|
|
Forum: In the News
Thread (Discussion): [Yahoo!] Mother in custody fight for unborn child
Message 164456
Introduction
Posted by admin
on Oct 13, 2005 02:42 PM | Also by admin
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: N/A |
Discuss the article Mother in custody fight for unborn child, by Mark Scolforo, which appeared on Yahoo! on October 05, 2005.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
Message 164578 (In Reply to Message 164456)
Posted by 1dadof5
on Oct 15, 2005 04:49 AM | Also by 1dadof5
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Indiana,
Country: United States |
simple answer to this. MOVE NOW to another state
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164456)
Message 164622 (In Reply to Message 164578)
Posted by orolan
on Oct 15, 2005 03:44 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Yes. Move now. But once moved, go ahead and file that $40 million lawsuit against the county.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164578)
Message 164691 (In Reply to Message 164622)
Posted by mawmaw
on Oct 16, 2005 05:12 AM | Also by mawmaw
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Pennsylvania,
Country: United States |
What about the baby ?? What IF this daddy cant control his sexual desire for kids and he ends up raping or ? the baby/kid ..... WHAT THEN ?????????
STUPID.... STUPID woman !!!!
If a guy that I was dating/married told me he was a registered Sex Criminal ... he would be gone !!
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164622)
Message 164795 (In Reply to Message 164691)
Posted by 1dadof5
on Oct 17, 2005 05:09 AM | Also by 1dadof5
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Indiana,
Country: United States |
he is the father of the unborn child. you cant go allowing the gvernment to force its will upon these people simple because they think there is a remote chance he could offend years in the future although they have no proof to offer
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164691)
Message 164820 (In Reply to Message 164691)
Posted by orolan
on Oct 17, 2005 02:49 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
What about that deranged and perverted foster family they stick that poor baby in after taking it away from its mother? It's a clear and proven fact that a LOT of physical, mental and sexual abuse goes on in state-approved foster homes.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164691)
Message 164887 (In Reply to Message 164820)
Posted by 1dadof5
on Oct 18, 2005 05:42 AM | Also by 1dadof5
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Indiana,
Country: United States |
It's a clear and proven fact that a LOT of physical, mental and sexual abuse goes on in state-approved foster homes.
you got that right.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164820)
Message 165055 (In Reply to Message 164456)
Posted by Hannahsmom
on Oct 20, 2005 02:43 AM | Also by Hannahsmom
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Pennsylvania,
Country: United States |
This case is not far from my home. And there is more to the story. I think they are using his rso title as an excuse to take the child because both of them have a history of mental illness. I don't think they really have a leg to stand on.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164456)
Message 165138 (In Reply to Message 165055)
Posted by brennus
on Oct 21, 2005 12:01 AM | Also by brennus
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Wisconsin,
Country: United States |
Well, it finally happened.
woman's baby taken from her
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (165055)
Message 165206 (In Reply to Message 164456)
Posted by Hannahsmom
on Oct 21, 2005 09:02 PM | Also by Hannahsmom
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Pennsylvania,
Country: United States |
I just went into my local newspaper, and they had a breaking news story. A judge just ruled that children and youth will be getting the child. He ruled aganist the mother. I know there has to be more to this story. I just can't believe it is just based on crimes he commited 22 years ago.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164456)
Message 165356 (In Reply to Message 165206)
Posted by orolan
on Oct 24, 2005 02:55 AM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Actually it's based more on some veiled allegations that the mother used to do crack and was a prostitute. Heck, around here that qualifies a mother for double Food Stamps, not getting her kids taken away.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (165206)
Message 165364 (In Reply to Message 165356)
Posted by joy1234
on Oct 24, 2005 12:20 PM | Also by joy1234
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: New York,
Country: United States |
The article is gone, is this the case that was on Nancy Grace friday? He is supposed to be a chief of some tribe? If it is it's about the same circumstances, he took a plea deal 20 or so years ago they say she was a prostitute at sometime in her life. I can't believe they are attacking her past, I guess maybe I should be scared because at some point in my past I was not up to the moral dogooders standards. I can't wait for the day someone tells me I can't have my kids because I screwed up sometime in my life. What are we going to do with all the kids that they take away from people who have bad moral backgrounds? Oh I know, put them in the same crappy foster homes like the ones I was in, ya know the ones who the states approve of as good parents, meanwhile worse crap happens at most of them. This is all beyond crazy
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (165356)
Message 165396 (In Reply to Message 165364)
Posted by Renunciation
on Oct 24, 2005 06:24 PM | Also by Renunciation
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: Bahrain |
http://wwnytv.net/72k/full-story.asp?uid=7651&area=news&ss=foster+care
Maybe the judge should read this article.
That said, Chaney voluntarily disclosed his record to the local DSS; it was not clear Wednesday what further "systems and procedures" would have been necessary to make a judgement in the Chaney case.
Unlikely an anomoly.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (165364)
Message 166138 (In Reply to Message 164456)
Posted by Hannahsmom
on Nov 02, 2005 02:03 AM | Also by Hannahsmom
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Pennsylvania,
Country: United States |
I just saw on the news and read in my local paper, that a judge once again ruled against the mother, the state gets to keep custody of the baby. Next step is to dissolve the rights of the parents, and adopt the baby out. I find this hard to believe. She was not even living with the father anymore, what else is going on here?
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164456)
Message 166324 (In Reply to Message 166138)
Posted by rodsmith
on Nov 03, 2005 05:27 PM | Also by rodsmith
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
as for me i am sorry about what is happening to them but i like it.
it's going to end up costing all the ones screaming about controlling the RSO's everything. last time the supreme court ruled on the megan's law it almost didn't pass..there was no mandate from the court it was a 5-4 split. only reason they allowed it to stay was that it wasn't a PUNISHMENT. well now you have all these new additions to it and it is being used for all of these new controls and you have DA's saying so and so is being given 10 years on sex offender probation as part of his PUNISHMENT....they won't be able to ignore it next time it hits them. and then they will lose them all once the underpinning Megan's Law is ruled unconstitutiona. as it is now an expost facto punishment.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (166138)
Message 166355 (In Reply to Message 166324)
Posted by rabbitreborn
on Nov 03, 2005 08:40 PM | Also by rabbitreborn
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
That remains to be seen as the nature of the Supreme Court is likely to change based on the new additions. I'm not really sure (and I doubt anyone else in the country is either) as to where the newest appointee's stand on these issues.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (166324)
Message 166373 (In Reply to Message 166355)
Posted by rodsmith
on Nov 03, 2005 10:28 PM | Also by rodsmith
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
me either might have to go back and look at the the original decision...just wonder if the two that are gone were part of the 5 who upheld the decision.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (166355)
Message 166394 (In Reply to Message 164691)
ty, exactly..
Posted by anti
on Nov 04, 2005 01:02 AM | Also by anti
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
why should another child be subjected to a life as that? and from what I read, last she was with him, but they said she would keep away from him, if it meant keeping her baby, now we know that will not happen, of course she will stay with him.
anti
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (164691)
Message 166421 (In Reply to Message 166373)
Posted by youtoo
on Nov 04, 2005 06:19 AM | Also by youtoo
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Missouri,
Country: United States |
Justices Reinquest and O' Conner where part of the five. Although we can not say for certain how the two new justices may rule the current nominee has been compared over and over to Justice Scalia who ruled with the four dissenters. I can not at this time remember which Justice wrote the dissenting opinon, it should however be noted they pointed out very strongly that the issue of liberty had not been addressed by the court at that time, making it clear that attacks of the registry where possible if it was used to deny liberty, or if it in fact was later proven to be as used as an additonal punishment.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (166373)
Message 166503 (In Reply to Message 166373)
Posted by orolan
on Nov 05, 2005 01:52 AM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
just wonder if the two that are gone were part of the 5 who upheld the decision.
All four dissenters are still on the Court. Rehnquist and O'Connor voted for the majority.
John Roberts argued before the Court in Smith v Doe, the Alaska registry case, on behalf of the State. So tha ttells you where HE stands. So the next appointee, to replace O'Connor, will set the stage.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (166373)
Message 166518 (In Reply to Message 166503)
Posted by Renunciation
on Nov 05, 2005 04:09 AM | Also by Renunciation
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: Bahrain |
Now the challenge is to get in front of them again.
I bet it comes from Iowa or Florida!
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (166503)
Message 166650 (In Reply to Message 166518)
Posted by rodsmith
on Nov 06, 2005 03:49 AM | Also by rodsmith
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
it's already headed there via that lawsuit from iowa about the 2500 foot rule....just waiting to hear now if they will take it.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (166518)
Thread
164456, admin, Oct 13, 2005 02:42 PM [Introduction]
164578, 1dadof5, Oct 15, 2005 04:49 AM
164622, orolan, Oct 15, 2005 03:44 PM
164691, mawmaw, Oct 16, 2005 05:12 AM
164795, 1dadof5, Oct 17, 2005 05:09 AM
164820, orolan, Oct 17, 2005 02:49 PM
164887, 1dadof5, Oct 18, 2005 05:42 AM
166394, anti, Nov 04, 2005 01:02 AM [ty, exactly..]
165055, Hannahsmom, Oct 20, 2005 02:43 AM
165138, brennus, Oct 21, 2005 12:01 AM
165206, Hannahsmom, Oct 21, 2005 09:02 PM
165356, orolan, Oct 24, 2005 02:55 AM
165364, joy1234, Oct 24, 2005 12:20 PM
165396, Renunciation, Oct 24, 2005 06:24 PM
166138, Hannahsmom, Nov 02, 2005 02:03 AM
166324, rodsmith, Nov 03, 2005 05:27 PM
166355, rabbitreborn, Nov 03, 2005 08:40 PM
166373, rodsmith, Nov 03, 2005 10:28 PM
166421, youtoo, Nov 04, 2005 06:19 AM
166503, orolan, Nov 05, 2005 01:52 AM
166518, Renunciation, Nov 05, 2005 04:09 AM
166650, rodsmith, Nov 06, 2005 03:49 AM
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
|
|
|
