Family of Justina Pelletier devastated after Mass. judge's ruling


#1

foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/26/justina-pelletier-to-remain-in-custody-massachusetts-judge-rules/

Speaking a day after Massachusetts juvenile court Judge Joseph Johnston issued a four-page ruling blasting Pelletier’s parents for being verbally abusive and complicating efforts to bring the West Hartford, Conn., family together, Lou Pelletier told Fox News Channel the Bay State bureaucracy has been aligned against his family from the beginning.

There have been threads on this here before-----but I wanted to bring the latest news to this to folks.

They are going to rule against the parents for being “verbally abusive?” Are you kidding me? Since when is is it illegal to be “verbally abusive” now to hospital administrators for essentially (IMO) kidnapping your own daughter?
God have mercy on me, but I probably would have been “abusive,” and used “colorful” language, in this situation as well. And every sign points to the poor child deteriorating fast because of this. If she dies while in the state’s custody, I totally hope the Pelletiers sue the hospital adminsitrators and the government for everything they have. :mad:

As before, I hope the Pelletiers get their daughter back and this gross oveereach of power and miscarriage of justice is addressed and solved. Comment if you wish. :frowning:


#2

I’ve been following this for a while, and as much as it horrifies me, especially since I have a child with a generally unrecognized chronic illness, I have to say that something does not sit right with me about these parents. I understand their anger, grief, fear and frustration, and have been in situations where I have completely lost my temper because of similar struggles. BUT, looking at this from the perspective of an attorney, it seems to me from what I’ve read and how I have seen them react through the process, that the Pelletiers either can’t or won’t control themselves long enough to sit down and come to a resolution that will work for everyone. I do believe that there is a lot more in the record that we don’t know about. In one of the news reports I read, there were even doctors at Tufts that had filed DCS complaints against them.

Of course, I haven’t read the decision yet, so maybe I’m off base. I do hope that they can come to some suitable arrangement. We must pray for the family.


#3

Are you joking? The parents have allowed the legal “process”, a term which has become as meaningless and euphemistic as “peace process”, to proceed for over a YEAR now. How would you like it if YOUR kid was kidnapped by the hospital and legal system? They have poked and prodded and bullied the family way past any normal human’s breaking point, and then they tell them that they are in need of anger management!
Let me tell you, I’d have flipped out on everyone in the system after about a week. This is insanity. I don’t trust the legal system anymore. It doesn’t work for decent, moral people anymore. :mad: Rob


#4

Let’s keep praying for this child & her family.


#5

I tend to agree as well. :thumbsup::thumbsup:


#6

Sorry, but if I were a judge, there is no way that I would give this girl back to her parents until they took some serious anger management classes or agreed to some sort of court supervision.

The little girl’s safety would be my primary concern, and I would not feel comfortable sending a child off with parents who threatened a social worker, which resulted in her reassignment. Sorry, but responsible adults do not threaten others with violence. It also seems like the parents refuse to compromise at all. Rather, they believe that they no better than the doctors regarding the girl’s condition. That right there makes me think that this girl would not get proper medical care if she lived with them unsupervised.

It’s always a tough call on cases like this, but if I were a judge, I would rather be safe than sorry when it came to this girl’s health and safety.


#7

The parents seem frighteningly angry and crazy to me. I understand that this is hard for them, but from the perspective of a judge, the child’s safety trumps their parental rights, and I couldn’t be sure that the child would be safe with them.

I know that they’ve kind of been picked up by a few conservative and religious groups as some sort of cause, but when you look deeper into the issue, they really have a lot of problems.


#8

Protect the child, I agree with the judge. The news has been filled lately with terrible child abuse, when parents bite off their child’s nose, rape their eleven month old daughter, and chain a eight year old to the wall while starving her, how can any judge say parental rights come first?


#9

Your siding with the state in this case is not surprising. As I stated, I would have gone apoplectic if some smug social worker was taking away my child. If the parents were as bad as the state oligarchs are claiming, why did they only remove Justina, and not the others? This is a classic CYA case, but liberals reflexively believe in the good intentions of a social worker with a sheepskin over parents. :cool: Rob


#10

There is ZERO evidence that either of the Pelletier’s abused Justina. This is reckless talk, linking them with the demons that you describe. :eek: Rob


#11

are you suggesting that abuse is involved here? :confused::confused::confused:

There are times when Parents know better than doctors.


#12

I’m not kidding. Judges don’t like it when you act like a raving lunatic and completely defy their orders, which is what happened here. I see these people and they seem to be completely self-absorbed and unable to control themselves. If my lawyer told me to behave myself so that I had a fighting chance in hell to get my kid back, I would do it.


#13

The parents didn’t flip out, but are very frustrated and rightfully so.

I live in the state and have seen several interviews with the father.

He comes across as a controlled man and has a good grasp on the issues and is very concerned about the welfare of his daughter.

Keep in mind, the family is from Connecticut, not Massachusetts, who they are now fighting.

From what I heard the father say in the interview, they brought their daughter to Boston Children’s Hospital for a respiratory issue. She had been treated at Tufts Medical for other issues, but Children’s decided that the diagnosis and treatment were wrong and recommended a different treatment. When the parents consulted the doctor at Tufts, he disagreed and told the parents to bring the child back to Tufts Medical. When the parents refused Children’s treatment recommendations, they filed with DHS medical abuse charges against the parents and the agency then took custody of the child. The parents have been fighting the MA bureaucracy since.

Either we’re not getting the entire story, or this is a case where DHS has more power then they should and the US Constitution is meaningless.

Jim


#14

I’m from the state too - and have been following this story as well. What’s disturbing, is that this is not the first time Children’s Hospital has been implicated in a situation like this. I think quite a few other families were also in similar situations when dealing with Children’s.

This was an old video that tells the story - I saw this back in Nov.

kfiam640.com/pages/MoreStimulatingTalkRadio.html?feed=104668&article=11848636


#15

Indeed. :thumbsup::thumbsup:


#16

Thanks for the video.

Interesting.

And gives an even more troubling background to this story. :blush::shrug:


#17

Agreeing with what RACJ stated----you siding with the state does not surprise me either.

Thanks for posting, though-----though I totally think you are wrong.

But yes, thanks for the opinion. :thumbsup::shrug:


#18

Sure thing :slight_smile:

Also this story sheds some more light on the case too. I knew she had an older sister who is alive and well, and she weighs in on the situation in this article too.

theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/26/irresponsible-and-wrong-lawyer-hits-back-at-judges-leaked-ruling-that-includes-accusations-against-justina-pelletiers-parents/


#19

Johnston also included that he thinks Lou and Linda Pelletier should be “psychologically and clinically evaluated,” noting that it must be coordinated through Connecticut’s DCF.
From the article. ^^^^

If one looks it up, most parents who’ve been through this will NOT come back with a good psychological report. In large part due to the stress and trauma the family has endured when the taking of the child is unnecessary. The psychological effects tend to be even more pro-nounced in families whose child (ren) have been removed by those in power who’ve been assigned to ‘protect’. It is like a double whammy to the psyche.

More from the article;
*“DCF, the courts and everyone else involved is sending a message,” Mahoney said.

That message, he said, is if you question these entities, they’re going to say, “‘Guess what? We’re going to take your child and not give them back to you.’*

How many people would question? The most likely response from many is “well, they (DCF) wouldn’t do something like that without a reason”.
Yet, most cases of child removal are unsubstantiated. MOST
So, the State then decides to pull their ace, the "err on the side of caution

As for the permanent custody being awarded to the State?
How will the parents ever, EVER, be able to prove that they are innocent? Think about it, their proof of innocence is with the child, and they will have no access to her.

The parents were accused of medical abuse - but every procedure done for this poor girl was at the advice of a physician. If they had not gotten the care for her that those physicians advised, would the DCF had then called it ‘medical neglect’?

And why is the poor child getting worse? And having to sneak messages to her parents? Though that has likely ceased now since it was discovered.

Just some points to ponder.
It is a double edged sword. Were it not for abusive parents, DCF wouldn’t exist.

Praying for all involved.


#20

The video and link to the article were very helpful.
Thank you. :thumbsup:


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.