Meet Adolf Hitler and his family, he is now in state custody

United States
May 26, 2012 1:13pm CST
No its not the historical Adolf Hitler its Adolf Hitler Campbell: http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/22/8952917-parents-of-adolf-hitler-campbell-lose-custody-of-newborn-hons?lite http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwawkb5vo08&feature=related The father and mother lost custody of Adolf and his other two siblings after they were investigated. When the mom tried to have a birthday cake made and the bakery refused and that caught everyone's attention. They lost custody of their children because there was domestic violence between the parents (they claim the children were never in any danger and the state did it because of what they named their children). When the Campbells had their third child the state police came into the hospital hours after it was born and took the baby into custody without any court order. They insist they are not Neo-Nazi and the allegations of domestic abuse between the parents are fabricated. Do you think if their kids had different names they would of been taken away? Should people who name their kids something offensive have them taken away? There was a towing company named Adolf's towing when I grew up and I always kind of wonder if the guy ever got any flak from having that name.
1 person likes this
6 responses
@petersum (4525)
• United States
26 May 12
This is an old story from last year. Why do you want to bring it up again?
• United States
26 May 12
I don't watch the news or TV and just ran across it. I did a search and couldn't find a topic on it on mylot. Is there a time limit on bringing something up?
@petersum (4525)
• United States
26 May 12
No, there isn't a time limit but we generally do not repeat topics. Look at these and carefully note the dates! http://www.mylot.com/w/discussions/1870799.aspx http://www.mylot.com/w/discussions/2376574.aspx There is no such thing as fresh news!!!
• United States
26 May 12
Correction; Taskr36 did start a topic about this (just found it) 3 years ago but since that time they have also took the new born. Also I ran across this in the comments when I was watching a video about the Travon Martin, George Zimmerman case and wanted to see what others had to say.
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
27 May 12
Are we going to take kids away who are named Jeffery, Joseph, John, Richard, and Ted too? All those names are connected to either serial killers or mass murderers. The government has far to much power.
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
28 May 12
Thought police. Minority Report on steroids. We are soon going to be living in a police state.
• United States
30 May 12
Soon? I think we are already there people haven't woken up to it because they haven't seen it on prime time news.
@matersfish (6311)
• United States
26 May 12
I won't scream at you for this being an "old" topic. To me, it's just as important now as it's ever been. Where exactly does society draw the line? Whose standards do we use? Whose rights are more important in these cases -- the parents or the child's? All very important questions. It's a very important topic in general. For instance, naming the kid Adolf Hitler was enough to draw people's attentions. But what about those things that go under the radar, like teaching bigotry and hatred? They could have named the kid John Smith and taught him to hate Jews and gays, etc. A "normal" name doesn't mean a normal kid, and a name like Adolf doesn't necessarily mean they're training a monster. Children are always innocent, always impressionable, and are always victims of their environment. But if you get into what you can name a kid or what you can't, I think you also have to get into what you can teach a kid. If we're to say that Adolf is a bad name because Adolf was the name of a mass murdering maniac, then at some point we're also going to have to say you can't teach this or that because it promotes bigotry and hatred. So I just don't know. Take the kid away? A bit harsh unless you wanna send the Gestapo into homes to monitor and remove children. But, then again, the welfare of this child is really in question (or was; but in a broader context of moronic parents, is). I don't know that there is a right answer here. The sad truth is that you just can't fix stupid.
• United States
26 May 12
oops I meant to say Barack not Obama... lol
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
2 Jun 12
Personally, I think it's the parent's right to raise their child as a Nazi if they so choose. I do believe that the domestic abuse bit was fabricated after the got national attention. I think it's horrible that they would raise their kids this way, but there's no law against it and I don't want the government telling people how to raise their children or how to name their children. There are kids out there named Sadaam, Osama, Idi, etc. He1l, do you know how common the name Joseph is? Joseph Stalin was WORSE than Hitler by many accounts and yet people name their kids Joseph all the time.
• United States
2 Jun 12
I agree it is horrible but the last thing we need is the government to have power to take away your children on bull hockey excuses. Like bestboy said above it was so unsafe in the home why didn't they remove the mom while she was pregnant instead of waiting till the moment she had the baby. I think they were looking for attention and got a bit more than they counted on. Thanks for not jumping on me for starting a topic that you did already....lol.
@suspenseful (40316)
• Canada
27 May 12
Of course it was because of the children's names. If there had been physical abuse there would have been bruises on the woman';s face as well as doctor reports on injuries to the children. But it shows how much danger there is when an evil man named Adolph tries to take over the world. Anyone with that name is immediately suspect. By the way, I did not see the previous article either. I wonder if they will get their children back if cut out the Hitler part of their son;s name. Maybe next time, the wife should opt for a home birth.
• United States
28 May 12
I don't think they have any plans to remove the kids names especially considering what they named the last one. I think you are right home birth would of avoided the situation at least the baby wouldn't have been taken hours after it was born. I think someone at the hospital had to have told on them, probably when they named the child.
@bestboy19 (5482)
• United States
26 May 12
If this couple's life is riddled with violence, the police should have removed Mrs. Campbell while she was still pregnant. Sounds like it was the names rather than the possibility of violence that took the children from their parents. They are stupid names to give their children, but that shouldn't give the authorities the right to take them.
• United States
28 May 12
Didn't think about that. If things were so violent why didn't they take her out of the home when she was pregnant. My guess is after they named the most recent child someone said "hey isn't this the same couple and called the cops". The state may not be able to talk about the children's case but there is nothing to prevent them to talk about her being knocked around and they haven't given up any information as far as I know.