On Changing Kansas, there is a post dated March 24, concerning the Protective Parent Act, which would enable foster children to file formal complaints about abuses and violations of their rights which take place while they are in custody of foster parents or other designated custodians. This would give foster children and their natural parents recourse in situations involving sexual predators who are given custody of foster children, such as Noble Rick Pendland. Many parents complained about him over the last decade, but since their children had been taken from them, their complaints were tossed into the circular file. Some of these children were sodomized, (Pendland's apparent abuse of choice) and injured in other ways, but denied legal recourse and medical treatment. No one in Kansas cared, and Kansas lawmakers still don't care, as evidenced by their resistance to passing the Protective Parent Act. Noble Rick Pendland is in jail in Cowley County, awaiting trial, by the way.
What does Kansas have to gain by refusing the rights of foster children and their natural parents? An alarming number of foster children are on drug regimens that are either experimental, or not approved for children. These very children are often the subjects of pharmaceutical experimentation. A "ward of the court" who has unwittingly become a subject in a drug experiment may find that there are other considerations, besides the fitness of his parents, to his reunification with his parents. What a way for Kansas to make money! Don't believe this? Here's a sample from Kansas Statutes, Chapter 38, Article 22.
(d) When the court retains jurisdiction after appointment of a permanent custodian, the court, in its order, may impose limitations or conditions upon the rights and responsibilities of the permanent custodian including, but not limited to, the right to:
(1) Determine contact with the biological parent; (2) consent to marriage; (3) consent to psychosurgery, removal of a bodily organ or amputation of a limb; (4) consent to sterilization; (5) consent to behavioral and medical experiments; (6) consent to withholding life-prolonging medical treatment; (7) consent to placement in a treatment facility; or (8) consent to placement in a psychiatric hospital or an institution for the developmentally disabled.
Looking closely at (3), (4), (5), and (6), the notion that social services can drop in on an unsuspecting parent whose child happens to possess a physical trait that is of current interest to drug companies conducting experiments on persons with said trait, and generate a reason that may or may not be factual to remove the child, then turn the child over to foster care or other circumstances wherein involuntary drug experiments can be conducted is a bit unsettling. Yours truly has guardianship of a child with medical problems, and this child was once on many drugs. We found a doctor who is truly interested in medicine, and, one by one, the drugs were permanantly removed from this child's life. Now he is much healthier, and no one really knows why all of the drugs were prescribed in the first place. The drugs certainly did not play a productive role. The very idea, as in (6), that a court or a caretaker can actually withhold life-prolonging medical treatment to a child is chilling. Changing Kansas makes a very serious and valid point concerning the rights of children who are wards of the court.
What does Kansas have to gain by refusing the rights of foster children and their natural parents? An alarming number of foster children are on drug regimens that are either experimental, or not approved for children. These very children are often the subjects of pharmaceutical experimentation. A "ward of the court" who has unwittingly become a subject in a drug experiment may find that there are other considerations, besides the fitness of his parents, to his reunification with his parents. What a way for Kansas to make money! Don't believe this? Here's a sample from Kansas Statutes, Chapter 38, Article 22.
(d) When the court retains jurisdiction after appointment of a permanent custodian, the court, in its order, may impose limitations or conditions upon the rights and responsibilities of the permanent custodian including, but not limited to, the right to:
(1) Determine contact with the biological parent; (2) consent to marriage; (3) consent to psychosurgery, removal of a bodily organ or amputation of a limb; (4) consent to sterilization; (5) consent to behavioral and medical experiments; (6) consent to withholding life-prolonging medical treatment; (7) consent to placement in a treatment facility; or (8) consent to placement in a psychiatric hospital or an institution for the developmentally disabled.
Looking closely at (3), (4), (5), and (6), the notion that social services can drop in on an unsuspecting parent whose child happens to possess a physical trait that is of current interest to drug companies conducting experiments on persons with said trait, and generate a reason that may or may not be factual to remove the child, then turn the child over to foster care or other circumstances wherein involuntary drug experiments can be conducted is a bit unsettling. Yours truly has guardianship of a child with medical problems, and this child was once on many drugs. We found a doctor who is truly interested in medicine, and, one by one, the drugs were permanantly removed from this child's life. Now he is much healthier, and no one really knows why all of the drugs were prescribed in the first place. The drugs certainly did not play a productive role. The very idea, as in (6), that a court or a caretaker can actually withhold life-prolonging medical treatment to a child is chilling. Changing Kansas makes a very serious and valid point concerning the rights of children who are wards of the court.
3 comments:
Sounds like a personal problem. no one cares you creep get a job. do you even Work? It would explain why your a horrible mother.
It's more your personal problem than mine, because I am not from Kansas. Why should I get a job? I have one. As my original quote was taken from another blog, which is written by a reporter for a rather large newpaper in Kansas, there are probably quite a few people who care about the subject matter of this post. If you do not, I suppose I should doublecheck yout IP#, find out who you are, and see if there is any family resemblence between you and Noble Rick Pendland.
Sorry you think I am a horrible mother. I pop out brilliant students; most other people around here pop out Margie Phelps lookalikes. Despite my inability to make you happy, there must be something good about my parenting. Bad parents generally do not produce good students. Speaking of being a good student, where did you learn to write and spell? That special frankfurter school?
What a cool sounding idea!
Post a Comment