G. S. Vs Sevs Case Study

Children are forced to forfeit their homes, their safety, their public and self-image, and their primary source of comfort and affection (Bernstein 2005). A national survey found that almost 70% of children when present when their parent was arrested (Bernstein 2005). Researcher Christina Jose Kamfner interviewed children who had witnessed their mother’s arrest and found that many suffered from post-traumatic stress symptoms; they could not concentrate or sleep and had flashbacks of the arrest (Bernstein 2005). The majority of the children at the scene of an arrest are taken away in a police car which is more intimidating than to say if they were taken away in a child welfare worker’s car (Bernstein 2005). Many of these children (is no other family is available) are shuffled around in the course of an arrest; the hospital for physical examinations first, then the police station for appropriate , “paperwork,” then to a juvenile detention center and lastly, they are deposited at a foster home (Bernstein 2005). Anyone can vouch that the process of what to do after the arrest is clearly a traumatizing one at that. After the arrest, children wait anxiously for the level of the sentence that their parent has to face. In most cases, children are unaware of why their parent is being sentenced because they were unaware that their parent was involved in the crime. Carl, for example, only remembered

7-15 year old (in some cases, a maximum of 17years) young people are confined under this Law. The courts, as the judicial role of parents, had to decide whether the young people should bear the consequences for their crimes. If the judge found that the minor's conduct had constituted a crime, then he could order him or her into the juvenile correctional homes until the relevant authorities agreed the criminal juvenile could be released. The law assumed the responsibility of the parents that they should determine the care of young people in terms of education and the linkages with their families (Sayson, 2006, p.6).

The first source I have chosen is Anna Sortun, REBUTTING THE PARENTAL PRESUMPTION IN OREGON: SUBSTANTIATING EMOTIONAL BONDS AFTER TROXEL V. GRANVILLE, 82 Or. L. Rev. 1191 (2003).

In her complaint, the Parents allege that the Defendants are liable to her on a theory of Intentional Inflection of Emotional Distress (“IIED”). “IIED claims are ‘rarely viable in a case brought under Maryland law.’” Takacs v. Fiore, 473 F. Supp. 2d 647, 652 (D. Md. 2007) (quoting Robinson v. Cutchin, 140 F. Supp. 2d 488, 494 (D. Md. 2001)). In order for an IIED allegation to survive a motion to dismiss, a plaintiff must allege: “(1) The conduct must be intentional or reckless; (2) The conduct must be extreme and outrageous; (3) There must be a causal connection between the wrongful conduct and the emotional distress; [and] (4) The emotional distress must be severe.” Lasater v. Guttman, 194 Md. App. 431, 448 (2010).

In the case example “Falsely Accused, A mother fights back”, Brenda Frank was accused of not only neglecting her 2 daughters but sexual abuse as well. Mrs. Frank was on welfare and separated from her husband. Mrs. Frank’s belief that children wean themselves from breast feeding, called the La Leche Philosophy, is part of what started the whole mess. That and the fact that since she was a single mother she let her daughters sleep with her.

After reading about the population of females in correction facilities, I came across the issue of incarcerating mothers. “Approximately 7 in 10 women under correctional sanction have minor children” (women offenders pg.7). Before reading this chapter, I have never put any importance to the challenge of sending mothers to prison. For the most part, I believe that judges and juries should consider the “motherhood” as a mitigating circumstance during a sentence. However, the age of the child and the crime should also play a role in the type of sentence given to a woman.

Many law makers do not fully grasp the inherent problems with these laws. Instead, they place the responsibility on the defense lawyers to present the case well enough in hopes that a battered woman will be found not guilty of child abuse by omission (Askins). Beyond the legislature, the court system must also be held accountable for its part in the process. The prosecution in the Lindley case could not recall an instance in which a father was tried under these laws. In such cases, prosecutors essentially blame the victims for the abuse wrought upon them and their children. They continually beg the question, “why did she not leave” but fail to remember the abuser maintains power by threatening to take the woman’s life or that of her children. In the unlikely case a father is tried, he is rarely held responsible. A court found a father whose wife murdered their child to not have responsibility to protect their child and also found the sympathy of the

Paragraph 1: Must briefly explain the issue and state your position on it (do not present any reasons).

It is not enough for a plaintiff merely to allege that they exist; he must set forth facts that, if true, would suffice to demonstrate that they exist.” Floor, 78 Md. App. at 175. In this case, the Parents have failed to allege facts that satisfy any of the aforementioned elements. Indeed, the Parents’ complaint fails to state facts sufficient to show that: 1) Cardenas acted intentionally or recklessly; 2) the Cardenas engaged in extreme or outrageous conduct; 3) that the Parents suffered any severe emotional response; and 4) that there was a causal connection between Cardenas’s conduct any emotional harm suffered by the Parents. As such, the Parents have failed to plead facts sufficient to state a claim for IIED. Therefore, the Defendants respectfully pray that this Court grant its motion to dismiss the Parents’ claim for

The reporter stated on 11/19/15, the children had a forensic interview with Regan Smith, family nurse at Children’s Safe Center. The reporter stated after the interview, Ms. Smith made a recommendation that the children seek professional counseling for lack of supervision; Ms. Smith also recommended that Ms. Kiner is not capable of properly caring for the children. According to the reporter, the children are not supervised properly, they leave the home after Ms. Kiner takes Oxycodine prescribed for back pain, and they vandalize and tear up her furniture and home. The reporter stated it’s been reported by the school that the children come to school with bad hygiene and that they are not bathed properly. Ms. Little stated that the children also

He stated that Kathryn wears makeup and high heels while with her mother. Mr. Sayers stated that this worker could speak to his wife and ask her about Kathryn behavior when she comes over. The worker provided Mr. Sayers with her contact information to give to his wife. Mr. Sayers stated that he is very concern about Kathryn speech problems. He stated that he has told her mother about several places she could take Kathryn to for speech therapy. He reported that Kathryn doesn’t go to daycare even though the fee comes out of his child support. Mr. Sayers stated that Kathryn stays with her mother’s family member instead of going to daycare. Mr. Sayers stated that when Kathryn comes to visit his home she has a bedtime and she has to help clean up her room. He stated that she becomes upset and calls him mean. Then she wants to go back home to her mother’s or grandmother’s home. The worker inquired about the bullet given to Kathryn. Mr. Sayers stated it was just a keepsake he gave to her and that he though t it was harmless. The worker explained that it concerns Ms. Kayla Sayer because she wasn’t sure if it was safe. Mr. Sayers stated that he would not do anything to hurt his

The government, instead of ensuring proper implementation of the rehabilitation and correction of the children in conflict with the law is shredding its responsibility through this retrograde law, holding the children accountable for the failures of our juvenile correctional institutions. This would never succeed as a deterrent and would only serve to ostracize them. This amendment to the preexisting law, not only lacks a rational social objective but also constitutional validity. The selective and unequal treatment of children between the age group of 16-18 years clearly violates the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14 extending equal protection of law and equality before the law and Article 15 (3) of the Constitution allowing

of the juvenile made a difference. In this period if a child was 7 and under then they could not be

In the summer of August 31, 2017 Emily Yoffe wrote an article called Innocence is Irrelevant. This article is about a women named Sweat who got framed by her boyfriend, by putting drugs in her house and then calling the police and framing her. The story goes on to tell us how she has to commit guilty to a crime to take care of her family. Sweat is hoping to make her life happy is by knowing that her kids are happy and protected. Unfortunately having to plea bargain is making it very difficult to make sure her kids are protected. For example when Sweat said, “ she believed that this would result in the police pinning the crime on her sons” (Yoffe, 23). Taking the blame for her boyfriend all started when he didn’t abide by Sweat’s rules in the house and smoked marijuana in front of her kids in the house. She kicked him out and wanted him out of her life. The outcome was he framed her and called the police on her. When the police found the stash she made a very bold decision and told herself. “I’m not going to let my children go down for someone else’s mistake. A parent should take ownership of what happens in the house” (Yoffe,21). In doing so to protect her sons she told the police the marijuana was her’s. Sweat is relatable to Mama in A Raisin in the Sun because Sweat and Mama both want what’s best for their children.

Mr. Chronis reported that the reason for the evaluation is due to the mother’s hospitalization in the summer for breaking into someone home. Mr. Chronis stated that since then she has had supervised access. Mr. Chronis reported that the court recently gave the mother unsupervised visits with the children, he indicated that the children have been unwilling to have visits with their mother.