Refusing To Put A Normal Child On Psych Drugs Results In Swat Teams and a Tank

Originally posted by TsukiLunar

I think so too. Rather, it should be focused on whether or not CPS had any right to take the child in the first place. They really didn't and THAT is alarming since they tried to any way. CPS needs to be investigated to find out if any other children were unjustly taken and those who ordered it punished.

We recently went through a CPS investigation. The case worker was wonderful. The psychiatrist that over reacted - - - needs some more training.

It's extremely difficult in these cases to really know all the facts.

reply to post by ninjas4321


Way to fight the system! She's like a modern day Rosa Parks minus the racism, and no I'm not implying that Rosa Parks was racist. I'm implying that she fought for peoples rights, which is exactly what this woman is doing but the subject doesn't have to do with racism.

Originally posted by GrimReaper86
reply to post by ninjas4321

 

Way to fight the system! She's like a modern day Rosa Parks minus the racism.

Why? Because she is fighting the system

Do you even care what the reality is?

reply to post by Annee


I understand that over medicating children can be a concern, that I do.

On the flip side, parents can be incredibly stupid when it comes to such things. If it had been proven that the child absolutely needed medication to function, but instead was "medicated" with some kind of new age thing then one could make the argument that the child was in danger.

That doesn't seem to be the situation here however. Yes, the mother seemed to be using less traditional methods but it was never proven the child needed medication. So I am having a hard time grasping why CPS felt the need to step in.

As a matter of fact, why were they on the radar of CPS to begin with?

Personally - - - I would have welcomed CPS putting James Eagan Holmes in a secure environment when he was still a minor.

Keep the daughter's name in mind.

reply to post by Annee

Do you even care what the reality is?

What do you mean?

reply to post by TsukiLunar


No argument from me.

Just beware which Emotional Band Wagon you jump on.

Originally posted by GrimReaper86
reply to post by Annee

 

Do you even care what the reality is?

What do you mean?

What if this child turns out to be another James Holmes?

What if she really needs to be medicated?

Beware in siding against the system. They could be right.

reply to post by Annee


The man is insane. You could have done whatever you wanted to while he was younger, but short of locking him up before he ever had the chance to do anything wrong, it wouldn't have made a difference. He is insane. Schizophrenia happens at his age.

I keep seeing people call him 'monster"....he isn't no monster. He is a man with schizophrenia.

reply to post by Annee




Many on this site just like to be anti establishment.

I think CPS made a mistake, that does not mean they are bad or against the American people. And that does not mean they are something to be fought against and defeated.

Some of us want CPS to be better about their work, not to stop doing it altogether.

This post is not about you, but about the people saying score one for freedom!

reply to post by Annee


If you believe that then you deserve to have your freedom's taken away, and this thing with James Holmes seems conveniently designed to make you question the validity of keeping those freedoms. Think about all the things run by the government, and aside from the military, name one thing the government does better then the private sector? # the government/system. I'll stick to seeking help for my child when I need it from private healthcare providers. I don't need one provided for me.

Originally posted by GrimReaper86
reply to post by Annee

 

If you believe that then you deserve to have your freedom's taken away, and this thing with James Holmes seems conveniently designed to make you question the validity of keeping those freedoms.

Yeah - well I think your response/viewpoint is very childish and unrealistic.

reply to post by Annee


and I think you'll regret your viewpoint more later when you don't have the rights you're so accustomed to.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Annee

 

The man is insane.

How do you know? Seriously - - how do you know? You know nothing about him - - except what the media tells you. And all they have is hearsay and opinions.

Not only that. You know nothing about this 13 year old girl.

You could have done whatever you wanted to while he was younger, but short of locking him up before he ever had the chance to do anything wrong, it wouldn't have made a difference. He is insane. Schizophrenia happens at his age.

I am fully aware of the onset of Schizophrenia. My friend's daughter is Schizophrenic. It took years to get a accurate diagnoses. You don't just take a blood test.

I keep seeing people call him 'monster"....he isn't no monster. He is a man with schizophrenia.

This part I agree. But it seems there were warning signs (as there usually is) early on.

Originally posted by GrimReaper86
reply to post by Annee

 

and I think you'll regret your viewpoint more later when you don't have the rights you're so accustomed to.

Doubt it.

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by Annee

 

Many on this site just like to be anti establishment.

I know. And emotional. I try to keep a level head.

I think CPS made a mistake,

I do too. Honestly.

Some of us want CPS to be better about their work, not to stop doing it altogether.

Children definitely need state protection. Unfortunately - - there is the people factor - - which is sometimes great - - and sometimes not.

Alright, I'll play the bad guy side of the story for the debate on this. Though, before I get into my few questions, I want to say it was overkill and parents should have the right to choose what medications their kid takes.

However, speaking about parents choosing what medications a child takes, there is the flip-side where there are children in desperate need of medication, but parents refuse to give it to them because of some misinformed belief. They would rather make their own child suffer because of their beliefs or even worse because they don't want to pay for medication even if they can afford it just to save a few bucks.

Next, all we have is this woman's side of the story and what the newscasters reported in the video. Which, might I add, was way over the top with the dramatic music and editing. For all we know swat was called in because when she barricaded herself in to keep out child services, she may have said something like "if you come in, I'll shoot my daughter and myself". Obviously, if there is someone barricaded in a building and there is the threat of harm to any people inside, then swat will be called immediately, because those are the situations they are designed for.

Now, I have been arguing possibly hypothetical points here in the case without all the facts, but one thing about this video really annoyed me. There was no tank called into the scene with the swat, that is just added sensationalism to the story. I do see an APC(Armored Personnel Carrier) in the video, which shares some similarities to a tank, but is vastly different in some key aspects. The main difference is that APC has no offensive capabilities, there is a ram on front, but that is for the swat team to break into barricaded houses like this situation. For it to be a tank that thing would need a hell of a lot more armament on it, mainly it would have a huge large-caliber gun on the front to blow things from miles away. It just really irked me that it jumped all over the idea it was a tank, and if you took that swat APC to combat zone in Iraq or somewhere you would be absolutely screwed.

Hopefully I don't get flamed for my first two questions/ideas on the situation, though I had to point out the last one. No need to make the story more exciting by calling an APC a tank.

If we weren't all so "connected" to our devices, I feel we could offer help and give help when it's needed. Now we just sit at home, or anywhere with internet connection and rant about things that make us mad, sad, glad. See anything wrong with that?

We talk about all these things that are wrong in the USA, but what do we do about it?
I'm not talking about sending letters to state reps, because that really is ineffective. The state rep, Im willing to bet, probably doesn't even read his mail. His assistants just notify him of the important letters (bills, people sending letters claiming they will take harsh action if so and so bill isn't passed).

The system we live in doesn't work for the people. It works for the ones who created the system, while we watched, amazed at what we can create and engineer. The mass public has become something of it's own organism. They get wiled up and amazed when things happen that they can't explain. They get outraged when something happens, that shouldn't be happening. Like the shooting, cops were too late, and cops are always too late.

My apartment got broken into, and it took cops 3 hours to get there, to tell me they aren't going to fingerprint or pursue anything further, because I'm a college kid and they deemed the things stolen to not be of real value. Cops don't work, they are for the money.


When we realize that money is the root of evil, and then we realize we don't have to ,live our lives on money. Of course at this point, how else would we live? We've become addicted to money as a whole population. Everything requires money, and service and trade skills are rarely used for anything other than money. It's all about stacking dat cheddar now adays. Which is a whole different thread in itself.

OT:
This situation is of course, incredibly out of control, and a total waste of extreme force. If a woman doesn't want to give her kid synthetic drugs that have been human tested for maybe 5 years, then let her continue to not dose her up that could give her daughter some onset disease later in life. Drugs have become what we thrive on, and its purchased by money! Take this for that, but it will give you these effects. These pills take care of those effects, but leave you with runny poops, thin blood, and what have you.
This lady is excersizing whats left of our right to be "free". If anyone disagrees with what she did, then I really don't know what to tell you. You must like being forced onto the teet of gov't when all they produce is sour milk that your body adapts to, and it leaves a very distinct "smell" about you.

Rant over. Woman did the right thing, our secret police of the world police acted like a scared puppy when she refused their meds.

Originally posted by Annee
Personally - - - I would have welcomed CPS putting James Eagan Holmes in a secure environment when he was still a minor.

Keep the daughter's name in mind.

Keep the daughters name in mind? What sort of odious prediction is this? What sort of foul propaganda are you engaged in? Never mind due process of law and all the criminality of the Detroit police and child protective services, and never mind the rights of a mother, you, in one thoughtless sentence would have everyone forget all that and instead wait and never forget the name of this little girl because you want everyone to believe she will grow up to commit mass murder like the accused James Eagan Holmes who had no discernible history of diagnosed mental illness a child and seemed to have safe and stable environment at home with his parents:

Holmes was born on December 13, 1987,[1] the son of a registered nurse and a mathematician working as a senior scientist.[3][4][5] His father has degrees from Stanford, UCLA and Berkeley.[6] James Holmes was raised in Castroville, California, where he attended elementary school,[7] and San Diego.[4][8][9] He graduated from Westview High School in the Torrey Highlands community of San Diego in 2006.[5][10][11] Holmes played soccer and ran cross-country at Westview High.[6] He attended a local Lutheran church with his family, according to the church's pastor.[12][13]

That's right, let's not hold accountable the criminal child protective services of Detroit and their lackeys the Detroit police, let's instead indict the little girl of Maryanne Godboldo and hold her accountable for the crimes you predict she will now commit. Let us never mind that you make the comparison between an innocent little girl and James Eagan Holmes and so ignorantly do you attempt to make this connection that you believe Holmes showed clear and recognizable sings of mental illness while still a minor in spite of the evidence against that.

Further, you also ignore the fact that there have been plenty of people who have been released from mental institutions only to kill afterward:

Earl Leonard Nelson

After several escapes and attempted escapes, Nelson was released from the Napa mental institution in 1925 and started on his killing spree early in 1926. He killed his first victim, Clara Newman on February 20, 1926, and two weeks later, he claimed his second victim, Laura Beal.

Schizophrenic son 'kills parents' in their home months after he was released from mental institution

Man accused of stabbing wife after being released from mental ward

I suppose we should all be grateful that, at the very least, you're trying not to be emotional about this. Sigh.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by WorkingClassMan

 

Uh-huh. None of it means squat to you which explain s why it appears you didn't even bother to follow the links I spoon-fed you. Did you not read the news article I cited reporting on the process of "rubber stamping" and it was not a "court order" as you hope to frame it. There was no due process of law, and yes all law enforcement personnel have a legal and lawful responsibility to ensure the "court order" that has been presented to them is lawful. All law enforcement personnel, including Detroit SWAT personnel, have taken an oath of office to uphold and defend both the federal Constitution and the Constitution for the State of Michigan. Those SWAT personnel had an obligation, binding by their oath of office, to verify the legality of the "court order" that sent them to extricate a mothers little girl.

A mothers little girl. Little girl. A mother. A mothers little girl. This is who SWAT were sent to arrest and extricate, a little girl and her mother. SWAT. SWAT. SWAT. Special Weapons and Tactics, SWAT is an elite tactical unit that specialize in hostage rescues and counter-terrorism, serving high risk warrants and subduing suspects who have barricaded themselves. It is the latter that you and the hapless and most imprudent Detroit Police Department hope to rely on to justify what ultimately became all charges against Maryanne Godboldo dropped and a judge declaring the whole mess unconstitutional. Did you ignore that part, where the judge called the child removal order unconstitutional?

You are entitled to your opinions, but the arguments you've made would not help any of these SWAT personnel who acted under of color of law to serve an unconstitutional order to rip a child from the arms of her mother and it is arguments like the one you have made that have paid for the swimming pools, vacation homes and Mercedes Benz that lawyers earned suing the crap out of errant law enforcement personnel.

Those members of SWAT took an oath of office to uphold the Declaration of Rights and to defend those rights but instead decided to let a bogus piece of paper that did not follow any due process of law to justify acting unlawfully. Those SWAT personnel are going to have a hard time arguing good faith given the circumstances and if they are to rely upon it, their lawyer would be ill advised to take up the arguments you've made.

Let me start by saying thanks for entitling me to my opinion (srs) and I don't think her child should have been removed or forms rubber stamped but address my questions like I asked. There was no tank & SWAT was not there to serve a warrent stop saying they were, because they are 2 of the main manipulations being thrown round here.

"Special Weapons and Tactics, SWAT is an elite tactical unit that specialize in hostage rescues and counter-terrorism, serving high risk warrants and subduing suspects who have barricaded themselves."

Thanks for that part now tell me why SWAT was there I know you know the answer cause you posted it. (see above "")

I don't know whether the woman was armed or fired on anyone I don't care either way, what I care about is that people want over dramatise the event and make those officers responsible.
They got a call that a woman had refused to hand over her child, armed herself, fired a shot & barricaded herself in the house with her child. (insert possible hostage) How many times does things like that end in dead kid & or parent?
I would not want SWAT pissing about checking facts/legality whatever I want their arse out the door doing the job they were trained to do.
Respond to a possible life threatening situation (insert 11 hour stand off) & worry about what idiot hadn't done his job properly after we know that child is safe.

Dispatch: Calling SWAT we have a women shooting at docs workers who went to remove her child.

SWAT: Whats the current situation?

Dispatch: Shots fired, at least one female barricaded in residence with a child.

SWAT: I'll get back to you in a couple of days when we have checked this warrant was constitutional.

Dispatch: Never mind, we just got word mother executed the child & turned the gun on herself.

SWAT: Well I would have gone & saved the kid but I had to check the legality first & you know if I rolled up in an APC people would say "ohh look at the heroes turn up in their tank to force pills on a kid".

See where I'm going, I don't care about the constitution/rubber stamps or anything like that when a child could be in danger. I would rather ensure the child's safety & hang the judge/system/doc later.

Don't hate the player hate the game.
FYI player = SWAT, DOCS worker
Game = GOV/bureaucracy/bull dust