New DHS Probe

[instantkarma]

I think the worker gave the address but it was redacted after they said the Duggar House. Maybe they just gave their last name as another identifier because everyone knows where that is located or they have the capacity to look up names in the 911 system.

[dianapavelovna]

You know, I would never allow a cop in my house without a warrant (unless I was calling about a crime in progress or something), but I would let CPS in for sure. Maybe it is the area that I live in (plus the fact that I have had to make reports in my line of work), but your child has to be in specific, imminent danger before they remove him or her. Like, they have extensive bruising, there is a police report documenting domestic violence in the home in front of the child (and the perpetrator is still residing there), etc. Home schooling, medical neglect, even unsubstantiated (but true) sexual abuse - nope, not going to remove them without a hearing. So your best bet is to cooperate, and NOT to force them to bring a police officer with them (because by that point, you are faced with a warrant and the police can search your home as well).

CPS does NOT need a parent present to interview with the child. IN FACT, they will separate parent and child. You cannot sit in with your kid when CPS talks to them. They do not need the parent or guardian's permission to talk to a child - they can do it at school, at the doctor's, at their therapist's office (this has actually happened at my workplace). Yes, the parents will be notified afterwards, but they are not necessarily told in advance. It is a COURTESY if they visit at the home, without trying to meet with the child first. Additionally, think about what all social workers have seen - for the most part, do you think they won't recognize the difference between an angry tween with a bad attitude (aka mom TAKES ALL MY STUFF and grounded me for a month), and legitimate physical abuse, with cigarette burns etc? In this neck of the woods (about an hour outside of LA), they tend to err on the side of parental rights.

Maybe it's different elsewhere, but I am actually pretty surprised at all the FJers who would speak with an attorney first or deny access to the child. Again, if you make them bring a cop with them, they will have a full warrant, and it will be a police report. If you argue further, you can be arrested for resisting. Also, you will look crazy. A CPS report =/= to a police report, and oftentimes abuse is not an arrestable offense. You have to understand- CPS is not there to investigate your laundry pile, how full your trash cans are, and whether you have an earthquake preparedness kit. They are not going to rifle through your drawers (unless they have a very specific reason, in which case they will get a warrant). They are going to look at the child's room to make sure there is a bed/sleeping area that is reasonably clean, and the common areas, also to make sure they are reasonably well kept. They MAY look in your fridge to see if there is some form of food, if they are there for neglect. Have you seen hoarders? NONE of those kids were removed immediately except a select few who had vermin in their sleeping areas and their guardians were given time to fix the issues.

Why would you talk to a lawyer before allowing a CPS interview? Your child is not being charged with a crime, and CPS will win. All that will do is obfuscate whether or not your child is in imminent danger.

I'm with you, NoneandDone! Maybe it's because I am a CPS worker, but if an investigator showed up on my door, I'd let 'em in and show 'em where the kids sleep, the food in the fridge, tell 'em to take the kids in another room and chat, whatever. If I were really concerned after that visit about anything the worker said or did or the allegations that were disclosed, then I might make a few calls.

I agree that the wording the worker used in the 911 call seemed awkward when read, but listening to it, it didn't sound that way. It also sounded like they cut off the part where he gave the address. I seriously doubt he just said, "Duggar family home" for the address with no clarification. I think he stated "Duggar family home" to make it clear the site is a residence, and then proceeded to give the address, which Today (appropriately) cut off. It sounded to me like it was not his first time making a call like that.

I can't help but wonder about the nature of the report and what went down after the police were called (did they give access to the kid? what reason did they give for refusing access to DHS? etc.). I hope all the kids are safe. I imagine there's enough upheaval in their lives at the moment with all the drama and fallout from the molestation revelations and publicity.

[silverspoons]

Should the Duggar's be silent right now if this was a simple visit? The Duggar's silence worries me. They have to know this is being reported all over the place. If the DHS did get to see or talk to the child after the police call and their was no case or the case was closed, then why would the Duggar's not make a statement. It could be a simple statement telling the public that all 17 kids at home are fine and this DHS visit (that should never have been made public) was a misunderstanding or nothing was found. They could also go the route of saying DHS was picking on them, but again state nothing was found and there is no case.

The Duggar's not saying anything, and letting rumors swirl is making me think this is not a simple matter and might be ongoing. If the public think there is something happening in 2015 in the home how could they think they have a shot at getting the show back on. One thing is for them to cry about the 12 years ago with Josh but if there is something unanswered floating in 2015, only the loyalist fundie fans will stick with them.

I don't think they need to give a statement but if they are fighting so hard to keep their show and brand and to be a tv family, then they need to speak up or just get off tv.

[FullmoonOverDuggardWaters]

:geek: Ive pasted an excerpt from -www.parentsinaction.net/english/Legal/KnowYourFamilyRights.htm, an informational PDF pamphlet (broken link). Another website titles the pamphlet, "Fight CPS Handbook".

Obviously, it is geared toward the "Dont tread on me" movement, or those who are very sensitive about the role of government in their home/life (which might include the Duggars).

It notes in the preface,"IT’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR CPS TO CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION AND INTERVIEW A CHILD ON PRIVATE PROPERTY WITHOUT EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES OR PROBABLE CAUSE."

- - -

"CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES AND THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM"

"A guide to protect the constitutional rights of both parents and children, as ruled by the Federal Circuit Courts and Supreme Court ."

- - -

SECTION 1

NEVER EVER TRUST ANYONE FROM CPS

You have to under stand that CPS will not give you or your spouse a Miranda warning nor do they have to. If CPS shows up at your door and tells you they need to speak with you and your children, you have the legal right to deny them entry. But before they leave, you should bring your children to the door but never open it, instead show them the children are not in imminent danger and that they are fine. If you do not at least show them your children, they could come back with an unlawful and unconstitutional warrant even though your children are not in imminent danger.

- - -

(I'm sorry if the link/info has been posted/explored already. I thought I went over/covered the whole thread.)

[Ella]

This visit is reality in the making - exactly what should be shown on Reality TV. As in, what really happens.

And if people think it's inappropriate to share, that means that reality TV is inappropriate. At least when kids are involved.

Go back to fake TV, where problems are solved within half an hour, and kids don't suffer in the long term.

[eh02]

Should the Duggar's be silent right now if this was a simple visit? The Duggar's silence worries me.

The Duggar's not saying anything, and letting rumors swirl is making me think this is not a simple matter and might be ongoing. If the public think there is something happening in 2015 in the home how could they think they have a shot at getting the show back on. One thing is for them to cry about the 12 years ago with Josh but if there is something unanswered floating in 2015, only the loyalist fundie fans will stick with them.

I think staying silent is their best bet with their "career" in mind. We've seen their desperate attempts to "clear up the truth" fail miserably and make things MUCH WORSE. The Duggars are not eloquent speakers; they try to dodge issues like sleazy politicians, but they fail miserably. Jim Bob was flailing his hands around and looked like a panicked actor running through his lines over and over again in the Megyn Kelly interview.

I think there is a good chance someone called CPS because of worries about blanket training or some kind of physical abuse. And of course, the chances that CPS would find any evidence that the Duggars had abused their children, much less be able to take the kids away, are practically 0 (I would hope).

BUT..the Duggars are in such a fragile state right now that a huge media buzz about their physically and emotionally abusive "child training" methods would be fatal. They've already dug their own graves. This would practically be building their own caskets. They failed once trying to talk about how molestation was no big deal. Think they could handle going back on Megyn Kelly to talk about how hitting a baby isn't a big deal, either?

[gilora]

They are done. While they were telling Megyn Kelly how cooperative they were regarding Josh, they denied DHS entry into their home. It doesn't matter that they had the legal right to do so; their actions highlight their lies and hypocrisy. Refusing access also reflects poorly on Jana and Jill, who praised their parents' handling of the Josh situation and supposedly told them to fully cooperate with authorities. I think even TLC would have to realize that putting the Duggars back on the air would hurt the network far more than any gain in leghumper viewership.

[JenniferJuniper]

I think there is a good chance someone called CPS because of worries about blanket training or some kind of physical abuse. And of course, the chances that CPS would find any evidence that the Duggars had abused their children, much less be able to take the kids away, are practically 0 (I would hope).

I don't think they are currently blanket training anyone. Precious Blessing is as wild as they come, and I don't they could get her on a blanket to save their sorry souls.

The call was about one specific child. (For all the pseudo-mods out there, I AM NOT SPECULATING WHICH CHILD.) However, it wouldn't surprise me if one of the kids old enough to know what's going on made the call himself after seeing a sibling get the rod or getting it himself. The TTH must be a terribly stressful place to live right now, Jim Bob and Michellle are probably huddled together in their own little world most of the time, and with Jessa and Jill no longer J-Slaving, I doubt anyone is paying much attention to what the kids are up to. A too-severe punishment and a kid with access to one of the older howler's flip phone, and I can see a call being made.

The Duggars' silence is troubling. Their handlers know this is all over the internet. If it was simply a prank call, I don't see why they wouldn't make a statement to that affect.

Anyone hoping to see any version of the Duggars on TLC again needs to give up the dream now.

[apple1]

...For all the pseudo-mods out there....

Off topic.

JenniferJuniper, I nearly always like to read your posts - you have been a long-term, thoughtful FJ poster.

That said - What's with the above comment? FTR - The actual helpmeets have recently made a very big deal of asking responsible posters to help monitor what's going on with FJ right now, including reporting inappropriate posts (no, I wouldn't report this one; you know what I am talking about) and calling out inappropriate posters in the thread where they are posting. I can't disagree with this; there are over ten thousand FJ members right now, and that number has included too many irresponsible posters. I agree that the helpmeets' request in this direction is necessary to prevent FJ from degenerating into something that becomes unusable. (Also FTR - I have seen that exact same thing happen with another board that I used to be a member of, and it wasn't pretty, and the board is now defunct).

Anyway..........

[JenniferJuniper]

Off topic.

JenniferJuniper, I nearly always like to read your posts - you have been a long-term, thoughtful FJ poster.

That said - What's with the above comment? FTR - The actual helpmeets have recently made a very big deal of asking responsible posters to help monitor what's going on with FJ right now, including reporting inappropriate posts (no, I wouldn't report this one; you know what I am talking about) and calling out inappropriate posters in the thread where they are posting. I can't disagree with this; there are over ten thousand FJ members right now, and that number has included too many irresponsible posters. I agree that the helpmeets' request in this direction is necessary to prevent FJ from degenerating into something that becomes unusable. (Also FTR - I have seen that exact same thing happen with another board that I used to be a member of, and it wasn't pretty, and the board is now defunct).

Anyway..........

What's up? Yesterday I had my hand-slapped by a non-mod for saying I wouldn't be surprised if a J-kid made the call that generated the visit. How dare I speculate! I have noticed others getting the same treatment from other posters when they weren't naming names either.

I have always respected the actual mods and their rules, but I find some of the church ladies out here playing rent-a-mod a tad annoying. Hence my disclaimer.

[apple1]

What's up? Yesterday I had my hand-slapped by a non-mod for saying I wouldn't be surprised if a J-kid made the call that generated the visit. How dare I speculate! I have noticed others getting the same treatment from other posters when they weren't naming names either.

I have always respected the actual mods and their rules, but I find some of the church ladies out here playing rent-a-mod a tad annoying. Hence my disclaimer.

I guess there is the alternative (not you, but there was an extreme example on another thread) of actual discussion being taken over by recurrent, repetitive, this-is-my-personal-soapbox-all-LE-personnel-are-out-to-get-me repetition to the point of excluding everything else.

Then perhaps the official helpmeets need to weigh in on how they want this to play out. I will post this and then report it so that the helpmeets see the discussion. (FTR - I don't believe I was one of the "church ladies" you are referring to...)

[Walking Cat Bed]

What's up? Yesterday I had my hand-slapped by a non-mod for saying I wouldn't be surprised if a J-kid made the call that generated the visit. How dare I speculate! I have noticed others getting the same treatment from other posters when they weren't naming names either.

I have always respected the actual mods and their rules, but I find some of the church ladies out here playing rent-a-mod a tad annoying. Hence my disclaimer.

The helpmeets HAVE asked for backup, mostly because of the enormous number of new posters who seem to think that FJ is a tabloid's comments section. Keeping the line between speculation and general statements clear makes the helpmeets' job easier.

[JenniferJuniper]

I guess there is the alternative (not you, but there was an extreme example on another thread) of actual discussion being taken over by recurrent, repetitive, this-is-my-personal-soapbox-all-LE-personnel-are-out-to-get-me repetition to the point of excluding everything else.

Then perhaps the official helpmeets need to weigh in on how they want this to play out. I will post this and then report it so that the helpmeets see the discussion. (FTR - I don't believe I was one of the "church ladies" you are referring to...)

No you weren't. I fully understand the need to leave minor kids out of this crap, but my fear is that over-zealousness by non-mods could turn this into a police state reminiscent of TWP or, heaven forbid, that awful Pickles Facebook page.

I always thought banning obvious troublemakers made more sense than hyper-moderation. But I know that's not the way of FJ.

[apple1]

I always thought banning obvious troublemakers made more sense than hyper-moderation. But I know that's not the way of FJ.

Disclaimer: My personal opinion only. Not a helpmeet nor board owner.

I do agree with you here. Another longtime poster mentioned on another thread the idea - given the current FJ situation - a three strikes you're out approach (IIRC that poster was suggesting three strikes and into the prayer closet, not three strikes you're banned). IMHO that's also a good thought.

Unfortunately, I suspect FJ has crossed an invisible line into a necessity for some change. Of couse, what that change will be is up to the board owner and the helpmeets.

[justbecause]

Ultimately, I do not think anything could have saved the show because the entire premise of the show was based on a falsehood. Refusing to talk beyond asking for privacy and prayers likely would have come across as phony, and the route they took was obviously a total failure.

It just goes to show (no pun intended) that these people and their fake 'always put on a smile and pretend to be happy' may have been good enough for a tv show when they had the whole world fooled, but once people see past the curtain, they see just how backwards the thinking is on a whole and just how righteous these people think/thought they are.

It's ridiculous the amount of pride. I am in awe of it still.

[SassyPants]

They are done. While they were telling Megyn Kelly how cooperative they were regarding Josh, they denied DHS entry into their home. It doesn't matter that they had the legal right to do so; their actions highlight their lies and hypocrisy. Refusing access also reflects poorly on Jana and Jill, who praised their parents' handling of the Josh situation and supposedly told them to fully cooperate with authorities. I think even TLC would have to realize that putting the Duggars back on the air would hurt the network far more than any gain in leghumper viewership.

Cooperative, only in terms of the girls. Didn't JB refuse to present Josh in 2006-07?

[JenniferJuniper]

Cooperative, only in terms of the girls. Didn't JB refuse to present Josh in 2006-07?

Josh supposedly refused to present himself. He was an adult at the time. I'm sure Jim Bob counseled him not to cooperate, but he's claiming now it was Josh's call.

[blessalessi]

I guess there is the alternative (not you, but there was an extreme example on another thread) of actual discussion being taken over by recurrent, repetitive, this-is-my-personal-soapbox-all-LE-personnel-are-out-to-get-me repetition to the point of excluding everything else.

Then perhaps the official helpmeets need to weigh in on how they want this to play out. I will post this and then report it so that the helpmeets see the discussion. (FTR - I don't believe I was one of the "church ladies" you are referring to...)

I would also appreciate it if the mods would clarify this.

I posted a "What the fuck?!" post somewhere about a now-archived thread that was suggesting "hilarious" molestation-related names for a new baby, and I think it was Happyatheist who responded saying the admin would appreciate it if the general membership would help with calling out inappropriate posts where they occur.

I'm happy to do that where I see fit, and I'm happy to be told to back off if I overstep the mark.

If I get called a "Church Lady" or a "pseudo-mod" for my troubles then... well, my "What the Fuck?!" shall stand regardless. :D

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

I would also appreciate it if the mods would clarify this.

I posted a "What the fuck?!" post somewhere about a now-archived thread that was suggesting "hilarious" molestation-related names for a new baby, and I think it was Happyatheist who responded saying the admin would appreciate it if the general membership would help with calling out inappropriate posts where they occur.

I'm happy to do that where I see fit, and I'm happy to be told to back off if I overstep the mark.

If I get called a "Church Lady" or a "pseudo-mod" for my troubles then... well, my "What the Fuck?!" shall stand regardless. :D

I think there's a big difference between getting upset with someone for something that is CLEARLY offensive and inappropriate, and getting upset with someone over something the reader doesn't want to read while pretending it's because the mods don't like it either. I've been seeing a lot of unnecessary policing lately and it's obnoxious.

[LilahBelle]

Josh supposedly refused to present himself. He was an adult at the time. I'm sure Jim Bob counseled him not to cooperate, but he's claiming now it was Josh's call.

Technically, you are right, but I think JB calls all the shots in that house. Period.

[Palimpsest]

Disclaimer: My personal opinion only. Not a helpmeet nor board owner.

I do agree with you here. Another longtime poster mentioned on another thread the idea - given the current FJ situation - a three strikes you're out approach (IIRC that poster was suggesting three strikes and into the prayer closet, not three strikes you're banned). IMHO that's also a good thought.

Unfortunately, I suspect FJ has crossed an invisible line into a necessity for some change. Of course, what that change will be is up to the board owner and the helpmeets.

That was me. I'm a big meanie but I haven't darkened the doors of a church for ages, so I don't think I'm a Church Lady. :) I'm not an Admin or Helpmeet either.

Yes, my suggestion was 3 "valid" reports (as in the mods agree with the person reporting the post that the FJ member was way out of line) and off to the prayer closet. If you are in the prayer closet your posts are moderated before they appear, which is a LOT of extra work for the Helpmeets. I'm really not surprised they have not taken up my suggestion so far. FJ prefers to be a free speech zone, within the bounds of common decency, and our mods are all volunteers.

Look, I hate reporting posts and giving more work to the mods. I haven't reported any on this thread yet because other people were already reining in inappropriate (IMO) speculation about the minor children.

Seriously, it is much better to moderate ourselves and keep things moving smoothly without adding to the rules. PLEASE be careful about speculation, especially when it applies to minor children. If you don't agree with the guidelines about careless speculation here, then there are other places to post if you absolutely must speculate or burst.

Back to topic now.

Edit to remove redundant words.

[happy atheist]

!

{TEXT1}:

We've chatted about this situation in Helpmeetland, and here's where we've landed: We don't want people to speculate about Josh's 5th victim, but this situation seems to be unrelated to that. As far as we can tell this is not molestation or sexuality related (please let me know if we've missed an important fact). As long as speculation stays in the realm of which child they want to check on, we're going to allow it. Please avoid inventing salacious scenarios, etc. Yes, I did ask for help policing the boards. Longtime users who are unhappy with FJ being treated like the comment section at People magazine have an incentive to voice their displeasure with the direction these threads are taking. That's how it works around here. As long as it doesn't take the form of jumping on newbies just because they're new (and I don't think it has so far), it's a good thing. It's how FJ will preserve our board culture. New users are encouraged to read and get a feel for how discussions work here. We tend to not just post any little thought that bubbles to the surface, and run away. We like conversations, and expect people to back up their statements and opinions. Disagreements and arguments happen, and when they do we try to keep them civil. I have seen plenty of new users who fit in well right off the bat, and plenty more who needed a day or two to find their feet, but were happy to learn. The problem isn't new users. It's users who ignore the board culture, or expect the board culture to change to suit them.

[VelociRapture]

What's up? Yesterday I had my hand-slapped by a non-mod for saying I wouldn't be surprised if a J-kid made the call that generated the visit. How dare I speculate! I have noticed others getting the same treatment from other posters when they weren't naming names either.

I have always respected the actual mods and their rules, but I find some of the church ladies out here playing rent-a-mod a tad annoying. Hence my disclaimer.

Is it bad I seriously just went back to try and figure out if I was the one who hand-slapped you?

I don't really see anything wrong with speculating about who called. Specifically naming a minor who may have been involved - yeah, I agree that is a bit too far in my opinion. I'll abide by HappyAtheist's announcement though - I don't have to like the speculation going on, but if its allowed thats all that matters; people have a right to discuss things.

We've chatted about this situation in Helpmeetland, and here's where we've landed:

We don't want people to speculate about Josh's 5th victim, but this situation seems to be unrelated to that. As far as we can tell this is not molestation or sexuality related (please let me know if we've missed an important fact). As long as speculation stays in the realm of which child they want to check on, we're going to allow it. Please avoid inventing salacious scenarios, etc.

Yes, I did ask for help policing the boards. Longtime users who are unhappy with FJ being treated like the comment section at People magazine have an incentive to voice their displeasure with the direction these threads are taking. That's how it works around here. As long as it doesn't take the form of jumping on newbies just because they're new (and I don't think it has so far), it's a good thing. It's how FJ will preserve our board culture.

New users are encouraged to read and get a feel for how discussions work here. We tend to not just post any little thought that bubbles to the surface, and run away. We like conversations, and expect people to back up their statements and opinions. Disagreements and arguments happen, and when they do we try to keep them civil.

I have seen plenty of new users who fit in well right off the bat, and plenty more who needed a day or two to find their feet, but were happy to learn. The problem isn't new users. It's users who ignore the board culture, or expect the board culture to change to suit them.

Thanks for clarifying for us!

To the users I have called out: if you avoided doing what HappyAtheist just said then please accept my apology for calling you out.

[antwan]

Anyone could have called and reported anything, BUT why did they resist the DHS official? Are the Duggars going full anti-government now? Good luck!

I think you hit the nail directly on the head. I don't put much weight into the call, itself. So many hate the Duggars and it only takes ONE call for DHS or CPS to be required to investigate.

One call.

I really believe there was nothing DHS-required that was going on with any of the children (listen, Jim Bob may be the new tool in town, you know...JBIAT is the new DPIAT) BUT...even he is smart enough to know that NOW would be the WORST time for anything (even a truly innocent mishap) to happen to one of his children that could leave the Duggars vulnerable to suspicion or accusation.

So paranoia is now on board, surely as well as contempt for those who feel likewise toward the Duggars. JB knew his rights as a home educator, and he definitely knew the extent to which he could refuse a DHS worker at his door step. I actually don't blame them for disallowing the investigation if JB *knew* it was nothing more than an overzealous person who was determined to see the Duggars fall.

They've always been anti-government to some extent (except for the part where they will FILL a government role, a la senator, because it's to their own benefit; wouldn't blame them for that, except that I personally believe political involvement should be based on the desire to benefit ALL citizens, not just those who think like YOU.)

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

I think you hit the nail directly on the head. I don't put much weight into the call, itself. So many hate the Duggars and it only takes ONE call for DHS or CPS to be required to investigate.

One call.

I really believe there was nothing DHS-required that was going on with any of the children (listen, Jim Bob may be the new tool in town, you know...JBIAT is the new DPIAT) BUT...even he is smart enough to know that NOW would be the WORST time for anything (even a truly innocent mishap) to happen to one of his children that could leave the Duggars vulnerable to suspicion or accusation.

So paranoia is now on board, surely as well as contempt for those who feel likewise toward the Duggars. JB knew his rights as a home educator, and he definitely knew the extent to which he could refuse a DHS worker at his door step. I actually don't blame them for disallowing the investigation if JB *knew* it was nothing more than an overzealous person who was determined to see the Duggars fall.

They've always been anti-government to some extent (except for the part where they will FILL a government role, a la senator, because it's to their own benefit; wouldn't blame them for that, except that I personally believe political involvement should be based on the desire to benefit ALL citizens, not just those who think like YOU.)

The thing is that people have likely been calling DHS on the Duggars as long as they've had a show. I really doubt DHS is going to move on anything unless there's a very believable evidence or claims. Some random "do gooder" or "person who wants to see them burn" isn't going to have the information to make this a believable case; they're just going to say things that sound like rumors.