Crystal S., Haleigh's mother #3

[CHICANA]

OMG! This has gotten so far out of hand, imo!

I guess it is where I grew up, but being 17 and in love isn't a crime, imo. Half the people in my high school must have been criminals their senior year because they turned 18 while dating their future spouses who were usually a couple of years younger. (Some of those "had" to get married while still in h.s., too...and I might add...the majority of those marriages have lasted over 30 years!) Then there were others who dated their future spouses while they were in h.s. and they were in college making them older, too! Oh, how times have changed...and values...and laws...and the divorce rates. Where and when did people decide to make it a crime to fall in love while being young?

It's not against the law for a teen to fall in love but we've all seen the Florida statute that makes it a felony for a person of Rons age to be with a person of Misty's.
Right or wrong, it's the law.

 

[stilettos]

I don't trust the child welfare system in any state and with good reason. That being said I'm sure there are some who feel as you do and have the best of intentions.
It bothers me when people think DFS is infallible.
Just as in any other profession, there are good and bad DFS workers.

In this case, the judge had very little to go on and IMO DFS didn't have a legal reason to remove the kids even though they might have been better off somewhere else.
The law is clear when followed. A child can only legally be removed when there is risk of serious physical harm or death. I realize not all workers follow this, but it is the law and I think it's necessary. Leaving a small bruise on a child's behind doesn't mean that parent is going to seriously hurt or kill their child. Even when they find some kind of mild abuse they are supposed to provide services to the family not just yank the kid out of their home which could be much more traumatic than a bruise on the butt.
The calls to DFS weren't working and Crystal's only real option imo was to try to get the custody order modified.

I agree that DFS is not infallible. A child can however be legally removed when the child has spoken to counselors and they feel that it is not in the best interest of the child to remain in the home. At that point DFS is contacted and an attorney might recommend emergency custody changes. The best thing to do in child cases is to get the child interviewed by a forensic psychologist familiar with abuse in family situations. NO leaving one small bruise on a child's behind may not indicate serious abuse...bruising your child should never be ok. One bruise may be all we see....JR is the only one who can say more.

 

[CHICANA]

So you blame the mom for her grown children records? So when do young adults take blame for their own actions?

Of course I don't blame her. I just don't think she should have a chance to raise another child that might turn out like those two when Haleigh and RJ have a mother. If they didn't have a mother and father then one of the grandmothers would be the next choice.

 

[stilettos]

OMG! This has gotten so far out of hand, imo!

I guess it is where I grew up, but being 17 and in love isn't a crime, imo. Half the people in my high school must have been criminals their senior year because they turned 18 while dating their future spouses who were usually a couple of years younger. (Some of those "had" to get married while still in h.s., too...and I might add...the majority of those marriages have lasted over 30 years!) Then there were others who dated their future spouses while they were in h.s. and they were in college making them older, too! Oh, how times have changed...and values...and laws...and the divorce rates. Where and when did people decide to make it a crime to fall in love while being young?

Two young high school students are a little different than a 24-25 year old dating many young teen women in the area. Shows a preference for the age group, imo. The law however is the law. Unless and until it is changed it is a felony. I have heard the statistic that 99% of all teenage relationships fail before adulthood.

 

[stilettos]

I keep hearing about SR and illegal sexual contact with a minor (in reference to Misty). I'm curious, what is the age of consent in Florida? Does anyone know this off the top of his/her head? I know it varies from state to state. In many states, the age is 17, I believe in some states, the age is even 16, so I'm just curious what the age is in Florida.


ETA - I just checked for myself. The age is 18 in Florida.

There is a loophole it looks like, a "close age exemption". The exception permits an a person younger than 24 to become involved in legal sexual activity with a minor aged 16 or 17. I'm trying to find out if this exemption is outdated. I don't believe it is.

Younger than 24 would be the applicable portion of the statute.

 

[tehcloser]

I guess if I saw them as being "in love", it would not bother me. But what I see is an older guy, with two kids, possibly a third, who has not had just a great life. And I see a 17 year old girl, who has been sexually molested twice by her own admissions. She has had a very hard childhood. They meet and within 6 months, they want everyone to believe that they are so in love, that they have to get married at the worst possible time. And even then...they were not screaming from the rooftops that they love each other....they were screaming it was what Haleigh wanted. Excuse me if I just can't see this being lasting love.....

 

[stilettos]

Ok what ever. Do you have any other ideas on finding Haleigh? Im sure Crystal would love some help in this area too.

My concern about Ron and Misty's surrounding circumstances are a part of finding Haleigh. Crystal's and Chad's also for that matter. It just seems as though LE is most interested in Ron's and Misty's arena. The behavior of the parent could have been the catalyst of the abduction. We need to find out everything about them. And let the legal chips fall where they may.

 

[magnolia]

I guess if I saw them as being "in love", it would not bother me. But what I see is an older guy, with two kids, possibly a third, who has not had just a great life. And I see a 17 year old girl, who has been sexually molested twice by her own admissions. She has had a very hard childhood. They meet and within 6 months, they want everyone to believe that they are so in love, that they have to get married at the worst possible time. And even then...they were not screaming from the rooftops that they love each other....they were screaming it was what Haleigh wanted. Excuse me if I just can't see this being lasting love.....

May I ask please, what any of this has to do with the disappearance of Haleigh?:waitasec:

 

[kant]

I guess if I saw them as being "in love", it would not bother me. But what I see is an older guy, with two kids, possibly a third, who has not had just a great life. And I see a 17 year old girl, who has been sexually molested twice by her own admissions. She has had a very hard childhood. They meet and within 6 months, they want everyone to believe that they are so in love, that they have to get married at the worst possible time. And even then...they were not screaming from the rooftops that they love each other....they were screaming it was what Haleigh wanted. Excuse me if I just can't see this being lasting love.....

Wow, teh closer you took the words right out of my mouth.

On he list of Ron's girlfriends du jour, all we know of so far are Crystal, and Misty right? Is there another one or am I confused? Did he date any of them when they were older than 17?

 

[SeriouslySearching]

The Law Says it's illegal........would you want your 17 yr old dating a 25 year old man ?

The problem is the law. It would depend on many factors not just age.

 

[stilettos]

May I ask please, what any of this has to do with the disappearance of Haleigh?:waitasec:

Since LE has not cleared them...they are suspects. Their whole life is up for investigation.

 

[tehcloser]

May I ask please, what any of this has to do with the disappearance of Haleigh?:waitasec:

lol...The honest answer magnolia? It may not have a da*n thing to do with it...lol. But since we don't know...it, like everything else, has to be looked at. :blowkiss:

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Two young high school students are a little different than a 24-25 year old dating many young teen women in the area. Shows a preference for the age group, imo. The law however is the law. Unless and until it is changed it is a felony. I have heard the statistic that 99% of all teenage relationships fail before adulthood.

Wow! So all those couples I saw marry as teens who are still married fall into a 1% category and come from my hometown! Amazing!

 

[CHICANA]

I agree that DFS is not infallible. A child can however be legally removed when the child has spoken to counselors and they feel that it is not in the best interest of the child to remain in the home. At that point DFS is contacted and an attorney might recommend emergency custody changes. The best thing to do in child cases is to get the child interviewed by a forensic psychologist familiar with abuse in family situations. NO leaving one small bruise on a child's behind may not indicate serious abuse...bruising your child should never be ok. One bruise may be all we see....JR is the only one who can say more.

I know that's how they do things but according to the law without evidence that the child is at risk of serious physical harm or abuse the best interest issue doesn't come into play. It comes in during custody fights between parents and after a case has been adjudicated and the parent/s are proven unfit.
If a child tells a counselor that he/she was seriously hurt or had been threatened then he/she could be removed as the child's statement is evidence.
Removing a child without any of the above is illegal. I know it happens all the time which is why I think the system needs way more oversight.
As for RJ, what can a three year old intentionally do to deserve to be hit with a stick at all, let alone hard enough to leave a bruise ??
And I don't think bruising your child is ever ok, it is abuse. I just understand why DFS didn't remove RJ based on that alone. And I don't think the system failed the kids this time, I think it was their parents.
I can't believe I'm defending DFS for once.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

May I ask please, what any of this has to do with the disappearance of Haleigh?:waitasec:

Nothing. It has nothing to do with Haleigh and finding Haleigh. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

It is actually off topic on the Crystal thread, but it was brought up here for some reason.

 

[texasmommy39]

Since LE has not cleared them...they are suspects. Their whole life is up for investigation.

LOL..... Ones whole life ( rumors and hearsay) is to be adressed here not in an investigaion. I believe they determine the facts and only work with such to determine guilt or not guilty of any suspect.
Dang nabbit I forgot I might be the only one that has faith in the systems in our society to serve and protect.

 

[kant]

LOL..... Ones whole life ( rumors and hearsay) is to be adressed here not in an investigaion. I believe they determine the facts and only work with such to determine guilt or not guilty of any suspect.

I sincerely don't understand what you mean Texasmommy; What portion of one's life is not subject to scrutiny when one's child has gone missing?

 

[CHICANA]

LOL So now we should punish in some way the parents of all children who have used drugs or have assault charges? I guess someone better go round up some members of Congress and a lot of other community leaders...because I have heard tell of them having children charged with such crimes, too! Take their other children and grandchildren away from them as they are a danger?! GMAB!

LOL.Nobody suggested taking anybody away from them. But why should either one of them have custody? Haleigh doesn't belong to the grandmother's. I think children should be with their PARENTS before their grandparents.
If or when one of their biological parents can't take care of them, the grandparents are the next logical choice to have custody.
I also didn't say they'd be in danger. I sure didn't say all that, my post was 1 sentence long.

 

[CHICANA]

LOL..... Ones whole life ( rumors and hearsay) is to be adressed here not in an investigaion. I believe they determine the facts and only work with such to determine guilt or not guilty of any suspect.
Dang nabbit I forgot I might be the only one that has faith in the systems in our society to serve and protect.

If I wanted to wait for the investigation to be over and all the facts on the table before discussing a case, I wouldn't read or post on a public forum.

 

[kant]

YIKES. If abuse is the issue in a home and the parent is found guilty of it such that the kids are removed, I shudder to think that the kids would then be palmed off to the parents of the parent who abused them; B/c, imo, that abusive parent learned it somewhere.... meaning from his parents.