These professors who are making the calls for the rest of society is a very dangerous precedent that we’ve allowed to be set up because we’ve given our children over to a broken education system right at the very beginning of their lives and wiped our hands clean, not realizing the radicalization that is about to take place in their lives. Is it any wonder that we now have pre-school being recognized as a prerequisite to kindergarten? Did you know that there is a Leftist movement ruminating now to ensure that a pre-pre-school is being pushed as well? We’re not talking anymore about waiting three to four years anymore before turning our children over to the good graces of the state. Now, they’re contemplating taking them at one or two years old!
It’s insane. The most enduringly impressionable years of a child’s life have now, by and large, been replaced with surrogate parenting in the arms of a willing government entity who can’t wait to indoctrinate these kids with their far-Left radical ideas of what’s right and what’s proper.
There is also the danger of our doctors and pediatricians who are now becoming an activist arm of the federal government, directly influenced by the teachings of law professors like Bartholet and Dwyer. If a doctor feels empowered and entitled, they now have the means of stealing your child from your home. Welcome to “Medical Kidnapping 101.”
If these law professors’ radical views were isolated and contained to a few classes and lectures attended by a handful of elite college students, their views might be dismissed as irrelevant to most of us.
However, both Dwyer and Bartholet appear to have a great deal of influence over public policy, and their views trickle down to the very people who have the power to make the equivalent of life-and-death decisions over families. These radical views that supplant parental rights in favor of government control of children are behind many of the Medical Kidnap stories we publish.
Professor Bartholet’s work appears to have greatly influenced the philosophy of a pediatrician who, until very recently, practiced in Jacksonville, Florida.
Dr. Sherry Shenoda cited Bartholet in her own journal writing, demonstrating an alignment with the philosophy that it is acceptable for doctors to usurp parental rights.
Dr. Shenoda is also the doctor whose allegations of medical neglect were recently used by Florida Child Protective Services to seize custody of the Odonnell twins – allegations which are demonstrably false.
The removal petition said that Dr. Shenoda “stated that she is concerned for the children’s health, due to severe medical neglect, and that the child, Abbie, is at risk of death, due to her disorder.”
The twins’ mother Laura Dalton has ample email, text, and other documented evidence that she has done everything in her power to get help for her daughters’ bulimia.
It was the insurance company, not the mother, who stood in the way of adequate medical care.
From the beginning of the twins’ care with the doctor, she recommended treatment in a facility that does not have eating disorder specialists, a component which the mother sees as crucial to her daughters’ health.
When they disagreed, the doctor worked with CPS and the insurance company to remove the teens from their mother’s care – a clear usurpation of parental rights.
How many other child removals from loving parents have been influenced and enabled by the radical philosophies of Elizabeth Bartholet and James Dwyer and others like them?
When my fourth daughter was born just last year in Ohio, the hospital staff had waited until I was out of the room to come to my groggy wife and slip paperwork under her hands, asking her to sign them in regards to the baby. My wife is very well aware of the dangers of medical practitioners and the birth of new babies when it comes to signing things (we’re not first-time parents) and she deferred until I returned. Then, she slept.
Upon my return and her waking up, the nurse returned with the paperwork. As it turned out, they were very insistent that we sign papers that required certain vaccines and return care at the clinic of the hospital, in addition to a census survey about the baby’s culture, ethnicity and other Leftist babble.
When my wife refused to fill out the paperwork, the nurse grew very angry and began to insist that we couldn’t take the baby home until we sign the papers. I asked to speak to an administrator. She obediently and defiantly stormed off to find one. When she returned with the administrator, the boss explained in a softer tone the reasons why they required the information. We said simply, “We’re choosing not to fill out that paperwork.”
The administrator paused for a long moment and then tersely replied, “Well, I’m going to record that you’re not cooperating with this study on the baby’s file, then.” We smiled and nodded. She stormed off with the nurse. Finally, on the last hour of our visit, the doctor arrived to explain all the outgoing procedures and of course, as anticipated, had brought along a copy of the packet which we earlier refused. As it turns out, he pretended not to have spoken with the nurse and the administrator and was trying to pass off the information to us once again.
Instead of arguing or explaining ourselves once more, we took the packet with us and departed the hospital. As it turns out, the information was not “required” as they threatened and, in fact, wasn’t even legal.
Another strain of the Leftist virus out there in regards to parenting is the belief that government may pick and choose who can and cannot be parents and who the babies SHOULD go to rather than whose babies these actually are. This is also a Bartholet-held belief system, that government knows better than God, and that some people should never be allowed to procreate. Can you say “forced sterilization?”
Turn to the following page to read about these “guiding principles” on the part of government entities and their toady enablers, the professors and the doctors!