The Texas Supreme Court today upheld the lower appellate court ruling, which ordered the trial Judge Barbara Walther to vacate her order authorizing the removal of all the FLDS children from the YFZ Ranch. You can read the ruling here. The court began by relating some of the history of the raid, and noted interestingly that Texas authorites never even found the alleged 16 year old victim who started the entire fiasco in motion:
The Yearning for Zion Ranch is a 1,700-acre complex near Eldorado, Texas, that is home to a large community associated with the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. On March 29, 2008, the Texas Department of Family Protective Services received a telephone call reporting that a sixteen-year-old girl named Sarah was being physically and sexually abused at the Ranch. On April 3, about 9:00 p.m., Department investigators and law enforcement officials entered the Ranch, and throughout the night they interviewed adults and children and searched for documents. Concerned that the community had a culture of polygamy and of directing girls younger than eighteen to enter spiritual unions with older men and have children, the Department took possession of all 468 children at the Ranch without a court order.[1] The Department calls this “the largest child protection case documented in the history of the United States.” It never located the girl Sarah who was the subject of the March 29 call.
Of course the court mentioning that Texas never found Sarah is not the basis of the opinion; however, I found it interesting that the court would make note of it specifically in its recitation of the facts. It did not have to do that. And, the fact that it did was telling, in my opinion.
This is a very short opinion, mostly because I believe the supreme court was merely saying: Hey, we’re not going to disturb the lower court’s finding–they (the lower appellate court) was right and Judge Barbara Walther was wrong. The supreme court opinion money quote:
The Department petitioned this Court for review by mandamus. Having carefully examined the testimony at the adversary hearing and the other evidence before us, we are not inclined to disturb the court of appeals’ decision. On the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted. The Department argues without explanation that the court of appeals’ decision leaves the Department unable to protect the children’s safety, but the Family Code gives the district court broad authority to protect children short of separating them from their parents and placing them in foster care. The court may make and modify temporary orders “for the safety and welfare of the child”,[4] including an order “restraining a party from removing the child beyond a geographical area identified by the court”.[5] The court may also order the removal of an alleged perpetrator from the child’s home[6] and may issue orders to assist the Department in its investigation.[7] The Code prohibits interference with an investigation,[8] and a person who relocates a residence or conceals a child with the intent to interfere with an investigation commits an offense.[9]
The numbers above correspond to the foot notes in the ruling, which you can read in the original. But, in essence, the court points out what the Texas Legislature specifically spelled out in its Family Code, and that is, that CPS may protect the FLDS children (at least those who, based on credible evidence need protecting) by doing any number of things other than herding and rounding them up like Texas Longhorns and sending them to the far reaches of Texas. They can restrain the parents from removing the children from the state; they can require alleged perpetrators to leave the Ranch. In fact, if Texas has evidence sufficient to warrant criminal prosecution for sexual assault, then law enforcement can even arrest the folks against whom they have such evidence.
Finally, sanity and the rule of Constitutional law return to the West Texas prairies.
In a dissent, Justice O’Neill wrote:
In this case, the Department of Family and Protective Services presented evidence that “there was a danger to the physical health or safety” of pubescent girls on the Yearning for Zion (YFZ) Ranch from a pattern or practice of sexual abuse, that “the urgent need for protection required the immediate removal” of those girls, and that the Department made reasonable efforts, considering the obstacles to information-gathering that were presented, to prevent removal and return those children home. Tex. Fam. Code § 262.201(b)(1)–(3). As to this endangered population, I do not agree with the Court that the trial court abused its discretion in allowing the Department to retain temporary conservatorship until such time as a permanency plan designed to ensure each girl’s physical health and safety could be approved. See id. §§ 263.101–.102. On this record, however, I agree that there was no evidence of imminent “danger to the physical health or safety” of boys and pre-pubescent girls to justify their removal from the YFZ Ranch, and to this extent I join the Court’s opinion. Id. § 262.201(b)(1).
This is an interesting observation. Justice O’Neill would have upheld Texas’ actions had they limited the roundup only post-pubescent girls; however, where I think the Justice is wrong is her reliance on the FLDS belief system. Again, the First Amendment will protect beliefs, but not necessarily actions. And, the kind of action Justice O’Neill intimates is unlawful sexual contact with minor children. That conduct can and should be prohibited. And, Texas would be correct to do so, if and when there is evidence that it occurs. But, to sweep up all post-pubescent girls I think still runs afoul not only of the Texas Family Code, but also the First Amendment.
The dissent continued by arguing that Texas made a reasonable effort under the circumstances to keep the children together with their families; however, because the families and children would not cooperate with Texas authorities then Texas has no option but to confiscate over 400 children from their homes and families:
Thwarted by the resistant behavior of both children and parents on the Ranch, the Department had limited options. Without knowing the identities of family members or of particular alleged perpetrators, the Department could not have sought restraining orders under section 262.1015 as it did not know whom to restrain. See id. § 262.1015. Likewise, it could not have barred any family member from access to a child without filing a verified pleading or affidavit, which must identify clearly the parent and the child to be separated. See id. § 105.001(c)(3) (“Except on a verified pleading or an affidavit . . . an order may not be rendered . . . excluding a parent from possession of or access to a child.”). Furthermore, the trial court heard evidence that the mothers themselves believed that the practice of underage “marriage” and procreation was not harmful for young girls; the Department’s witnesses testified that although the Department “always wants kids to be with their parents,” they will only reunify children with their parents after “it’s determined that [their parents] know and can express what it was in the first place that caused harm to their children.” This is some evidence that the Department could not have reasonably sought to maintain custody with the mothers. Thus, evidence presented to the trial court demonstrated that the Department took reasonable efforts, consistent with extraordinarily difficult circumstances, to protect the children without taking them into custody. Id.
The problem with this argument, in my view is that it assumes Texas was justified in looking at the YFZ Ranch as a whole, one big family rather than the many, many families which in fact resided at the ranch. Texas should not have taken the Texas sized bite it did, not being prepared for the consequences.
Other media coverage beginning to trickle in:
SAN ANGELO, Texas – The Texas Supreme Court today turned down the state’s request to overturn a lower court’s ruling that hundreds of FLDS children were taken into custody improperly.
In doing so, the high court rejected the Texas Department of Families and Protective Services’ plea to overturn the Third Court of Appeals ruling that the children should be returned to their parents.
The opinion was met with delight by attorneys representing the FLDS families. Kevin Dietz of Texas RioGrande Legal Aid said he would work with the courts and state Child Protective Services to do what’s in the best interest of the children.
“Right now, that means reuniting these families,” he said.
In its brief opinion, the court decided by a six-to-three justice majority that “we are not inclined to disturb the Court of Appeals’ decision. On the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted.”
The state had argued the appellate decision left it unable to guard the children’s safety from what it had deemed imminent danger of sexual and physical abuse due to the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints’ practice of polygamy.
In early April, 51st District Judge Barbara Walther authorized the raid and subsequently ruled the children would remain in state custody. The state Supreme Court, however, found that Texas’ family code gives the district court broad authority to protect children short of separating them from their parents and placing them in foster care or shelters. For example, the lower court could have issued a restraining order barring the children from being taken out of state or ordering the removal of any perpetrators from their homes, the justices said.
The Deseret News has an excellent article on the opinion (read the whole article):
The Texas Supreme Court has ruled that the removal of FLDS children from the YFZ Ranch was unwarranted — and the decision to take them was an abuse of judicial discretion.
The decision today comes after Texas RioGrande Legal Aid filed a writ of mandamus in the Third Court of Appeals on behalf of 38 mothers.
In its ruling, the high court said that state law gave the lower court broad authority to protect children “short of separating them from their parents and placing them in foster care,” including removing alleged perpetrators from a child’s home and preventing the removal of a child from the jurisdiction of the investigating agency.
Those options were not embraced, the court said.
“This is decision in an important step in reuniting these families,” said Texas RioGrande Legal Aid attorney Kevin Dietz who is leading the group of attorneys working on the case. “It’s great to see that the court system is working in the interest of justice.”
The decision gives the mothers new hope that their families will be reunited relatively soon. Although the decision only applies to the 38 mothers named in the case, the decision will likely influence all the families, Dietz said.
Texas officials had no right to remove about 460 children from a polygamist sect, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
The Texas Supreme Court agreed with a lower court’s ruling, that Child Protective Services did not present ample evidence that the children were being abused.
The high court ruling could possibly clear the way for the children to be returned to their families. They were removed in April from the Yearning for Zion (YFZ) Ranch, near Eldorado.
“We are not inclined to disturb the court of appeals’ decision,” the ruling said. “On the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted.”
The court’s 6-3 ruling came in the case of 38 mothers who had appealed the removal of their children, but attorneys in the case have said the reasoning behind the court rulings can be applied to the removals of all the children from the Yearning for Zion Ranch raid which began on April 3.
About 460 children were removed, although 20 were later found in court to be adults.
The Texas CPS folks have posted this statement on their website:
Today the Texas Supreme Court issued a decision on the YFZ child custody case. The decision can be found on the Texas Supreme Court web site.
We are disappointed, but we understand and respect the court’s decision and will take immediate steps to comply. Child Protective Services has one purpose in this case – to protect the children. Our goal is to reunite families whenever we can do so and make sure the children will be safe. We will continue to prepare for the prompt and orderly reunification of these children with their families. We also will work with the district court to ensure the safety of the children and that all of our actions conform with the decision of the Texas Supreme Court.
Disappointed eh? That’s it? That’s the best they can do after disrupting the family life of over 400 children and wreaking the heartache and despair they have brought about because of their own incompetence? One purpose–to protect the children? Wow!
The New York Times has now posted this story on its website:
The Texas State Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the removal of children from a polygamist religious group’s ranch by child welfare authorities was unwarranted and that the children should be returned.
The court’s ruling upheld a decision issued last week by the Third Court of Appeals in Austin finding that a state district court judge had not been justified in allowing the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services to remove hundreds children from a ranch complex near Eldorado in April.
In Thursday’s decision, the Supreme Court noted that while “the district court must vacate the current temporary custody orders as directed by the court of appeals,” the district court judge could impose conditions to protect the children including preventing their removal from beyond a geographical area.
Although the Supreme Court on Thursday instructed the district court to vacate its original order approving the children’s removal, it did not set a timetable under which they should be returned. Thursday’s decision involved 126 of the children, but a lawyer for representing one of the children seized from the ranch has said previously that the decision would effectively apply to all of the children taken into state custody.The Supreme Court said state child welfare officials must meet several legal standards concerning the safety of the children in order to justify removal — such as proving that state officials made a reasonable effort to enable the children to return home but that there was a substantial risk of continuing danger if the children were returned.
“Having carefully examined the testimony at the adversary hearing and the other evidence before us, we are not inclined to disturb the court of appeals’ decision,” the Supreme Court ruled. “On the record before us, removal of the children was not warranted.”
Grits For Breakfast is beginning to post as well. Grits, a Texas Blogger focusing on the Texas criminal justice system has been following this story rather closely.
So, what does it all mean? I don’t know. I suppose in part it means, that the Founding Fathers, back in the day of this country’s infancy, were indeed inspired men, raised up by God to enshrine God given rights in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. In part it means that the rule of law is still paramount even today, even when a state is investigating an extremely unpopular religious movement. In part, I think it means that we should be grateful that the passions of the moment are subject to later review by cooler and calmer minds.
But, I suppose one of the more important meanings is that soon, hopefully very soon, mothers, fathers, and children will soon be reunited as families. That’s a pretty important meaning, in my view.
Messenger and Advocate 
May 29, 2008 at 2:52 pm
The sun is coming out! The Constitution lives!
May 29, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Wonderful, wonderful news! Thanks, Guy.
May 29, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Thanks Guy. Good news indeed. Sorry, Flora, but the law’s on the FLDS’s side, not yours.
May 29, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Great news, Guy. What did you think of the dissent?
May 29, 2008 at 3:17 pm
YAY!!!!! I am so happy those kids can be with mom soon!!!
Jim or Guy would you explain what the dissent is?
Will she order all the kids to go home or will they have to file their own appeal?
May 29, 2008 at 3:52 pm
I think the Texas supreme Court was correct in affirming the lower appellate court’s ruling. The appellate court found that while some of the girls approaching puberty may have been in some danger of being “married off” and potentially forced to have sex at a very young age, the majority of the children were not in any physical danger. When the police/authorities do things like this, they encroach on the rights of everyone else. The FLDS parents were robbed of their due process rights to a full hearing in a court of law before their children, who for the most part were in no physical danger, were taken from them. I don’t agree with what the FLDS are doing, but we must uphold the rule of law in this country for all of our sakes.
May 29, 2008 at 4:26 pm
I will rejoice when I see the buses pull up to the YFZ Ranch and the children reunited with their mothers. I’m praying that will happen this weekend.
May 29, 2008 at 5:37 pm
This is great news! It will be even greater when the children are home. Thank you for covering this so thoroughly, Guy.
May 29, 2008 at 5:44 pm
It’s nice to see the Texas Supreme Court reach the right conclusion and do so in an expeditious manner.
May 29, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Oh Dear… I can’t even imagine the size of the lawsuit. I really hope we have 50+ families filing lawsuits against the CPS.
Someone should total up the state revenue lost on this one… From the round up, to the child relocating, to the legal fees, and the child re-locating. Heads should roll!
May 29, 2008 at 6:00 pm
If this were a movie, this is the moment when the big bad bully (CPS) who has been terrorizing the town, gets its arse kicked by the tougher lawman (the Texas Supreme Court).
Texans don’t generally hold the state supreme court in high regard (they are directly elected and can be bought and paid for by big business and big special interests), but we can be proud of it today.
May 29, 2008 at 6:04 pm
… And we should be glad Al Gonzales isn’t still on the Texas Supreme Court, or else he’d have shipped all the kids to Gitmo.
May 29, 2008 at 6:13 pm
I’m extremely grateful for this outcome; however, I’m still very upset that such terrible (and obviously illegal) actions by CPS could have occurred in the first place.
Guy and others – does the Texas Supreme Court decision, along with the earlier appellate ruling, mean that CPS can be sued by the FLDS and have a good chance of receiving compensation for the emotional heartache and trauma CPS caused?
The Texas raid and resultant outcome have been eye-opening, to say the least! I’ve heard negative reports about CPS-type departments over the years, but this situation surely demonstrates how utterly powerful such organizations have! It’s frightening!
May 29, 2008 at 6:57 pm
mom2oneson: In an appellate case, the judges vote on what the court’s final result will be. One justice from the majority is then selected to write the court’s opinion. The justices who voted against the result chosen by the court may write their own dissents explaining why they believe the majority of the court got it wrong, and these are published with the opinion itself. This decision, I believe, was a 6-3 decision.
Cary, I wouldn’t expect a civil suit just yet. CPS isn’t done here–they’ve just been told that they have to tear these families up one by one, rather than altogether in one fell swoop. So there will be plenty of hearings in family court–as well as in criminal court, if the Texas AG’s office is to believed–where the legality of the original raid will be argued. If those hearings determine the raid to be unjustified, a civil suit will have a much easier time going forward.
May 29, 2008 at 8:12 pm
Wow; not only is this a good day for the Constitution, but it occurred much more quickly than I thought it would.
May 29, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Unfortunately it looks like Judge Walther is still in charge and she’s not at all objective. I’m afraid she’s going to really “sock it to them” now. She and CPS must be hoppin’ mad and ready to fight. I don’t believe for one minute they care about the children and the children will continue to pay.
May 30, 2008 at 8:09 am
Thanks, Guy, for a fantastic job of following the situation, posting related links, and offering great insights! I’m very pleased with the latest development (as everyone with a correct understanding of the event’s implications should be).
I also have family members directly involved, and though I don’t agree with various elements of their belief system, I’m happy that their children will be coming back, and I think some good may come out of the situation yet (on a personal level). On a general level, though, these children now have a larger obstacle than before to their life’s progression; Everything they have been told about the government and outside world has been validated in their minds. And it will remain so for years and years to come. Just ask any of the children involved in the ’53 raid…..55 years after the fact!
Sorry for the tangent….
May 30, 2008 at 8:10 am
Wondering if the buses from the First Baptist Church in El Dorado will be bringing the kids back to YFZ?
If YFZ was well financed by manipulation of the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program, how much will they make off of the lawsuits they’ll bring against CPS, et al?
Our early Church advocates had no success in the courts in regards to polygamy, what will the FLDS think of the rightness of their cause with this ruling?
Can anyone think of what “good” has come from this spectacle?
(And to think, before all this, the biggest thing I had to worry about was toll roads.)
May 30, 2008 at 8:56 am
Wonderful. Great news. I’m glad to know that I still live in the land of the free and home of the brave.
Now I hope CPS is dismantled completely, or at least penalized so badly by civil suits that they are effectively moot for the next 100 years, and that it affects the CPS departments in other states as well.
It is a great day in America.
May 30, 2008 at 11:44 am
Finally a little common sense and compassion prevails.
Now we can pray that the Texas CPS returns these poor tramautized children to the love of their families and homes just as quickly as they snatched them away!
http://dayofpraise.blogspot.com/
May 30, 2008 at 1:12 pm
#17 – Regarding the conviction that these kids (especially the teenagers and the YOUNG MOTHERS) will have when they leave the system that “the world” is an enemy out to get them – AMEN! CPS couldn’t have hardened their resolve any more if they had tried. Ironically, whatever they might have had happen at the ranch probably will look good to them compared to what they experience in this case.
That truly is sad.
May 30, 2008 at 2:02 pm
This afternoon’s news is that the parents’ lawyers are reviewing the latest [Judge W’s kangaroo-]court-approved CPS to return the children next week — which puts restrictions on the families that they cannot remove the children from Texas, the parents must take parenting classes, and CPS thugs have access to the residences at any time for any reason.
How does CPS have the right to any of this?
May 30, 2008 at 4:05 pm
I rejoice with everyone else that is glad to see innocent children being returned to their innocent parents.
But after watching an episode of 48 Hours episode about Polygamy, I do have many questions that I do not think are easily answered.
Here’s a link to the website for the episode. If you prowl around, you’ll find videos from the episode you can watch: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/22/48hours/main4120479.shtml
They had the Utah Attorney General on their giving his comments on the FLDS on the Utah/Arizona border, and he did not have anything positive to say about them. He said that they rely on taxpayer’s dollars (through food stamps) to support their lifestyle, that they resemble Nazi Germany in their willingness to separate families, and that Warren Jeffs has organized his closer following in such a way that resembles the mafia. There was also a video clip of Warren Jeffs admitting that he is not, nor was he ever, a prophet; rather, that he is a very bad man.
And while I know better than to devour what I see on television as a fact (where would I be if I did that with Anderson Cooper?) I have to wonder if it’s even possible to get the truth about the FLDS instead of biased spin anymore.
And as for the comment about whether the children have been reinforced to believe the world is evil, I would think that the state of Texas would be tripping over themselves to get these children educated. This country is hounding every other child in this country for standardized test scores. I say initiatives need to be made to get the children in school, not the parents in prison.
But of course, that would be practical… and we know how the state of Texas feels about practicality;)
May 30, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Ardis, it is crazy but CPS and judges are like this all over, the FLDS moms and dads just need to smile and waive at the maligned bitter women teaching the classes and get their papers signed.
Once they have the kids they will have the kids, I think that is most of the battle right there. CPS can’t even keep tract of the kids in their care nevermind monitoring them at home. They will cause the parents headaches and anxiety but I’m guessing that will be the extent of it. They money for CPS is in seizing the children.
May 30, 2008 at 5:19 pm
I just read the San Angelo Times, was anything actually signed by the parents? If not can they just refuse to agree to it? Do the parents have to agree or is this something the judge can just order like the first time they took custody?
June 2, 2008 at 5:52 am
Guy, fyi, your conference post is getting spammed with stuff you will want to delete.
Obviously, you can delete this when you delete the others.
June 2, 2008 at 6:44 am
Guy, great coverage as usual! I’m very glad that the TX Supreme Court ordered the children returned, but unhappy that Judge Walther is still stalling.
Does anyone know if the transcripts from the original custody hearing in April are online anywhere, or if they will be? I don’t know if they even post such transcripts, but if they do, a friend of mine is looking for a link to them. Thanks.
June 2, 2008 at 9:58 am
YAY!!! They are picking them up today!!!
June 2, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Hindsight is 20/20 – it’s easy to pick on people who already had fearful stories in their minds, and who were trying to act quickly. The result was ugly, I agree, but I sure would not have wanted to be one of the CPS employees who had to make quick decisions based on the information they had at the time – not the information that we have today. In addition, most CPS departments are terribly understaffed and overworked, which leads to mistakes and inefficiency. Some compassion and benefit of the doubt is in order.
After seeing things going terribly wrong with cults such as the Waco event, David Koresh’s followers, or the tragedy in Guyana, we become afraid when we see a group of people remove themselves from our society and barricade themselves on property with secret structures and rites. If something awful does happen in places like these, we feel a horrible sense of guilt that we did not do anything to help when we saw strange signs. People are afraid of the unknown; that’s why honest communication and transparency fosters acceptance.
That said, I am thankful the kids are back at home – now it’s time to figure out if there has been any abuse, and punish the bad guys, rather than the children.
June 2, 2008 at 4:50 pm
now it’s time to figure out if there has been any abuse, and punish the bad guys, rather than the children.
April 3 would have been an event better time to do these things.
Many of us didn’t wait for the 20/20 hindsight to kick in. We recognized the unconscionable abuse of power from the moment we heard about it, and have been protesting and trying to explain it to the rest of you late-to-the-bandwagon commenters from the earliest days.
Not that it isn’t a good thing that you finally realize that what happened was wrong — but you do us a disservice by pretending that we’re just going along with the crowd now that the crowd finally recognizes what we understood all along.
June 4, 2008 at 10:13 am
Okay, these folks are not criminals, at least I am unaware of them being convicted of any crime to date. I just read what these people are going to have to put up with from CPS. Most of it is innocuous. But the invasion of privacy stood out to me. I will consider myself forewarned that there is no right to privacy in the United States anymore.
I can come up with no legal, ethical, moral, or religious reason for CPS to exist. Can one of the lawyers tell me how it can be shut down?
June 4, 2008 at 10:33 am
SH, if you had or knew of a child that had been abused or neglected, you would be thanking God that there was an organization like CPS to help; you would not be able to help the child the way this agency can (unless you have a lot of money and power already). Granted this Texas situation looks awful, but CPS helps many children every day.
June 4, 2008 at 10:34 am
I’m interested, AEP: what would you have done differently on April 3?
June 4, 2008 at 11:54 am
I’m glad for the return for the return of the children but I have serious concerns that this witch hunt will not end any time soon. I think that CPS will probably plant evidence to snatch the children one by one. Why are these horrible CPS people not in jail yet ?
The went storming in there illegally and kidnapped hundreds of people and were ready to sell them off for adoption without a shred of reason.
These people need to get this corrupt judge off the case ASAP.
What exactly is CPS planning ? to hover around the FLDS community doing pregnancy tests until every Mormon girl turns 18 ? In the meantime every other non FLDS teenage girl in the country is free to pop out babies with reckless abandon ?
Hmmmm not allowing specific people to have children based on their religion ? I’m sorry but this still stinks of RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION as it always has been.
June 4, 2008 at 12:55 pm
33, angelawd, I don’t know precisely what I would have done because I don’t know fully what practical options exist, but I do know, as CPS and the Texas sheriff and the judge and every commenter here should know, a few constitutional principles that would have prevented me from the kind of abuse the Texas Supreme Court affirmed was done in this case.
I would have quickly recognized that I was dealing with a culture alien to mine, and that I would need to be careful how I interpreted things:
So the women all talk softly — was that really a sign of fear and subservience, or a mode of speech cultivated for reasons of modesty? Baptist preachers have a distinctive style of speech, as do Mormon general conference speakers; I believe I would have been smart enough to recognize the FLDS women’s speech pattern.
So foolish gossips in El Dorado spun rumors about the FLDS burning bodies in their incinerator — maybe I would have to investigate it eventually, but I wouldn’t have added to the confusion of that day by investigating at that moment.
So bitter FLDS apostates reported dozens of infant-sized graves — again, I would have had to have investigated eventually, but I wouldn’t burst in with cadaver dogs to increase the fear of the people, and to make me look foolish when the “graves” were discovered to be nothing but flower beds planted in soil that has to be heaped above the surface limestone in that area.
So I started to hear names repeated when I tried to create a list of residents — was that really evidence that the residents were deliberately trying to confuse me, or was it the natural result of a small town composed of a very few families, with names necessarily repeated? Not being a small town redneck Texas idiot, but having a smattering of familiarity with the outside world, I also would have known that different cultures practice different naming habits, and that a mother might not always bear her husband’s surname, and I might have considered that a child who told me his name was John Jessop once, and John Barlow another time, might have been perfectly honest, sometimes using his mother’s name and sometimes his fathers.
So I notice that the girls are miniature replicas of the adult women in their clothing style and hair style — would I have immediately assumed that there all who claimed to be adults were really lying children, no matter what their state-issued documents said? or would I have realized, again, that cultural differences meant that these makeup-less women looked much younger than that drag queen Marleigh Meisner who wears so much eye makeup for her hourly infestation of the camera lenses?
Most of all: So I find a bed in a building — would my dirty mind immediately have concluded Bed Equals Sex? So I find a woman’s hair there — again, does my filthy mind immediately leap to sex? And even if there *were* evidence of sex, would my prurient imagination immediately conclude that it was between an underage female and a dirty old man? Or might I possibly have considered the other uses to which a bed might be put, and the illogic of the other assumptions?
Without the assinine, foolish credulity of CPS, I would not have imagined the signs of depravity that their own depraved minds saw, and I would not have panicked to the point where I trampled on constitutional protections. I would have investigated my options calmly, and the Texas supreme court wouldn’t have had to bitch slap me the way they did Judge Walther.
So you can dismiss me today for not knowing what I would have done then. But as the various threads on M&A would prove to anybody who looked, I *did* recognize from Day 1 that what CPS did was wrong. Even without knowing what I would have done, I know what I would NOT have done.
June 4, 2008 at 6:22 pm
Thank you for your understanding and prayers.
June 5, 2008 at 10:29 am
angelawd and others of similar ilk:
I know of a whole family of children who were abused, I went to school with them. CPS never intervened. The abuse didn’t become public knowledge until the father was being tried for another crime. Most of the children were adults by then but CPS didn’t intervene then either.
The children went on to Ivy League and other good colleges. They married and had children of their own, in that order even. And the ones I knew chose to raise their children differently. Now tell me how the outcome would have improved if they had instead become wards of the state in elementary school and Jr high when a few of us became aware of it?
I knew of other abused children as I grew up, CPS never intervened in any of the cases, and the children now lead happy productive lives. How would CPS have helped anything? I think many of them are stronger because of the adversity they had to endure, and all have chosen to raise their children differently.
I would have to go looking for it again, but there is a report that shows the outcome for the children is BETTER for the children if they are left with an abusive parent then if they are taken into state custody, except for the rare cases where the parent is actually trying to kill the child.
Honestly, I believe less children would die if spanking was considered appropriate again. The cases I know of where the child died were situations where the parent was being far too creative with the punishment and the death of the child was a total surprise to the parent. Currently I happen to live in a state where spanking is expressly legal. I find it far preferable for a parent to give 5 or 10 spats on a covered butt with an open palm then for a parent to risk water intoxication, small space asphyxiation, neglecting the child in “time-out” or some sort of emotional manipulation.
I didn’t always feel that way. I was as anti-spanking as you can get before I had my first child. I learned a lot from parenthood. Most of all I learned that someone who does not have children has no right to tell someone who does how to raise their kids.
I am also aware of other cases of serious, obvious, abuse that CPS has on their case files, but where they do not intervene. (That may turn out to be in the best interest of the children in the end.) But there are many cases where CPS removes children from loving, caring parents.
I am aware of at least 2 cases of a child being removed for having brittle-bone disease. In both cases the parents were innocent. In one case it took a couple of years to finally prove their innocence and have the child returned, in the other case I believe they are still trying to prove their innocence and get the child back 3 years later. In both cases the child was seriously abused in foster care.
I am aware of a number of folks who had their children removed because the neighbors didn’t like homeschoolers. In these cases it once again took years to finally clear the system, and prove their innocence, meanwhile their children were abused in foster care.
(And, yes, I am a homeschooler as well. I chose homeschooling because I took math beyond calculus and I want my child taught math by someone who actually understands and enjoys it. In addition, our local schools teach only in Spanish, and while I think it is a useful language to know I’d like my child to learn more that just Spanish. And our local school, K-5, is infested with some gang or another, and they will initiate the children as early as 4th grade. And the school is more like a prison then a school, where parents are decidedly not welcome. And on and on. I could continue, there are all sorts of problems, but suffice it to say my child will not be going there.)
I am also aware of a case where a child was diagnosed with cancer and the Doctors tried to have the child taken away by CPS because they didn’t agree with the parents getting a second opinion and the final treatment option the parents choose. That was clearly a case of loving parents looking for all of the information they could get and evaluating all of the treatment options. It was not a case of abuse. But to keep their son the parents were forced to flee the state until they could prove their innocence.
(And since that state expedites adoption, terminating parental rights after a year or 18 months automatically, the parents really did have to remove the child from the state and flee CPS. Most cases where the parents are finally deemed to be innocent take longer the 18months to get through the system. That state is truly steeling children.)
The largest problem with all of this is that phrase “prove their innocence.” In an American court of law the accused is supposed to be innocent until proven GUILTY. Not guilty, and tried and convicted in the press, unless and until they can prove their innocence. CPS and the court system that allows them to operate is unconstitutional and violates constitutional rights all the time. The FLDS actually were better treated then most and their case was really expedited. The right to a speedy trial is usually also trampled on by these “child protection” people.
No, I would not thank God. I believe God cries when he watches from above and sees children ripped out of the loving arms of their parents. I believe He is sad when a child is taken from a home where the parents might not be perfect, but they are doing their best, and is placed in a foster home and physically, emotionally, and sexually abused by the other children as well as the “caretaker.” I cannot imagine the depth of his sorrow when he looks down and sees children who have parents who care about and love their children but who are in foster care neglected, abused, and not knowing anyone cares. I think He finds the miscarriage of justice at the hands of CPS and their court system repugnant.
I also agree with everything AEP said in #35.
So, does anyone know how we Americans can shut this abusive system down?
June 5, 2008 at 1:26 pm
SH #37,
Personally, I agree with most of what you said! However, CPS and like organizations wouldn’t exist if they only caused harm, for they do sufficient good that they will continue to exist, whether any of us like it or not!
The same is true of our legal system. We all hear about numerous prisoners being released years and even decades later when eventually found innocent due to DNA, etc. Yet, we also all know that our legal system does good by locking people up who truly are criminals.
There will always be abuse of anything and everything, and that will never change in mortality! The best we can hope for and try to get is a lessening of abuse.
To most of us, the FLDS just endured abuse by CPS and the legal system in a manner I thought impossible in this day and age. Obviously, I was wrong, and maybe we are destined to experience only a worsening of abuse as the world seems to get more evil. It’s discouraging, I know, but we also must remain positive for our own benefit. Believe me, I know how negativity and pessimism can destroy lives!
June 5, 2008 at 4:47 pm
It would be well for America to debate the question of whether CPS does more harm than good. People can cite anecdotes to support either side, but what data is there to give us an accurate big picture? And what level of harm should Americans tolerate?
Our principle of “innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt” in criminal cases has let many a criminal walk free for lack of sufficient proof. Nevertheless, it’s not a principle I would like to see changed. I’d rather free criminals than imprison innocent people.
With regards to CPS, would we rather rescue abused children or shatter loving families?
Judge Walthers permitted CPS to seize the FLDS children on the basis of pure hearsay and unconfirmed suspicion. There was no jury or rules of evidence. All it took was one or two bureaucrats to convince one judge. Assuming laws in most states are similar to Texas, what’s to stop CPS from doing something similar to you or to me?
Americans need to wake up and put checks and balances on this aspect of government power.
June 5, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Cary and Doug, thank you. You expressed things so much more eloquently than I did.
For many issues in life, we can cite good or bad examples, but the wise thing to do is look at the whole picture.
In this particular issue, I know first-hand how CPS can be an amazing blessing to people who have suffered from physical, mental, or sexual abuse.
An earlier commenter mentioned that much more good could have been done if the CPS team was more familiar with the culture and behavior of the Mormons. But how can you fully understand a culture that locks itself away from you and shuns you as an evil influence?
June 5, 2008 at 7:40 pm
angelawd, the Mormons don’t do that — we practically beg you to let us tell you what we believe and how we live. Do you mean that after all this time and all the news coverage and all the explanations on the blogs, you still confuse Mormons and FLDS?
June 5, 2008 at 8:28 pm
angelawd — I don’t know that there is an easy solution to understanding a reclusive culture. Patience needs to play a big role. Perhaps you offer incentives to get past the gate (a free health examination? free school books or sports equipment?) in exchange for permission to look around. Knowing what to do is a hard question.
As you pointed out, 20/20 hindsight tells us what NOT to do. You don’t accept best selling books by bitter ex-members and self-proclaimed cult experts as gospel. Certainly, you consider what they have to say. But you also need someone to play Devil’s Advocate and argue the other side when deciding, for instance, what to do about the anonymous phone call from “Sarah” (that later proved to be a hoax). Before marshaling a small army for a raid you go to court and get whatever authorization is needed to trace the phone call to make sure it came from the ranch. What Texas did was like betting $3 million dollars on an anonymous tip.
I could go on about other mistakes that were made but they have been aptly described elsewhere. To a non-Texan like me, it appears local authorities acted rashly and illegally because they believed anti-FLDS stereotypes and were eager to become heroes by rescuing poor Sarah and all the other hapless FLDS children. Ironically, events showed the anti-FLDS beliefs of CPS actually caused more harm then the beliefs of the FLDS that they sought to prevent.
I think as this case goes into the criminal phase (there are rumors of grand juries) the public will lose interest because: 1) People will assume there are sufficient legal protections in place for a criminal trial. 2) It’s one thing to see individual adult men (and perhaps women) get carted off to jail after being convicted in a court of law. It’s another thing to see government forcibly separate 460 children separated from their mothers due to wild, unsubstantiated allegations.
June 9, 2008 at 8:02 pm
Here is the key to the future of this situation…
[contained in the dissent – buying into CPS Standard Operating Procedure]
“they will only reunify children with their parents after “it’s determined that [their parents] know and can express what it was in the first place that caused harm to their children.”
This is the ‘Sophie’s Choice’ they intend to put these parents thru one at a time. Unless they agree ‘that the sun is the moon’ by their lights, they cannot retain their kids. Every innocent parent that faces the CPS faces this. Admit you are guilty or lose your kids. If you are innocent you cannot meet this bar without a soul destroying lie, told convincingly. admitting to a crime you are not guilty of.
This is torture right out of Orwell’s ratcage scene. It happens every day across this country.
As best I have been able to detirmine FLDS beliefs are that early marriage is preferable to immorality and that if the girl cannot remain chaste due to rising hormonal urges then they are better off married. I don’t believe they insist on this in all cases but rather on a case by case basis. Obviously you and I may not trust the judgement of the leadership in this but also understand that the religious leaders from their perspective are offering to risk their being personally complicit and responsible for those immoralities by not allowing early marriage in the future, just to please the outside world, you and I.
As has been stated by others, ‘It was good enuff for little Baptist girls all these decades, but not the FLDS’.
No, we must yank these kids from these outstanding parents, outstanding as testified to by all the mental health professionals invited in by the CPS. To save them from multiple partners we must hand them over to a foster system that will teach them that ‘Heather has two mommies’, ‘Oh that lucky Hugh Hefner with 4 babes on his arm, why can’t I be that lucky’, ‘Look at that cool as ice James Bond, and his countless sexual conquests sans all responsibilities and consequences’.
Oh yes, save the children. From Texas.
August 29, 2020 at 12:51 pm
2PDf0o8a S