- Oct 2, 2020
- 27,768
- 15,120
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
It's evidence of an agenda to grant autonomy to children.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
It's evidence of an agenda to grant autonomy to children.No. Parents should have control over their own children until they become adults. This is insanity.
Have to wonder how much of this is due to all the trans ideology children are being subjected to these days. It seems more of this is to be expected as time goes on. It wouldn't be surprising if it becomes epidemic.There's WAY more to this than the Fox New article is letting on.
The Child in this case was diagnosed with major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, parent-child relationship problem, and gender dysphoria. There was also a borderline personality disorder diagnosis.
DCS investigated and found a Child In Need of Help (CHIN) situation. Specifically CHINS-1 (Child's physical or mental condition was seriously impaired or seriously endangered due to the Parents' neglect) and CHINS-2 (Child's physical or mental health was seriously endangered due to injury by the Parents' acts or omissions).
DCS went to a trial court to get a removal, based on multiple findings that removing the Child from their Parent's home was both necessary to safeguard their welfare and in their best interest. The court held a combined initial and detention hearing, and made a finding that there was probable cause to believe that Child was a CHINS and that Child's detainment was necessary to safeguard Child's health.
The DCS then filed a dispositional motion to add a CHINS-6 classification (Child substantially endangering their own health, in this case anorexia and self-isolation from parents). The parents did not object to this addition, and the trial court granted the motion.
The trial court then subsequently held a hearing following an agreement between the parents and DCS to dismiss the CHINS-1 and CHINS-2 allegations, unsubstantiate and expunge the record of any reports related to the parents, and proceed under the CHINS-6 statute.
The trial court then found that remaining in the Parents' care would be contrary to Child's welfare, and ordered a partial removal. The Child and Parents were ordered to attend counselling, with the parents barred from mentioning the Child's transgender status during these sessions.
The parents then appealed the removal. But, they did not object to of challenge the CHINS-6 finding (which the removal is based on), so the appellate court ruled their apart of their appeal moot and agreed with the DCS/trial court findings on the CHINS-6 classification and upheld the removal.
The parents are now arguing that removing the child on a CHINS-6 (child endangering their own health [because of parents actions]) violates the 1st and 14th Amendments. Appellate court has already found that the removal was not based on the dismissed CHINS-1 and CHINS-2 allegations, and thus doesn't violate either.
The child is now 18 years old, and the parents no longer have say over A.C.It is a child. A child that doesn't need to know about the trans agenda. Let children be children! When they are older, let them decide. And no, I do not have children.
Gender affirming non compliance just slid over into the child abuse catagory. Look at it this way, its better than the child going into deep depression and ultimately committing suicide. This is not an uncommon outcome.Indiana parents warn nation after child is removed from home for improper pronoun usage: ‘Can happen anywhere’
A religous couple in Indiana is asking the Supreme Court to hold the state accountable for removing their child from their home after they declined to use his chosen name and pronouns.www.foxnews.com
What say you all? Did the Indiana Department of Child Services do the right thing, or not?
If this is the case then I wonder why this is a story.The child is now 18 years old, and the parents no longer have say over A.C.
What would you advise telling them about any trans feelings they may have?It is a child. A child that doesn't need to know about the trans agenda. Let children be children! When they are older, let them decide. And no, I do not have children.
Other media outlets do this as well.I, for one, am SHOCKED that Fox would leave out a bunch of relevant details and only focus on those most likely to rile up their audience.
Yes - it's a good reminder to always seek out context for any claims that stoke a strong emotional response.Other media outlets do this as well.
remember the Nick Sandmann fiasco?
yepOther media outlets do this as well.
remember the Nick Sandmann fiasco?
No, but I remember the Shirley Sherrod fiasco.Other media outlets do this as well.
remember the Nick Sandmann fiasco?
QFTThere's WAY more to this than the Fox New article is letting on.
I stand with the parents to raise their child as they see fit.What would you advise telling them about any trans feelings they may have?
Thank you for the informationThe child is now 18 years old, and the parents no longer have say over A.C.
Per Fox news, who should not be trusted to provide the whole story.Did you read the article? The parents did nothing wrong.
That’s right. There’s a lot more going on, but apparently he is no longer a child.Per Fox news, who should not be trusted to provide the whole story.
Just to clarify: Parents should have ABSOLUTELY limitless, dictatorial powers over their children and have carte blanche to do anything they deem fit?No. Parents should have control over their own children until they become adults. This is insanity.
After reading that, it appears that:
According to the state’s response opposing cert, filed Feb. 1, “One report alleged that Mother was using ‘rude and demeaning language’ toward A.C. ‘regarding Child’s transgender identity.’ The second report, just 10 days later, alleged that parents were ‘verbally and emotionally abusing Child because they do not accept Child’s transgender identity,’ and that ‘the abuse was getting worse.’”
A DCS family case manager investigated the reports and met with the parents, A.C. and A.C.’s siblings, and spoke with an employee of A.C.’s school.
DCS alleged A.C. was a child in need of services due to the neglect and the parents’ actions endangering A.C.’s health.
According to the CHINS petition, both Mary and A.C. “stated that Child had been suffering from an eating disorder for the past year but had yet to be evaluated by a medical professional”; the parents had withdrawn A.C. from school and DCS “was unaware of the family’s intent to enroll Child in a new school”; and the parents had “discontinued” any therapy for A.C.’s mental health issues.
The petition also alleged that A.C. did not feel mentally or emotionally safe in the home and was “more likely to have thoughts of self-harm and suicide” at home “due to mental and emotional abuse.”
After reading that, it appears that:
1. The child is clearly estranged from his parents, and does not want to live at home
2. After the "transgender identity" was rejected by his parents, the boy then embarked on a kind of hunger strike, and adopted an eating disorder, as a way to seek escape from the home
One wonders what led to all this dysfunction to begin with?
the state wasn't simply motivated by protecting the boy's transgender identity, but also to make sure he got treatment for the eating disorder
but I also see the common blackmail technique of transgender people of "if you don't let me go get hormones or a sex change operation, I'll kill myself, and it will be your fault"! Transgender activists push this tactic online
this whole thing is a cautionary tale for parents: you need to make sure your kid is getting brainwashed with ideology, or exposed to bad actors.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?