you know, people are quick here to criticize the quick grab of kids, both in this circumstance and others, by CPS... but i GUARANTY that there would be much more criticizm if the CPS had a breath of a hint that there was a problem before a tragedy (a child killed or seriously abused) and hadn't moved fast and hard enough to prevent it.
the fact is that they are a (probably) understaffed group (meaning the folks actually hitting the street investigating this sorta crud) tasked with doing a damn delicate job with wispy and amorphous information... PLUS they are a bureacracy wrapped within a larger bureacracy that has operate within fairly tightly defined guidelines with the judiciaciary ANOTHER large bureacracy. Lets agree that in this scenario they are not going to be able to change direction with nimble agility of a speed boat... they are a supertanker, in a fog, on a small creek.
fact is there are grounds for moving fast with scanty information here, because type I error (failure to prevent a heinous act agaist children) is usually much worse than type II error in this case (temp move a child out of a house where after the dust settles it is apparent that they shouldn't have).
<<< this, of course, assumes that the children aren't abused by the very system that was designed to protect them>>>
now ^^^ this ^^^ is all general discussion... in this case lots of you are quick to alledge not only that CPS moved in a situation where they should've stood down but thtat they ALSO moved for politically motivated religious persecution reasons.... I'll wait for some of the dust to settle, and facts to emerge (other than blogosphere "facts") before I make a judgement on this particular case.
|