USCCB Condemns Separating Immigrant Children from Families


I am dumbfounded that there is an American of any political persuasion who hears that our government might be separating children from nursing mothers on the premise that a woman with a child at her breast might be a clever front for a sex-trafficking operation.

Unless someone thinks that these stories are fabricated, I think it is fairly clear that we have to have a better way to deal with people who stand accused of immigration violations. Even those who for some unknown reason believes someone accused of a violation should be treated no differently at all than someone has had due process and been found guilty in a court of law of a serious crime (?!? but it happens), please admit that even a convicted felon has the time and opportunity to work out who will have guardianship of her children while she is incarcerated. Even a convicted felon does not have her children shipped off to she knows not where with no opportunity to have any choice about who has them or the conditions under which they are kept.

In other words: the bishops are absolutely right, and it is beyond the pale to suggest they have no standing to speak out because the matter is “political.” It is not as if a sin is not a sin just because it is a government ordering it done.


I have answered this very question multiple times. Namely, it is seldom an issue, and when it is, the foster system places the child with a family temporarily. But it does not happen, because in most cases where two parents were involved in a misdemeanor, an officer has the discretion of getting a warrant and allowing the parent to bond out first. Thus, even if there is jail time, simultaneously, there is time to find a family member, friend, or in the extreme the foster system to care for the child.

The child is never incarcerated.


The Administration says that this situation cannot be fixed without Congress.

OK, what’s the law that the Administration wants to have passed?


President Trump is calling for comprehensive immigration reform. Specifically, the problem on the border is people being nabbed for trying to sneak across and then claiming “asylum”.

That really delays the entire adjudication process for months even, and people don’t want to house children with their parents in a correctional facility. Unless people are cool with that- children in jail with parents, separation is inevitable.

If they deported the asylum claimers and their families immediately, and let them pursue their claim at the US consulates abroad, it would really alleviate the problem.

Ordinary immigrants crossing the border illegally can be handled in a few days at most.


The only reason they are “unable” to care for their children is that the US chose to incarcerate them, instead of deporting them or releasing them pending a formal hearing. These parents have everything they need to care for their children except one: a safe place to raise their children - something that we take for granted. It is not their fault that they don’t have such a place.


OK, I think it the mark of a reasonable person that we need comprehensive immigration reform.
What, specifically, does this Administration hope that Congress will do with regards to the handling of families who enter (or stay) in this country in violation of immigration law?
Most directly to the point, how does this Administration propose to prevent the diligent enforcement of immigration law so as to avoid separation of minor children in otherwise healthy and intact families from their parents?
I am specifically referring to protection of parental rights and daily contact between members of the nuclear family unit, excepting as the parents decide is necessary for the welfare of the children (such as any citizen parents might have their children live with relatives or guardians of the parents’ choosing).


The government can’t just send Central Americans back into Mexico. Nor does the Flores decision allow the government to hold minors with their parents or accompanying adult. If the parents are released, 84% of them never appear for a hearing.

And we have no idea whether the parents have a “safe place” or not. Clearly they were able to gather significant sums of money together to pay the coyotes. It was safe enough to do that where they came from.

But right now it appears to be moot. We’re back to open borders which Obama had at the end of his term.


Why not? That’s where they were just before entering the US.

The 84% problem is for us to solve. But there does not appear to be any will to do so.

It is a fact that many of them do not have a safe alternative.

That is no proof that they came from a safe place.


it’s against the law at present.

No, actually there is. Trump tried it, faced a firestorm and dropped it.

How many, and how does anyone know it? Just because somebody says they’re endangered in, say, El Salvador, doesn’t mean they are, and it sure doesn’t mean they’re any more endangered than citizens are at 12th and Vine in Kansas City.


Lest we think this is some horrible thing that only the United States is doing, let’s be clear that finding a way to deal with refugees in a way that is just and humane without simply conceding the right to secure a nation’s borders is a worldwide problem.

You can all do searches on you own if you like, but as far as I know, every one of the “wealthier” nations has the same problem to some degree…that is, not just the US but also Australia, Canada and nations of the EU.


This is an informative article from their perspective and analysis .

This is the original:

Here is google translation:
The countries that shelter the victims of violence in El Salvador,15700023,15700122,15700124,15700149,15700168,15700186,15700191,15700201,15700208&usg=ALkJrhgYQP-vUF1j_vzLwquOtedl2vo4sg

Here is another one so as to better understand what is going in and how many are fleeing and why. It is their sources in Spanish.

Translated with google:
How many Salvadorans ask for asylum in different countries?,15700023,15700122,15700124,15700149,15700168,15700186,15700191,15700201,15700208&usg=ALkJrhiTq9DBG1hdR9VCxIcj8fEPMwIPfA

These articles may answer some of our questions.
As from April,Uruguay has been gradually receiving Salvadoran refugees too.


This is going on in Spain. It is worldwide as you say.

Latin American asylum applications in Spain quadruple until June (aug. 2017)



As Mark Twain said, "Lies, D. Lies, and statistics. The murder rate in El Salvador is five times the world average, and six times that of the United States (a country, not a city). If you are going to use cities, you know, like in honest statistics, then San Salvador would still have triple the murder rate as Kansas City, and that would be every year, not just 2017.


Mexico also has a much higher murder rate than the U.S. Do all Mexicans get asylum too? Do all people whose countries have higher murder rates get to come here? That would include most of the world.

In the U.S., as I expect is true in San Salvador, murder is concentrated in “hot spots”, usually within cities. They are the “turf” over which gangsters war. I believe the U.S. has now imported some 13,000 members of Ms-13. How many more do you want us to import?


This is not an argument against aiding refugees. It is just a cry of hopelessness over the scope of the problem. The temptation is to say "If we cannot solve all the problems, let’s not solve any of them.

During Jesus’ ministry, there were many lepers and children who died and people with hemorrhages and blind and lame. Jesus did not cure all of them. He didn’t even cure a significant fraction of them. But that did not stop him from acting with compassion - a trait we would do well to emulate.


Everybody has his/her favorite charity case, and they differ. Just because one political party presently believes it has a good political issue to push open borders with Central America, there are plenty of people in the world a good deal worse off.

But there is little or no merit in it. How many Democrats have sponsored anyone from Central America or taken any kind of detriment or risk at all in acting virtuous? Virtually none, I’ll wager. It’s always “charity at my neighbor’s expense”. There’s no virtue in that whatever. Jesus didn’t put somebody else up on the cross, He put Himself there.


None. That is a straw man.


Ah! So they’re not here at all. Well, that’s a relief.


I think it is a problem, if it wasn’t, President Trump wouldn’t have received grief for calling MS13 immigrants “animals” a few months ago.


Of course, I did not say that, as any kid with a basic understanding of grammar could tell you.

These last two years have have increased both the frequency of non-arguments and their lack of substance. Here, fore example, are two in a row.

  1. Anyone open to immigration reform, or in this case not jailing kids, wants to admit more MS-13.
  2. Not wanting more MS-13 in the country is equivalent to saying their are not MS-13 in country.

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