Hmmm, it's easy to slip into anti-institutional mode and hate social services and/or grandmother on account that somebody claims she's a vindictice bitch. But it is superficial, the update to the story provides a clue that those claiming young mother cannot provide a stable home to her baby might have been on to something. I understand relationships breaking up, but she had an arrangement that allowed her to be with her baby and she opted out. Sorry, she lost me on that one.
RE: Teenage Mom and Baby 'Easy' Targets for MCFD: Pamela's Story -- Part II (FamilyProtection Series)
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Teenage Mom and Baby 'Easy' Targets for MCFD: Pamela's Story -- Part II (FamilyProtection Series)
Sure, she had her flaws and was likely to be immature given her age. But none of that changes the fact that they initially took her baby without any investigation. And they weren't going to even let her have a say in court. Even the worst mass murderer gets to defend himself and have his say in court.
MCFD gave her less rights than the worst of criminals would get. Just because some teenage moms have in the past shown themselves not to be good mothers, does NOT give them the right to assume that she is guilty without even the most basic of an investigation. Why did they have to constantly break the laws and guidelines just to get her baby? (Read part I if you missed some of the things they did.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit