Forums

[Grandma Lynn]

Is taking surviving children away from their
parents because their sibling wasn't in a car
seat and died?
Father was driving and the aunt had the
18 month old on her lap in the back seat.

Wrong, yes, But to take the other children
away from their parents, at a time when
they need them is wrong.

But the Calif. Supreme Court said they
must be taken away , which the social welfare
authorities did.

[Grandma Lynn]

Okay, I guess this isn't important.
At the time i thought it was.....

[APLMAN]

It would help to link the story so there was a little more detail to it.

[Grandma Lynn]

It would help to link the story so there was a little more detail to it.

Duh! I'm not sure, it was in the Times
this week.

[mafeki]

Yeah that's absolutely horrible from the sounds of it. Those Child Social Service people are heartless and profile everyone.

[billwald]

Seat belt and car seat rules are mostly city money raisers and government training of the American serfs to take orders. Seat belts were comfortable when they were seat belts and not straight jacket training devices.

[Grandma Lynn]

Okay, got the details. Was in the Times,
Friday, July 6th on page 2 "Newsline".
Says "the Calif. Supreme Court decided
unanimously Thursday"..
So parents who transport a youngster
without a car seat and lose the child
in a fatal accident may have their surviving
children removed by social welfare authorities.
The state high court ruled in favor of L.A.
County social workers who placed two boys
in foster care after their 18 mo. old sister
was killed,
A driver ran stop sig and plowed into the car
their father was driving.
As I mentioned before the child was in the
lap of her aunt in the back seat.