Teachin'Mine Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_detroit_standoff_mother_s_fight Obviously this isn't clear cut when she fired a gun, but this seems like the state overstepping its boundaries for sure. In reading the daughters symptoms - the little bit that's discussed in the article - does it sound like it's possibly PANDAS to anyone else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snickerdoodle Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 What an ugly, horrible story all around. :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mysticamethyst Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 I cannot even imagine the city/state coming in and telling me I HAD to medicate my child in any one way. I feel bad for her and her daughter how sad. I applaud the mom though for standing up for her daughter at all costs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LidiyaDawn Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 "If a parent feels the child is going to be removed and there isn't a basis for it, there are legal avenues that the parent needs to follow." ^^^ that. You don't start waving a gun around and being all crazy at the cops with your kid in the house! (not a very good idea when you're alone either, but hey.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katilac Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 I think the mother sounds like a loon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snickerdoodle Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 I wonder how many kids these days are on antipsychotics. I wonder what the numbers look like across SES. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 There just isn't much information in this article. Did she try more than one doctor? Did they ever refer her to a neurologist? I wonder if they've tested her for strep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarkacademy Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 I think it is crummy for everyone. One one hand you have the state, they are responsible for all child abuse etc. Anytime a child is abused people say, where was the school, where was child services etc. I think they are getting fed up in their business all they see is bad parents. On the other hand the majority of kids today are not in great homes and are being abused. It is like this never ending circle. Do they step in do they back off? Which kid truly needs help which kid don't? We homeschool so our kids are kept under the radar so to speak but how many have used that as a cover? There was a disabled little girl last year homeschooled they found her in in different ares after mutilated by step mom. You have a class of 35 kids half on drugs for behavior how many of those parents are truly involved. I wish the state would back off and leave people alone but at the same time if they did, how many deaths will we have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoopytwo Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 It was not clear in the article whether the police had a court order to seize the girl. Did I miss something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 There just isn't much information in this article. Did she try more than one doctor? Did they ever refer her to a neurologist? I wonder if they've tested her for strep. I was wondering the same things. I'm sure there will be follow up articles soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 I think it is crummy for everyone. One one hand you have the state, they are responsible for all child abuse etc. Anytime a child is abused people say, where was the school, where was child services etc. I think they are getting fed up in their business all they see is bad parents. On the other hand the majority of kids today are not in great homes and are being abused. It is like this never ending circle. Do they step in do they back off? Which kid truly needs help which kid don't? We homeschool so our kids are kept under the radar so to speak but how many have used that as a cover? There was a disabled little girl last year homeschooled they found her in in different ares after mutilated by step mom. You have a class of 35 kids half on drugs for behavior how many of those parents are truly involved. I wish the state would back off and leave people alone but at the same time if they did, how many deaths will we have? Maybe I'm not understanding what you meant to say, but if you're saying that you truly think the majority of kids today are being abused ... :blink: Well I definitely don't agree. I think that this is the skewed view that many in child protection get after years of seeing all they see. That thinking may well have played into the actions taken in this case. Assuming the mother acted rationally, prior to the gun incident, it seems like a far stretch to go from thinking maybe she should be on medication to forcibly removing her from her home, unless they think as in the bolded statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 I wonder how many kids these days are on antipsychotics. I wonder what the numbers look like across SES. Good question. I think it's probably at an all time high with the mentality that there's a pill for everything. :confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 It was not clear in the article whether the police had a court order to seize the girl. Did I miss something? It did state that there was no order to medicate the girl. That is probably because risperdal use in young kids is so controversial. I doubt a doctor is wanting to on record in court trying to force it. If harm from it is proven later, then the doctor and state would likely be liable. It *sounds like* they know that and were trying to seize the girl *without* giving the mom a court order to medicate. Usually parents are ordered to medicate/give treatment before they lose custody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serenade Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 I read this last night and I find it very troublesome. Parental rights seem to be going by the wayside. Years ago my DH was diagnosed with ADHD, and we have chosen not to medicate. First off, I don't think he really has a medical condition, and second, I don't think medication is always the best option. There are side effects to consider as well. I wonder what I would have done if the state forced me to medicate my son? Makes me never want to take my kids to the doctor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 It was not clear in the article whether the police had a court order to seize the girl. Did I miss something? You didn't miss it. There's a lot of unanswered questions. I don't even know the girl's age. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LidiyaDawn Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 You didn't miss it. There's a lot of unanswered questions. I don't even know the girl's age. Other articles have said that the girl is 13. Godboldo said the state was not involved in the care of her daughter until she pursued a more holistic treatment. When asked by the AP what that entailed' date=' she replied: "God's medication."[/color'] …yes, because responses like that are very helpful to her case. :001_huh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brightside Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 This is just further evidence of the US becoming a police state. It is just sad and frightening that we have become so lazy and so afraid of "the bad guys" that we roll over like sheep and let our rights be taken away. She did not have a choice in medicating her own child with a drug that in it's very use is controversial in children. :angry: I think I had better get off this soapbox before I start...it is just too early this morning for this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 There is more to the story than what is included in the link. This has been heavily reported in our local news. It's also being followed closely by dd's paramedic instructor and the three doctors that oversee her EMS. It's a subject of their medical ethics discussions. The nuts and bolts is...yeah, mom got desperate and possibly did a loony thing. But, and here is the big but...the psychiatric NOS diagnosis is not enough to justify the risperadol which can really impair children in terms of energy, ability to concentrate, etc. Sworn statements from the children's psyche hospital indicate that psychiatrists there chose not to medicate the child with risperadol due to their inability to nail down any definitive diagnosis and no strong reason to believe it would improve her condition and the fact that the child's side-effects to risperadol were documented by mom, the 2nd clinic that the mom took the child to, and her special ed teachers. Apparently, the first doc that prescribed risperadol is one that does not accept parents questioning his authority and the social worker has implied - though we don't know how much if this is a direct quote, indirect but witnessed, or hearsay - that all forms of non-allopathic medicine are quakery and dangerous. Again, no allegations of absolute abuse of power have been made against the caseworker, but there could possibly be some personal feelings against alternative medicine at play. The court has not ordered her foster parents, the child's maternal aunt, to medicate the child or change treatment plan. That is very telling because if there was medical evidence to support that the benefits of the meds that would outweigh the drawbacks, you can bet the child would be medicated once in the state's care. The judge has specifically stated that he has not chosen to force medication based on his review of the medical records and medical testimony from pediatric/neuro-psych experts. So, it's possible that the original charge of medical neglect will be dropped if it is determined the mom was definitely being railroaded on that issue. Unfortunately, because the allegation that a gun was fired in the house prior to the police entering the home, more charges may stick. Wayne and Macomb counties have notorious reputations for having a few social workers that abuse their positions. It is widely known amongst foster parents here that the one thing you don't ever want to agree to is a placement from these counties - it's even brought up at foster parent training here that our county no longer accepts requests from Wayne or Macomb for any reason. These counties routinely beg to "borrow beds" (as the saying goes) from the northern counties because they have a ridiculous number of children in care and a mind-bogglingly low number of foster families. Their reputation is just that bad. I also have personal experience with Macomb and Wayne Counties from when I did respite care for a couple of foster families in Genesee County who had RAD placements from these counties on the borrowed bed option. I learned the hard way that I would never, ever, ever agree to take a child from either of these counties. So, please don't jump on the band wagon that the county/state is right in this case. As for the gun thing, well even that is disputed. Two officers say they didn't hear a shot fired and could not find any indication of a lodged bullet on the premises. So there are conflicting reports on that and the shell casing wasn't in a location that would indicate she was shooting at police anyway. Other witnesses say the definitely heard a shot. Emtpy shell casings in the home of gun owners, is not uncommon. So, they need to do some serious forensics investigating before everyone jumps on the "she tried to kill cops" bandwagon. She may have shot, but she also may not have. At any rate, it's sad that this occured. She got a second opinion and the second opinion doctor did not support the use of risperadol. This should have been an open shut case of mamma gets to choose, long before it got to this point. That said, these clinics in Detroit are beyond overwhelmed, just beyond anything we can readily imagine. These docs see a huge amount of medically neglected children, children in desperate need. It becomes easy for them to not take parents seriously or to assume the worse of parents. However, the first clinic needs to get its "dog" out of the fight. Faith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amo_mea_filiis. Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 In reading the daughters symptoms - the little bit that's discussed in the article - does it sound like it's possibly PANDAS to anyone else? It did to me. I was accused of getting too much medical treatment for my son by a psychologist. *I* asked children and youth (CPS) to get involved and everything was dismissed. I would love to read what's missing from the story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 Other articles have said that the girl is 13. Godboldo said the state was not involved in the care of her daughter until she pursued a more holistic treatment. When asked by the AP what that entailed, she replied: "God's medication." …yes, because responses like that are very helpful to her case. :001_huh: Thank you. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 This is just further evidence of the US becoming a police state. It is just sad and frightening that we have become so lazy and so afraid of "the bad guys" that we roll over like sheep and let our rights be taken away. She did not have a choice in medicating her own child with a drug that in it's very use is controversial in children. :angry: I think I had better get off this soapbox before I start...it is just too early this morning for this. I agree. As Faith's information pointed out, the doctors who had her as an inpatient for a month agreed with the mother's decision not to use the drug. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 There is more to the story than what is included in the link. This has been heavily reported in our local news. It's also being followed closely by dd's paramedic instructor and the three doctors that oversee her EMS. It's a subject of their medical ethics discussions. The nuts and bolts is...yeah, mom got desperate and possibly did a loony thing. But, and here is the big but...the psychiatric NOS diagnosis is not enough to justify the risperadol which can really impair children in terms of energy, ability to concentrate, etc. Sworn statements from the children's psyche hospital indicate that psychiatrists there chose not to medicate the child with risperadol due to their inability to nail down any definitive diagnosis and no strong reason to believe it would improve her condition and the fact that the child's side-effects to risperadol were documented by mom, the 2nd clinic that the mom took the child to, and her special ed teachers. Apparently, the first doc that prescribed risperadol is one that does not accept parents questioning his authority and the social worker has implied - though we don't know how much if this is a direct quote, indirect but witnessed, or hearsay - that all forms of non-allopathic medicine are quakery and dangerous. Again, no allegations of absolute abuse of power have been made against the caseworker, but there could possibly be some personal feelings against alternative medicine at play. The court has not ordered her foster parents, the child's maternal aunt, to medicate the child or change treatment plan. That is very telling because if there was medical evidence to support that the benefits of the meds that would outweigh the drawbacks, you can bet the child would be medicated once in the state's care. The judge has specifically stated that he has not chosen to force medication based on his review of the medical records and medical testimony from pediatric/neuro-psych experts. So, it's possible that the original charge of medical neglect will be dropped if it is determined the mom was definitely being railroaded on that issue. Unfortunately, because the allegation that a gun was fired in the house prior to the police entering the home, more charges may stick. Wayne and Macomb counties have notorious reputations for having a few social workers that abuse their positions. It is widely known amongst foster parents here that the one thing you don't ever want to agree to is a placement from these counties - it's even brought up at foster parent training here that our county no longer accepts requests from Wayne or Macomb for any reason. These counties routinely beg to "borrow beds" (as the saying goes) from the northern counties because they have a ridiculous number of children in care and a mind-bogglingly low number of foster families. Their reputation is just that bad. I also have personal experience with Macomb and Wayne Counties from when I did respite care for a couple of foster families in Genesee County who had RAD placements from these counties on the borrowed bed option. I learned the hard way that I would never, ever, ever agree to take a child from either of these counties. So, please don't jump on the band wagon that the county/state is right in this case. As for the gun thing, well even that is disputed. Two officers say they didn't hear a shot fired and could not find any indication of a lodged bullet on the premises. So there are conflicting reports on that and the shell casing wasn't in a location that would indicate she was shooting at police anyway. Other witnesses say the definitely heard a shot. Emtpy shell casings in the home of gun owners, is not uncommon. So, they need to do some serious forensics investigating before everyone jumps on the "she tried to kill cops" bandwagon. She may have shot, but she also may not have. At any rate, it's sad that this occured. She got a second opinion and the second opinion doctor did not support the use of risperadol. This should have been an open shut case of mamma gets to choose, long before it got to this point. That said, these clinics in Detroit are beyond overwhelmed, just beyond anything we can readily imagine. These docs see a huge amount of medically neglected children, children in desperate need. It becomes easy for them to not take parents seriously or to assume the worse of parents. However, the first clinic needs to get its "dog" out of the fight. Faith Thank you for all the extra info - very sad about the state of affairs there. I agree with the bolded part wholeheartedly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 It did to me. I was accused of getting too much medical treatment for my son by a psychologist. *I* asked children and youth (CPS) to get involved and everything was dismissed. I would love to read what's missing from the story. Too much medical treatment??? Good grief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbmom Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 As far as the medical treatment in this case, it sounds as if the mother was in the right and no state involvement is warranted, however, from the limited information presented it sounds as if the mother brought it on herself with her behavior. If she had second opinions from other doctors and CPS was still insistent that she medicate the child, was there no option to go to court to have a judge decide? Missing CPS meetings, waving a gun around when the police come to your house, and saying you are using "God's medicine" as your holistic treatment plan do not really instill confidence that you are making the best decisions in your daughter's life (or yours.) The other cases mentioned-I don't know...is it the state's responsibility to protect children whose parents are making decisions that could (and do) kill them? Or is the parents decision to live with after all is said and done? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaithManor Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 Yes bbmom, that is the saddest thing of all is that she did not approach the situation well and she does not appear to know how to behave in an appropriate manner to authorities, nor did she engage help from community legal services which would have provided her with a pro bono attorney if she was low income. With the evidence that she has that she was not neglecting her child, a well worded letter from an attorney might have gotten FIA to back off. Instead, her comments and behavior only inferiorated the case worker. There is a very real divide between the people of Detroit and law enforcement agencies. It is something we northerners don't get as we do not have a history that automatically includes being hostile and at odds with social workers and police from get go. So, the issues run deep, very, very deep because many Detroiters feel persecuted...as if "the state" is just waiting to incacerate them, shoot them, seize their kids, etc. It's tragic, but I can guarantee you there are many, many more in that county who would react the same way even if it is highly unwise to do so. Again, a lawyer or family court intermediary would have been the best choice. She needed advice and she needed someone to diffuse her own negative feelings while also making sure she wasn't railroaded and that the authorities behaved themselves as well. "God's medicine" was a pretty bad reponse. Obviously, something like, "My daughter is being treated with St. John's Wort, vitamin D3, omega oil supplements, therapeutic massage, and chiropractic would possibly have worked." (By the way, I'm just throwing this out there. I do not know what the naturopathic course of treatment actually was.) But, again, sarcastic, angry responses to inquiries by legal authorities in her neighborhood of Detroit, is all together very common and again, I don't fully understand that history but I'm guessing it's pretty similar to inner city L.A. after the Rodney King experience. Many Detroiters just assume that the authorities are waiting to prey on them. She didn't exercise good judgment in dealing with the legal issues. I suspect that CPS's judgment was possibly worse. Faith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impish Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 What an ugly, horrible story all around. :( :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 As for the gun thing, well even that is disputed. Two officers say they didn't hear a shot fired and could not find any indication of a lodged bullet on the premises. So there are conflicting reports on that and the shell casing wasn't in a location that would indicate she was shooting at police anyway. Other witnesses say the definitely heard a shot. Emtpy shell casings in the home of gun owners, is not uncommon. So, they need to do some serious forensics investigating before everyone jumps on the "she tried to kill cops" bandwagon. Are the other witnesses also cops? I ask because if you haven't been around gun fire a lot you could mistake a lot of things for gun fire. I don't have time to research this today, I shouldn't even be here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted May 23, 2011 Author Share Posted May 23, 2011 Maybe I watched too much TV as a kid, but isn't there a simple test they can do to see if someone fired a gun? Isn't there powder residue or something on their hands? Maybe someone who watches CSI would know. :lol: It just seems to me that that would have taken priority even over her daughter's medication. If she actually shot at them, I would think they would do whatever tests to prove that since they don't seem to have a leg to stand on on the other issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 I suspect the mother probably needs the Risperdal more than the child. It never helps one's case to act wildly defiant like that, even without a gun involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rlugbill Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 This is just further evidence of the US becoming a police state. It is just sad and frightening that we have become so lazy and so afraid of "the bad guys" that we roll over like sheep and let our rights be taken away. She did not have a choice in medicating her own child with a drug that in it's very use is controversial in children. :angry: I think I had better get off this soapbox before I start...it is just too early this morning for this. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaners Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 On the other hand the majority of kids today are not in great homes and are being abused. Someone else asked about this statement too and I didn't see it answered yet. Do you mean that the majority of children today are being abused? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.