What about the children?

Posted by Dalene | April 24, 2008 | 12 Comments

Last month we launched a new feature at Segullah. It’s called Ask Nine Women and it is a reader-generated discussion post. You can read more it here.

Today’s question:

My first thoughts about the recent raid on the FLDS compound in Texas were, “It’s about time someone did something about that!” But then I read this from The Salt Lake Tribune and this from GetReligion.org and I realized there are some members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who equate current events with the persecution that early LDS saints faced in Nauvoo. That never even occurred to me, but I found it interesting to contemplate.

Now I’m reading about how the children are being separated from their mothers and the issue suddenly seems a whole lot more complex.

In modern times I’ve always thought of both the women and children as the victims of polygamy. I’ve never even considered that the women might be complicit and could be held accountable if prosecuted. What does that mean for the children?

I’m interested to know what others think about 1). the raid, 2). how it may or may not compare to the situation in Nauvoo and 3). the separation of mothers (some of whom may be children themselves) from their children.

Please discuss.

If you have a topic or question you’d like to bring to the table, please e-mail us at askninewomenATgmailDOTcom. Unless otherwise requested, your question will be posted anonymously.

Category: Ask Nine Women

Comments

12 Responses to “What about the children?”

Wendy
April 24th, 2008 @ 8:28 am

1. In my heart of hearts the situation in TX just didn’t seem right, so I think something DID need to be done. The more I read about it, when Warren Jeffs selected the people to be there, families were already separated, fathers from children, children from their parents, etc. He only wanted those that were the hardest working to be there.

2. I don’t think it compares to Nauvoo, or other early saints situations. The state there is trying to set things straight. Trying to protect the rights of the children, and young women, trying to use DNA to figure out whose kids belong to who, since the people are not giving up that information freely. Just because the women were agreeing to be in the situation, doesn’t mean it’s right for them or the children. From what I have read the labor situation was ridiculous, children up at 4am to work all day, men required to work 20 hours of hard labor a day.

3. I do feel for the women, in being separated from their children, but if they are not compliant with the authorities in saying whose children are whose, and these children are in a situation that doesn’t allow for kids to be kids (one of the women at the shelter said when she gave them crayons and paper, they didn’t even know what to do with it), then there is a problem.

Overall, I think it’s just a sad situation.
Jocelyn
April 24th, 2008 @ 10:22 am

1. A commentator on the radio yesterday made a very good point about the raid: those phone calls from “Sarah” may have prompted authorities to visit the compound, but they must have seen and heard very convincing evidence of abuse once they entered the compound that prompted them to carry out the raid to take all the children. We don’t know all the details, but I’m inclined to trust that the authorities were acting on solid evidence.

2. I don’t equate this with religious persecution–all religions that obey the laws of the land are generally left alone by authorities. This isn’t about religious persecution, its about protecting the welfare of children.

Personally, I agree with Utah’s policy of leaving polygamists alone as long as they don’t break any other laws (like abuse or welfare fraud). I think that anti-bigamy laws are unconstitutional, and sects like the FLDS are not the only ones affected by those laws. I have heard stories of many Muslim, Asian, and African immigrants being forced to choose between their polygamous wives, abandoning some wives and children in favor of others. I wouldn’t want to live polygamy myself, but I see no reason why it should be illegal. However, I do think that it should be illegal for persons under the age of 18 (even with parental consent) to enter polygamous marriages. Marriage at a young age is difficult enough without having to share your spouse. This sort of law would also help ensure that polygamy was only entered by consenting adults–not forced on young teenagers.

3. I feel very badly about the mothers and children being separated. I think that eventually some of the mothers will get their children back. Many of the women were children themselves when they were married and became mothers. I hope that this process will give them a chance to learn more about the outside society so that they can make an informed decision about whether or not they wish to remain a part of the sect. But after the investigation is over, I hope that children for whom there is no proof of abuse will be returned to their mothers.

This is a difficult, heartbreaking situation with far more victims than abusers. I sincerely hope and pray that things can be resolved in a way that is best for both the children and the parents.
Elizabeth
April 24th, 2008 @ 10:53 am

“As the FLDS are, we once were,â€ says Guy Murray, a lawyer in Southern California who has been blogging daily in defense of the FLDS communityâ€™s civil rights.”

I don’t agree with this statement. In the current polygamous culture, young/adolescent men are essentially kicked out in order to make room for 1 man to partner with multiple women. It is my understanding this never happened in the early church. If I’m wrong, I would sure like to be corrected.

I do think the women are as responsible as the men for keeping their children safe, but if a woman doesn’t like what is going on and wants to get out, I can imagine it is very difficult. If they are poorly educated, how are they supposed to get the heck out and support themselves and their babies? This has been a problem for women for ages.

As an aside–I am curious to see what happens with the DNA business. Vaguely tongue-in-cheek, I wonder if they’ll come back with “We have no idea! They all look the same.” My impression is the community is so tight-knit, so closed, that there isn’t much hybrid vigor. I mean, do they actively recruit women to join? I can’t imagine many women on the outside of the system would want to enlist.

In child welfare, the goal is to always keep children with their families if at all possible, removing from the home the perpetrator, rather than sending a child into foster care. My guess is because the women were so tight-lipped, the State had justification to separate everyone. This situation is a child welfare nightmare, and I feel very sorry for the social workers and lawyers trying to figure this one out.

Finally,we have two Articles of Faith which seem opposed to one another in this situation–one says we should honor, obey,and sustain the law; but another encourages us to allow others to worship how, where, or what they may.
Justine
April 24th, 2008 @ 10:56 am

I heard the news this morning report that the authorities now believe “Sarah” is a woman living in Colorado who has, over the last year, made dozens of calls accusing dozens of men in various states of physical and sexual abuse. I’m not a lawyer or anything, but if this is indeed true, it seems the evidence the state has gathered could very well be deemed inadmissible in any proceedings.

This entire thing just makes me sad. I can’t figure out how I feel in any concrete way. I feel for those children, but who wouldn’t! The media was a large part of the reason the Cold Creek raid in 1952 relented into the wholesale return of every child. There are just so many victims to go around. There are also so many inappropriate things going on. How can we easily weigh what takes priority?

I’ve thought about the early saints persecution, and I’ve witnessed how members of the mainstream LDS church in Texas are being harassed. There are some similarities, but Wendy’s right that they don’t bear out in their entirety.

I wish there was an easy solution to this.
Johnna
April 24th, 2008 @ 10:59 am

I don’t think the Government found evidence of child abuse to justify seizing the children. I think once the government had its foot in the door, it just wasn’t going to stop. I’m not convinced they’re going to be able to marginally improve these kids lives in foster care.

I’m angry they separated the mothers from the children. Especially nursing mothers, thank heaven they atleast reversed that for children under age 1. I think the real reason they won’t release any children is they’re afraid the parents will flee.

Texas/local authorities could have required proof of adequate schooling years ago.

I feel like they learned nothing from Short Creek. And that makes me angry.
cardine
April 24th, 2008 @ 2:45 pm

I don’t think that polygamy is the issue here, even though that’s what most people are pointing towards. These people aren’t actually participating in polygamy. They’re not legally married. The law has no hold on their sexual relations and living lifestyles so far as they are of legal age.

The issue here is child abuse. If there are numerous pregnant children who are 14, then there is sufficient evidence of child abuse. As for every adult in that compound being a part of the abuse, I couldn’t verify that. However, if there is sufficient evidence pointing towards each individual being a part of it, then in my mind, they are doing well to stop this illegal activity.

Religious or no, each citizen of whatever land has the responsibility to follow the laws of the land where they live or suffer the consequences for not doing so. And I am happy when our governments hold people responsible to the law. If, however, there is insufficient evidence that laws are being broken, then obviously it is wrong for the government to prosecute people for wrongs that they are not committing.
queenscarlett
April 24th, 2008 @ 3:49 pm

Here’s the deal – none of us know what is going on there. BUT… if there is evidence of abuse and none of the mother’s are doing anything to protect their children… then the children should be taken away from them.

I can tell without out a doubt there will be hell to pay – and I may be standing there if ever one of my children were harmed.

I have a BIG problem with man who would marry a girl underage. That’s not healthy – it’s not right – there you have it. They are still children.
Kate
April 24th, 2008 @ 11:05 pm

When the Warren Jeffs trial was going on- one of the prosecuters- (who is a friend of my husbands) said- that we (the public) have no idea what is going on behind ‘closed doors’ if you will- that it was very hard for him to work on the case because it was beyond disturbing… so, I think it is sad that the children are being taken away from their ‘mothers’ – but I in no way, shape or form equate this to the raid in Nauvoo. These people are truly brainwashed and are taught that our society is evil- it is wrong, it is backwards, I look at it like america is trying to save women from abuse in another country. I am a little disappointed that this is even being discussed on this website- because – except for the name- true Latter Day Saints- have nothing in common with this group of people.
Wendy
April 24th, 2008 @ 11:42 pm

I’ve been thinking of this off and on. I don’t think the raid was a bad call, based on the information available (how the raid was done is another matter). I do think it’s heart wrenching to see the children taken away from their Moms, even if it seems necessary because of what they allowed to happen to their children. It’s so not an easy black and white issue. When I worked with foster children, I saw the children really miss their moms, no matter how abusive the home was. I also saw moms who, in spite of their problems, really, truly loved their children. I was glad I wasn’t the one to make the call as to whether or not they could be reunited.
Cheri
April 25th, 2008 @ 1:19 am

This is a horrible dilemma. It seems likely that this religious community truly functioned as a cult, in which members were physically and emotionally isolated, without the real choice to leave. Abuse, at least in the sense of underage “marriage,” seems clear. It needed to be stopped. But I also believe in due process.

As I understand Texas law, a 16 year old can marry with consent of her parents. I think that law ought to be changed. It’s clear here that parents are not necessarily going to know the child’s best interest, and why is a 16 year old getting married anyway? That is just legalized statutory rape. Nonetheless, that is the law.

And what about due process? What are the specific charges against specific adults? Were authorities acting on general, group charges? Is that constitutional? Do authorities have a legal obligation to verify an accusation (and/or the identity of the accuser) before taking action? I have no answers.

Worst of all, as Dalene’s headline says, what about the children? Why do they have to be yanked all over the place? Isn’t there a more compassionate way? Couldn’t moms be re-educated or something? We have drug rehab programs that allow serious addicts to live, under supervision, with their children as they seek recovery. Couldn’t we do something like that for these women and children? If laws have been broken, couldn’t we deal with it more humanely?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/24/us/23cnd-polygamy.html?ref=us
Tiffany
April 25th, 2008 @ 11:59 am

This whole story has made me feel extremely uncomfortable. I don’t know whether or not there is clear abuse happening. I don’t understand why the children and mothers are separated. Frankly, I feel unsure what to believe.
I had a brief experience with CPS a few years ago. I called CPS on a relative who had abused my sister several years ago. This relative was, at the time of the call, remarried to a woman with disabled children. I was concerned about the safety of those children. I was told that there was nothing the state could do about it unless, my sister formally made a complaint against this relative or one of his “current” victims came forward.
So unless the government was out to get the FLDS compound, I suspect that there is more going on than just a phone call and evidence that is not being revealed to the public as they conduct this case.
On the other hand, I do see the religious aspect as problematic. We all know how members of our church are inaccurately portrayed in the media, so I’m skeptical of reports which purport to portray the situation accurately
denebug
April 27th, 2008 @ 4:18 pm

Why couldn’t they have taken the women with their children to shelters? In my mind separating a nursing mother from her child should be a criminal offense. Many states allow incarcerated women to nurse their babies. These women haven’t been convicted and they are being denied that basic right, to the detriment of both the mother and the child’s health.