Archived page

    “Even after a judge required ACS to reunite Ms. Rivers with her baby, ACS continued to subject Ms. Rivers to needless court proceedings and a litany of conditions that interfered with her parenting of TW for months, while the unlawful removal of her baby was ratified by senior ACS leadership,” the complaint reads. “This was not because ACS was trying to protect TW; this was because Ms. Rivers is Black.”

  • AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Elaborate please. Are you saying there should be no laws, or no punishment for breaking laws, or something else?

    • Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      The government should punish lawbreaking behavior. The government should not punish behavior deemed ‘bad’ by you or by me, unless that behavior is illegal.

      • AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It sounds like you’re just not familiar with how CPS works, no offense. If a child is being subjected to an unsafe situation they can legally remove a child, whether the conduct rises to the level of illegal conduct or not.

        Medical professionals are mandatory reporters (I’m not sure if that’s the same legal term in NY, my experiences with CPS have been with several other states). That means they are legally required to notify CPS if they see or THINK they see evidence of abuse. Allegations must be investigated before being acted upon.

        I can certainly see why you don’t like the fact that the hospital tested the baby for marijuana but if it means they need to modify treatment of the baby they absolutely can do that. Testing the mother may be different, like I said I don’t have experience with the NY system.

        In short it sounds like you are just not familiar with the standard processes of CPS and are actively interpreting everything in a negative way.

        • halvo317@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          You don’t get to randomly drug test random individuals who have no broken the law. That’s a violation of human rights. The mother would not have consented to a drug test of her or her baby. Even if they get reported, that isn’t probable cause.

          Imagine if that were the case. One racist nurse could say that every ethnic mother that comes in smelled like weed, and both mother and child get forcibly drug tested based on that? Do you want to live in that world?

          • AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m sorry but what you just described is not even close to what was alleged in the article and frankly incorrect on several points. I have no intention of arguing against a strawman, I’ve made several othee comments in this thread which add context to the situation, you should read them.

            • halvo317@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              I did. From how it reads, you definitely think what I’m saying. You really think CPS can and should violate human rights.

                  • AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Well if you tried actually reading the article it sounds like the settlement was for the delay in returning the baby and the practice of using pot use as a negative factor. Not testing the baby or mother for marijuana, and not removing the baby because the mother smoked pot in the hospital while pregnant. Headlines are not an adequate source of information, you have to keep reading.

        • Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Guilty as charged. I am ignorant of how CPS works, except that I used to watch Judging Amy. I’m operating solely on instinct here — I don’t trust cops, and this news item has the odor of cops.

          That said, most of what you say makes sense, and the concept of mandatory reporters hadn’t popped into my head at all, thanks. Assuming it’s illegal for children to have cannabis in their blood, I can almost see mandatory reporting coming into play.

          Except, we’re in New York, where marijuana is legal. Are all hospitals testing all newborns, and seizing them for CPS/APS if they test positive for marijuana? They’d be seizing an awful lot of newborns.

          My guess — still utterly uninformed, I’ll admit — is that New York newborns are only tested for marijuana if Mom is black and has pissed off the hospital staff.

          • AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            The article said a nurse witnessed the mother smoking pot in the hospital room, I would err on the side of assuming that was the reason the baby was tested. The article says there is a history of racism at CPS in NY towards black people which yeah, that’s an issue. But I’m unwilling to assume that about hospital workers given that the inherent basis of medical work is to treat everyone as best you can regardless of personal feelings.

            • Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              The article said a nurse witnessed the mother smoking pot in the hospital room, I would err on the side of assuming that was the reason the baby was tested.

              Agreed — I can’t even muster any doubt that that’s why.

              Seems a fairly obvious conclusion that she smoked pot in her hospital room, which led someone to order a marijuana test on both mother and child. That test led to the child being taken away.

              A quick Googling suggests that the penalty for smoking indoors in New York is a fine of up to $2,000. Seems harsh, but we don’t want people smoking indoors, so levy the fine.

              It doesn’t say that the penalty is losing your child.

              • AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah but you’re thinking of it as an action being punished. She was not reported to the police for doing something illegal, even though they technically could have. The hospital was not trying to punish her, they were trying to make sure the child was safe. CPS didn’t take the child away because the mother smokes pot (see caveat at the end), they took the child away because the mother smoked while pregnant. Not to punish her, to protect the baby.

                Caveat: a major point of the article is that CPS had been continuing to use smoking pot as a factor of determining unsafe conditions, which they should not have been doing once pot was made legal. Just like smoking cigarettes is not illegal and shouldn’t be a factor in and of itself. However, smoking cigarettes or pot AROUND children is still a negative factor.

                • Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t see any of what happened happening if she hadn’t smoked marijuana in her hospital room, so I can’t envision how what happened isn’t punishment for that act.

                  You’re saying they took the child away because the mother smoked while pregnant. I’d like to know how common that is. Are newborns taken away if staff is aware any mother smokes pot while pregnant?

                  Did health care workers remain mandated to report marijuana use after is became legal?

                  • AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Obviously there could be mountains of context we don’t have which could push this in either direction. I do know subjecting children to second hand smoke is absolutely a factor which can result in CPS getting involved.

                    Tovthecbwsr of my knowledge hospital workers have never been mandated to report drug usage to the police, I know for a fact it’s explicitly illegal for medical staff to report drug use to the police, with one major exception: if there is evidence of harm to the user.

                    As for reporting drug use to CPS: probably depending on the drug. Again, pot use is legal, but if you get high around your children to the point where you are diminished in your ability to care for that child it becomes an issue.

    • Manifish_Destiny@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      The cops can’t arrest you for being a shitty person, only for breaking laws decided by Congress.

      Are you from Russia or something?

      • AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No they can’t, but CPS can remove a child for all kinds of abuse that doesn’t rise to the level of illegality, it’s like that in every state in the US.

        • Doug Holland@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re good at explaining stuff, and I’d like to understand please. What abuse that “doesn’t rise to the level of illegality” gets kids seized by child protective agencies?

          • AngryHumanoid@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            OK think of it like this, CPS’ duty is to the child. Their goal is to provide the best environment for the child they can. Absent other factors that will always be with the parents. If they see issues with how the child is being raised or their environment they don’t immediately take the child away (depending on the severity, obviously). They will provide the parent with education, supplies, etc to fix the problem and get the child back into a healthy environment.

            Things can escalate from there if repeated attempts are not yielding positive results. In this case it said she had previous issues with smoking around her other children. That is unhealthy. I doubt that was the only factor in removing them but it is part of the history, so when they saw she had been smoking while pregnant they removed the child.

            I would also like to point out from Googling it sounds like that is the procedure in NY, a child can be removed and then the parent can go to court to ask a judge to have the child returned. That is what happened. Then it sounds like the issue with CPS was them not returning the child in a timely manner and using marijuana use it self as a factor determining a child was in a bad environment. Those are obviously issues, but the initial removal (keep in mind we are both armchair quarterbacking) did not seem like an issue to me, it fit standard practices as I have known them.