• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

State Taking Kids Away From Med Pot Users

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
A referee made the decision to have Michigan Child Protective Services remove baby Bree, saying the Green's home is unsafe. "They were worried about the possibility of a break in or armed robbery, that kind of thing," said Maria Green.
Click to expand...

If thats the reasoning why are they not taking children away from areas with high probabilities of break ins? I don't see it mentioned where they live but there are a lot of places in Detroit where your house will be robbed yet I don't see CPS taking those kids...
 
Exterous said:
If thats the reasoning why are they not taking children away from areas with high probabilities of break ins? I don't see it mentioned where they live but there are a lot of places in Detroit where your house will be robbed yet I don't see CPS taking those kids...
Click to expand...

Who knows what the reasoning was. The problem with these CPS cases which make the news because parents are complaining is that 100% of the information comes from the parents because CPS is not allowed to make any comment due to privacy laws. I'm sure lots of parents who have their kids taken away think they shouldn't have been taken away. Maybe these parents are right but I'd reserve opinion without knowing the true and full reason for this.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Well, I would also wonder who is looking after the kids if/when the parents are high on pot?

But I am thinking of the states where pot is legal, not necessarily people using medically.

Is that a stupid question?
Click to expand...

Pot doesn't make you lose complete control you know. I'd say it is far more mild than alcohol... not that I smoke pot of course but I do know what the effects of it are and they are far less than someone who gets smashed (drunk) on a daily basis.
 
PokerGuy said:
People choose to commit federal crimes and then complain when the government steps in to protect the children? Problem not found.
Click to expand...

It isn't simply a matter of "legal", they would do better to take the kids of people drinking, but that's "legal" so it's no problem right? Most ignorant BS evar.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Well, I would also wonder who is looking after the kids if/when the parents are high on pot?

But I am thinking of the states where pot is legal, not necessarily people using medically.

Is that a stupid question?
Click to expand...
How come no one ask this question about parents who use alcohol?
 
Children are taken into protective custody for all types of substance abuse including alcohol. However, don't let that ruin your little pity parties.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Children are taken into protective custody for all types of substance abuse including alcohol. However, don't let that ruin your little pity parties.
Click to expand...

Only once it has become a front and center "problem", unlike weed, where they can act before any problem arises other than ZOMG Tha WeedZzz!!1!!

It's a stupidity party, not a pity party
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Children are taken into protective custody for all types of substance abuse including alcohol. However, don't let that ruin your little pity parties.
Click to expand...

I didn't use the word "abuse" with respect to alcohol. I used the word "use."

But don't let that ruin your self-righteous rage.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
LMAO!!!! You and your pot pity party are the one's raging.
Click to expand...

Typical irrational/evasive response: I said "use." You responded as if I said "abuse." I corrected you. And now you're off on a diversion.

You suck (and your grammar ["one's"] sucks, too).
 
shira said:
Typical irrational/evasive response: I said "use." You responded as if I said "abuse." I corrected you. And now you're off on a diversion.

You suck (and your grammar ["one's"] sucks, too).
Click to expand...

Poor poor baby, I'm sure you'll get over it one day.
 
The government did the right thing. Governments on all levels currently have a record surplus of free cash. If they don't spend it right now, inflation will eat away at it until there is nothing left. It's for the good of the republic that we waste as much money as possible.
 
Children living in households with unrelated adults are nearly 50 times as likely to die of inflicted injuries as children living with two biological parents, according to a study of Missouri data published in the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2005.

Children living in stepfamilies or with single parents are at higher risk of physical or sexual assault than children living with two biological or adoptive parents, according to several studies co-authored by David Finkelhor, director of the University of New Hampshire's Crimes Against Children Research Center.

Girls whose parents divorce face significantly higher risk of sexual assault, whether they live with their mother or father, according to research by Robin Wilson, a family law professor at Washington and Lee University.
 
Exterous said:
If thats the reasoning why are they not taking children away from areas with high probabilities of break ins? I don't see it mentioned where they live but there are a lot of places in Detroit where your house will be robbed yet I don't see CPS taking those kids...
Click to expand...

The reference is hidden in the article (not well made) but it indirectly states that they're growing pot, not just smoking it. If they have a substantial number of plants, then yes, there is a higher probability of break in, and thus potential danger to the child.

They don't say how many plants there were, just that there were plants.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Actually there is more to the story, the baby is being cared for by the Grandmother.

The baby is now in the care of Maria's mother. Mrs. Green says The Department of Human Services is "stealing" her baby. The Greens insist their home is a safe and loving environment. Quote:
A referee made the decision to have Michigan Child Protective Services remove baby Bree, saying the Green's home is unsafe. "They were worried about the possibility of a break in or armed robbery, that kind of thing," said Maria Green.

Tim Skubick reports that the state of Michigan will not comment about details on cases like this because of privacy issues but the Director of Human Services said this: "The safety and the well being of the child is paramount for any of our investigators when they are doing their job," said DHS spokesman David Ackerly.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

This is important info and I can't disagree with the state's case, actually. I think a lot of people glossed over the fact that the wife is a licensed MMJ "caregiver." In most states that allow this, this means she can grow a certain amount of plants at home on an annual basis.

The state doesn't seem to be going after them because they are using pot, but because they are creating a situation that could very likely lead to a violent situation--robbery and/or worse.

This is quite different than taking the kid away because dad tokes each day.
 
Looks like a few more immature people need to go look up the definition of rage or raging. I'm not the one throwing a hissy fit over the state looking after a child rather than allowing the parents to place the child in potential danger over their love of marijuana.
 
zinfamous said:
This is important info and I can't disagree with the state's case, actually. I think a lot of people glossed over the fact that the wife is a licensed MMJ "caregiver." In most states that allow this, this means she can grow a certain amount of plants at home on an annual basis.

The state doesn't seem to be going after them because they are using pot, but because they are creating a situation that could very likely lead to a violent situation--robbery and/or worse.

This is quite different than taking the kid away because dad tokes each day.
Click to expand...

While I agree with the sentiment of protecting the children, this is not the right way to go about it. If the State feels that their current system is not doing enough to protect the children from all the possibilities out there, then the State should create their own dispensing system for MMJ.

Anyone here buy alcohol? You just increased the chance that your children will get their hands on it.

Anyone hang a big screen TV in their living room? You just increased the chance of someone breaking into your house.

Anyone have a shiny new car? Prepare to be home invaded.

The State is taking liberties based on what if's. Well, what if you just dispensed it yourselves. You can monitor it, make money off of it, make it much more difficult for people to break in and get it, it won't be near children, and you can provide a consistent level of quality.

Win-effin-win.

If the caregiver is operating within the parameters of the law, then the State should stay out of it.
 
Last edited:
Londo_Jowo said:
Looks like a few more immature people need to go look up the definition of rage or raging. I'm not the one throwing a hissy fit over the state looking after a child rather than allowing the parents to place the child in potential danger over their love of marijuana.
Click to expand...

...wait. that's not even the issue in the link you provided and that I agreed with. Go back and re-read.
 
WTB trained squad of 20 masked civilians armed with assault rifles and full ballistic gear dropping in on the small group that took the child to return her to her family and give them a taste of their own meds.

This shit needs to stop, with mass civil unrest and violence if need be.

People have a right to protect their families and communities from thugs of all colors and occupations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top