Forget Free-range children

[Racket_Man]

how about BACKYARD Children. Note this takes place in Manitoba or Winnipeg Canada

http://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/p...4R7&OCID=HPDHP

http://www.inquisitr.com/3027936/mom...e-in-backyard/

It seems a neighborhood hero busybody called CPS on a Mother who *gasp* allowed her 10 5 and 2 year olds to *DOUBLE GASP* play outdoors in their fenced in totally enclosed, manicured, AND safe backyard *TRIPLE GASP* alone by themselves with the Mother watching from the house .

The CPS visit (according to CPS that is) was just a "well being check" but in reality it was a FULL BLOWN detailed investigation into all things in the house.

Now the parents have a CPS "permanent record" for the "well being visit".

It seems you can't win for lose these days *le sigh*

[TheHuckster]

I heard about this one. I thought it was in Minnesota, but that's practically Canada, right?

The worst part is the permanent record. It's stupid enough to have a visit for such a pointless reason, and get harassed about how well the kids are taken care of, all because of an overzealous neighbor. But to have this on public records despite having been found cleared of any wrongdoing is horrible. This can affect the parents' future if they are in any line of work that involves children.

It shouldn't be this easy to get a CPS record. Had CPS found something wrong, then they should absolutely add it to a record. I would also be fine if CPS had filed this particular visit internally so that they could detect patterns, as long as it's not public record. But if they made a one-time investigation to respond to a neighbor's complaint and they determined everything was perfectly fine, then keep that out of the public.

[s_stabeler]

Huckster, from what the article says, it IS only a record internally with CPS.

On the other hand, it DOES sound like the CPS worker was overzealous, considering it sounds like the woman was subject to the same scrutiny as for a suspected abuser- it's noted in the article that she was grilled on if she drinks, takes drugs, how she punished her kids, if she had enough food in the house, and more that wasn't mentioned. Seriously? for someone who it was reported was letting a 10-year old, a 5-year old and a two-year old play in the garden with her apparently watching through the window. At best the two-year old needs supervision. HOWEVER, considering that the mother was close at hand, the 10-ear old is sufficient supervision (if there's a problem, the ten-year old can easily yell for her, and she can be there in seconds.)

[Aragarthiel]

I think what's really sad about these kinds of cases is that it makes good parents think they might get CPS called on them for any little thing. We all know that there aren't perfect parents- my 2-year-old has had her good share of falls and "where did she go?!" scares- and that essentially assures that even the best parents can have CPS called on them for minor things.

And I agree with the 2-year-old possibly needing supervision- IF there were no other appropriately-aged children or adults in the yard and/or the yard wasn't childproofed (fenced in, gate locked, gardening tools picked up, etc). My grandfather works for a local police department and recently went on a call where a 2-year-old wasn't being watched while playing in the yard (kid was in the front, parents were barbecuing in the back) and cut the tip of his finger off with a pair of garden shears.

[Ree]

While I think it was a ridiculous overreaction, I do know, in my case, a permanent closed file doesn't always hinder future dealings where children are involved.
When my daughter was very young, we had CAS (Children's Aid Society, our local version of CPS) called because someone saw a bruise on our daughter's back.
I had just had major surgery and was in the hospital for close to 3 weeks. My husband was looking after her alone, so there were a lot of friends and family stepping in to babysit.
She was at the restaurant where he worked and she had to use the bathroom. A waitress or friend from the restaurant took her down and she saw the bruise. Instead of asking my husband about it, she reported it. They investigated and concluded that it was just one of those clumsy little kid accidents, so it went no further, but they talked to several people before closing the file.
Years later, we became foster parents through that very same CAS office, so there obviously wasn't a huge problem having that one little blip.

As for the mother in this case, it's absolutely ridiculous. Holy crap, it's a wonder my siblings and I weren't all sent to foster care when we were kids. We spent hours playing outside and roaming the fields unsupervised.
I have seen so many intake workers and caseworkers who don't seem to feel anyone is properly able to parent a child.
I have also seen way too many vindictive people whose first act of revenge when they get pissed off about something, is to call and report the parent to CAS.
It's a waste of the system and tax dollars and takes away valuable time from legitimate cases in an already over burdened system.

[Gravekeeper]

Considering I spent half my childhood basically wandering through the woods / rivers / docks... -.-

[HYHYBT]

I like how both articles blame CPS, without even saying *what the person making the complaint actually said.* Without specific information on that, it's impossible to make a meaningful opinion about whether they were right to come out and ask a lot of questions.

If there really wasn't anything going on that would look wrong to a reasonable outsider, chances are it was someone with a grudge against the family rather than someone who thought playing outdoors was dangerous, though either is possible.

[BlaqueKatt]

Considering I spent half my childhood basically wandering through the woods / rivers / docks... -.-

heh, that's what I did while in foster care.
Also rode my bike everywhere, I lived on a highway, foster parents were like "well it's a county highway, and bikes are allowed"

[s_stabeler]

I like how both articles blame CPS, without even saying *what the person making the complaint actually said.* Without specific information on that, it's impossible to make a meaningful opinion about whether they were right to come out and ask a lot of questions.

If there really wasn't anything going on that would look wrong to a reasonable outsider, chances are it was someone with a grudge against the family rather than someone who thought playing outdoors was dangerous, though either is possible.

the issue isn't that CPS investigated. the issue is that- on what was supposed to be a well-being check-the mother was questioned in a way which made it look like she was suspected of being an unfit parent. ALL that should have been required was seeing the backyard, seeing if the mother could have quickly seen and responded to any problem, then that be it. Instead, the mother was apparently reduced to tears by the CPS worker.

[HYHYBT]

As I said, that depends on details of the original complaint which we have not been given, and also possibly on the CPS person's experience which we are told nothing of. (Maybe there was reason to be more suspicious and look deeper, but we aren't going to be told that in an article solely from the family's point of view, are we?)

I'm not saying they should have done more than check the yard. Only that you cannot reasonably determine for certain they shouldn't without information nobody's going to give out. Suppose it were the other way around. Suppose this were an article about the results of neglectful or abusive parenting, including that complaints had been made but all CPS did was make sure you could see the yard from inside the house and then went on their merry way?

[s_stabeler]

the issue is with how deep the questioning was. It sounds like- from the family's account- she was more-or-less made to prove she wasn't neglectful of her child. When they had a single complaint that- from the account we have- should have been dismissed out of hand.

In short, question the mother about what happened, sure. But don't effectively force her to prove she is a god parent.

[Ree]

I'm not saying they should have done more than check the yard. Only that you cannot reasonably determine for certain they shouldn't without information nobody's going to give out. Suppose it were the other way around. Suppose this were an article about the results of neglectful or abusive parenting, including that complaints had been made but all CPS did was make sure you could see the yard from inside the house and then went on their merry way?

That's true.
They would rather err on the side of caution, I think.

The frustrating part from my experience, though, is that I have seen some very good parents investigated and forced to prove they are fit parents, while some completely clueless, inept and neglectful parents are still messing up their poor little kids' lives and it seems like they turn a blind eye.

There is such an inequality in their investigations. At least, that's how it appears in my area.

[Racket_Man]

That's true.
The frustrating part from my experience, though, is that I have seen some very good parents investigated and forced to prove they are fit parents, while some completely clueless, inept and neglectful parents are still messing up their poor little kids' lives and it seems like they turn a blind eye.

There is such an inequality in their investigations. At least, that's how it appears in my area.

That was my experience back about 20 years or so ago.

Yes our Daughter (my Ex's and I) did make some BS allegations about Mom at school and CPS was called. But where is went off the rails was when the school social worker started in with a VERY heavy hand with my Ex, making accusations and basically threatening to have our child PERAMNENTLY taken away WITHOUT a SHRED of evidence OR the approval of CPS (the CPS worker had NOT even arrived at the school to conduct an investigation). Ex flipped out and did something stupid and thus we had to get sucked into the system on BS stuff.

We did however get the school social worker in enough trouble as we filed a formal complaint with the school district. We also found out later the SW had really F-ed up with more than enough kids, letting obvious things failing to get her attention and the kids fell through the crack to a not so nice situation.

[s_stabeler]

Personally, I think there needs to be a slight reform to the system for investigating child welfare issues. how I'd reform it:

1. upon receiving a complaint, if it is considered worth investigating it, an agent goes to visit the family to investigate the truth of the situation
2. if it is clear the parents are making an effort to look after the kid properly, but there are minor problems ( say, supervision inadequate but an attempt had been made to supervise adequately, or discipline slightly too hard) then let the parents know the problems, and give them an opportunity to fix them, with CPS checking up periodically
3. if the parents are ignoring CPS, or if the problems are more than minor ones- or if the kid is at immediate risk- then CPS should consider if the kid needs to be taken away, either temporarily or permanently,

The idea is that if the kid getting taken away was clearly a last resort, parents would be worried by a CPS visit.