Had DHS called on me (1 Viewer)

[bigbottom]

Should have just told the stepson that he has to let the six-year-old hit him as hard as he can in the gut.

 

[matttyl]

The point of my original post was the statement below.

The person then proceeds to tell me that spanking is legal in the state of Iowa as long it is not done with foreign objects and does not injure. Needless to say, I was very because I did not know there was such a law.

I am sure all of us were raised differently, but I was raised that if you were naughty, you were punished, usually with a spanking. The DHS asked if it would be ok if they called my stepson's father and I said yes. I also called him and told him what happened and he said he understood and had no problems with me. I also understand that it sounds like I drilled him which is why typing is harder to tell the story than speaking, but please understand I did not full out punch him with all of my strength.

I have nothing to hide from DHS or anyone else. I also totally understand getting ripped here, because if I was someone else and read what I posted I would probably have the same response.

If you have nothing to hide, why didn't you tell DHS that you discipline them with time outs, grounding, punching and spanking?

figured the punching part was already known because that is why they were at my house.

Wait, did they call you, or physically show up to your house?

 

[spOOfy]

i always love the child abuse justification when people say, yeah, i was beat much worse so this clearly isn't child abuse.

i was tossed down the stairs and was told many times i would be killed when i was asleep. so i can clearly punch my kids in the face since it's not as bad as that.

 

[snellman]

The point of my original post was the statement below.

The person then proceeds to tell me that spanking is legal in the state of Iowa as long it is not done with foreign objects and does not injure. Needless to say, I was very because I did not know there was such a law.

I am sure all of us were raised differently, but I was raised that if you were naughty, you were punished, usually with a spanking. The DHS asked if it would be ok if they called my stepson's father and I said yes. I also called him and told him what happened and he said he understood and had no problems with me. I also understand that it sounds like I drilled him which is why typing is harder to tell the story than speaking, but please understand I did not full out punch him with all of my strength.

I have nothing to hide from DHS or anyone else. I also totally understand getting ripped here, because if I was someone else and read what I posted I would probably have the same response.

If you have nothing to hide, why didn't you tell DHS that you discipline them with time outs, grounding, punching and spanking?

figured the punching part was already known because that is why they were at my house.

Wait, did they call you, or physically show up to your house?

They called me first. Asked if they could come over and talk to the wife and I.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

i always love the child abuse justification when people say, yeah, i was beat much worse so this clearly isn't child abuse.

i was tossed down the stairs and was told many times i would be killed when i was asleep. so i can clearly punch my kids in the face since it's not as bad as that.

Way off my friend, no one is encouraging abuse or punching kids in the face, in fact I think under my abuse definition post I posted the exact thing you are speaking of.

Ever heard the saying: Spare the rod spoil the child?

I can show you a lot of others who do not get any discipline as kids, never laid a hand on, a lot of them become spoiled brats as they get older and turn into Lindsay Lohan and Justin Bieber without the money of course. And then those people get abused by the likes of MOP, OPM, LD, and GM in the real world.

 

[General Malaise]

The point of my original post was the statement below.

The person then proceeds to tell me that spanking is legal in the state of Iowa as long it is not done with foreign objects and does not injure. Needless to say, I was very because I did not know there was such a law.

I am sure all of us were raised differently, but I was raised that if you were naughty, you were punished, usually with a spanking. The DHS asked if it would be ok if they called my stepson's father and I said yes. I also called him and told him what happened and he said he understood and had no problems with me. I also understand that it sounds like I drilled him which is why typing is harder to tell the story than speaking, but please understand I did not full out punch him with all of my strength.

I have nothing to hide from DHS or anyone else. I also totally understand getting ripped here, because if I was someone else and read what I posted I would probably have the same response.

If you have nothing to hide, why didn't you tell DHS that you discipline them with time outs, grounding, punching and spanking?

figured the punching part was already known because that is why they were at my house.

Wait, did they call you, or physically show up to your house?

They called me first. Asked if they could come over and talk to the wife and I and me.

Back in the catholic school I went to, grammar mistakes like that earned lashings with a ruler. Probably okay if I hit you now, right?

 

[bigbottom]

i always love the child abuse justification when people say, yeah, i was beat much worse so this clearly isn't child abuse.

i was tossed down the stairs and was told many times i would be killed when i was asleep. so i can clearly punch my kids in the face since it's not as bad as that.

Way off my friend, no one is encouraging abuse or punching kids in the face, in fact I think under my abuse definition post I posted the exact thing you are speaking of. Ever heard the saying: Spare the rod spoil the child?

I can show you a lot of others who do not get any discipline as kids, never laid a hand on, a lot of them become spoiled brats as they get older and turn into Lindsay Lohan and Justin Bieber without the money of course. And then those people get abused by the likes of MOP, OPM, LD, and GM in the real world.

So we should use a rod then?

 

[spOOfy]

i always love the child abuse justification when people say, yeah, i was beat much worse so this clearly isn't child abuse.

i was tossed down the stairs and was told many times i would be killed when i was asleep. so i can clearly punch my kids in the face since it's not as bad as that.

Way off my friend, no one is encouraging abuse or punching kids in the face, in fact I think under my abuse definition post I posted the exact thing you are speaking of.

Ever heard the saying: Spare the rod spoil the child?

I can show you a lot of others who do not get any discipline as kids, never laid a hand on, a lot of them become spoiled brats as they get older and turn into Lindsay Lohan and Justin Bieber without the money of course. And then those people get abused by the likes of MOP, OPM, LD, and GM in the real world.

there's a difference between kids who get NO discipline and kids who just don't get punched to teach them a lesson.

so while you can show me a lof of others who do not get any discipline, i really don't care. of course, they are going to be spoiled if you don't discipline them AT ALL. i just disagree that hitting has to be part of it.

and yes, there are many people in this thread who have said they got hit with spoons, belts, etc., so who cares if the kids gets an arm punch.

and i am saying that for effect. people say spoons hit them, so arm punches = ok, because hey, they turned out okay. i am saying i got tossed down the stairs, and hey, i turned out okay, so obviously if i do something a little less "abusive" it should get a gold star.

 

[UniAlias]

no one is encouraging abuse

Long term I think it probably was the best thing to do for the 11 year old.

It's not a bad lesson that the 6 year old learns if they don't act right they could get a whooping from an older brother...

but this is why you might go for a straight whack on the behind even at 11.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

i always love the child abuse justification when people say, yeah, i was beat much worse so this clearly isn't child abuse.

i was tossed down the stairs and was told many times i would be killed when i was asleep. so i can clearly punch my kids in the face since it's not as bad as that.

Way off my friend, no one is encouraging abuse or punching kids in the face, in fact I think under my abuse definition post I posted the exact thing you are speaking of. Ever heard the saying: Spare the rod spoil the child?

I can show you a lot of others who do not get any discipline as kids, never laid a hand on, a lot of them become spoiled brats as they get older and turn into Lindsay Lohan and Justin Bieber without the money of course. And then those people get abused by the likes of MOP, OPM, LD, and GM in the real world.

So we should use a rod then?

Maybe we should just send Snell the entire series of Super Nanny on DVD to watch.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

no one is encouraging abuse

Long term I think it probably was the best thing to do for the 11 year old.

It's not a bad lesson that the 6 year old learns if they don't act right they could get a whooping from an older brother...

but this is why you might go for a straight whack on the behind even at 11.

A smack on the behind is not abuse.

 

[Limp Ditka]

I've heard the best way to avoid abusing your children is to completely abstain from raising them.

Memo frackface, he lives with me now so can it. Keep that notebook up to date, even LD has cut me some slack.

He's done what now?

 

[sublimeone]

Some of you guys are incapable of not going to one extreme or the other. The OP has provided very little context to his overall parenting abilities. As an isolated incident, punching a kid in the shoulder because he punched his little bro in the shoulder is not a huge deal. I honestly don't see how this is much different than spanking the kid. The shoulder is probably the best area of the body to take a punch.

Sometimes the best discipline is knowing what it's like to be on the receiving end... it takes getting hit, to stop hitting… or having someone break your heart so that you won't be careless with someone else's… etc.. basic stuff.

Now, if this guy is regularly putting his hands on the kid, it's a different story. If he punched the kid in the face, stomach, gonads he's a child abuser and should be dealt with. Maybe this is just one incident that has been a part of a larger pattern. I don't know, but to act like this is a totally heinous act regardless of context is a bit of a stretch.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

I've heard the best way to avoid abusing your children is to completely abstain from raising them.

Memo frackface, he lives with me now so can it. Keep that notebook up to date, even LD has cut me some slack.

He's done what now?

You gone soft?

 

[Limp Ditka]

I've heard the best way to avoid abusing your children is to completely abstain from raising them.

Memo frackface, he lives with me now so can it. Keep that notebook up to date, even LD has cut me some slack.

He's done what now?

You gone soft?

I must have. It's the only logical explanation as to why I haven't made a joke about asking for a link to the amber alert.

 

[Clifford]

It sounds like you are sort of minimizing this to an extent. The whole "he bruises easy" is a pretty convenient excuse.

I am guessing however that for DHS to become involved, a mandatory reported (such as a teacher or a doctor) saw the bruises and they were significant enough to raise red flags. So there is probably more than just a little mark.

I think there is some potential for problems for you here. This wasn't just a slap or a spanking. When you enter into the world of punching a kid, there are potential criminal implications. Just saying....

Oh in Colorado, CPS and DSS are called DHS here as well.

I'm presently involved in a Dependency case (the legal term for the court proceeding where CPS/DSS/DHS has stepped in and removed a child) where the sole basis for removal when an unexplained bruise. Was reported on an anonymous tip line.

The father involved now gets to see his kids (that's right, plural, because CPS usually doesn't just remove one) 1-2 times a week for a couple hours with some old woman volunteer looking over his shoulder. This is in between "voluntarily" submitting to numerous services and going to court 1-2x/month to have some dickbag lawyers dissect his and his family's life.

Hopefully this doesn't happen to the OP, but saying things like "he bruises easily" to DHS/CPS and then making admissions to punching a kid hard enough to leave a bruise is a substantial step towards getting there.

Please tell me there was more to it than a single, unexplained bruise. Kids get bruises all the time, Sounds like a system out of control if that is literally the only piece of evidenced required for the state to remove kids from their parents. Was it an especially bad bruise or a black eye or something? Did the father cause the bruise?

Black eye. Cause is up for debate and will likely be litigated soon at a trial.

More to my point though is that even a bruise/black eye is likely enough evidence for the state to get involved and, even in best case scenario, likely cause one to have his kid removed for a period of time and have to go through the court process.

So the state removes your child for the process of the trial before you are even convicted of any wrongdoing at all? And of course the state controls the trial process and how long that takes as well, right?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I've heard the best way to avoid abusing your children is to completely abstain from raising them.

Memo frackface, he lives with me now so can it. Keep that notebook up to date, even LD has cut me some slack.

He's done what now?

You gone soft?

I must have. It's the only logical explanation as to why I haven't made a joke about asking for a link to the amber alert.

I thought most knew at this point that he lives with me, maybe that's still news.

 

[Joe T]

When they visit, be honest with what happened. They will be looking for signs of abuse and whether it's something that occurs regularly or a reason to feel that the child is at harm. Make it very clear that abuse is not something that happens in the home and you can see how the situation would be seen that way. They will likely schedule future visits and want contacts that are close to you that they can interview to see if there is any reason to investigate.

It really sucks to be called out as a possible bad parent. IMO, if everything went down exactly as described you should be in the clear. However, things are different from case to case and also very dependant on whom is working your case. I wish you the best of luck. In the meantime, try to find another way of getting the point across other than reciprocating the action.

Also, keep in mind these are very low paid government workers with nothing to do other than make your life miserable.

Good luck!

 

[bigbottom]

Now, if this guy is regularly putting his hands on the kid, it's a different story.

Would it be different if he was punching the kid in the shoulder and bruising him, say, every other day?

 

[Clifford]

Is this better or worse than making your kid wipe urine off your ###?

Did we ever get a verification of the gender of the OP on that thread?

 

[optionmaven]

i always love the child abuse justification when people say, yeah, i was beat much worse so this clearly isn't child abuse.

i was tossed down the stairs and was told many times i would be killed when i was asleep. so i can clearly punch my kids in the face since it's not as bad as that.

Way off my friend, no one is encouraging abuse or punching kids in the face, in fact I think under my abuse definition post I posted the exact thing you are speaking of.

Ever heard the saying: Spare the rod spoil the child?

I can show you a lot of others who do not get any discipline as kids, never laid a hand on, a lot of them become spoiled brats as they get older and turn into Lindsay Lohan and Justin Bieber without the money of course. And then those people get abused by the likes of MOP, OPM, LD, and GM in the real world.

there's a difference between kids who get NO discipline and kids who just don't get punched to teach them a lesson.

so while you can show me a lof of others who do not get any discipline, i really don't care. of course, they are going to be spoiled if you don't discipline them AT ALL. i just disagree that hitting has to be part of it.

and yes, there are many people in this thread who have said they got hit with spoons, belts, etc., so who cares if the kids gets an arm punch.

and i am saying that for effect. people say spoons hit them, so arm punches = ok, because hey, they turned out okay. i am saying i got tossed down the stairs, and hey, i turned out okay, so obviously if i do something a little less "abusive" it should get a gold star.

I don't think we are saying that at all(bolded). Maybe just that our tolerance might be a little higher than most on the subject. What went on back then and what is allowed today are two different animals. No kids of my own (stepdad to two daughters), but i could never even think of hitting any kid, period. And thats not a slam on the OP. He was giving the kid a dose of his own medicine. No doubt in my mind he wasn't trying to physically hurt the kid and i don't know him personally at all. I'm sure OP would take this back if he could. He can't and now just needs to rectify the situation at home and with DHS. Lets support the guy and not lambast him for a lapse in judgement.

 

[Clifford]

Good lord....some things are too distasteful for humor. Child abuse is one of those things.

You think the OP is child abuse? I grew up receiving much worse than that. My mother used a broomstick handle on me, I can show you some real child abuse.

How many adults do we have walking around with no discipline? Lots and down the road they all end up managing Walgreen's stores and being abused by me trying to buy some Swedish Fish so if Snell doesn't discipline him I will later on life. Better to set the kid straight now vs MOP wrath 15 years down the line. Snell is doing everyone a favor here.

1. You were abused as a child. Might have something to do with your obvious anger issues. Just sayin.

2. One day you are going to go off on someone who will snap and kill you or others or both. You need to take steps to reduce your anger and its effect on others.

3. There is nothing that says because severity of child abuse varies, that everything to be considered child abuse must be equal to the most severe example. That being said I don't consider the incident child abuse since AFAIK it was only one incident. If OP regularly produces bruises or resorts to punching his kids as a form of discipline, then I think it could be child abuse. Not enough info in this thread to know.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Now, if this guy is regularly putting his hands on the kid, it's a different story.

Would it be different if he was punching the kid in the shoulder and bruising him, say, every other day?

Thats not fair BB, you are making a big leap here my friend.

I know you are a great parent and we all feel a special soft spot for you, I know I do.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Good lord....some things are too distasteful for humor. Child abuse is one of those things.

You think the OP is child abuse? I grew up receiving much worse than that. My mother used a broomstick handle on me, I can show you some real child abuse.

How many adults do we have walking around with no discipline? Lots and down the road they all end up managing Walgreen's stores and being abused by me trying to buy some Swedish Fish so if Snell doesn't discipline him I will later on life. Better to set the kid straight now vs MOP wrath 15 years down the line. Snell is doing everyone a favor here.

1. You were abused as a child. Might have something to do with your obvious anger issues. Just sayin.

2. One day you are going to go off on someone who will snap and kill you or others or both. You need to take steps to reduce your anger and its effect on others.

3. There is nothing that says because severity of child abuse varies, that everything to be considered child abuse must be equal to the most severe example. That being said I don't consider the incident child abuse since AFAIK it was only one incident. If OP regularly produces bruises or resorts to punching his kids as a form of discipline, then I think it could be child abuse. Not enough info in this thread to know.

He has kids ranging form teenagers to 6, if there was a pattern it would have come up by now.

And ..!.. frack off ..!.. for telling me where my anger issues stem from

 

[Clifford]

i always love the child abuse justification when people say, yeah, i was beat much worse so this clearly isn't child abuse.

i was tossed down the stairs and was told many times i would be killed when i was asleep. so i can clearly punch my kids in the face since it's not as bad as that.

Way off my friend, no one is encouraging abuse or punching kids in the face, in fact I think under my abuse definition post I posted the exact thing you are speaking of.

Your definition of abuse allows for hitting kids in the face with an open hand. It's a laughable definition that fits almost no other definition of child abuse.

 

[trogg78]

So awful, but it could still be worse (like the parts that are left out).

 

[Tom Skerritt]

I was slapped, punched, kicked, got the spoon and the belt as a child. And every time, I deserved it. Didn't like it, but I deserved it. And I learned real quick not to do those things again. At least don't get caught.

I think what is missing here is does the OP love and care for the 11yo or not. If not, then there might be problems.

 

[bigbottom]

Now, if this guy is regularly putting his hands on the kid, it's a different story.

Would it be different if he was punching the kid in the shoulder and bruising him, say, every other day?

Thats not fair BB, you are making a big leap here my friend.

I know you are a great parent and we all feel a special soft spot for you, I know I do.

Thank you for the kind words. Really appreciate it. But I was trying to pin down the frequency or regularity angle. If punching him once is no big deal, but punching him regularly is a big deal, at what point of frequency does it transition from no big deal to big deal?

 

[LinusMarr]

i always love the child abuse justification when people say, yeah, i was beat much worse so this clearly isn't child abuse.

i was tossed down the stairs and was told many times i would be killed when i was asleep. so i can clearly punch my kids in the face since it's not as bad as that.

Thats a shame, hippy.....

 

[Zow]

It sounds like you are sort of minimizing this to an extent. The whole "he bruises easy" is a pretty convenient excuse.

I am guessing however that for DHS to become involved, a mandatory reported (such as a teacher or a doctor) saw the bruises and they were significant enough to raise red flags. So there is probably more than just a little mark.

I think there is some potential for problems for you here. This wasn't just a slap or a spanking. When you enter into the world of punching a kid, there are potential criminal implications. Just saying....

Oh in Colorado, CPS and DSS are called DHS here as well.

I'm presently involved in a Dependency case (the legal term for the court proceeding where CPS/DSS/DHS has stepped in and removed a child) where the sole basis for removal when an unexplained bruise. Was reported on an anonymous tip line.

The father involved now gets to see his kids (that's right, plural, because CPS usually doesn't just remove one) 1-2 times a week for a couple hours with some old woman volunteer looking over his shoulder. This is in between "voluntarily" submitting to numerous services and going to court 1-2x/month to have some dickbag lawyers dissect his and his family's life.

Hopefully this doesn't happen to the OP, but saying things like "he bruises easily" to DHS/CPS and then making admissions to punching a kid hard enough to leave a bruise is a substantial step towards getting there.

Please tell me there was more to it than a single, unexplained bruise. Kids get bruises all the time, Sounds like a system out of control if that is literally the only piece of evidenced required for the state to remove kids from their parents. Was it an especially bad bruise or a black eye or something? Did the father cause the bruise?

Black eye. Cause is up for debate and will likely be litigated soon at a trial.

More to my point though is that even a bruise/black eye is likely enough evidence for the state to get involved and, even in best case scenario, likely cause one to have his kid removed for a period of time and have to go through the court process.

So the state removes your child for the process of the trial before you are even convicted of any wrongdoing at all? And of course the state controls the trial process and how long that takes as well, right?

1. Yes. And a parent's rights to a child can be severed with no conviction at all because the burden of proof is lower than beyond reasonable doubt.

2. Yes… although ideally through the separation of powers so that it is in accordance with due process.

 

[General Malaise]

i always love the child abuse justification when people say, yeah, i was beat much worse so this clearly isn't child abuse.

i was tossed down the stairs and was told many times i would be killed when i was asleep. so i can clearly punch my kids in the face since it's not as bad as that.

Thats a shame, hippy.....

I hate to admit it, but I kinda missed Peens.

 

[trogg78]

I turned out alright= room for a lot of improvement.

 

[Zow]

So... is the OP in prison? Is that why no responses?

My hope is that he's backing away slowly and either hoping this thread dies or presently bribing Colin to hard delete.

I DON"T HAVE THE POWER ANYMORE WHY WON"T ANY OF YOU LISTEN I HAD NOTHING TO DO WITYH ANY DELETING OF ANYTHING.

I was joking.

 

[Clifford]

It sounds like you are sort of minimizing this to an extent. The whole "he bruises easy" is a pretty convenient excuse.

I am guessing however that for DHS to become involved, a mandatory reported (such as a teacher or a doctor) saw the bruises and they were significant enough to raise red flags. So there is probably more than just a little mark.

I think there is some potential for problems for you here. This wasn't just a slap or a spanking. When you enter into the world of punching a kid, there are potential criminal implications. Just saying....

Oh in Colorado, CPS and DSS are called DHS here as well.

I'm presently involved in a Dependency case (the legal term for the court proceeding where CPS/DSS/DHS has stepped in and removed a child) where the sole basis for removal when an unexplained bruise. Was reported on an anonymous tip line.

The father involved now gets to see his kids (that's right, plural, because CPS usually doesn't just remove one) 1-2 times a week for a couple hours with some old woman volunteer looking over his shoulder. This is in between "voluntarily" submitting to numerous services and going to court 1-2x/month to have some dickbag lawyers dissect his and his family's life.

Hopefully this doesn't happen to the OP, but saying things like "he bruises easily" to DHS/CPS and then making admissions to punching a kid hard enough to leave a bruise is a substantial step towards getting there.

Please tell me there was more to it than a single, unexplained bruise. Kids get bruises all the time, Sounds like a system out of control if that is literally the only piece of evidenced required for the state to remove kids from their parents. Was it an especially bad bruise or a black eye or something? Did the father cause the bruise?

Black eye. Cause is up for debate and will likely be litigated soon at a trial.

More to my point though is that even a bruise/black eye is likely enough evidence for the state to get involved and, even in best case scenario, likely cause one to have his kid removed for a period of time and have to go through the court process.

So the state removes your child for the process of the trial before you are even convicted of any wrongdoing at all? And of course the state controls the trial process and how long that takes as well, right?

1. Yes. And a parent's rights to a child can be severed with no conviction at all because the burden of proof is lower than beyond reasonable doubt.

2. Yes… although ideally through the separation of powers so that it is in accordance with due process.

That is nothing short of horrifying. Is this the same across all states? I assume that in cases where no child abuse was found there is no legal recourse for the parent to sue DSP/CPS either, right? Or is it one of things like leaving the Soviet Union, no law against it but good luck?

 

[sublimeone]

Now, if this guy is regularly putting his hands on the kid, it's a different story.

Would it be different if he was punching the kid in the shoulder and bruising him, say, every other day?

yes

edited to add: It should not be done with any sort of frequency. An isolated incident, fine, a regular occurrence is a problem especially if you see it's caused a huge bruise. Abuse is subjective and it's impossible to define.

Is it OK to yell at your kid? Of course. Can it become abusive? Absolutely.

 

[bigbottom]

Now, if this guy is regularly putting his hands on the kid, it's a different story.

Would it be different if he was punching the kid in the shoulder and bruising him, say, every other day?

yes

How about once a month?

Once a quarter?

 

[sublimeone]

Now, if this guy is regularly putting his hands on the kid, it's a different story.

Would it be different if he was punching the kid in the shoulder and bruising him, say, every other day?

yes

How about once a month?

Once a quarter?

response above

 

[Long Ball Larry]

i always love the child abuse justification when people say, yeah, i was beat much worse so this clearly isn't child abuse.

i was tossed down the stairs and was told many times i would be killed when i was asleep. so i can clearly punch my kids in the face since it's not as bad as that.

Way off my friend, no one is encouraging abuse or punching kids in the face, in fact I think under my abuse definition post I posted the exact thing you are speaking of.

Ever heard the saying: Spare the rod spoil the child?

I can show you a lot of others who do not get any discipline as kids, never laid a hand on, a lot of them become spoiled brats as they get older and turn into Lindsay Lohan and Justin Bieber without the money of course. And then those people get abused by the likes of MOP, OPM, LD, and GM in the real world.

It's spoil the rod, spoil the child.

 

[General Malaise]

Now, if this guy is regularly putting his hands on the kid, it's a different story.

Would it be different if he was punching the kid in the shoulder and bruising him, say, every other day?

yes

edited to add: It should not be done with any sort of frequency. An isolated incident, fine, a regular occurrence is a problem especially if you see it's caused a huge bruise. Abuse is subjective and it's impossible to define.

Is it OK to yell at your kid? Of course. Can it become abusive? Absolutely.

Why is it fine? If an adult punched your child hard enough in the arm to cause a bruise would it be fine with you? If my 11 year old son was with his mom and her boyfriend punched him in the arm hard enough to bruise him, I wouldn't be fine with it. At all.

 

[sublimeone]

Now, if this guy is regularly putting his hands on the kid, it's a different story.

Would it be different if he was punching the kid in the shoulder and bruising him, say, every other day?

yes

edited to add: It should not be done with any sort of frequency. An isolated incident, fine, a regular occurrence is a problem especially if you see it's caused a huge bruise. Abuse is subjective and it's impossible to define.

Is it OK to yell at your kid? Of course. Can it become abusive? Absolutely.

Why is it fine? If an adult punched your child hard enough in the arm to cause a bruise would it be fine with you? If my 11 year old son was with his mom and her boyfriend punched him in the arm hard enough to bruise him, I wouldn't be fine with it. At all.

For reasons stated in: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=703650&p=16496489

 

[Zow]

It sounds like you are sort of minimizing this to an extent. The whole "he bruises easy" is a pretty convenient excuse.

I am guessing however that for DHS to become involved, a mandatory reported (such as a teacher or a doctor) saw the bruises and they were significant enough to raise red flags. So there is probably more than just a little mark.

I think there is some potential for problems for you here. This wasn't just a slap or a spanking. When you enter into the world of punching a kid, there are potential criminal implications. Just saying....

Oh in Colorado, CPS and DSS are called DHS here as well.

I'm presently involved in a Dependency case (the legal term for the court proceeding where CPS/DSS/DHS has stepped in and removed a child) where the sole basis for removal when an unexplained bruise. Was reported on an anonymous tip line.

The father involved now gets to see his kids (that's right, plural, because CPS usually doesn't just remove one) 1-2 times a week for a couple hours with some old woman volunteer looking over his shoulder. This is in between "voluntarily" submitting to numerous services and going to court 1-2x/month to have some dickbag lawyers dissect his and his family's life.

Hopefully this doesn't happen to the OP, but saying things like "he bruises easily" to DHS/CPS and then making admissions to punching a kid hard enough to leave a bruise is a substantial step towards getting there.

Please tell me there was more to it than a single, unexplained bruise. Kids get bruises all the time, Sounds like a system out of control if that is literally the only piece of evidenced required for the state to remove kids from their parents. Was it an especially bad bruise or a black eye or something? Did the father cause the bruise?

Black eye. Cause is up for debate and will likely be litigated soon at a trial.

More to my point though is that even a bruise/black eye is likely enough evidence for the state to get involved and, even in best case scenario, likely cause one to have his kid removed for a period of time and have to go through the court process.

So the state removes your child for the process of the trial before you are even convicted of any wrongdoing at all? And of course the state controls the trial process and how long that takes as well, right?

1. Yes. And a parent's rights to a child can be severed with no conviction at all because the burden of proof is lower than beyond reasonable doubt.

2. Yes… although ideally through the separation of powers so that it is in accordance with due process.

That is nothing short of horrifying. Is this the same across all states? I assume that in cases where no child abuse was found there is no legal recourse for the parent to sue DSP/CPS either, right? Or is it one of things like leaving the Soviet Union, no law against it but good luck?

1. I don't know but my guess is probably yes.

2. There is a distinction between "conviction" and "finding" of abuse. Conviction refers to proof beyond reasonable doubt. A finding in a CPS case by a judge of ongoing abuse or whatever needs to be only proven by clear and convincing evidence. So, it's very possible to litigate over alleged abuse in a CPS case with that nucleus of fact never entering the criminal court. And since the burden of proof is less, a parent could have his or her rights severed without definitive proof.

3. Regarding suing CPS, I'd defer to other lawyers who handle civil rights type claims. I'd imagine there would be a cause of action if CPS totally crapped all over a person's due process rights. But following due process isn't that tough and CPS can still arguably badly screw with someone's life and not violate a civil right.

 

[cstu]

3. Regarding suing CPS, I'd defer to other lawyers who handle civil rights type claims. I'd imagine there would be a cause of action if CPS totally crapped all over a person's due process rights. But following due process isn't that tough and CPS can still arguably badly screw with someone's life and not violate a civil right.

My SIL and BIL got a $1M settlement with the CA CPS. Lawyer got half that.

 

[Zow]

3. Regarding suing CPS, I'd defer to other lawyers who handle civil rights type claims. I'd imagine there would be a cause of action if CPS totally crapped all over a person's due process rights. But following due process isn't that tough and CPS can still arguably badly screw with someone's life and not violate a civil right.

My SIL and BIL got a $1M settlement with the CA CPS. Lawyer got half that.

 

[Henry Ford]

1. I don't know but my guess is probably yes.


2. There is a distinction between "conviction" and "finding" of abuse. Conviction refers to proof beyond reasonable doubt. A finding in a CPS case by a judge of ongoing abuse or whatever needs to be only proven by clear and convincing evidence. So, it's very possible to litigate over alleged abuse in a CPS case with that nucleus of fact never entering the criminal court. And since the burden of proof is less, a parent could have his or her rights severed without definitive proof.

3. Regarding suing CPS, I'd defer to other lawyers who handle civil rights type claims. I'd imagine there would be a cause of action if CPS totally crapped all over a person's due process rights. But following due process isn't that tough and CPS can still arguably badly screw with someone's life and not violate a civil right.

There are definitely situations in which one might consider suing the DHS. And in which they'd be in big, big trouble. See, e.g. In re: Olivia Y in Mississippi.

 

[cstu]

I was slapped, punched, kicked, got the spoon and the belt as a child. And every time, I deserved it. Didn't like it, but I deserved it. And I learned real quick not to do those things again. At least don't get caught.

I think what is missing here is does the OP love and care for the 11yo or not. If not, then there might be problems.

Good for you, but I never deserved the abuse I got as a child. I suppose I should have been a ####tier child so I could feel good now about my beatings.

 

[Max Power]

Glad to hear the boy's father didn't have an issue with the punch. That could have gotten ugly. He is more understanding than I would have been.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

I now I understand why our society is turning out the way it is.

Lol. I'll take the society that tries to protect kids from abuse, thanks.

 

[General Malaise]

Now, if this guy is regularly putting his hands on the kid, it's a different story.

Would it be different if he was punching the kid in the shoulder and bruising him, say, every other day?

yes

edited to add: It should not be done with any sort of frequency. An isolated incident, fine, a regular occurrence is a problem especially if you see it's caused a huge bruise. Abuse is subjective and it's impossible to define.

Is it OK to yell at your kid? Of course. Can it become abusive? Absolutely.

Why is it fine? If an adult punched your child hard enough in the arm to cause a bruise would it be fine with you? If my 11 year old son was with his mom and her boyfriend punched him in the arm hard enough to bruise him, I wouldn't be fine with it. At all.

For reasons stated in: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=703650&p=16496489

But you've already admitted that once is fine, more than once is not fine. So....you're kind of hedging your bet a little bit. Hard to take anything you say on this issue seriously.

 

[top dog]

when the department of homeland security folks show up you should punch the first one in the face and tell them that's for interrupting your dinner. The other representative will know not to come over between 3-7pm after that.

 

[sublimeone]

Now, if this guy is regularly putting his hands on the kid, it's a different story.

Would it be different if he was punching the kid in the shoulder and bruising him, say, every other day?

yes

edited to add: It should not be done with any sort of frequency. An isolated incident, fine, a regular occurrence is a problem especially if you see it's caused a huge bruise. Abuse is subjective and it's impossible to define.

Is it OK to yell at your kid? Of course. Can it become abusive? Absolutely.

Why is it fine? If an adult punched your child hard enough in the arm to cause a bruise would it be fine with you? If my 11 year old son was with his mom and her boyfriend punched him in the arm hard enough to bruise him, I wouldn't be fine with it. At all.

For reasons stated in: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=703650&p=16496489

But you've already admitted that once is fine, more than once is not fine. So....you're kind of hedging your bet a little bit. Hard to take anything you say on this issue seriously.

I think my stated opinion is pretty easy to understand. Sorry you can't understand slight nuance.