Interesting. In my state we have to have law enforcement accompany us if we want a warrant.
That may well be the case in my state, too. If I were a judge (and I'm a CPS-is-the-last-resort kind of girl), and I heard the stories that the neighbors told on Dr. Oz from November and March, and that CPS had already been by twice, seen cars coming and going, but got no answer at the door, I would have issued a warrant, with police if necessary. If I were CPS, I would have sought that warrant. The stories are disturbing - very - and worth at least a face-to-face meeting with the kids in view of the parents but out of hearing for at least a brief interview on the specific points in question, and this is one of the rare instances where I would even say it's totally reasonable to search the fridge & pantry (see if they're locked) and probably even bring a doctor on site to evaluate the children right then and there.
IMO, it actually benefits the parents accused of abuse to have a doctor evaluate on site (it was done with the Stanley children), or allow the children to be transported straight to your pediatrician-of-choice, because if you're innocent, the case can and should end right there. (Unfortunately, too often, as with the Stanley children, that *does not* end the case ... but it should.)
Hannah's behavior (she not only went to their house, but RAN UPSTAIRS straight to their bedroom where Dana was sleeping and hid in between the furniture) and Jen's behavior (she not only went to their house, but ENTERED without permission and started searching for Hannah), along with the rest, was very disturbing. If all these details were given to CPS and also to a judge, I think a warrant would have been called for. Unfortunately, instead, there seems to be some very inefficient system where CPS actually had to call 911!
One point I'm not clear on: on Oz, it sounded like the 3 visits were while the family was still at home. They happened culminating on that Friday, then? Not Fri and then two days after the family had skipped town?
Possibly. I have a rare type of a connective tissue disorder called Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome. (I have Vascular EDS with crossover HEDS.) It has caused my small stature (4'10" and 95 lbs) and has given me a lot of oral issues: TMJ, frequent periodontal disease, and tooth loss. I am 38 and actually getting a whole set of dentures this year,...
You can't diagnose anyone from a few pictures on the internet but Hannah's overall size and stature look very similar to my own. ...
Note: not implying that Hannah's size is ONLY a result from a condition and not malnutrition. She still could have been malnourished. Just agreeing that there could have been a contributing factor to her small size.
This is fascinating to me, totally OT, because I have HMS and possibly EDS (but not severe), and my grandmother had a full set of dentures by 38. She's deceased now so I can't ask, but I wonder ...
Anyway, back OT, Hannah was 4'1" and 45lb at age 16, which is significantly less than your size, which is well within the normal range for people (most of my maternal line was 5'0" or less, and 100lb until they all went low-fat and gained 50-100lb ...). But you may be right that some combo of genetic + deprivation is responsible for her looking 7 at 16.
) I have been at least a couple of times in my lifetime, at a stoplight/stopsign, when the car was not in 'park', and my foot was on the brake pedal.. but I became distracted, probably by conversation with another in the vehicle, and ever so slightly and slowly, my foot lightened off the pedal, which made my vehicle start to move ever so slowly forward.. I mean, if JH was going 150km straight off the cliff from a stopped position, that is one thing.. but if the vehicle was barely going forward, that *could* potentially be a different thing, no? Thoughts?
