<modsnip>
I've had to take a break from this case for a few days because it was getting confusing as to what the actual facts were vs what posters were speculating. I'm also a little uncomfortable at some of the conclusions that are being drawn in regards to to race. (Non-Caucasian, older children are traditionally the most difficult to find adoptive parents for. While it is certainly possible that the mothers had some kind of "white savior" complex, it is JUST as likely that they adopted African American children because they simply wanted to provide a home for children that might have otherwise not found a permanent home. I've been through the adoption process. In the very beginning we were told that if we wanted a "occasion infant" then we'd have to wait several years. If we were willing to adopt an African American toddler, especially if there was a developmental issue or physical impairment present, then the process would be much quicker. Although we ultimately did not go through the process, we were definitely leaning towards an African American toddler because we were interested in providing a home for someone who'd been waiting longer.)
Where I live, there are many families who live off the grid and are almost "clannish." People actually move to my part of the state to set up farms and go offline. My household doesn't have a telephone, although we have internet because I do a lot of online work. We're also a little "crunchy" and we do the protests, family events, festivals, etc. with our kids. (Someone a few pages back referred to this as being "new age" and used that phrase in a negative manner.) So none of that is weird to me.
I'm not real big on calling this "another Turpin family" case. There are big differences between the families. For starters, the Hart children were adopted and their small statures/sizes could very well stem from problems they faced inutero or as infants. (Young children diagnosed with "failure to thrive" often have trouble catching up with other children their age in terms of development.)
Re: the burning of the cross in the yard. Posters were saying that it probably didn't happen because it would have made the news. Not necessarily. There was a Klan meeting about an hour away from me last year and a cross was burned in a yard of an African American family. Although the family took video footage of it and shared it on their social media, not even the local paper reported.
The Turpins went out of their way, it seems, to ensure that their children were cut off from the world. They were isolated from just about everyone. The Harts, however, were very sociable. Although we have no way of knowing what went on behind closed doors with the Harts, there were people in their lives who spent time with the children and the mothers.
I understand the comparisons between the two families but I think it serves either in reducing them to simply being the same. There are nuances, important ones, that set them apart.
The fact is, we don't have a lot of facts about this case. A good portion of the information has come from the next door neighbors. All we have, for instance, are the neighbors saying that the children were malnourished. Unlike in the Turpin case, we haven't heard any of the children's doctors, or even a coroner's report, corroborate this.
Something terrible clearly happened here. I don't believe it was accidental; I do think it was intentional. I think it's important not to let speculation become facts, however. We don't know that either parent had a narcissistic personality disorder, we don't know that there was anything nefarious in their adopting of ethnic children, we don't really even know to what extent they were "isolating" the children. I'm just trying to gather more information from official sources before I reach any firm conclusions.
