CDing Vs. Child Services

[CrossdressinGoth]

This will probably end up being a big discussion, but after seeing some articles about child services stepping in and taking kids away from parents for some pretty stupid reasons, I was wondering how would crossdressing fair with such problem?

The story that got me thinking on this was a couple had a young teenage boy who never listened and did poorly in school. The parents tried to discipline him but it never worked. One day when the kid went to school, the parents removed all his "fun things" (tv, game systems, computer) and left him the things he needs, clothes, bed, all the things needed to not disrupt life, but only the fun things were taken out. They boy came home and threw a major fit. The next day he went to school and told on his parents for doing that. Since then child services stepped in and are looking at removing the boy from the parents saying that they are causing him serious harm and they are dangering him with these "tactics". Now if taking away a video game and tv and computer that was all purchased by the parents not the kid, is a "cruel way" to deal with a kid. Who says other things may not be suitable.

I know that homosexual couples can have significant problems with ever trying to adopt, so this leads me to this question.

If you are a parent and are a crossdresser, your child knows and says something about this at school. Would that raise caution in fear that child services would step in to take a child away because of "unhealthy" conditions?

I for one don't see how crossdressing would ever be grounds to take a child away from their parents, but with the way the world is becoming, that fear to me seems pretty good of being there. Just wondering your thoughts on this possibility.

[renee99]

Well, CDing is not politically correct, that's for sure. And unfortunately, when bureaucrats who write their own policies and enforce them with their own judges are in charge of your children, being PC is the name of the game.

It might get a pass in many areas, but unless you know the bureaucrats in your area to be CD-friendly, it pays to behave.

[Amy Hepker]

I was able to get custody of my kids and the courts knew I was a crossdresser and so did Human Services, that was in Iowa when I lived there. I still have custody.

[Nicole Erin]

I don't think most kids, at least boys would go to school and tell anyone their dad was a CD cause they don't want that attention.

And unless there were other things going on, I don't think child service would have grounds to take a kid. Usually it takes quite a bit before that happens.

[Phyliss]

I gained “legal custody” of my grandson when he was 4 yr old, (10 yrs ago). Long involved “soap opera”
At the time not wanting to have anything to do with the “state” I mentioned that I didn’t want to apply for financial aid. This way I wouldn’t have to involved with any “inspections or reviews” … Fat chance.
The case worker explained to me that by NOT taking the “aid” it would appear that I was neglecting the child, and that fell under the “abuse” statute.
Here I am attempting to save the state some money and they “force” me to take it… go figure.
Shows how “odd” the thinking can be when dealing with “Social Services”
So, yes, I am careful about “dressing up” while he’s around.

[sterling12]

That's an interesting story, but can you confirm it? Do we have a who, what, where, and when? A verifiable newspaper or TV News Story? Often these stories get passed on as truth and they don't have a basis of reality.

In my state Family Services has made some major screw-ups. Kids left in homes where they shouldn't have been left, lost kids, social workers not following up, the list gets longer as each day passes.

But, the emphasis for my state and I suspect most others is to keep the kid in the home as much as possible, or to return the child to the parents as quickly as that can be accomplished. Foster care is a burden on the Taxpayers and if prolonged or capricious, can be legally construed as undue interference from The State.

So, it seems unlikely that an a troublesome 18 year old would be removed from a home because the parents applied a little firm discipline. There was no physical abuse, no mental abuse, no crime committed. Most 18 year olds in most states would probably be considered "emancipated." You stated that he was in High School, so that might not be the case. But usually at 18, that kid has the right to stay or leave, as they choose, and the parents haven't taken his freedom from him. If the story were true, I would think even a very stupid lawyer would have an easy time getting that type of case dismissed.


Peace and Love, Joanie

PS. However, to answer your question. Yes, zealous Social Workers can at least make an attempt to remove a child from a home where someone Cd's. But, they better be ready to prove that The CD activities would have some dire effect upon the child. It would be a hard case to prove, and then they would be looking down the barrel at a lawsuit!

[CharleneCD]

If the story were true, I would think even a very stupid lawyer would have an easy time getting that type of case dismissed.


Peace and Love, Joanie

PS. However, to answer your question. Yes, zealous Social Workers can at least make an attempt to remove a child from a home where someone Cd's. But, they better be ready to prove that The CD activities would have some dire effect upon the child. It would be a hard case to prove, and then they would be looking down the barrel at a lawsuit!

If this were only the case. In Arizona several years ago, a child was taken form a mother accused of Munchousens. Once the child was in foster care the medical problems continued, and a doctor finaly found the real problem. Common sense would say the child would go back to its mother immidiatly. That is not what happened. I remember the lawsuits going through the courts. I am not sure the final outcome as we moved out of state, but at that time she still had not regained custody of her child.

If the wrong idiot in CPS gets the idea your unfit, they will do whatever they can to make your life hell and they could care less about evidence and reality. They could also care less about lawsuits. Hey it is not their money going to pay for the lawyers. Plus by admitting they were wrong, might make them fear losing their jobs or getting sued personaly. Then again there are those egomaniacs who feel they cant be wrong and they have the power to do what they feel is right.

[RobertaFermina]

Anything can happen, dear.

The workers at CPS have varying degrees of training, and each has their own psychological makeup, and their county-level supervision has varying degrees of aggressiveness w.r.t. child neglect and abuse.

If everything were by-the-book, being a crossdresser, or "unique" in any way, would have absolutely no impact on a cps intervention investigation.

Sadly, this is too often untrue.


Every investigator brings their own childhood issues and family-of-origin issues and religious judgements and biases into the mix. With excellent training and personal work (therapy, group counseling), a cps worker can learn to identify their own conscious and unconscious biases and prejudices and fears, and hold them seperate from their decision making process.

In my judgment, this takes a human being making a remarkable admission, they are flawed and their flaws are as dangerous to children as their fears of others. It takes that person also making a powerful assertion, they can keep children safe by keeping their own flaws conscious and seperate...forgive themselves for being flawed (we all are) and distrust these flaws enough to keep an eye on them all the time.

Most cps workers don't do this. They trust that they and their co-workers have the "best of intentions" and reasonable training and that that is enough.

It isn't.

For obvious cases of child-beating, starvation, and extreme emotional abuse, the evidence is clear and difficult to cover-up or exaggerate.

For borderline cases, and worse still, benign cases with elements in the target family that trigger the psychological discomfort/fear/terrors of cps worker, what evidence is present may be skewed or exaggerated. At the very worst, an absence of evidence of harm can be taken as proof of harm in the mind of a highly triggered worker, or case supervisor.

It all boils down to "who is watching the watchers."

In truth, Nobody. Worse still, they have legal immunity from screwing up your family.

So, if you have kids, know the laws, know your rights, and don't give them any more information than you legally have to. A CPS worker that is not well psychologically grounded and free of overstress can take you in directions that a well-grounded and emotionally sober one would never consider.

Been there, done that! Trust me, it hurts.

:rose: Roberta :rose:

[Mariah]

I saw one time (so don't quote me) that in my state 80-88% of the CPS investagators,are from abuse and distruped houses. And there bise towards familys as cost the state millons in lawsuits and reinburstment, and thiaripy due to taking childern from perfictly fine homes.

keris

[Carroll]

Interesting topic.When I lived in Reno, CPS got involved with my family. A Long story short, My oldest son was trying to kick my wife (not his mom) in the stomach (two months pregnant), she swung her hand and caught him in the face. school reported is and he was removed and my wife went to jail for domestic violence. Forward 7 months later we had our first son. When my son was about 6 months old someone turned us in the CPS. ( we later found out it was some we had turned in for neglect). CPS jumped right in to ours lives again and telling us that we HAD to go to parenting classes and we had to do this and that.. She would write us up for things as stupid as a penny she found on our floor. She came over one day and we refused to let her come in. She was highly pissed and told us she was going to tell her boss and force removal of our baby. Since there was never a court order, she had nothing to stand on. Two days later we got a call from her boss, and a letter from her, apologizing for her actions. We noticed she would sometimes be down the street watching.We moved out of the state 2 months later.

When my wife took some "extra pain killers", CPS was called (along with the police, ambulance, etc). They came to check out the kids. While they were at the house I asked. They asked if the kids were healthy, fed, clothed, housed, schooled and, and free from harm. I said yes. "As long as you and your wife aren't running around naked, we dont care what you wear.

Carroll

[Eugenie]

This is a very serious question...

From a legal aspect it could lead to complex arguments and counter arguments in court, should a zealous civil servant, informed by a "friendly" neighbour, decide that the father's x-dressing is a threat to the children well being.

It depends probably a lot upon the interpretation of the law by child services and that interpretation is a matter of personnal creeds and beliefs... That's where things become complex...

Once the case is brought in front of a court, it will probably be a complex one and costly at that...

I know a family in France where the father, with the approval of his wife, openly crossdress in front of their children, respectively 9, 7 and 4 years old. The children take it quite naturaly.

I'm not judging or even commenting on their choice as parents.

My only fear for this family is that a zealous employee of children protection might decide that x-dressing in front of one's children is damaging for the children. And as a result these services would decide on placing these children in a center for abused children.

I've tried to touch upon this subject with this family which I know very well. They said that this is not a worry they have...

I'm less optimistic: with the confusion that exists in the minds of uninformed people, somme well thinking neighbour might denounce them, associating x-dressing to some sort of sexual perversion...

This is so difficult... No simple answers...

:hugs:
Eugénie

[RobertaFermina]

...and if you were committed and conscientious nudists, what should that matter ?


:rose: might have a chip on my shoulder :rose:

[Eugenie]

...and if you were committed and conscientious nudists, what should that matter ?

Right on the point Roberta. The comparison with nudism is an excellent one.

When x-dressing is a genuine desire of a man to dress as a woman (for FtMt, the other way round) I don't see why it would be different from genuine nudism which is just a way of living, not a perversion.

I could never understand, when we lived in the USA, that seeing a nipple on Television could set immediately hordes of public protests while seeing violence, murders and assassination would almost go uncommented...

By the way x-dressing is less of a problem than nudity as "public nudity" is still considered an offence... :heehee:

:hugs:
Eugenie

[EDNA]

Child Service was wrong. By removing a Child or Childen from a Home of a Crossdresser. There is no law against Crossdressing in your Home. Just as there is no law against a Nudist Family. To go Nude while they are in thier own house. I have some Family Members. That live on a farm and they are Nudist. In which they only wear clothes in the Winter Time and while working near the roads. Child Service tried to take action against the Parents, but could not do so. As there was no Law against what they were doing. Just like the Child Welfare. Tried to take action against my Parents. When I started dressing as a Girl. In which the Child Walfare. Was told that I had the right to dress any way that I wanted. As there was no Dress Code. Stating what a Child and any Adult can wear.

[Sherrii]

As for the story of the couple removing all of the "optional" stuff the kid had, well I thought that was how you disciplined now. No more taking the kid out to the woodshed. However since all this soft stuff came around kidshave been getting more and more out of control. And school grades have been falling. I can't understand what was so bad about the education we all got in the 40 and 50, and early 60. And I don't see why there isn't a move back to the discipline, values, education, etc of that era. It is costing the country. Young people don't know what it is to work, be polite, and honest people. I will admit there are many good exceptions to this, many good kids. I am not for abuse, but I don't ever remember anyone who had good discipline as a kid regreting it or not being glad as an adault.

Sherrii

[Kendra Irene]

As for the story of the couple removing all of the "optional" stuff the kid had, well I thought that was how you disciplined now. No more taking the kid out to the woodshed. However since all this soft stuff came around kidshave been getting more and more out of control. And school grades have been falling. I can't understand what was so bad about the education we all got in the 40 and 50, and early 60. And I don't see why there isn't a move back to the discipline, values, education, etc of that era. It is costing the country. Young people don't know what it is to work, be polite, and honest people. I will admit there are many good exceptions to this, many good kids. I am not for abuse, but I don't ever remember anyone who had good discipline as a kid regreting it or not being glad as an adault.

Sherrii

You must remember that by removing the "optional" stuff, the child may actually feel undue stress. It's that "fix" at home that keeps him in touch with friends (chat rooms) and stress relieving games. It was the introduction
of gaming systems and computors that has put us into this new age, and new forms of "abuse".
What does the future hold??

Kendra

[VtVicky]

As much experience as I have had with idiots in social service, the real culprits are the judges.

Sure, an overzealous case worker may try to stir up something out of nothing. But, it is the family court judges that do all the real damages. Case workes can do very little without a court order. I spent over a decade working in the NY Family Court System. The stories I could tell, if I wasn't constrained by privacy rules, would turn your stomach. The abuse visited on the victims and families by the court system, allegedly designed to protect them, is abominable.

My experience is that most CPS workers are decent, overworked, and caring. Even if they are undertrained, understaffed, and underpaid.

Again, my experience: A significant number of Family Court Judges are lawyers whose practice was not lucrative enough to keep them happy. By running for the judge job they are guaranteed a 10 year stint of having better and higher paid lawers kiss their asses, at a salary significantly better than they were making as a lawyer. Or, they are tryng to gain a foothold on a political appointment further up the court system food chain. Or, they have "found the Lord", in whatever manner they see Him, and now feel it is their responsibility to spread His Word.

In NY, at least, the Family Court Judges are elected. But, because of the way the system is designed, few of the voters ever get to know what kind of a job they are doing. Anyone involoved in any of the cases generally falls under the privacy rules. No case worker, or lawyer, could support an opposition candidate or his or her cases would be trashed by the judge when ever they came to court.

The court system is less about justice, and more about theater. And, all too often it is the theater of the absurd.

If CDer's want to protect themselves against discrimination, they need to get involved with the political system before they ever get involved with the court system. Oddly enough, you do not need to come out of the closet to vote. (And, PLEASE, do not think it is as simple as Republican vs. Democrat.)

[CrossdressinGoth]

Hey girls, sorry for such a long delay in response to my own thread. Tied up with the ability to check the forums. In my time away from the site, I have also tried to find the article but was unsuccessful. I did though see the thing I mentioned about the 12 y/o being punished by his parents taking away the "fun" things in his room on CNN.

Well, I see a strong bunch of things here regarding the idea of dressing and politics with this sort of situation. I didnt mean to rial anyone up if I had, was merely wondering on the idea behind this due to how messed up things in the system have seemed to have gone these days. I just wonder how often something like this though is actually brought before a service worker in todays society. Thanks all for the responses on this, its nice to see others ideas behind something like this as well