Unsubstantiated Child Neglect

vraiblonde

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Roll that around in your head for a second: "Unsubstantiated child neglect."

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/soci...ed-child-neglect-letting-kids-walk-home-alone
The Maryland parents who were under investigation after letting their two young children walk home by themselves have been found responsible for unsubstantiated child neglect, The Washington Post reports.
Click to expand...

Because these people let their children walk home from school and the park, they have been charged with *unsubstantiated* child neglect and are under investigation by CPS, who can keep an active file on them for 5 years. I just don't know what to say about this sort of garbage.

And the parents are even Montgomery County hippies who label themselves as "free-range". Unsubstantiated child neglect - what does that even freaking mean?
 
Vince

Vince

......
The nanny state must keep their control over all that you do. Can't let your child out the door without proper supervision. :bs:
 
Midnightrider

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
vraiblonde said:
Roll that around in your head for a second: "Unsubstantiated child neglect."

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/soci...ed-child-neglect-letting-kids-walk-home-alone


Because these people let their children walk home from school and the park, they have been charged with *unsubstantiated* child neglect and are under investigation by CPS, who can keep an active file on them for 5 years. I just don't know what to say about this sort of garbage.

And the parents are even Montgomery County hippies who label themselves as "free-range". Unsubstantiated child neglect - what does that even freaking mean?
Click to expand...

it means the court found it was wrong for this twit to let her 6 and 10 yo go to the park by themselves but there isn't technically a law against it. As i heard this lady claimed that the law "you can not leave a child under X home alone" didn't apply because her kids were not in her home. The court found that she was negelctful to let her kids wander the streets alone even if it wasn't against the letter of the law. This idiot is why we end up with laws about everything.
 
Last edited:
Gilligan

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Misfit said:
When I was a kid my Dad wouldn't let me in the door. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You too, huh? I had to go hunt and kill my own dinner if I wanted to eat. After I turned 6.

But seriously....When I was 9 or 10 I was free to range for many miles away from home, and often did. By road, woods, both. Same for all my friends. Why is that now wrong today? Who said so?
 
Last edited:
Chris0nllyn

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Midnightrider said:
it means the court found it was wrong for this twit to let her 6 and 10 yo go to the park by themselves but there isn't technically a law against it. As i heard this lady claimed that the law "you can not leave a child under X home alone" didn't apply because her kids were not in her home. The court found that she was negelctful to let her kids wander the streets alone even if it wasn't against the letter of the law. This idiot is why we end up with laws about everything.
Click to expand...

No, CPS charged them under Family Law 5-801 because there's no law for "free range kids", and it's even a long shot to claim the kids were "locked or confined in a dwelling" if they are playing in a park.

A person who is charged with the care of a child under the age of 8 years may not allow the child to be locked or confined in a dwelling, building, enclosure, or motor vehicle while the person charged is absent and the dwelling, building, enclosure, or motor vehicle is out of the sight of the person charged unless the person charged provides a reliable person at least 13 years old to remain with the child to protect the child.
Click to expand...

http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/f...on=5-801&ext=html&session=2015RS&tab=subject5

The issue was when she called CPS and someone told her "...Judges have interpreted the law to include parks..."

The cop threatened the dad that if he didn't show his ID, and came to the door with anything else "shots would be fired", and basically, anyone who watches TV knows that "free range" kids are in constant danger.

CPS then showed up later to make the dad sign a "plan" to make sure the kids aren't unsupervised. the father initially refused, then was threatened that they would take away the kids if he refused.


This isn't about them being "idiots", it's about a nosey neighbor calling the cops, and CPS sticking their nose into a situation and making it worse. It's about a parent's freedom to send their kids 2 blocks down the street to a park. I'm glad the parents have vowed to continue letting their kids be "free".
 
Dakota

Dakota

~~~~~~~
So basically, the way many of us were raised doesn't fly today.... :ohwell:

I would run out the door after school and wouldn't come home until dark - or the dinner bell rang to come home.
 
Chris0nllyn

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Gilligan said:
You too, huh? I had to go hunt and kill my own dinner if I wanted to eat. After I turned 6.

But seriously....When I was 9 or 10 I was free to range for many miles away from home, and often did. By road, woods, both. Same for all my friends. Why is that now wrong today? Who said so?
Click to expand...

Media.

You see, things like this are often exaggerated by the presense of the media, and how it regurgitates through social media.

It's safe to be a kid now, and has been.

Just as it's safe to be a police officer right now, but if one listens to the media without question, they are led to believe it's a dangerous time for them.

Just as Lumber Liquidators has safe floors, but watch the news and you'll want to tear the floors out of your home.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
Midnightrider said:
it means the court found it was wrong for this twit to let her 6 and 10 yo go to the park by themselves but there isn't technically a law against it. As i heard this lady claimed that the law "you can not leave a child under X home alone" didn't apply because her kids were not in her home. The court found that she was negelctful to let her kids wander the streets alone even if it wasn't against the letter of the law. This idiot is why we end up with laws about everything.
Click to expand...

Wait, what was that whole rule of law thing again? You cant find someone guilty of laws that HAVEN'T BEEN FREAKIN WRITTEN YET!!!! If it's NOT AGAINST THE DAMN LAW, you cant be found guilty of it. And I'm pretty sure you wont get new ones out of this. Wander the streets alone? No, they knew exactly where they were going, and exactly how to get there, and had been trained in how to handle situations that might arise in the course of this journey. I'll be so glad when the societal pendulum swings back the other way and people understand to stay the hell out of others peoples business.
 
SG_Player1974

SG_Player1974

New Member
Can't bother to exhaust the time to find the sleezy a-holes that actually harm children. It is far easier and a lot less work to just go after the parents that are sitting right at home! A statistic is a statistic. An arrest is an arrest right?
 
Misfit

Misfit

Lawful neutral
Gilligan said:
But seriously....When I was 9 or 10 I was free to range for many miles away from home, and often did. By road, woods, both. Same for all my friends. Why is that now wrong today? Who said so?
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

I was free to go out alone when I was 7 or 8.

I grew up with the town park across the street from my house where I constantly got beat up by other kids....but after school, if it was nice, we were out the door until the street lights came on and in the summer I was out getting pummeled until much later. :yay:
 
Last edited:
Gilligan

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Misfit said:
I grew up with the town park across the street from my house where I constantly got beat up by other kids but after school, if it was nice, we were out the door until the street lights came on and in the summer I was out getting pummeled until much later.
Click to expand...

That's one reason I started open carrying at age 9.
 
Midnightrider

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
Misfit said:
:yeahthat:

I was free to go out alone when I was 7 or 8.

I grew up with the town park across the street from my house where I constantly got beat up by other kids but after school, if it was nice, we were out the door until the street lights came on and in the summer I was out getting pummeled until much later.
Click to expand...

there are a lot of things that are illegal today that would have been fine 50-75 years ago :shrug:

supervise your freaking children. s that really htat hard of a concept for people? If you cant leave your kid alone in your home, you shouldn't leave them alone in a park or anywhere else for that matter. You guys can defend the free range crazy lady, having known kids raised by those type of parents i can say the rest of us end up raising your kids for you.
 
Chris0nllyn

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Midnightrider said:
there are a lot of things that are illegal today that would have been fine 50-75 years ago :shrug:

supervise your freaking children. s that really htat hard of a concept for people? If you cant leave your kid alone in your home, you shouldn't leave them alone in a park or anywhere else for that matter. You guys can defend the free range crazy lady, having known kids raised by those type of parents i can say the rest of us end up raising your kids for you.
Click to expand...

That's ridiculous.

I grew up in a large neighborhood where a bunch of us were rarely under parental supervision. Building forts, catching frogs, fishing, riding bikes, etc.

there's absolutely zero reason a parent should be required to constantly keep watch over their children. More to the point of this thread, the is no law that says that, and that's the crux of the issue.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
Midnightrider said:
there are a lot of things that are illegal today that would have been fine 50-75 years ago :shrug:

supervise your freaking children. s that really htat hard of a concept for people? If you cant leave your kid alone in your home, you shouldn't leave them alone in a park or anywhere else for that matter. You guys can defend the free range crazy lady, having known kids raised by those type of parents i can say the rest of us end up raising your kids for you.
Click to expand...

See, I think kids can be allowed freedom to move about the world in safety, and without being nannied every second of the day. Since of course you don't know these kids, nor the parents, how in the hell can you say categorically that you know you would be supervising them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top