|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Norway28667 Posts
On August 17 2019 05:32 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2019 04:10 Liquid`Drone wrote:
With regards to children's rights, I believe they have been on a fairly consistent rise for the past century and I think that's gonna be a continuing trend. Children are increasingly being considered autonomous humans rather than future adults, and I think it's a very positive development. (This can be signified by stuff like to what degree children's enjoyment is considered an independent factor in school and not just something that may or may not accelerate their learning.)
However when you deal with 'parents having ownership of their children', I think this is one of the most difficult philosophical and political questions to handle. What degree of bad parenting constitutes abuse of children/ to what degree does society have a responsibility to shield children from the effects of bad parenting weighted against the strong natural bond between parents and child and their rights to raise their child in the fashion that most suits them / is that 'right' a real 'right' and if it is, should it be?
Personally i lean towards building such strong public child-rearing institutions that the damages of an incompetent (not abusive) parent are greatly diminished, favoring that over a more intrusive child protection agency. (Well, that's me the Norwegian speaking. It might be that the american child protection agency is not nearly intrusive enough - but in Norway I feel we might be erring a bit on the other side. ) To be honest Barnevarnet is one of the most fucked up and terrifying aspect of an otherwise highly functional norwegian society. The amount of young parents I know here who live in absolute terror of those people is mind boggling.
Are those young parents immigrants? Because I know many Norwegian parents but none who live in any fear or terror of them - however I've heard that some immigrant communities are indeed afraid. I also know people who credit barnevernet for them currently being functional adults. And being a teacher I've had some interactions with people working with them / talked to other teachers who were really disappointed that a parent they thought were sexually abusing a child got to maintain custody.
One important thing to keep in mind is that barnevernet is supposed to be an aide to parents. Unless there is suspected abuse, they do not take your kids away from you, they instead try to teach you stuff that might make you a better parent. Like, I get that there is a real issue, as evident by 20-some custody cases or whatever (I don't remember exactly) being successfully appealed in european courts. As mentioned in my previous post, I do think we might err on the side of being too intrusive. But at the same time, I know of many adults who feel that barnevernet saved them, and they are involved in far, far more cases than the ones where custody is removed from the parents. (Those cases however are the ones that get media attention - understandably so as having your kid 'wrongfully' (the interpretation of what that constitutes is the crux of this discussion) taken away from you is one of the bigger crimes a person can experience.. )
Like unless your young parent friends are beating or sexually abusing their children they don't really have anything to fear. They might come on a visit for other cases, they'll get involved if they find out that one parent uses drugs, but then it's a 'hey, try to do these things. It will have a positive impact on your child's development.' kind of thing, not a 'we want to take your kids from you'. I think for immigrants this might be part of the thing because they're used to child protective services in their countries only being involved in more egregious cases, whereas in Norway this isn't the case, and then they feel like they are targeted as a particularly egregious case, which isn't the case by default.
Then, of course, there are individuals involved who make arbitrary decisions based on their best knowledge. It might actually be that something really looks like sexual abuse based on children's behavior that in 95% of cases is a real indicator. Is it better in that case to get one pair of parents wrongfully accused of sexual abuse (obviously a terrible outcome) or is it better than 19 children continue to be sexually abused? Basically I think that yes, there are issues. But it's not an easy 'the norwegian barnevern is worse than other child protective agencies in other countries', and I felt your characterization is a bit hyperbolic (or grounded in fear that I don't think is warranted) - it's more like, it's more intrusive, and that comes with a set of both positives and negatives.
(For americans, there is at least one example of a girl being taken from her mom because of extreme obesity, and this indicating that the parent is unfit. That was a 12 year old girl being more than 100 kg, and there were also other elements, however with the weight being the single biggest one. Dunno how that would fly in the US / doubt you'd have the required foster homes to deal with it.  )
|
Barnevernet is criticized all over the world(news articles, protests, human rights activists etc) and several of its cases ended up at Strasbourg, European Human Rights Court; as for its modus operandi:However on the weekend Brigita misbehaved, and Natalya decided to take the phone away for some time as a means of discipline. On Monday May 20-th Brigita talked about this incident in school. Still on the same day but later at night, Norway‘s child welfare system „Barnevernet“ along with the Police came to the family‘s house. The children were already asleep at this time, and they were brutally ripped from their beds. Like in so many other cases there was no forewarning, no court proceeding, no thorough investigation or assistance given to the family prior to the taking of the children. The entire family was brought to a police station where they were detained for 24 hours and interrogated separately for 3 hours. The children were then brought to a foster home in an other city an hour away. Ever since the removal of their children the parents haven‘t seen them again. Meanwhile their youngest daughter Elizabeth had her 7-th birthday, but the parents weren’t allowed to send birthday gifts. Norway’s child welfare system has insinuated that the reason that they took the children was because they believed that the children didn’t have proper rules or a proper routine, and in Norway, this (and pretty much anything) can be considered „neglect“ and used as grounds to take such a violent and child traumatizing action. Both parents were threatened with a 2-years prison penalty if they would talk to anyone about this case before June 11-th. Barnevernet said they needed this time for their own investigation. On Thursday June 6-th they had a court hearing. One day later a verdict was ruled that the children need to stay in foster care. But at least the parents were given visitation rights to see their kids once a week for one hour with supervision. This was supposed to start on June 11-th. But then they were informed that they can not see their children as the Barnevernet and Police want to do further interrogations with them separately. .Steven Bennett was shocked to find out in late 2015-early 2016 about the human rights violations committed by Norway against the family of Marius and Ruth Bodnariu when CWS stealthily and ruthlessly removed their 5 children (including an infant) for Christian indoctrination and false allegations of abuse. A deeper look at the issue revealed for Steven a dark world in the CWS which is economically dependent on reporting families, stealing children, forced adoptions and forced institutionalization. Psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers are dependent on creating victims and keeping the vicious cycle going. Then you have dentists, physicians, school teachers and regular folks like your neighbors entangled in a snitching culture of reporting things like “lack of eye contact” as reasons for CWS to intervene and help children by removing them from their good and loving families.
By the Spring of 2016, the world found about Barnevernet and the crime committed against the Bodnarius, and in the most embarrassing moment for Norway in decades, tens of thousands across the globe hit the streets in protest! Steven has worked tirelessly since then to accumulate meticulous information on various cases and patterns within the CWS to tell the story of this abusive system. i don't really know Steven Bennetts' ulterior motives, if any, but the book heavily criticizes Barnevernet.
Edit: a video from "Norway, release the Children" - Vienna Press Conference, children rights activists(detailed cases, talks about the legality of it all in an European human rights context, etc) + Show Spoiler +
|
Norway28667 Posts
I think this article does a better job portraying the issues in xm(z's post. I'm obviously not defending the cases where they've wrongly accused people of domestic abuse, but here the 'false allegations of abuse' referenced refers to the parents admitting in an interview that they spank their children and pull them by the ear - both being illegal and abusive practices..
|
they spank their children and pull them by the ear i don't know man, that's way to contextual to be a viable rule; who made those rules?(it makes whole countries seem barbarian/abusive towards children).
anyway, i disagree on the whole thing: its legality, the need of it, the whole premise in which it operates.
the state should only provide means for children to group socialize: children games and child to child interaction without adult intervention. let them figure stuff out while exposing them to different environments/ways of being(the state should recreate the village that used to raise the children back in the days).
|
Barnevernet is a very thankless job/agency. No matter what you're going to be painted evil by someone. Either you took a child from its parents, and they'll get mad, or you didn't, and the children grows up wondering why no one cared.
I was not aware that they had such a bad reputation tbh. I've seen stories in the news of course, but it's generally never their decision. "Barnevernet took crying child from Daddy", and then 5 minutes later we learned that he lost child custody in a court decision. What were they suppose to do? Ignore it?
Anecdotal evidence of course. But I haven't seen much of many other types of evidence on this topic in the first place.
|
On August 17 2019 08:14 xM(Z wrote:i don't know man, that's way to contextual to be a viable rule; who made those rules?(it makes whole countries seem barbarian/abusive towards children). anyway, i disagree on the whole thing: its legality, the need of it, the whole premise in which it operates. the state should only provide means for children to group socialize: children games and child to child interaction without adult intervention. let them figure stuff out while exposing them to different environments/ways of being(the state should recreate the village that used to raise the children back in the days). Hate to break it to you but I'm pretty sure that Romania, as part of the EU, also has spanking your child being illegal.
|
i'm more here, from the same news outlet: Eight Norwegian child welfare cases have been heard by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg over the past 15 months in what a long-time human rights lawyer has called “an extremely serious warning to Norway”.
The Norwegian Child Welfare Service (Barnevernet) has long been accused of overreach in its efforts to protect children from potentially abusive situations.
...
“It is an extremely serious warning to Norway from Strasbourg to the Norwegian authorities that [the ECHR] has taken on so many cases within an area like child welfare,” she said.
Czech MEP Tomáš Zdechovský, a leading voice amongst Barnevernet's critics, called the court's decision to take on so many Norwegian child welfare cases "a breakthrough".
"This means that the ECHR has found strong indications that human rights violations by Norway have occurred. It is obvious that the ECHR has noticed that there is something very dangerous happening in Norway," he told The Local.
He added that he hoped the attention the cases have received in the European court system will "expose the system flaws" within the Norwegian Child Welfare Service. if not for EU, who would've or could've stopped or investigated Barnevernet?.+ Show Spoiler +STRASBOURG (29.6.2018) – On 28 June, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) concluded its report into the practices of the Norwegian child protection agency, Barnevernet. The report highlighted a number of troubling discoveries from a fact-finding visit to Norway, and emphasized the need for impartial safeguards to be implemented in child protection agencies across Europe to prevent abusive practices.
Edit: @Gorsameth - the only thing EU related about the spanking being illegal, is the pressure put on the EU countries to make it illegal. ex: in France and Italy and a few other EU countries, it's not illegal; in Romania is.
|
Norway28667 Posts
On August 17 2019 08:14 xM(Z wrote:i don't know man, that's way to contextual to be a viable rule; who made those rules?(it makes whole countries seem barbarian/abusive towards children). anyway, i disagree on the whole thing: its legality, the need of it, the whole premise in which it operates. the state should only provide means for children to group socialize: children games and child to child interaction without adult intervention. let them figure stuff out while exposing them to different environments/ways of being(the state should recreate the village that used to raise the children back in the days).
In Norway, it is illegal to hit or slap your children. If stories that you use corporal punishment as part of your child rearing reach the ears of a teacher, it is illegal for that teacher to not contact barnevernet through a so called 'message of concern'. Additionally, many other people will indeed report similar rumors, there's fairly widespread consensus that 'it's better to report one too many than one too few' (a sentiment I generally share, although I can see how it's a slippery slope, and I do think you need to be above a certain % of certainty before you should act - not that I wanna speculate on what that % should be).
Then when barnevernet gets one of those messages of concern, the degree of concern influences their actions. Stuff like police raids at night is only if they have gotten reports of really bad child abuse where based on the report, it seems likely that the children will be abused more severely if they instead come on an investigative visit.. Then like, this stuff is gonna be arbitrary because you do have a person or several people deciding on what action this particular message of concern warrants, and even the people filing out the messages of concern might exaggerate (people do that), and sometimes you get instances where the report was exaggerated and the people in charge make a wrong decision and 'light corporal punishment' that could have been dealt with through simple talks and clarifications of what is legal in norway instead result in a police raid.
Like, overall, I think barnevernet is massively positive. Based on both what I've read and anecdotal evidence and people I know's interactions with barnevernet, a vast, vast majority of interventions they involve themselves in are neutral or positive for the child. The problem is just that the stakes are so high, that whenever they make mistakes - and making mistakes is inevitable if it involves itself in suspected, not just 100% dead certain cases - the consequences are terrible. But they are terrible no matter which way you err. And I'm confident that barnevernet has a lot more cases per year where their intrusiveness uncovers real abuse than cases where their intrusiveness causes wrongful foster care.
All that said, as I started off with, this is a really difficult political and philosophical issue. No problem with people thinking parents should be more free to raise children how they want to raise children, and I don't think spanking your kid 3 times over a 10 year period warrants foster care. (Nor does barnevernet, though.) But I don't think your first sources painted an accurate picture - well, I haven't read the guy's book so I can't comment on that, but the two paragraphs were very one sided.
|
Spanking children is an incredibly damaging thing to society. Just imagine how society looked like, and how much less mental illness and crime we would have, if parents abusing children never happened.
There are so many outrage stories of European government child welfare agencies not pursuing the removal of children from their parents and then the child being murdered by their parents. The fact is that bad parents do have some rights to learn from their mistakes and that it is also much better to keep a child with their parents. Outrage over child welfare agencies removing children from parents that admit to corporal punishment; that's new to me.
|
On August 17 2019 05:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2019 04:27 Simberto wrote:
This is further complicated beyond the ethical problems with taking children away from their parents by the practical considerations about the outcomes. Because parents need to be really shitty to make taking the children away improve the outcomes for them. Just average shittyness is probably not enough, because being raised by the state usually doesn't lead to the best outcomes either. I agree, and I have no idea how to qualify or quantify "shittiness". Apparently, not vaccinating a child isn't shitty enough for a parent to lose custody of their child. Instilling beliefs (religious or otherwise) that teach bigotry and hate apparently isn't shitty enough either. As a teacher, I regularly see parents fucking up their children, and it's extremely frustrating.
"Shittiness" is a relative definition. Everybody thinks their beliefs are correct and that those on the far opposite end of the spectrum are shitty. If you want parents to lose custody of their child for being shitty, it will just be enforcement of a majority opinion of what is good for children, which is very authoritarian.
For example, a lot of people don't see not vaccinating a child as an act of harm.
It is in fact an omission of an extra artificial act that is believed by majority of society to be helpful.
Personally I will vaccinate my children and encourage people to do likewise, but I will also fight for the right of the people who end up choosing not to vaccinate (although I will tell my kids to stay away from them).
On August 17 2019 08:47 Liquid`Drone wrote:
All that said, as I started off with, this is a really difficult political and philosophical issue. No problem with people thinking parents should be more free to raise children how they want to raise children, and I don't think spanking your kid 3 times over a 10 year period warrants foster care. (Nor does barnevernet, though.) But I don't think your first sources painted an accurate picture - well, I haven't read the guy's book so I can't comment on that, but the two paragraphs were very one sided.
The problem is people don't want to properly define what is considered abuse.
Abuse becomes a very vague term that is open to interpretation, and the law does not set hard limits on what is overboard and what is not.
For example - spanking is permissible up to 3 times with a force of not more than 2n+5 newtons per spank where n is the age of the child, as punishment for acts of destructive physical violence from the child.
|
Any act of spanking is damaging to the child, because it both means the child cannot trust the parent AND the child learns inflicting pain is an acceptable way to solve problems.
There is no problem of definition.
On August 17 2019 08:33 xM(Z wrote:
Edit: @Gorsameth - the only thing EU related about the spanking being illegal, is the pressure put on the EU countries to make it illegal. ex: in France and Italy and a few other EU countries, it's not illegal; in Romania is.
Spanking is illegal in France according to French law. In Italy, the supreme court also ruled it to be illegal. But politicians refused to put in place actual specific laws with specific punishments.
But ignoring that, any child would obviously win in the EUCHR suing their parents. It is a violation of a basic human rights under EU law regardless of the national law on spanking.
|
On August 17 2019 10:50 Muliphein wrote:
Any act of spanking is damaging to the child, because it both means the child cannot trust the parent AND the child learns inflicting pain is an acceptable way to solve problems.
There is no problem of definition.
You think light spanking (not very painful) on very rare occasions is harmful?
And is it more harmful than the lasting psychological effects of CPS separating children from their parents at a developmental stage?
|
You think it is a good thing if a child cannot trust their parents? You think using violence is a good way to solve conflicts?
Your second point has nothing to do with it. I already said that often it is almost never clear what is the best action to take to best protect a child from abusive parents. Removing a child from abusive parents might very well do even more harm.
|
Canada11350 Posts
On August 17 2019 10:39 Muliphein wrote:
Spanking children is an incredibly damaging thing to society. Just imagine how society looked like, and how much less mental illness and crime we would have, if parents abusing children never happened.
There are so many outrage stories of European government child welfare agencies not pursuing the removal of children from their parents and then the child being murdered by their parents. The fact is that bad parents do have some rights to learn from their mistakes and that it is also much better to keep a child with their parents. Outrage over child welfare agencies removing children from parents that admit to corporal punishment; that's new to me.
Spanking ≠ Abuse, unless you define Spanking = Thrashing
I hadn't heard of the organization, but the two stories that popped up, sounded like serious government over reach to me.
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36026458
First one- some analysis of lack of eye contact in a home video = baby "suffering serious psychological harm"
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/a-big-state-versus-a-poor-family-canadian-s-son-forcibly-removed-in-norway-1.3804956
Second one- kid gets bullied and threatened with death in school. Parents pull kid, temporary homeschool until they can transfer to another school. Authorities show up and tackle the kid because he didn't want get taken away by the authorities- then they take him away.
I don't know. Maybe there's some follow up stories that reveals more, but on the face of it, seems pretty horrific to me.
|
On August 17 2019 10:58 Muliphein wrote:
You think it is a good thing if a child cannot trust their parents? You think using violence is a good way to solve conflicts?
Your second point has nothing to do with it. I already said that often it is almost never clear what is the best action to take to best protect a child from abusive parents. Removing a child from abusive parents might very well do even more harm.
Personally I don't believe in spanking children, but I think it should only be criminalized past a certain threshold of magnitude.
Society uses violence to solve conflict all the time. Police uses violence to stop criminals, World powers use violence on weaker states. Parents using violence on children is merely a microcosm of human society at large. It is not a fair way to resolve conflict, but a very effective way for authorities to resolve conflicts in their favor and enforce subjugation.
|
On August 17 2019 11:00 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2019 10:39 Muliphein wrote:
Spanking children is an incredibly damaging thing to society. Just imagine how society looked like, and how much less mental illness and crime we would have, if parents abusing children never happened.
There are so many outrage stories of European government child welfare agencies not pursuing the removal of children from their parents and then the child being murdered by their parents. The fact is that bad parents do have some rights to learn from their mistakes and that it is also much better to keep a child with their parents. Outrage over child welfare agencies removing children from parents that admit to corporal punishment; that's new to me. Spanking ≠ Abuse, unless you define Spanking = Thrashing I hadn't heard of the organization, but the two stories that popped up, sounded like serious government over reach to me. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36026458First one- some analysis of lack of eye contact in a home video = baby "suffering serious psychological harm" https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/a-big-state-versus-a-poor-family-canadian-s-son-forcibly-removed-in-norway-1.3804956Second one- kid gets bullied and threatened with death in school. Parents pull kid, temporary homeschool until they can transfer to another school. Authorities show up and tackle the kid because he didn't want get taken away by the authorities- then they take him away. I don't know. Maybe there's some follow up stories that reveals more, but on the face of it, seems pretty horrific to me.
My understanding is that psychological science's best analysis shows spanking is never superior to not spanking. Since spanking has no benefit over just putting more effort into being a good parent, the fact that it can only be neutral at best means it should never be done. Choosing to spank is choosing to be a worse parent. Never justifiable.
My experience with these topics coming up is that people refuse to see their own parents as flawed. If they had good parents, since of course people think that whether true or not, and they spanked, spanking must not necessarily be bad. It is common, flawed, unfortunate logic. It's not immoral for people to have a hard time labeling their parent's parenting abilities as poor or flawed, but it is a weakness people should seek to suppress in order to be a worthwhile contributor to conversations.
Not saying you're doing this, but commenting on how every time spanking comes up you can tell some people are defending their parents rather than having a discussion.
|
On August 17 2019 11:00 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2019 10:39 Muliphein wrote:
Spanking children is an incredibly damaging thing to society. Just imagine how society looked like, and how much less mental illness and crime we would have, if parents abusing children never happened.
There are so many outrage stories of European government child welfare agencies not pursuing the removal of children from their parents and then the child being murdered by their parents. The fact is that bad parents do have some rights to learn from their mistakes and that it is also much better to keep a child with their parents. Outrage over child welfare agencies removing children from parents that admit to corporal punishment; that's new to me. Spanking ≠ Abuse, unless you define Spanking = Thrashing I hadn't heard of the organization, but the two stories that popped up, sounded like serious government over reach to me. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36026458First one- some analysis of lack of eye contact in a home video = baby "suffering serious psychological harm" https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/a-big-state-versus-a-poor-family-canadian-s-son-forcibly-removed-in-norway-1.3804956Second one- kid gets bullied and threatened with death in school. Parents pull kid, temporary homeschool until they can transfer to another school. Authorities show up and tackle the kid because he didn't want get taken away by the authorities- then they take him away. I don't know. Maybe there's some follow up stories that reveals more, but on the face of it, seems pretty horrific to me.
The problem is big government and a lack of proper separation of powers.
The executive branch of government is not supposed to be able to act without clearing the judiciary hurdle first. The CPS should only be able to take away children after winning a case against parents in court first.
Except in the extreme circumstance where parents are about to inflict permanent physical damage on kids, but the CPS should call the police instead of acting by themselves.
|
Canada11350 Posts
Any act of spanking is damaging to the child, because it both means the child cannot trust the parent AND the child learns inflicting pain is an acceptable way to solve problems.
False on both fronts.
Children do not learn inflicting pain is an acceptable way to solve problems, from spanking- they've already tried to solve their problem with violence. Hence, the spanking.
We understand the difference between judgement rendered and solving one's own problems. We are not similarity confused that hostage taker learn to take hostages when they themselves are involuntarily detained in prison for the crime of taking hostages. The authorities did not have a problem that the needed to solve by hostage taking, so thereby giving the idea to the rest of society. So to, with parents- it's a category difference that even a child can understand.
Now they would learn violence 'solves problems if the parents used violence against each other, or against their neighbours, etc. But that's a whole other matter. Most kids have fairly operational guilty conscious when called to task and so understand the difference.
As for trust, trust would only be broken if expectations were unclear and the consequences applied in an arbitrary manner. No such trust is broken if I know in advance that if I hit a sibling, that I will be spanked.
|
|
|
On August 17 2019 11:00 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2019 10:39 Muliphein wrote:
Spanking children is an incredibly damaging thing to society. Just imagine how society looked like, and how much less mental illness and crime we would have, if parents abusing children never happened.
There are so many outrage stories of European government child welfare agencies not pursuing the removal of children from their parents and then the child being murdered by their parents. The fact is that bad parents do have some rights to learn from their mistakes and that it is also much better to keep a child with their parents. Outrage over child welfare agencies removing children from parents that admit to corporal punishment; that's new to me. Spanking ≠ Abuse, unless you define Spanking = Thrashing I hadn't heard of the organization, but the two stories that popped up, sounded like serious government over reach to me. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36026458First one- some analysis of lack of eye contact in a home video = baby "suffering serious psychological harm" https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/a-big-state-versus-a-poor-family-canadian-s-son-forcibly-removed-in-norway-1.3804956Second one- kid gets bullied and threatened with death in school. Parents pull kid, temporary homeschool until they can transfer to another school. Authorities show up and tackle the kid because he didn't want get taken away by the authorities- then they take him away. I don't know. Maybe there's some follow up stories that reveals more, but on the face of it, seems pretty horrific to me.
On the face of it, yeah. Problem, as has been mentioned before, is that we're only hearing one side here. In the last one, we're told that they had been in contact with barnevernet repeatedly since they've arrived, but gives no other reason than "because we're poor" (which, afaik, is only reasonable if we're talking so poor they barely have food on the table). Homeschooling is legal in Norway, but not just anyone can do it "just cuz". It's a very difficult process exactly because the kid needs socialising. It sounds to be like the parents just yanked the kid out of school and told them after the fact that "He's being mobbed, so we're gonna teach him ourselves!", which is a huuuuuge nono.
So couple good intentions with bad execution, and a known history with Barnevernet, and suddenly it's not so unreasonable any more.
Don't know how this case ended, but I would be very surprised if the kid wasn't returned after some rounds in court where the family got to explain themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
