What Right?
By STOUTjodee
@STOUTjodee (3670)
United States
March 16, 2013 11:17pm CST
What right did the state of Minnesota have to take this baby away from their parents? There are a lot of cases where children are removed from their homes that should be removed because of abuse, neglect and endangerment, but why in this case? Read the link here minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/03/06/mower-co-family-fights-for-custody-of-hiv-positive-infant/ The parents were doing what was right for their child by getting a second opinion. Maybe the parents believed that God could take care of this child and make him well by being at home. Also, why are the parents being charged all the medical bills, if the child is in welfare the state should be paying for the child's care!
3 people like this
4 responses
@sid556 (30953)
• United States
17 Mar 13
Hi Stout,
I read the article and it does seem pretty extreme for them to remove that child. I do understand that the child needed medical attention and also they had to make sure that the baby ws recieving the proper nutrition. I also understand the parent's wanting a second opinion considering the mother's history.
I'm curious as to why they traveled to get that 2nd opinion but turned around and headed home prior to doing so. And did they call to cancel the appointments and explain why they were cancelling them? They do sound to be very loving parents so I hope they get their baby back soon.
@STOUTjodee (3670)
• United States
18 Mar 13
Thanks for the update, but my question is still why the state took the child, just because the child had HIV? The mother should have known that it would have been passed on to the child. Also, why the concern for the child now, the child's mother had HIV as a baby as well, but her parents took her off the medication and she survived!! Thanks for responding!
@flowerchilde (12529)
• United States
18 Mar 13
grrrr, government is getting way too powerful and pushy!!@STOUTjodee (3670)
• United States
18 Mar 13
That's what I think as well as the states are having way too much power as well!! Thanks for responding!
@911Ricki (13588)
• Canada
17 Mar 13
There can be a lot of arguements over this, if they signed paperwork with the state for them to cover the costs, tehn they are in breach. It's not what is better for the child, but what doctors think are better. Why should the state cover it only when the family feels like it or the child needs it? It could also be classified as neglect, abuse, and so on depending on what judge looks at it.
@srisahara (4508)
• Indonesia
17 Mar 13
Yes, you are right friend if you asked why the parents should charged the medical bills, if the state of Minnesota has been take care the child. I think this policy does not fair for parents. Because they have been release the child to reduce their charge on the baby but if they have to spend money to care the child i think the government let the child with his parent and give assurance about his welfare.
