Reply to Free-range kids picked up AGAIN by police

Forum Index » Infants, Toddlers, & Preschoolers

Reply to "Free-range kids picked up AGAIN by police"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

Well for one thing it's evidence that a kid wasn't being supervised by someone old enough to supervise her.  That, if coupled with other evidence, might constitute neglect.  That's why they investigate. [/quote]

But that's what I don't get. Is it against the rules for a six-year-old and a ten-year-old to be out in public? Lots of people on this thread say that it is. But evidently CPS did not find that it is. But if it isn't against the rules for a six-year-old and a ten-year-old to be out in public, why did CPS investigate? Because it's kind of against the rules? Because it might be against the rules, if they find out more?[/quote]

It's some evidence of neglect, not conclusive evidence. That's why there's an investigation. They have to look at the totality of the circumstances and thinking about child issues. Which, if you think about it, makes a lot of sense. Let's say they found the kids alone and the kids are too young to be out alone. So they go check out the house. The parents say oh they knew exactly where they were, this is the first time we've done that, sure we'll make sure that little Bobby isnt out supervising his little sister until he turns 11 next week.   That's one thing. It's quite another if when they go to the house they find the dad high and he had no idea where the kids were. And the kids hadn't been to school for 10 days in the last month. Then the investigation continues.  It's always a totality of the circumstances.   In this particular case, I do not know what those circumstances are, and neither do you.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics