.jpg)
Family of nine abandoned in Nebraska
Categories: Newborns, Teens & tweens, Single parenting, Extreme Childhood
A family of nine children, ranging in age from one to seventeen, was left at a Nebraska hospital on Wednesday, thanks in part to the state's unique safe haven law. Generally, such laws are intended to protect newborn infants from being killed or left to die by allowing the parents to leave them at a hospital or police station without fear of prosecution.
That's the way Nebraska's law started out too -- but concern over arbitrary age limits led to the inclusion of the term "child" in the law, allowing it to apply to, some say, anyone up to the age of nineteen. The nine children left at Creighton University Medical Center were brought in by their father. "It was the parents not wanting to continue the journey with their kids," said Todd Landry of Children and Family Services, speaking of the older kids that have been abandoned since the law went into effect. In addition to the nine siblings, two other, unrelated, boys, aged eleven and fifteen, were also left at a hospital.
I can sort of understand a parent feeling the need to give up a newborn infant -- they may be unable to care for the baby or may not be ready for that sort of responsibility -- but I can't imagine abandoning a child older than that, let alone a teenager. By the time a kid is a year or two old, I would imagine that any parent would have bonded with them enough to make such an action impossible. And what about the kids? What sort of effect would this have on kids old enough to understand what's happening? It seems to me that Nebraska better start budgeting for a whole lot of therapists if this keeps up.
That's the way Nebraska's law started out too -- but concern over arbitrary age limits led to the inclusion of the term "child" in the law, allowing it to apply to, some say, anyone up to the age of nineteen. The nine children left at Creighton University Medical Center were brought in by their father. "It was the parents not wanting to continue the journey with their kids," said Todd Landry of Children and Family Services, speaking of the older kids that have been abandoned since the law went into effect. In addition to the nine siblings, two other, unrelated, boys, aged eleven and fifteen, were also left at a hospital.
I can sort of understand a parent feeling the need to give up a newborn infant -- they may be unable to care for the baby or may not be ready for that sort of responsibility -- but I can't imagine abandoning a child older than that, let alone a teenager. By the time a kid is a year or two old, I would imagine that any parent would have bonded with them enough to make such an action impossible. And what about the kids? What sort of effect would this have on kids old enough to understand what's happening? It seems to me that Nebraska better start budgeting for a whole lot of therapists if this keeps up.
Recent Posts
- Reviews: What's New This Week (11/06/2009)
- Jim Carrey's "A Christmas Carol" Creepy in a Good Way (11/06/2009)
- Twitter Follow Friday on ParentDish! (11/06/2009)
- Babies Pick Up Mothers' Accents In The Womb (11/06/2009)
- Recall: Adventure Playsets (11/06/2009)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
mckenna 9-25-2008 @ 6:40PM
I used to teach 3rd grade. I had one student whose mother tried to put her up for adoption in another state. The father had to race over to the other state to get full custody of her. Yes, the mother tried this stunt without even asking the father if he wanted her. Apparently the grandmother had done this to her as well. Clearly, she was trying to traumatize her the way she had been. The poor girl was a nervous wreck when she came into my class. Very clingy with me, and lots of social issues with other kids. It was heart-breaking. But this was the culmination of the psychological trauma, not the beginning. I wouldn't want to force a parent to keep a child s/he doesn't want. It doesn't do anyone any good.
Reply
pbhj 9-26-2008 @ 6:26AM
It is a parent's responsibility to raise their children. But to be honest when our second child arrives we're going to struggle a lot to feed our selves.
If one lost a well-paid job and had 11 mouths to feed I could see major problems coming along. The parents maybe see it as a fast track to short term foster care?
You can be as caring as you like, but without food to feed your child love dictates you should give them up.
Reply
ninainindia 9-26-2008 @ 10:52AM
I don't know what was behind these parents' decision but I can only imagine it heartbreaking. Maybe they couldn't buy food for their children and they just wanted to make sure their children didn't go hungry? Maybe that's naieve of me, but any other possibility is just to awful to imagine.
Reply
Heather 9-27-2008 @ 1:29AM
When I was growing up my aunt and uncle split up, abandoned the home, and their three children ages 12 to 16. The children lived in the home for a couple months until the utilities were cut off. They got themselves to school and ate who knows what. Finally, one of the parents moved back in, but it was a horrible thing. Nearly forty years later those children have become adults with a lot of emotional problems. This man did the only thing his mental state allowed him to do probably severe depression brought on by the death of his wife. Perhaps that item was unknown to the blogger. Thank goodness he had enough sense to get help. I shudder to think what despair could have made him do. In this case that law may have prevented a tragedy.
Reply
Tara 9-28-2008 @ 11:22AM
The part of how he was overwhelmed and couldnt do it anymore really holds nothing for me. There is help out there ask for it. He walked out the easy way. Let someone else deal with his children. What would his wife think? It is so easy to hand over your responsibilities to someone else now it is conveint to throw away your kids. Why 11 didn't the thought go through his mind he had 11 kids till they were prepared to enter the world on their own whether they had a mother or not. The older kids could help out. I know it is a hardship on them but I bet they would rather that then being split up.
nia 10-06-2008 @ 10:02PM
It could have been worse! At least they was'nt left in a secluded place to possibly be harmed.You cannot always pass judgement on parents decisions when it comes to their kids.More than likely, it was best for that family.Some parents need extra support.
Reply
WENDY 11-18-2008 @ 1:57PM
I am 43 yrs old and my police sergeant husband is 50. We have one son age 9. I would take all 9 of those children and thank God for them everyday! My home may not be so big or my wallet, but our home is filled with love and support of each other. Our son is top in his class of his own doing and we are so proud of him. Those children need a seure environment with family that will be with them forever. the problem with our adoption policies are they rule out older people to adopt. I am a stay at home mom and i am there for every school project or anything else going on in my sons life. Let us have them. What a happy home they could have.
Reply