This case study presents a child named Tommy, who lives in filthy conditions and is cared for by Margaret who is described as a derelict; unstable and not yet at a 4^th grade level mentally.  Neighbors aware of Margaret and Tommy believe that Margaret will commit suicide if Tommy is removed from her care.  Margaret does not possess the parenting skills necessary to parent effectively and is inclined to yell and scream; she does not have the mental maturity necessary to maintain a sanitary living environment for Tommy.  When we ask “What’s more important?” Are we really asking, “Whose life is more important – Tommy’s or Margaret’s?”  I believe that it is possible to show compassion for both of them. 

 

            The neighbors are protagonists for improvement, but will their intervention result in Margaret’s suicide?  Will Tommy be eternally distressed if Margaret dies?  What are the alternatives that do not result in separation or death? 

 

            I have a dual opinion of Child Protective Services [CPS] based on personal observation and experience.  CPS as I’ve come to know them, does not like to get their hands dirty and will avoid cases where sanitary conditions do not already exist.  Margaret’s home epitomizes that disdain perfectly.  I came from the 2^nd poorest town in Arizona, where illegals camp very conspicuously on the dirt floor underneath a condemned building in plain sight of everyone.  An orange extension cord can be seen leading into the cellar from under the door for power.  The children are not washed, have rags for clothes, no shoes, no toys, little food and look like poster children for “Feed the Children.”  The school system accepts them.  INS, ICE and CPS especially could really care less.  I know – I’ve called them.

 

            On the other hand:  When I was going to college, a neighbor who I employed as a baby sitter, painted cosmetic injuries on my 4-year-old twin sons and called CPS with claims that I was Heinrich Himmler

 

resurrected.  Even though CPS ADMITTED that the accuser’s claims were false and that the accuser was proven to be a child trafficker by profession, I was still forced to endure 14 months of legal terrorism, attend the anger management and parenting classes, and accept that God wanted me to have this experience for some future purpose in life.  I don’t have a criminal record because I jumped through all of the hoops.  And I am better off for knowing what actually happens.  [ARS 13-3601 (M)] 

 

            As the system applies to Margaret, the parenting classes do not present scenarios that Carol Brady can not resolve in 26 ½ minutes.  Other parents in the class were dressed like biker chicks and part-time prostitutes.  Their faces reflected apathy at a system that could not acknowledge the condition of their lives.  Margaret would never comprehend that privileged, ‘enlightened’ individuals in gated communities create these superficial courses for the lesser loved to ‘learn’ from.  Those individuals will never know what it’s like to live hand-to-mouth; to stay one step ahead of living in a cardboard box on Main Street like Margaret.  CPS doesn’t care about children wandering on Main Street because they’re not being abused.  Although this profile did not fit every single caseworker, I was appalled by how many it did fit:

 

            The caseworkers I dealt with were 19-years-old females, with no children of their own, who expect praise and adoration for their embarrassing lack of talent.  If you don’t properly patronize their vanity, they will threaten to annihilate your family.  Referrals to ‘No habla Englais’ families go ignored because CPS can’t rehabilitate cultures that ‘No habla.’  In effect, Arizona hires children, with no children of their own, to pose as irrefutable authorities on parenting.  If you dwell inside a dumpster like Margaret’s place, you are also beyond rehabilitation and CPS won’t get involved.      

            CPS was engineered to traffic abused children from dangerous environments to a crisis shelter until a State sponsored foster family could assume custody.  Since then, many foster families have applied for foster family status because the State subsidy is more alluring than working for a living.  It has also been proven that many foster families have disfigured the souls of more children than a child’s natural family would have.  Tommy’s case is so severe, that he stands a better chance outside of Margaret’s control.  Margaret too, needs to be institutionalized until she can be trained in the basics of sanitation.  Social Services will conduct Margaret to healthier circumstances as provided for by the State.  At this point, since Margaret did not physically abuse Tommy in a violent manner, a judge may relieve CPS of further involvement. 

 

            If I had my way, I would comprehensively overhaul CPS procedures and start over by hiring only qualified personnel.  Would you trust your life on an airplane; knowing that the pilot does not have a license?  When I was a kid, the police handled child abuse cases more sensibly because many of the officers have children of their own to qualify their interaction at a scene.  Back then, it wasn’t about merchandising – it was about justice.  Based on 8-years of coordinating e-groups on this subject, I feel qualified to speak.    

 

            When I got spanked as a child, I did not perceive that my father was “role modeling that hitting was good” or that “violence is OK” and nobody I know outside of CPS believes that.  Yet, CPS wants to project doctoral-level reasoning capabilities into children who can not possibly think at that level.  And if you do not nod your head up and down in total agreement – you may get to watch your kids carted off to a more politically correct family.  Even the famous Dr. Spock, who started the national emasculation epidemic in 1963, renounced his rhetoric on his deathbed.  I wonder why the media can’t sensationalize that truth?

            Margaret needs to be properly cared for by the State or turned loose to be a bag lady, whichever she prefers.  The “Will work for food” business in Phoenix is a venture that Margaret might excel in.  It’s been reported that the homeless make more money standing at intersections than we do in our 9-to-5 jobs. 

 

            Tommy’s age is not a factor unless Margaret commits suicide.  As a professional, I would prefer not to compose a thesis for that outcome on grounds that nobody can force another person to live any more than we can force a horse to drink water.  The younger a child is when removed from a hazardous environment, the more accepting a child is toward behavior modification.  I have experience with emotionally handicapped adolescents and attribute my limited success for not regarding them as ‘case numbers.’ Neither did I speak clinically to colleagues as if the child wasn’t in the room.  People do not like to be the subject of analysis, and the more intelligent the person is – the less they like it.  Because we have kids in this country who have survived more evil than all of us put together, I prefer to eradicate the cause than to eternally treat the effect.       

 

            Those in judgment of Tommy and Margaret are faced with a situational ethics dilemma because nobody has a text-book solution to this unique problem [exempting Pollock].  Society knows what’s better for Tommy and Margaret than Margaret does.  Because Rule Utilitarian would make a standard out of a solution that is not universal, I believe Act Utilitarianism is accurate because it exempts future acts.  Kant’s ethical formalism could apply when everybody’s good will is attempting to provoke the most humanitarian result.  The act of ‘caring’ about Margaret’s ‘possible’ suicide is teleological in nature but can be diminished as an unrealized fear – it hasn’t happened yet.  Margaret doesn’t know what’s good for Margaret so the State will execute a social contract to protect her even though Margaret can’t abide by her end of the contract.       

 

            If Margaret and Tommy can survive the pain of treatment, and be given scheduled visits, then I think we have an amicable solution, but the notion of repatriating the two in the future does not look promising until Tommy becomes an emancipated adult.  Then he is free to do as he chooses. 

 

            In the end, I believe that unquantifiable acts like love and care, help to heal others in situations like this, which means that a thread of religious ethics will influence everything else, by whatever name it wears.