  |
|
|
|
Childhood Abuse & NeglectRead the article this discussion is about
This archived discussion is "read only".
» Marella - Rodney I live in St. Louis and this story has just been awful to follow. This woman not only didn't know where her kid was, but apparently didn't care - when detectives asked her where he was she said she "assumed" he was with a friend. The friend's mother said she had never met Rodney nor had he ever spent the night with them. So why would Rodney's mother just "assume" that's where her kid was?Also, one article mentioned that Rodney and his 13 year-old brother (who is retarded) would often come home from school to find the apartment locked and mother nowhere to be found. So they couldn't, at times, even get into their own home. One article talked about how Rodney's father had tried to get custody but the courts wouldn't give it to him unless he took the 13YO, too. But that couldn't happen unless the 13YO's father gave up HIS rights, and the mother wouldn't reveal who the 13YO's father was. End of custody battle. Why didn't the courts at least take the opportunity to get one kid away from this woman?? And why did family services give them back to her twice? Obviously, some women are not meant to be mothers, but you can't say that too loud in our society, since every woman has the "right" and some believe the "duty" to be a mother. I hope cases like this make some people wake up to the fact that not all women are good mothers, just like not all women are good housekeepers, or pet owners, or airplane pilots, or store managers. Even worse, several letters to the editor that week in the same paper were from folks who were offended that the paper's articles were slanted to blame the mother for the tragedy. She was blameless since DOGS did it, the letters asserted. Hell, if she'd kept an eye on her kid, would the dogs ever have gotten him? The dogs killed him but the mother was the one who neglected him to the point where this situation occurred. This was not a case where someone turned their back to, say, change a diaper, while the other kid crawled under a fence and got bit by the neighbor's pooch. This kid was often on his own after school, and even when mom was home, she just "assumed" where he was. Another article last week was about another woman who should never have reproduced. Twenty years ago, her eleven kids, age 11 to 10 months, all died in a fire, while mom was out gambling. Since then she's had 6 more kids, 2 of whom have been so abused "they're a threat to others." The other 4 were interviewed for the article and said their mother often locked them outside during the winter and would tell them she wished they were all dead. Just because a woman CAN have a baby does not mean she will take care of it! When are the courts going to wake up to that? Why were Rodney and his 13YO brother left with their mother? Why has this other woman had 17 children and maybe four of the six who will live to grow up will be, if not model citizens, not a danger to others. And yet, tell anyone you're not having kids and you're treated like you're insane. I'm more unstable than THESE women? Don't think so. -- posted by Marella » Authoress - Re: Rodney In response to message posted by Marella:Marella, --Cara -- posted by Authoress » ladysyc69 - Re: Re: Rodney In response to message posted by Authoress:
Amen!!! This site certainly is a start (or, a continuation). From what I've seen, I'm frightened for the future of this society: too much dyfunction is happening RIGHT NOW, and to think that many of those who have been raised in homes of dysfunction either will have, or have had children....*shudders*. -- posted by ladysyc69
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion. |
|
|
|
