by Jack
I’m from the government and I’m here to help.. . .
A beautiful little 6-year-old girl has been ripped away from her Southern California home of four years due to a law about her small slice of Native American heritage. She is 98.5% Caucasian with only 1.5% Choctaw Indian, but that was enough to take her away from her devoted adopted parents.
Lexi, has been living in Santa Clarita with Rusty and Summer Page. By all account they are very decent, upstanding people who love her and they were absolutely devastated to have the government suddenly step in and forcibly steal away their daughter to give her a drug addicted mother and an idiot father with a lengthy criminal background. She was taken away from them because she was be beaten, now they (gov) are sending her back to be eventually reunited with the parents, thanks to a court ruling on the Indian Child Welfare Act.
The 1978 federal law was designed to keep “Native American” families together, attempting to stop large numbers of children with tribal heritage from being taken away and given to non-Native American households, never mind the reasons. In other words, heritage is more important than the welfare of the child. Well, lets be specific, its only Indian Heritage that is more important here. Anyone else, forget it…heritage is irrelevant, as it should be! This is one of the most tragic and stupid things I’ve heard our government do all year. It’s an outrage.
Lexi’s biological parents lost custody of their daughter when she was 17-months-old because she had a black eye. Apparently a 17 month old can’t fight very well, so I guess we’ll see how well a 6 year old can take a punch?
While I agree that this story is tragic and the court’s decision was probably the wrong one, you got several important facts wrong in this article. Lexi is not being returned to her biological parents, but to a couple who are related to Lexi’s biological father through marriage. Furthermore, Lexi did not sustain the black eye from her biological parents, but from one of her previous foster homes.
So, you were there.
What?
Chris, she was being returned to her relatives to facilitate the eventual return to her biological parents. The original syndicated article said the black eye, at age 17 months, was the reason for removal from her biological parents.
Just more confirmation that Government intervention has to be reduced and restricted to more of a common sense application as what might be considered a apparent standalone situation.
One law does not fit all. If trained family court Judges are not qualified to intervene in cases like this, and can only administer law as what Government prescribes it, then we are really that much closer to an authoritarian submission of rule.
Jack, this is where citing your sources would be helpful. I have no idea what “the original syndicated article” is, but I got my information from NBC News. It said:
“Lexi was placed with the Pages — who have three other children — in December 2011 after two unsuccessful foster homes, including one where she was taken out of because of a black eye and a scrape on her face, the court documents said.”
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/6-year-old-girl-taken-longtime-california-foster-family-being-n542971
That article said nothing about Lexi eventually being returned to her biological parents.
Can you link to the article where you got your information?
Off Topic —
Thank Obama, thank Mexico
Hidalgo residents say they’re tired of migrants running through the streets