Free-range kids picked up AGAIN by police

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If you are too busy and important to supervise your kids, then hire a babysitter. And, shouldn't they be underfoot helping with household chores to make them independent and able to do them on their own when they need to?

People have a lot of ideas about how other people should live their lives, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So I can decide to let my 12 drink whiskey?

Or sell her for sex?

Focus, please. We're talking about children playing outside and walking to the park.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I live in the area, and you are wrong.

I will also point out that many, many people who live here in Silver Spring 20910 DO know one another. In a sense, it is like Mayberry, in that neighbors are very neighborly. My kids would know where to go for help within ten or 15 blocks of our house - they know someone, or know of someone on most blocks.

In my experience, people who haven't lived in urban areas seriously underestimate the degree to which people in urban areas know each other and look out for each other.

Right like all those people walking back and forth around the parking garage on sunday evening. Right.

Did you look at a map? It's by the Safeway, the comic shop, a Citgo, etc. Yes, there are people around.

+1

I live here too. And in April, 6pm is not the "evening"

Except that it is, in the English language, the evening. It's a commercial area. Not a residential area. Big difference. You're not walking by neighbors you know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So I can decide to let my 12 drink whiskey?

Or sell her for sex?

Focus, please. We're talking about children playing outside and walking to the park.

What? Different parents, different decisions? YOu make your decisions that are best for your family, some others make other decisions, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And yes, bad things happened to kids in the old days when there wasn't constantly an adult supervising, but lots of good things happened too. The good things aren't newsworthy, of course. (NOT a leading news story: Yesterday Joe went into the woods to play and came home in time for supper.) My question is: what won't my kids learn if there is always an adult supervising?

Can't you just wait until they are 10?

Or 8, for that matter?

Speaking for myself, my kids will get a lot more healthy, outdoor play time if they are allowed to go play outdoors without mom. I am busy. I have to do the things that keep the house running and the family clean, happy and healthy.

I come home from work at about 5 PM and need to start cooking dinner and taking care of whatever needs to be done. I am thankful that I can send the kids out to play BY THEMSELVES without needing supervision. Sometimes I do accompany them but it is great to just let them off to amuse themselves while I get my household chores done without them underfoot.

This is the way I was raised. Once we were about 4 years old my mom shooed us out of the house to "go play outdoors'" and no, she didn't follow us around.

Now that I know it is illegal in MD for kids under the age of 8 to play outside unaccompanied by an adult, I will have to just let them stay inside and play on the internet. It is really sad that MD has made this law! Does the state of VA also forbid kids under age 8 from playing outside without constant adult presence?

Because you can't go outside ever? That's sad. Do you have a yard? I let my 4 and 6 yo play out in the yard while I make dinner. I leave a window open and listen for them. They know to stay in the side of the yard I can see them in. If they want to go ride bikes on the street or whatever, I go out front and hang out in the front yard where I can see them. What's the big deal? I have a job too. You're not THAT busy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/montgomery-county-free-range-children-taken-into-custody-again/2015/04/12/39987b08-e188-11e4-905f-cc896d379a32_story.html?tid=pm_local_pop_b

This news article was dated on 4/12, which is Sunday, the day it happened. Its interesting to me that the post, on the same day the kids got picked up published an article regarding it especially since the kids were custody all evening. This was a set-up. Parents are looking for an excuse to sue and make a name for themselves. How did the post get the information so quickly and be able to publish an article given the time frames.

The first comment on the article was posted at 4/13/2015 12:11 AM EDT. While the WaPo article is dated 4/12, it probably was posted quite late on Sunday, close to midnight.

OK, I was wrong. They put something up late Sunday night, after the kids were home.

Meanwhile, how did the Post get the information so quickly? Well, maybe somebody at the Post monitors the local news channels.

How did the local news channels get the news so quickly? Well, maybe friends or relatives of the parents called a news channel to say that CPS had the children. It seems a reasonable and obvious thing to do.

I absolutely believe that a friend, relative, or even the parents themselves called the news and/or the Post to have the story covered. We have all seen people do this. People love a good "story" - accurate or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If you are too busy and important to supervise your kids, then hire a babysitter. And, shouldn't they be underfoot helping with household chores to make them independent and able to do them on their own when they need to?

I am certainly busy with household chores as most working parents are at 5:30 PM. I'm not too important to supervise the kids. I'm not well off but most importantly, I do not believe it is particularly dangerous for my kids to go outside and play by themselves for a while as I am preparing dinner.

They do help me with the household chores some days, but some days I would rather they just go play. They do NOT need me to hover over them all the time.

[Anonymous]

Not inclined to comb through 75 (!!!!) pages thoroughly. Has anyone eyer mentioned the Lyons sisters' disappearance? Was that not on a very busy street, during daylight hours? Was it the same, or similar area of MD?

[Anonymous]

It is NOT against the law to let a child under the age of 8 play unsupervised outside. It is against the law from them to be in a home or car under that age unsupervised by someone who is at least 13.

No. Virginia does not have any similar law. Some counties have guidelines.

My now almost 13 year old started flying by herself (unaccompanied minor) at 8. Went completely solo at 12. (Southwest allows this.) She can navigate going several miles away by bike or foot.

She is EXTREMELY responsible and the opportunity to be responsible has allowed her to be EXTREMELY self-confident. (People meet her and can't believe she is not 16.)

My 11 year old is less mature and more nervous and she is still growing towards the same level of responsibilities (with joint parent-child decisions and discussions). She is becoming more and more self-reliant.

A child cannot learn to be on their own........ without getting opportunities to BE ON THEIR OWN. Kids are self reliant are more likely to be able to make good decisions WITHOUT parental "help" and are less susceptible to peer pressure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Because you can't go outside ever? That's sad. Do you have a yard? I let my 4 and 6 yo play out in the yard while I make dinner. I leave a window open and listen for them. They know to stay in the side of the yard I can see them in. If they want to go ride bikes on the street or whatever, I go out front and hang out in the front yard where I can see them. What's the big deal? I have a job too. You're not THAT busy.

I CAN go outside and "hang out" and watch them. I just don't think it is necessary once kids are school aged. A 4 year old sure needs supervision. But not necessarily by an adult.

We have a park just down the street and I send them to play there. I do not think it is dangerous. My parents raised me this same way. My mother would have died laughing if someone expected her to watch school aged children play instead of cook dinner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I live in the area, and you are wrong.

I will also point out that many, many people who live here in Silver Spring 20910 DO know one another. In a sense, it is like Mayberry, in that neighbors are very neighborly. My kids would know where to go for help within ten or 15 blocks of our house - they know someone, or know of someone on most blocks.

In my experience, people who haven't lived in urban areas seriously underestimate the degree to which people in urban areas know each other and look out for each other.

Right like all those people walking back and forth around the parking garage on sunday evening. Right.

Did you look at a map? It's by the Safeway, the comic shop, a Citgo, etc. Yes, there are people around.

+1

I live here too. And in April, 6pm is not the "evening"

Except that it is, in the English language, the evening. It's a commercial area. Not a residential area. Big difference. You're not walking by neighbors you know.

Actually, I live within a block of that comic books store. It is a mixed neighborhood. It was a beautiful sunny day and there is always plenty of foot traffic there at that hour.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Not inclined to comb through 75 (!!!!) pages thoroughly. Has anyone eyer mentioned the Lyons sisters' disappearance? Was that not on a very busy street, during daylight hours? Was it the same, or similar area of MD?

Has anyone mentioned that a family of 3 was driving down a highway in a car and a piece of overpass barrier FELL ON THEM and killed them dead?

This just happened yesterday I believe.

Please people, do not put your children in cars. Highways may fall on them!

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/14/us/washington-overpass-accident-concrete-barrier

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Actually, I live within a block of that comic books store. It is a mixed neighborhood. It was a beautiful sunny day and there is always plenty of foot traffic there at that hour.

Where is this parking garage? I can't find it on a map. And did they say what the park was the kids were playing at?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No, they will lose. There is no specific law needed - the general law on child neglect is enough.

Also, the Meitevs are just demonstrating further poor judgment bu retaining pro bono biglaw with presumably no expertise in MD child welfare cases. They need a family law expert first to resolve the CPS case. Then once the kids are safe from being taken away they can sue. Their present strategy belies more attention seeking motivation than actual desire to protect the kids.

I hope that you're not a lawyer, because there are an awful lotp of unfounded assumptions right there in your post.

If you are a lawyer take a look at the MD code and explain why thw kids could not have been picked up on a report of child negkect in general. Please also outline all the steps mandated reporters must take, and cps must take after a report when the children are in their custody, and explain your theory about why taking 5 hours to complete these legally mandated steps violates anyone's rights under any source of law.

I am not a lawyer, and I never said that I was. Here are the assumptions you're making:

1. retaining pro bono big law demonstrates poor judgment
2. the law firm has no expertise in Maryland child welfare cases
3. the parents are out for attention

Do you know any of this stuff? No, you don't.

Meanwhile, the reason they shouldn't have been picked up on a report of child neglect in general is because walking home from the park neither harmed the children’s health or welfare nor placed the children in substantial risk of harm. Or rather, wouldn't have harmed them/placed them in substantial risk of harm, except for that whole 911/police/CPS thing.

It is extremely doubtful that this firm has md family court experience. You do not want glamour lawyers for this stuff. You w want a local lawyer with experience in the local courts who nows the judges and prosecutors.

I've been practicing 20+ years in all of Virginia, DC and MD and I respectfully disagree. The family in all likelihood does not have the type of income necessary to retain and pay for a very good lawyer and law firm. This is not their criminal attorney, this is their litigation attorney and this particular attorney has substantial trial and appellate experience. I wouldn't be surprised if they do hire a local co-counsel t anticipate this will be a large lawsuit, going after the State, the municipality, the police department and the state agency (CPS). In all honestly I think this lawsuit is needed, to clarify once and for all what exactly the law says. That is what lawsuits do, establish case law to prove how laws are to be interpreted and carried out. As I read the Maryland code, the age restriction deals with being in a building, house or car. It does NOT discuss being in a public, open space. So does that mean that the law only excludes instances that are listed, is that list exhaustive, does that mean if it isn't explicated excluded it's included? There is too much discretion left to individuals in law enforcement and state agencies now with the law written as it is.

Wiley Rein is a respected and good law firm. they have the money to pay for out of pocket for good research, experts, analysis, and legal work. Sure, there is some free publicity for the firm, but all large firms these days are required to participate in pro bono and that is a very good thing. Many people cannot afford any legal representation whatsoever.

Sure, for their "impact litigation" it might be a reasonable choice. But for dealing with ths CPS case? No way. This family has plenty of money to hire a competent practitioner skilled in these matters. And it is a questionable thing to be mounting your high profile civil suit before, you know, making sure your kods will not be removed.

What part about civil litigation and civil attorney do you not understand?? This isn't their criminal attorney. There isn't a criminal case against the parents yet. Do you have access to the parents' bank accounts? How in the world do you know how much money the parents have? A good attorney, a really, really good one, charges at a minimum $500 an hour, and will require a retainer in the thousands. As in, give us $20,000 for a retainer, and then we bill $500 an hour. The average person then doesn't have that much liquidity and flexibility.

And I don't see what is wrong with Wiley handling the CPS case. they are in fact based out of DC, they are a regional firm, who probably already has experience doing pro bono in family law matters. It amazes me what people just "think they know".

This just goes to show how out of touch you are. A good family law attorney for a neglect case is a local lawyer with a ton of experience, not some pro bono associate who has never set foot in court.

Dude, have you read anything about the law firm or the attorney Dowd? He's a partner, with tons of litigation experience, not "some pro bono associate who has never set foot in court".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So I can decide to let my 12 drink whiskey?

Or sell her for sex?

Focus, please. We're talking about children playing outside and walking to the park.

No. We are talking about deciding a law does not apply to you.