PA - Most Of One-Month-Old Babys Face Chewed Off By Trio Of Ferrets

[Lulu14]

The idea of forcibly sterilizing Americans deemed inferior by testing doesn't sit well with me at all, JMO.

There are no easy answers, but eugenics is not, IMO, even worthy of consideration in the United States of America.

Eugenics was a part of our society until very recently. In reality, as a society, we cannot support so much extra weight. People who cannot take care of themselves - financially, emotionally or IQ wise -should not be allowed to bring other people in the world. Society should not be forced to support the results of their actions. We all say it is ok to spray and neuter pets, and also to put them down when they are too sick, yet cry in offense when we think humans - both the one that are the subject of those measures, and those

 

[MyBelle]

Convicted criminals are a different story. I was responding to the idea that "low IQ" (as judged by a test) Americans be forcibly sterilized to prevent their having children and thereby theoretically prevent cases like the one this thread is about.

I wasn't responding to that idea, I was responding to this case which involve the crime of child abuse and neglect of 5 children and the parents have shown themselves to be incapable of providing proper care. I'm not sure what more of a "test" is needed in this case.

JMO

 

[lizzybeth]

Maybe I missed it in the article but does anyone know how the baby is doing? TIA

 

[Wagara]

The few times I have known someone who owned ferrets, they were kept in a cage. If CPS was seeing them, did they not notice the condition of the home? Or did it just suddenly get that way in one week between visits?

We have a ferret and a 6 month old. Rocco the ferret is always caged. Boss Baby is first priority here.

 

[1&2&3]

It is beyond my comprehension why people with disabilities bring children into this world! With both parents functioning at a lower level, they are not able to give a child what it needs. Why a person would want to or be allowed to pass a known disability to the next generation is a selfish act!

The majority, if not all, people with genetic defects are on government assistance from birth. Then when they grow up and want to live a regular life, it is you and I paying for these children being reproduced by the parents with problems. These "adults" still live off the government.

We have to admit they have problems, they are different, they will not function as you and I do. Trying to deny these facts is useless! Giving them the benefits of regular life in all areas is not wise!

My opinions only!

 

[K_Z]

It is beyond my comprehension why people with disabilities bring children into this world! With both parents functioning at a lower level, they are not able to give a child what it needs. Why a person would want to or be allowed to pass a known disability to the next generation is a selfish act!

The majority, if not all, people with genetic defects are on government assistance from birth. Then when they grow up and want to live a regular life, it is you and I paying for these children being reproduced by the parents with problems. These "adults" still live off the government.

We have to admit they have problems, they are different, they will not function as you and I do. Trying to deny these facts is useless! Giving them the benefits of regular life in all areas is not wise!

My opinions only!

There is (or was) a documentary on Netflix called "Monica and David". It's about a mother who has an adult daughter with Down Syndrome, and her struggles to provide a life for her. The mom is very wealthy, so can provide things like a separate apartment in her home. Monica meets a man with Down syndrome, and they want to get married, which they do. The mom provides them with supervision and designs an apartment for them within their condo. The documentary has a section on where the mom discusses her guardianship of Monica, M & Ds sexual activity, and her efforts to prevent Monica from becoming pregnant. Quite interesting.

I think the issue you're discussing is that for many decades, there has been no "forcible" sterilization anymore for the mentally disabled. When there is a guardianship situation, it's easier to find a way to have the disabled person sterilized, or put on long term birth control, but reproduction is seen by many as a "right", even of mentally disabled people. Sadly, there are even cases of comatose young women being sexually assaulted and made pregnant, while in nursing homes.

It's a real problem. We know a family with a teen girl who is very beautiful, but autistic, and functions at the level of a 5-7 year old. The grandmother is frantic to keep boys away from the teen, but the mom of the girl is all but oblivious to how easily her vulnerable daughter could be sexually assaulted or abused. The mother grooms the teen to make her more beautiful, buying her push up bras, highlighting her hair, putting makeup on her. It's a very troubling situation to observe.

 

[Constance]

IMO, I find it disturbing that so many here seem to support the idea of restricting the reproductive rights of innocent American women on the off chance that something like this might happen.

Reading about this case upset me, too. It made me want to see those ferrets ride the lightning in little ferret-sized electric chairs. But common sense tells me that's a stupid knee-jerk reaction on my part.

I understand the anger, the "If only..." thoughts that can lead to fantasies like little ferret-sized electric chairs and the forced sterilization of our "inferior" fellow Americans. Really, I do. But I don't get how anyone can seriously believe that it would prevent children being injured due to parents' neglect. Persons of average or above average IQ neglect, abuse, and kill children, too, sadly.

I'm aware that eugenics were a part of our society in the past. So were slavery, Jim Crowe laws, and back alley abortions. The financial aspect doesn't concern me, either, considering that we somehow manage to send roughly 3 billion dollars a year to Israel for its defense. I don't begrudge some of my taxes being used to help my fellow disabled Americans. I'd prefer it, actually. We're all in this together, the way I see it.

It's unlikely I'll be changing my own or anyone else's opinion anytime soon, though, so I'll just shut up now.

All of this is only my own opinion, of course. For optimal experience, read while listening to Alice Cooper's I Love America.

 

[Lulu14]

IMO, I find it disturbing that so many here seem to support the idea of restricting the reproductive rights of innocent American women on the off chance that something like this might happen.

That's because we are brought up thinking the right to have children is somehow sacred and untouchable. We restrict people from certain activities all the time. We don't allow people to drive a car when we know they are incapable of. We even take away children from families that cannot take care of them. We even force medication on children and refuse a person's right to euthanasia. But somehow restricting reproduction is something diabolical and Nazi-like.

 

[Constance]

That's because we are brought up thinking the right to have children is somehow sacred and untouchable. We restrict people from certain activities all the time.

As the law stands, it is each individual woman's right to choose when and if she will bear children.

We don't allow people to drive a car when we know they are incapable of.

We don't "allow" it, maybe, but we don't blind or otherwise physically maim them to prevent their driving.

We even take away children from families that cannot take care of them.

This is done in the best interests of the children and is absolutely not the same as forced, non-punitive sterilization of innocent Americans.

But somehow restricting reproduction is something diabolical and Nazi-like.

I didn't say that restricting reproduction is Nazi-like. This isn't 1930s Germany and the issue at hand has nothing to do with the National Socialist German Worker's Party, in my opinion.

This is the United States of America. As the law stands, it is each individual woman's right to choose when and if she will bear children.

 

[Lulu14]

What I was trying to say is that as a society we make choices for our members all the time. In some cases, reproduction should be one of those choices.

Not a popular opinion, but it is mine and I stand by it.

 

[adorei]

I'm wondering what exactly is disabled about these parents? There are so many different levels of disability, it makes me curious.

 

[Constance]

Not a popular opinion, but it is mine and I stand by it.

I can respect that.

 

[Constance]

I'm wondering what exactly is disabled about these parents? There are so many different levels of disability, it makes me curious.

That's a very good question. I still haven't looked at the links, so I don't even know. I think we're just speculating? I think most (me included) are just of the mind that these folks aren't real bright, what with letting ferrets run loose and leaving their baby unattended and all. JMO.

 

[Rayemonde]

April 2015:

The parents of a 1-month-old girl whose face was eaten by pet ferrets were held for court on one count each of recklessly endangering another person and endangering the welfare of children, both misdemeanor offenses.

Magisterial District Judge Leonard V. Tenaglia dismissed four additional counts of endangering the welfare of children against 42-year-old Burnie Fraim and 24-year-old Jessica Lynne Benales following a nearly two-hour preliminary hearing....


The parents are free on unsecured $100,000 bail each. Bail conditions, set previously by Tenaglia, include no contact with their five children, the oldest of whom is 5, without appropriate approval by Children and Youth Services of Delaware County.

At the time of the arrests, Darby Borough Police Chief Robert Smythe said the parents and the five children, all of whom have varying degrees of challenges, have their own caseworker, either through CYS, Elwyn or Northwest Human Resources Services.

http://www.delcotimes.com/general-n...-held-for-trial-on-single-misdemeanor-charges

 

[Rayemonde]

May 2015:

The parents of a 1-month-old girl whose face was partially eaten by pet ferrets were formally arraigned Wednesday on misdemeanor charges of endangering the welfare of a child and reckless endangerment....

Baldini argued at the preliminary hearing that the child's injuries were a tragic accident, but not a crime. Barr countered that both parents had a duty to protect their children, but failed to do so here. He added that they knew the ferrets could escape their cage.

http://www.pottsmerc.com/general-ne...ly-arraigned-in-ferret-mauling-of-1-month-old

 

[MsMarple]

September 24, 2015:

A Darby Borough couple whose 6-week-old daughter was mauled by pet ferrets was acquitted of child endangerment and reckless endangerment charges Thursday.

Judge John Capuzzi found Assistant District Attorney Christopher Boggs did not meet the burden of proof to convict Bernie Fraim, 42, or Jessica Lynne Benales, 24, on either charge following a short bench trial.
...
Capuzzi reviewed jury instructions for the crime of endangering the welfare of a child and found the second element calls for “knowingly” placing the child in harm’s way, which requires being “practically certain” the alleged conduct will cause a particular result.

Reckless endangerment likewise requires a person to consciously ignore a great and unjustifiable risk that his or her actions will produce an injury.

While certainly a tragedy, the judge found the commonwealth could not prove criminality based on the evidence and granted motions to acquit for both defendants.

http://www.delcotimes.com/article/DC/20150924/NEWS/150929750