If people are responsible and are taking care of their children the government should have no right and no reason to take anyone's kids.
Whatever happened to the sanctity of the home? I guess "sanctity of the home" is just another casualty of the drug war...
We all agree that Violence is a threat to children, and we all agree that deprivation is a threat to children. Can we now agree that the government is more of a threat to children than "so called drugs of abuse"?
Parents care for children more than anyone else can or will, even if the parents are "drug users"-the government's opinion on this issue be damned.
Furthermore, who says "drug use" by parents is always a threat to children?
If Mom and Dad enjoy some fine American bourbon and some fine American tobacco cigarettes before they turn in for the evening, no one thinks anything of it, not even the kids. In spite of all the propaganda to the contrary, caring, responsible parents who use so called "illegal drugs of abuse" are no different.
My father has been a heavy drinker all of his adult life and I shudder to think what would have happened to me as a child if our country were still under zero-tolerance alcohol prohibition. (Of course, these days, alcohol and cigarettes consumed in a home with children is considered a "problem" by various agencies so some children are now being taken from homes because parents use "legal substances"!! In the past, I never heard of such a thing)
I imagine that the trauma of being ripped away from a caring family because Daddy failed his drug test is something that would be very hard for a child to get over. Being stuck in some mercenary (or even deadly- as the article details) foster care situation is much, much, much worse than having a caring parent who uses substances.
My father's very heavy, chronic alcohol use did not prevent him from caring for his family and it did not prevent him from earning a very good income to support his family in fine style. My father did have legal problems associated with his alcohol use, but the fact that he did not require government housing, welfare or other social assistance is perhaps one reason his children were never taken from him.
It is usually the drug users among the poor whose children get snatched by the government "for the good of society". It would be interesting to know exactly why the parents in the article had to take the drug tests in the first place.
Thank goodness I had an alcoholic Dad instead of murderous "child services case workers" and "foster parents"!!
Dr.Tom's Medical Marijuana Blog
Med MJ blog by an MD; it's focused mainly on the surprising implications of what he's learned
(and the government doesn't know) about pot use.
It's based on a study of those hoping to be designated as "medical"
in accordance with California's much misunderstood law.
1 Comments:
If people are responsible and are taking care of their children the government should have no right and no reason to take anyone's kids.
Whatever happened to the sanctity of the home? I guess "sanctity of the home" is just another casualty of the drug war...
We all agree that Violence is a threat to children, and we all agree that deprivation is a threat to children. Can we now agree that the government is more of a threat to children than "so called drugs of abuse"?
Parents care for children more than anyone else can or will, even if the parents are "drug users"-the government's opinion on this issue be damned.
Furthermore, who says "drug use" by parents is always a threat to children?
If Mom and Dad enjoy some fine American bourbon and some fine American tobacco cigarettes before they turn in for the evening, no one thinks anything of it, not even the kids. In spite of all the propaganda to the contrary, caring, responsible parents who use so called "illegal drugs of abuse" are no different.
My father has been a heavy drinker all of his adult life and I shudder to think what would have happened to me as a child if our country were still under zero-tolerance alcohol prohibition. (Of course, these days, alcohol and cigarettes consumed in a home with children is considered a "problem" by various agencies so some children are now being taken from homes because parents use "legal substances"!! In the past, I never heard of such a thing)
I imagine that the trauma of being ripped away from a caring family because Daddy failed his drug test is something that would be very hard for a child to get over. Being stuck in some mercenary (or even deadly- as the article details) foster care situation is much, much, much worse than having a caring parent who uses substances.
My father's very heavy, chronic alcohol use did not prevent him from caring for his family and it did not prevent him from earning a very good income to support his family in fine style. My father did have legal problems associated with his alcohol use, but the fact that he did not require government housing, welfare or other social assistance is perhaps one reason his children were never taken from him.
It is usually the drug users among the poor whose children get snatched by the government "for the good of society". It would be interesting to know exactly why the parents in the article had to take the drug tests in the first place.
Thank goodness I had an alcoholic Dad instead of murderous "child services case workers" and "foster parents"!!
KudBeU2
By
Anonymous, at 1:12 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home