Some states have safe haven laws for children in place (a parent can relinquish their child at a safe place like hospital, police dept, etc when they're unable to care for the child any longer). Should these laws apply to any minor child or should they be limited to infants only? Why?
I agree with all of you. I read today about the law in Nebraska. Currently there is no set age in place. The issue arose when a grandmother dropped her 17 year old grandson off at a hospital. She had legal guardianship over him as he was a ward of the state. Others have come from other states & dropped their kids off in Nebraska. Sadly, Nebraska feels like a dumping ground for unwanted kids. They want to change the age limit to up to 3 DAYS old only. So, where does this leave all the other kids who get abandoned? It varies from state to state. What the heck?! No matter the age of the child, they deserve a chance to survival and to be protected by this law. Thanks for all your opinions.
Answer by OldrWizrMom at 8:20 PM on Oct. 30, 2008
Answer by Anonymous at 6:59 PM on Oct. 30, 2008
Answer by perksmom at 7:02 PM on Oct. 30, 2008
I think it's a great idea and there should be no age limit on it and it should be in effect in all states, because the alternative would be children abandoned on the streets ,neglected ,abused and killed, that's why the safe haven law should have no age limit.
Answer by FishingMama at 7:07 PM on Oct. 30, 2008
Answer by BlueSaphire at 7:09 PM on Oct. 30, 2008
Answer by Married2theBest at 7:14 PM on Oct. 30, 2008
Answer by pnwmom at 7:26 PM on Oct. 30, 2008
Answer by flutterfae at 8:44 PM on Oct. 30, 2008
Answer by shmorris56 at 12:59 AM on Oct. 31, 2008
Check out some of the top posts today in Groups: