Recent comments in /f/boston

dazzlingupstairz OP t1_jdbkt8e wrote

Reply to comment by priyatequila in Interesting Globe article about how DCF avoids going through the courts when they take custody of children by dazzlingupstairz

>How do you fix it?

You make it illegal to take children out of homes with no due process. You establish criteria DCF must meet, and DCF must meet it. Unless DCF has firsthand knowledge that child will imminently be harmed, then none of the emergency bullshit. They clearly have gotten used to playing by their own rules.

You have a Judge available 24/7 365 to review warrants. And as often as possible, they are reviewed in person, and recorded for future reference.

31

priyatequila t1_jdbjviu wrote

Reply to Interesting Globe article about how DCF avoids going through the courts when they take custody of children by dazzlingupstairz

oh my God. I remember coming across this story around August or so on Twitter. the mon or a close relative had taken to sharing the story of their children being taken from them by DCFS and took to Twitter after they got nowhere through normal channels. hearing how the kids were taken so quickly, without legitimate reason, WERE NOT CARED FOR in state custody, and how the welfare of the kids and the truth of the story were both pushed aside due to the mess that is our public health system was saddening and maddening.

quote from the article in Reason: "It seems everything was deliberately timed to avoid having to get a court order and avoid proving to a judge that the children were in imminent danger," Perkins later wrote"

the end of that quote links to one of the original Twitter threads. I remember following it for a month or so and not knowing what happened (I think I eventually had to stop checking for updates due to my own sanity).

also, iirc, the mom (or maybe a close friend/relative?) worked in a field that made them semi more familiar with the court system, or they knew someone that had 1st hand knowledge and could help them through. and even then it was a literal nightmare, and their kids could've been in custody for 1 year and there was nothing they could do about it. it's significantly more difficult for the majority of people who get unfairly pulled into the system, as they don't have assistance with first hand knowledge.

how do you fix it? there's so many children who are mistreated by their families who don't get on the radar. and the problems with dcfs, being in "the system", being in foster care.... I can't even get started with that.

23

dazzlingupstairz OP t1_jdbj13t wrote

Reply to Interesting Globe article about how DCF avoids going through the courts when they take custody of children by dazzlingupstairz

Video of the a cop and some social workers showing up at 1:00 AM on a Saturday

Good thing Friday just ended and courts aren't open until Monday. After returning the child from the hospital? For more than a day? It's hard to not think that they're just abusing the emergency powers that they have.

They gave the family ZERO paperwork when they first took the children out. They literally had no documentation that their children were taken by DCF. Not a scrap. No names. No signatures. No documented reasons as to why they're doing it. Nothing.

Tufts by the way. Harvard too.

MGB too.

Newton Wellesley.

25

dazzlingupstairz OP t1_jdbh2za wrote

Reply to Interesting Globe article about how DCF avoids going through the courts when they take custody of children by dazzlingupstairz

The aunt of the father tweeted this (cited in the articles, not just a random person on twitter).

  • Wednesday updates: My nephew and his wife were able to read why CPS felt that the boys were in "imminent danger" (CPS says that has to be believed to do the child extraction). And remember, this is after the pediatrician vouched for them, and the hospital released the baby.

  • There were 3 reasons listed:

    1. "Living in a neighborhood with not enough children." This is straight up punishing parents for not being rich. My nephew and his wife chose a "poor" neighborhood because they are trying to save up for a house, and it was convenient to their work.
    1. "The mother rolled her eyes when asked a question." Want to know what the question was? Here you go: "How often does your husband neglect his children?" I mean... I would have 100% rolled my eyes. What a manipulative thing to ask.
    1. The last "evidence" was that "the mother cried when they wanted to give the baby another blood test." CPS said, "Her crying indicated that she was guilty." Keep in mind, they had already done 12 tests on the baby! And he was distressed by it!

If even a fraction of that is true, then what the fuck?

Also, this.

  • Something you might be interested to know: As soon as the judge ruled against DCF, DCF promptly asked for a gag order against any discussion of the case with the media. But their request for a gag order was denied (except for the actual court records).

What the fuck?

Can anyone explain this to me? What's going on with Harvard/Tufts and DCF?

61

BeerLeague_Biznasty t1_jdb8caz wrote

Reply to Who's winning the sportsbook war in MA thus far? by oyeme

Personally, if you were day 1 on FanDuel, you could've just played the "score a point" bets with a $50 deposit and have $500 now (withdrawal capable). MGM and DraftKings seems to have better "free bets" so far. Best bet if you're serious is to have some in each and look at best odds.

3

cocktailvirgin t1_jdazekm wrote

Reply to Who's winning the sportsbook war in MA thus far? by oyeme

DraftKings certainly has the best ad with the Dropkick Murphys-like soundtrack, the old guy from Southie shilling, and the 20-something hours before gtting wasted at Lincoln Tavern yelling "Woo-hoo!" in response.

As for betting purposes, I neither follow sports that closely nor want to burn through my money, so no clue.

2