M W-S: “You can’t take a swing at parents without the blow landing squarely on the child.”

I guess she answered me: “would be immediately rejected by liberals, because there would be a measure of personal responsibility and consequences….

So, should we not force absent fathers to pay child support?

Why is it that taxpayers always have to pay for the failures and blatant disregard for responsibility by individuals? Nothing is perfect and sometimes kids might, (again “might”) be inconvenienced by punishing parents, but no one gets a life equal to others, and it might prevent people from walking away from “problems” that they brought into the world.

One thing on which I can count is that government will claim to have an answer to this, just like they did when it created DCFS, and then find out that it doesn’t work, so then a “new answer” comes up, and we’ll find that it doesn’t work either.

Liberals can go on feeling good about trying, but I never felt good when I lost a game even though I tried. It’s time for winning results, so maybe consider what conservatives have to say rather than be defensive.

I want to be sure I’m clear on one point (before people latch onto one of my comments and choose to blow it up to a degree that is diverting of my primary point):

There ARE times when abused and neglected children must be removed from their homes to keep them safe. There ARE parents and families who are either too dangerous or dysfunctional, even with help, to ensure the safety of a child. But when DCFS is so busy removing children as a first reaction, rather than working primarily to preserve families as a first reaction, the system not only causes children to suffer what Richard Wexler has referred to as a traumatizing experience akin to a kidnapping, but families are torn apart needlessly with serious aftershocks that last years.

When a system spends its time and resources (our tax money) removing children from homes who should never be removed, the real cases of abuse and neglect are missed. Thus perpetuates a dysfunctional cycle of tragic headline after tragic headline, followed by reactionary systems to continue doing things the very same way with no progressive end in sight.

While I haven’t read enough on the subject of the post to offer “solutions,” I’m sure that any that would come to mind might work but would be immediately rejected by liberals, because there would be a measure of personal responsibility and consequences in there for the parents.

For those people who feel better hearing or daydreaming about punishing struggling parents, consider another truth Wexler has brought to light: “You can’t take a swing at parents without the blow landing squarely on the child.” That’s because children need – and – like it or not – love their own homes and families. Even in situations where there are serious problems at home, children are safer and will fare better within their own homes than to be forcibly displaced like refugees – made to be orphans by the state.

So aside from some need angry people tend to harbor for cathartic revenge on troubled families, liberals and conservatives alike should be in agreement on this: Choosing INTENSIVE WRAPAROUND services tailored to fit the individual family’s needs will not only help save children, it will be CHEAPER for the state than either foster care or juvenile justice system – and these realities don’t even take into consideration the longer term ramifications to children, families, and communities. For when children either succeed or fail, the effects of either will have repercussions that will be felt by us all in so many ways.