s/o abuse screening: How should the community at large deal with child abuse?

[msjones]

I read about half of the 'abuse-screening-questions' thread. It got me thinking.

 

If you are opposed to screening questions from doctors, nurses, teachers, etc. how do you believe the community at large should deal with child abuse?

 

What help should be available for children who are beaten, burnt, choked, whipped, and locked up for 'discipline?'

 

I, too, have felt irked at those screening questions -- particularly if I was in a hurry or had a very sick child and just wanted to get home, but I don't have a better alternative to suggest.

 

So, I wonder what those of you who are opposed to those types of questions would prefer for child-abuse prevention/intervention.

[Whereneverever]

First, I am not opposed to screening questions. I hope I can answer, anyway.

I wish that there was more support available for parents before things hit crisis point. Support that was free, easily accessible, and would NOT have the threat of the children being removed. I know a lot of families that didn't seek help when there was still a good chance of things being set right because they were afraid of the repercussions. By the time there was outside involvement things had escalated to needing the kids removed.

I live in an isolated area with high amounts of neglect, abuse, incest, and drug use. People need a LOT of help and they aren't getting it. And the kids suffer and families suffer.

[OnTheBrink]

I don't necessarily disagree with doctors asking, but I think there needs to be actual evidence of abuse. A bruise on knees, shins, foreheads is normal. Cigarette scars, bruising on the genitals, odd marks on the back, neck or places where kids don't normally fall could be signs of abuse.

 

I have a friend who had CPS called on her when she took her daughter to the ER for breaking her arm going down a slide. That's a normal childhood accident. Maybe not the most common, but not outside the realm of possibility. There was no other sign of abuse, at all. Yet the triage nurse didn't believe her "story" and made the call (she assumes it was that nurse, going on how that nurse treated them).

 

Anyway, I think mandatory reporters need evidence. Not their "feelings" or assumptions or preconceived notions of people based on their own biases. Facts. "Patient presented with oblong bruises on his lower back and buttocks. Patient's parent reported patient fell off his bike. Bruises are not consistent with the way the fall was described." I mean, I guess there is some degree of subjectivity, but I think it's a mistake to assume every mark on a child is from a beating. I think using some common sense and not asking irrelevant, invasive questions where no evidence of abuse is present is the way to go.

[Daisy]

My husband is a teacher and a mandated reporter. His job is to notice signs of abuse (physical bruising, inappropriate vocabulary, inappropriate behavior, verbal clues, etc.) but he is not supposed to ask leading questions. I think the same should apply with the medical community. Doctors/Nurses & Teachers see a lot of cr@p. They see a lot of lousy parents but they should fight against the assumption that all parents are that way. I don't know if they should be able to ask the questions or not. I waffle back & forth but regardless they should treat the parents with dignity, respect, and an assumption of innocence.

 

If a child is being physically abused or neglected some physical signs should show up at some point. The thing is that they often do and child protective services blows off the complaint. Other times CPS goes overboard and harasses innocent parents. Sexual & emotional abuse is harder but even there signs do show up without having to play 40 questions with the child.

 

I don't think this is a problem of doctors, nurses, teachers being unable to screen for abuse but rather a basic distrust of the child protective services ability to do its job. Far too many times abused children who have been reported to CPS STILL get overlooked while CPS spends its time and energy harassing innocent parents. Innocent parents who have had their careers & relationships destroyed by false accusations.

 

I don't know what the answer is. I don't want abused kids to be stuck in those homes but I don't want innocent families torn apart either. Bottom line is that we cannot guarantee a child's safety against his/her own parents.

Edited October 30, 2009 by Daisy

[Jugglin'5]

My three year old once got nursemaid's elbow horsing around with her brother. I wasn't sure exactly how it happened because I didn't witness it. DD3 said that she and her brother had "run into each other." She probably didn't know exactly how to describe what happened. We were new to the area at the time, so we took her into a minor emergency clinic since we didn't have a family doc. It was one of the most humiliating experiences of my life. The female doctor was obviously very suspicious from the get-go. I tried to just let my daughter answer, so that she wouldn't think I was trying to manage the situation, but that wasn't good enough. She kept repeatedly asking DD and me what happened again and again, like she was a cross-examining lawyer looking for a slip up in our stories. I was disgusted. DD was otherwise healthy, happy, bruise-free, etc. I know this is a very common injury - almost every family I know has had at least one child get this. I was paranoid about a CPS call all week. I guess she decided that we were okay, though. So kind of her. :001_rolleyes:

 

There are so many obviously abused kids in the local Walmart everyday, with the mothers shrieking at the kids to shut up or calling the kids idiots. Maybe CPS should just hang out in the grocery stores if we are going to go the Big Brother route. Or heck, let's just install cameras in people's homes and cut out the middle man. :glare:

[Elizabeth Conley]

"What help should be available for children who are beaten, burnt, choked, whipped, and locked up for 'discipline?'"

 

These acts are extreme. The idea that these behaviors will be detected through routinely interrogating every parent who seeks medical treatment for their child strikes me as ridiculous.

 

People who commit these crimes know full well that if any normal person finds out about these perversities, the gig is up. These criminals aren't going to confess to inquisitive medical personnel.

 

When genuine abuse is detected, decisive action should be taken. Let's face it, currently child protective services aren't very good at this. Histrionic loons wax hysterical about the evils of smacking a toddler's diaper, while real abuse is ignored.

 

Stop worrying about people who use moderate corporal punishment, and start taking definite steps to immediately protect truly abused children. If there are signs of abuse, investigate. Otherwise, leave families in peace.

 

If a parent has been convicted of child abuse, the parole should last until the child leaves the household. Leaving the state should change nothing. People tend to do what they've done before. Patterns tend to repeat themselves. People who have never abused are unlikely to start. People who have abused are unlikely to stop.

 

One of the ways that child abuse could be significantly curtailed is by locking up violent offenders for longer periods. This includes domestic violence as well as other types of assault. Getting the violent parent out of the home curtails child abuse. It would also be wise if violent offenders were required to submit to regular checks on the well being of their domestic partners and children as a condition of parole.

 

Violent offenders almost always abuse their children or live in domestic situations where children are routinely abused. It's part and parcel to this type of dysfunction.

 

While we're on the topic of people tending to do the same things over and over, it's important to realize that people who make false allegations of child abuse tend to do it over and over again. It's OK to grant people who report child abuse privacy, but it's ignorant and foolish not to track their identity and watch for a pattern. If someone cries wolf twice, then maybe s/he should be charged with malicious mischief. It's an old fashioned charge that you don't hear much about any more, but it needs to be resurrected. It absolutely applies to those who maliciously harass others with false accusations of child abuse. These people are criminals and should fear prosecution, instead of operating with impunity.

 

Here's the hard part:

1. Accept that harassing good parents hinders efforts to reduce child abuse. This behavior reduces the credibility of child protective services.

 

2. Accept that you won't catch all offenders, and can't protect every child. You'll do a better job if you concentrate your efforts on real abuse, but in the end some abuse will go unrecognized.

 

I've got friends whose parenting practices are very different from mine. Forcing them to parent just like me won't protect a single child from being "beaten, burnt, choked, whipped, and locked up for 'discipline.'" These people parent differently than I do, but they don't do those over the top, obviously evil things. In my whole life, I've never directly observed evidence or had direct knowledge of anyone doing these vile things. Sure it happens, but the people who do these things conceal their crimes. They know full well the behavior is illicit. They're not going to confide in their pediatrician or a nurse.

[Plucky]

I don't have a problem with the question. I've never been subjected to much scrutiny. I can see how the way a question is asked of an innocent parent can feel very intrusive.

 

I've been judged harshly by a 20-year old CNA for homebirthing, and talked down to. I changed pediatricians because the dr. was just as big a bonehead. Not all medical workers are alike. There are caring ones and there are boneheads, like in every other walk of life. I don't think someone should have to answer a question posed by a bonehead.

[Plucky]

"What help should be available for children who are beaten, burnt, choked, whipped, and locked up for 'discipline?'"

 

These acts are extreme. The idea that these behaviors will be detected through routinely interrogating every parent who seeks medical treatment for their child strikes me as ridiculous.

 

People who commit these crimes know full well that if any normal person finds out about these perversities, the gig is up. These criminals aren't going to confess to inquisitive medical personnel.

 

When genuine abuse is detected, decisive action should be taken. Let's face it, currently child protective services aren't very good at this. Histrionic loons wax hysterical about the evils of smacking a toddler's diaper, while real abuse is ignored.

 

Stop worrying about people who use moderate corporal punishment, and start taking definite steps to immediately protect truly abused children. If there are signs of abuse, investigate. Otherwise, leave families in peace.

 

If a parent has been convicted of child abuse, the parole should last until the child leaves the household. Leaving the state should change nothing. People tend to do what they've done before. Patterns tend to repeat themselves. People who have never abused are unlikely to start. People who have abused are unlikely to stop.

 

One of the ways that child abuse could be significantly curtailed is by locking up violent offenders for longer periods. This includes domestic violence as well as other types of assault. Getting the violent parent out of the home curtails child abuse. It would also be wise if violent offenders were required to submit to regular checks on the well being of their domestic partners and children as a condition of parole.

 

Violent offenders almost always abuse their children or live in domestic situations where children are routinely abused. It's part and parcel to this type of dysfunction.

 

While we're on the topic of people tending to do the same things over and over, it's important to realize that people who make false allegations of child abuse tend to do it over and over again. It's OK to grant people who report child abuse privacy, but it's ignorant and foolish not to track their identity and watch for a pattern. If someone cries wolf twice, then maybe s/he should be charged with malicious mischief. It's an old fashioned charge that you don't hear much about any more, but it needs to be resurrected. It absolutely applies to those who maliciously harass others with false accusations of child abuse. These people are criminals and should fear prosecution, instead of operating with impunity.

 

Here's the hard part:

1. Accept that harassing good parents hinders efforts to reduce child abuse. This behavior reduces the credibility of child protective services.

 

2. Accept that you won't catch all offenders, and can't protect every child. You'll do a better job if you concentrate your efforts on real abuse, but in the end some abuse will go unrecognized.

 

I've got friends whose parenting practices are very different from mine. Forcing them to parent just like me won't protect a single child from being "beaten, burnt, choked, whipped, and locked up for 'discipline.'" These people parent differently than I do, but they don't do those over the top, obviously evil things. In my whole life, I've never directly observed evidence or had direct knowledge of anyone doing these vile things. Sure it happens, but the people who do these things conceal their crimes. They know full well the behavior is illicit. They're not going to confide in their pediatrician or a nurse.

 

Well said. I'm a fan.

[Jugglin'5]

I am very thankful to have found a sensible GP,btw. Invaluable.

[Plucky]

And why would a person who abuses their child to those extremes even bother seeking medical care?

 

Sadly, they don't. Some even let their kids die instead of subjecting themselves to scrutiny.

[HRAAB]

My dd broke the same arm twice, a couple years apart. At the time I wondered (worried) if the doctor or nurse would ask any questions, but they didn't. After reading through these threads, I feel fortunate that I wasn't grilled about how she fell off the monkey bars. I think it helps that we've been going to the same practice for years; they know us fairly well, approve of homeschooling and are basically supportive.

[Elizabeth Conley]

I met a person who worked for the state of NY for many years as a social worker for child services. I have known her for years. She is one of the most difficult people to talk to because she constantly assumes the worse in a person. Everything I say or anyone else says is blown 100 x out of proportion.

 

I really think some people in this group are just so jaded they don't think anyone can be trusted and treat people accordingly.

 

I pray I'm not offending you, particularly is this social worker is your friend. Please understand that I'm not necessarily saying that this is her issue but -

 

It's been my personal experience that the violent offenders I knew were extremely eager to believe the worst of others. In general, people who do evil tend to imagine everyone else does too. People who work hard to do the right thing assume everyone else is trying just as hard. Innocent people tend to be naive. Perverse, cruel people tend to be cynical.

 

I trust most people, but if someone's quick to condemn then I shy away. I legitimately fear that they might turn on a dime and become spiteful, punitive, combative or even abusive. Suspicious, darkly imaginative authoritarians are the most likely to act out this pattern.

[Dawn in OH]

I met a person who worked for the state of NY for many years as a social worker for child services. I have known her for years. She is one of the most difficult people to talk to because she constantly assumes the worse in a person. Everything I say or anyone else says is blown 100 x out of proportion.

 

I really think some people in this group are just so jaded they don't think anyone can be trusted and treat people accordingly.

 

These are the kinds of people that scare me. The idea that she works for child services is even scarier. I would be fine with the whole concept of CPS if all the workers were calm, rational, common sense using people, but too many of them (especially the ones that have never had children) automatically assume that we are all abusing our children.

[MeanestMomInMidwest]

I pray I'm not offending you, particularly is this social worker is your friend. Please understand that I'm not necessarily saying that this is her issue but -

 

It's been my personal experience that the violent offenders I knew were extremely eager to believe the worst of others. In general, people who do evil tend to imagine everyone else does too. People who work hard to do the right thing assume everyone else is trying just as hard. Innocent people tend to be naive. Perverse, cruel people tend to be cynical.

 

I trust most people, but if someone's quick to condemn then I shy away. I legitimately fear that they might turn on a dime and become spiteful, punitive, combative or even abusive. Suspicious, darkly imaginative authoritarians are the most likely to act out this pattern.

 

This may be true. There may also be an alternative explanation.

 

People who deal with (I can't think of a polite way to say it) the dregs of society on a daily basis start to think that everyone is that way. I've seen it in Social workers, parole officers, law enforcement.

 

I say this because I worked in law enforcement, saw what it did to others and felt what it did to me. The world looks very different when you see the worst of it every day.

[Plucky]

This may be true. There may also be an alternative explanation.

 

People who deal with (I can't think of a polite way to say it) the dregs of society on a daily basis start to think that everyone is that way. I've seen it in Social workers, parole officers, law enforcement.

 

I say this because I worked in law enforcement, saw what it did to others and felt what it did to me. The world looks very different when you see the worst of it every day.

 

I can see that. I saw enough adults growing up that I thought were abusive. Now I see so many great parents I'm amazed. I didn't see this growing up. I do tend to distance myself from those that have dysfunction. That is probably why I think today's parents, teens, and kids are pretty healthy and trustworthy.

[LauraGB]

People who deal with (I can't think of a polite way to say it) the dregs of society on a daily basis start to think that everyone is that way. I've seen it in Social workers, parole officers, law enforcement.

 

I tend to agree with this for the most part. I know social workers who, 10 years ago, started out ready to save the world, and now are jaded and sad and defeated because they are the ones who deal with the really bad stuff day in and day out. Athough, part of their defeat lies also in the red tape to which they are bound before they can actually do anything about the offenders.

[LisaNY]

Well said. I'm a fan.

 

Make that two of us. :iagree:

[Daisy]

I tend to agree with this for the most part. I know social workers who, 10 years ago, started out ready to save the world, and now are jaded and sad and defeated because they are the ones who deal with the really bad stuff day in and day out. Athough, part of their defeat lies also in the red tape to which they are bound before they can actually do anything about the offenders.

 

I think this could be said of many, many professions that are meant to help people but feel stuck in a world of red tape. Doctors, nurses, social workers, foster care agencies, teachers,...the list could go on forever. It is sad.

 

I don't know the answer. My husband gets tired of it. He's a teacher but his degree is in school counseling. His internship was supervising court-ordered parent/child visitations and he was miserable. Teaching is better but not much.

[SonshineLearner]

Well, I don't think we would all agree on what abuse is. I spanked my daughter quite a bit and my son very little. I didn't ever bruise my daughter... and can't imagine that I would ever bruise my son. I would work VERY hard to not ever bruise them again... if it happened.

However, I don't believe that a bruise is the end of the world, on a child. I have friends who spank for defiant disobedience and yet don't bruise their children. However, would I turn them in if I saw a small bruise (maybe there's a term for a "slight" bruise)

If I saw a bruise that would cause a huge "WOW" because of it being serious.... I would speak to the elders in their church...

If I saw a broken arm, a mark on the neck... a slap across the mouth, anything that looks like an out of control thing.... (hair pulled....etc....) I would call CPS.

BUT, I've spoken with some really immature CPS people, and would have to know that I was looking at anger. You can bet that cigarette burns... or anything along the same idea... Would get a call to CPS from me.

I don't consider it my job to turn in every one.... but I have called in to CPS for little children (we're talking 1 and a 2 yr old... and 2 other little children) being left in the car.... and they crawled out... Dad just took them back... and went back inside the building... 10 or 11 yr old that had baby walking behind him... when there was snow on the ground... with no shoes... and oh yes... the day I found the 3 or 4 year old across the busy street... got her home... and mom wasn't anywhere to be found. When the little girl went inside... still non mom.... but there was a bong on the table...

SO, I judge for myself... and I don't feel guilty about it...

Carrie

[Joanne]

Well, I don't think we would all agree on what abuse is. I spanked my daughter quite a bit and my son very little. I didn't ever bruise my daughter... and can't imagine that I would ever bruise my son. I would work VERY hard to not ever bruise them again... if it happened.

However, I don't believe that a bruise is the end of the world, on a child.

 

In the absence of extreme sensitivity to bruises, if you have to work hard to avoid a bruise in the punishment you use, it's too forceful. A bruise left in the name of discipline is ALWAYS wrong.

 

I'd report a person who left a bruise: I was a mandatory reporter when I owned a daycare and will be again when I get to my MAC internship.

 

Stop worrying about people who use moderate corporal punishment, and start taking definite steps to immediately protect truly abused children. If there are signs of abuse, investigate. Otherwise, leave families in peace.

 

I am vehemently and vocally anti spanking, yet I completely agree with the above quote.

 

Edited to add: After I graduate, I will not consider the occassional use of spanking as discipline of my clients who are parents as abuse and would not even consider reporting them (and mucking up the already challenged system) with a non abuse claim about "spanking".

[momtoboys]

Honestly, the "community" will never usually know in cases of child abuse. When a child is being abused he/she is extremely threatened and often isolated. The child also still loves his or her parents to a certain extent and is often told that they will "hurt" the family by speaking out. Therefore the parents are usually safe from any exposure or uncovering of the abuse. And, sadly, i think it happens more often than most people would like to believe.

 

Yeah, I mean, you hear the cases on the news that are super-extreme. But in the quietness of everyday life, dysfunctional families repeat history each day, with one generation hurting the next, and so on.

 

Most children who are being abused *wish* someone would find out and help them because they hate what is happening. But on the other hand they *don't wish* someone would find out and help them because they would rather deal with what they know (there are ways of learning to cope with nearly anything), then deal with the unknown. I don't know if that makes sense or not.

 

As an adult, I would say, if you think a child is being abused, please speak out. I would rather personally err on the side of caution. NO, i wouldn't call child services because someone smacks their kid on the rear end for something. . .but bruising, suspected sexual abuse, etc. . yes, I would call for that in a second.

 

Now, sadly, i have seen only failure by CPS in my experience when it comes to real abuse cases, but that is another story.

[Daisy]

Honestly, the "community" will never usually know in cases of child abuse. When a child is being abused he/she is extremely threatened and often isolated. The child also still loves his or her parents to a certain extent and is often told that they will "hurt" the family by speaking out. Therefore the parents are usually safe from any exposure or uncovering of the abuse. And, sadly, i think it happens more often than most people would like to believe.

 

Yeah, I mean, you hear the cases on the news that are super-extreme. But in the quietness of everyday life, dysfunctional families repeat history each day, with one generation hurting the next, and so on.

 

Most children who are being abused *wish* someone would find out and help them because they hate what is happening. But on the other hand they *don't wish* someone would find out and help them because they would rather deal with what they know (there are ways of learning to cope with nearly anything), then deal with the unknown. I don't know if that makes sense or not.

 

:iagree: Wow, Momtoboys, you pegged it.

Edited October 30, 2009 by Daisy

[Laurie4b]

Stop using CPS for enforcing different philosophies or standards of parenting and use CPS for very serious physical abuse, very serious neglect, and for sexual abuse. CPS loads are sky high. They need to be investigating cigarette burns, not spanking with plastic spoons. I've never spanked with an implement, but I don't think it is necessarily harmful. (In fact, Dr. Sears who is against physical punishment says that if you really believe you should use it, to use a light implement because you can't inflict harm in the same way a hand can.) The standard should be: does the trauma occurring at home signficantly exceed the trauma of a child being taken from the home? That's for "taking," not for helping.

 

Second, mandatory reporting laws need to be changed to allow professionals to use their judgment and to allow parents who want help to seek it without fear of losing their kids once they tell what is going on. I think our current state of things keeps people who might want to be help from getting help. (Note: I said that professionals should be able to use their judgment. Not every child is safe in the case of a parent seeking help.) Right now, professionals who use judgment are risking their livelihoods. Knowing how the system works, there are some who choose the best interests of their client (the child) sometimes over rigid reporting. They shouldn't have to take risks to use their judgment. Under judgment-based reporting, they could report when they really thought there was an issue.

 

Third, until we can do something to significantly improve the children's safety in foster care, we should be extremely hesitant to remove them from their parents' or relative's care. I've seen really, really crappy foster homes (and I've been a foster parent, so I'm not knocking all of them. )

 

Fourth, and this will sound awful, the public has got to accept that not all abuse can be prevented. Often deaths happen in families where there was a previous report of abuse and it couldn't be substantiated, and people start calling for the social worker's heads. No one can predict the future. When social workers begin to err on the side of removal to protect their own backsides, then the state has accepted a policy of state-sanctioned infliction of emotional trauma on children for PR purposes. One social worker I knew, from an agency that had been excellent, lamented the changes in policies that resulted from a death of a child in the state. She said, "We're all crazy now." Another, who had worked in the system for several years said, "I hate the way it is now. We used to really try to help people. Now it's so adversarial."

 

There tends to be a very naive assumption that there is no harm done in an investigation, nor even in a removal. From my child mental health days, that is just not true.

 

5. There should be very serious psychological screening for child protective service workers and supervisors, and it should be periodic. I have met way too many people on power trips, rather than working for the best interests of the child.

 

Are there individuals who should never be allowed to have power over a child? Absolutely. We should focus forensic efforts on the really bad ones. That would free up the system a lot. We should use the criminal justice system for those individuals, not CPS. There should be legal remedies.

 

The legal protections for criminals are much higher than the legal protections for people accused within the CPS system. That's why social workers can work out their childhood traumas on other parents with impunity. They are protected by immunity, there is no trial by a jury of your peers, and the standard is not beyond a reasonable doubt, but clear and convincing evidence. This leaves innocent parents without enough protection once a false report is made. If they are blessed with a decent person as a social worker, who has a decent supervisor, it may all go as it should. If not, a total nightmare for parents and children can ensue. There will be no recourse in the end.

 

I don't think any of this is likely to change, because there there are people using the state to push certain ideology and social change combined with social outcry when there is horrific abuse reported in the media. However, I hear that some changes are at least being talked about within the social work community. Here's hoping...

[Laurie4b]

If a child is being physically abused or neglected some physical signs should show up at some point. The thing is that they often do and child protective services blows off the complaint. Other times CPS goes overboard and harasses innocent parents.

I don't think this is a problem of doctors, nurses, teachers being unable to screen for abuse but rather a basic distrust of the child protective services ability to do its job. Far too many times abused children who have been reported to CPS STILL get overlooked while CPS spends its time and energy harassing innocent parents. Innocent parents who have had their careers & relationships destroyed by false accusations.

 

I don't know what the answer is. I don't want abused kids to be stuck in those homes but I don't want innocent families torn apart either. Bottom line is that we cannot guarantee a child's safety against his/her own parents.

 

This is my experience, too. You could predict CPS's response by rolling dice about as well as if you knew the facts. Kids in obvious danger get investigated then left there. CPS harrasses other fairly reasonable parents.

[Sara R]

I would rather personally err on the side of caution.

 

But "erring on the side of caution" assumes that CPS (individual workers and the agency) are reasonable and fair, and that foster homes are safer than their original homes (when the stats say otherwise), and that separating children from their parents is harmless.

[LauraGB]

Stop using CPS for enforcing different philosophies or standards of parenting and use CPS for very serious physical abuse, very serious neglect, and for sexual abuse. CPS loads are sky high. They need to be investigating cigarette burns, not spanking with plastic spoons....

 

Wow. All of it. The entire post. (I didn't copy all of it, but I'm referring to the whole thing)

 

:iagree: Very well stated.

[Harriet Vane]

Stop using CPS for enforcing different philosophies or standards of parenting and use CPS for very serious physical abuse, very serious neglect, and for sexual abuse. CPS loads are sky high. They need to be investigating cigarette burns, not spanking with plastic spoons. I've never spanked with an implement, but I don't think it is necessarily harmful. (In fact, Dr. Sears who is against physical punishment says that if you really believe you should use it, to use a light implement because you can't inflict harm in the same way a hand can.) The standard should be: does the trauma occurring at home signficantly exceed the trauma of a child being taken from the home? That's for "taking," not for helping.

 

Second, mandatory reporting laws need to be changed to allow professionals to use their judgment and to allow parents who want help to seek it without fear of losing their kids once they tell what is going on. I think our current state of things keeps people who might want to be help from getting help. (Note: I said that professionals should be able to use their judgment. Not every child is safe in the case of a parent seeking help.) Right now, professionals who use judgment are risking their livelihoods. Knowing how the system works, there are some who choose the best interests of their client (the child) sometimes over rigid reporting. They shouldn't have to take risks to use their judgment. Under judgment-based reporting, they could report when they really thought there was an issue.

 

Third, until we can do something to significantly improve the children's safety in foster care, we should be extremely hesitant to remove them from their parents' or relative's care. I've seen really, really crappy foster homes (and I've been a foster parent, so I'm not knocking all of them. )

 

Fourth, and this will sound awful, the public has got to accept that not all abuse can be prevented. Often deaths happen in families where there was a previous report of abuse and it couldn't be substantiated, and people start calling for the social worker's heads. No one can predict the future. When social workers begin to err on the side of removal to protect their own backsides, then the state has accepted a policy of state-sanctioned infliction of emotional trauma on children for PR purposes. One social worker I knew, from an agency that had been excellent, lamented the changes in policies that resulted from a death of a child in the state. She said, "We're all crazy now." Another, who had worked in the system for several years said, "I hate the way it is now. We used to really try to help people. Now it's so adversarial."

 

There tends to be a very naive assumption that there is no harm done in an investigation, nor even in a removal. From my child mental health days, that is just not true.

 

5. There should be very serious psychological screening for child protective service workers and supervisors, and it should be periodic. I have met way too many people on power trips, rather than working for the best interests of the child.

 

Are there individuals who should never be allowed to have power over a child? Absolutely. We should focus forensic efforts on the really bad ones. That would free up the system a lot. We should use the criminal justice system for those individuals, not CPS. There should be legal remedies.

 

The legal protections for criminals are much higher than the legal protections for people accused within the CPS system. That's why social workers can work out their childhood traumas on other parents with impunity. They are protected by immunity, there is no trial by a jury of your peers, and the standard is not beyond a reasonable doubt, but clear and convincing evidence. This leaves innocent parents without enough protection once a false report is made. If they are blessed with a decent person as a social worker, who has a decent supervisor, it may all go as it should. If not, a total nightmare for parents and children can ensue. There will be no recourse in the end.

 

I don't think any of this is likely to change, because there there are people using the state to push certain ideology and social change combined with social outcry when there is horrific abuse reported in the media. However, I hear that some changes are at least being talked about within the social work community. Here's hoping...

 

:iagree:

 

One thing I would amend, however.

 

I have seen, in numerous situations, professionals (or neighbors or relatives or pastors, etc.) use their "judgment" to try to finesse along or help an abusive parent. All too often this means that the child continues to be abused and all too often the abuser is allowed continued access to children. I am talking about real abuse (the situations I have witnessed were all pedophilia).

 

I do not believe in interrogating all parents, and I do not believe in reporting trifles. I agree that there needs to be a better understanding of what constitutes abuse.

[msjones]

OP here.

 

Several of you pointed out that I used examples I used in my original question that were too extreme. Good point, and I see that they weren't helpful.

 

And certainly I agree that the 'community' can't prevent all abuse.

 

I agree with many of you that reports should not be made for mild physical discipline. And I agree that mandated reporters can abuse their mandate.

 

However, I find the screening questions from medical personnel acceptable. While they can seem condescending, I think the questions represent a middle road -- not ignoring a possible problem, but not immediately reporting, either.

 

Even if there is no visible physical reason to suspect abuse, I can tolerate a seemingly nosy question if it means that some child somewhere may get the help she needs. I think of frightened kids and frustrated parents who have no one to tell -- the doctor's office may truly be the only possibility for help.

 

I see the questions the same way I see airline security measures or bag searches at a ball game or those endless FBI forms I have to fill out every time I volunteer somewhere -- a big inconvenience, a bit insulting, but something I can tolerate in order to at least try to prevent a tragedy.

 

I'd be interested to know what kinds of responses those questions tend to elicit. It seems that there must be some quantifiable benefit, or they wouldn't continue the questioning -- time is money at a doctor's office. Does anyone know?

[IsabelC]

I read about half of the 'abuse-screening-questions' thread. It got me thinking.

 

If you are opposed to screening questions from doctors, nurses, teachers, etc. how do you believe the community at large should deal with child abuse?

 

What help should be available for children who are beaten, burnt, choked, whipped, and locked up for 'discipline?'

 

I, too, have felt irked at those screening questions -- particularly if I was in a hurry or had a very sick child and just wanted to get home, but I don't have a better alternative to suggest.

 

So, I wonder what those of you who are opposed to those types of questions would prefer for child-abuse prevention/intervention.

 

I haven't read all the replies, so sorry if it's already been said. But what really jumps out for me is that we (as in, the authorities and society as a whole) have a strong tendency to address symptoms rather than causes. I'm talking about root causes, not immediate causes. In the case of child abuse, I would like to see more of the research into it being translated into action to prevent abuse. Why are people either growing to adulthood thinking it is OK to abuse children? Or why are parents feeling so desperate that they perpetrate abuse when they know it's not right? We don't just need education about what is not OK to do to your children, we need support for parents who are struggling with parenting and life issues. Help that people can access before it gets to the point of hurting themselves or their kids. A person who feels the need to beat, burn, choke etc their child is a sick person. Or a person who has been traumatized herself/himself. The child abuse is just one result of this. The parent needs help, not a witch hunt. Of course there will always be some cases where the child has to be rescued, but in an ideal world, people would be able to get their issues sorted out before they even have children.

[Tress]

Slightly off topic, but I have to say that this thread and the other thread about health professionals asking questions and the numerous posters who were very much against using implements while hitting children and hitting in general, has restored my trust in American parents again.

 

Until recently I was also part of another homeschooling forum. The owner of that forum made it very clear that the only way to be a good Catholic was to use forceful physical discipline with our children (*daily* use of a *leather belt* :001_huh:). I was shocked. Outraged.

 

And what was even more shocking was that none of the other parents felt that this was extreme. You bet I left that place in a hurry.

 

But I did start to feel I had somehow wandered into some kind of 'alternate reality', I'm not American, and sadly we also have parents abusing kids around here, but noone could make this kind of statements without being in a lot of trouble. A. Lot. Of. Trouble. By the authorities *and* by the public in general.

 

Sorry to hijack, I think I just needed to share.

[Elizabeth Conley]

This may be true. There may also be an alternative explanation.

 

People who deal with (I can't think of a polite way to say it) the dregs of society on a daily basis start to think that everyone is that way. I've seen it in Social workers, parole officers, law enforcement.

 

I say this because I worked in law enforcement, saw what it did to others and felt what it did to me. The world looks very different when you see the worst of it every day.

 

Again, I don't want to be offensive, but I must respectfully point out that every police officer and social worker is not an abusive bully. Some are, and even their peers know who they are and find them a bit disgusting.

 

These people are more likely sociopaths and/or narcissists who sought the job because it gave them the chance at "legitimate" situations in which to act out their disorders. Thankfully, these conditions only effect about 3 % of the population, but these people cause 97 % of the world's problems.

 

The vast majority of people are good people trying to be even better. Sociopaths and Narcissists aren't. They're bad people attempting to get what they want without caring in the least for how their behavior effects others.

 

The next time you see an abusive, nasty authoritarian in action, don't listen to his/her excuses for his/her behavior, watch his/her overall behavior. Chances are the excuses are simply the sociopaths way of dodging responsibility. Enough of the traits of a sociopath will be present for you to confirm the truth.

 

They'll run around saying "Everybody lies!", "Everybody's hiding something!" and similar remarks. What they really mean is "I Lie!", and "I'm always pulling something over someone!" and "When I get the chance, I love tearing those smug 'good' people down."

 

Once you can spot these rare bad apples, life improves. Most people are good, and life is better when you associate with good people.

 

http://www.cix.co.uk/~klockstone/teleg.htm

[mirth]

I would never answer any question that could incriminate me. That said, I don't think it's wrong for them to ask. (Well, in the case of the nurse/medical thing, I would feel annoyed if the asking took up more than 5% of the appointment time.) Ask away ...

 

84% of all criminals confess their crimes somehow before trial. So most of them will spill. Maybe motivated out of guilt, maybe an incentive was dangled, maybe they are stupid or have received bad or no legal advice.

 

Look at those idiotic balloon hoax parents. They went back and back and back to the police station, answering questions. Trying to appear helpful and establish their innocence about ballooning. Even when the police said charges are forthcoming (which means of course that they had not been charged, and are not under arrest, and are free to go), what do they do? Go back and talk to the police, of course! And doing so, they confessed their crime. These are the sort of people who you want to keep talking. Who knows what else they confessed to, child abuse, spouse abuse? (Have you seen the video of Balloon Dad trying to shove a lit cigar into his baby's mouth?). Yes maybe they would be better off had they hired any lawyer "worth his salt" a bit earlier, but I am glad they did not.

 

Oh, how does the community deal with it? The community can deal with child abuse prevention. This means lots of advertising that c.a. is bad and you need to stop it. Lots of ordinary people reaching out to other families. If your neighbor looks pregnant, call her and ask how you can help her out. Stuff like that.

Edited October 30, 2009 by mirth

[Caribbean Queen]

But "erring on the side of caution" assumes that CPS (individual workers and the agency) are reasonable and fair, and that foster homes are safer than their original homes (when the stats say otherwise), and that separating children from their parents is harmless.

 

 

This is why I am against the government searching out abuse by questioning people at check-ups at clinics. I am also against calling CPS on people for punishments that are rude, or a bit harsher than necessary. I would only call CPS if the abuse was obvious and horrible. The government is not very good at helping abused children. Children in foster care are abused even worse than they were in their orginal homes.

[Elizabeth Conley]

I know people like that exist. I have only met one. I told her I was having trouble getting my 4 year old to wear his glasses. She told me I should spank him. That is her answer for everything. Her son's behavior is a nightmare btw. I told her that wasn't an option for me. I don't spank, but even if I did, I can't see how spanking would be the answer for something like that.

 

 

I absolutely have known people like that, although not recently. When I was young I was in the Marines, and quite a few of my young peers were parents. Most of them operated that way.

 

I gotta tell you, I was appalled. That being said, these parents weren't bad people at all. They adored their kids, really and truly. They would have benefited from parenting classes.

 

No way would they or their kids have benefited from having their kids placed in foster care. They needed someone to convince them there really was a better way. These parents would have responded to parenting classes, because they were the type of people who respected authority. If someone they respected and trusted had presented a few seminars to them on child rearing, the success rate within this population would have been phenomenal.

[PineFarmMom]

I know people like that exist. I have only met one. I told her I was having trouble getting my 4 year old to wear his glasses. She told me I should spank him. That is her answer for everything. Her son's behavior is a nightmare btw. I told her that wasn't an option for me. I don't spank, but even if I did, I can't see how spanking would be the answer for something like that.

 

Interesting thread. I am with those (obviously) that believe grilling each and every parent is not the answer. It's a witch hunt. Those types of situations have never gone well for our govt. in political/war matters, so why would it be a good idea in this one? People would be outraged if we handled each and every person that looked like they "might" be a terrorist in this manner, just because they might come from a country we found suspicious. Why treat each and every parent who goes through some medical avenue like this just because they have a child? It creates a wall, IMO. Aside from becoming big brother in a majorly intrusive way, I don't think it's possible to locate and identify every child. Those who honestly suspect abuse calling cps seems a better avenue than grilling every parent just because they have a child.

 

I wanted to comment on the spanking thing. I have a grandmother-in-law whose answer for each issue is spanking. She and I had it out when discussing this topic as relates to potty training. She was insulting another family member who had a 3yo who wasn't potty trained (I do too, at this point, btw). She said that every time this kid had an accident, she needed a "good spanking." I told her that was a good way to end up with a kid with issues. I can't imagine doing that every time yet being unable to even identify whether it was an accidental thing or not. I do "know" those people, and the ones I know are usually senior citizens.

[Elizabeth Conley]

Look at those idiotic balloon hoax parents. They went back and back and back to the police station, answering questions. Trying to appear helpful and establish their innocence about ballooning. Even when the police said charges are forthcoming (which means of course that they had not been charged, and are not under arrest, and are free to go), what do they do? Go back and talk to the police, of course! And doing so, they confessed their crime. These are the sort of people who you want to keep talking. Who knows what else they confessed to, child abuse, spouse abuse? (Have you seen the video of Balloon Dad trying to shove a lit cigar into his baby's mouth?). Yes maybe they would be better off had they hired any lawyer "worth his salt" a bit earlier, but I am glad they did not.

 

 

 

The idiotic "balloon parents" were an obvious case of lunatics. As soon as the story aired, everyone with mental health experience knew they were fraudsters. It was just a matter of time before their story fell apart.

 

Those two, particularly the father, had a long history of attention gaining behaviors. He desperately wanted attention, and any attention would do. This absolutely includes negative attention.

 

We all know kids like this, but when a person's still at it after the age of 25, it's a mental health problem.

[Laurie4b]

:iagree:

 

One thing I would amend, however.

 

I have seen, in numerous situations, professionals (or neighbors or relatives or pastors, etc.) use their "judgment" to try to finesse along or help an abusive parent. All too often this means that the child continues to be abused and all too often the abuser is allowed continued access to children. I am talking about real abuse (the situations I have witnessed were all pedophilia).

 

I do not believe in interrogating all parents, and I do not believe in reporting trifles. I agree that there needs to be a better understanding of what constitutes abuse.

 

I included sexual abuse in the very serious category as an automatic report. I've not ever, ever heard of a medical/mental health professional wishing they could "use their judgment" on that. I am talking about professionals being able to use their judgment if a parent came in saying, "I lost control and hit my child too hard and I need help." I think there are people who would seek out that kind of help if available without worrying about losing their children.

 

I have heard mental health professionals at conferences wish there was a way for people with pedophilia to come for treatment without risking arrest, but those same individuals would also not advocate leaving them in contact with children. Who knows if pedophilia could be headed off if caught at its earliest stages? (There is no evidence that it can be changed once ingrained.) And there have actually been research studies where permission was gotten to not report/arrest sex offenders in order to be able to get information/try out treatments. There were many who participated, so there are people who would like help if they could get it without landing in jail. Maybe there should be a somewhat less restrictive environment than jail that could be developed that both protects the community and enables us to make some progress with treatment. There are also a couple of categories of sexual offenders. Some are driven to have sex with children as their primary sexual outlet. Treatment for them is pretty close to impossible at this stage. However, the larger category is people who have sex with children as a stress response . There are also people whose mental capacity or social skills are such that they are more comfortable relating to children. The latter two groups actually can respond to treatment. Then there are teens who experiment on children --not because they are attracted to children but because it's a safer place to "learn" than with their peers. They do respond to treatment ; most in fact, commit this kind of abuse a few number of times and stop on their own. That kind of sexual abuse is very common.

Edited October 30, 2009 by Laurie4b

[Laurie4b]

But "erring on the side of caution" assumes that CPS (individual workers and the agency) are reasonable and fair, and that foster homes are safer than their original homes (when the stats say otherwise), and that separating children from their parents is harmless.

 

:iagree: It means choosing to inflict a certain amount of abuse by the state, in an attempt to decrease the amount of abuse in homes. It is like saying, "To make sure that we convict a higher percentage of criminals, we'll accept a significant rate of conviction of innocent people and err on the side of protecting the community."

[momtoboys]

I still say, no matter how "good" CPS is or how many mandated reporters there are, true child abuse will never be eliminated.

 

It is a hidden, secretive thing, and is usually never found out. Even if it is reported.

 

I know first-hand of two cases where CPS failed badly. Both cases were definitely, definitely abuse cases.

 

First case: drug use and sexual abuse of little girl. Abuse reported to CPS. Child removed from home and put in care of loving grandparents. Child returned to abusive environment. Abuse reported three more times. Child still remained in care of parent.

 

Second case: severe mental/emotional abuse/threats, some sexual abuse, physical abuse (as in, pulling hair, hitting, spanking so that children are black and blue, spanking for things child has no clue they did wrong). This happens to all the children in the family to one degree or another. Family is finally reported when foster child who comes to live with them is abused even worse than the biological children and is almost killed.

 

Family is "professional" at hiding things and looking great to others. Kids are scared into silence. Parents good at getting others to vouch for their "great parenting skills". Report comes back unfounded. Family is reported again. Report again comes back unfounded.

 

All that to say, there is no real way to prevent true child abuse in my opinion. For all the complaints about children getting unnecessarily removed from their parents, I have disappointment about CPS failing in legitimate child abuse cases.

 

As I stated before, true child abuse is secretive, VERY hidden, and covered up--spanning generations. The really bad child abuse is not when you see the mom leave the kid in the car in the parking lot or slap her kid openly on the face in the store or scream at her kid in public.

 

Real child abuse is occurring secretly, every day in "normal" looking homes, where you would swear that things were great. And the children are hiding it. This is why it will nearly always go undetected.

[lgm]

I read about half of the 'abuse-screening-questions' thread. It got me thinking.

 

If you are opposed to screening questions from doctors, nurses, teachers, etc. how do you believe the community at large should deal with child abuse?

 

What help should be available for children who are beaten, burnt, choked, whipped, and locked up for 'discipline?'

 

I, too, have felt irked at those screening questions -- particularly if I was in a hurry or had a very sick child and just wanted to get home, but I don't have a better alternative to suggest.

 

So, I wonder what those of you who are opposed to those types of questions would prefer for child-abuse prevention/intervention.

 

 

I'd like to see parenting classes offered the same way prenatal classes are.

 

I'd like those convicted of crimes involving children and crimes involving substance abuse to automatically lose the privilege to parent and be in the presence of children.

 

I'd like children to have a safe out. No one deserves to be emotionally or physically abused, but so many have parents that are substance abusers or are children of substance abusers that there is no way to get them all out of their rotten home lives. So..I'd like to offer a dorm option. We're already feeding bkfst and lunch at school...might as well go the rest of the way before they become runaways and prostitute themselves.

[Laurie4b]

OP here.

 

Several of you pointed out that I used examples I used in my original question that were too extreme. Good point, and I see that they weren't helpful.

 

And certainly I agree that the 'community' can't prevent all abuse.

 

I agree with many of you that reports should not be made for mild physical discipline. And I agree that mandated reporters can abuse their mandate.

 

However, I find the screening questions from medical personnel acceptable. While they can seem condescending, I think the questions represent a middle road -- not ignoring a possible problem, but not immediately reporting, either.

 

Even if there is no visible physical reason to suspect abuse, I can tolerate a seemingly nosy question if it means that some child somewhere may get the help she needs. I think of frightened kids and frustrated parents who have no one to tell -- the doctor's office may truly be the only possibility for help.

 

I see the questions the same way I see airline security measures or bag searches at a ball game or those endless FBI forms I have to fill out every time I volunteer somewhere -- a big inconvenience, a bit insulting, but something I can tolerate in order to at least try to prevent a tragedy.

 

I'd be interested to know what kinds of responses those questions tend to elicit. It seems that there must be some quantifiable benefit, or they wouldn't continue the questioning -- time is money at a doctor's office. Does anyone know?

 

The problem with these types of questions now is that reporting IS mandated and a family gets turned over to a really broken system. There is no such thing as "not ignoring a possible problem, but not immediately reporting either." That's what I was arguing for in terms of changing mandatory reporting laws to allow professionals to use their judgment.

 

As our system is set up, it's "unreasonable search" imo. There might come a time in the future when the ideologues opposed to homeschooling manage to get doctors to start asking questions about how often you teach math, how many paragraphs per day your child writes, what kind of socialization they have, whether they are exposed to opposing ideologies, etc. etc.

[momtoboys]

Actually, just sitting here thinking. . .that there is a way to stop and prevent child abuse, at least in future generations.

 

Those who have been hurt by their parents/family/relatives in this way, need to stop the cycle. This can be somewhat complicated, and a long process. . .*but* it's a sure method for stopping abuse, because the truth is, most severe abuse is generational in nature.

[Elizabeth Conley]

I still say, no matter how "good" CPS is or how many mandated reporters there are, true child abuse will never be eliminated.

 

It is a hidden, secretive thing, and is usually never found out. Even if it is reported.

 

I know first-hand of two cases where CPS failed badly. Both cases were definitely, definitely abuse cases.

 

First case: drug use and sexual abuse of little girl. Abuse reported to CPS. Child removed from home and put in care of loving grandparents. Child returned to abusive environment. Abuse reported three more times. Child still remained in care of parent.

 

Second case: severe mental/emotional abuse/threats, some sexual abuse, physical abuse (as in, pulling hair, hitting, spanking so that children are black and blue, spanking for things child has no clue they did wrong). This happens to all the children in the family to one degree or another. Family is finally reported when foster child who comes to live with them is abused even worse than the biological children and is almost killed.

 

Family is "professional" at hiding things and looking great to others. Kids are scared into silence. Parents good at getting others to vouch for their "great parenting skills". Report comes back unfounded. Family is reported again. Report again comes back unfounded.

 

All that to say, there is no real way to prevent true child abuse in my opinion. For all the complaints about children getting unnecessarily removed from their parents, I have disappointment about CPS failing in legitimate child abuse cases.

 

As I stated before, true child abuse is secretive, VERY hidden, and covered up--spanning generations. The really bad child abuse is not when you see the mom leave the kid in the car in the parking lot or slap her kid openly on the face in the store or scream at her kid in public.

 

Real child abuse is occurring secretly, every day in "normal" looking homes, where you would swear that things were great. And the children are hiding it. This is why it will nearly always go undetected.

 

I couldn't agree more. :iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

The only bona fide case of domestic violence I've ever been exposed to was like that. The family looked picture perfect from the outside. They maintained appearances fanatically. When I was a child I used to imagine that my life would be perfect if I was part of their perfect family.

 

Two out of three of their sons were bullies, but I never realized it was because their father was a bully too.

 

Then I started dating their eldest son. I started to realize the family was sick, sick, depraved! It was little things at first, like the knowledge that all the kids were wraith thin because they lived on a starvation diet inside their luxurious upper middle class home. Everyone walked on egg shells all the time. It was a "Twilite Zone" experience, in that I had a constant sense that something was terribly wrong, but I couldn't put my finger on the problem. The I saw their mother's bruises one day, and realized the twisted truth. She had been the recipient of the worst beating you could possibly imagine. There was no explaining away the marks on her face and body. There wasn't an inch of her that hadn't been methodically battered. Bizarrely, the entire family pretended her condition and the violent beating away. I asked my boyfriend why, and he panicked. "Shhhh!"

 

Good grief!

 

The only real abuse I've ever known of was in an outwardly "perfect" family, and everyone in the family was conditioned to pretend it away. They were terrified of facing the family's very real problem.

 

Needless to say Mom didn't leave the house until every one of those horrifying bruises had healed. I can't remember precisely, but I think it took about 6 weeks. Try catching that problem by asking a few casual questions around vaccination time. That is, if you even remember to ask Mr. and Mrs. "Perfect" any questions in the first place. After all, when people radiate such perfection, who questions them?

[Joanne]

Actually, just sitting here thinking. . .that there is a way to stop and prevent child abuse, at least in future generations.

 

Those who have been hurt by their parents/family/relatives in this way, need to stop the cycle. This can be somewhat complicated, and a long process. . .*but* it's a sure method for stopping abuse, because the truth is, most severe abuse is generational in nature.

 

It won't happen, for many reasons. One is that children (or grown ups, for that matter), tend to normalize their experience over time, even when their experience is outside of reasonable bounds.

 

I didn't know a lot of what went on on my first marriage was abuse for many years. Many, many adults don't see the very real abuse they experienced in over-punitive homes and they improve on what was done to them but are still abusive to their children.

 

Cultures and subcultures sanction abuse.

 

Abuse of humans will always exist.

[MeanestMomInMidwest]

Again, I don't want to be offensive, but I must respectfully point out that every police officer and social worker is not an abusive bully. Some are, and even their peers know who they are and find them a bit disgusting.

 

These people are more likely sociopaths and/or narcissists who sought the job because it gave them the chance at "legitimate" situations in which to act out their disorders. Thankfully, these conditions only effect about 3 % of the population, but these people cause 97 % of the world's problems.

 

The vast majority of people are good people trying to be even better. Sociopaths and Narcissists aren't. They're bad people attempting to get what they want without caring in the least for how their behavior effects others.

 

The next time you see an abusive, nasty authoritarian in action, don't listen to his/her excuses for his/her behavior, watch his/her overall behavior. Chances are the excuses are simply the sociopaths way of dodging responsibility. Enough of the traits of a sociopath will be present for you to confirm the truth.

 

They'll run around saying "Everybody lies!", "Everybody's hiding something!" and similar remarks. What they really mean is "I Lie!", and "I'm always pulling something over someone!" and "When I get the chance, I love tearing those smug 'good' people down."

 

Once you can spot these rare bad apples, life improves. Most people are good, and life is better when you associate with good people.

 

http://www.cix.co.uk/~klockstone/teleg.htm

 

 

I never said or implied that every police officer or social worker is an abusive bully. Those are your words. Many on this thread have categorized social workers and CPS as a whole the way you are indicating they should not be categorized. Not me. I simply stated that seeing the worst of the world changes how one views the world. I stand by that statement.

 

Frankly, I think your post should be directed toward those who have a fear and mistrust of CPS workers due to anecdotal evidence of exactly the sort of thing you are posting about. Perhaps you just used my post as a jumping off point?

[momtoboys]

CPS or the government won't ever be able to stop abuse from occurring. It will always secretly be taking place in "perfect all-American looking families".

 

I guess my point was that someone who has been abused can take steps to prevent it from being repeated when they marry and have a family.

[Elizabeth Conley]

I stated that every police officer is not an abusive bully to make the point that if exposure to the dregs of society necessarily makes you project depravity on everyone and anyone, abusing innocents in the process, then all officers would be affected. Since I know plenty of mentally healthy police officers, I conclude that the "I suspect everyone because I've seen so much evil!" excuse is bunk. When I ask my sane police officer friends about the bad apples, they confirm my suspicions.

 

 

 

http://www.officer.com/web/online/Police-Life/The-Malignant-Narcissist/17080

 

 

I knew before I posted that I would offend you a bit. That's why I struggled for the gentlest possible words. It's a hard fact to face, that some people are deliberately bad. On the other hand, the good news is that the vast majority of people strive to be good.

[Harriet Vane]

I included sexual abuse in the very serious category as an automatic report. I've not ever, ever heard of a medical/mental health professional wishing they could "use their judgment" on that.

 

Unfortunately my experience has been quite different. It usually comes down to the pastor/therapist/teacher/parent either minimizing what happened or debating endlessly internally about whether or not they can trust that the child has been truthful.

 

Over the years I saw the same behavior with more than one child in more than one situation. I would actually say that my experience shows that mandated reporters are extraordinarily reluctant to report.

[MeanestMomInMidwest]

I stated that every police officer is not an abusive bully to make the point that if exposure to the dregs of society necessarily makes you project depravity on everyone and anyone, abusing innocents in the process, then all officers would be affected. Since I know plenty of mentally healthy police officers, I conclude that the "I suspect everyone because I've seen so much evil!" excuse is bunk. When I ask my sane police officer friends about the bad apples, they confirm my suspicions.

 

 

 

http://www.officer.com/web/online/Police-Life/The-Malignant-Narcissist/17080

 

 

I knew before I posted that I would offend you a bit. That's why I struggled for the gentlest possible words. It's a hard fact to face, that some people are deliberately bad. On the other hand, the good news is that the vast majority of people strive to be good.

 

Actually, you didn't offend me. I knew before I posted you would be unable to relate to how seeing certain things day in and day out can have a profound affect on even a mentally healthy individual, without rendering such individual into an abusive, power-hungry monster. I struggled for the appropriate words. Its a hard fact to face, but like mentally healthy soldiers in combat can struggle with PTSD afterward, seeing horrible things as a course of one's everyday job can have an affect. Knowing someone who is in a certain profession is not akin to participating in that profession. Individuals in a profession (nursing, law enforcement, etc.) are able to talk about such things freely. Acknowledging these facts and talking about them helps us maintain mental stability/health. Unfortunately, we also know that civillians will not be able to relate.

[LibraryLover]

My answer is simple: Let's voluntarily stop hitting our kids.

 

If physical pain was taken off the table as a discipline tool, and we started using our love and creativity instead, we'd all be better off.