Quote:
|
Danielle's birth mother did not want to give her up even though she had been charged with child abuse and faced 20 years in prison. So prosecutors offered a deal: If she waived her parental rights, they wouldn't send her to jail.
|
Why was she given that option?
While I understand that different people have different "standards", this goes far and above what a normal person would find even remotely "acceptable". But, it's easy to armchair quarterback this situation with 20/20 hindsight.
Is the DHHS at fault?
Perhaps. But then again, they're always in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Not to mention being overwhelmed under a staggering case load. What can be expected?
If the birth mother was telling the truth about attempting to enrole Danielle in school, and not finding one that would accept her, then perhaps that raises some more questions. While it is understandable, given Danielle's "condition", that she could not attend a mainstream school, why were no red flags raised? Or, were there? If it ever even happened.
How much government involvment are we willing to tolerate in order to insure that this doesn't happen again? I mean, upon birth a child could be placed into a centralized database that could monitor doctor visits, school enrolement, etc. It could make sure that no child simply falls off of the radar. But, it's invasive, for those of us that
do do what we're supposed to. Not to mention expensive.
So what's the answer? I mean besides the kneejerk reactions of outrage? What can
reasonably be done to ensure that the "Michelles" in this world are not allowed to let their "Danielles" fall through the cracks of our undeniably broken system?