Families Threatened By Government Interference

By Shonda Ponder
(This was originally posted in the Federal Observer)

The Education and the Workforce Committee approved H.R. 3839, the "Keeping Children and Families Safe Act," which reauthorizes the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) and other related acts. One of which is neonatal harm.

This is a noble piece of legislation, but one that raises specific concerns. Parts of this legislation are aimed at protecting children who were born to an addicted parent from their parents. What, exactly, poses as "addiction"?

Cigarettes are addictive.

This legislation will open the way for Child Protective Services to snatch your baby from the hospital without your consent or authorization if they deem that the child is "abused" by your "addiction". Of course, parts of the bill require that CPS and Parents work together to insure that no violation of the Parent's individual rights are committed.

The operative word here is "together".

Yes, there are children who are left abandoned by their mothers in trash cans. Some of these mothers were not ever addicted to anything. There is no way to protect the children from these types of atrocities committed against them without first taking away the rights of every parent in the United States.

My mother was raised in a two bedroom home with an outhouse. She grew up, went to college and I never did without. But, there were times when all we had to eat were potatoes and eggs, both of which we grew ourselves. In today's world, CPS will not allow a family with more than 2 children reside in only a one bedroom home. And, if you have an outhouse, then the child is suspect for abuse according to their version of the law. Why is it that if your electricity gets cut off, it is required by the electric company that they report your home to CPS if there is a child living in it?

Is this freedom?

And the term neo-natal is something else altogether. How can the government even think of passing such a law that will protect children during pregnancy when they have already determined that children are not human beings worthy of Constitutional Protection under Roe Vs. Wade?

I'm not saying I disagree with that portion of the law. I am pro-life, and I believe that all un-born children are worthy of Constitutional Protection. But, I also believe that it is the parent's right to bring up a child in the way they see fit, so long as that child is not killed or maimed because of their actions toward their children. I hardly see how lack of electricity will kill anyone.

I smoked during both of my pregnancies. My son is at the top of his class in school.

My mother smoked when she was pregnant with me. It would have been outrageously wrong for me to have been taken from my parents because of that. There have been times during my childhood when we went without electricity because my mother was working and going to school and caring for me as a single mother, after she and my father divorced.

This law needs to be stopped before some good families are torn apart by well-meaning government agencies sticking their nose where it does not belong.

Related Links:

Education and the Workforce Committee approved H.R. 3839