Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

These Children are Mine and the State Can’t Have Them!

Posted by   + Show Post
This is WRONG! no matter which country its happening in!

Melissa Harris-Perry of MSNBC and former Massachusetts Secretary of Education Paul Reville said that children belong to all of us.

No, they don’t. I’ve seen what happens to children when they are owned by the state. State ownership of children leads to neglect. It cripples children, so don’t do it. That is so glaringly obvious that I wonder why Harris-Perry and Reville say otherwise.

I’ve cleaned up the mess of state owned children. My son came from an Eastern European orphanage. Many children died there. He was examined by a foreign doctor before he was given an immigration visa. His medical report described him as “in fine health.” When we got him home, he tested positive for five parasites and diseases. That explained his continuous diarrhea. If that was “fine health” then God help those who are considered ill. Many of the other children would have died as these diseases swept through the orphanage. He contracted some of the diseases from drinking dirty water or food contaminated with feces. We had some tense days as we waited for his AIDS test. It came back negative. As odd as it sounds, his medical neglect was the good news.

He couldn’t speak any language. At first we thought he was profoundly deaf when he would not turn to the human voice. Think what it means that a two and a half year old child is completely uninterested in the human voice. It means he was treated like a stockyard animal. He was warehoused like a caged chicken for two and a half years. That leaves scars that medicine can’t cure. This “healthy” child only made eye contact when he was being fed. He was five before he asked his first question. That is what state ownership does to children.

My adopted son wasn’t being singled out for mistreatment. On the contrary, he was a typical child of the state. He belonged to the state and was being bred as a perfect socialist citizen. Some might complain that my son was from Eastern Europe so the criticism of state ownership does not apply to socialism in the US. Some might complain that socialism might not work for babies, but state ownership works well for older children. No, it doesn’t. A similar problem exists here in the US.

One of my foster children could not read by the time he was 12 years old. He was bright and outgoing, but he could not spell his own name or read a street sign. His dad was also illiterate, so I doubt his parents helped him with his homework. That changed when he came into our home. We were shocked at first because my foster son had attended public school most of his life. Unfortunately, he also received a social promotion from grade to grade for at least the last 4 years. He clearly could not do the work. That “pass them along” approach is all too typical in public schools.

Unfortunately, it took almost a half year to get the public school’s attention. We were afraid our foster child would move to another placement before he learned to read. If a school is required by law to respond within 56 days, then they will respond on day 56… or later. They have free lawyers, and you don’t. taught him to read. We taught him to write and to spell. We read to him. We read with him. Sometimes we spelled words at the dinner table and drove him crazy with frustration because he could not follow the conversation. We hired reading tutors for him. One problem was that our foster son had the interests of a bright 12 year old while the introductory reading books were written for someone half his age. We wrote short stories about his family for him to read. These short stories became more demanding as his reading developed. We bought him audio books so he could read along with more advanced stories. This beautifully adventurous boy dove into the Harry Potter series and Lord of the Rings. My foster son loved to read by the time he left us and returned to his parents.

Our foster children literally belonged to the state when they were with us. We had to ask permission from the state to take them with us if we left the county on weekend trips. There is no doubt that the state owned these children, while we merely rented them.

That approach doesn’t work to raise responsible adults. Several of my foster son’s sisters are now single moms and living on state assistance. Children need parents who will pay attention to their particular child and provide what their child needs. Any parent with two or more children knows that each child is different. Children thrive because their parents care about them. There is no substitute. Money isn’t a substitute either.

People who claim otherwise have hidden motives, and they are not interested in the good of the children or of society. They will never call it state ownership of children. That doesn’t change what it is.

Beware of people bearing state ownership of children.

Do YOU feel that America is claiming state ownership of oyr children OR is this just one person's experience?



by on Feb. 16, 2014 at 11:50 AM
Replies (11-13):
by Sonja on Feb. 17, 2014 at 12:16 PM
That, I am in total agreement.
But how many actually have this type of common sense let alone the wisdom to go along?

Quoting bluerooffarm:

I'm not saying that they are capable of totally making the decisions, but I think they should be heard even at a young age.  A cousin of mine got divorced (nearly 15 years ago now) and his oldest was the only one that the judge questioned.  He (the 9 year old) was adamant that he did not want to live with his mother, not even visitation.  The judge gave him to the father but did give visitation to the mother.  But the judge never even asked the younger 2 (4 and 5 at the time), he just shipped them to the mother.  Over the years, he slowly moved them all to the father and by the time the oldest was ready to move out on his own he had even ended visitation with the mother.  The things that happened to those kids are appalling and could have been mitigated by just listening to them!  I'm not saying that the judge should have totally left it up to them, but listening to them might have made him have the checkups more frequently, he could have heard from the very beginning what was happening and maybe not taken so long to react.

Quoting kirbymom: I think I understand all of what you say and even agree with a lot of what you daid but, I am not sure that I can agree that small children are capable enough to make adult type decisions or even understand the consequences of such decisions. BUT... I do believe they can form opinions and can have good ones to boot.

Quoting bluerooffarm:

It's probably the libertarian in me, but IMO a child is not the state's but he/she is not MINE either.  A child is his own.  He has his own passions, his own ideas, desires, and goals.  He has his own mind.  However in this society, children are not given the same rights as adults.  They are not given the same voice for their choices as adults are.  The vast majority of parents believe they are acting in the best interest of their child, but what happens when they are not?  The state when it doesact has workers who acting feel as though THEY have the child's best interest at heart as well.  What happens when they don't?  Things get ugly.  I'm not one to believe that a parent is always the best judge of what will work well for their child, but I am even less likely to believe that state workers will know what is best for a child.  So often the child's voice is lost.  They are ignored by the parents and then they are ignored by the system as well.  They are ignored by the system because we are under the false impression that because they are young (their brains are not fully developed, they are raging hormones, and whatever other gobbldygook we tell ourselves to make us feel better) they are unable to form an opinion on what is happening around them.  That is unjust.  Their opinions should be heard, and I think their opinions would often be surprising.  I doubt the children in this article would have wished to be "passed on" in grades without learning what they needed to learn.  I doubt they would have wanted to move from one foster situation to another.  But so often they get no say in their lives.

I'm not sure how to fix this system, but I think we need to hold children to the same rights as we give adults.  They should have a say as to what happens to them, giving them stock in the situation and confidence in their own desision making capabilities along the way. 

by Group Admin on Feb. 17, 2014 at 1:07 PM
1 mom liked this

It's rare, unfortunately.  Very rare.

Quoting kirbymom: That, I am in total agreement.
But how many actually have this type of common sense let alone the wisdom to go along?

Quoting bluerooffarm:

by on Feb. 17, 2014 at 5:23 PM
1 mom liked this

I remember seeing that statement. 

What they mean is that the state should have the ability to put restraints and guidelines on what is best for the child. Not just restraints against physical harm but a wide array of things. One example is in Canada the state is allowed to determine if the packed lunch you sent the child to school with is "healthy" enough. The parent can be fined for not following the guidelines. In many places(even in schools in the US) you are not even allowed as a parent to send your child with a packed lunch. 

It can spread into parenting styles and what is acceptable by the state. What kind of medical "treatments" your child gets(think about vaccinations), also if you have the right to teach your child at home or not. Such as the German ban on homeschooling and that a chilid can be removed from your home by the state solely because you homeschool. It can be a very dangerous concept.

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)