Cops Barge Into Cali. Parents’ Home, Take Their Baby After They Seek 2nd Medical Opin

[Shorts]

‘I’m Going to Grab Your Baby, and Don’t Resist’: Cops Barge Into Cali. Parents’ Home, Take Their Baby After They Seek 2nd Medical Opinion — And It’s on Video | Video | TheBlaze.com



4/30 7:17am
ETA update: http://www.news10.net/news/local/ar...port-of-Baby-Sammy-to-Stanford-Medical-Center

 

[txinvestigator]

Again, a very one sided report. How do we know the police had no warrant or court order.

I have no doubt there was an abuse of the system, but I am not prepared to point at the police yet.

 

[Texan2]

Again, a very one sided report. How do we know the police had no warrant or court order.

I have no doubt there was an abuse of the system, but I am not prepared to point at the police yet.

Exactly. All the screaming about the liberal media, but when they bash the cops with few facts to back up theri story, the bandwagon sure fills up fast.

 

[Texanjoker]

I would be really curious to know if DR #2 knew what happened at the 1st hospital when the parents took a baby out of ICU on their own. That would concern me. I worked that system and that would be a medical neglect investigation and could be very serious. A child can be taken for an emergency removal w/o a court order if the facts were there.

 

[Shorts]

Did you guys watch the video? Some questions are answered there.

The LEOs shows up at the second hospital to check the baby and said everything was ok. The next day CPS & LEOs showed up and took the baby. According to the video it is implied there was no warrant.


The parents needed to handle the transfer to the 2nd hospital better. I think what happened here is the first hospital got on the horn and called in the parents. Whether or not they embellished, no idea. But for a baby that had been cleared to be taken away the next day it had to be under the impression it was an emergency serious situation.

 

[Texan2]

Plenty of exceptions for warrants, as it should be. I DID see the story, I did see the video. Internet video is worth what you pay for it, as are most news stories.

§ 262.104. TAKING POSSESSION OF A CHILD IN EMERGENCY
WITHOUT A COURT ORDER. If there is no time to obtain a temporary
restraining order or attachment before taking possession of a child
consistent with the health and safety of that child, an authorized
representative of the Department of Protective and Regulatory
Services, a law enforcement officer, or a juvenile probation
officer may take possession of a child without a court order under
the following conditions, only:
(1) on personal knowledge of facts that would lead a
person of ordinary prudence and caution to believe that there is an
immediate danger to the physical health or safety of the child;
(2) on information furnished by another that has been
corroborated by personal knowledge of facts and all of which taken
together would lead a person of ordinary prudence and caution to
believe that there is an immediate danger to the physical health or
safety of the child;
(3) on personal knowledge of facts that would lead a
person of ordinary prudence and caution to believe that the child
has been the victim of sexual abuse;
(4) on information furnished by another that has been
corroborated by personal knowledge of facts and all of which taken
together would lead a person of ordinary prudence and caution to
believe that the child has been the victim of sexual abuse; or
(5) on information furnished by another that has been
corroborated by personal knowledge of facts and all of which taken
together would lead a person of ordinary prudence and caution to
believe that the parent or person who has possession of the child is
currently using a controlled substance as defined by Chapter 481,
Health and Safety Code, and the use constitutes an immediate danger
to the physical health or safety of the child.

 

[Shorts]

So, you've all spoken as LEOS. How about as parents?

 

[Texan2]

So, you've all spoken as LEOS. How about as parents?

As already stated....story has too few facts to say.

 

[Shorts]

As already stated....story has too few facts to say.

This is the internet, not a court.

 

[Texan2]

And SINCE its the internet and there are few facts, I cant make a decision as to whether things were done as they should have been. Unlike many, I don't automatically assume that CPS and the cops screwed up. I typically DO assume the media screwed up in reporting the facts correctly.

 

[Shorts]

I guess I don't get why a reader can't look at the vid for what's there and say with empathy "Wow, that's terrible. Hope they get their baby back". I mean, what "decision" are you actually making by making a human comment? Further more, if you do say such a thing does that mean you've condemned the LEOs in the vid? I'm trying to understand why LEOs on the forum here, and I guess any forum always wear the cop hat. I'm not criticizing, just trying to understand. <Tangent alert> For example, TxI, you take a lot of heat here for your direct style (In fact all the LEOs here do). I figured out why after I met you. You wear your LEO/CHL instructor hat here on the forum all the time (which is a huge resource and I thank you for it). I like and respect you. You are very knowledgeable. I notice you don't do it too often, but it's nice to see you let your hair down, so to speak. LEOs are professional and it shows. But I wonder if LEOs are human too? That's all





Back to the OP...
When I first saw the vid, since it had CPS & LEOs coming in, reminded me of the recent incident in NJ were CPS came into that family's home when they saw the pic of the son holding a rifle. In that case they came in without a warrant and wanted to see the Dad's firearms/safe. Next thing I thought about, since in the video interview they said that CPS places a substantial amount of weight on information from health care providers, to what extent in regards to parents/home/privacy rights? With Obamacare looming and the gun-grabbing atmosphere (and let's face it, a POTUS scorned re: gun control), I'm curious if health care is an avenue that will be exploited. Currently, doctors are asking patients if they own/posses firearms. It only takes a Doc with a certain political/personal decision to push an agenda in his practice. I am curious about incentives (if any?) for hospitals. Is it crazy to think large hospitals & their boards could take a certain position and have their staff really push policies that invade patient privacy rights? In the OPs case, they took their baby. Can we be certain that the medical communities won't be used to attempt to take people's firearms at some point?

 

[Shorts]

Update posted in OP.

 

[Texan2]

What does wanting to know more facts before making a decision have to do with being an LEO? I don't know that I "want them to get their kid back" until I know what happened.
I can just as easily ask you why you can't remain emotionally detached and not get worked up over every emotionally charged story that the press puposely sticks out there to get the public worked up. These stories are always one sided and always rushed to press, in an effort to be the first to break a story (accurate or not). Almost without exception, the press is far more concerned with being the fastest, not the most accurate.

 

[Shorts]

What does wanting to know more facts before making a decision have to do with being an LEO? I don't know that I "want them to get their kid back" until I know what happened.

Fair enough. I'm understanding then you don't trust the parents.

I can just as easily ask you why you can't remain emotionally detached and not get worked up over every emotionally charged story that the press puposely sticks out there to get the public worked up. These stories are always one sided and always rushed to press, in an effort to be the first to break a story (accurate or not). Almost without exception, the press is far more concerned with being the fastest, not the most accurate.

I did say "empathy".


Is this going to continue to be dragged into an LEO confrontation or can we get to what I've posted?

Back to the OP...
When I first saw the vid, since it had CPS & LEOs coming in, reminded me of the recent incident in NJ were CPS came into that family's home when they saw the pic of the son holding a rifle. In that case they came in without a warrant and wanted to see the Dad's firearms/safe. Next thing I thought about, since in the video interview they said that CPS places a substantial amount of weight on information from health care providers, to what extent in regards to parents/home/privacy rights? With Obamacare looming and the gun-grabbing atmosphere (and let's face it, a POTUS scorned re: gun control), I'm curious if health care is an avenue that will be exploited. Currently, doctors are asking patients if they own/posses firearms. It only takes a Doc with a certain political/personal decision to push an agenda in his practice. I am curious about incentives (if any?) for hospitals. Is it crazy to think large hospitals & their boards could take a certain position and have their staff really push policies that invade patient privacy rights? In the OPs case, they took their baby. Can we be certain that the medical communities won't be used to attempt to take people's firearms at some point?

 

[Texan2]

I didn't say I dont trust the parents. I don't know the parents.
You seem to be the only one wanting to be confrontational. Heck, the mere posting off this story is an exercise in confrontation.
I see some posts about wanting more info before making a judgement. I don't think we need to get back to what you posted...we never left the topic. Simply said more info was needed... about your topic.

I think what happened is that you didn't get the response you expected. Maybe "getting back on topic" will get some irrate mouth breathers to come bash CPS for doing what they thought was right, keeping in mind that they have many more facts available than we have.

 

[Shorts]

I didn't say I dont trust the parents. I don't know the parents.
You seem to be the only one wanting to be confrontational. Heck, the mere posting off this story is an exercise in confrontation.
I see some posts about wanting more info before making a judgement. I don't think we need to get back to what you posted...we never left the topic. Simply said more info was needed... about your topic.

I think what happened is that you didn't get the response you expected. Maybe "getting back on topic" will get some irrate mouth breathers to come bash CPS for doing what they thought was right, having many more facts available than we have.

Man, cool it already.

 

[Texan2]

Man, cool it already.

So if we aren't going to pile on CPS, then we can't participate?

 

[Shorts]

Back to the OP...
When I first saw the vid, since it had CPS & LEOs coming in, reminded me of the recent incident in NJ were CPS came into that family's home when they saw the pic of the son holding a rifle. In that case they came in without a warrant and wanted to see the Dad's firearms/safe. Next thing I thought about, since in the video interview they said that CPS places a substantial amount of weight on information from health care providers, to what extent in regards to parents/home/privacy rights? With Obamacare looming and the gun-grabbing atmosphere (and let's face it, a POTUS scorned re: gun control),I'm curious if health care is an avenue that will be exploited. Currently, doctors are asking patients if they own/posses firearms. It only takes a Doc with a certain political/personal decision to push an agenda in his practice. I am curious about incentives (if any?) for hospitals. Is it crazy to think large hospitals & their boards could take a certain position and have their staff really push policies that invade patient privacy rights? In the OPs case, they took their baby. Can we be certain that the medical communities won't be used to attempt to take people's firearms at some point?

 

[Glockster69]

 

[Texanjoker]

Did you guys watch the video? Some questions are answered there.

The LEOs shows up at the second hospital to check the baby and said everything was ok. The next day CPS & LEOs showed up and took the baby. According to the video it is implied there was no warrant.


The parents needed to handle the transfer to the 2nd hospital better. I think what happened here is the first hospital got on the horn and called in the parents. Whether or not they embellished, no idea. But for a baby that had been cleared to be taken away the next day it had to be under the impression it was an emergency serious situation.

Again there is no evidence in the video that the 2nd DR was told what happened at the 1st hospital. W/O that we don't know if the baby was cleared with proper info. I can tell you from working for a 4 year period in CPS that it is not uncommon for one DR to clear a child and not find traumatic injuries, ect. and another to find just that. Especially if the family doesn't tell the DR why they are there, or what has been done to or happened to the child. In this case being admitted to the ICU. If they are not told what to look for then they might miss it. I have testified over and over on this. Having been one assigned to review CPS cases for error, IMO I can there is not enough factual info to go buy to conclude the facts. By now CPS would have had to go to court for this emergency removal and prove their facts. That portion becomes public info. Where is the follow up story? I would hope that the case worker had contacted the 2nd DR to find out if he had been told the facts from the 1st hospital.

I actually may be opening a PI business to do these types of cases due to my background. Sure there are some that are not handled correct, but the facts will speak for themselves if sought out.