A Nation of Cowards - The Nanny State, Part 2

Although my mother grew up in Alabama during the civil rights era, she wasn't a part of the Civil Rights Movement. My grandma wouldn't let her children protest. Nobody wants their children to have hoses turned against them, yet somebody had to do it.


Somebody had to let their children walk into schools where they were being screamed at and spit on and had bottles hurled at them. Somebody had to let their children ride on buses that were being fire bombed.


And what of the early homeschool movement? There was a time when homeschooling was illegal. Families went into hiding. Fathers went to jail. Children were made to testify. What if these pioneers had sent their kids to school so as not to create waves? What if they acted as I do when the pediatrician asks his invasive questions.


Any guns in the home? "No sir, we don't own guns, sir."

Do you smoke? "Not a chance. Smoking is bad for you."

Does the baby have his own crib? "Yes sir. And there are only 2 adults in our home, and even though I homeschool, my son has lots of friends."


Don't get me wrong, it's not that I don't like our pediatrician. He's a nice guy. And it's not that I don't have the right answers. We don't drink, smoke, own guns or co-sleep. I don't have anything to hide.


The problem is, it doesn't matter whether or not I have anything to hide. It is not my job to prove that I'm parenting up to our pediatrician's standards to avoid being reported to the State. It's my pediatricians job to look in my child's nose and ears and check his heartbeat. It's the state's job to prove I am guilty of a CRIME or stay out of my business.


I have heard stories online of people being investigated for refusing newborn eyedrops, vitamin K shots, and Hep B vaccinations. I have heard of people having to go through Gestational Diabetes training which they have attended with previous pregnancies so as not to be accused of negligence. It is not the parents job to prove we are not being negligent. It's the pediatrician's job to do what we tell him to do and the State's job to prove we are committing a crime or leave us alone.


I am sorry to be on a soapbox here, but I feel we're in dangerous territory. Every time I act for fear of being investigated, I contribute to the Nanny State.


Yes, I am protecting my children. But am I protecting my children's children? Am I protecting my great-grandchildren? What will the state have deemed negligent by then?


I didn't speak up when they came after the gun owners. I didn't speak up when they came after the non vaxers. I didn't speak up when they came for the homeschoolers. I didn't speak up when they came for the spankers. I didn't speak up when they came for the Christians. There was no one left to speak up when they came for me.

Bad paraphrase, but you get the point...

Government Gone Wild - The Nanny State, Part 1

I found the following story from a link on the SL forums:


Controversy swirled this week over Nebraska’s law requiring mandatory blood testing of newborns for various diseases. Recently, a couple would not allow their infant boy to be tested, citing religious reasons, but because the law has no opt-out provision, the county obtained an order from a juvenile-court judge to test the baby anyway. This permitted sheriff’s deputies to take the nursing six-week-old baby from his parents. Additionally, the next day, the judge ordered that the baby remain in foster care until the preliminary results came back and confirmed further testing wasn’t needed...

Read the full commentary here:


http://archive.patriotpost.us/pub/07-44_Digest/page-5.php


Here's another story about parents facing jailtime for failure to immunize for chicken pox of all things:


http://abcnews.go.com/Health/US/story?id=3866502&page=1


I must say that this type of thing frightens me.


I think it's great that blood testing for newborns can detect potentially fatal conditions and save lives. I think it's great that immunizations can save children from potentially fatal diseases. Is it great that the government mandates these procedures because they've been deemed to be in the best interest of children? Asolutely not.


It is up to PARENTS to decide what is in the best interest of children - not the state.


Will some parents make wrong choices? Absolutely. Yes it is sad, but it is their right. When we take away the rights of bad parents to make choices for their children, we are also taking those rights from GOOD parents. And the good parents of today will one day be considered bad for things like *gasp* refusing to give their children Ritalin or refusing to have their daughters injected with a potentially harmful vaccine for STDs. Oh wait, that's already happening.


We good parents think it's okay for a judge to decide that Brittney Spears needs a coach and parenting classes, but what about when the government decides WE need a coach. And what about when that coach recommends removing OUR children - you know for their own best interest.


It would be a tragedy to have my child spend any time in foster care - even just one day. Children are regularly neglected and abused in foster homes. There are many wonderful Christian families who foster children, but don't assume all, or even the majority, are that way.


These are the tactics of our government:

1. Fear, fear, fear! Danger, danger, danger! Be afraid! I'll protect you. Give more of your rights to me.

2. We know you're informed and capable of making good decisions for your children, but what about all those other parents out there? You know, the negligent ones who let their kids play tag, and *gasp* aren't preparing their 2 year olds for the SAT. We trust you, Ms. Wise, but for the sake of those poor children, give more of your rights to me.


How long before Ms. Wise is considered Ms. Negligent? How long before her children are placed in foster care until CPS can investigate?

Right now, I'm not under fire. We use bike helmets. We vaccinate our children. Other than homeschooling, which is becoming more mainstream, most of our family's decisions are PC. But that doesn't mean this Wise family won't one day be considered Negligent. I can almost bet it will happen in this nation of cowards. Also pointing the finger at myself here...

Life-threatening Food Allergies...

Drew has a life-threatening peanut allergy. In the name of education, I want to share this story about a 13 year old girl who died from an allergic reaction.

Here's a quote from the article that expresses what I want people to understand:

Kids who grow up with the allergies and understand how deadly they can be — mere skin contact with peanut dust or residue can cause outbreaks of hives — have to be constantly aware of the danger. One teenage girl died after kissing her boyfriend, who had just eaten peanuts.

“You may not know how much trace peanut oil is in other food,” said Snyderman. “You have to read labels carefully. You have to ask. Just transferring one knife from a chocolate cake to another slice — that can kill a child.”

I don't know why people (including friends and family members) choose not to understand that trace amounts of peanut protein could kill my son.

On Modesty...

Is it just me or has little girls clothing become a bit too racy?

I'm not looking for ankle length prairie dresses or anything, but could the skirts cover her rear? Could the shorts hit mid thigh? Could the word "cutie" not be scrawled across her backside?

I can't help but wonder who is designing this stuff and why on earth parents are buying it. They are Little Girls, not street walkers!