391–400 of 639 posts
>> how many people are in jail or lost their kids due to something that didn't actually happen. Thousands upon thousands. By some estimates upwards of 10% of incarcerated individuals. The situation is just accepted. The general consensus is always that locking up too many people is better than than too few. It is on defense attorneys to check on the system.
There is a problem with responsibility. Do you want to never let a perp go (i.e. jail innocent people in order to catch every guilty person) versus let some baddies slip through the net while not imprisoning innocent people. My own life found itself on the nexus, where I lost loved ones with a false accusation, but wasn't charged for it from (obvious) lack of evidence. Although the legal system worked somewhat, it wa…
“ Let there be no misunderstanding on the point that shaking is an absolutely real and dramatic form of child abuse. Inflicted head trauma is a devastating condition and a definite cause of traumatic brain injuries, including intracranial hemorrhage. Many medical determinations of SBS/AHT are made on children who have effectively been victims of violent intentional trauma. Prevention efforts against all forms of chil…
I missed this part. Where does the author mention that other medical explanations (other than SBS) are exceedingly rare compared to the baby having indeed been shaken?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Similar case in Denmark/Romania where a baby was taken from his romanian parents because of the shaken baby syndrome, parents spent time in jail, but the hemorage continued over time so they had to concede it wasn't the shaken baby syndromd.
Even if the kids hemorrhaging continued, it was brought to the ER initially with fractures in the right side of the skull.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mob justice existed too. And execution for minor crime, with king's justice. Modern western police forces, with all their foibles, are far, far, far better than mob justice. Are people even aware of history, and how absolutely bloody it was, with an immense lack of personal rights? Fixing what's broken now is good. Trying to pretend it is worse than what was before, is absolutely absurd and laughable.
It's not so clear cut. At least admit that a lot of thought has been given to this, none the least by Foucalt's famous essay on this topic, Discipline and Punish . Foucalt has his critics, but it's not immediately obvious that the massive incarceration problem in some Western nations is better than public execution at the whim of monarchs. And some forms of torture, Foucalt argued, have changed from the theatrical an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might be a bad idea persoannly to become angry in such a situation if the local social service is authoritarian. But as an altruistic move for the greater good it is good.
>But as an altruistic move for the greater good it is good. That's only the case if overall children taken away from their parents end up with better outcomes than in societies where children aren't taken away from their parents, have you seen any data showing this is the case? Children in foster care tend to have horrifically bad outcomes, statistically speaking.
Many parents of 'mentally disabled' kids put the kids in foster care because the parents need a break from the constant care of a kid who isn't normal. Many other kids end up in foster care because they have been abused. Both of those will make the kids much worse than normal and thus much harder to care for.
Kids that are close to normal but end up in foster care often end up adopted fairly quick - there are plenty of families who want a kid but not their own (I personally know several people with genetics they don't want to pass on - there are other good reasons to not want someone else's kids) - but they will try to select a kid who is going to be easy to raise thus kids who will end up normal don't spend much time in foster care.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a world where people are incarcerated on a scale unprecedented in all of human history, This is only true, because prior to these times, people were killed instead. Or beaten to within an inch of their lives. Local "justice", lynching, mob action, used to be far, far more common. And of course, many people used to be worked to death. Or sold into slavery. Or die from horrid conditions in jail. Or forced into the f…
> This is only true, because prior to these times, people were killed instead. Or beaten to within an inch of their lives. Local "justice", lynching, mob action, used to be far, far more common. Hm, sounds like an assertion that ought to be checked by a historian, possibly ACoUP's blog? (Yes, the one who writes about Rome, he is sometimes featured in HN). He specializes in demolishing misconceptions people/Hollywood…
> It is the perfect combination of crap. I think that's being way too charitable. In a world where people are incarcerated on a scale unprecedented in all of human history, and where prosecutorial success is measured by number of scalps taken, the assumption that this is plain malice designed to let the state rob a few more individuals of their freedom makes much more sense than it all being just a big pile of incomp…
In a world where people are incarcerated on a scale unprecedented in all of human history, This is only true, because prior to these times, people were killed instead. Or beaten to within an inch of their lives. Local "justice", lynching, mob action, used to be far, far more common. And of course, many people used to be worked to death. Or sold into slavery. Or die from horrid conditions in jail. Or forced into the f…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It could be, but communication issues could also be at play, plus overeager doctors/social workers. In Romania they go at great lengths not to pull children out of family environments, in Denmark and other more developed countries it could be the opposite.
> in Denmark and other more developed countries it could be the opposite. Did you mean: richer?