(Natural News) Kansas City - Mid-April - It began as a routine check-up. New parents Calob and Ashly had taken their 2.5-month old baby, Caden, to a weight specialist because he was slightly underweight. As far as they knew, they were doing a great job with Caden, feeding him everything he needed and performing the duties of responsible parents. They had gone along with their pediatrician's recommendation to see the specialist because they wanted to be certain nothing was wrong.
But after a few minutes in the examination room, the appointment turned into an ambush. Multiple officials from Department of Family Services (DFS) stormed in the room, demanding the astonished parents disclose what they had been feeding their child. They were then given a choice, between being put into jail on the charge of child abuse, and signing a rights waiver to relinquish their parental rights over their child. Under the intense scrutiny and pressure of state officials, they signed the waiver, and then lost their child.
Caden was then administered a slew of tests and treatments. The 2.5 month-old's head was punctured by a needle, and he was given a number of other tests. State health professionals gave him Phenobarbital, Rocuronium, Diazepam, Dopamine, Adenosine, and Alprostadil, among other substances. He was defibrillated at one point, though not in cardiac arrest.
One week later, the couple's baby was returned to them, along with instructions for 'proper care.'
It is clear that state officials had been alerted to Ashly and Calob's 'maltreatment,' prior to their check-up, possibly due to two reasons. First, they had signed a religious waiver of vaccination. Second, they had notified their pediatrician that they intended on feeding Caden an alternative formula. But the pediatrician had not objected to either of these practices, both of which were well within the couple's legal rights as parents. Their pediatrician had even approved the alternative formula.
Nonetheless, Ashly and Calob were clearly targeted by authorities, which deemed their parental decisions as harmful to their child. They are now visited on a regular basis by a social worker who ensures Caden is receiving state-approved, generic formula.
This is not the first case of DFS or Child Protection Services' (CPS) abuse of power. In Chicago last year, there were at least three documented CPS due process cases which were won by claimant parents. That means that in three cases parents sued CPS on the grounds that the agency had broken from its guidelines. Ashly and Calob are currently attempting to raise funds for a case of their own.
This is just the tip of the iceberg, in terms of the number of cases out there. Maryanne Godboldo was also attacked by CPS officials in May of this year for not giving her daughter psychiatric drugs in preference of holistic care. Natural News covered the story and interviewed Maryanne; the article and interview can be found at (http://www.naturalnews.com/032501_Maryanne_G...). Maryanne is actively involved in taking a stand on parental rights.
But there are many more cases of individuals who do not or cannot stand up for their rights, either do to intimidation by government officials, or by the prospect of taking a government agency to court. Many people still believe in the ultimate good conscience of government officials. If their child is taken away, they presume that they are in the wrong, despite many cases that suggest otherwise.
Mass media sources keep stories like Ashly's and Calob's out of mainstream view. You will not find their story on KMBC, even if they go to court against DFS and win. This is a dangerous situation for our country to find itself in; the lack of widespread information further allows government agencies, such as CPS and DFS to continue to act unconstitutionally without danger of reprisal. If no one checks their use of power, then abuse of power will only worsen.
When infants can be removed from their parents based on the type of formula, medical care, and vaccinations (or lack) they choose for their children, we must ask whether we are actually free. Perhaps the Constitution supports only the freedom of religious choice; meanwhile, a child was taken from his parents due to formula choice and a religious waiver.