If anyone insists on drug testing for her to keep benefits for the children. the ACLU will go after them. I'm betting she's on welfare and since she's already in the system, they probably spent a lot of money putting her through government programs to be a better parent, so that should have solved the problem completely. We are enabling a lot of drug addicts and endangering many children by allowing unconditional access to tax payer money just for having children. Many have figured that out and are taking advantage. We are hard pressed to do much because government regulations and rules are dictating how things go and they protect their dependents.
What really gets me is that I'll end up on some government watch list for saying socialism is bad and I think we should drill our own oil, yet this woman can endanger and maybe kill one of her children through negligence and the same government that is worried about me will look the other way when their dependents pose real dangers.
bull crap..if a woman had 6 children born with drugs in her system and this was known the courts they would insist on drug treatment,drug testing to keep custody of the children..things may slip through the cracks but not 6 children born with drugs in their system with no intervention, something is wrong with this story
Sadly, this story is common. I worked in a hospital for years and we had a duty to report any suspected child abuse. I've seen babies born addicted to drugs, I've seen drugged out parents come in with their children. We report it, a social worker follows up. They usually contact the person and make an appointment, then the parent is put on one of their programs if they deem it necessary. One program to prevent child neglect meant a social worker went to the home and went over things with the parent, such as feeding the child 3 times a day, getting them up for school and bathing them, etc. Of course, the parents already know what they are supposed to do, but as soon as they take their drugs or drink alcohol, they just don't care anymore and the children are on their own.
I've seen some horror stories and have complained loudly when
we would see the same children all the time and it was always neglect. I was told that once the people are "in the system", rarely are the children taken away. I've seen parents put in these useless jokes they call programs for neglect, abuse, drug/alcohol addiction, pornography addiction, child endangerment, etc. and it's all a waste of time, but the state can claim they've done everything possible and spend a pile of money in the process.
It's never until a child is seriously injured or killed that they get serious about dealing with it, but it's too late then.
Welfare recipients are the most likely, in my experience, to have these problems. It's just the way it is, so don't yell at me because I am conveying what I observed in 30 years. I knew who was on welfare by the insurance information. Used to call it Title 19. The welfare parents are the ones who likely smoke, drink and do drugs. But, since they are already under the government's wing, they tend to spend more money on these useless programs instead of taking prudent action, like removing the children from the home. It sounds all compassionate to say they want to keep families together, but why in the hell do you want to keep innocent children with an abusive or addicted parent?
Non-welfare people were treated much differently. A kid with a bruise on his leg was removed from the home, then the matter was investigated. Turned out the kid hurt his leg in baseball practice, but the state traumatized him for a week by placing him in foster care while they figured that out.
If people are in the system, it's like the government coddles them no matter what happens. I've had many conversation with other nurses and doctors over the years about the disparity in how people are treated by government and how the children lose. The government claims to want to help kids, but end up doing more harm in the long run. I find that is the case with most government programs.
