This is a story that was on Good Morning America this morning and is taking place about 20 miles from where I live.
Just wondering what your thoughts are?
ABC news

By Marcia on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 09:07 am:

If the father isn't even living with the mother, I don't see how they can take her kids based on his past. The article did mention drug and alcohol abuse, though, and made it sound like they both had problems in that area. I guess it would really depend on the real reason, and what she's doing to get help for herself if it is the drug and alcohol abuse.

By Colette on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 09:14 am:

She's already had one baby taken away and she got pregnant again? By a convicted sex offender? The child would probably be better off if it was taken away. Sounds like neither one is fit to be a parent.

By Ginny~moderator on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 09:43 am:

On reading the article, it turns out this convicted sex offender was convicted 20+ years ago of raping teenage girls, and is presently married to the mother. The county says they "have heard stores" of mental illness and drug and alcohol abuse, but that is different from having evidence. The county also says there are allegations that he has abused his three children (I assume by his wife), but again, the article said nothing about evidence.

I have no brief for a 30+ year old man who rapes two teenage girls. But 20 years later and married, he may have reformed. And, men who rape adult or adult-appearing women are not usually the men who sexually abuse young children. Until I know the facts, I can't have any opinion.

By Beth on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 09:47 am:

The sad thing is they probably will rip this child back and forth. I have worked in foster care and I have a friend who was a foster parent for a high profile case in Illinois. She will probably lose the child, get it back and lose it again. Justice will not be served for anyone.

By Jtsmom on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 11:25 am:

Sounds like the child will be better off if they do find suitable parents for him. I have a very strong opinion that sex offenders should not get a second chance. Plus the mother has issues of her own.

By Emily7 on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 02:24 pm:

I agree with you Joelle.
The "man" that sexually molested me at age 5 didn't care who he hurt, his grandchildren, friends kids, boys, girls, teenagers or a 5 year old. He was addicted to prescription drugs & didn't care. Years after he hurt me he was still doing it.
IMO, they don't stop because they get caught...they try to be more careful.
If they can protect those children then justice is served.
I don't understand how you could fall in love with a man that rapes children, what does that say about her?

By Cocoabutter on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 08:34 pm:

I agree with Ginny. The authorities have no solid evidence that abuse of any kind- substance or physical/sexual, has taken place at all since his release. They are walking a fine line if they think they can justify taking the child based on such a weak argument.

But in general, women who marry convicted sex offenders should have their tubes tied. If a woman wants to risk herself with a rapist/child molestor, I won't lose any sleep, but I think that there should be laws against a woman bringing an innocent child into that mix.

By Emily7 on Monday, October 17, 2005 - 09:45 pm:

I guess the way I look at it, if he was your neighbor you would expect the authorities to keep a very close eye on him to protect your children. Well they are keeping a close eye on him to protect his.
I really doubt that the police are watching him for no reason, something must have happened to have them keeping this close of an eye on him after 20 years. I don't think the authorities pick on people just for the heck of it.
JMO.

By Juli4 on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 04:53 pm:

Not a lot of evidence, but I don't believe in reformed rapists, child pedophiles, or any sex offender.
So I say if they are living together then the baby goes. Don't give him another chance to ruin another kids life.
I also give the authorities teh benefit of the doubt. I think that they believe there is some danger here or they wouldn't waste their time.

By Reds9298 on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 - 11:28 pm:

Ditto Juli4 completely.

By Unschoolmom on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 09:52 am:

I'm with Ginnie. It's too easy to rip kids from their families without proof and this is a good example. How much investigation did they do? What work did they do with the family to address their concerns? How damaging will this be for the kids if it's found the concerns have no basis?

There was a case here a couple of years ago where child welfares first step in regards to one reported concern about a baby was to take the baby from the family. Or try to. It led to a very ugly confrontation.

That he's a sex offender makes it seem easier to understand. But if one of us had a husband that had been convicted of statutory rape 20 years ago? If they came after one of us?

There may well be a good reason but because of the power such organizations have we had better make sure we insist on asking questions and getting answers.

By Colette on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 10:51 am:

Statutory rape is one thing. A 17 yr old who sleeps with a 15 yr old is not a necessarily a violent sexual predator.

He was not convicted of statutory rape. He was convicted of and pled guilty to "rape, attempted rape, sodomy and attempted sodomy" of two teenage girls. Yes, it happend 20 years ago and that would have put him in his early 30's. Old enough to know better.

Why would anyone in their right mind marry or get involved in any way with someone like this? She's lost one child, she got pregnant again and probably will lose this one as well. So, she's already managed to give one child a bunch of baggage that the child will have to have on it's mind for the rest of it's life and she's about to do it to another. Do you really think either one of them are going to raise well adjusted members of society?

My views are extreme though, I know this and I know a lot of people do not agree with me. I do not believe there should ever be a chance of a second offense. I don't care if some might be able to be rehabilitated. I personally believe violent sexual predators should be removed from the gene pool permanently. The last thing this country needs is people like this breeding.

By Juli4 on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 11:05 am:

I am currently doing a research paper on pedophilia and the lack of justice.
They get out too easily and almost always reoffend. They cannot be cured.

By Kaye on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 12:28 pm:

Collette, I completely agree. Once you have violated a child in that way, you become less than human in my opinion. You should lose all your rights. Why would someone do this if they could control themselves? Because they choose not to, they don't feel like it was all that wrong, it was someone elses fault, or they are just plain stupid. So if they fall in one of those catagories, to heck with them, don't let another child pay for his stupidity. If they couldn't control themselves, what makes us think they now suddenly they have developed that ability. I just have no sympathy when it comes to children. If we are wrong, then we screw up an adult mans life (and a women), but you know what it was already screwed up. If we are right we prevent a child from being hurt.

By Cocoabutter on Wednesday, October 19, 2005 - 03:17 pm:

Julie, see my new post!

By Colette on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 10:41 am:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,172978,00.html

yup - just the type of people who should have kids.

By Emily7 on Friday, October 21, 2005 - 10:53 am:

The last paragraph:
At Monday's hearing, the county produced a doctor's report that Melissa WolfHawk had acknowledged using cocaine and methamphetamine and working as a prostitute, and a New York parole document indicating DaiShin WolfHawk sexually abused his daughter. The WolfHawks have vigorously denied those allegations.

What winners they must be! I bet they could win parents of the year awards. Congrats to her for breastfeeding what good will that do the baby if she is on drugs? I hope the state is successful in finding that baby a better home. If the mother is serious about raising this little boy then hopefully she will take the steps necessary to assure the baby will be raised in a safe, drug free home.

By Colette on Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 07:47 am:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/10/22/sexoffender.custody.ap/index.html

the father cares so much he didn't even bother to show for the hearing...

By Reds9298 on Sunday, October 23, 2005 - 03:33 pm:

Ditto Kaye, Juli4 and Colette!
Regarding how quickly the authorities/child prtotective services steps in....I worked in a school system overwhelemed with such cases. I was all too frequently in contact with police liasons and CPS, filing reports on the abuse of children. Guess what? It's been my personal experience that THEY DON'T DO ANYTHING until it's too late. By then the damage to the child is already done. Don't wait for that to happen, especially when we're talking sexual predators.

By Groovepickle on Thursday, December 8, 2005 - 08:44 am:

It sounds like the mother has already made a vast array of poor choices, putting herself and children in danger. What makes anyone think she's actually worked on herself enough to make the right ones? Take the baby away before it's too late.
Groove