vouches to refuse them. the landlords cite a real problem getting reimbursed by the govt as their reason for wanting to opt out of the program.
I get that they are in business to make money. i really do get that. but what is to be done with the massive amount of people who will not be able to get housing in the free market? those with bad credit, those with a drug conviction, those who have no job, those who are ill, physically and mentally? if we look at the current financial catastrophe with the banks and the stock exchange we can see that many people will find themselves homeless in a very short time. with a bankrupt govt what will become of these people many of whom have children?
if a society is only as great as measured by the compassion given to those less fortunate i fear this society will be harshly judged.
im wondering how the rest of you feel about this? what do we think of the man who dumped his 9 kids?
OMAHA, Neb. (Sept. 26) - An out-of-work widower who abandoned nine of his children at a hospital under Nebraska's new safe haven law said he was overwhelmed without his wife and just "fell apart." ''I hope they know I love them," Gary Staton told KETV. "I hope their future is better without me around them."
The unique law allows caregivers to abandon babies and teenagers alike at hospitals without fear of prosecution - but in light of recent abandonments, including the Staton family's, lawmakers are pondering changes. Originally intended to protect infants, the law was expanded in a legislative compromise to protect any "child." Some have interpreted that to mean anyone under 19.
Nebraska officials said 11 children ranging in age from 1 to 17 were left at hospitals Wednesday under the state's safe haven law. Nine of those children, five boys and four girls, are from the same family. A recently widowed father who said he "fell apart" after his wife died left them at Creighton Medical Center in Omaha, shown above.
Staton anonymously left the five boys and four girls ages 1 to 17 at Creighton University Medical Center's emergency room on Wednesday night. He has a 10th child, a daughter who is 18 and was not dropped off.
A number of relatives have volunteered to take the siblings, said Kathie Osterman, a spokeswoman for the state department Health and Human Services.
Staff members were doing required background checks Friday in hopes of placing the children in the next few days, she said.
Staton said his wife died early last year, shortly after delivering their youngest child. He said he quit his job because of his family responsibilities but couldn't pay rent or utilities or take care of his kids.
"I was with her for 17 years, and then she was gone," he said of his late wife. "What was I going to do? We raised them together. I didn't think I could do it alone. I fell apart. I couldn't take care of them."
Staton said he surrendered them so they would be safe.
A call Friday to a number listed for Staton went unanswered.
A 2007 interview with Staton's oldest daughter in Omaha North High School's student newspaper said she shouldered some of the parenting duties at home. Despite helping to feed her siblings, check their homework and put them to bed, the teen managed to graduate a year early.
Once a child is abandoned under the safe haven law, the courts become involved. Parental rights don't end automatically, but parents who change their minds about abandonment may find it difficult to regain custody.
At least 16 children have been abandoned since the law took effect in July.
Hospitals call police when a child is left, and officers will usually place a child in protective custody. Then the county attorney determines whether a child should be allowed to return home and makes a recommendation to a judge.
"If we see another family being left off, then we're going to have to do something immediately," said state Sen. Arnie Stuthman, who introduced legislation that was the basis for the law.
Stuthman said lawmakers need to set a maximum age for children who can be handed over to the state, and he's not sure whether it can wait until the Legislature reconvenes in January.
But it's not clear whether Gov. Dave Heineman will call a special session to modify the law, even though he has said it should be changed.
Todd Landry, director of the division of Children and Family Services, said the safe-haven law was designed to help children who are in danger, but none of the kids who were dropped off had been in harm's way. Landry said he empathizes with parents who struggle to raise their families, but "it is the job of a parent to be a parent." He said there are resources to help them.
James Blue, president and CEO of the Lincoln-based nonprofit Cedars, which works with abused and neglected children, said he's been inundated with calls ever since the safe-haven law took effect.
He said the group gets more than 10 calls a day from struggling parents, and its temporary shelter is at its capacity of 15.
"While this (law) has, I think, exposed an underbelly of our society of families that are dropping teenagers off forever at a hospital, it has also given a message to families that there is help out there," Blue said.
He said it's important for the state to have a safe-haven law, but there needs to be an age limit for the children who are left behind.
Nebraska lawmakers tried for years to pass the law, and they succeeded this year only after intense debate. Senators worried that an age limit was too arbitrary and that it might endanger youngsters who were just a week too old.
"It does open a door to older children being left off," Sen. Gwen Howard said during debate of the bill. But she added: "I don't see that being a problem."
She acknowledged Friday that the lack of an age limit had become an issue, but insisted it offers the state an opportunity to reach out to struggling families.
"We need to look at the bigger picture of what's going on with parents and children," Howard said.
Sen. Ernie Chambers, who cast the lone vote against the law, said Friday that lawmakers will be forced to revisit a bad bill.
"I knew it would have broad results, and they would have to come back and readdress the issue," he said.
Nebraska was the last state to adopt a safe-haven law. Most other states have focused their laws on protecting infants.
For years, child-welfare experts have disagreed about whether safe-haven laws reduce the total number of abandoned children.
Adam Pertman, executive director of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute and an opponent of safe-haven laws, said he's never seen anything like what's happening in Nebraska.
"What we're seeing is the unfolding of a policy that wasn't well thought-out," he said.
The main issue here is that these children are here already. How or why anyone may think it reasonable, as a common person, to raise all these little people is beyond me. But, the fact that they are here is the point. I have One question, where the hell were the extended family members that are now willing to (now that the courts involved) step in and try to help their nieces and nephews? The other thing, one I think is the redemption that this poor man deserves acknowledgement for is that he took the "right" of two paths. We've almost become numb to stories of murder suicides. This man could easily have "mercy killed" these children in a moment of hopeless frustration and turned the gun on himself. He didn't. When the dust settles I hope everyone involved in this gets some support and love from the community and extended family that, apparently, turned their backs to them over the year passed.
no one wants to see this happen, not even me. I do have some issues with the whole thing. Nine kids, NINE? He and his wife had 10 one was over the age limit. What did he expect when he quit his job? What would have he done in say 1950? I am solidly against people having more than two children. Limiting population is the answer to our pollution crisis. I won't even go into the social services strain of over population. I don't want to hear civil rights, when my civil rights violates yours I need to lose mine. Simple. I don't like the term breeder, but, this is a case of a breeder. Beyond the ability to feed so danged many kids how the hell do you give them the love and teaching a child requires? I would like to know what his wife died from, my guess is her body was over stressed from being a baby machine. Now the family steps up? eye roll When my cousins wife died (cancer), my uncle stepped up and took the baby during the week, the oldest watched the middle, until my cousin could get home from work. Was it hard on my cousin? D amned straight it was, he missed a lot of sleep but his kids didn't miss any meals. It isn't easy being both parents. If a woman had done this the news coverage and public opinion would have been slanted in a whole different direction. I do feel badly for the children but I have no pity or sympathy for the man.
-- Edited by milo at 06:03, 2008-09-28
__________________
my days left here may not be long, I wouldn't waste my time telling you nothing wrong, love is a flower that needs the sun and the rain, alittle bit of pleasure is worth a whole lot of pain. no pain no gain. betty wright
Many states have laws that allow a child to be left off at a hospital or police station no questions asked. There are a variety of reasons for parents to choose this option but for the most part the reasons for doing so certainly beat the alternative. Recently tho, a man left his 9 children off at a hospital citing his inability to care for them after the death of their mother and the loss of his job. the childrens ages range from 1 to 17 and since the abandonment has become public other family members have stepped forward to care for the children.
I can understand the feelings of those who work hard and do not want to pick up the tab for those who dont. i get that. but life sometimes throws some serious curve balls. The papa of the 9 children for instance had to give up his job to care for the children after his wife died. anyone who has priced the cost of day care can understand the math involved there. Sure, there are those who would say that he shouldnt have had 9 kids and id prolly be among them but the kids are already here and mom has died. what should happen now?
in the past 18 months ive become quite aware of the lack of a safety net for the poorest among us. there really is no welfare anymore. at most there is a lottery for section 8 housing vouchers and some food stamps and medical in some states for the kids and thats about it. and even the section 8 housing is at risk at the moment. a new law will allow landlords who have been accepting these vouches to refuse them. the landlords cite a real problem getting reimbursed by the govt as their reason for wanting to opt out of the program.
I get that they are in business to make money. i really do get that. but what is to be done with the massive amount of people who will not be able to get housing in the free market? those with bad credit, those with a drug conviction, those who have no job, those who are ill, physically and mentally? if we look at the current financial catastrophe with the banks and the stock exchange we can see that many people will find themselves homeless in a very short time. with a bankrupt govt what will become of these people many of whom have children?
if a society is only as great as measured by the compassion given to those less fortunate i fear this society will be harshly judged.
im wondering how the rest of you feel about this? what do we think of the man who dumped his 9 kids?
OMAHA, Neb. (Sept. 26) - An out-of-work widower who abandoned nine of his children at a hospital under Nebraska's new safe haven law said he was overwhelmed without his wife and just "fell apart." ''I hope they know I love them," Gary Staton told KETV. "I hope their future is better without me around them."
The unique law allows caregivers to abandon babies and teenagers alike at hospitals without fear of prosecution - but in light of recent abandonments, including the Staton family's, lawmakers are pondering changes. Originally intended to protect infants, the law was expanded in a legislative compromise to protect any "child." Some have interpreted that to mean anyone under 19.
Nebraska officials said 11 children ranging in age from 1 to 17 were left at hospitals Wednesday under the state's safe haven law. Nine of those children, five boys and four girls, are from the same family. A recently widowed father who said he "fell apart" after his wife died left them at Creighton Medical Center in Omaha, shown above.
Staton anonymously left the five boys and four girls ages 1 to 17 at Creighton University Medical Center's emergency room on Wednesday night. He has a 10th child, a daughter who is 18 and was not dropped off.
A number of relatives have volunteered to take the siblings, said Kathie Osterman, a spokeswoman for the state department Health and Human Services.
Staff members were doing required background checks Friday in hopes of placing the children in the next few days, she said.
Staton said his wife died early last year, shortly after delivering their youngest child. He said he quit his job because of his family responsibilities but couldn't pay rent or utilities or take care of his kids.
"I was with her for 17 years, and then she was gone," he said of his late wife. "What was I going to do? We raised them together. I didn't think I could do it alone. I fell apart. I couldn't take care of them."
Staton said he surrendered them so they would be safe.
A call Friday to a number listed for Staton went unanswered.
A 2007 interview with Staton's oldest daughter in Omaha North High School's student newspaper said she shouldered some of the parenting duties at home. Despite helping to feed her siblings, check their homework and put them to bed, the teen managed to graduate a year early.
Once a child is abandoned under the safe haven law, the courts become involved. Parental rights don't end automatically, but parents who change their minds about abandonment may find it difficult to regain custody.
At least 16 children have been abandoned since the law took effect in July.
Hospitals call police when a child is left, and officers will usually place a child in protective custody. Then the county attorney determines whether a child should be allowed to return home and makes a recommendation to a judge.
"If we see another family being left off, then we're going to have to do something immediately," said state Sen. Arnie Stuthman, who introduced legislation that was the basis for the law.
Stuthman said lawmakers need to set a maximum age for children who can be handed over to the state, and he's not sure whether it can wait until the Legislature reconvenes in January.
But it's not clear whether Gov. Dave Heineman will call a special session to modify the law, even though he has said it should be changed.
Todd Landry, director of the division of Children and Family Services, said the safe-haven law was designed to help children who are in danger, but none of the kids who were dropped off had been in harm's way. Landry said he empathizes with parents who struggle to raise their families, but "it is the job of a parent to be a parent." He said there are resources to help them.
James Blue, president and CEO of the Lincoln-based nonprofit Cedars, which works with abused and neglected children, said he's been inundated with calls ever since the safe-haven law took effect.
He said the group gets more than 10 calls a day from struggling parents, and its temporary shelter is at its capacity of 15.
"While this (law) has, I think, exposed an underbelly of our society of families that are dropping teenagers off forever at a hospital, it has also given a message to families that there is help out there," Blue said.
He said it's important for the state to have a safe-haven law, but there needs to be an age limit for the children who are left behind.
Nebraska lawmakers tried for years to pass the law, and they succeeded this year only after intense debate. Senators worried that an age limit was too arbitrary and that it might endanger youngsters who were just a week too old.
"It does open a door to older children being left off," Sen. Gwen Howard said during debate of the bill. But she added: "I don't see that being a problem."
She acknowledged Friday that the lack of an age limit had become an issue, but insisted it offers the state an opportunity to reach out to struggling families.
"We need to look at the bigger picture of what's going on with parents and children," Howard said.
Sen. Ernie Chambers, who cast the lone vote against the law, said Friday that lawmakers will be forced to revisit a bad bill.
"I knew it would have broad results, and they would have to come back and readdress the issue," he said.
Nebraska was the last state to adopt a safe-haven law. Most other states have focused their laws on protecting infants.
For years, child-welfare experts have disagreed about whether safe-haven laws reduce the total number of abandoned children.
Adam Pertman, executive director of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute and an opponent of safe-haven laws, said he's never seen anything like what's happening in Nebraska.
"What we're seeing is the unfolding of a policy that wasn't well thought-out," he said.
What a pickup move that was. ;)
