Did CPS Overstep the Law at the FLDS Ranch?
May 6th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Does Texas’ Child Protective Services have the legal authority to remove 463 children from the FLDS ranch in West Texas? Some lawyers representing the mothers and the removed children say that CPS is stretching its legal authority in this case.
Thirty-eight of the FLDS mothers filed an appeal with the Third District Court of Appeals in Austin on April 30th. They want the appellate court to return their kids. The mothers, represented by Texas RioGrande Legal Aid, contend that CPS and District Judge Barbara Walther — in seizing the children — violated the families’ due process rights.
At a hearing on April 17, CPS offered evidence of abuse against about 20 kids — and then argued that all 463 children were in danger. After that hearing, Judge Walther ruled the state could take custody of the kids.
In their brief to the appellate court, the FLDS mothers argue that the legal process at the April 17 hearing was a mess. They say they received no notice about the hearing, that some of the mothers weren’t even named in court papers, and filings weren’t made available to their attorneys, and that the courtroom was so full, most mothers weren’t even present when the custody of their kids was debated. They also argue that CPS didn’t present specific evidence to prove abuse against most of the mothers.
There is evidence that teen-aged girls were sexually abused at the ranch by older men. A CPS spokesperson says that 31 teen-age girls (ages 14-17) removed from the compound are either pregnant or have a child. Six of those girls have two kids. And two girls 17 or under have three kids. (Under Texas law, forcing a 15 year old to have sex with an older man is sexual abuse.)
Should evidence of abuse against a few families implicate everyone?
The short answer is yes. The Texas Family Code gives CPS the right to remove children in potentially abusive homes, even if they haven’t been abused yet. For example, if a mother doesn’t remove her children from a dangerous home, all the kids will be taken by CPS — even those who weren’t abused.
You can read the relevant sections of the family code here.
The law — specifically section 262 — says that a child should be removed if he or she would be in danger with the parent or guardian or if “continuation of the child in the home would be contrary to the child’s welfare.”
The key word there is “home.” The FLDS families lived on the same ranch, but in separate houses. The lawyers we’ve talked to who’ve been on the property all describe a town-like setting of separate houses and duplexes that are 1,000 to 1,500 feet apart.
These kids didn’t necessarily live in the same homes where abuse was taking place. CPS can’t remove a child just because they live next door to an abusive home. Some lawyers involved in the case believe CPS has stretched its legal authority here.
Of course this isn’t your typical subdivision. The families are all connected through a single religious sect. So does living in a tight-knit community in which kids are abused put all children at risk? The courts will have to untangle that one.
May 7th, 2008 at 3:38 am
As a former CPS investigator I am not surprised. CPS is the only organization that can rip families apart based on assumptions. I left the agency because I got tired of watching children and parents being victimized by CPS. Most of the time the allegations involve angry, feuding neighbors or ex spouses trying to gain custody of the kids.
May 10th, 2008 at 10:21 am
Dave, TO Blog is only a month or so late in taking notice of the debalce at Eldorado. Thanks for doing it, even at such a late date.
The only abuse which was actually “proven” in court, or even alleged with some specificity, was sexual abuse of young women. There was no credible allegation, and no proof at all, of any sort of abuse of boys, or of any other kind of abuse of women. Seems to me that TO needn’t be so reticent about condemning the removal of over 400 children from a small community, when the “proven” allegations were about approximately 20 young women.
In addition, CPS claimed that it was necessary to remove the young men, because of the religious beliefs of their parents. Doesn’t this ham-handed intrusion of the State into religious beliefs bother the leaders of the Leading Liberal publication in Texas???
May 13th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Where is the proof of the ages of these pregnant teenage girls? Where is the proof that they were forced to have sex with an older man? The texas teen pregnancy rate is similar to the alleged pregnancy rate at this compound. Does CPS investigate all teen pregnancy cases, take DNA samples, and remove the teens from their hames until things are sorted out? When you give something like the CPS power like this over another person or group, they are invariably going to use it.
May 15th, 2008 at 11:12 am
There is PROOF that the underage girls ARE pregnant! Thank goodness the CPS did step in! The comments left here sound as if your male. Have you ever been a woman having children? Let alone a little girl having children. If something goes wrong, do you think they are getting the adequate medical attention? I don’t care if it’s not within the law to seek answers about their lifestyles, I think it’s within good people’s abilities to reach out to some children who should have a right not be used, abused and brainwashed by these “Nuclear Baby” believers. Proof? Did anyone need proof that David Koresh wasn’t Christ?
May 15th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
when you put these women next to all the overweight rednecks in texas, they are going to look a lot younger than they are because they look fit and thin from the pictures i’ve seen. I want to see proof that these allegations are true rather than just believe the government.
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:15 pm
[…] have detailed some of the legal problems with Child Protective Services’ seizure of the sect’s children. The AP brief about the […]