Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Nothing ever good enough in child inquiry

Re: Meryem's year away, April 17,

I am involved in a situation in which I do not have custody of my children and no one - not the case manager, not the Guardian Ad Litem volunteer, and not the criminal investigator in my case - thinks that I harmed my child. When child protective investigators enter your life, it is forever changed. They are constantly looking for the dirt in your life. I have a great job, wonderful children and a great family with plenty of support. None of that matters. It doesn't even matter if you do what they ask of you. Nothing is good enough.

A child dependency case is civil. No criminal laws apply. In a criminal case, a prosecutor must have enough evidence to charge you with a crime. In a dependency case, no one needs any evidence. Judges back child protective services no matter what the consequences or the potential harm to the child. No one wants to be responsible for a child who ends up dead, so parents who don't deserve to lose their children do. Children still end up dead. The system does not and cannot work the way it is arranged.

The important part of the story lies in the fact that an appellate court reversed the judges' decision. That's nice, but the damage done to the family is irreversible. Peggy's children will go to bed every night with the fear that they will be taken again. How long does it take for that fear to go away? When will Peggy be able to quit looking over her shoulder fearing that with every accidental bruise or scrape her children will be taken again?

The law does not even afford Peggy the option of a civil lawsuit. Not that any amount of money in the world could make up for the time spent away from your children.

The article mentioned a custody battle looming ahead. In this day and age, with parents who cannot agree, cases like this do nothing but provide dirt for the other person to use in a custody battle.

A custody battle looms ahead for me also, if and when all of my dependency issues are ever resolved. I am a Christian and a good parent. I used to think something like this could never happen to me. If it can happen to me, it can happen to anyone.

New self-defense act may intensify road rage problem

Almost 30 years ago, before our legislators and governor were under the thumb of the National Rifle Association, our Legislature passed, and the governor signed, the Jack Hagler Self-Defense Act.

It was enacted because far too many Floridians were shooting each other! The new Castle Doctrine bill (SB 436) soon to be signed by the governor will return us to those dangerous days and will in fact increase the chances that even more innocent people will be killed or injured.

The new self-defense act is so broad it's mind boggling that any Legislature would pass, and a governor would sign, a bill that gives exclusive rights to the man with the gun at the expense of public safety.

The new act established your home to be your castle. Your car or anywhere you might be, including the street, is also Castle Doctrine territory from which you have no duty to retreat; you can stand your ground, meet force with whatever amount of force you think is needed if you feel you are in danger of great bodily harm or death.

This new bill will diminish our safety if we are in homes, cars, public gatherings or in the street. Sens. Victor Crist and Mike Fasano and Reps. Ken Littlefield and John Legg voted to support this assault on public safety.

Sen. Fasano stated in an April 20 letter that he opposed the Road Rage Reduction Act soon to be signed by the governor. Isn't that strange, because he voted for the self-defense bill that now designates your car as a "castle" with all the self-defense rights of your home to include no duty to retreat.

With so many Floridians carrying loaded handguns in their cars, this could create a new dimension to the term road rage. Will fender benders and obscene gestures turn into shootouts? In the same April 20 Times edition was an article entitled, "SUV's tag returned, apology delivered." It seems two people were over the top about what one thought was the other's threatening gestures with his car. One waved his concealed handgun license at the other, and the police had to sort it out.

Carrying loaded handguns in the vehicle compartment of a car is bad enough; now combining the right to carry in a car with new Castle Doctrine rights will mean road rage incidents are bound to become more deadly.

[Last modified April 22, 2005, 00:44:19]