On 11/01/09 12:04, Darren New wrote:
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> On 10/30/09 12:10, Darren New wrote:
>>>> But seriously, from this distance it's impossible to tell whether the
>>>> authorities did they because they don't like the beliefs of the
>>>> family, or because the family has actually been doing something more
>>>> serious.
>>>
>>> Well, the article claimed there were no reports of abuse or anything.
>>
>> How often is that the case when CPS is involved?
>
> I don't know. I'd guess it's not very common for CPS to get involved if
> nobody calls them to say there's a problem.
>
> My sister-in-law works for CPS. I'll ask her when I see her how it works.

	I think you missed my point (or I misread the article - too lazy to 
reread). CPS didn't say there had been no reports. The *police* said it. 
That doesn't mean that no one reported stuff to CPS.

	So my question was how often does that happen - where CPS are alerted 
but the police aren't (prior to CPS getting involved)?

>> That there were no reports of abuse really does not tell us much about
>> why they were taken away.
>
> They were taken away because they tried to register "Adolph Hitler
> Smith" for school, I'm guessing.

	Although I really hate the common bandying of the phrase, I feel it is 
appropriate here:

Correlation does not imply causation. (Although it wouldn't surprise me 
if that is the reason).

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=7071764

	Up till that point, CPS hadn't publicly commented. The father is 
certain it's because of the name, but at the end of the article he 
mentions that the state was relying on accusations made against him by a 
neighbor and an ex-wife of abuse.

-- 
People who don't eat yogurt are uncultured.

Post a reply to this message