Another religious mother beats her child to death
GSLCVK
Here's Maryland's version of the David Polreis tragedy:
Beating death of boy, 8, stuns Worcester teachers
School had reported signs of abuse, neglect
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Chris Guy
Baltimore Sun Staff
BERLIN -- Worcester County social service officials acknowledged
yesterday that teachers and school administrators filed two dozen
reports over the past two years warning about suspected child abuse in
the home where an 8-year-old boy was found beaten to death this week --
killed, police say, by his adoptive mother.
Staff members at Buckingham Elementary School frequently saw signs that
Shamir Hudson and his younger, adopted siblings, Sharnae and Shamale, 6
and 7, had been abused or neglected, but lost track of the children when
they were transferred to a Salisbury church school in November, said
Buckingham's principal, Mark Bowen.
"There are a lot of teachers here who are grieving," Bowen said. "The
teachers have taken it very hard. The bright spot, if there can be one,
is that this child transferred in November and that seems very distant
for schoolchildren of this age. It's not like someone they've seen every
day."
Catherine Marie Hudson, 58, who was approved as a foster parent in
Worcester County in 1991 and adopted the three children in 1995, is
being held without bond at the Worcester County Detention Center,
charged with second-degree murder, assault and three counts of child
abuse.
Police and rescue workers found Shamir's body early Tuesdaymorning lying
on a bedroom floor of Hudson's mobile home on a dead-end street just
outside the town limits of Berlin.
Investigators recovered a bent metal shelving pole and a 4-foot
carpenter's level from the bloody room. The two younger children were
taken from the home to Peninsula General Hospital, then placed in foster
care, officials said.
"All child abuse cases are difficult to look at, but certainly this is
the worst I've ever seen in Worcester County," said Sheriff Charles T.
Martin. "We're in the early stage of the investigation, and I'm not
ready to place any blame."
The state medical examiner has ruled that Shamir died of trauma and
multiple injuries. All the boy's wounds appeared to have been inflicted
within recent months, police said, quoting the medical examiner's
report. That was well after the three children were transferred to Faith
Deliverance Academy, an unaccredited private school.
The Rev. George A. Copeland, listed as the pastor and founder of the
Faith Deliverance United Way of the Cross Church in north Salisbury,
would not comment on the case yesterday. "There is an investigation
going on and I can't really speak about it," he said. "I would ask
everyone to pray."
Officials at the state Department of Education said the school, housed
with the church in a long, one-story brick building, was registered in
1991, all that is required under Maryland law.
Paula Edie, county social services director, said a response team from
the Maryland Department of Human Resources has begun reviewing
documents.
Edie praised public school officials for following procedure in alerting
her department when they suspected abuse or neglect, but said that case
workers found insufficient evidence to justify removal of the children.
"Obviously, we have looked again at all those referrals from the school
and there just wasn't enough evidence to warrant a court order to remove
them from the home," Edie said. "We did receive multiple complaints
about the children, but only two about the child who died.
"Our staff is devastated," she said. "There hasn't been a dry eye here
since this happened."
Last summer, Baltimore County social services officials were faulted in
the death of 9-year-old Rita Denise Fisher, who starved to death despite
repeated reports of suspected abuse.
Worcester County school Superintendent John Andes said that school
officials were stunned at news of the child's death. School counselors
and a psychologist were available for staff members or students at the
Buckingham school who might need help coping with the death, he said.
"Our first emotion is one of shock and sadness; the second is one of
anger," Andes said. "I have a 12-year-old daughter and a 7-year-old son,
and I spent a lot of time just hugging my son."
Hudson was accepted about six years ago as a foster parent, expressing
interest from the start in adopting. She was accepted as a candidate for
adoption after an investigation that included a series of home visits,
training and a criminal background check completed by a regional case
worker shared by Somerset, Wicomico and Worcester, social service
officials said.
"Obviously, hindsight is 20-20, but we just have no way to predict
violence," said Edie. "In this case, we were looking at someone who had
been a longtime and well-thought-of foster parent."
In Worcester County, with a population of about 35,000, four protective
services case workers handle as many as 250 cases of suspected child
abuse a year, officials said.
Bowen said that Shamir's death has been devastating for his staff in the
515-student grade school. But beyond that, the first-year principal
says, the child's death has shaken the town of 2,000 where he grew up.
"My brother was one of the first police officers to arrive at the
scene," Bowen said. "This is a lady who is known in the community,
someone you might run into in the grocery store. We are all going to be
asking how this could happen, asking for answers forever."
Originally published in the Baltimore Sun on Mar 27 1998
Kym Andrews
I have to comment on the article that someone posted about the adoptive
mother who beet her child to death. There is absolutely no way, unless
they have a previous record, to weed these kind of people out of the
system. But, believe me, that was ONE story about abuse in an adoptive
home....I would imagine you could get 50 abuse by biological families
stories for every one abuse by adoptive families stories. So, as a
perspective adoptive parent, I am upset that someone would post this.
There are sick people everywhere, that's the wonderful world we live in.
Kym
NurseNell
In article <6fghr2$f...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, "Kym Andrews"
<MMT...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> I have to comment on the article that someone posted about the adoptive
> mother who beet her child to death. There is absolutely no way, unless
> they have a previous record, to weed these kind of people out of the
> system. But, believe me, that was ONE story about abuse in an adoptive
> home....I would imagine you could get 50 abuse by biological families
> stories for every one abuse by adoptive families stories. So, as a
> perspective adoptive parent, I am upset that someone would post this.
As an adoptive parent I appreciate that this story was posted. Any abuse
of children is deplorable. It should never happen. That an adoptive parent
would abuse a child is doubly tragic IMHO because by virtue of adopting
they are entrusted with another parent's child. This is really a sacred
trust, and abusing adopted children breaks this trust in its worst
possible form. When I read this article my first thought was how in the
world did a woman her age get to adopt? She was 58 years old and adopted
the children in 1995, making her 55 years old when she adopted. Sorry, 55
is just plain too old to be parenting young children, never mind children
arriving with plenty of baggage from the foster care system. I'm 53,
grandchildren are wonderful, younger parents need to be doing the
parenting.
This case also illustrates the shortcomings of this country's child
protection system. It's too often that you need a dead child to have
sufficient evidence of neglect and abuse.
--
Elizabeth, American by birth, Irish by the grace of God
"A walk through the ocean of Jessica's soul would scarcely get your feet wet." Moses 1/4/1998
Kym Andrews
> As an adoptive parent I appreciate that this story was posted. Any abuse
> of children is deplorable. It should never happen. That an adoptive
parent
> would abuse a child is doubly tragic IMHO because by virtue of adopting
> they are entrusted with another parent's child. This is really a sacred
> trust, and abusing adopted children breaks this trust in its worst
> possible form. When I read this article my first thought was how in the
> world did a woman her age get to adopt? She was 58 years old and adopted
> the children in 1995, making her 55 years old when she adopted. Sorry, 55
> is just plain too old to be parenting young children, never mind children
> arriving with plenty of baggage from the foster care system. I'm 53,
> grandchildren are wonderful, younger parents need to be doing the
> parenting.
>
> This case also illustrates the shortcomings of this country's child
> protection system. It's too often that you need a dead child to have
> sufficient evidence of neglect and abuse.
>
> --
> Elizabeth, American by birth, Irish by the grace of God
Elizabeth,
You are right, it is absolutely horrible that this woman was allowed to
adopt. The system fails so much and so many. This is true for *all* types
of families. A good friend of mine grew up in an emotionaly, physically,
*and* sexually abusive home. Ran away many times, ended up in state
custody only to be returned home again. Eventually she gave up. My point
was that this sort of thing happens way too much. It doesn't mean that
biological families have some sort of "right" to abuse their kids, but to
think that it is even more horrible when adoptive families abuse, is not
right either. What can be done to keep it from happening? We entrust our
government with something so sacred as children and they still fail. You
are right and I too am glad when these "kinds" of stories come out, because
hopefully it will cause peolpe to get angry enough to do something about
it.
Kym, American by birth *and* the grace of God.
GSLCVK
Kym writes about the report of a murder of an 8 year-old:
>So, as a
>perspective adoptive parent, I am upset that someone would post this.
I posted it just to give you a little more perspective, Kym.
Gordon
Sue Tretter
Kym Andrews wrote:
>
> I have to comment on the article that someone posted about the adoptive
> mother who beet her child to death. There is absolutely no way, unless
> they have a previous record, to weed these kind of people out of the
> system.
Kym, on what basis do you make that statement? Have you studied all
possible measures which might avoid such adoptive placements and found
them all totally lacking? Was there not one that demonstrated even a
strong likelihood of achieving the desired goal, ie protecting one child
(who being in need of adoption or foster care had, by definition,
already suffered loss) from harm and/or death?
Frankly, Gordon's -- btw, THANKS for posting the article, Gordon --
subject title leads me to suspect that he might have some ideas on how
to better decide who might be a good adoptive parent and who might not.
And I have other ideas, including a one year mandatory tour of a.a.
(more about that later, if you wish) and a modified MMPI or similar
psych test. Other posters have proposed other possible solutions: we all
agree that NONE will be totally effective but that even a modest
reduction in the numbers of children placed in inappropriate homes would
be noteworthy.
> But, believe me, that was ONE story about abuse in an adoptive
> home....
But this is an ng on which we gather to discuss ADOPTION, not biological
parenting.
> I would imagine you could get 50 abuse by biological families
> stories for every one abuse by adoptive families stories.
Or maybe 500 or 5,000 but that really isn't germane, is it?
So, as a
> perspective adoptive parent, I am upset that someone would post this.
Frankly, I would hope that EVERY adoptive parent would be upset, but not
for the same reasons you seem to think valid.
> There are sick people everywhere, that's the wonderful world we live in.
Yes, there are. I think Society has a duty to protect all children from
such sick people, and one way to begin doing so is to create a higher
standard for adoptive parents and then raise the "bar" for all
parent-child interactions.
Btw, are you aware that Gordon (who posted the original article) is an
adoptee and an adoptive parent?
I'm a birth aunt who along with about 99% of the posters here wishes to
see adoption made better for all who are affected by the process.
Best wishes. Sue T.
PS. If you are interested in another young adoptee who was killed by his
adoptive mother -- a person who imo should NEVER have been allowed to
have any living vertebrate in her home -- please find a copy of A DEATH
IN WHITE BEAR LAKE and prepare to be astonished.
shea grimm
On 27 Mar 1998 15:49:54 GMT, "Kym Andrews" <MMT...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
>I have to comment on the article that someone posted about the adoptive
>mother who beet her child to death. There is absolutely no way, unless
>they have a previous record, to weed these kind of people out of the
>system. But, believe me, that was ONE story about abuse in an adoptive
>home....I would imagine you could get 50 abuse by biological families
>stories for every one abuse by adoptive families stories.
Well, yes, because adoptive parents represent only about 2% of the
total number of parents, Kym. But purely statistically speaking, I
have never seen any evidence that adoptive parents are less likely to
abuse their children than biological parents.
Shea
Kym Andrews
Thank you Gordon, I did not mean that I.....oh, I get so frustrated at
this group. I have had my E-mail jammed up for 3 days, some very
enlightening but most hateful and attacking.......anyway, I don't know
anymore what I am trying to say to you. The article WAS horrible and
disgusting. No child should have to live that way or die that way. This
woman obviously should not have had children. Believe me, Gordon, you
don't need to give me perspective about abuse, been there - done that. I
know about how horrible people can be, I lived with it for many
years....don't tell me about abuse. What I was trying to say is that abuse
is abuse - no matter who does it. This is a terrible story about a woman
who needs to rot in Hell, it doesn't matter that she was an adoptive person
or not.
And do not make it seem like I think you shouldn't post about horrible
things like abuse. I guess after the last 3 days of having "lovely"
E-mails sent to me, I am on the defensive. And to see an article about
abusive "adoptive parents" made me think you only put that there to sorta
prove the point of alot of the people on this group. I had no idea that
you are an adoptee or an adoptive parent. I don't know anymore, I guess I
am glad I do not E-mail at home....I'll get a weekend off to cool down and
think about all this.
Kym
GSLCVK <gsl...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199803271831...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> Kym writes about the report of a murder of an 8 year-old:
>
> >So, as a
> >perspective adoptive parent, I am upset that someone would post this.
>
shea grimm
On 27 Mar 1998 17:27:48 GMT, "Kym Andrews" <MMT...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
> It doesn't mean that
>biological families have some sort of "right" to abuse their kids, but to
>think that it is even more horrible when adoptive families abuse, is not
>right either.
Actually, there is a legitimate basis for being more outraged at abuse
by adoptive parents. Adoptive parents are *supposed* to go through an
intensive screening process. They are *supposed* to have been chosen
to parent because the parents the child was born to were not capable
of parenting. It may not be 'fair', but yes, they are often assumed to
be by themselves and by our society as better parents than those who
became parents "randomly".
Now, in reality, I don't think they *are* better parents as a group.
But I think your comments are hypocritical and a bit ironic in light
of the fact that in your first post to this newsgroup, you as much as
lectured adoptees on how our lives were probably so much better since
we were adopted. Which is it? Either adoptive parents are likely
better parents, or they're just like everybody else. I pick the
latter, and it sounds like you do to, in which case your admonishment
to adoptees that we should be more grateful than the rest of the
population for our parents, does not hold any water.
Shea
SCOM2
>The bright spot, if there can be one,
>is that this child transferred in November and that seems very distant
>for schoolchildren of this age. It's not like someone they've seen every
>day."
>
>
Is anyone else disgusted by a comment like this, from a school official? How
demeaning to this boy's life.
>Edie praised public school officials for following procedure in alerting
>her department when they suspected abuse or neglect, but said that case
>workers found insufficient evidence to justify removal of the children.
>
>
Two dozen reports filed by the school and they can't find any reason to remove
these children? What the hell were they looking at? Someone better be losing
their job for this. They obviously did not do their job.
>"Obviously, we have looked again at all those referrals from the school
Ummm, isn't it a little late now to look at the referals again? Maybe
relooking will teach them, for the future, but had they paid attention to them
in the first place, this boy may still be alive.
>and there just wasn't enough evidence to warrant a court order to remove
>them from the home," Edie said.
What constitutes enough evidence......a dead child? Is that what it takes to
get them removed?
>"We did receive multiple complaints
>about the children, but only two about the child who died.
This comment is sick!! "ONLY" two about him?
>
>"Our staff is devastated," she said. "There hasn't been a dry eye here
>since this happened."
>
>
Probably because they're afraid of losing their jobs over this. It's a shame
that these social workers didn't realize the fact that not doing their jobs
would mean a child would die.
>Last summer, Baltimore County social services officials were faulted in
>the death of 9-year-old Rita Denise Fisher, who starved to death despite
>repeated reports of suspected abuse.
And it looks as if no one learned from her death. Will social services ever
learn?
>"Obviously, hindsight is 20-20, but we just have no way to predict
>violence," said Edie.
It can't be predicted, but when social services receives two dozen reports on a
child, doesn't someone say it's time to remove these kids, pending an
investigation?
>"In this case, we were looking at someone who had
>been a longtime and well-thought-of foster parent."
I sure hope that an investigation is being done to see if any other children
that were ever in her care were abused.
>We are all going to be
>asking how this could happen, asking for answers forever."
>
>
Seems like it's time to stop "asking" and start DEMANDING.
Connie
We have only one life. Make it worthwhile.
Bonnie Gordon
NurseNell: When I read this article my first thought was how in the
> world did a woman her age get to adopt? She was 58 years old and adopted
> the children in 1995, making her 55 years old when she adopted. Sorry, 55
> is just plain too old to be parenting young children, never mind children
> arriving with plenty of baggage from the foster care system. I'm 53,
> grandchildren are wonderful, younger parents need to be doing the
> parenting.
hope. I don't know if teens will be easier than little ones, but so far I
feel up to it. I just wanted to comment that older parents abuse their
children as a group far less than younger parents according to my reading.
The group most at risk for abusing their children are teen parents, then
parents in their twenties, then older parents who get lumped. The number of
parents raising young children in their 50's who are not their actual
grandchildren is probably too satistically small to get an accurate number,
but this is the first severe case I've ever heard of, bio or adopted where
the parent was over 50 and the child under teen years. Most grandparents
who raise their grandkids seem to be good parents as far as I have seen and
read. I'm not sure this woman's age is a relevant factor in the abuse,
whatever one's views on older parents. This woman got to adopt because she
was foster parenting the kids. Foster parenting is not so sought after that
state agencies can turn people in their fifties away, I imagine. My question
is how did she get through the checks on foster parents--or did she go crazy
later or what. Bonnie
dono...@hotmail.com
Kym, if people are sending you nasty email, find out how to block 'em. I think
it's in your preferences.
kate
In article <6fh3kc$4...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>,
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
bkpeters
SCOM2 wrote in message <199803272150...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>Two dozen reports filed by the school and they can't find any reason to
remove
>these children? What the hell were they looking at? Someone better be
losing
>their job for this. They obviously did not do their job.
That happens everywhere unfortunately. A few years ago here, a 7 month-old
was found dead in her home. The mother was arrested (age 21 and also with a
7 yr old). She was tried 3 times and convicted 3 times of killing the baby.
Her lawyers tried to say that the baby had pneumonia that caused the baby's
death. The neighbors continuously called Child Services, two of them even
took turns calling every other day, and still the children were not removed.
The baby had such a severe case of diaper rash that it was said she had no
skin left on her bottom. The mother would leave the children at home while
she walked to the store (nearly a mile away) or to a restaurant (even
further). She would leave the children in the house and have the stereo on
at full volume while she hung around outside drinking with "boyfriends". A
social worker was there the day before the baby died and was not let in
because the mother said she had been ill and the house was "untidy". She
didn't push because she didn't feel there was a reason to. If they are
receiving calls every day about a particular family and don't see fit to
check it out thoroughly, maybe new social workers need to be hired! This is
sick and I can't believe people let this happen.
I don't know why Gordon chose to highlight the *religious* aspect of this
story. Would it have been okay if the family had been atheist? Even folks
who go to church are human. I am in no way condoning this, but people act
like those who attend church are supposed to be perfect.
>Connie
>We have only one life. Make it worthwhile.
Amen Connie!!
--
Kellee Peters, Proud Bastard & MOB-ster
Open Records for Adult Adoptees -- Period!
CDm...@bigfoot.com
ICQ#8680434
Born 11/18/66 Lima Ohio searching for b-mom (last name Burnett, age 29 at
time of my birth)
"I'd just like to say that being chosen as this month's Miss August is like
a compliment I'll remember for as long as I can. Right now I'm a freshman in
my fourth year at UCLA, but my goal is to become a veterinarian because I
love children!"
--Julie Brown "Cause I'm a Blonde"
Lainie Petersen
Morra <mo...@onramp.net> wrote in article <351C28...@onramp.net>...
> Barbara Franks-Morra
> who is musing on the mess that must be created when someone beets
> someone else to death.
It would be tricky, trying to separate the red beet juice from the blood.
But hell, Barb, you're a nurse, you could do it!
Lainie
shea grimm
On Fri, 27 Mar 1998 17:41:35 -0500, "bkpeters" <bkpe...@fuse.net>
wrote:
>I don't know why Gordon chose to highlight the *religious* aspect of this
>story. Would it have been okay if the family had been atheist? Even folks
>who go to church are human. I am in no way condoning this, but people act
>like those who attend church are supposed to be perfect.
Probably because the media has highlighted the religious aspect of it.
It was implied in one news report that the state has stopped
investigated once the child was transferred to a rprivate Christian
school, and the birthmother said she has assumed her children would be
fine because the adoptive mother was Christian. In this particular
instance it appears that the fact that the amother was Christian
played a part in the lack of action on the part of the state and in
the perceptions of the community, thereby making it extremely
relevant, IMO.
Shea
Lainie Petersen
One could also consider that since it is the Christian right that champions
adoption over single parenthood and abortion in this country, it is ironic
when a conservative Christian adoptive parent goes ahead and beats their
child to death.
The fact remains that most people, religious or not, do not beat their
children. The fact also remains that religious conviction does not
necessarily make someone a better parent.
Lainie--Who is a Christian herself.
Kym Andrews
> Well, yes, because adoptive parents represent only about 2% of the
> total number of parents, Kym. But purely statistically speaking, I
> have never seen any evidence that adoptive parents are less likely to
> abuse their children than biological parents.
>
>
> Shea
>
Thank you Shea, THAT WAS EXACTLY MY POINT !!!
Kym
Christopher Alan Becker
shea grimm (sh...@oz.net) wrote:
: On Fri, 27 Mar 1998 17:41:35 -0500, "bkpeters" <bkpe...@fuse.net>
: wrote:
Just my two cents. I thought that was a very biased thing to include in a
newsreport about a beating death of a child. What purpose did it serve to
talk about the boy being transferred to a private school? There was a lot
of innuendo and very little facts about the Christian school. The story
should have been about the abuse, not a Christian school. If the state
stopped tracking this boy because he was transferred to a private school,
then the state officials need to have their heads cracked together. A
journalist shouldn't imply that it was because of the school that this
happened when nothing was done after the impliedly altruistic public
school officials reported the abuse. Give me a break.
That having been said, I must also admit that in my experience, there *is*
a passive attitude towards abuse in *some* Christian circles. One of the
unfortunate (or fortunate, depending on how you see it) things about
private Christian schools is that there is a desire not to believe that
every unusual behavior by a child stems from abuse. This is an area where
Christian schools and the church in general need to improve greatly. But
I get awfully tired of the media wanting to blame bad things on someone's
Christianity (or lack thereof). It smacks of hypocrisy.
: Shea
Chris
Kym Andrews
> Actually, there is a legitimate basis for being more outraged at abuse
> by adoptive parents. Adoptive parents are *supposed* to go through an
> intensive screening process. They are *supposed* to have been chosen
> to parent because the parents the child was born to were not capable
> of parenting. It may not be 'fair', but yes, they are often assumed to
> be by themselves and by our society as better parents than those who
> became parents "randomly".
You have a point. I would hope that the agencies and Social Workers would
catch all of the "nut cases", but they don't.
> Now, in reality, I don't think they *are* better parents as a group.
> But I think your comments are hypocritical and a bit ironic in light
> of the fact that in your first post to this newsgroup, you as much as
> lectured adoptees on how our lives were probably so much better since
> we were adopted. Which is it?
I was not trying to lecture anyone about how grateful they should be. I
was merely posting a question(out of frustration) about whether adoptees
thought about the life they could have had...I know now that is irrelevant.
Everyone has the right to know where they came from. But after reading
and reading about *some* people slamming adoptive parents...I got
frustrated....I was wrong. (there, now I've said it.) ha ha ha
Either adoptive parents are likely
> better parents, or they're just like everybody else.
It is hard for me to say exactly. I know I've been back and forth on this,
and perhaps that *IS* confusing. Hell, in 4 days of sending and receiving
posts from you all, I've learned more than in the months I'd been
lurking...funny, huh? I thought Adoptive parents (technically) should be
better parents, they actually "wanted" these kids. Worked for months even
years to get them. But I am beginning to realize that is always the case.
Adoptive parents could be worse in some cases....the ones that *would* go
through all of the work to get a child, only to abuse it....like it was
premeditated!! How horrible.
Kym
JmhJmd
Celeste wrote:
> Obviously this is just
>another tragedy of delaying adoptions in the foster care system and a very
>troubled foster child that probably required institutionalization.
>
>Celeste
Perhaps I'm wearing the wrong filters today, Celeste, but I see nothing in this
news article indicating that the child had any problems other than the mother
who appears to have killed him and the public officials who so badly served him
. May they serve his siblings better.
J.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Beating death of boy, 8, stuns Worcester teachers
School had reported signs of abuse, neglect
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Chris Guy
Baltimore Sun Staff
BERLIN -- Worcester County social service officials acknowledged
yesterday that teachers and school administrators filed two dozen
reports over the past two years warning about suspected child abuse in
the home where an 8-year-old boy was found beaten to death this week --
killed, police say, by his adoptive mother.
Staff members at Buckingham Elementary School frequently saw signs that
Shamir Hudson and his younger, adopted siblings, Sharnae and Shamale, 6
and 7, had been abused or neglected, but lost track of the children when
they were transferred to a Salisbury church school in November, said
Buckingham's principal, Mark Bowen.
"There are a lot of teachers here who are grieving," Bowen said. "The
teachers have taken it very hard. The bright spot, if there can be one,
is that this child transferred in November and that seems very distant
for schoolchildren of this age. It's not like someone they've seen every
day."
Catherine Marie Hudson, 58, who was approved as a foster parent in
Edie praised public school officials for following procedure in alerting
her department when they suspected abuse or neglect, but said that case
workers found insufficient evidence to justify removal of the children.
"Obviously, we have looked again at all those referrals from the school
and there just wasn't enough evidence to warrant a court order to remove
them from the home," Edie said. "We did receive multiple complaints
about the children, but only two about the child who died.
"Our staff is devastated," she said. "There hasn't been a dry eye here
since this happened."
Last summer, Baltimore County social services officials were faulted in
the death of 9-year-old Rita Denise Fisher, who starved to death despite
repeated reports of suspected abuse.
Worcester County school Superintendent John Andes said that school
officials were stunned at news of the child's death. School counselors
and a psychologist were available for staff members or students at the
Buckingham school who might need help coping with the death, he said.
"Our first emotion is one of shock and sadness; the second is one of
anger," Andes said. "I have a 12-year-old daughter and a 7-year-old son,
and I spent a lot of time just hugging my son."
Hudson was accepted about six years ago as a foster parent, expressing
interest from the start in adopting. She was accepted as a candidate for
adoption after an investigation that included a series of home visits,
training and a criminal background check completed by a regional case
worker shared by Somerset, Wicomico and Worcester, social service
officials said.
"Obviously, hindsight is 20-20, but we just have no way to predict
violence," said Edie. "In this case, we were looking at someone who had
been a longtime and well-thought-of foster parent."
In Worcester County, with a population of about 35,000, four protective
services case workers handle as many as 250 cases of suspected child
abuse a year, officials said.
Bowen said that Shamir's death has been devastating for his staff in the
515-student grade school. But beyond that, the first-year principal
says, the child's death has shaken the town of 2,000 where he grew up.
"My brother was one of the first police officers to arrive at the
scene," Bowen said. "This is a lady who is known in the community,
someone you might run into in the grocery store. We are all going to be
asking how this could happen, asking for answers forever."
Originally published in the Baltimore Sun on Mar 27 1998
L. Anne Babb
>Actually, there is a legitimate basis for being more outraged at abuse
>by adoptive parents. Adoptive parents are *supposed* to go through an
>intensive screening process. They are *supposed* to have been chosen
>to parent because the parents the child was born to were not capable
>of parenting. It may not be 'fair', but yes, they are often assumed to
>be by themselves and by our society as better parents than those who
>became parents "randomly".
Shea, a third reason is that not only is an assumption made that
adoptive parents will be better parents, but the legal language in the
adoption decree states that adoption will be in the BEST INTERESTS OF
THE CHILD, or some such similar language. Because the federal law
mandates this or similar language before children can be defined as
having special needs, the language became nearly universally applied,
and in addition now most states have a BIC standard. So, it is not
only an assumption that adoptive parents will be better parents, it is
something of a guarantee made to the CHILD first, then to society, and
then to the birth parents from whom the child was taken.
Anne
_______________________
L. Anne Babb
anne...@homes4kids.org
Damsel Plum
On 28 Mar 1998 18:29:24 GMT, "Kym Andrews" <MMT...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
Shea wrote:
>> Actually, there is a legitimate basis for being more outraged at abuse
>> by adoptive parents. Adoptive parents are *supposed* to go through an
>> intensive screening process. They are *supposed* to have been chosen
>> to parent because the parents the child was born to were not capable
>> of parenting.
>I was not trying to lecture anyone about how grateful they should be. I
>was merely posting a question(out of frustration) about whether adoptees
>thought about the life they could have had...
To see what some adoptees have had to endure from some adoptive
parents check out "True Tales of Atrocious Adoptions" at
http://www.bastards.org/library/harsh.htm
To see what some adoptees managed to escape in terms of scary
birthparents, check out "True Tales of Revolting Reunions" at
http://www.bastards.org/search/rev.htm
To learn about LDAs (Late Discovery Adoptees - adoptees whose parents
loved them so much they pretended they were blood-relatives) - see
http://www.ryzome.com/LDA/
>I know now that is irrelevant.
> Everyone has the right to know where they came from. But after reading
>and reading about *some* people slamming adoptive parents...I got
>frustrated....I was wrong. (there, now I've said it.) ha ha ha
I imagine most adoptees have tolerable or loving parents, like most
legos ("legitimates") There are some special differences at times
though, which you can learn about from Lori Pringle's page linked from
the Atrocious Adoption site. Luckily I did not have an atrocious
adoption, but some people do, and they have a right to know that
they're not alone, damned if it annoys anyone else.
> I thought Adoptive parents (technically) should be
>better parents, they actually "wanted" these kids.
Sure, but for what reason? Ever see "Mommie Dearest?"
Happy to be an Adoptee - WHOOP-EEE!
Damzy
Damsel Plum
Co-Founder & Publications Chair
BASTARD NATION http://www.bastards.org/
Ring Mistress, The Adoption Ring
Over 280 linked sites devoted to adoption issues
http://www.plumsite.com/adoptionring/
bkpeters
shea grimm wrote in message <351c49d9....@news.alt.net>...
>On Fri, 27 Mar 1998 17:41:35 -0500, "bkpeters" <bkpe...@fuse.net>
>wrote:
>
>>I don't know why Gordon chose to highlight the *religious* aspect of this
>>story. Would it have been okay if the family had been atheist? Even folks
>>who go to church are human. I am in no way condoning this, but people act
>>like those who attend church are supposed to be perfect.
>
>Probably because the media has highlighted the religious aspect of it.
>It was implied in one news report that the state has stopped
>investigated once the child was transferred to a rprivate Christian
>school, and the birthmother said she has assumed her children would be
>fine because the adoptive mother was Christian. In this particular
>instance it appears that the fact that the amother was Christian
>played a part in the lack of action on the part of the state and in
>the perceptions of the community, thereby making it extremely
>relevant, IMO.
>
>
Good point, Shea. I guess I didn't get that when I read the article. But I
still think the focus should be on the fact that the state didn't do it's
job. Regardless of what type of school the child attended, the reports of
abuse should have been checked more thoroughly, especially when there were
reports about more than one child in the home. And I'm sure "Christian Mom
Beats Child to Death" plastered on the front page will probably sell more
papers than "Child Beaten to Death", which is pretty sad considering that
everyone should be outraged when a child is killed by a parent, no matter if
the parent is religious or not.
bkpeters
Celeste wrote in message ...
>
>
>I fail to see where this article states the foster/adoptive mother was
>"religious"? Is that just your own interpretation of it that she was
>religious because she happen to transfer the child to a Christian school?
>Just because children attend a Christian school is no indication in and of
>itself that the parents are religious. It happens all the time that
>parents transfer 'troubled' children to private schools as a way of
>modifying their environment. It sounds to me that this is another case of
>a foster/adoptive parent that got in over her head attempting help a very
>troubled foster child.
>
>You weren't deliberately trying to send a stereotypically false impression
>about "religious mothers" were you?
>
>Celeste
So Celeste, are you saying that this child died because he was "troubled"?
Are you defending the mother who beat her child to death????
bkpeters
Celeste wrote in message ...
>Sometimes children are so damaged by the biological/birth parent and then
>further damaged by the system that they are incapable of being parented.
>No adoptive parent screening is going to ensure we have parents well enough
>prepared to take on such HUGE risks and responsibilities.
So if they do beat their adoptive/foster children it's okay because the
child is screwed up and you're just trying to "fix" them? What so you do
when your computer is on the fritz? Whack it with a shoe?
>With adequate adoptive parent screening, careful handling and early
>placements of infants -- adoption has a statistically proven track record
>for success in raising children.
Maybe all young, unmarried pregnant women shoudl be drugged and their babies
taken so that we can get them as early as possible - after all, the fresher
the better, right Celeste? Just like some nice ripe strawberries.
Now at the other end of the childhood,
>when the child reaches adulthood we are seeing there is a little glich or
>problem that wasn't anticipated...that there would be 'some' adoptees
>wanting access to their birth records and knowlegde of their birth parents.
>Hopefully, once this is ironed out and settled adoption can become the
>curall for unwanted or unplanned for children as was always intended.
>
>Celeste
I don't know about any other adoptees here, but I am DAMN proud to be one of
those little "glitches"(well, okay, maybe I'm one of the "bigger" glitches -
:o). And I will not rest until I get my Original Birth Certificate, complete
and uncensored. Remember Celeste, once your kids are grown you can't lock
them in their rooms.
--
Kellee Peters, Proud Bastard & MOB-ster & Glitch!
bkpeters
Celeste wrote in message ...
any kind of normal setting.
>
>Celeste
So I guess you're saying he is better off dead, huh Celeste? My goodness, he
was probably so bad he beat himself to death.
--
Kellee Peters, Proud Bastard & MOB-ster
bkpeters
Celeste wrote in message ...
>this mother even went to church, only that she had transfered the child to
>a religious school. The religious school didn't kill the child, the parent
>did.
No one is suggesting the church school killed the child, dimwit. What angers
me (and many others) is that the state stopped investigating the abuse
claims once the child was transferred to the church school.
>Likely the already very troubled child was transfered to the school to
>modify his environment and minmize the negative influences he was exposed
>to in attempt to straighten him out.
I am aware that this does happen. A very good friend of mine attended a
private Christian school. There were more *bad apples* there than in public
school. She was routinely offered drugs even, on the school bus. Many of the
kids who attended this school were there because they were kicked out of
public school because of behavior problems.
>I don't believe most of us have any
>idea just how difficult it is to raise these very damaged system children.
I wonder if those two boys who ambushed their classmates in Arkansas were
"damaged system children". Anyone who would plan and execute something like
that seems pretty "damaged" to me.
>It's not an excuse, but certainly a reason to show mercy and understanding,
>and perhaps wake everyone up to the REAL issue here which is the problems
>that arrise due to delaying adoptions and causing serious behavior and
>attachment disorders in children. Perhaps no one was capable or prepared
>enough to raise this child? How can we judge unless we've tried it
>ourselves? Adopt any seriously damaged system children lately?
No. Have you?
>This
>doesn't look like a case of a sick parent, it looks to me to be another
>case of a very sick child, made sick from the mishandling from both his
>original parent/s and the system.
Well, Lord knows the poor, pitiful, overmatched adoptive mother couldn't
possibly be faulted for this. She was only doing what any normal mother
would do - BEAT HER CHILD TO DEATH. Maybe we should nominate her for the
Congressional Medal of Honor.
Jurol
Kym Andrews wrote in message <
>I thought Adoptive parents (technically) should be
>better parents, they actually "wanted" these kids. Worked for months even
>years to get them. But I am beginning to realize that is always the case.
>Adoptive parents could be worse in some cases....the ones that *would* go
>through all of the work to get a child, only to abuse it....like it was
>premeditated!! How horrible.
Kym, also bear in mind that many adoptive parents are facing challenges that
few other parents would face, and that they could never have really
anticipated until their child joined them. Children for adoption include
kids abused by birth family or the welfare system, children with severe
disabilities that their biological family felt unable to cope with, kids
with attachment disorder and other incredibly challenging behaviour. Often
these problems do not come to light until the child is in the adoptive
family and everyone is doing their best to survive.
I am in no way condoning any form of child abuse by anyone. However, I am
realistic enough to know that if I had not chosen to adopt, I would probably
never had known what it was like to parent a child with multiple
disabilities and behaviour problems, a child with a chronic, life-shortening
disease, or a child who had been abused and had worked as a child labourer
before being abandoned at 8 yrs old.
So - adoptive parents are fallible, and so is the screening system. But the
challenges we face are more than most parents face - and hell, I am a better
mother for it! Hope my kids are better off for having me too, imperfect and
all...
Julia
Kirby Pierce
In article <celesta-ya0240800...@cnews.newsguy.com>,
cel...@usa.net (Celeste) wrote:
... snip ...
>
>Children adopted as infants are less likely to be abused by their adoptive
>parents than older or seriously damaged foster children. That's why they
>call these "special needs" children.
>
>Celeste
>
Are there any studies or statistics that support this statement? Also, I was not aware that the 'special needs' children included children that were 'older'.
Kirby
Kirby Pierce
>jmh...@aol.com (JmhJmd) wrote:
>
>> Celeste wrote:
>>
>> > Obviously this is just
>> >another tragedy of delaying adoptions in the foster care system and a very
>> >troubled foster child that probably required institutionalization.
>> >
>> >Celeste
>>
>> Perhaps I'm wearing the wrong filters today, Celeste, but I see nothing
>in this
>> news article indicating that the child had any problems other than the mother
>> who appears to have killed him and the public officials who so badly
>served him
>
>
>adopted at approx 6 years of age, and is the oldest of a sibling group, all
>born a year apart, adopted just two to two and a half years ago *out of the
>foster system*. The article states: " said Edie. "In this case, we were
>looking at someone who had been a longtime and well-thought-of foster
>parent."
>
Perhaps I'm missing something, but I can find no mention in the article that the children were in foster care prior to being placed in Ms. Hudson's care, only that Ms. Hudson "was approved as a foster parent in Worcester County in 1991 and adopted the three children in 1995." The article also indicates that 'teachers and school administrators filed two dozen reports over the past two years warning about suspected child abuse', which seems to indicate problems in the home from near the time of the adoption. I see no indication in the article that justifies assuming that these were 'problem children' without making some rather large assumptions not supported by the details of the incident as reported.
>If that doesn't give away the truth of the matter, I don't know what does.
>If you haven't been living in a vaccume, anyone knows how the foster system
>has been psychologically damaging and breaking the spirits of children like
>these. Likely, seriously damaged, there was no way the case workers
>involved could have ensure that child's well-being with ANY parent. What
>always seems to happen in such cases is that more than the child's life is
>destroyed, but also any parent that is brave enough to think they can help
>such troubled children.
It is a pretty large leap to state because some, or even many, children are damaged in foster care, that these particular children were damaged at the time of their adoption. Again, I can find no support in the article, as published, for this assumption.
.... snipped the rest ...
>Celeste
>
Kirby
Bonnie Gordon
Celeste:
> >Children adopted as infants are less likely to be abused by their adoptive
> >parents than older or seriously damaged foster children. That's why they
> >call these "special needs" children.
Kirby:
> Are there any studies or statistics that support this statement? Also, I
was not aware that the 'special needs' children included children that were
'older'.
Kirbey, all children that are hard to place are referred to as "special
needs" in a placement context. Older children are considered special needs
as far as what they need post-placement because adjustment to a new family is
, speaking generally, much harder for an older child than it is for an infant
or young toddler. Older children in foster care may have been moved a number
of times and may have experienced trauma prior to placement. I don't know if
there are stats. about abuse by adoptive parents, this is a statistically
small group of people. Adoptive families make up only 2% of the population
and of course, few families abuse their children. Yes one is too many, but
it makes studying a phenomenon difficult when the numbers are small. Bonnie
shea grimm
> Everyone has the right to know where they came from. But after reading
>and reading about *some* people slamming adoptive parents...I got
>frustrated....I was wrong. (there, now I've said it.) ha ha ha
Hey, good for you! I've been wrong about a hundred times on
alt.adoption over the years, and it took me a lot longer to be able to
admit when I was wrong than it's taken for you. <g>
>It is hard for me to say exactly. I know I've been back and forth on this,
>and perhaps that *IS* confusing. Hell, in 4 days of sending and receiving
>posts from you all, I've learned more than in the months I'd been
>lurking...funny, huh?
No, I'm not surprised. Dialogue and debate are great ways to learn new
things. As frustrated as I get with alt.adoption, as annoyed as I get
with the spam and meaningless posts and Celeste's nonsense, I still
have to admit that I have learned an incredible amount since I first
joined this newsgroup years ago.
Shea
Christopher Alan Becker
bkpeters (bkpe...@fuse.net) wrote:
: Celeste wrote in message ...
: >If you reread the story you will find no where within it does it state that
: >this mother even went to church, only that she had transfered the child to
: >a religious school. The religious school didn't kill the child, the parent
: >did.
: No one is suggesting the church school killed the child, dimwit. What angers
: me (and many others) is that the state stopped investigating the abuse
: claims once the child was transferred to the church school.
Kellee, if you read between the lines, the writer of the article was
implying that the school played a part in the death. Why else would they
think it was important to interview the principal and then go on to tell
people that the school wasn't accredited (whatever that is supposed to
mean) and that all they had to do was register with the state? In the
overall scheme of things, this makes absolutely no difference to the fact
that an adoptive mother beat her child to death. I've seen this type of
article too many times to recall. Would it make any difference that the
child was in a non-accredited judo school or that the mother was a
card-carrying member of the Democratic Party? No. So where is the
connection here? If the writer wants to say that the school had a role or
that her Christianity had a role in the death, then have enough guts (and
the facts to back it) to print that. If not, leave it out of the story
altogether. If I turned in a paper at university which had this dead-end
innuendo in it, I'd get nailed by a couple letter grades. This is bad
journalism.
And I'm not defending Celeste!
Celeste:
: >Likely the already very troubled child was transfered to the school to
: >modify his environment and minmize the negative influences he was exposed
: >to in attempt to straighten him out.
A very silly assumption.
: Kellee Peters, Proud Bastard & MOB-ster
Chris
Steve White
> ... in later reports of the story when more details begin to surface
> about the seriously troubled nature of these children, often the
> public begins to show at least a measure of mercy and sympathy for
> what the parent must have been enduring. With such troubled
> children, I doubt you can find good enough parents to parent
> such a child.
So, you're saying that it was somehow justifiable, or understandable, or
excusable, that this woman killed her child? That is REALLY sick.
I have no sympathy whatsoever for a person who would kill a child, be that
person an adoptive parent, a bio-parent, or a complete stranger.
Whatever troubles those children might have had (and no news report has
said anything about that issue, from what I've seen so far), the troubles
of the survivors are infinitely worse now that their mother has killed one
of them.
steve
Steve White
> Children adopted as infants are less likely to be abused by their adoptive
> parents than older or seriously damaged foster children. That's why they
> call these "special needs" children.
Oh, and do you have any proof of this?
There is little systematic study about abuse of adopted children in the
first place. It's highly unlikely that there is any reliable source of
information about abused older adopted children.
steve
Steve White
> ... This parent probably wanted so bad to help this child, to
> prevent that child from institutionalization, perhaps even too
> proud with her reputation as a foster parent that could handled
> it to admit she was failing. She most certainly did fail, but
> not because she was a "sick person" but because she failed to
> realize she is human ...
You can't even see your own problems, and now you're psychoanalyzing
someone you haven't met, just on the basis of a few news clips?
The sane people on this forum will wait and see what develops in the news,
thanks.
steve
Steve White
> .... ANY ONE OF US is *capable* of snapping and losing it if we
> are pushed, or push ourselves too far.
No. YOU might be, but don't tar us with your brush.
There are a few people in this world who might kill a child under stress.
But most of us most certainly would not.
Don't ever make the mistake that we're like you.
steve
Steve White
Archived to DejaNews 3/28/98.
steve
=====
In article <celesta-ya0240800...@cnews.newsguy.com>,
cel...@usa.net (Celeste) wrote:
>
>
> I fail to see where this article states the foster/adoptive mother was
> "religious"? Is that just your own interpretation of it that she was
> religious because she happen to transfer the child to a Christian school?
> Just because children attend a Christian school is no indication in and of
> itself that the parents are religious. It happens all the time that
> parents transfer 'troubled' children to private schools as a way of
> modifying their environment. It sounds to me that this is another case of
> a foster/adoptive parent that got in over her head attempting help a very
> troubled foster child.
>
> You weren't deliberately trying to send a stereotypically false impression
> about "religious mothers" were you?
>
> Celeste
>
>
>
> In article <199803271350...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
> gsl...@aol.com (GSLCVK) wrote:
>
> > Here's Maryland's version of the David Polreis tragedy:
> > violence," said Edie. "In this case, we were looking at someone who had
> > been a longtime and well-thought-of foster parent."
> >
Steve White
> It happens all the time that parents transfer 'troubled' children
> to private schools as a way of modifying their environment.
According to the article, the school was not accredited. That's some
modification.
steve
Steve White
> I fail to see where this article states the foster/adoptive mother was
> "religious"? Is that just your own interpretation of it that she was
> religious because she happen to transfer the child to a Christian school?
> Just because children attend a Christian school is no indication in and of
> itself that the parents are religious. It happens all the time that
> parents transfer 'troubled' children to private schools as a way of
> modifying their environment. It sounds to me that this is another case of
> a foster/adoptive parent that got in over her head attempting help a very
> troubled foster child.
For someone who is whining about inaccuracies in the interpretation of
this story, you are just fill of inaccuracies.
First: you don't know that these children were troubled. You have no idea
what their situation was.
Second: you have no idea whether this woman transferred the children to
this unaccredited school as a means of "modifying" their environment. It's
equally plausible that she was trying to hide her abuse from the
authorities.
steve
Lainie Petersen
Steve White <swh...@interaccess.com> wrote in article
<swhite-2803...@d252.focal2.interaccess.com>...
> Second: you have no idea whether this woman transferred the children to
> this unaccredited school as a means of "modifying" their environment.
It's
> equally plausible that she was trying to hide her abuse from the
> authorities.
It is also possible that this school itself used corporal punishment
against children. Such punishment is not unknown in some fundamentalist
Christian schools. Depending on the ideology of the church that runs the
school, severe "discipline" such as that which was inflicted on these
children may be considered appropriate.
Lainie
Sue Tretter
Christopher Alan Becker wrote:
<snip>
> implying that the school played a part in the death. Why else would they > think it was important to interview the principal
A good reporter, imo, interviews anyone and everyone who might possess
pertinent information.
> and then go on to tell
> people that the school wasn't accredited (whatever that is supposed to
> mean)
One thing that accreditation means is that the school staff is employed
by the school district, not directly by the parents -- very important!
Accreditation doesn't necessarily mean that the school is either good or
bad, high or low quality, but it may indicate that teachers feel
constrainted to act/teach in a certain manner or lose their jobs. It
also might mean that their wages and/or their educations are inferior.
> and that all they had to do was register with the state? In the
> overall scheme of things, this makes absolutely no difference to the fact > that an adoptive mother beat her child to death.
I think it does.
In our society, we have decreased funding to social service agencies to
the point many are precluded, imo, from doing the job they are supposed
to do in a meaningful manner. To prop up the system, "mandated
reporters" (ie teachers, school nurses, etc.) are required by law to
report signs of abuse. Sadly, when that safety net isn't in place,
children die when they might have been saved by the intervention of a
mandated reporter.
Iow, we all share some of the blame in this case because we (society)
have time and time again voted against local initiatives that support
quality services to children and for children. We as a nation, again
imo, simply don't exhibit a caring attitude toward children, especially
if it involves the expenditures of $$$$$.
I've seen this type of
> article too many times to recall. Would it make any difference that the > child was in a non-accredited judo school or that the mother was a
> card-carrying member of the Democratic Party? No. So where is the
> connection here? If the writer wants to say that the school had a role or > that her Christianity had a role in the death, then have enough guts (and > the facts to back it) to print that. If not, leave it out of the story > altogether. If I turned in a paper at university which had this dead-end > innuendo in it, I'd get nailed by a couple letter grades. This is bad > journalism.
I don't think it's bad journalism.
Imo, the role of journalism is "to comfort the afflicted and to afflict
the comfortable". (Sorry, I don't remember the original author.)
Journalists can't comfort this child because he's now dead, but they can
cite factors which MIGHT have contributed to his death in order that
other children might be saved.
Best wishes to all. Sue T.
Btw, who here has read A CHILD CALLED "IT"? Very troubling story of
another child who was "saved" (but belatedly) by public school
personnel.
Sue Tretter
Steve White wrote:
>
> In article <celesta-ya0240800...@cnews.newsguy.com>,
> cel...@usa.net (Celeste) wrote:
>
if we > > are pushed, or push ourselves too far.
> There are a few people in this world who might kill a child under
stress. > But most of us most certainly would not.
I think Celeste is correct in saying that we are all CAPABLE. Please,
note that she didn't say we are likely to kill another human being.
> Don't ever make the mistake that we're like you.
I think we're all pretty similar in this regard. And I don't find much
difference between the Susan Smiths of the world and the parents I know
and respect. We are all fallible, imo. Sue T.
Celeste, I thought you weren't going to respond here so often anymore.
Julia Rivers
Steve White wrote:
>
> In article <celesta-ya0240800...@cnews.newsguy.com>,
> cel...@usa.net (Celeste) wrote:
>
> > about the seriously troubled nature of these children, often the
> > public begins to show at least a measure of mercy and sympathy for
> > what the parent must have been enduring. With such troubled
> > children, I doubt you can find good enough parents to parent
> > such a child.
>
> So, you're saying that it was somehow justifiable, or understandable, or
> excusable, that this woman killed her child? That is REALLY sick.
Yes Steve this is sick. Celeste let me tell you a story of a troubled
adopted child who got beat. I was taken from a loving mom and home when
I was three month old by a vindictive bdad. He moved me around to
different homes until I was six. I then went to live with his sister
who later adopted me at the age of 12. By the time I was six I had an
ulcer because I never knew where I would be living the next day. Now do
you want to know what I use to get beat for? I use to get beat because
I did not tell my amom I loved her or hugged her at the right time.
This was after hours of mental abuse telling me I was the devil's
spawn. And do you know why I was the devils spawn? Because amom was
drunk and feeling sorry for her self and I just did not come up to her
expectations. I never talked back to my amom I always internalized
everything, I always tried to be the perfect kid, I was a troubled child
Celeste. Did I deserve those beating because I was a troubled child
Celeste? According to what you wrote a special needs child who is beat
by aparents is justified in beating them because of being pushed to far
and snapping. I would like to know what I did so bad that I deserved
the beatings I got and I would also like to know what the hell a little
boy who cannot defend himself did to be murdered.
>
> I have no sympathy whatsoever for a person who would kill a child, be that
> person an adoptive parent, a bio-parent, or a complete stranger.
>
> Whatever troubles those children might have had (and no news report has
> said anything about that issue, from what I've seen so far), the troubles
> of the survivors are infinitely worse now that their mother has killed one
> of them.
>
> steve
--
Remove @nowhere.com and replace with @home.com
Searching for siblings: Bmom Lillian Joan Bonta
You where born a girl in Cinn. OH or KY, born 46 or 47,
You born unknown sex in Cinn. OH or KY Born 47 or 48
Searching for siblings: Bdad William Garnet McMee
Born in IN, sex unknown 1942 or 43 and born in OR in the 60's.
Sue Tretter
Celeste wrote:
<snip>
> No. Ultimately the responsibility lies on this parent
At least you're consistent.
But I disagree -- I think the "ultimate" responsibility is Society's.
We owe all children certain minimums, safety from parental abuse being
one.
who took on this
> tremendous, and when she saw she was failing miserably failed to do the
> right thing in seeking help
The parents could have and should have sought help. But for those
parents who don't ... There must be a back-up system, Celeste, one that
just might interfere with the fantasy of an isolationist family.
> or relinquishing the child to someone better > equiped to deal with his problems.
A "forever family" only if the child is compliant and amenable to the
parents' wishes?
> I am saying that a poor early > environment and the system is creating seriously troubled children
I agree there.
> that are > incapable of being parented
I don't think any young child is INCAPABLE of being parented, though
some adults are incapable of "good enough" parenting.
> in a normal setting, by normal parents,
What's normal? Is there a difference between what's "normal" in
adoptive and non-adoptive parenting?
> and > that these children have special behavioral needs that can drive > normal/untrained people to do things they wouldn't ever thought themselves > capable of. Not realizing that they were taking on far too much.
Are you talking about yourself and son #2?
> This mother and child were set up for tragedy, set up for a homicide.
But you said above that the parents were ultimately responsible and now
you're blaming the system. Which is it, Celeste?
It
> wasn't that that mother shouldn't have been a parent to any child, just not > a parent to THIS child, it's that that child should never been placed in > any normal environment or home, only a specially trained person or staff > under professional supervision could possibly handled or deal with some > more or very seriously troubled children. It's very sad, especially sad > that no one understood this child's needs or anticipated what could happen > when we fail to meet his needs. There are not many of us who could deal > with this, even the system/government doesn't want to pay for the cost of > saving a child like this..which they helped to create.
And of course WE drive the system.
JmhJmd
My discussion with Celeste continues:
JmhJmd:
>> Celeste wrote:
>>
>> > Obviously this is just
>> >another tragedy of delaying adoptions in the foster care system and a very
>> >troubled foster child that probably required institutionalization.
>> >
>> >Celeste
>>
>> Perhaps I'm wearing the wrong filters today, Celeste, but I see nothing
>in this
>> news article indicating that the child had any problems other than the
>mother
>> who appears to have killed him and the public officials who so badly
>served him
>
Celeste:
>I see the tell tale signs in this article which indicates that the boy was
>adopted at approx 6 years of age, and is the oldest of a sibling group, all
>born a year apart, adopted just two to two and a half years ago *out of the
>foster system*. The article states: " said Edie. "In this case, we were
>looking at someone who had been a longtime and well-thought-of foster
>parent."
>
You infer much from these few words, Celeste. We don't know how long the
children had been in foster care (or with how many foster families). The
children may or may not have had problems which affected the mother's behavior
in some way.
With respect to the mother, I actually agree with many of your points, aside
from the amount of credence you seem to give this one sentence regarding what
others thought of her. It's the classic quote, isn't it, whenever a murder
occurs? In my experience, the world at large has damn little concept of who
any of us are as a parent, or what parenting 'skills' we bring to the party.
>If that doesn't give away the truth of the matter, I don't know what does.
More information may. This article really tells us nothing about the children
or the mother.
>If you haven't been living in a vaccume, anyone knows how the foster system
>has been psychologically damaging and breaking the spirits of children like
>these.
No vacuum I'm aware of. Do I understand correctly, then, that it is your
opinion that all children in circumstances similar to those sketched in the
news article are to be presumed damaged? What of all children who live with
abusive parents (adoptive or otherwise)?
Let me say this. I spent too many years of my life in a situation in which the
acts of children were used to justify the abuse of a parent to accept that an
eight year old played any role in causing his own death, no matter how
'damaged'.
>Likely, seriously damaged, there was no way the case workers
>involved could have ensure that child's well-being with ANY parent.
Speculation, Celeste. The information provided does indicate that caseworkers
were given an opportunity to explore the situation. Whether they learned
enough to allow them to take action ( or could have if they had operated
differently) remains to be seen. My own experience leads me to suspect that
the mother had severe problems with a need to control others and with
expressing and managing her own anger. Speculation on my part, as well.
> What
>always seems to happen in such cases is that more than the child's life is
>destroyed, but also any parent that is brave enough to think they can help
>such troubled children. I say any one is capable of being pushed to the
>breaking point in such cases.
I agree that all can be pushed to a breaking point in cases of the type that
you believe is presented here. But the nature of the 'break' and the manner in
which it finds expression rarely results in the murder of the child.
> All that attempt to do this need to be
>warned and prepared to know that they are NOT immune to snapping and going
>off a deep end with the right amount of preasures.
Again, I don't agree that all are capable of going to this particular end of
the pool. Most people, imo, would be incapable of this particular act. I
agree that all need to know that their limits may be tested in these situations
- and that they had best know as much as they can about what those limits are
and the options available to them once those limits are reached.
> Knowing this about
>ourselves can actually prevent such a tragedies, because then we will know
>if we are being pushed too far when to get outside help or even perhaps
>giving up.
See above.
> This parent probably wanted so bad to help this child, to
>prevent that child from institutionalization, perhaps even too proud with
>her reputation as a foster parent that could handled it to admit she was
>failing. She most certainly did fail, but not because she was a "sick
>person" but because she failed to realize she is human and that any human
>being is capable of killing another given the right circumstances.
An armchair psychologist might be inclined to say you are projecting your own
circumstances and experiences onto this woman's situation, Celeste. What
caused her failure? We'll have to wait on that.
>We can't be too proud to admit we are human, we can and do fail as humans that
>we are ALL sinners. Don't make the mistake of being like the Pharisees
>thinking you are too good .
Celeste, the last thing I'm likely to think of myself in my role as parent is
that I am too good. I may be too proud to admit my human weaknesses at times,
but I have a pretty good idea of what they are. I'd like to thinkthat I do what
is necessary to counter those failings. Time will tell.
J.
>Celeste
>
Mary Hunt-Scoville
In article <celesta-ya0240800...@cnews.newsguy.com> cel...@usa.net (Celeste) writes:
>She was not in what you would call any "normal" mothering relationship with
>this child. When we live around others who are ill, if we aren't trained
>and aware of what we are dealing with, it can make us sick as well. The
>way she handled it was very unfortunate, but she was probably made to
>believe, even fooled herself into believing that this was something she
>could deal with, that she had enough experience in foster parenting to know
>what to do. As soon as we think we have enough experience and parenting
>know how, there is always a child that can come along and prove us wrong.
>This child obviously drove an experienced and well-thought-of foster parent
>to snap. We are all human, and in her same situation we might very well
>have made the same terrible mistakes that she did. WE, you and I, are no
>better than her. We are just fortunate not to end up in the same situation
>she found herself in.
I don't care what you think YOU might do, Celeste. I (and probably just about
anyone else here) would NEVER beat a child to death regardless of the problems
they have. If I found myself that engraged over something a CHILD did - which
I doubt - I would seek help immediately and remand the child over to the
custody of social services.
I cannot believe you are excusing the actions of this woman AND blaming the
child to boot. Shame on you!
-Mary
Lisa-Boo
On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 14:51:23 -0600, cel...@usa.net (Celeste) spake
thusly:
<snip>
>If that doesn't give away the truth of the matter, I don't know what does.
>If you haven't been living in a vaccume, anyone knows how the foster system
>has been psychologically damaging and breaking the spirits of children like
>these.
Especially if they landed in foster homes where they were locked in
their rooms.
> Likely, seriously damaged, there was no way the case workers
>involved could have ensure that child's well-being with ANY parent.
Oh, what BULLSHIT Celesta! The kid didn't beat HIMSELF to death, the
MOTHER abused him till he died! If he'd had a history of setting
fires then died in a fire that he set and the mother was charged with
negligence, your idiot argument might make sense. But no child CAUSES
an adult to beat them to DEATH with hands, feet, or wooden spoons!
>What always seems to happen in such cases is that more than the child's life is
>destroyed, but also any parent that is brave enough to think they can help
>such troubled children. I say any one is capable of being pushed to the
>breaking point in such cases. All that attempt to do this need to be
>warned and prepared to know that they are NOT immune to snapping and going
>off a deep end with the right amount of preasures.
Or putting a lock on a door even when DHS has TOLD you not to.
>Knowing this about ourselves can actually prevent such a tragedies, because then we will know
>if we are being pushed too far when to get outside help or even perhaps
>giving up.
Physician, heal theyself!
>This parent probably wanted so bad to help this child, to
>prevent that child from institutionalization, perhaps even too proud with
>her reputation as a foster parent that could handled it to admit she was
>failing. She most certainly did fail, but not because she was a "sick
>person" but because she failed to realize she is human and that any human
>being is capable of killing another given the right circumstances. We
>can't be too proud to admit we are human, we can and do fail as humans that
>we are ALL sinners. Don't make the mistake of being like the Pharisees
>thinking you are too good .
>Celeste
Does this last paragraph mean you're going to admit you need help? Or
even that you shouldn't have locked YOUR foster kids in their rooms?
Lisa-Boo
Chair, Porcine Music Theory.
To reply, remove mommyboo from the email address,
elsewise it'll bounce right back at you! :)
Lisa-Boo
On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 13:24:47 -0600, cel...@usa.net (Celeste) spake
thusly:
<snip>
>Children adopted as infants are less likely to be abused by their adoptive
>parents than older or seriously damaged foster children. That's why they
>call these "special needs" children.
>Celeste
If I ever needed proof of how deranged (in my opinion) you are, the
above paragraph is a gold mine.
You're blaming the VICTIMS, Celeste!
GSLCVK
From the U.S. News story about the trial of Renee Polreis, ultimately convicted
of murdering her son:
The Polreis story began in 1996, when the long-married, affluent
couple--he is a vice president of ConAgra Red Meat Cos., she owns an
electrolysis salon--decided to adopt a second son. (They had adopted an
American child, Isaac, in 1992.) Through an agency called Rainbow House
International they found a Russian boy: The video showed a blue-eyed,
blond, plump-cheeked toddler romping with other kids. In July 1995, they
flew to Moscow and drove to an orphanage in Tula, an uneasy trip for the
devoutly Christian Renee, who feared adopting a child from "a bunch of
atheists," her friends told police. The couple brought David to their new
split-level home in Greeley.
Northern Colorado is the nation's center for the treatment of attachment
disorder. Norton himself trained with Dr. Foster Cline of the Attachment
Center at Evergreen, the most well-known purveyor of attachment disorder
diagnoses and therapies. According to statements given to police by
Polreis's friends, Norton told her that David's chances of developing a
happy bond with the family were slight and that he might well be
dangerous and grow up to be a criminal like serial killer Ted Bundy. In
the attachment disorder support group Polreis joined, she heard parents
tell how they locked their bedroom doors each night, fearing for their
lives. Polreis talked of being so afraid of her son, friends reported to
police investigators, that she feared that "if she ever started hitting
David, she would not stop."
Norton denies ever telling Polreis that David would never bond or that
he would be without morals or conscience. "I even told her not to read
the literature, like High Risk: Children Without a Conscience [the
bestselling book on attachment disorder], which is very, very scary." In
fact, Norton testified, he had seen marked improvement at each session
with David. He had seen the toddler hand his mother a baby bottle and
climb into her arms to be fed. In their final session the boy had rolled
into his mother's lap, held her face, and kissed it all around. "When
that happened, Mrs. Polreis got a little rigid, and that concerned me,"
Norton told the court. Polreis asked for medication for depression and
stress. Norton asked to see her by herself, but she never came back.
Bright, a daycare worker, describes Renee as "a mother who cared deeply about
her children. She would often visit with me for 20 minutes, wanting to know how
the boys' day had gone." David's father was equally loving, running and playing
with the kids. "I used to watch
them," says Bright, "and think `what a fortunate child.' " Renee still
brings her other son, Isaac, to the center and seems to Bright totally
unchanged. "She's at peace; she shows no anguish, which I believe is
because of her faith. Her theology makes it easy to dismiss what
happened. She believes that David is in a better place."
Even Renee's husband saw no serious problem with his younger son; when Renee
wanted to give David up and learned of an Albuquerque couple eager to adopt
him, friends told police, her husband said no.
On Friday, February 9, David Polreis Sr. left for a short trip to
Houston, leaving his wife alone all weekend with the boys for the first
time. To ease her daughter's burden, Renee's mother took Isaac to stay
with her at her nearby home. At 4 a.m. on Saturday, Renee called her
brother Kevin Risk and their mother and told them David had been
sleeping with her when he began choking. They hurried over, they later
told police, and found Renee giving mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to
David, who had brown liquid seeping from his nose. Renee also called a
friend, Kathy Teal, and asked her to come over. She then phoned Norton
and another therapist: Both later told an investigator that Renee
admitted to them that she had hurt David. When Norton got the call, he
dialed 911.
Finally, at 4:17 a.m., Renee herself called for an ambulance. When the
paramedics got to the house, they found only Teal with the boy, who was
lying on his back on the bathroom floor, wearing red-and-blue pajamas
with plastic feet. When they opened his pajamas, they asked about his
cuts and bruises. Teal told them that he was an unattached child. Medic
Curt Walter told police that everyone in the house was strangely calm.
David was taken to North Colorado Medical Center in Greeley. The
23-pound boy was bruised over 90 percent of his body, the worst of it on
his genitals: His testicles were swollen to the size of plums. His
condition was so grave he was flown to Children's Hospital in Denver to
be treated by a trauma team specializing in child abuse. Dr. Emily
Dobyns told police that David had finger marks on his arms, blistered
buttocks, and linear cuts on his abdomen, as if struck with a
straight-edged object. She called it "one of the worst beatings" she had
ever seen. An autopsy found massive generalized blunt trauma, causing
respiratory arrest and brain death. A police officer scraped David's
fingernails for signs of struggle; he noted they "were very clean and
well groomed."
Renee's brother Kevin went to the hospital. So did her husband, after
rushing back from Houston. He could be heard, a police officer reported,
sobbing uncontrollably in his dead son's room. Renee stayed away: She
was "hospital phobic," she told the police, and was too busy finding a
lawyer. Later that morning, when she refused to let officers into her
home, they got a warrant. Their search turned up two broken wooden
spoons and bloodied diapers in the kitchen trash. On the counter they
found the wooden handle of a rubber spatula, spattered with what DNA
testing reportedly showed was David's blood. When police interviewed
Kevin, he told them he had seen Renee discipline Isaac by making him
stand by the toilet and drop his pants. She would swat him with a wooden
spoon and say a prayer.
Cain and Abel. Polreis was arrested the next day but was freed when her
husband posted the $80,000 cash bond. She sat in the front row at
David's memorial service at St. Paul's Congregational Church. Mourners
were invited to make out checks to the Attachment Center at Evergreen.
Renee has continued to attend St. Paul's every Sunday. Late last month,
just a few weeks before her trial was to begin, she waved excitedly and
beamed with pride as Isaac sang in a children's program. Wearing a
lavender dress, her black hair neatly bobbed, she listened serenely as
Pastor Steven Oeffling delivered a sermon on Adam and Eve: "They were
wonderful parents. And they had a good son named Abel. They also had a
son named Cain, from the same home and parents, that caused this family
great grief and pain."
Yet if it is well documented that neglect in infancy can cause severe
damage to a child, the eagerness with which many therapists have seized
upon the diagnosis is worrisome to researchers, who feel the label is
being applied to adopted children too quickly and much too frequently.
They are alarmed, for example, that many clinicians who claim expertise
in treating the disorder have rejected the definition used in the
official Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM IV)
as inadequate, asserting that it fails to include many symptoms. Among
those left out, author Ken Magid asserts in High Risk, are "viciousness
to pets and devil worship." University of California--Davis Prof.
Phillip Shaver, who is editing a handbook on attachment theory and
research, says that "most of what is written about attachment disorder
is by clinicians who don't know much about the research or much about
the theory. Attachment disorder is a vague term that's become very
popular to the dismay of those who work in serious science."
Still more disturbing is the nature of therapies some clinicians
employ--treatment for which worried parents often pay thousands of
dollars. In "holding" or "rage reduction" therapy, four or five adults
forcibly hold down a child, sometimes swaddled in a blanket, arms pinned
to his sides in an "angel wrap." He is then provoked into a rage: The
therapist or parent jabs at the child's ribs, presses a fist or elbow
into his abdomen, shakes him, pours water in his face, taunts him, and
shouts. Then the adult professes love. Children subjected to this
treatment scream in pain, plead for mercy, and are praised for "getting
out all the bad feelings of childhood" and "capitulating . . .
acknowledging who is boss." Michael Pines, a psychologist at the
Association for the Treatment and Training in the Attachment of
Children, has said that "for kids with severe symptoms, the
interventions need to be intrusive and confrontational. . . . Making the
child acknowledge his rage is key to healing." Paula Pickle, executive
director of the Evergreen attachment center, describes it as "revisiting
the trauma so the child can work it out a different way." She also
describes a therapy designed to access "traumatic memories stored in
sensory motor memory by going back to that development stage"; the
therapist "regresses" the patient to his first year by holding him
across the lap like an infant…
Trauma bond. Critics of these therapies call them a barbaric form of
brainwashing. For a child previously restrained or abused, says Peter
Fraenkel, director of research at New York's Ackerman Institute for the
Family, such therapy risks "re-enacting the abuse and retraumatizing the
child." He adds that "the idea that you can age-regress someone has
never been established." Beverly James, author of the Handbook for
Treatment of Attachment-Trauma Problems in Children, believes that the
only bond formed by holding therapy is a trauma bond, like that hostages
feel for their captors. If the kids succumb, she says, it is out of
terror rather than love. Therapist Byron Norton used holding therapy on
his own adopted son but later rejected it, turning instead to the "play
therapy" he used with David Polreis. "My philosophy was less controlling
than that model," he says. As for the efficacy of these therapies: The
Attachment Center Web site has a "research" page, which offers just one
study speaking to their effectiveness, the doctoral dissertation of a
student at the Professional School of Psychology in Sacramento.
The brutal nature of holding therapy was tragically proved last January,
when Donald Lee Tibbets, 37, a nurse from Midvale, Utah, was sentenced
to up to five years in prison for the July 1996 murder of his 3-year-old
adopted daughter, Krystal. He killed her using the therapy to cure her
attachment disorder, said to have been caused by abuse in her biological
home and frequent moves to different foster homes. The therapy, he
testified, involved pinning the 35-pound girl to the ground with his
body and pressing his fist into her abdomen to evoke and release her
pent-up rage. Even when another foster child told Tibbets that Krystal
was turning blue and "looked dead," he continued. Defense Attorney Ed
Brass told the court that Tibbets had been taught that the child's loss
of consciousness was normal "dissociation" and that she would revive;
she died "because Tibbets loved her so much and believed so much in the
therapy." He also noted that holding therapy had been recommended by the
Utah Division of Family Services when Krystal was adopted…
Deputy District Attorney Todd Taylor, a 32-year-old Greeley native with
two sons, ages 2 and 7, has been prosecuting child abuse cases for many
years. David Polreis's death and the responses it stirred have deeply
disturbed him. After the trial is over, he says, he will resign.
Christopher Alan Becker
Lisa-Boo (lis...@mommyboo.ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 13:24:47 -0600, cel...@usa.net (Celeste) spake
: thusly:
: <snip>
: >Children adopted as infants are less likely to be abused by their adoptive
: >parents than older or seriously damaged foster children. That's why they
: >call these "special needs" children.
: >Celeste
: If I ever needed proof of how deranged (in my opinion) you are, the
: above paragraph is a gold mine.
Unfortunately, Boo, older children are termed "special needs" in BC where
I come from. IT puts a lot of people off adopting them. Whether or not
they are at a greater risk, I don't really know.
: You're blaming the VICTIMS, Celeste!
: Lisa-Boo
: Chair, Porcine Music Theory.
What's a Porcine Music Theory?
: To reply, remove mommyboo from the email address,
: elsewise it'll bounce right back at you! :)
Chris
Steve White
> She was not in what you would call any "normal" mothering relationship with
> this child. When we live around others who are ill, if we aren't trained
> and aware of what we are dealing with, it can make us sick as well. The
> way she handled it was very unfortunate, but she was probably made to
> believe, even fooled herself into believing that this was something she
> could deal with, that she had enough experience in foster parenting to know
> what to do.are just fortunate not to end up in the same situation
> she found herself in.
Alternately, she was a sociopath who fooled the system and beat the
children for no good reason at all. And the children weren't "ill", they
were scared to death. And one was beaten to death.
It's equally plausible.
And it's positively scary to see you continue to make excuses for this woman.
steve
Lisa-Boo
On 29 Mar 1998 22:44:08 GMT, cbe...@is.dal.ca (Christopher Alan
Becker) spake thusly:
>Lisa-Boo (lis...@mommyboo.ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>: On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 13:24:47 -0600, cel...@usa.net (Celeste) spake
>: thusly:
>
>: <snip>
>
>: >Children adopted as infants are less likely to be abused by their adoptive
>: >parents than older or seriously damaged foster children. That's why they
>: >call these "special needs" children.
>: >Celeste
>
>
>: If I ever needed proof of how deranged (in my opinion) you are, the
>: above paragraph is a gold mine.
>Unfortunately, Boo, older children are termed "special needs" in BC where
>I come from. IT puts a lot of people off adopting them. Whether or not
>they are at a greater risk, I don't really know.
I know older kids are termed special needs -- that's not why I think
Celeste (in my opinion) is a lunatic. I think she's deranged (in my
opinion) because she's saying that infants are less likely to be
abused than older children -- implying that it is the child's AGE, not
the aparent's actions, which *causes* abuse.
> : You're blaming the VICTIMS, Celeste!
>: Lisa-Boo
>: Chair, Porcine Music Theory.
>What's a Porcine Music Theory?
That's where you teach a pig to sing :)
Lisa-Boo
Chair, Porcine Music Theory.
Christopher Alan Becker
Ca> <351efd1f....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>:
Distribution:
Lisa-Boo (lis...@mommyboo.ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: On 29 Mar 1998 22:44:08 GMT, cbe...@is.dal.ca (Christopher Alan
: Becker) spake thusly:
WOW! It's been a long time since I "spake" anything.
Lisa-Boo:
: I know older kids are termed special needs -- that's not why I think
: Celeste (in my opinion) is a lunatic. I think she's deranged (in my
: opinion) because she's saying that infants are less likely to be
: abused than older children -- implying that it is the child's AGE, not
: the aparent's actions, which *causes* abuse.
That's what I figured. But you included the first part about "special
needs" so I wasn't sure.
: >What's a Porcine Music Theory?
: That's where you teach a pig to sing :)
Jeepers. What have I been doing with my life? Is there good money in
this?
: Lisa-Boo
: Chair, Porcine Music Theory.
: To reply, remove mommyboo from the email address,
: elsewise it'll bounce right back at you! :)
Chris
Kym Andrews
> To see what some adoptees have had to endure from some adoptive
> parents check out "True Tales of Atrocious Adoptions" at
> http://www.bastards.org/library/harsh.htm
>
> To see what some adoptees managed to escape in terms of scary
> birthparents, check out "True Tales of Revolting Reunions" at
> http://www.bastards.org/search/rev.htm
>
> To learn about LDAs (Late Discovery Adoptees - adoptees whose parents
> loved them so much they pretended they were blood-relatives) - see
> http://www.ryzome.com/LDA/
Let's add one more to these options.......a place to go and see what some
adoptees were blessed with, a happy adoptive family. Do you have a URL for
that? I would like to know, because the only ones I see are on adoption
agencies pages and are they paid or not? I am just wondering.
Kym
Kym Andrews
> Children adopted as infants are less likely to be abused by their
adoptive
> parents than older or seriously damaged foster children. That's why they
> call these "special needs" children.
>
> Celeste
I find this hard to believe. Are their studies on this or are you just
making an assumption? I would imagine it would be no different. If someone
was going to abuse, why would "only" abuse older kids? Or are you saying
that it is easier to get these "special needs" kids and therefore they
sometimes, hastily, get put into bad situation by the system? I'm kinda
unclear on what you are trying to say?
Kym
Kym Andrews
> Kirbey, all children that are hard to place are referred to as "special
> needs" in a placement context. Older children are considered special
needs
> as far as what they need post-placement because adjustment to a new
family is
> , speaking generally, much harder for an older child than it is for an
infant
> or young toddler.
You know, in the state of GA, a 24 hour old African-American male infant is
considered "special needs", even if he's perfectly healthy!!! Really says
something doesn't it?
Kym
Ann Willey
NurseNell (ecar...@pioneerplanet.infi.net) writes:
>
> As an adoptive parent I appreciate that this story was posted. Any abuse
> of children is deplorable. It should never happen. That an adoptive parent
> would abuse a child is doubly tragic IMHO because by virtue of adopting
> they are entrusted with another parent's child. This is really a sacred
> trust, and abusing adopted children breaks this trust in its worst
> possible form. When I read this article my first thought was how in the
> world did a woman her age get to adopt? She was 58 years old and adopted
> the children in 1995, making her 55 years old when she adopted. Sorry, 55
> is just plain too old to be parenting young children, never mind children
> arriving with plenty of baggage from the foster care system. I'm 53,
> grandchildren are wonderful, younger parents need to be doing the
> parenting.
>
> This case also illustrates the shortcomings of this country's child
> protection system. It's too often that you need a dead child to have
> sufficient evidence of neglect and abuse.
>
> --
> Elizabeth, American by birth, Irish by the grace of God
>
> "A walk through the ocean of Jessica's soul would scarcely get your feet wet." Moses 1/4/1998
Elizabeth,
While for the most part I agree with what has been said and personally
I would not choose to be begin parenting again at such an age. The age
of this woman is not the issue, when I was a baby of two weeks old my
grandmother aged 57 and her sister aged 63 took on my care and raised
me, I left their home at the age of 21. Age can not be used as an
indicator for abusiveness. My grandmother passed away last Tuesday
aged 94, she was one of the most caring, loving people I have had the
privalage to know. Her sister also had a great impact on my life, it is
because of these two people that I am interesed in adopting, to give
to some child who needs care, I should add that I do have four bio
children and the older two are really behind us in our decision to
adopt.
Ann
--
ao...@freenet.carleton.ca(Ann Willey)
"To thine own self be true"
Kitty Trodglen
Celeste wrote:
>In article <199803291725...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
>jmh...@aol.com (JmhJmd) wrote:
>Celeste wrote:
>No we wouldn't have to assume anything. If this is how I suspect, this boy
>likely was showing definite signs of problems. Interventions are costly.
>The government doesn't want to pay for it. They tend to wait until
>something terrible happens to do anything, sometimes that ends up being too
>late as it likely was for this child.
Celeste people from outside the "family" were reacting to his bruses. People that wern't putting blame on him, but on his "mother". If I remember corectly, it was after these complaints that she moved the kids to a different school.
>An eight year old isn't accountable for his actions, the adults are. But
>let's realize the truth that poorly behaved children are more at risk to be
>abused than well behaved children. They're the children that can cause a
>normally non-abusive adult to act out abusively.
IMO Celeste, this is pure and utter BS. You will NEVER teach a child love and respect for both him/herself or for other people by corporal punishment. Neither will you be able to "teach" a child to "obey" with corporal Punishment. Yes, you might be able to teach them to shut-up. But that won't be out of loving and respecting you. It will be only out of fear...... Until the day this child grows up, and is able to tell you exactly where you can go........
>I personally have met
>very few adults who never lose their temper or become impatient with
>children.
Of course a parent will lose their temper or become impatient with their children. They're human. But from losing your temper and "swatting" your kid on the butt. There's a looooooong way to go to actually killing your child.
>Now take a child that will try your patience to the ever
>smoldering limits? And there are children who will do that, especially
>overly detached children. These children can not be just adopted away and
>forgotten, their special needs neglected. Caring for these children should
>require supervision and interventions at least until the child is well on
>his way to recovery.
>
>This story tells us that there was signs that there was a problem from the
>beginning.
Where does it say that??? Beeing a fosterchild doesn't always have to mean that you're a child delinquent!
> Why weren't they supervising his placement until he had fully
>adjusted to his new environment? Perhaps if a child doesn't adjust, he
>isn't able to adjust?
Yes, I do believe that many of us never were/are able to adjust to the environment. But you can NEVER blame the child for that!
>The child made the mother feel like a failure, and
>everything went down hill from there.
Double, tripple and Quadroople BS!!!!!!!!! How the heck can you justify that this "mother" killed her "son" because he made her feel like a failure???? IMO it's the child that was made to feel like a failure by his "mother"!!!
>She wasn't use to failing perhaps,
Yeah right..... First time failure results in a child murder..... Sheeeesh!
>he made her come face to face with the reality that --yes, she too is not
>immune, not perfect, a sinner. People who think all high'n-mighty about
>themselves, if someone comes along and bursts their bubble perhaps maybe
>are even more vulnerable to snapping then those of us who admit we are weak
>and imperfect.
Have you ever considered that this child might just have gotten killed for beeing the "strong" one of the siblings? The one that had the "guts" to stand up for something that he believed was wrong?? The one that maybe tried to "defend" his younger siblings????
>This child is another victim, or casualty of an impersonal foster care
>system.
You bet he is!!! There are many of us out here. It's just a VERY small % of the abuse that actually makes it to the headlines. Most of us have been conviently swept under the carpet in order to make things look good. I grew up in a extremly strict religious home. Where the "pastor" more or less took part in the punishments. He would give "advice" to my "loving" christian apars, how and what matter of corporal punishment I should reseive. How many lashings was apropriate for such and such....... What "tool" they sould use. And after each beating my amom would read to me from the Bible. Did that make me obey????? Hell nooo...... It made me shutup! and wait for "my time".
>Long term foster care is a total failure. Foster care needs to
>be short term, only one time occurances for any one child. No second and
>third chances.
Oh.... so what do you do with us if the first one doesn't work out? Have us put to sleep like a puppy no one wants?
JmhJmd wrote:
>> My own experience leads me to suspect that
>> the mother had severe problems with a need to control others and with
>> expressing and managing her own anger. Speculation on my part, as well.
>
>They said she had been a foster parent for a long time, they must have
>observed this by the time this adoption took place if this were true. If
>they knew this was true, why the heck would they have approved her to
>adopt?
Everyone is human Celeste..... Everyone can fail. The system is human. And it is "very" easy to trick a human beeing into believing something or another. Maybe this "mother" got a "kick" out of beeing soooo well thought of by socitiy(sp) her beeing so bighearted and all as to take care of these "horrid" children! It wouldn't suprise me if the reason she transfered the children to a different school was because "someone" was getting to be abit too nosy. Besides, it wasn't just the boy she was beating on. It was also the younger children.......
>I suspect that the child's behavior was out of control, and she was
>in over her head and too proud to surrender and admit she had met her
>match, that case she wasn't strong enough to deal with. The rubberband
>snapped.
BS again Celeste, you don't know that. IMO this rubberband you're talking about probably wasn't there in the first place.
>> > What
>> >always seems to happen in such cases is that more than the child's life is
>> >destroyed, but also any parent that is brave enough to think they can help
>> >such troubled children. I say any one is capable of being pushed to the
>> >breaking point in such cases.
JmhJmd's reply
>> I agree that all can be pushed to a breaking point in cases of the type that
>> you believe is presented here. But the nature of the 'break' and the
>manner in
>> which it finds expression rarely results in the murder of the child.
AMEN!! I second that opinion!
Celeste,
I am a "special needs child" I was adopted thru a private adoption. My a-pars would have NEVER been able to pass thru a "regular" screening. I was 4 yrs. old. and had been thrown back and forth. My dear b-father kidnapped me when I was 7 mo. old. The first months his ever changing girlfreinds would "take care" of me. Finaly he flew me out to Florida to live with his mother. I lived 3 yrs out in the swamps of Fl. with only my granny and her retarded daughter. My b-mother was then in a mental institution for "losing her mind", when she was not able to find me. When I was 4 yrs old dear granny flew me back to Calif. dropped me off on the curb outside of my b-moms house, Said: Your mamma lives in there. Then she took off..... Do you have any idea at all how that would have felt for a 4 yr. old??? Standing there all alone. Not knowing anyone. Not knowing what I'd done wrong for her to dump me like that. Do you know how much curage it took to walk up to that damn door and ring a doorbell I barely was able to reach??? Do you know how I felt when the door opened and a "strange" lady was standing there wondering who I was??? Do you know how hard it was to ask: Are you my mommy? SHIT Celeste!!! You have NO idea what you're talking about when you say that corporal punishment is something that is justified when dealing with "troubled" children! We've been punished all our lives. What we need is Love. Not more punishment in our new homes. Yes it is hard to love a child that is more or less like a "wild animal". And if your not damn sure you would be able to do just that...... walk on by.... But I would guess it is easier to hit us to get your point across to us... afterall that is the language we're used too..... :(
And no, my b-mom couldn't handle me. She told me when I found her that I was totaly "wild" She also said that she "would" have killed me if she would have kept me..... But did she snap??? No she did what she thought was best for me. She gave me up to what she hoped would be a loving family. Need I say that it was the "wrong" family.........
I am now a mother myself. I will forever suffer for what I've been thru. I have PTSD, PA's and depression disorders. And if there is anyone in this world that could "snap" it would be me...... But from that, to killing my children..... Celeste, I'd slit my own throat, before I'd lay my hands on my children!
Kitty
Correct e-mail address:
kitt...@hem2.passagen.se
Markg91359
Celeste wrote:
>You weren't deliberately trying to send a stereotypically false impression
>about "religious mothers" were you?
This is my "take" on the "Christian Mother Beats Child to Death". The headline
at first glance seems unfair. After all, mothers of all religious persuasions
(and no religious persuasion) unfortunately have committed acts of child abuse.
It seems to me, though, that Christianity has to take some blame for child
abuse in this sense. If we open the Bible we go back to all those verses that
speak of things like "spare the rod, spoil the child". The older that I get
the more these verses sicken me. I've heard people give them different
interpretations. But, the sad reality of it is that when it comes right down
to it, it would have been much better for children if they had never been
written. These verses function as a justification for certain whacko
fundamentalist Christian groups to urge the beating of children. How many
children have been abused or beaten because of these verses and the whacko
beliefs that go along with them?
MarkG
"Though all the winds of evil and truth were loosed to do do battle with one
another, what of if? Whoever, knew truth the worst in a fair and open fight?"
....John Stuart Mills ( a paraphrase)
MarkG
Bonnie Gordon
Kym Andrews <>
> Let's add one more to these options.......a place to go and see what some
> adoptees were blessed with, a happy adoptive family. Do you have a URL for
> that? I would like to know, because the only ones I see are on adoption
> agencies pages and are they paid or not? I am just wondering.
Kym: By now you must have realized that many of us who post here had good
adoption experiences. My family, though by no means perfect, was a loving,
happy adoptive family. I think Lisa-Boo, TTina, Chris and many others would
say the same. A lot of us who are angry about closed records or other
adoption issues are NOT angry at our adoptive families or sorry we were
placed for adoption. IMO, a lot of adoptees do not consider adoption a big
issue in their lives at all, so of course, they are not writing about it on
the internet. A lot of adoptees who've posted their stories on the bastards
site are posative about their adoptive families too. There are all kinds of
stories there. Regards, Bonnie
Kym Andrews
> So - adoptive parents are fallible, and so is the screening system. But
the
> challenges we face are more than most parents face - and hell, I am a
better
> mother for it! Hope my kids are better off for having me too, imperfect
and
> all...
>
> Julia
>
I'm sure they are. Good points made in this post. How do you handle the
additional stress of such children? How common are these problems? Did
you know what you were taking on from the beginning? Not ot imply that you
would not have, but I was wondering.
Kym
Bonnie Gordon
GSLCVK <gsl...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199803292236...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> From the U.S. News story about the trial of Renee Polreis, ultimately
convicted
> of murdering her son:
>
> The Polreis story began in 1996, when the long-married, affluent
> couple--he is a vice president of ConAgra Red Meat Cos., she owns an
> electrolysis salon--decided to adopt a second son. (They had adopted an
> American child, Isaac, in 1992.) Through an agency called Rainbow House
> International they found a Russian boy: believed so much in the
> therapy." Hi Gordon and all. This is just something I
happen to know, not an endoursement or otherwise. Rainbow House handled only
the international portion of this adoption. They did not do this couple's
home study, which was done by a local Colorado home study agency. This is
very common in international adoption as there are not agencies that handle
international adoptions in that many communities. Rainbow House has since
changed their process for reviewing homestudies and for reviewing homestudy
agencies with which they will work. Rainbow House also lined up people
interested in adopting David, but Mr. Polreis would not agree to a
disruption. Bonnie
Bonnie Gordon
Christopher Alan Becker <cbe...@is.dal.ca> wrote in article
<6fmiro$jlc$1...@News.Dal.Ca>...
> Unfortunately, Boo, older children are termed "special needs" in BC where
> I come from. IT puts a lot of people off adopting them. Whether or not
> they are at a greater risk, I don't really know.
>
Older children are deemed special needs because they are harder to place.
This is a fact, not an attempt to demean older children. They are so labeled
in an attempt to direct more resources towards placing them. Perhaps some
other term would better suit this purpose, but I support targeting resources
toward hard to place children. As far as greater risk, I think Anne Babb has
spoken about this numerous times in the newsgroup. Anne has adopted older
kids and written a book about "special needs" adoption. Older kids MAY be at
greater risk for attachment problems because it is more likely they have been
moved a number of times and had traumatic experiences than it is for a baby.
Babies are placed for different reasons than older kids and abuse and neglect
are often not part of the picture. Older children usually come to be placed
for adoption because of abuse or neglect in their birth families, though not
always. Bonnie
Kitty Trodglen
Ann Willey wrote:
<6fog1e$h...@freenet-news.carleton.ca>...
>
>NurseNell (ecar...@pioneerplanet.infi.net) writes:
>>
>> As an adoptive parent I appreciate that this story was posted. Any abuse
>> of children is deplorable. It should never happen. That an adoptive parent
>> would abuse a child is doubly tragic IMHO because by virtue of adopting
>> they are entrusted with another parent's child. This is really a sacred
>> trust, and abusing adopted children breaks this trust in its worst
>> possible form. When I read this article my first thought was how in the
>> world did a woman her age get to adopt? She was 58 years old and adopted
>> the children in 1995, making her 55 years old when she adopted. Sorry, 55
>> is just plain too old to be parenting young children, never mind children
>> arriving with plenty of baggage from the foster care system. I'm 53,
>> grandchildren are wonderful, younger parents need to be doing the
>> parenting.
>>
>> This case also illustrates the shortcomings of this country's child
>> protection system. It's too often that you need a dead child to have
>> sufficient evidence of neglect and abuse.
>>
>> --
>> Elizabeth, American by birth, Irish by the grace of God
>>
>> "A walk through the ocean of Jessica's soul would scarcely get your feet wet." Moses 1/4/1998
>
Ann's reply:
>Elizabeth,
> While for the most part I agree with what has been said and personally
>I would not choose to be begin parenting again at such an age. The age
>of this woman is not the issue, when I was a baby of two weeks old my
>grandmother aged 57 and her sister aged 63 took on my care and raised
>me, I left their home at the age of 21. Age can not be used as an
>indicator for abusiveness. My grandmother passed away last Tuesday
>aged 94, she was one of the most caring, loving people I have had the
>privalage to know. Her sister also had a great impact on my life, it is
>because of these two people that I am interesed in adopting, to give
>to some child who needs care, I should add that I do have four bio
>children and the older two are really behind us in our decision to
>adopt.
>
Hello Ann,
Yes, I know that this womans age isn't the issue here, but I felt I wanted to add my point of view to the "age" stuff... I do not want you to take this ment as anything "bad" twords your grandma and aunt. (please) There are some cases that will work out just fine with "older" parents or "older" relatives. I would believe that in your case, your were "dubble" fortunate. First: beeing your grandmother and bloodrelated you were instantly family. Second: You were not the first child to be raised by your grandma. She had done it before when raising her "own" children. I'm am not trying to say that this necessarily is why things worked out so good for you. But imagine it compleatly different for a few minutes. My a-pars were 50 and 53 when they adopted me. a "special needs 4yr old" They couldn't get anything else due to their age....... They had never had anything to do with young children before. There were at least 2 generations that seperated us. They were "old fashiond" And that was how they had intended to raise me. Kids at school would tease me for my long dresses and tightly braided hair. I was beaten for anything and everything. From not sitting up straight at the table. or not paying attention when I as a 4 to 10 yr. old and they would force me to sit and look wellbehaved for hours, when they had company.......
I will not say that I think it should be "forbidden" to adopt when your over a certain age. But I do believe that it shouldn't be allowed for a "new" parent to be so "old". There are so many things in the world that has changed from when they were young. Heck, I'm 38 yrs old. My son is 14 and I've got problems understanding him at times.:)
It's even harder if there are 2 generations between parent and child.
Ann, I'm so sorry your Grandma passed away. You sound like you were truly blessed to have been able to grow up with her.
Love & Light
Kitty
bkpeters
Steve White wrote in message ...
<snip Celeste's child-killer defending>
>For someone who is whining about inaccuracies in the interpretation of
>this story, you are just fill of inaccuracies.
>
>First: you don't know that these children were troubled. You have no idea
>what their situation was.
Exactly right. And remember Celeste - people in glass houses...
>Second: you have no idea whether this woman transferred the children to
>this unaccredited school as a means of "modifying" their environment. It's
>equally plausible that she was trying to hide her abuse from the
>authorities.
>steve
And obviously it worked. Maybe they subscribed to the "Spare the Rod and
Spoil the Child" method of teaching.
--
Kellee Peters, Proud Bastard & MOB-ster
Open Records for Adult Adoptees -- Period!
CDm...@bigfoot.com
ICQ#8680434
Born 11/18/66 Lima Ohio searching for b-mom (last name Burnett, age 29 at
time of my birth)
"I'd just like to say that being chosen as this month's Miss August is like
a compliment I'll remember for as long as I can. Right now I'm a freshman in
my fourth year at UCLA, but my goal is to become a veterinarian because I
love children!"
--Julie Brown "Cause I'm a Blonde"
bkpeters
Christopher Alan Becker wrote in message <6fkm3i$fec$1...@News.Dal.Ca>...
>Kellee, if you read between the lines, the writer of the article was
>implying that the school played a part in the death. Why else would they
>people that the school wasn't accredited (whatever that is supposed to
>overall scheme of things, this makes absolutely no difference to the fact
>article too many times to recall. Would it make any difference that the
>child was in a non-accredited judo school or that the mother was a
>card-carrying member of the Democratic Party? No. So where is the
>connection here? If the writer wants to say that the school had a role or
>that her Christianity had a role in the death, then have enough guts (and
>the facts to back it) to print that. If not, leave it out of the story
>altogether. If I turned in a paper at university which had this dead-end
>innuendo in it, I'd get nailed by a couple letter grades. This is bad
>journalism.
Hi Chris!
I totally agree with you. Celeste is just really ticking me off with this
blaming the kid crap! No child deserves to die and I really resent the fact
that Celeste is portraying this child in this way. Especially since she does
not know the particulars of this situation. She did not know this child or
his a-mom personally, so where does she get off saying this stuff?? You're
right. it does not matter where the kid went to school. If the school
suspected or had evidence of abuse and did not report it, then the school is
nearly as guilty as the mother.
>And I'm not defending Celeste!
Good for you!
>Celeste:
>: >Likely the already very troubled child was transfered to the school to
>: >modify his environment and minmize the negative influences he was
exposed
>: >to in attempt to straighten him out.
>A very silly assumption.
Yeah! Too bad she didn't just lock him in his room! Right Celeste??
bkpeters
Celeste wrote in message ...
>In article <6fkeac$cst$1...@defiant.fuse.net>, "bkpeters" <bkpe...@fuse.net>
wrote:
>> >I don't believe most of us have any
>> >idea just how difficult it is to raise these very damaged system
children.
>>
>> I wonder if those two boys who ambushed their classmates in Arkansas were
>> "damaged system children". Anyone who would plan and execute something
like
>> that seems pretty "damaged" to me.
>
>I have the impression that those children were products of divorce and
>broken families. It also seems that they grew up in enviroments that
>encouraged boys to know how to use guns and to be violent.
So does that excuse them for what they did? Should we just all say "OK, it's
how they were brought up. Never mind."
The world is
>increasingly becoming a very dark and evil place, eventually the darkness
>will completely take over. Wrong is prevailing, wrong is winning it seems.
>Yet there is hope, cause I know that the Lord, Our God Almighty has already
>won. This is His battle, and I choose to stand up for what is right, even
>if I must stand alone.
You're preaching to the choir here Celeste. I do attend church, you know.
(Well, you do now)
>> Perhaps no one was capable or prepared
>> >enough to raise this child? How can we judge unless we've tried it
>> >ourselves? Adopt any seriously damaged system children lately?
>>
>> No. Have you?
>
>No, I am the first to admit that with special training and education I
>would never dare attempt such an undertaking. The problem is that we have
>too many damaged children like this, not enough well trained individuals to
>handle them and they are placing these children in harms way by placing
>them in normal family environments with parents that have only average or
>slightly above average parenting skills. This setting these children and
>parents up for potentially abusive situations and in worse case scenarios,
>homicides. These children also tend to be abusive toward their parents,
>and even to murder their parents. So the dangers of being abused or killed
>goes both ways.
These children? Do you know them personally Celeste? Did you observe this
family in their home? Do you know what type of child he was or his siblings
are? Does that in any way justify his death?
<snip for the sake of space>
>She was not in what you would call any "normal" mothering relationship with
>this child. When we live around others who are ill, if we aren't trained
>and aware of what we are dealing with, it can make us sick as well. The
>way she handled it was very unfortunate, but she was probably made to
>believe, even fooled herself into believing that this was something she
>could deal with, that she had enough experience in foster parenting to know
>what to do. As soon as we think we have enough experience and parenting
>know how, there is always a child that can come along and prove us wrong.
>This child obviously drove an experienced and well-thought-of foster parent
>to snap.
See my comment above.
We are all human, and in her same situation we might very well
>have made the same terrible mistakes that she did. WE, you and I, are no
>better than her.
I never said I was. But when I discipline my children, I don't beat them
with a closet rod. Neither do I lock them in their rooms.
--
Kellee Peters, Proud Bastard & MOB-ster
Open Records for Adult Adoptees -- Period!
CDm...@bigfoot.com
ICQ#8680434
Born 11/18/66 Lima Ohio searching for b-mom (last name Burnett, age 29 at
time of my birth)
"I'd just like to say that being chosen as this month's Miss August is like
a compliment I'll remember for as long as I can. Right now I'm a freshman in
my fourth year at UCLA, but my goal is to become a veterinarian because I
love children!"
--Julie Brown "Cause I'm a Blonde"
www.bastards.org
We are just fortunate not to end up in the same situation
>she found herself in.
--
bkpeters
Celeste wrote in message ...
wrote:
>> So Celeste, are you saying that this child died because he was
"troubled"?
>> Are you defending the mother who beat her child to death????
>
>No. Ultimately the responsibility lies on this parent who took on this
>tremendous, and when she saw she was failing miserably failed to do the
>right thing in seeking help or relinquishing the child to someone better
>equiped to deal with his problems.
Or perhaps she was receiving a healthy stipend from the state to care for
these children and didn't want the gravy train to dry up. I mean they lived
in a trailer park, so I am assuming that they were not exactly the
Rockefeller's. Not that everyone living in a trailer park is bad or on
welfare, but most folks who reside there aren't wealthy either.
>I am saying that a poor early
>environment and the system is creating seriously troubled children that are
>incapable of being parented in a normal setting, by normal parents, and
>that these children have special behavioral needs that can drive
>normal/untrained people to do things they wouldn't ever thought themselves
>capable of. Not realizing that they were taking on far too much.
Point taken. Some of these kids are "damaged" as you put it earlier. But
that doesn't make it acceptable for him to have been killed. He didn't beat
himself to death.
> This mother and child were set up for tragedy, set up for a homicide. It
>wasn't that that mother shouldn't have been a parent to any child, just not
>a parent to THIS child, it's that that child should never been placed in
>any normal environment or home, only a specially trained person or staff
>under professional supervision could possibly handled or deal with some
>more or very seriously troubled children. It's very sad, especially sad
>that no one understood this child's needs or anticipated what could happen
>when we fail to meet his needs. There are not many of us who could deal
>with this, even the system/government doesn't want to pay for the cost of
>saving a child like this..which they helped to create.
>Celeste
Are you their social worker? Do you know these people personally? If not,
how can you presume to know what kind of child he was? Or what kind of woman
she is? For all you or I know, she may have been high on cocaine and he
asked her for a drink of water before bedtime. Or maybe he wet the bed. Or
maybe he was making too much noise while she was trying to watch TV. The
point is, we don't know. I'm not saying that there aren't children who
shouldn't be placed with "normal" parents or in "normal" homes. I'm sure
that is true in some cases, but since we don't know the whole story here,
you shouldn't be taking sides. The fact still remains that a child has died
a horrible death, and his mother is the one who killed him. Whether she
meant to or not, whether she wanted to or not, he is still dead. That is the
true tragedy here.
bkpeters
Celeste wrote in message ...
>swh...@interaccess.com (Steve White) wrote:
>> And it's positively scary to see you continue to make excuses for this
woman.
>I am not making excuses for this woman, I feel I am seeing this more
>realistically. But I blame the system for this. This woman did NOT commit
>a "murder" in the first degree in legal terms, she committed
>"manslaughter", or perhaps second degree murder.
I suppose that is going to make his siblings feel better. Of course, what
would one logically expect to happen if you beat a child with a closet rod?
Pretty much what did happen.
She didn't premeditately
>plan to adopt and kill a child. Going into to it, she was probably very
>well intended. She attempted to love a child that was damaged
>psychologically and unable to appreciate or return love. She couldn't
>understand why he wasn't responding to all her hard work and effort to give
>him a chance at a life. She likely drew a conclusion that he was just a
>"bad" kid, and that licken the tar out of him was going to fix whatever was
>wrong with him, when that didn't work it got out of control.
I'll say it again Celeste. Do you know these people personally? If not, how
can you say that this is what happened?
She is to
>blame for her actions, she is accountable...she must be punished,
>imprisoned or incarcerated for what she has done.
Finally you're making some sense. But if it were up to me, someone would
beat her to death. And Susan Smith would long ago have been drowned strapped
into a seat in a car. But I digress...
BUT mainly this WAS a
>fault of the system. The kid is dead, the woman will go to prison for the
>rest of her life, everyone's lives are damaged, and the TRUE villan __THE
>FOSTER CARE SYSTEM__ gets off free! Why? Because they UNLOADED their
>problem on to someone else, a unlikely target/foster parent that will
>envitable bear all the responsibilties and pay the price for THEIR
>mismanagement of this child's case.
The system is partly to blame, but because they did not act when the abuse
was originally reported, not because they *dumped* this child on someone.
Had they checked the situation when the abuse was reported, perhaps the
child would not have been there to make the woman *snap*.
When are we going to hold the system
>accountable for their part in these tragedies? This will never end until
>we do.
I am in 100% agreement with you there Celeste. The system needs to be
rethought or retooled. Then maybe next time there are dozens of reports of
abuse, the situation will actually be examined and the children will be
removed before harm can come to them.
bkpeters
Celeste wrote in message ...
>like this prior to this to indicate to case workers that a child might be
>in danger in her home.
The article did say that there were in the neighborhood of a dozen report of
abuse in the household, not just of this child but his siblings as well. I
would say that that would at the bare minimum indicate that someone should
make a home visit (preferably unscheduled) to verify this. This wasn't done.
>An eight year old isn't accountable for his actions, the adults are.
But in previous posts, Celeste, you said that the boy most likely caused his
mother to "snap". Make up your mind.
>But let's realize the truth that poorly behaved children are more at risk
to be
>abused than well behaved children. They're the children that can cause a
>normally non-abusive adult to act out abusively.
That is true, but it is also true that some parents lose their temper while
drunk or on drugs. A child in that type of home situation is just a likely
to be beaten for accidentally spilling his milk on the table as for anything
willfully intentional. Or for some imagined reason.
I personally have met
>very few adults who never lose their temper or become impatient with
>children. Now take a child that will try your patience to the ever
>smoldering limits? And there are children who will do that, especially
>overly detached children. These children can not be just adopted away and
>forgotten, their special needs neglected. Caring for these children should
>require supervision and interventions at least until the child is well on
>his way to recovery.
>
>This story tells us that there was signs that there was a problem from the
>beginning. Why weren't they supervising his placement until he had fully
>adjusted to his new environment? Perhaps if a child doesn't adjust, he
>isn't able to adjust? The child made the mother feel like a failure, and
>everything went down hill from there. She wasn't use to failing perhaps,
>he made her come face to face with the reality that --yes, she too is not
>immune, not perfect, a sinner. People who think all high'n-mighty about
>themselves, if someone comes along and bursts their bubble perhaps maybe
>are even more vulnerable to snapping then those of us who admit we are weak
>and imperfect.
>This child is another victim, or casualty of an impersonal foster care
>system. Long term foster care is a total failure. Foster care needs to
>be short term, only one time occurances for any one child. No second and
>third chances. It may be just a hard reality that an infant's need for
>protection and nurturing in the earliest months and years must take
>priority over preserving a family that is already found to be seriously
>neglectful or abusive.
Again Celeste, you don't know the particulars of this case, yet you speak
about it as if you were the case worker. At least learn to use the phrase
"in my opinion".
>What do you mean they had no opportunities? These children were wards of
>the state before they become adopted. When children are placed at these
>older ages there needs to be a longer supervision of that child's new
>enviroment and adjustment to it. The news report says there was signs of
>trouble from the git go.
Yes, there were several reports of abuse by the parent and the state did not
act upon them. And once the children were transferred to the private school,
the abuse went unreported. Perhaps the school didn't want to lose tuition
money by reporting it and possibly having the child pulled from the school,
therefore losing money for them.
L. Anne Babb
In article <6fo3vo$j...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, "Kym Andrews"
>You know, in the state of GA, a 24 hour old African-American male infant is
>considered "special needs", even if he's perfectly healthy!!! Really says
>something doesn't it?
Kym, minority race can qualify any child as having special needs under
federal adoption law.
Anne
_______________________
L. Anne Babb
anne...@homes4kids.org
Steve White
> ... But I think that painting people as all black and white,
> good and bad ...is ...well...frankly it's just plain dumb,
> stupid, short sighted and narrow minded. No Steve, people
> are ALL shades of gray.
Now THAT is one of the dumbest things you've said to date. And there's a
long list of contenders.
Among other things, it contradicts much of what you've previously written.
And to be clear, there are people who are truly evil. I could name several
relevant historical examples, but of course these would be lost on you.
And to be even more clear, there is very little gray in someone who would
beat a child to death.
> I am not making excuses for this woman, I feel I am seeing this more
> realistically. But I blame the system for this.
Then you proceed to make excuses for the woman.
The system has its share of responsibility. It failed to follow up on the
multiple complaints of the teachers at the public school. For that alone,
someone in the Department of Social Services should lose his/her job.
But the prime responsibility for the murder of a child is with the person
who commits the murder.
> This woman did NOT commit a "murder" in the first degree in legal
> terms, she committed "manslaughter", or perhaps second degree
> murder. She didn't premeditately plan to adopt and kill a child.
Let's hope you never practice law. Let's allow the real lawyers and jury
to do their jobs. And let's find you a legal dictionary so that you can
look up the definition of premeditation.
> ... and the TRUE villan __THE FOSTER CARE SYSTEM__ gets off free!
> Why? Because they UNLOADED their problem on to someone else ...
Nope, that isn't going to happen. People will be held accountable.
But you do have one point: the foster care system has deep troubles. After
all, they allowed you to be one.
steve
Christopher Alan Becker
Ca> <6fpmeq$ji4$1...@defiant.fuse.net>:
Distribution:
bkpeters (bkpe...@fuse.net) wrote:
: Hi Chris!
: I totally agree with you. Celeste is just really ticking me off with this
: blaming the kid crap! No child deserves to die and I really resent the fact
: that Celeste is portraying this child in this way. Especially since she does
: not know the particulars of this situation. She did not know this child or
: his a-mom personally, so where does she get off saying this stuff?? You're
: right. it does not matter where the kid went to school. If the school
: suspected or had evidence of abuse and did not report it, then the school is
: nearly as guilty as the mother.
I can't figure out what she has read that we haven't. Where was it said
that this kid was so "damaged"? I don't get it. Even so, it doesn't
excuse the mother for what she did. I just wanted to blast the writer for
a really bad job.
: >Celeste:
: >: >Likely the already very troubled child was transfered to the school to
: >: >modify his environment and minmize the negative influences he was
: exposed
: >: >to in attempt to straighten him out.
: >A very silly assumption.
: Yeah! Too bad she didn't just lock him in his room! Right Celeste??
Ouch.
: --
: Kellee Peters, Proud Bastard & MOB-ster
: "I'd just like to say that being chosen as this month's Miss August is like
: a compliment I'll remember for as long as I can. Right now I'm a freshman in
: my fourth year at UCLA, but my goal is to become a veterinarian because I
: love children!"
: --Julie Brown "Cause I'm a Blonde"
Did you see my correction of Julie in another thread? I think she is
really dumb because everyone knows it's VEGETARIANS who like kids. (I
know it is bad form to repeat your punchlines when nobody laughed the
first time, but I'm crying out for attention here people!)
Chris
--
GSLCVK
Christopher Alan Becker writes:
> If the writer wants to say that the school had a role or
>that her Christianity had a role in the death, then have enough guts (and
>the facts to back it) to print that.
A local newspaper is reporting that the mother's pastor advised her not to send
the children to public school if they had bruises on them lest she be reported
(again) to protective services. Later the murdered child was transferred to HIS
school where no reports of suspected abuse were ever made.
Gordon
SCOM2
>A local newspaper is reporting that the mother's pastor advised her not to
>send
>the children to public school if they had bruises on them lest she be
>reported
>(again) to protective services. Later the murdered child was transferred to
>HIS
>school where no reports of suspected abuse were ever made.
>
>Gordon
>
>
Let's see if the Church now protects this pastor, who deserves to be jailed for
allowing the abuse to continue.
Connie
We have only one life. Make it worthwhile.
Jeanne
SCOM2 wrote:
>
> >A local newspaper is reporting that the mother's pastor advised her not to
> >send
> >the children to public school if they had bruises on them lest she be
> >reported
> >(again) to protective services. Later the murdered child was transferred to
> >HIS
> >school where no reports of suspected abuse were ever made.
> >
> >Gordon
> >
> >
>
> Let's see if the Church now protects this pastor, who deserves to be jailed for
> allowing the abuse to continue.
Amen Connie!
Jeanne
Christopher Alan Becker
GSLCVK (gsl...@aol.com) wrote:
: Christopher Alan Becker writes:
: > If the writer wants to say that the school had a role or
: >that her Christianity had a role in the death, then have enough guts (and
: >the facts to back it) to print that.
: A local newspaper is reporting that the mother's pastor advised her not to send
: the children to public school if they had bruises on them lest she be reported
: (again) to protective services. Later the murdered child was transferred to HIS
: school where no reports of suspected abuse were ever made.
Thanks, Gordon. This is the kind of information I was looking for. A
journalist can't just say "Christian school, wink wink, nudge nudge" and
expect me to buy into that. This pastor could have been extremely stupid
and believed this woman when she came up with excuses for why her child
had bruises. If so, I don't really know what should be done to him. But
again, it shouldn't matter to state officials that the child was
transferred. They seem to have no excuse for not following up on a child.
Looks like this situation went bad on 3 fronts: the mother, the pastor,
the state.
: Gordon
Chris
--
Bonnie Gordon
Kitty writes:
I will not say that I think it should be "forbidden" to adopt when your over
a certain age. But I do believe that it shouldn't be allowed for a "new"
parent to be so "old". There are so many things in the world that has changed
from when they were young. Heck, I'm 38 yrs old. My son is 14 and I've got
problems understanding him at times.:)
It's even harder if there are 2 generations between parent and child.
----------
Actually, the abusive parent wasn't a "new" parent, she was an experienced
foster parent. I'm 43 and have 5 year old twins. They were my first
children. So far so good. My aparents were in their late thirties when they
adopted me--also good. When I was growing up, one of my close friends spent
most of her time with us--her young parents were more interested in partying
than in her. I'm not sure age is a good indicator of parenting fitness.
I'm also not sure our own experience is necessarily a good way to make
public policy re restrictions on adoption. I believe that careful
homestudies done in a good, standard manner would solve many of the problems
of people parenting who can't handle it, not more restrictions on age, race,
sexual orientation etc. The whole point about "religion" being relavant to
the thread seems to me to be that we "expect" religious people to be good
parents, but of course they aren't always. IMO, you have to look at the
individuals and their circumstances, not judge people by age, religious
afficiation etc. --the differences between people in any group are too wide.
Bonnie
Kym Andrews
Although it is incredibly horrible that these things happen, why must it
be a question or debate over "religious factors"? I used to have a bad
taste in my mouth for religion, I wasn't raised with any at all. And all I
ever saw was these "religious" people doing bad things. I also saw them
judging other people, and I was under the impression that that was as bad
as anything else. So, I had alot of problems with religion.
But, in the last few years, I've established a relationship with God and
it's one I have found much peace with. I can tell from alot of the posts
here that religion is quite a debatable(sp-don't shoot me) topic, so I
don't want to go there too much(believe me!!). There are terrible people
*everywhere*. They come from all places, backgrounds, sexes, ages,
religions or non-religions. I know it does seem *worse* somehow when
people that *say* they're religious do things like this, but remember, it's
what's in the heart.....or, is some cases, what's NOT in the heart.
Kym
mica...@hotmail.com
As an adoptive mom, I would like to say that I do *not* think parents who
adopt older children are adequately prepared for what they are getting into.
Even if the child *hasn't* been abused, there are serious issues to consider.
I am so, so grateful for info I found on the internet regarding parenting
issues. Not everyone goes out looking for that info, though. I think that
throngs of a-parents think that a "love conquers all" attitude is sufficient .
But they don't know that sometimes loving this child, who isn't sure if they
can trust you right off the bat to be around even the next day, is sometimes
going to be very difficult.
This is also true in international adoptions. We adopted a
nearly-two-year-old child. She received excellent treatment once she came
into care, and then she was ripped away from her second environment and placed
in our home. New climate (from Haiti to Alaska), new people, new language
(something people need to know a lot more about!), new everything. This is an
amazingly adaptable kid, and very strong-willed. That strong will is what
kept her alive- she was on death's door the day she came into care. That same
strong will can drive me nuts, too! But because I sought out information, I
understand attachment issues, I can see the signs of attachment problems and
know why I feel a certain way when she behaves a certain way. I can ask for a
break when I need it, I can deal with her in positive ways, because of all the
information I have read. IMO, this info should be *mandatory*, not optional.
I guess I am what you call a "religious" mom. I don't preach the gospel,
certainly, but I do try to live my life by example. And giving a child-killer
a "break" is not my idea of "religion". I believe in forgiveness, but I also
believe in assuming responsiblity for one's actions, regardless of the amount
of stress involved. If a person is irresponsible enough to kill a child
rather than try to deal with their stress, then they should pay the price. I
don't believe in "resources are not available" in this case. This a-mom was
involved with the foster care system, she could have continued to make calls
until she got the help she needed. I live in rural Alaska- no road into town,
limited services. If I have a problem, I don't stop until I find the help I
consider adequate.
Have at it Celeste. Nothing will condone what happened in my eyes.
LisaMarie
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Kimmiee
Maybe we've misinterpreted the punctuation and phrasing all these centuries.
how about "Spare the rod" (spoken persuasively) "SPOIL the child!" (spoken
brightly)
Coulda been Dr. Spock's inspiration!
Steve White
In article <199803310625...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
gsl...@aol.com (GSLCVK) wrote:
> A local newspaper is reporting that the mother's pastor advised
> her not to send the children to public school if they had bruises
> on them lest she be reported (again) to protective services. Later
> the murdered child was transferred to HIS school where no reports
> of suspected abuse were ever made.
Thanks, Gordon. Do you have a pointer or URL to the newspaper article? If
not, is there a way you could reprint it here (ask the newspaper first for
permission so that we don't violate their copyright)? It would be very
helpful.
steve
Kym Andrews
I loved this.....Perhaps we;ve done this to alot of the scriptures, huh?
Kym
Kimmiee <kim...@ozz.net> wrote in article
<6fsoj5$8e6$1...@hourglass.oz.net>...
Celeste
In article <6fs620$ppk$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, mica...@hotmail.com wrote:
> This is also true in international adoptions. We adopted a
> nearly-two-year-old child. She received excellent treatment once she came
> into care, and then she was ripped away from her second environment and placed
> in our home. New climate (from Haiti to Alaska), new people, new language
> (something people need to know a lot more about!), new everything. This is an
> amazingly adaptable kid, and very strong-willed. That strong will is what
> kept her alive- she was on death's door the day she came into care. That same
> strong will can drive me nuts, too! But because I sought out information, I
> understand attachment issues, I can see the signs of attachment problems and
> know why I feel a certain way when she behaves a certain way. I can ask for a
> break when I need it, I can deal with her in positive ways, because of all the
> information I have read. IMO, this info should be *mandatory*, not optional.
I had a similar experience when we adopted an infant domestically. Our
eldest son came to us at six months, I felt that something wasn't right,
but when I said something to social workers, his physician and other family
members everyone brushed it off as nothing to worry about. I had to seek
out information on my own and discovered for the first time what attachment
disorders are and how to approach this with my son. Because everyone was
telling not to worry, I could have just as easily followed their advice and
done nothing about it until it blew up in our faces. Thank the Lord I
continued to listen to my own instincts and sought out an answer.
The problem I was dealing with was all the 'denial' that an infant this
young could experience an attachment disorder, certainly not as severe as
with an older child but nevertheless it was definitely a factor. These
days I am seeing a tendency to want to deny the damage broken attachments
do to children as old as six or eight years. Denying and covering up the
problem DOES NOT make it go away. It is setting up children and anyone who
attempts to give them permanency for serious adjustment problems. Some
parents are not cut out for this, and perhaps if they knew what they were
taking on they would think twice and this would spare us all a lot of heart
ache.
Yes, I do believe there is a serious lack of understanding of this in the
'religious' community in regard to attachment disorders and other behavior
disorders in children. The religious communities too are likely going to
be the people who may adopt many of these older and special needs children.
They need to be educated, more informed about attachment disorders and the
brain damages caused by it, so they won't jump to well-intentioned, yet
wrong, ill-informed conclusions such as "love covering a multitude" and
"spare the rod". With knowledge and understanding comes endurance,
patience and love that then can conquer all.
Celeste
--
JmhJmd
Steve asked:
>Thanks, Gordon. Do you have a pointer or URL to the newspaper article?
A follow-up article dated 3/31 can be found at
http://www.shore-source.com/times/Pages/dtnews.html
Mother: 8-year-old's death could have been avoided
By Heather Lynch
Daily Times Staff Writer
SALISBURY -- As they plan to lay their son to rest Wednesday, the birth
parents of Shamir Hudson are still angry at a situation they say could
have been avoided.
Jacqueline Nelson, 38, mother of the slain second-grader, said Monday
she saw signs of abuse when she saw her son for the last time nearly two
years ago.
``I saw it in their eyes, they had tears in their eyes,'' she said.
Shamir Hudson, 8, was found beaten to death in a mobile home March 24.
His adoptive mother since 1995, Catherine Marie Hudson, has been charged
with second-degree murder, assault and three counts of child abuse.
In court documents, Hudson admitted beating Shamir and his two siblings,
Shamale and Sharnae, on numerous occasions.>
Ann Willey
"Kitty Trodglen" (kitt...@hem.passagen.se) writes:
>>
> Hello Ann,
> Yes, I know that this womans age isn't the issue here, but I felt I =
> wanted to add my point of view to the "age" stuff... I do not want you =
> to take this ment as anything "bad" twords your grandma and aunt. =
> (please) There are some cases that will work out just fine with "older" =
> parents or "older" relatives. I would believe that in your case, your =
> were "dubble" fortunate. First: beeing your grandmother and bloodrelated =
> you were instantly family. Second: You were not the first child to be =
> raised by your grandma. She had done it before when raising her "own" =
> children. I'm am not trying to say that this necessarily is why things =
> worked out so good for you.
This is a good point, my great-aunt, the one who helped raise me never
married and had no child, but she did say that if she'd had kids
"they'd be died by now", I should add that never once did she strike me in any
way she did tell what their mother told them, "life will knock you about
enough without me doing it". Her name was also Kitty.
> But imagine it compleatly different for a =
> few minutes. My a-pars were 50 and 53 when they adopted me. a "special =
> needs 4yr old" They couldn't get anything else due to their age....... =
> They had never had anything to do with young children before. There were =
> at least 2 generations that seperated us. They were "old fashiond" And =
> that was how they had intended to raise me. Kids at school would tease =
> me for my long dresses and tightly braided hair.
I was teased at school also but that was because I was different from
the others, I was dressed normally - school uniform - but I loved history
and lived with older people, which the other kids found strange.
> I was beaten for = > anything and everything. From not sitting up
straight at the table. or = > not paying attention when I as a 4 to 10 yr.
old and they would force me = > to sit and look wellbehaved for hours,
when they had company.......=20 >
I'm sorry you were beaten, I agree it sounds as if could not cope with a
young child. I accually liked to sit quietly and listen to the adults
talking, in fact I learnt a lot by doing so.
> I will not say that I think it should be
"forbidden" to adopt when your = > over a certain age. But I do believe
that it shouldn't be allowed for a = > "new" parent to be so "old". There
are so many things in the world that = > has changed from when they were
young.
> Heck, I'm 38 yrs old. My son is = > 14 and I've got problems
understanding him at times.:) > It's even harder if there are 2
generations between parent and child. > Ann, I'm so sorry your Grandma
passed away. You sound like you were = > truly blessed to have been able
to grow up with her. > Love & Light > Kitty
>
I will be 38 in the summer and my oldest will turn 15 also in the summer,
my youngest is almost 2. so we'll be parenting for a few years more.
Thank you Gran is now at rest, after a life long job well done.
Blessings
Ann
--
ao...@freenet.carleton.ca(Ann Willey)
"To thine own self be true"
GSLCVK
From the Salisbury (MD) Daily Times:
Family, friends mourn Shamir Hudson
By Melissa Midgett
Daily Times Staff Writer
SALISBURY -- Hallelujahs filled United Faith Church of Deliverance
Tuesday night as more than 100 friends and family members of Shamir
Hudson gathered to ask God for strength and consolation.
``In case you're wondering where Shamir Hudson is, he's in the arms of
Jesus,'' said the Rev. George Copeland, who runs Faith Deliverance
Academy, where the boy attended school.
A plaque with the boy's picture, along with a few large funeral wreaths,
were placed at the altar.
One wreath made of red and white carnations was from the Worcester
County Department of Social Services.
Ministers from as far away as Washington and Atlanta came to the
memorial.
In the pews, mourners, many of them children, clapped and sang during
the service.
``Some of you who have never been here before might be wondering why we
are saying Amen and thanking the Lord,'' Copeland said.
``It is because we know that in the midst of every storm, we must thank
the Lord, even when it hurts, because he knows all things.''
Several members of Shamir's adoptive and biological family attended the
service.
His birth parents, Jackie Nelson and Shane Goslee, lost custody of
Shamir in 1994. He was adopted by Catherine Marie Hudson, 57, of Berlin
in 1995 after a year in her care as a foster child.
His adoptive mother was charged with murder, assault and three counts of
child abuse after she admitted beating Shamir with a metal shelving rod.
Police found the boy dead March 24.
sha...@gmail.com
> Here's Maryland's version of the David Polreis tragedy:
>
> Beating death of boy, 8, stuns Worcester teachers
> School had reported signs of abuse, neglect
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> By Chris Guy
> Baltimore Sun Staff
> BERLIN -- Worcester County social service officials acknowledged
> yesterday that teachers and school administrators filed two dozen
> reports over the past two years warning about suspected child abuse in
> the home where an 8-year-old boy was found beaten to death this week --
> killed, police say, by his adoptive mother.
>
> Staff members at Buckingham Elementary School frequently saw signs that
> Shamir Hudson and his younger, adopted siblings, Sharnae and Shamale, 6
> and 7, had been abused or neglected, but lost track of the children when
> they were transferred to a Salisbury church school in November, said
> Buckingham's principal, Mark Bowen.
>
> "There are a lot of teachers here who are grieving," Bowen said. "The
> teachers have taken it very hard. The bright spot, if there can be one,
> is that this child transferred in November and that seems very distant
> for schoolchildren of this age. It's not like someone they've seen every
> day."
>
> Catherine Marie Hudson, 58, who was approved as a foster parent in
> Worcester County in 1991 and adopted the three children in 1995, is
> being held without bond at the Worcester County Detention Center,
> charged with second-degree murder, assault and three counts of child
> abuse.
>
> Police and rescue workers found Shamir's body early Tuesdaymorning lying
> on a bedroom floor of Hudson's mobile home on a dead-end street just
> outside the town limits of Berlin.
>
> Investigators recovered a bent metal shelving pole and a 4-foot
> carpenter's level from the bloody room. The two younger children were
> taken from the home to Peninsula General Hospital, then placed in foster
> care, officials said.
>
> "All child abuse cases are difficult to look at, but certainly this is
> the worst I've ever seen in Worcester County," said Sheriff Charles T.
> Martin. "We're in the early stage of the investigation, and I'm not
> ready to place any blame."
>
> The state medical examiner has ruled that Shamir died of trauma and
> multiple injuries. All the boy's wounds appeared to have been inflicted
> within recent months, police said, quoting the medical examiner's
> report. That was well after the three children were transferred to Faith
> Deliverance Academy, an unaccredited private school.
>
> The Rev. George A. Copeland, listed as the pastor and founder of the
> Faith Deliverance United Way of the Cross Church in north Salisbury,
> would not comment on the case yesterday. "There is an investigation
> going on and I can't really speak about it," he said. "I would ask
> everyone to pray."
>
> Officials at the state Department of Education said the school, housed
> with the church in a long, one-story brick building, was registered in
> 1991, all that is required under Maryland law.
>
> Paula Edie, county social services director, said a response team from
> the Maryland Department of Human Resources has begun reviewing
> documents.
>
> Edie praised public school officials for following procedure in alerting
> her department when they suspected abuse or neglect, but said that case
> workers found insufficient evidence to justify removal of the children.
>
> "Obviously, we have looked again at all those referrals from the school
> and there just wasn't enough evidence to warrant a court order to remove
> them from the home," Edie said. "We did receive multiple complaints
> about the children, but only two about the child who died.
>
> "Our staff is devastated," she said. "There hasn't been a dry eye here
> since this happened."
>
> Last summer, Baltimore County social services officials were faulted in
> the death of 9-year-old Rita Denise Fisher, who starved to death despite
> repeated reports of suspected abuse.
>
> Worcester County school Superintendent John Andes said that school
> officials were stunned at news of the child's death. School counselors
> and a psychologist were available for staff members or students at the
> Buckingham school who might need help coping with the death, he said.
>
> "Our first emotion is one of shock and sadness; the second is one of
> anger," Andes said. "I have a 12-year-old daughter and a 7-year-old son,
> and I spent a lot of time just hugging my son."
>
> Hudson was accepted about six years ago as a foster parent, expressing
> interest from the start in adopting. She was accepted as a candidate for
> adoption after an investigation that included a series of home visits,
> training and a criminal background check completed by a regional case
> worker shared by Somerset, Wicomico and Worcester, social service
> officials said.
>
> "Obviously, hindsight is 20-20, but we just have no way to predict
> violence," said Edie. "In this case, we were looking at someone who had
> been a longtime and well-thought-of foster parent."
>
> In Worcester County, with a population of about 35,000, four protective
> services case workers handle as many as 250 cases of suspected child
> abuse a year, officials said.
>
> Bowen said that Shamir's death has been devastating for his staff in the
> 515-student grade school. But beyond that, the first-year principal
> says, the child's death has shaken the town of 2,000 where he grew up.
>
> "My brother was one of the first police officers to arrive at the
> scene," Bowen said. "This is a lady who is known in the community,
> someone you might run into in the grocery store. We are all going to be
> asking how this could happen, asking for answers forever."
>
> Originally published in the Baltimore Sun on Mar 27 1998
hello. im sharnae. the girl who was 6 at the time. I seen where it stated how could this happen. However it was happening the entire time we were there. We told the schools but they just told her ad she got better at covering things up.