(Houston) CPS takes custody of 6 kids living with parents in storage shed

[alp227]

HOUSTON—Parents who thought their home was safe are battling with the state over the custody of their kids, and they believe they’re being punished because they’re poor.　

"You shouldn’t take our kids because we’ve fallen on hard times," said Prince Leonard, a married father of six whose family resides in a northeast Houston storage shed.

The Leonards moved in three years ago after the father, an unemployed welder, was hired as a maintenance worker.　

The family had already lost an apartment and believed the homeless shelter wasn’t safe enough.

full: http://www.khou.com/news/Storage-Shed-CPS-Fight-125041524.html

via: http://www.drudge.com/news/145979/parents-living-shed-lose-kids

[AsahinaKimi]

1. The comments on this story were amazing...

This one stood out:

all i can say is if cps was around in the 1930s no one would have any children...........

pogo1 said on July 6, 2011 at 6:51 PM

[Luminous Animal]

3. And how much money is the state going to expend fostering out those children?

A lot more than it would cost to guarantee that family an income whether anyone was working or not.


For what it is worth, I can't stop thinking about the kids. Ripped from the comfort of family.

[MADem]

19. Nothing--they are staying with relatives.

Which is where they should have been in the first place, while the parents got their act together.

They haven't been "ripped" from anywhere--they're having a little visit with Aunties and Uncles.

[Luminous Animal]

36. This proves that you know nothing about CPS. The placement is temporary...

each of those homes will have to be investigated and evaluated. Some of them will be rejected... some of the kids will go to foster homes. It will be years, if ever, that this family will be reunited.

[MADem]

I think you're being overly dramatic.

How do you "KNOW" that some of them will be rejected?

Answer--you don't. It just makes for good drama, though, doesn't it?

CPS will always leave kids with family unless they're living in a crack den.

And since the family is going to start building their house on their fifty acres pretty soon, I'm guessing that they'll be back under one roof in no time.

[MADem]

DELETE--dupe/sorry

[MADem]

DELETE--dupe/sorry

I've never quadruple posted before--what a hiccup.

[MADem]

40. DELETE--dupe/sorry

[ejpoeta]

49. having a little visit? have you ever dealt with the foster system? had to go into the foster

system LIKE THAT! i mean the only saving grace is that it is family, but that is no guarantee that they are being treated well. sometimes family are worse than strangers. I've seen that. I myself have never been in foster care but I have seen what foster care can do to kids. And I have seen what 'family' can do to family in foster care system.

Oh... and they may be staying with relatives, but they will be still getting foster money. And the kids will be getting medicaid.

I wonder if the parents tried to apply for assistance and it wasn't there for them.

[MADem]

52. CPS has "placed them"--with the maternal grandparents--ALL of them.

The parents made the decision to purchase fifty acres of land AT THE SAME TIME that they made the decision to move their six kids into a tiny, rusty corrugated metal shed.

Now, if it were you, and you had six kids, would you buy fifty acres of land and move your kids into a dank, tiny, windowless shed heated with a woodstove, from which they are homeschooled, or would you find a better living situation for your kids, even if it meant asking Granny if you could move in with her for a bit and chip in for expenses?

The father is working now. Supposedly, they're awaiting a USDA loan so they can build a house on their fifty acres.

[ejpoeta]

58. Of course I wouldn't do that. And I can understand why the kids were taken.

The thing is, we lived in a camper for three weeks with our daughter once while we waited for our house to be moved. It would have been a tent with no electricity if it weren't for the kindness of friends. And if it were the tent we would not have had a bathroom or electricity or running water.

Another thing.... Granted this was in 1989 (i think)... we had social services come to our house. Where we had no running water because the water pump was broken and my dad refused to fix it. So my brother had to go out to the well and get the water for us to use. The well wasn't far... There was an enclosed walkway area between the garage and the house where the well was. We also had no heat. Every time we tried to start the furnace it caught on fire. You could smell it to. Well, we didn't notice it so much because we lived there. It was freezing though. And we had no food. Except soy burgers and condiments. They left us there in that house. With no running water, no food and no heat. But there was a bathroom. Nevermind that we couldn't flush the toilet. Or take a shower.

I washed my hair in freezing water from the well. It was all scummy and never got the soap out. Then I would go outside to wait for the bus that wouldn't even slow down if we weren't at the end of the driveway and my hair would have icicles hanging off of it. But there were only 3 of us. And the lady told me I could leave any time I wanted as i was 16. Oh, how nice. Thanks so much for that. What about my 11 year old sister who cannot leave? She never came back that lady. I guess she was supposed to. But she never did.

Would I have inflicted that on my kids? Hell no. I can't even stand when someone doesn't flush the toilet. I bet there are families living in conditions that are less than stellar all over the place right now because they have no other choice. Clearly this family, if they had money to buy land at the same time had another choice I suppose.

But it's hard to judge because I can understand why they would do it. You end up in a situation where you can't get out of it. I don't mean living in a shed. I mean you get a place and it is supposed to be temporary. And you never make more money than you are spending on rent so as to get out of there. And you are trapped there.

[MADem]

61. You plainly didn't have family who stepped up like the grandparents did.

That was a hideous situation for you to be living in as a child. It shouldn't have happened.

There are times when, for the sake of your children, you need to swallow your pride and ask for help--if not from the state, from family. The grandparents, in the case of this family, now have the kids. Maybe if they gave the money they were spending for the rental of the storage unit to the grandparents, they could have blended their families until the building loan came through, and there wouldn't have been any CPS drama at all.

They probably shouldn't have gone off and bought land at the same time they decided it was a good idea to move into an industrial shed with six children. I wonder if the whole shed thing wasn't a money-saving enterprise in order to save faster for a goal. While that's laudable, it's never a good idea to put your kids in an unhealthy environment if you have any way of preventing it.

I just don't think they did all they could to give those kids a better or even acceptable living situation. Like I've said elsewhere, I don't think they're evil or bad, I just think they exercised poor judgment.

[ejpoeta]

62. My older sisters took my dad to court for custody of my little sister.

That was why the social worker was there. They couldn't just take her. I could have left but didn't want to leave her there by herself. My brother was older than me and he could have left but neither of us wanted to leave her there by herself. It had been like that for awhile. My mom died when I was 12. My dad kind of lost it. My sisters tried to help as best they could. So please don't judge them.

As for this family, I agree this was poor judgement, but we can all sit back and make judgements about others. I hope they can get things straight and get their kids back.

[MADem]

64. I do judge them--not your family, but these parents

They seem a bit annoyed that CPS took their kids from a situation with no running water and very poor sanitation. They don't seem to have their priorities quite in order. They need to realign their POV--Kids first, land second.

I think they'll get the kids back soon enough. For now, though, they are with the grandparents. Hopefully they'll get some good meals and hot baths, and maybe some nice memories of their grandparents that will keep them warm in their old age.

It is instinctive to me to advocate for children, particularly the young and helpless. They didn't ask to live in crappy and unclean surroundings. It's important to do the best you can if you are a parent, and if you run out of resources, to ask for help.

[Broderick]

70. Exactly

That is just unfathomable. It would be far cheaper to give them temporary housing and help them get back on their feet. The torment and turmoil this will create and the long term mental abuse on being taken away from family is unconscionable, not to mention far more expensive in the long haul.

[Aerows]

83. Isn't that the truth

These people are struggling, and did the best they could to hold their family together. What a horrible abuse of a family by CPS.

[tomm2thumbs]

104. P R E C I S E L Y . . .

better loved than separated -- hope the court steps in and finds a creative solution

[MADem]

2. No running water, but 2 computers?

The shed, which lacks running water, is about 12 feet wide and 25 feet long.　

It has an air conditioner, a refrigerator and two personal computers. The Leonards said their kids were well cared for and happy there.

[Suich]

4. I thought about that, too.

Storage sheds have power outlets but not running water.

I'd be willing to bet they're not the only people living in a storage shed.

[MADem]

13. I knew a lady who lived in her storage shed during the summer.

She lived in a resort area, and she rented out the house to make the money for taxes and repairs during the 'season.' Her shed was about the same size as the one in the article, but it was insulated, wired, had a tiny bathroom, and was finished inside and out. It was a shed that had been upgraded to "guest cottage," I suppose, but it had all the amenities.

Some cities put their homeless in sheds on the outskirts--but that's a very temporary "check in each day/be out in the morning" type situation. Others have quasi-permanent facilities...

Fresno--This is kind of old, but the pics are interesting: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2004/11/22/17067361.php

Portland OR-more recent: http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2011/06/nothing_transitional_about_a_p.html

[Luminous Animal]

5. Access to electricity but no pipes. How does that not make sense to you?

[MADem]

8. Why are you being confrontational?

I posted a few lines FROM THE ARTICLE.

Are you telling me that if you had the money to buy not one, but two computers, you wouldn't try to get your kids into a situation that at LEAST had running water?

CPS did the right thing. Maybe a church or other social agency will step up and help these people, but that many people in a tiny shed with no ability to wash or toilet is NOT a good situation and it makes no "sense" at all. Anyone who suggests it is has screwed-up priorities.

[LiberalAndProud]

14. Doesn't say how old the computers are, either.

I've computers for as little as $15. Or maybe they bought the computers when times weren't quite so bad. They should pawn them for $15 bucks?

They shouldn't have because they can't afford rent every month. Six kids. I imagine some of them are in school. Computers are almost essential to the education process, but they're poor, so they shouldn't have.

I am so tired of people making judgements on what poor people should or should not own. Gingrich's outlook on poverty is everywhere, I guess.

[MADem]

26. They have fifty acres of land, and expect to get a loan to build a house.

I never said they "should not own" computers, so don't put words in my mouth.

I question the priorities of people who have family living nearby (who immediately stepped up to help and took in the kids once CPS got involved)...maybe they could have given the storage garage rent money to a relative in exchange for a room at their place?

Who goes to school in the summer?

I'm equally tired of people who enjoy playing the "Poor Pitiful Pearl" card, and assuming that people with poor judgment are always helpless, indigent and disenfranchised in some fashion. These people own fifty acres of land, are expecting to be granted a USDA loan to build a house, the guy is a certified welder, and I suspect they could have done a little better in the housing department--either by reaching out to family or researching other options--than they did. I don't find their situation noble, I think they didn't work hard enough (and by work, I mean go to relatives and ask for help and offer the storage facility money as rent, or find economies in some other fashion) and give those children a decent place to live.

[LiberalAndProud]

30. So they viewed this as a temporary living arrangement.

I wonder if you'd be surprised at how many children grow up in this country without running water. Or with the toilet installed right next to the cooking stove.

Look, I understand that you're outraged by this, and I understand why you are. But CPS can tend to overlook a lot, and then some child turns up in critical condition in the hospital, or dead. As long as the children live in comfortable surroundings, they are often left in very dangerous situations. Certainly these weren't ideal circumstances, but I don't think the children's lives or health were truly at risk.

I also believe that CPS had no choice except to intervene in this case. I wonder though, if standards won't have to be relaxed as more and more people find themselves in untenable situations. Food for thought, anyway.

[MADem]

38. We're not talking about Appalachia or rural Maine.

We're talking about Houston TX.

I've lived in what people call the Third World. That's a nice term for absolute shitholes. I've seen living conditions that would make a toilet next to a cooking stove look like the Ritz.

CPS did do the right thing. The person who reported the living arrangements did the right thing, too. The extended family stepped right up, immediately, so no kid ended up in foster care. The parents should have reached out to the extended family sooner if they were truly having trouble with housing.

I get a sense that some aspect of this living arrangement had, as a goal, a desire to save money faster, for whatever reason. That's a laudable goal, but sometimes you have to take the slower road when you have kids. If it were just the adults living in that dump, fine--but kids? Naaaah. Especially when there's family in town who can (and did) help out.

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Gormy Cuss]

126. How exactly, would it matter if it were in " Appalachia or rural Maine?"

Would that make it okay for them to live in the shed? How about if the shed were in Berkshire or Hampden counties?

[Name removed]

137. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TK421]

139. always wanted to visit Maine...I hear it's a beautiful state

[MADem]

140. It is--and the people are top drawer, once you get to know them.

They're not all honeypie and sugarbritches and "Bless yer heart" like you'll find in our more southern states, but if you're in a fix, they're the type that help quietly and don't expect to have their behind kissed afterwards. They assume that you'll be fair. Their word is good. I rather like those sorts of folks. In northern Maine, I regularly encounter folks who are quite industrious, inventive, thrifty ... and many have a dry wit that you can't help but enjoy.

If you like hunting, fishing, skiing, snowmobiling and "The Great Outdoors" you can't do better than northern Maine. In Aroostook County you can buy a little "camp" or even an honest-to-Gawd house for not much money. I bought a tiny fixer-upper for a song (the owner went to the nursing home and died, and the heirs hardly knew the guy--they just wanted some cash, and they didn't get much either because the place needed a lot of work), and I've been fixing upping for the last several years. It's a fine hobby and the house, while not fancy, is snug and a nice refuge, and getting nicer with each project.

[TK421]

141. gonna need to PM you with all that...some time, please

[Gormy Cuss]

143. With due respect, you're biased against urban environments if you think it's that different

living in substandard housing in an urban area and living in deep poverty in rural country. For all of those good works you see in the County, there are still many gaps and families with children who are more similar to this Houston family than not.

One of my branches is from the Mars Hill area, another from the part of western ME made famous by Carolyn Chute. ("The Beans of Egypt, ME.") I had relatives with neither running water nor indoor plumbing, some in leaky old single wides. More to the point though they had neighbors who lived in basements for years while they were trying to cobble together enough money to build the rest of the house. These weren't finished basements with amenities -- more like cellars with electric stuff hooked up to a generator, a few small windows that would have been useless in case of fire, and water carried in jugs. Does that really sound better than the environment of the Houston family?

Then there's my family who lived in a more urban setting next to industrial development and with plenty of broken glass, rusty fences, and more than a few abandoned or burned out buildings AND we had a vital, strong community, but I digress.

[MADem]

151. Nonsense, I am not "biased"--and who the hell keeps deleting my posts, and WHY?

All you've got to do is check the crime rates and you can see that it's a safer living environment to live in a rural setting than a city one. You're less likely to be shot on the street in a rural community. The air is cleaner. The neighbors give a damn.

It's all well and good to talk about hardships that WERE, back in the day, but this is the 21st Century. I have ancestors who lit their homes with gaslight, and before that, with candles in the old country, who crapped in the bog and walked a half mile to the water pump, but that doesn't mean that this sort of living arrangement is appropriate or "the standard" in this time in our nation's history. It doesn't "build character." It makes kids feel inferior, frightened, not-up-to-par, and frantically desperate to "prove" themselves once they get out in the world and realize that the rest of their peers didn't live in a shithole shed with no running water.

Just because people "survive" living in a shitty situation doesn't make it RIGHT.

I can't believe that no one seems to care about the kids. They're more worried about CPS and "The Man."

I'd laugh like hell if it WAS Granny who made the call to CPS because she wanted her grandkids out of that dump. That would really screw up the whole "Waaah, these people are being dissed because they're POOR" rant. And I have to wonder if the father just didn't want to hand over a chunk of his maintenance worker paycheck to get Section 8 housing, so he saved money by pocketing the bulk of his paycheck instead of handing over a percentage, and renting that cheap old rusty shed instead.

Mars Hill is quite the place these days. Great place to ski and snowboard and go tubing. Plus, the wind farm along the mountaintops is a sight to behold.

[Gormy Cuss]

152. If by "back in the day" you mean the 1970s and 1980s, you may have a point.

Those are the most recent decades when my relatives and family lived that way. And sorry, but not all high poverty urban areas are places where one is more likely to get shot than in a rural area, although in a rural area it's more likely to occur somewhere other than "the street" for obvious reasons. The point that I was trying to make however is that one can not assume that urban poverty is always worse than rural poverty. It's all a matter of the details. Sure, living in substandard housing or nonhousing units isn't easy on the children. That goes without saying. Neither is being uprooted and placed with other relatives who may or may not be better at providing the nurturing needed in addition to the physical security of stable housing.

I don't recall anyone on this thread stating that they don't care about the welfare of kids in difficult situations like the case in the OP. Some are jaded about CPS intervention, to be certain, but they are making a judgment based on their own experiences and biases just as you and I have.

[MADem]

154. I am getting a very different impression from you, apparently.

There are some people here who are furious with CPS for taking those kids, ascribing nefarious motives to them, and insisting that these parents have a right to raise their kids in horrific conditions, even though there are (as has been shown in fairly efficient fashion) better options available, that have been realized.

I don't know it for a fact, but I am starting to wonder if:

Granny turned the family in to CPS because she was appalled at how her grandchildren were living.

Daddy didn't want to hand over 25 to 30 percent of his maintenance worker/now welder paycheck to get Section 8 housing.

Most people here are averring that the desires of the parents to raise their kids in that shithole outweigh the children's right to grow up in a clean, safe and sanitary environment. I am a "Kids First" person. In the USA, in a city like Houston that does "do" social services (remember how they took the brunt of the "Katrina refugees?"), it's outrageous that these parents didn't reach out for housing support over four full years. And, if the father was working, and according to the article he was, he would have qualified for housing, rather than claiming that he didn't want to go to an unsafe homeless shelter as his excuse. He knew how to get community college training, he knew how to register his kids to go to Online School--this guy is no dummy, or a poor pathetic victim. I think he and his wife love their kids, but I think their judgment stinks on ice.

Something isn't adding up here, and the kids are the ones who are suffering. I agree with the poster who suggested that a parenting class is in order.

[uppityperson]

146. Are you seriously complaining about mods removing posts?

[MADem]

153. I would like to know WHY, when I haven't said anything lewd, rude or offensive in them.

The only thing I can think is that someone is bullshitting the mods about the meaning of a term, or something. I used the term DEEP SOUTH OF THE FAR NORTH in referring to Maine in both of the deleted posts, but if that's an insult, I am stumped. In The County, it is a "point of pride."

You can buy t-shirts at WALMART in the County Seat with that slogan on it, people have it on bumper stickers on their pickup trucks, it's in common use all over the place--all one has to do is google the term and up comes MAINE. Aroostook County is hugely into country music, Ron White sells out the civic center every time he comes to town, and NASCAR fans in New England are heavily concentrated in ME, it's littered with small, sometimes independent churches much like the south is, and they self identify that way. It's also at the northern end of the Appalacians, and the culture follows the mountains. There are more baastids in cowboy hats in Aroostook County than any other place in New England.

So, if that's the issue, mods, someone is BSing you. It's like trying to claim that the phrase "Florida--The Sunshine State" is an insult because too much sun is bad for you, or something.

I roll my eyes in abject disgust.

[pstokely]

54. Summer school?

But budget cuts have forced a lot of districts to offer only remedial classes

[MADem]

56. Turns out they didn't go to school.

That's probably why they were able to fly under the radar in the shed for awhile.

They were enrolled in an "online" school--one of the computers was from said online school.

If they were attending a brick and mortar school, I'll bet the teachers/administrators might have picked up that something was a bit amiss with those kids.

[pstokely]

53. Do they have a landline?

Or they connecting of someone's unsecured WiFi network?

[MADem]

57. They were enrolled in an online school, so I suspect they found a way

to get online.

Maybe there was a Starbucks nearby? Or one of those cheaper hotels that crop up in the industrial parks?

[butterfly77]

127. +1

A lot of people are naive and they really don't get that this has been going on for a long time for many people. Situations like this with different scenarios that are like this and worse.

I know some people and I hear about others through friends and family many are catching hell and some who have never known any type of poverty are now experiencing it and can't believe it.

Some people who I know use to talk about how they didn't need anything because they could get it themselves are now finding out no matter how hard they try they keeping hitting a brick wall.

Some I feel bad for and some I don't because they could never understand it when others I know were struggling to make it. Somehow they were never doing enough.

Now,I ask are they doing enough???

[Luminous Animal]

16. Oh, I don't know. The guy had a job. No need to assume that the computers didn't

predate homelessness. And even if they didn't, a one time purchase of a cheap computer (necessary for most children education-wise) wouldn't pay half one months rent.

[MADem]

18. He also had fifty acres of land in Liberty County.

He would have been better off letting his family 'camp' on his own land rather than shove his kids in a windowless storage garage--because that's what it was.

[Luminous Animal]

20. Is that land near schools? Is it close enough to readily access food? Is it wired

for electricity?

[MADem]

23. Do you need those things in the summer, when one is CAMPING?

Who goes to school in the summer?

The guy expects to get a loan to build a house on his land, so I imagine that all of that 'stuff' is available--electricity to the lot, access to food and schools, and so on. Surely he wouldn't be building a house where none of that was available? Ya think?

[Luminous Animal]

29. Nobody needs electricity during the summer? He and his wife do not need electricity

or access to computers to find a job? It's pretty funny that you are all gung-ho about this family of 6 living in a tent with no electricity or running water for as long as it takes for their loan to come through and their house to be built but it is appalling I tells ya! Just appalling that the do it within sight of civilized people.

[MADem]

33. Not when you're camping. That said....

there's no reason why the guy couldn't have the electricity turned on at the street somewhere along the roadway of his fifty acres--that's what people DO when they're building a house. See, you need electricity to build a house, so you ask the power company to turn it on so you can operate the saws, fans, work lights and so forth--that's how construction sites operate.

There are plenty of computers at libraries, too, in the interim, while he's waiting for the power company to come out and turn on the power. There are probably computers at all of their relatives' houses, too...you know, the relatives who stepped up and took the kids in? I'm sure they could leave one of their computers with the kids and the extended family and access it from that house.

They're supposed to get the loan in a week or two, according to the wife--that was in the link I posted, too.

The guy is a certified welder--I'll bet he's already got a job. Those are kind of helpful when applying for a loan.

Look, you can snark till the cows come home, but you will not convince me that this family used sound judgment. These are people who are not without assets, they simply didn't prioritize finding suitable housing for their family or asking their relatives for a hand. You carp on and on about "family values" and keeping the kids together, but they HAVE FAMILY in the area--family that stepped right up without missing a beat and took those kids in.

I think the issue here is JUDGMENT. As in--POOR judgment.

Storage garages are NOT homes. It is one thing for adults to live like that, but putting six kids in a space like that? When they have family in town? Not an acceptable solution.

[LiberalAndProud]

37. He does have a job. He was working maintenance on the property where they were living.

Every article you referrenced has said that. They didn't have shelter on their 50 acres, so they would be in tents. Do you know how hot it gets in Houston in the summer? The kids were far more comfortable in the air conditioned storage shed than they could possibly be camping on an undeveloped 50 acres.

In their judgement they were living in a better place than the state sanctioned shelters. And I don't doubt that. I really don't.

[MADem]

47. Now they are living in an actual home with rooms, with their grandparents

Now, if I told you that this family chose to buy that fifty acres at the very same time that they decided it would be a good idea to raise six homeschooled kids in a tiny, windowless, rusty, corrugated metal shed, would you still have as much of a bleeding heart for the parents?

Or would you say "Damn, that's some shitty judgment--they should have used that land money to get themselves a decent living situation."

[Luminous Animal]

39. All you have presented is "ifs" and no facts. How much does it cost to have electricity

extended to the property? What is the permitting process and how long does it take? Did the family already asked for help from their relatives but were rejected and did the family only step up when faced with a crisis? Did the wife try to mitigate the media fury with her week or two comment?

50 ACRES WITH NO SHELTER AND NO ELECTRICITY IN THE HOT TEXAS SUN IS NOT A HOME.

[MADem]

41. He's planning on building a HOUSE on his fifty acres.

We're talking about TEXAS, here--I'll bet the permitting process isn't too onerous.

The guy could get himself a 12 by 25 shed at the Home Depot, slap an air conditioner in it, and move his family into that while he's building the house, and they likely wouldn't say a damn thing. Why? Because it's on HIS land, and it's not a commercial building zoned for industrial use.

You're pretty good at tossing around the "ifs" as well. You automatically assume that CPS is going to expend scarce resources shoving these kids into stranger-foster care, which isn't the case--ALL the children are staying with their grandparents and they were assigned there by CPS. Also, this family made the decision to buy those fifty acres at the same time they made the decision to move into the shed. The husband is now working as a welder, too.

They were homeschooled too--online school from their shed. No wonder they were able to stay under the radar for so long.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7642602.html

CPS made the right call, here.

[LiberalAndProud]

24. Where did you read that?

Can't find it.

[MADem]

27. It's in the link I provided elsewhere in this thread. NT

[MADem]

45. One computer was theirs, the other belonged to the ONLINE HOMESCHOOL

they were attending.

I've said this elsewhere, but it bears repeating--they purchased that fifty acres AT THE SAME TIME that they moved those kids into that windowless, corrugated metal shed.

Not the best use of resources, IMO.

[eilen]

48. Many people have lived without running water

Ever hear of outhouses? You are demonstrating a middle class bias. When my mother came here it was a year or two before her family could rent a place with their own bathroom and hot water. They lived in cold water flats in Queens and Brooklyn.

[MADem]

55. Oh please.

Not only have I "heard" of outhouses, I've used them. And let me tell you, THEY SUCK. Especially in winter, when it is cold as a welldigger's ass out there. They also smell to high heaven, more so in summer. I've lived in places where the electricity went out ROUTINELY, for hours at a time, and you either did without or you got yourself a very expensive generator. I've had the thrill of having to boil and disinfect the water I used so I didn't end up with oddball parasites or worse. Don't make assumptions about "middle class bias" when you don't even know someone. Further, I don't think it is at all unreasonable to expect that, in Houston, Texas, USA, in this 21st Century, that children be expected to cheerfully live in a frigging rusty storage shed with a composting toilet to crap in and no running water and not a window in the joint. I'm appalled at the number of people who have no issue with this arrangement--particularly when the parents could have made a better choice.

Yes, many people have lived without running water, but in America, most do not-- it is a suboptimal and unsanitary situation when you have EIGHT PEOPLE in a tiny, rusty, corrugated metal, windowless shed heated by a woodstove with a composting toilet in the tiny room. That's FOUL.

And it was unnecessary.

This family chose to purchase fifty acres of land at the VERY same time they chose to move into this storage facility.

Their judgment was lacking. They should have worried more about suitable housing for their little ones, and less about buying fifty acres.

The "evil" people from CPS didn't just grab the kids, they were in the shed for three hours talking to the parents. Now the kids are in an actual home, with their maternal grandparents--sounds like a pretty compassionate placement to me. It's got to be a much healthier environment for them. When the parents get their act together, they'll get the kids back, but putting six children and two adults in a space that small is just unhealthy and dumb.

[eilen]

89. The children were healthy, happy and not abused

I take issue with governmental agencies interfering where they are not needed nor wanted and superceding the parent's. Maybe they had a good reason not to move in with their inlaws. Maybe they thought they could do it on their own. At any rate I don't believe anyone was being abused nor neglected thus no need for CPS interjecting themselves and separating this family.

Edited to apologize for assuming anything about you, that was impolite.

[MADem]

97. Those kids endured living in that hellhole for FOUR years.

That's unacceptable. Call me an old softy, but I do think that children should have living conditions at LEAST as nice as what we provided to prisoners at Gitmo. These children didn't even have that living in that stinkhole shed.

But there's a bright side to all this--a community activist has found the family a home to rent, and they'll be reunited with their children:

A Houston couple whose six children were removed from their custody by Child Protective Services after caseworkers found the family living in a storage shed has apparently secured a rental home.

Prince and Charlomane Leonard, the children's parents, met with CPS officials on Friday afternoon to provide an update on their efforts to find new living arrangements.

After the meeting at a CPS office in northwest Houston, community activist Quanell X stood beside the couple and spoke on their behalf. Quanell said he reached out to a property owner and secured funds to help find the couple a home so they could be reunited with their children.


Read more: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7645545.html#ixzz1Rd8ilyIW

[WolverineDG]

87. The kids look clean & fed to me

as well as happy. If lack of running water was the only concern, then the removal was bullshit.

dg

[MADem]

100. No "smell-a-vision" newspapers are available online quite yet.

The toilets at GITMO flushed. The prisoners got showers regularly and clean laundry delivered to them. Att GITMO. they also had more square footage per prisoner, access to an exercise yard, and better sanitary conditions, than these children had in that hellish shed.

I'm amazed at how many people think it's "OK" that these kids lived in conditions worse than GITMO. Children don't have a choice, but they deserve a decent and safe place to live.

Fortunately a community activist has found the family a home to rent. I have provided a link to the story elsewhere in this thread.

[WolverineDG]

112. Where there allegations that the children were dirty?

No. Just a bunch of pearl clutchers having tizzys & removing well-cared for children from a loving home, instead of removing children who are truly being neglected & abused.

dg

[MADem]

114. They had a composting toilet in their dirty little shed.

I don't care how carefully you close the lid, there had to be, given that lack of space, fecal matter in the air as a consequence of eight people living/crapping in that rusty tin shed. They had no running water.

There is no way those children had adequate sanitary facilities.

You know, I can't help but think that if Gitmo prisoners were held in those same conditions, people here would be absolutely poutraged and demanding someone's head! Yet, here are six beautiful American children whose living space is vastly inferior to the conditions at Gitmo, who have been living in those hideous conditions for FOUR YEARS....and no one says a fucking word.

To quote a popular song--I believe the children are our future.

I am amazed that so few people feel the same way. Parents' rights stop when parents fail to use adequate judgment as to what is clean, safe or reasonable accomodation. Children aren't "pets," and they deserve to be raised in clean, safe, sanitary facilities, not circumstances that approximate the living space at a concentration camp.

Amazing how once those horrible "authorities" got involved, a community activist found them a cheap rental and they'll be living in a FOUR bedroom house with INDOOR plumbing AND a yard. Isn't that terrible...no, wait--it's GREAT.

Gee--and if those horrible CPS people did nothing, those kids would still be in that fucking shed.

Good for Houston CPS. They have their work cut out for them.

[uppityperson]

120. +100.

[mythology]

161. Some people have different standards I guess

I wouldn't let my dog live in a shed, much less if I had kids and/or a wife. I don't consider what these parents were doing as well-cared for by the standards of the community in which they live. Saying that other people have an outhouse is irrelevant.

Additionally personally I question whether or not somebody who would buy 50 acres of land prior to having a quality and legal place to live neglectful of themselves and their children. This couple made a choice, that choice has potential consequences one of which was the potential loss, even temporarily, of their children. It's not because they were poor, it's because they made a stupid decision.

[uppityperson]

121. You keep posting that the kids never got out of the shed and it just wasn't so.

They had bicycles and such. They had a big "exercise yard", probably better than GITMO's but you continue to miss that. Do you seriously believe these kids never bathed or had clean laundry or had access to outside? This was worse than GITMO? Seriously?

[MADem]

123. I've seen the pictures. It's crappy macadam, with broken glass on it.

It's behind rusted fence and barbed wire, and the "sheds" are made of rusty corrugated metal.

It ain't GITMO--GITMO looks like the Lakers Training Camp in comparison.

So no, I didn't "miss" a thing.

It would be rough living for a family pet, never mind a child....or SIX, for FOUR long years.

Good grief.

[uppityperson]

6. Most sheds don't have running water. Plumbing is expensive and you can haul water

in 5 gallon jugs easily. They had 2 computers. So? I don't understand your point.

[MADem]

10. Apparently you also didn't read the article.

Those lines were direct quotes from it.

Do these children not have bowels that need to move on occasion? That many children crapping in or near a 12 x 25 foot shed is not a sanitary situation.

A five gallon jug doesn't solve an "I need to take a dump" situation.

I don't understand YOUR point. You think this kind of life is "hunky dory" for these kids?

Good grief.

[Luminous Animal]

12. You can bring in water and, certainly, you can bury poop. No doubt life was not hunky dory

for the entire family. But, destroying that family is a motherfucking shame. I grew up poor, at times abjectly poor, the worse thing that could have been done to me is to separate me from my siblings and my parents... the people who loved me the most.

Creature comforts don't even come close to love and support of a family.

[MADem]

17. You can bury poop? In Northeast Houston? Yep, that would go over real well--not.

They aren't camping in a woods, they're in the middle of a city, in one of those "self storage" facilities that look like garages that are built on an acre of concrete and macadam.

The conditions are foul--see the picture with this article: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/houston-texas-family-living-storage-shed/story?id=14009261

No one is suggesting that the family be "destroyed." Save you, apparently. Right now, the children are staying temporarily with other family members, they are not in foster care.

They could have stayed together at the homeless shelter, but they didn't want to go there. Perhaps they could have used the computers at the library instead of buying two of them, and saved the cash for a security deposit on an apartment. Surely they qualify for housing assistance, and they must be getting some sort of transitional assistance as well.

Creature comforts may not be the most important thing, but people living and working around that storage facility have the right to not have to deal with feces and disease caused by lack of sanitation. I think they used poor judgment, even if they were "nice people."

Also, they're not completely indigent--they own fifty acres of land. They would have been better off going "back to nature" and doing a bit of summer camping on their own land--they probably wouldn't have been hassled in that case.

Charlomane has hope for her family's future. Prince recently graduated from community college and has been certified as a welder. They made enough money before the recession to have bought 50 acres in Liberty County, on which they hope to build a house. "We're waiting on a USDA loan," she says. "It should be finalized this week or next."

[Luminous Animal]

25. Oh the ignorance of the

comfortably numb. If I can give one word of advice to any person with children on the verge of homelessness, DO NOT, DO NOT, take your children to a homeless shelter.

Doing so is the quickest path to having your children taken away from you.

[MADem]

28. Take them to your RELATIVES, then--like the relatives that took them in once CPS showed up.

That's a plan. Beats letting them live in a windowless garage.

[Luminous Animal]

31. Did one relative take in the entire family? NO. Thus the family was broken up.

Without a doubt, I'd rather live in a windowless garage than be separated from my mom and dad and my brothers and sisters.

[MADem]

46. Two relatives who live in the same house--the maternal grandparents--took all of them in.

The children are all living in the same house with their grandparents, and CPS made the placement.

You don't think the parents shouldn't have bought fifty acres of land at the same time they decided that living in a shed was a good idea? Maybe they should have taken that land money and used it for adequate housing.

[uppityperson]

67. You wrote above that they had a composting toilet. That solves your "dump" situation.

My point was that you stated they had "No running water, but 2 computers?" I see that you have also written that one of those computers belonged to the online school the kids were signed up with.

Perhaps the other computer was bought for $15 at a Goodwill, or was a gift, or predated this move. Or perhaps they bought it for $400, which would not bring plumbing into their living situation.

THAT was my point. Computers vs running water costs.

YOU assume " You think this kind of life is "hunky dory" for these kids? "

Good grief back atcha.

[MADem]

72. No, it really doesn't "solve" it at all.

Tell ya what--lets put you in a 25 x 12 (pace that out, now) rusty metal shed on a concrete apron with dozen of similar structures, no windows, no water, wall to wall mattresses on the floor, filth, and SEVEN OTHER PEOPLE. Then let's throw a composting toilet in that building and all of you get to crap in it. Is your problem "solved?" I don't think so.

But more importantly, you need to read. What I "stated" was fact. All I was doing is pointing out WHAT THE ARTICLE SAID. Those two facts--two computers, no running water--were part and parcel of the story in the paper.

Now you're playing the "Poor Pitiful Pearl" card, doing your own "assuming" that "perhaps" these people could only afford a Goodwill computer, when it is established by their own statement that they purchased fifty acres of land at the same time that they decided that living in a shed was a "good" idea. Just by that action alone, it's plain they failed to make a good decision when it came to the care of their children. If they could afford to buy fifty acres, gee, maybe they could afford a computer that costs more than fifteen bucks from Goodwill? Maybe they just didn't want to spend their money on HOUSING because they were saving for another goal? Infantalizing these people isn't helpful--they certainly knew enough to buy fifty acres of land. They knew how to apply for a USDA loan. The husband knew how to get through college and get a welding certificate. He's working, so he knows how to apply for and get a job. Where they come up short is providing a clean and safe environment for their little ones.

If you think this living situation is "OK," and children in America somehow "deserve" to live in these kinds of conditions, and CPS is evil for insisting upon an environment that is safe and clean (and with immediate relatives, their grandparents) for those little ones, you have some screwed up priorities, like these parents, who chose to BUY LAND at the same time they chose to raise their six kids in an INDUSTRIAL shed.

Good grief once again. I say put kids first. I think I'll take the judgment of the CPS worker who contributed downthread, and who indicated that the parents might need to attend a parenting class (a very good idea), over yours.

[uppityperson]

73. You do not seem to have any desire to understand what anyone else posts.

I understand you are upset about the kids and their living condition. However, you continue to miss my point, and the point of other posters and seem to only want to argue. Goodbye.

[MADem]

76. What point are you making? All you're doing is yelling at me for

pointing out inconvenient facts. I seem to be the only one here, with the exception of the former CPS worker, who gives a crap about the kids.

Off you go, then. Feel better.

[uppityperson]

79. My point was that you stated they had "No running water, but 2 computers?"

THAT was my point. Computers vs running water costs.

Your point is to scold us and tell us we don't care. Again, all you want to do is argue. Goodbye.

[MADem]

101. Right back atcha.

You'll be pleased to learn that the family has found a place to rent.

Or maybe not.

[Luminous Animal]

7. Are you really questioning no running water in a SHED?

[MADem]

9. Are you REALLY not understanding that those lines were FROM THE ARTICLE?

Jesus--get a life.

[Luminous Animal]

15. Haha! I do understand where those lines come from, I question your intent on posting those lines.

Also, I am confused as to why you would demand that Jesus get a life. The commonly told myth is that Jesus and not one, but two lives. Are you suggesting he seek a third?

[MADem]

21. My "intent" was to suggest that this is a pisspoor place to raise children.

The more I learn about this family, the more I see that they could have afforded a better situation, but chose not to go that route. They also had family in the area who are stepping up and taking the kids.

The guy owns fifty acres of land--he could have sold some of it to make ends meet, or camped out on his own land and not been hassled. Instead, he put little his children in a storage facility--one of those places with a garage door, not a cute little shed with windows, a storage facility in a concrete wasteland, with no running water.

Poor judgment. CPS was right to intervene.

[Luminous Animal]

32. Yeah, and raising children in GW & Laura Bush's house was a pisspoor place to raise children

but nobody took those children away.

[MADem]

42. They didn't have to--daddy was never home.

The children were largely spared his influence.

But that was a gratuitous comment and had nothing to do with this situation.

CPS spent three hours with the family--they didn't just swoop in and take those kids away without doing an in-depth assessment. There's video of the shed online at KHOU--the place was a shithole. No windows. Corrugated, rusty metal. Dismal concrete all around. Heated with a wood stove.

They're better off with their grandparents for now until the parents can come up with a better situation for them.

The parents bought the fifty acres AT THE SAME TIME that they moved into the shed. To me, that says something about their priorities, and what it says speaks to their judgment challenges when it comes to making good choices for their children. I don't think these are "bad" people at all, I just think they made a bad decision when they decided to buy fifty acres and live in a shed with six children. Some times, you have to defer your dreams in order to properly provide for your children.

[eridani]

35. Air conditioner+refrigerator+2 computers = VASTLY less than

--first and last month's rent + security deposit.

[MADem]

43. Granny likely wouldn't ask for first/last or security. They should have moved in with her.

They bought that fifty acres of land AT THE SAME TIME that they made the decision to move into the shed.

That, to me, is poor judgment and not the wisest use of their resources.

[eridani]

74. Which gives you or the state ZERO right to break up their family

I grew up among people who gradually unslummed their living quarters, and it works just fine. The first thing was a basement (hole in the ground) with a roof. Then basic wiring. Tben plumbing. It usually took about 5 years to save for framing and roofing a house on top of the basement. After that it was a matter of doing one room at a time and gradually moving everyone upstairs. Then the basement becomes a mother in law apartment or a rec room. Maybe add-ons to the house later.

Rules that stop people from doing this are bad, period.

[MADem]

78. Bullshit.

You don't let children live in unsafe, filthy conditions .... unless you are a Republican. Then you call catsup a vegetable and go drink champagne.

Children are the weakest of our citizens, and they are entitled to protections which include a safe, clean living environment. If their parents prioritize buying fifty acres of land over providing an adequate shelter for their offspring, it's time for the state to act.

Nothing wrong with "unslumming." Just don't force innocent children to live in a filthy industrial area while you do it.

[eridani]

82. Did you ask the kids? n/t

[MADem]

102. They're babies, and they've lived in that shithole for four years.

They don't know anything else.

They will though--a community activist has found the family a home to rent.

[Marrah_G]

77. It's easier to run an extension cord then to install plumbing.

[JVS]

108. Yup. Or even installing wiring in a shed is easier.

You can't put plumbing into a shed without the zoning people getting wise.

[Abq_Sarah]

11. So...

No running water and a compost toilet is grounds for removing children?

There are lot of families in New Mexico who would have their kids taken if they used that standard here. I know quite a few people who haul their water in jugs because their property doesn't have accessible water. The kids are happy, healthy and well adjusted.

[MADem]

22. Living in a storage facility garage (not really a "shed") is.

This guy owns fifty acres of land. If he camped out on his own property no one would have bothered him.

Family members have the children, so they aren't in foster care.

We aren't talking about rural New Mexico, we're talking densely populated Houston.

[Cereal Kyller]

34. I get what you're saying, MADem

Even if nobody else in this thread does. Chalk it up to the wee hours, I guess.

[MADem]

44. Thanks.

I don't think these people are evil or anything of that nature, I simply think they weren't firing on all cylinders when they made the decision to buy land at the same time they decided it was a good idea to live with six homeschooled kids in a windowless corrugated metal shed with no running water, a sketchy wood stove, and a friken composting toilet to crap in--just not a good situation.

[REP]

50. You're not alone - I agree. They're not bad people but they made some bad decisions

Those kids at least should have been living with the grandparents all along. A dirty, windowless storage locker with no plumbing is not a healthy place for young kids.

[Fumesucker]

51. I camped with a three year old for several months back in the early 80's..

My ex and I both lost our jobs in the recession at the beginning of the Reagan term, didn't have enough money for a deposit/utilities/first month rent on a place to stay. The only thing we could do on meager unemployment was take our (old, beat up) van and a tent and camp in a campground. We used the low cost of that to save enough money to get a place but it took nearly six months to do so.

It was miserable from shortly after sunrise until way after dark, a tent with no AC is unbelievably hot in the summer and we were in Mississippi on the gulf coast with the humidity and bugs. To be in the tent in the daytime was unbearable, we spent all day outside when it wasn't pouring rain (gulf coast remember, lots of rain showers).

A storage shed with AC and computers would have been vastly more comfortable.

As for the "burying the poop" thing, I imagine that the storage facility had a toilet in the office, I've emptied a portable toilet into a "real" one many times over the years.

I salvage old computers people have thrown away, fix them up, install Linux and give them away, computers are a disposable commodity and most people when they get a new one either throw out the old one or stick it in a closet. If you aren't playing games or watching video on a computer even a low end Pentium is still usable for most purposes. Indeed, I have a CNC machine I built out of scrap that uses a Pentium 90 running on DOS to control it.

In my opinion you're just being just as blind or maybe even more so than the people you're criticizing, sure they may have made some less than optimal decisions but who the hell hasn't?

At least they were planning for a better future, moving into an apartment that would accept six kids would have taken every penny they had, assuming they could even find anything they could afford on one paycheck.

[MADem]

59. They chose to buy land at the same time they made the decision to make that shed home.

The computers were for their online school--one of them was provided by the school.

They had a composting toilet, used by all eight of them, INSIDE the shed.

The shed was a shithole--corrugated, rusty metal, no room to move around, no windows, in a concrete yard. There's video of it online. The place was a dank dump.

I am not being "blind"--I happen to think that children deserve a healthy environment, and living in a frigging tiny metal shed in an industrial storage facility, eight people in a tiny space shared with the feces of all of them in a porta-toilet, crowded in without any room to move around, without running water, never mind hot running water, is a hideous situation and completely unnecessary.

It's one thing to make a crappy decision that affects just adults, but we're talking school-aged children here who have more needs than an infant or a toddler. They deserve to be able to lay their head in a real bed, not a shared stinky mattress on the floor, and turn on a tap and get hot water to wash their faces. Essential sanitation should not be regarded as a luxury, and those parents didn't do right by their kids.

If they had to go ask the grandparents for help before CPS got involved, that's what they should have done.

[Fumesucker]

60. You suggested they live in a tent..

That comment is what I was responding to.

A tent would have no running water and would be far more uncomfortable than the shed, unbearably so in the daytime and until well after dark. Houston is a hell hole climate wise in the summer, hot and humid around the clock.

Also too, in the tent they wouldn't even have electricity.

I bet if they had been in the tent you would have wanted the kids removed anyway.

[MADem]

63. If they were "camping" on their OWN land the state wouldn't have gotten involved, odds are good.

I don't know what kind of land the guy bought. Is it verdant farmland, with shade trees and hills and maybe a nice stream running through it, which would be a nice situation even in the hottest weather.... or is it flatland with the sun beating down?

As I said elsewhere, the guy is planning on building a house on his land and anticipating getting a loan inside of two weeks. You need power to build a house. All he has to do is get the electric company to come out and activate power at the street, and then he can run the power to where it needs to go--and that might be a tent for the short term, or a Home Depot shed, optimally more than one, with more square footage than the corrugated tin shed they were in previously.

I just can't imagine that anyone thinks that this hideous and unsanitary living situation is "OK" for the children. I'm amazed at the number of people who are giving me guff for declaring that this is not an acceptable environment. Children deserve a safe, CLEAN environment with appropriate sanitation, a table at which to eat, and a bed where they might sleep--not a filthy mattress on the floor that doubles as a walkway for eight people. Just because they don't complain, that doesn't make it right. The parents know better--they should have found a way to readjust their priorities so the kids had a decent living environment, or asked granny and gramps to step up well before CPS even had to get involved.

[Fumesucker]

65. We camped under shade trees, had our pick of campsites..

It's *still* unbearably hot in a tent in the daytime in the summer..

And I'll point out we were only blocks from the gulf, Houston is inland and much more oppressive than the coast.

I'll be surprised if that family ever gets back together now.

[Maat]

66. As a former (retired) CPS worker, I most respectfully disagree.

This will probably go 'court-involved FM (family maintenance)' soon - with the Department helping the family get some sort of apartment while a home gets built on the land (if there are no substance abuse issues). Fret not - the kids are with relatives, and I predict will remain with the relatives. I predict that the family will get the help they need, and things will be better than ever soon.

When I was a worker, Code Enforcement frequently forced the issue, along with law enforcement. Hopefully, they will set up some sort of fund, and people will help them get housing on their land. I used to be known as the Queen of Family Maintenance. I used to secure housing, food and clothing for my clients.

At worst, a parenting class and/or some sort of counseling (paid for by taxpayers) will be required.

This is, by far, a less serious case than the majority of cases with which I dealt.

[MADem]

69. Thank you for that. In Houston, CPS workers are getting murdered by crazy baastids, they

don't have time to play Simon Legree for shits-n-giggles.

I think a parenting class is a GREAT idea. Children deserve to grow up in a clean and safe environment--not a windowless shed in an industrial zone, sleeping two feet from a bucket of crap.

[uppityperson]

92. have you EVER been around a composting toilet? Far different than a "bucket of crap

Educate yourself.
.
.
.
Composting toilets



bucket of crap

[MADem]

103. Yes, I have, your royal smugness.

And I know that they work OK for a couple of people, but when you have eight people crapping in one, in a 12 x25 space that they also LIVE in, the things STINK. No matter how much you turn that crank and throw in the destinking product, they STINK. Even the solar ones can't keep up with eight frigging people.

I rather doubt these people were using the 2500 dollar and up models, either--theirs was probably more like a bucket of sawdust and a bigger bucket with top on it.

[uppityperson]

119. You know what they say about assumptions. eom

[Fumesucker]

84. Thanks for your input..

I guess what really irks me is that it takes this kind of exposure before people can get help.

I do hope that it all works out and the family can once again be reunited.

[MADem]

68. Would you have done "better" with a little electricity?

The guy owns the land. It's a phone call to get the power company to turn the power on at the street.

The children are living with mom's parents. All of them. They aren't scattered to the four winds. It's what should have happened in the first place, only they had to buy that fifty acres...!

[Maat]

71. Ah .... Mom's parents ... that explains it.

They probably never have liked the husband, and they have probably been aggitatin' behind the scenes. I probably would have been a tad upset about their living situation had I been the maternal grandmother - just because of my personal ideas about how my daughter and her kids should live. There probably are a lot of interesting family dynamics going on - and Code Enforcement is probably involved. It will all be resolved fairly easily, I imagine. Community support will be helpful.

[MADem]

75. Well, the article isn't clear on that at all.

The daughter didn't seem to take that POV in the articles, but I suppose ya never know. I got the impression that someone saw the children playing in the industrial area, and reported it. Of course, you have more experience with this kind of stuff than I do.

I see what you're suggesting, though--that the maternal grandparents asked CPS to intervene because they were concerned about the welfare of their grandchildren? With six grandkids, even if they don't like the son in law, they'd probably better get used to him!


I do hope it's all settled soon, and these kids, with their hopefully-wiser parents, are placed in a safe and clean environment where they can thrive.

[uppityperson]

93. Educate yourself."a phone call"? It cost us over $10,000 to get electricity to our property

Then a bunch more to get it to our shop and living quarters. Over $10,000 to bring it up our road to the edge of our property. Yes, it took "a phone call to get the power company to turn on the power" but a bunch of money to get it to our street.

Not as simple as "It's a phone call to get the power company to turn the power on at the street. " Have you ever been involved with property development?

[MADem]

106. I'm talking about power to the pole abutting the property.

Putting electricity in a PERMANENT structure is a different kettle of fish.

This guy owns fifty acres of land, don't tell me there's not a single power pole abutting his land.

The issue here isn't "property development"--it's getting a temporary solution in place while he's building his house using that USDA loan. When the house is built, that's when he'll need the big money to bring the utilities from the street to the home.

In any event, the issue is moot--they've found a house to rent, the family will be reunited.

[uppityperson]

118. So was I. $10,00 to the edge of our property."Property development" is getting power TO the property

Not putting electricity in a structure but simply getting it TO the property. Yes, there is LOTS of land, lots of acreage that does not have" a single power pole abutting his land".

[MADem]

124. If there is a power line on the abutting road, you don't have to

spend that kind of money until you've finished your foundation and start to build. In the meantime, you can still access power from the street once you have an account, and it does not cost any ten grand to do that.

This guy's property is in the same county as Houston and Tom Delay's Sugarland. I'd bet there's access to power close by, without having to run a country mile to find it.

At the end of the day, though, so what? He's getting a USDA loan to build; putting in power is part and parcel of the process.

[uppityperson]

130. Notice your first word. "If". eom

[MADem]

133. And we're talking greater HOUSTON, not Montana. eom.

[uppityperson]

134. Cool, You have now insulted Appalachia, Maine AND Montana!

It doesn't matter. The pertinent word is still "if".

[Name removed]

136. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

145. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Straight Story]

85. I can think of a lot of kids in Africa (and here on Indian land) who could use people to rescue

their kids from them.

We just need to get old world on them and convert them to our religion beliefs.

[MADem]

107. Oh please.

Just because kids in Africa live in shitty conditions, that makes it "OK?" Just because the native peoples who aren't getting their money back through casino gambling live in hellholes without services, that makes it "OK?"

Where do you find this tortured logic? Don't you give a shit about children, who have no choice but to rely on their parents, who, in this case, made poor choices and raised them for FOUR YEARS in unsafe and unsanitary conditions?

I am astounded at people who call themselves "liberals" who think it is "OK" for children to live for four years in conditions that are far worse than Gitmo.

Boggles the mind.

The update to this story is that the family has gotten some help and found a rental home, and they'll be reunited. Wasn't that quick! Maybe some of that "old world" pressure from those evil "authorities" did the trick. I'm sure the children will be happy every time they have a bath or flush the crapper at their new abode.

[Evasporque]

80. The family was growing vegatables in front yard....nt

[MADem]

109. No they weren't.

The "front yard" was concrete and macadam. They were living in a storage park, you know, the kind of place that divorced people rent to throw their crap while they try to get their lives back together. Shed after shed after shed on concrete. Crappy sheds, too, not the nice modern ones you see in some industrial parks.

They were growing vegetables on a "verge"--like a median strip near the industrial park--and who knows what kind of soil that was. This is an industrially zoned area in Houston, after all.

The good news, though, is that they have found a rental home and will be reunited.

[riderinthestorm]

81. Just as a point of reference, a 2BR mobile home is usually 12' x 26'

A 2 car garage is somewhere on the order of 20' x 25'.

I'm not saying anything about the condition of the storage shed but I've seen big families survive 2 BR apts or mobile homes that are on the same size scale as what this family was living in. It's done ALL over the world, and yes even here in the US. If you've grown up in poverty, the shelter they were living in probably didn't feel "wrong" at all. It had AC, a toilet and the family was together. while it may be messy it's hard to say how unclean it was. Cluttered doesn't necessarily mean unclean. If they had a water supply nearby it probably wasn't a terrible way to live actually. Clearly the parents had a long term goal for their family and were working towards that - it bodes well for them getting back together. Even more clearly, the family was together which is hard to say for many, many poor families these days. To be honest, I'm pretty impressed the parents found a way to keep their family intact, sheltered, schooled and safe.

Some people are seeing this through middle class eyes and are upset. Those of us who have truly been poor aren't judging at all and I assume like me have been quietly watching this thread without comment.

[Horse with no Name]

88. I agree with you.

That 50 acres is probably very rural and didn't have utilities on it--which is why it was affordable. Maybe someone knew they were struggling and gave them a really good deal. Land that is considered unusable is sometimes pretty cheap in Texas.

So, the suggestion to "just call the light company" and turn on the lights...sometimes just isn't as easy as it sounds.

Just putting a pole and box can cost thousands of dollars...then you have to run power lines to and from the unit, then you have to have an electrician out to do an inspection, there are many costs involved...much more than just calling a power company.

If the land was unimproved...there would be no sewage, no water, or anything else...hell, there might not even be a driveway into the land.

It is clear that the family had a long term goal. It is quite possible that they had no idea it would take $20k or more to ready that land for a home to be put on it.

I hope CPS uses its resources to find some temporary housing and assistance for this family.

[uppityperson]

91. A 1 bedroom travel trailer is 8X18-25 ft. 2 br mobile may be only 12' wide, but is longer than 26'

A 2 bedroom mobile home is typically 14 ft by 48-70 feet. We were in one while building our house, 1 bath, 1 bedroom with another tiny one, 14' X 48'. I lived in a 8'X18 ft travel trailer as a young adult, with a shower and no separate bedroom. I hauled water and used propane for lights, heat, etc, had an outhouse.

12X26 is NOT typical of a mobile home, especially a 2 bedroom one. 8 ft bedroom, 6 ft bathroom,8 ft kitchen, 8 ft living room, 8 ft bedroom=30 ft and that is minimal for room sizes.

However, I am very much in agreement with you that we can't and shouldn't judge by what is provided in this story. It is possible to live in a small space, without indoor plumbing. I hope the family gets back together.

[riderinthestorm]

94. Thanks. I was using my Irish mum's dimensions on a typical trailer size

and she was thinking of what was typical there. I just assumed they were similar to the US.

However yes, my larger point was that it's not possible to adequately judge this family as viewed from a middle class vantage point. Expectations on things like "normal" space requirements for "shelter" or the "value" of indoor plumbing are vastly different for the poor.

[MADem]

110. They had a long term goal? They had lived there for FOUR YEARS.

Look at the pictures of the place--it was a hellhole.

The good news? They've found a rental home. They will be reunited.

Maybe the spotlight shined on them by the "awful" CPS was a good thing. I'm sure the kids will be happier with a place to bathe and a crapper to flush.

As I have said elsewhere, I think children should live in conditions that are at least as good as the conditions afforded to prisoners at GITMO. These kids didn't even have that quality of living space. Playing the "middle class" card is complete bull--the issue was that essential sanitation was lacking, and the home was fetid and dangerous.

And your mobile home measurements are WAAAAAAAY off. The smaller ones average about fourteen feet wide (many are sixteen or eighteen), and they're usually in the neighborhood of at least seventy or eighty feet long.

[WolverineDG]

86. God I hate CPS

the fuckers lie through their teeth all the time & make up laws off the tops of their heads. I've heard them spout off that it's "against the law" for children to share a bedroom. Or that it's "against the law" for children of the same gender & similar age to share a bed. All just to keep their mitts on the kids who they turn into cash cows, to hell with their "best interests."

Meanwhile, kids out there in truly abusive, neglectful situations are routinely ignored.

dg

[Shagbark Hickory]

90. Only 6 kids? You need to literally be a millionaire to raise 6 children.

Irresponsible on part of the parents but I don't see what taking them away is going to solve.

[originalpckelly]

98. Hey, I've got a fucking idea, why don't you keep the family together and pay for temporary housing?

Aw shit, they could never do that. That might actually be humane.

[MADem]

111. The parents didn't want to leave, that's why.

CPS did the best they could by placing them with the maternal grandparents and not strangers.

The problem has been solved, though. Because of the spotlight focused on them by the intervention of those 'evil bastards at CPS,' the family has gotten help, found a rental home, and the family will be reunited.

[Vinca]

99. It would seem more cost effective to keep the kids with the parents and find them all a home.

There must be some sort of subsidy to help these people out. IMHO, anyone who has 6 kids these days is nuts, but the kids are here and shouldn't be punished.

[Glimmer of Hope]

105. Some very kind person has donated a home for the family to stay:

http://www.khou.com/home/Good-Samaritan-donates-house-to-couple-who-lived-in-storage-shed-with-6-kids--125255159.html

[Danger Mouse]

113. I actually have a good deal of experience with CPS, and...

...they're not the evil child-stealing demons that people make them out to be.

In fact, they're often powerless to take kids out of bad, abusive homes, because the system protects bad parents a lot more often than it doesn't. For the most part, they really are just trying to keep kids safe. It's just highly charged because 'OMG THEY TAKE KIDS!' Of course, they're not perfect, and sometimes families have CPS called on them for pointless reasons. As for this situation, it seems tragic all around. Do we know the complete rationale for why the kids were taken? It seems to be me that a storage shed isn't really a safe place for six kids...but again, I don't know all the details so I can't say for sure.

But still, it's a tragic situation either way.

[MADem]

115. A voice of sanity and common sense.

However, tragedy has been averted. The children will not have to stay with Grandma and Gramps for much longer.

In this case, the family has been found a four bedroom home, courtesy of a community activist who is working WITH CPS to resolve this matter, the rent will be affordable (it's not a total donation, but probably as cheap as the shed), AND...the house has running water, a crapper and bath, and a yard.

[Danger Mouse]

117. It's not like having the kids taken away means you can't get them back, either.

Family court will usually tell you what you need to do in order to regain custody. This system is all set in place for a reason...for the safety of the kids.

And thanks. :pals:

[MADem]

122. Anytime.

I have family who have worked in the social services arena, teaching in the most challenged/neglected schools, assisting battered women with transition/safety issues, working at the shit end of the stick doing the necessary caregiving for the profoundly disabled...that kind of thing. Some of the stuff these folks have seen is just horrific. I admire their dedication and fortitude--I know I would probably have a tough time summoning up "the right stuff" to do that kind of work. It takes courage, a strong stomach, and a lot of compassion. I know that for every jerk working in the system, there are tons of people who actually give a crap, and deserve to be paid more than they're getting.

[jtuck004]

116. If the "state" really wanted to solve the problem they would be making sure employers

were paying a living wage and supporting the Federal government in a jobs\education\rebuilding wealth-creating production-in-this-country program which invests money in those that create demand instead of giving it to the wealthy who don't.

If that's too much, how about providing SAFE fucking shelters that are up to the standards of someone who thinks they know how everyone ought to live. Surely that would be cheaper than what this is going to cost. And a lot more respectful.

These people care about their kids, and, frankly, there have been a lot of very bad decisions made over the past few years that probably contributed to their problems, decisions made well above their pay grade (above most of us), with far less consequences, so pounding on these parents for their decisions is a little chickenshit. As long as the kids are fed and more or less clean and able to be taken to a doctor as needed, they beat the hell out of the parents who use them as a punching bag, or leave their kids in the car while they are inside a bar. Or Walmart. But those take more work to find, and they fight back more.

The parent's contention that they are being punished for being "poor" is believable. They have 300 square feet, but if they spent more money 89 square feet with no running water might not have generated a phone call. Looks like the kind of siding you have really does make a difference.

That's a happy black family in the picture. I would like to find out how many of the people who are involved in telling them how they should live their life are white.

Houston, we may have a problem.

[MADem]

125. The father just graduated from one of those job retraining programs

That's where he got his welding certificate.

The community activist who worked with CPS to obtain the four bedroom house wasn't white.

Houston doesn't have a problem--people who think it is "OK" to leave a family in a shed, and resent CPS for trying to help, are the ones with the problem.

[Maat]

128. And, the thing is ...

that most times it was Code Enforcement that insisted we take them in when I was with the Department ('93 to mid-2000). It was not I who condemned life in a garage or a shed; Code Enforcement responded right along with us, and insisted that the kids be taken into custody. Frequently, they would yellow-tape the whole place. So, we don't know that CPS wasn't pushed into placing the kids; chances are, they were.

I was the expert at getting people housing, clothing and food; I figured that, since they had an encounter with an unpleasant system, the least I could do was see that they REALLY benefited from it.

[jtuck004]

131. I know, and that is what I would expect from code enforcement.

I am glad they are there doing their job, because a lot of families would be in unecessary danger without them.

But there seems to be an odor of assuming these are not caring parents trying to do the best they can, which the article seems to indicate they are, and any talk about them that is not respectful needs to be challenged on a factual basis.

And then they need people like you to make sure the situation really improves for them. Thank you for your work.

[MADem]

135. Who's suggesting these parents are not "caring?"

I am only suggesting that their judgment was off. And not just "off" a little, "off" in a BIG way.

They knew enough to buy fifty acres of land and apply for a USDA loan, they knew how to benefit from community college job retraining, they had two computers at the ready, so why did they live--for four years--in a rusty industrial shed with no running water?

In DAYS--not weeks--DAYS--their problems were solved, by those "evil" folks at CPS working with a community activist.

I certainly am not -- nor is anyone here or anywhere in any of the articles I have read - suggesting that the parents "don't care." That's just an inaccurate statement.

[Gormy Cuss]

132. Maat, I have a lot of respect for the good CPS workers out there.

I've never met one who enjoyed removing children from their parents even when everyone agreed it was the best move for the child. I applaud you for doing your best to help in whatever ways were appropriate for each family.

A lot of people on this thread have reached conclusions in favor or against CPS based on one or two news articles but the facts of cases like this are often quite nuanced and for me, there just isn't enough public information for me to second guess the CPS move.

[MADem]

155. I am really starting to warm to your "Granny made the call" theory.

If those were my grandchildren, living like that, I'd make the call too--and be ready to take the kids in on a temporary basis until the parents were pushed into getting better housing...which is what has happened.

[Maat]

156. Indeed, MADem.

The family will be living in better digs soon. As I've said, I retired ten years ago. Members of my family (and my circle of friends) are still active. I'm not into being judgmental, but, different relatives have different perspectives.

Thanks for the kind words, folks.

Of course, we wouldn't have these situations if we allocated government-owned land for small modular homes (or something like that). We have to take a serious look at ourselves as a nation.

[jtuck004]

129. There are all sorts of definitions of "help"

Having a welding training program when there are few welding jobs because we just sent 43,000 manufacturing jobs overseas may or may not be "helpful".

And whether the nosy person "activist" was white or not doesn't mean they weren't working within a system that picks on people who dare try "Living While Black". See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_profiling">Driving While Black in Wikipedia for a similar indiscretion. (3.7 times more likely to be pulled over - are they really 3.7 times worse drivers? Seriously?)

And like I said, the parents said the shelter was unsafe. If the "activist" wanted to help maybe they should make the shelter safe, because if that is accurate they are ignoring additional families in perhaps more real danger than this one. Some help.

Without some evidence that these caring parents were mistreating the kids (than not living like some busybody thought they should)
whether the nosy "activist" was "helping" is certainly disputable.

[MADem]

138. Do you know anything at all about Houston? The people, the politics?

Do you have any idea who Quanell X is? At all??? Google him. He was born Quanell Evans. You might want to stow all that "Living While Black" stuff after you've read up on the guy.

Take a guess as to what hue Quanell X is--hint: He looks nothing like Conan O'Brien or Jackie Chan.


He was the "nosy person" activist who worked with CPS to get this family into a four bedroom home with running water and a crapper and a bathtub/shower. He's no milquetoast, either--he's rather "out there" when it comes to getting involved, for better and for worse.


No one said the parents were "mistreating" the kids, as in abusing them. What they were doing was living eight people to a 12x25 corrugated metal shed, with no windows, and a composting toilet filled with the feces of eight people contained within said shed. That's unhealthy.

The worst prisons in this country don't have those kinds of unsanitary and overcrowded conditions. Why should children be forced to live like that? Why would you think it is "OK" to let children live like that, for four long years?

What's the issue with the parents in this case is their poor JUDGMENT, not their "caring." Don't confuse poor decision-making with brutality or absence of love.

Further, one person on this forum with social worker experience suggested that it might have been the maternal GRANDPARENTS who reported their daughter and her husband, because they were appalled at those living conditions. Said grandparents were the ones who immediately stepped up and gave the children a temporary home when CPS removed them from that non-residential industrial shed. Now, this is, of course, pure speculation, but it does seem well within the realm of possibility.

That said, if the reporting to CPS were done by Granny and Gramps, that would be, in the minds of people here screeching about the evils of CPS and "The Man," somewhat of a 'black on black crime,' wouldn't it?

Edited to add one other thing: The guy found a job working as a welder, so I guess that lousy community college program that he qualified for paid off, eh?

[jtuck004]

142. Wow, they lived for 4 whole years in this?

They must have been skin and bones, thirsty, and uneducated.

Oh, wait, no evidence of any of that, and the picture sure doesn't do much to make the case either.

I know people in West Virginia, and have met some in other states, for whom 300 square feet of air-conditioned and computer-equipped space would be beyond their wildest dreams. They don't have running water, except when they run to get it. Yet some manage to live through it and thrive.

Went in a home once where they lost their gas, so they built a fire in the living room which burned through into the crawl space. That became their heat and where they did their cooking, for years. Calling it cooking, however, might be a little strong. I remember when the kid brought home a #10 can of pickles. It was their dinner. When I did what I could to help them I didn't go on ad nauseum about bad decisions, unsubstantiated rusty sheds, and composting toilets (did you check into the model? There is no reason it couldn't be sized for that, and cleaned appropriately), and how they were being made to live in sub-standard conditions - by someone else's standards.

I just helped them and understood that I couldn't know why those decisions were made, and in the absence of real evidence, that they were bad or incorrect. I would rather not live like that, but I am not doing to disparage people for things I can't know.

What I am reading above seems like nothing more than some weird defense of the rightness of the course of events, really leaving out their point of view. I am only interested in the people and what they think, especially when there seems to be such a need for justifying what happened to them.

Their life may be better now. It just seems like much of what I read (here and elsewhere) is designed to bolster a case for doing something in the absence of real evidence that there was a need, other than the opinions of people who just know better how someone else should live their life.

Just as one can insinuate things without saying them, there are ways to "help" people without respecting them. And that kind of help is always suspect.

Bye.

[MADem]

144. There is no "point of view" when it comes to housing children in conditions that are

worse than those where PRISONERS are housed. That's all the "real evidence" that you need. And that isn't an insinuation, it is fact. It's against the law to house prisoners in quarters that tight, never mind the unsanitary conditions (which is doubtless why CPS made their move). And seriously, if someone could afford one of those fancy composting toilets, they sure as hell could afford first, last and security, and/or get some help from Section 8. Of course, when you get Section 8 help, you're expected to contribute, and if you want to save money, well, putting your kids in a crappy shed is one dumb way to do that.

What I'm seeing from you is a tortured defense of parents who desperately need a parenting class. No, they are not "bad" people, but they exercised horrible JUDGMENT when it came to the care and nurturing of their children.

Sure, someone ALWAYS has it "worse." You can always find another horrible example that makes that shed seem, by comparison, a palace. You know those people you say you know in West Virginia? They don't deserve to live in a wall-to-wall mattresses on the floor shed with a bucket crapper and two computers attached to an extension cord, EITHER. They deserve running water, a decent ambient temperature, and a flushing toilet. Hardship does not make people THRIVE. It often makes them resentful, insecure, and especially in the case of children, it can affect their self-esteem, if they are allowed to go to school and start comparing their circumstances to their peers (these children did not go to a public school--and that's probably why they flew under the radar for so long).

It is laudable that you helped people in need. However, trying to paper over this situation by suggesting that there was "no need" is patently absurd. As I have said, prisoners get better living conditions--and these are American children, not dogs.

I don't think that Quanell X failed to "respect" this family in the slightest. I also don't think that CPS treated them badly either (they didn't just swoop in and grab the kids, they spent three hours with the family in the shed).

You failed to address the very valid possibility that Grandma and Grandpa turned them in, too, I notice. They very well could have been the "meanies" who got the ball rolling, because, awful people that they are, they love their grandchildren. It's way easier to rail at The Man or Evil CPS--instead of breaking it down, speaking bluntly and honestly, and acknowledging that these kids were not in a good situation, did not deserve to live like this, and their parents were not making smart decisions on behalf of their kids.

That's just the truth.

[uppityperson]

147. Link to where it says these children were locked up like prisoners.

Link?

"Of course, when you get Section 8 help, you're expected to contribute". Not unless you have income. Otherwise you aren't. The max you pay if on Sect 88 is 1/3 of your income. If you have no income, you aren't "expected to contribute". EDUCATE yourself.

"prisoners get better living conditions--and these are American children, not dogs". Mixing your metaphors? I'd like to see a link that says these children were locked up like prisoners are. Everything I've read says otherwise.

That's just the truth.

[MADem]

149. Are you having trouble reading what I am saying?

I was talking about their LIVING CONDITIONS, not their liberty.

Before you demand "links" you just might try reading the ones that have been provided, as well as reading the entire thread carefully, with COMPREHENSION as your primary goal. It'll help prevent you from making silly comments like "Link to where it says these children were locked up like prisoners," when no one ever said anything about locking anyone up.

Let me break this down for you--read carefully, now:

Have you seen the size of an average prison cell lately? Go do the google. I'm tired of doing the homework around here.

Those children were housed in a facility that afforded each member of their family LESS square footage than a prisoner -- in the general population or death row--gets.

Prisoners get flush toilets that they generally have to share with one other person, if they're not in isolation or on death row.

Prisoners have running water and can brush their teeth or make a pack of KoolAid or Crystal Light.

Prisoners sleep in a bed that is elevated from the floor, in a room that is appropriately and safely heated and cooled.

No one EVER said that anyone was locked up. Not once. Again, read for comprehension before you play your Outrage Card.


As for Section Eight help, the father was employed as a maintenance man before he got his welding certificate and got hired as a welder. Employment wasn't the issue. He WAS employed (so educate YOURself--by reading the links provided before you get shirty and mouth off with half-knowledge). Of COURSE Section 8 takes a percentage of earnings, if there are earnings. DUH. In this case, there WERE earnings. But perhaps the father didn't want to expend them on decent housing? That's a bad judgment call, if that is the case.

Now THAT's just "the truth."



:eyes:

[Maat]

158. Yes, and agencies act according to "community standards."

So, agencies would react differently in West Virginia than they would in Houston, Tx.

I'm the retired CPS worker. My beat was San Bernardino, Ca., the meth capitol of the world (at one point at least). Our standards weren't so high.

All I know is that when I couldn't quietly help the family get better housing, without the courts being involved, it was because Code Enforcement and local law enforcement were pushing the issue. The law enforcement officers took the vast majority of kids into custody, by far, and then expected CPS to take it from there. If this was so, then the court became involved.

Also, in instances such as these, relatives were usually pushing for the kids to be taken from the environment, and authorities generally listen to them. It says that someone saw the kids playing in the environment unattended. It doesn't say who, and it doesn't mean that relatives weren't also making calls. There's more to this case than meets the eye.

[Jakes Progress]

148. All these people need to do is wait.

Wait some more. As soon as the banks see how bad it is, they will begin lending again. As soon as the republicans see that people are hurting, they will join in offering up tax dollars to get the economy started. As soon as the administraion knows about this they will ask their corporate friends to forego a couple of percent of their bail-out profits to help. As soon as the richest 1 percent see this, they will hand their heads in shame at their greed.

Yeah. Just wait. The republicans tell these people to just die and get it over with. The administration tells them to wait it out. They are sure that the stuff listed above will happen.

[MADem]

150. You need to read the whole thread. You're behind the curve.

This situation has been resolved, the family has been assisted and will move into a four bedroom house with a yard and a genuine bathroom with all the facilities.

[Jakes Progress]

157. Whew. One family. Now what about the other couple of million.

You're behind the curve is you think this story is a one-off.

I thought you did a decent job of pointing out the problems people have getting by in this economy. If you want to turn this into a yippee, everything is just fine kind of story, I'll take my rec back.

[MADem]

159. Who the hell said anything about this situation being a "one off?"

What world are you living in that you could so boldly make that completely illogical and unsubstantiated leap?

Everything isn't "just fine" in the world of children in substandard housing, and no one suggested that it was (save you, with that crooked little strawman you whipped up).

This particular issue has been resolved. That's all I said.

[Jakes Progress]

160. What the hell? Then what was the purpose of your snark

at my post? I was agreeing with what I thought was an OP about the problems of people like the ones I work with every day.

Then you told me I didn't get it, that I was behind the curve.

Mayhaps, you were the one who didn't get it.

[MADem]

164. You said that all they need to do is wait. I said they've already found a place.

That's not snark, you just didn't keep up with arc of this particular story.

The OP wasn't about the general problems of substandard housing, the OP was about one specific family living in an industrial shed for four years. I believe that Maat (who has CPS experience), as well as the mod commenting on this thread, hit the nail on the head as to the backstory on this situation.

[aikoaiko]

162. This thread needs more Bobolink.

:think:

[uppityperson]

163. +100 and

you made me laugh.