Here’s one for the books, or at least one for the
newspaper. I pay special attention to
events that take place in both Chicago and Urbana, Illinois, as I did my
undergraduate work at Northwestern, and my legal work at the University of
Illinois. I haven’t been to Urbana
other than for a long weekend in the last twenty years since graduating from
law school, however, things appear to be getting out of hand.
This very summer found the Department of Children and
Family Services removing a five-year-old boy from his home because his mother
would not stop breast-feeding him. The
boy has been placed in foster care, and is presently being tended to by his
long-time babysitter, pending the next hearing. This matter pits the babysitter against the mother for, when
interviewed by the Department of Children and Family Services, the babysitter
said she was told that the child wanted to stop nursing however, his mother
wouldn’t let him. Circuit Court Judge
Ann Einhorn heard this case, and fortunately, made a finding that there was no
proof of sexual abuse in this case.
Judge Einhorn further concluded that the mother, who is 32 years old,
had raised a very intelligent young man.
The Judge took the boy from his mother, however, concluding that the
downside here was significantly greater than the upside, in that significant
harm could befall this child if things continued as they were.
In this matter, the mother’s attorney argued that the
mother had a constitutional right to parent the way she wanted to parent; Judge
Einhorn disagreed, and I’m with the judge on this one.
Five years old and still breast-feeding? What’s going on here? No, there are limits to the manner in which
a parent parents her child. The parent
cannot sexually abuse or physically abuse her child. Emotional abuse is certainly not favored, either; however, it is
more difficult to prove. For the
mother’s attorney to argue that there were, in effect, no boundaries in the
raising of her child is ludicrous.
Rights we have that often seem absolute are not quite
so. You often hear people talk about
the absolute right to free speech; that right ends when someone yells “Fire!”
in a crowded movie theater. (Unless of
course, the movie theater truly is on fire.)
There is no constitutionally authorized right of privacy that allows a
mother to raise a child without any accountability.
I fervently hope that Judge Einhorn orders a
psychological evaluation of the mother, the babysitter, and the child before
the next hearing. Perhaps this is one
of those cases in which the babysitter falls in love with the child and wants
to find a way to separate the child from the mother. You find this from time to time in divorce cases where the
divorce is quite bitter and vitriolic, and one parent accuses the other parent
of either physical or sexual abuse of the child in order to help his or her
case. Obviously, I have no way of
knowing whether the babysitter is being truthful or not; however, if the
babysitter is “telling it like it is,” I would suggest that the mother needs
some help. In domestic violence cases
in the state of California, those who are convicted generally go to anger
management classes. I am trying to
think of an equivalent type of class the mother in this case can be assigned
to, however, this is a family newspaper.
One way or the other, this child should eventually
come home; however, this mother must agree to keep her body away from her
son.
I apologize in advance for taking the easy pun,
however, I will keep you abreast of any further developments in this case.