Racine V. Woods

“I just knew the phone would ring some day and Joshua would be dead,” stated social worker Ann Kemmeter regarding Joshua DeShaney and the ongoing abuse he endured from his father. Joshua’s father brutally and repeatedly abused his four-year-old son Joshua (Wichenbach). The State of Wisconsin was aware of this abuse, but still did nothing to intervene and stop the mistreatment of this child (Wichenbach). The State’s inaction led to the Supreme Court case DeShaney v. Winnebago Department of Social Services, in which Joshua’s mother, Melody, sued the Winnebago Department of Social Services claiming, “the social worker deprived Joshua of his liberty without due process of law” (Alexander). In order to fully understand the DeShaney case, one must conduct thorough background research, delve into the court case itself, and analyze the impact the case has yet today.

A state that undertakes custody of a child is declaring that it can do a better job providing protection. This system is a powerful agent of support, providing positive nurturing environments that enable a child to reach his or her potential. Nonetheless, when children suffer additional abuse in the system, this government intervention should be questioned.

In some ethical and legal respects a pregnant woman and her fetus can be considered separate. Both the woman and the fetus are ordinarily affected by the well-being of one another for as long as each of them live. The ethical and legal issues are challenged deeply in cases where the well-being of the fetus and the mother appear to be in conflict. Our society struggles with identifying cases where the pregnant woman’s interests and/or behaviors might put her fetus at risk. Criminal and/or civil commitments should be used to bar pregnant women from exposing their fetuses to risk.

Foster Care and Adoption are the most multi-faceted areas of child welfare. Foster care consists of placing children outside of the custody of their parents or legal guardians. This out-of-home placement can be temporary or long-term. Adoption on the other hand, consists of the legal and permanent process that establishes a parent/child relationship between individuals not related biologically (Downs, Moore, & McFadden, 2009). These two areas of child welfare are constantly evolving and the decisions made on a child’s behalf can affect many areas of their biological, spiritual, social, and emotional wellbeing.

A report was received on 06/05/2017 alleging that the mother (Hermionne) left Ashante (C-V 17) with a non-relative since 02/2017 without any legal rights. According to the report, the mother refuses to take her child back home and will not engage with Ms. Aarons (caretaker) to provide legal documentation for the child to be enroll in school and taken to a Primary Care Physician. Ashante has not been is school for the past 4 months and are unable to enroll in school without paperwork. According to the report, Ashante self mutilates her arms, and the mother refuses to get counseling. The report indicates Ashante was to follow-up with a Cardiologist for a chest pain and the mother refuses to take her to the doctor.

In contemporary America it can be argued that nothing is more contentious and controversial of an issue than abortion. From the vehement pro-life movement to the impassioned pro-choice coalition, this policy issue is one that has become increasingly important in our society. This debate has raised important questions regarding the value of human life, at what stage of development does a fetus have it’s constitutionally ensured rights take hold over that of the mother and at what stage can a state start regulating abortions.

Few Supreme Court decisions have stirred up as much controversy, vitriolic debate, and even violence as the one delivered in Roe v. Wade in 1973. Four decades later, it remains a touchstone for the culture wars in the United States and a pivot upon which much of American politics turns. In fact, the authors of “Roe v. Wade: The Abortion Rights Controversy in American History” state that even today, the case (and its companion cases) “remains the most divisive and controversial judicial decision of the twentieth century” (3). Although it is a landmark case in itself, its continuing influence on American law and politics proves that its legacy lives on far beyond its formal resolution in a court of law. Essentially, the most important points are that the cause of the case’s complexity and drama is the legal relationship between men and women that the ruling mirrored and compounded, the way the medical profession was impacted, and the political significance that the issue still holds presently.

When Dred Scott v. Sandford was decided in 1857, it made an enormous impact on the United States. It riled up both pro- and anti-slavery Americans. It angered many Americans in an extreme example of judicial activism. Some say it made the Civil War inevitable. By the time the dust had settled and the 13th and 14th Amendments reversed the Court’s decision, Dred Scott could be considered one of the worst Supreme Court decisions of all time. And yet, although the case was egregiously wrong, it still can be considered a “great case”.

The holding of this case is that the Pennsylvania provisions are upheld, and a new standard was made. Roe was reaffirmed and states have to determine the validity of each law put in place to restrict any abortion.

In 1973, the Supreme Court made a decision in one of the most controversial cases in history, the case of Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113 (1973)), in which abortion was legalized and state anti-abortion statues were struck down for being unconstitutional. This essay will provide a brief history and analysis of the issues of this case for both the woman’s rights and the states interest in the matter. Also, this essay will address the basis for the court ruling in Roe’s favor and the effects this decision has had on subsequent cases involving a woman’s right to choose abortion in the United States. The court’s decision created legal precedent for several subsequent abortion restriction cases and has led to the development of legislation to protect women’s health rights. Although the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade was a historic victory for women’s rights, it is still an extremely controversial subject today and continues to be challenged by various groups.

In the case, Wisconsin v. Yonder which was argued on December 8, 1971, and the decision was made on May 15, 1972. The defendants were an Amish Mennonite Church who was in violation of Wisconsin’s school compulsory law. Which after their children graduated the eighth grade they declined to send them to the public or private school. Because of the compulsory school law which is required until age 16 a child’s school attendance. The Amish Mennonite Church continued to provide their children with vocational education preparing them for continued Amish life in their community. The sincerely did not believe that the Amish life would work well with the public or private school attendance law because of their way of life. The Amish believe that this

Even if Annette B. did not currently have stability in her foster home or group home yet, it does not mean that keeping the option open for Joseph to retain custody of Annette B. would be in her best interest. DSS should continue to look for suitable adoptive parents for Annette B. to provide her with a quality, structured life. It should be DSS’s goal to show that “all children, no matter their origin or circumstances, are worth every ounce of effort it may take to help them overcome the ill effects of their early hard experiences,” which was clearly evident through her father’s physical and emotional abandonment since she was a young child (Jerkins,

To understand some of these issues, the focus will primarily be directed towards how the law views same-sex adoptions. An analysis will compare and contrast on the upbringing of children who have been adopted and the

There was a court case, Baby Girl v. Adoptive Couple, in which a child who was partially Cherokee Indian, because of her father, and Hispanic, because of her mother. The adoption of Baby Girl was a difficult one due to the fact that she has an ancestry of Cherokee Indian. Therefore, under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), the adoption of Baby Girl seemed impossible because Biological Father had the right to have custody of his child, Baby Girl, if he chose to. So, the court greatly sees that by giving Baby Girl back to Biological Father would be in the child’s best interest under the ICWA, because there is the assumption that if she is with her Biological Father and her culture, she will not suffer any type of emotional distress. For

A recent legal puzzle is bringing about changes to the Florida courts. (Quinn, 1). In her September 14, 2002 editorial entitled, "Old Law Fails In New Situation", Heidi Quinn discusses a recent dispute "In that case, the biological parents disputed the interpretation of the Illinois Parentage Act