jannuncutt
jannuncutt
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2005
- Messages
- 892
- Reaction score
- 11
Does anyone have an update?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
WTF is going on here? These people should be in jail!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:furious:mysteriew said:The Ohio couple accused of keeping some of their 11 adopted children in cages is breaking their silence and fighting to get their children back.
The Gravelles told "Good Morning America" in an interview today they only kept three or four children in the enclosures and that they did so because they were severely emotionally disturbed and a threat to themselves and the other children. They said two other children "just liked sleeping in the enclosure."
"One little girl, she had a regular bed that's still in the room and she chose to get down and get in the enclosure," Sharen Gravelle said. "They play in them."
The Huron County Sheriff's Office reported finding nine cages built into the wall of an upstairs bedroom. The Huron County Department of Job and Family Services has alleged in court documents that the children, who suffer from conditions such as fetal alcohol syndrome and autism, were abused and neglected or in danger of being mistreated.
The Gravelles said there are only six enclosures and not all the children suffer from disabilities.
Michael Gravelle told police he built the cages himself in 2002 after a child therapist assured him it was the best way to protect the kids from each other. He said the cages were meant to accommodate a twin size mattress and that they are spacious, allowing a child to move around and stand up in the larger cages. They said the cages were never locked, but were fitted with alarms that alerted them when a child was up and about.
"There are no locks," Sharen Gravelle said. "We didn't even lock our house at night so why would we lock our child in?"
Michael Gravelle said he was willing to compromise with family services about keeping the children in cages if they regain custody.
"Several of the children still need to be in some type of enclosure for their safety and for the security of the whole family," Michael Gravelle said. "Yes, we would consider any type of compromise That is our goal, to reach out to them so they will listen to us and negotiate with us in all fairness and bring our children home."
In a hearing last week, Huron County Common Pleas Court Judge Timothy Cardwell rejected a motion to allow the Gravelle's 19-month-old adopted child to be returned to a Chicago-area adoption agency.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1273177
I know I did the right thing for my child, no doubt in my mind. But that's kind of why I have reserved judgement on this whole thing, because I really don't know what the truth is.mysteriew said:No JBean I don't think you were wrong. A parent has to do whatever they can to see that children who aren't old enough, or able enough are protected.
I have said all along, I am less concerned with the so called "cages" as long as they were big enough, if the children had mattresses and coving and if they were not locked. The parents cannot be expected to be awake 24/7 to watch the kids. And from the descriptions of the children, special arrangements might have to be made for them. The Gravelle's have said that each enclosure had a mattress and pillow and blanket. At least one article disputes that. I am a lttle more concerned about the dau and son's statements about their father, but at least one dau. appears to dispute what they say.
A lot of what is happening here, is not going to be known unless it goes to court. It may be only a matter of social workers disagreeing about what is proper treatment for the kids. At least 2 social workers seem to agree that the "cages" or enclosures were necessary for the children's protection. The kids appeared to be healthy, clean, fed, and supervised. As far as using the enclosures for punishment- I myself have sent my kids to bed for misbehavior. Since the beds weren't locked, only equipped with an alarm- then I just am not seeing so much of a problem here.
I do think it is significant that there has been no charges filed here. If the prosecution had seen evidence of wrong doing, I feel pretty certain that charges would have been filed.
I always defended the "cages" it made sense to me from the very beginning.JBean said:I know I did the right thing for my child, no doubt in my mind. But that's kind of why I have reserved judgement on this whole thing, because I really don't know what the truth is.
What if I were sitting around my living room drinking a glass of wine after I put this child to bed.
If someone were to come in, they could say, truthfully, that I lockd up my child and then started drinking. Doesn't sound too good for me, when in fact it is nothing. I have been very curious about this story and have hoped all along that these people really were acting in the best interest of the children, as I was. Just don't know.
I so agree with your post. These children were treated in an inhumane fashion. I saw the pics of the cages too. I had an agressive baby who walked and never did crawl and was pretty adept at jumping out of her crib too. Jbeans turning the crib over was a good solution to an aggressive BABY, not a special needs child. Special needs children need the most humane and endearing care in the world not cornering when their disabilities are hard to handle. These children are older and are thinking and must believe their world is a very scary place. They need the professional care that our society can provide....not the fact that someone will take them in. That in itself is disheartening.LinasK said:I saw the pictures of these cages. JBean, your baby was just that- a baby not a grown child. These cages were not "clubhouses" like the parents claimed, and that's inhumane to not give them blankets and pillows, they were not beds, only rubber matresses in cages. I don't believe they didn't keep them in at night by shoving the dressers up against them. 11 disabled special needs children were clearly more than they could handle, but they wouldn't admit it. The Gravelle's were only out for the money they got from having these kids. Their own children talked about what lousy parents they were- I tend to believe them. Children like this belong in a locked institution, not CAGES!:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: That social worker needs her head examined!!!:behindbar
LinasK said:So glad you're back CP:blowkiss:
concernedperson said:Back atcha sweetheart! :blowkiss:
Opie said:There is also the problem that in some states (OH included) it is necessary for the family to sign over custody of the child to the state in order to receive assistance in some cases. There is a child with severe problems in my family, and that "solution" has been proposed. A loving parent would have to be really desperate to do that, IMO.