Newborn seized because of poppy seeds on bagel

[bℓσωηG]

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news%2Fnational_world&id=7727304

……………………………………..________

………………………………,.-’”……………….“~.

………………………..,.-”……………………………..“-.,

…………………….,/………………………………………..”:,

…………………,?………………………………………………\,

………………./…………………………………………………..,}

……………../………………………………………………,:`^`..}

……………/……………………………………………,:”………/

…………..?…..__…………………………………..:`………../

…………./__.(…..“~-,_…………………………,:`………./

………../(_….”~,_……..“~,_………………..,:`…….._/

……….{.._$;_……”=,_…….“-,_…….,.-~-,},.~”;/….}

………..((…..*~_…….”=-._……“;,,./`…./”…………../

…,,,___.\`~,……“~.,………………..`…..}…………../

…………(….`=-,,…….`……………………(……;_,,-”

…………/.`~,……`-………………………….\……/\

………….\`~.*-,……………………………….|,./…..\,__

,,_……….}.>-._\……………………………..|…………..`=~-,

…..`=~-,_\_……`\,……………………………\

……………….`=~-,,.\,………………………….\

…………………………..`:,,………………………`\…………..__

……………………………….`=-,……………….,%`>–==“

…………………………………._\……….._,-%…….`\

……………………………..,

[Sonny Jim]

I have read a few cases of false positives from poppy seeds but this is the first case I have heard of relating to the custody of a child.

Tragic

I can't remember the name of the chemical but I have read more than once that this chemical can be used to differentiate between poppy seeds and actual opiate abuse.

What ever the case I hope she is compensated.

[synchromesh]

Oh, just get on with it already!

I have read a few cases of false positives from poppy seeds but this is the first case I have heard of relating to the custody of a child.

Child? More like Newborn...

[ThunderIdeal]

so the newborn and the mother get to bond for roughly one day, then for FIVE DAYS they are removed from each other.

man if i were the father i would be fucking homicidal, i swear that my anger would boil over and the only outlet would be to destroy their buildings and fucking kill them. although because that would make the problem worse, i would just destroy them in my head over and over again while the rage directly attacks and diminishes my lifespan.

shit bags. i can understand removing children from parents before 100% confirming the facts, but newborns?? wouldn't it be possible even to impose supervision whilst checking your facts, rather than just tearing the baby from mother? i don't know all the issues but even if she was an addict, outright separating them seems almost inhumane.

[bℓσωηG]

man if i were the father i would be fucking homicidal, i swear that my anger would boil over and the only outlet would be to destroy their buildings and fucking kill them. although because that would make the problem worse, i would just destroy them in my head over and over again while the rage directly attacks and diminishes my lifespan.

shit bags. i can understand removing children from parents before 100% confirming the facts, but newborns?? wouldn't it be possible even to impose supervision whilst checking your facts, rather than just tearing the baby from mother? i don't know all the issues but even if she was an addict, outright separating them seems almost inhumane.

my feelings exactly, i bet she was a single mother...

[Sonny Jim]

^^^ Yeah, what you said. Child/newborn I probably should have written newborn.

Injustice to say the least. More like cruel.

I just hope she and her supporters have the money to nail what I can only assume are police or whatever prosecutors to the wall. Which is unlikely. If she and her supporters can afford it, I hope she at least gets adequate financial compensation and of course (more importantly)her newborn back, if she has not already.

Also, I don't think a bar coded baby has much to do with this.

[Torsten]

The worst thing is that the protocol for eliminating poppy seeds from drug tests has been known for more than 10 years. All you do is test for the ratio of oleamide to opiates and this establishes whether the opiates are from poppy seeds or otherwise. If they are going to use such draconian methods then they should at least get their science up to scratch.

[santiago]

innocent until proven guilty isnt an option in child protection cases..........

they have the right to remove based only on suspicion.

this is the fundamental right and wrong of the system.

yes it is a draconion system and yes they should use better methods, but they dont..........in the vast majority of child protection cases the social workers have to work fast to remove the child from potential risk.

its important not to get emotive on this aspect.........its about the best interests of the child, not the parent.....this is where the major confusion lies in child protection cases.........and this is how they win in court cases also...................the lack of INSIGHT.

in this case the parent who lost the child would have a good legal case for compensation based on wrongful loss of child and emotional pain due to wrong testing techniques.....and so it should to, to stop this happening to other innocent parties or to stop opiate users from using poppy seeds as a get out of jail card.

child protection officers do a very hard job...............they dont have 1 or 2 cases to deal with but often hundreds.....with many more potentially each day, put yourself in a social workers shoes before castgating them, sure out of that hundred cases or so you might get it wrong once or twice but just think how you would feel if you gave the benifit of doubt to the parent and the child ended up dead.

[Torsten]

santiago, are you saying that all kids should be removed from parents who have any traces of drugs in their system?

poppy seeds do not give strong positives, so as long as there are legal ways for opiates to end up in a persons system there also has to be a safeguard that innocent people are not punished.

If you don't have these safeguards then you also have no rights and I doubt you are advocating that. It doesn't take rocket science to show whether the opiate levels in a mother are high enough for her to be an immediate risk to her child or if there is enough time to do a more reliable test.

[synchromesh]

innocent until proven guilty isnt an option in child protection cases..........

they have the right to remove based only on suspicion.

this is the fundamental right and wrong of the system.

yes it is a draconion system and yes they should use better methods, but they dont..........in the vast majority of child protection cases the social workers have to work fast to remove the child from potential risk.

It isn't?

They do?

What do you think the potential risks in this "child protection case" were? Even if the mother was a drug addict, what dangers could have she posed to her newborn in that single day?

child protection officers do a very hard job...............they dont have 1 or 2 cases to deal with but often hundreds.....with many more potentially each day

No wonder they're so indifferent then...

"Someone was saying that 'Oh, we're CYS and we found something in your system,' and at that time I never even heard of it before. It means that we have to take custody of your child," Mort said.

Not to mention the hospital as well:

"We have initiated an investigation to compare our standards to other community and regional hospitals. And if necessary, we will advise our reference lab to critique their standards for consistency."

Also, I don't think a bar coded baby has much to do with this.

Use your imagination...

[santiago]

i went out with a girl for years in my 20's who was involved in high level social work so im not siding either way all im doing is giving my unbiased perspective on the above situation, personally no way at all do i think that every single parent who has drugs in their system should lose their kids.

i know how they work and the dirty tricks they use to keep children in protective custody and im aware they often get it wrong, breaking up couples and families and scarring children for life...........but im also aware they get it right more times than wrong and the way they see it is if they get it right 75% of the time they are doing more good than harm.

the poor people who are on the wrong end are subjected to opinionated social workers, the revolving door...which means they constantly rotate the main case worker so emotion is not a human factor, a vast legal team, voice and paper recordings of EVERYTHING....and quite often the final tactic they use even when they know the parent is capable is to use a to 18yo apprehension order.....which means when it is time to go to court they threat with the child in custody until 18, then to settle the matter you basically have to plead guilty even if your not and they reduce it to a 2 year apprehension order.

and you know what the workers making these decisions dont actually undergo drugs tests themselves

they should have used better techniques with the mother above, poor girl...thats why i said she really should take it to court, you gotta make these departments accountable......im def not on the social workers sides, but i do acnowledge they do one of the hardest jobs in the world and yes doing it you would really have to cut all emotion out of it and just look at the facts and potential risks.

on face value a 9 month pregnant woman with opiates in her system who has just given birth is a pretty serious problem.......even though it wasnt actually opiates. in the end and the article doesnt make any reference to any past child protection issues, there could be history.

[Sonny Jim]

Synchromesh

I get what you mean about the bar coded baby and I kinda take your point. I just think it goes too far because we are talking about a U.S state with harsh laws. IMO the whole thing was a big mistake. People who conduct the drug testing must know about the poppy seed false positive thing, there was even a Sienfeld episode about it and there is a way to determine if it was from seed on a bagel or what ever. I hope it is not to late for that i.e. urine or blood sample to old.

Like I said before, I just hope that she gets big $$$$$$$$ compensation. I hope she already has her baby back. Though I remember reading an experience report on erowid ( I think) about a woman in the U.S who lost her nursing job and I think was banned from working as a nurse because of a poppy seed false positive. The bad thing was that the report (from memory) was written a few month after the false positive and it still had not been resolved.

[ThunderIdeal]

the story states that she got her child back after 5 days

i appreciate your input santiago, but i want to clear one thing up. i'm no expert on child rearing but to me, when you say it's about the best interests of the child and not the mother, i would have thought that the relationship between mother and child directly pertains to the best interests of the child, and i would have thought that missing out those first five days would be a serious blow to that relationship.

[synchromesh]

Exactly. Nothing could be worse for a newborn and its mother than to be separated for those first few days.

Edited October 19, 2010 by synchromesh

[santiago]

your on the money thunderideal..........its extremely important for long term bonding those critical first few days, however the social worker weighs up risk vs non risk.........as they see it play safe with non risk and apprehend, unfortunately the child being born is a prime time for apprehensions.......mother in hospital not really able to fight back, under sedation, security of premise for a safer apprehension.........do u think they dont think of that option above kicking some security door down in balga 6 months later with police backup. all logistics isnt it.

[synchromesh]

“My fiance didn’t even get any time to bond with the baby. They came in and stole our child!”

Setting a chilling precedent and in a manner befitting the most tyrannical of regimes, the government seized a newborn baby girl today because the father has associated with the lawful, pro-peace, pro-constitution, anti-violence Oath Keepers. What makes this particularly scary is exactly that, that the ‘Oath Keepers’ is a peaceful, pro-rule of law organization which supports serving military, veterans, peace officers, and firefighters and reminds them of their oath to the Constitution of the United States in a direct and open manner.

This move is further proof of the radicalization of the government agents and their fear of the Constitution and the rule of law. Why else would they be going after peaceful law abiding citizens who have are not charged with a crime, and go to the extend of breaking apart the family bonds.

Peaceful Oath Keeper's Newborn Baby Seized at Hospital

Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of currently serving military, reserves, National Guard, veterans, Peace Officers, and Fire Fighters who will fulfill the Oath we swore, with the support of like minded citizens who take an Oath to stand with us, to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God. Our Oath is to the Constitution.

Oath Keepers Official Website

FBI bomb-sniffing dogs were at Concord Hospital on Friday after demonstrators gathered to protest a newborn being removed from her mother’s care by the state.

The hospital said there was no threat made, but it was taking precautions in part to reassure staff and patients. WMUR 9

That’s right, the FBI, with no threat or sign of danger, sent bomb sniffing dogs to the protest. The FBI sent a clear message. People that stand up for the rights of American citizens are now possible terrorists. This Nazi like tactic has been used hundreds of times. The goal is to get the local media to connect the protest to a bomb threat in order to scare citizens who would normally support the parents into keeping their mouths shut.

FBI Sends Bomb-Sniffing Dogs To Peaceful Protest Against State Kidnapping of Newborn

[bℓσωηG]

@ Synchromesh , looks to me as if they are trying to set a precedent over there, creating the very real threat of losing your kids even newborns at the slightest suspicion of being unlawful...Truley sickening. Our kids are not property, and i get the barcoded baby pic.

[FancyPants]

The worst thing is that the protocol for eliminating poppy seeds from drug tests has been known for more than 10 years. All you do is test for the ratio of oleamide to opiates and this establishes whether the opiates are from poppy seeds or otherwise. If they are going to use such draconian methods then they should at least get their science up to scratch.

 

IMO the fact that this particular test to differentiate between poppy seeds and opiate abuse wasn't used is what makes this case disgusting. They also could have ASKED the mother of use/abuse of opiates before just taking the baby away. There could've been legitimate use for opiates.

On the other hand, if the mother is abusing heroin/morphine etc and there's undeniable PROOF, and there's a chance the baby was born with opiate dependancy then IMO the baby should be removed from the probably incompentant mother before more damage is done.

I'm not saying all mothers who USE opiates or even in some cases abuse (which can be rectified by a genuinely caring mother willing to change her ways) should have their newborns taken away, but sometimes childcare workers have to take that chance before something irreversible happens to an innocent baby. There's plenty of cases where childcare workers haven't removed a child and it dies or becomes horribly mistreated - eg the case on the Central Coast NSW where the 9yr old girl wasted away to death from starvation because the parents were more concerned with their own drug issues. Or the case in the UK where a child was murdered either just before or after a childcare worker came to the home to review the case, but she left; too little too late.

[incognito]

child protection officers do a very hard job...............they dont have 1 or 2 cases to deal with but often hundreds.....with many more potentially each day, put yourself in a social workers shoes before castgating them, sure out of that hundred cases or so you might get it wrong once or twice but just think how you would feel if you gave the benifit of doubt to the parent and the child ended up dead

word. and childprotection workers get a bum wrap, all u see in the media is where docs has failed or fuked up. U never get to see the positive outcomes and kids that they have saved due to confidentiality and privacy policies.

I think theres more info needed in the news-story before one could draw a conclusion.

I mean proving positive to opiates in a drug test, and saying 'i ate a bagel' i mean what does that prove?

maybee the mother has a bad case history??

or maybee she really did just eat a bagel and came up positive.

but from what ive heard from professionals in the drug and alcohol field is that testing positive from eating bread or pastrys with poppy seeds is just plain horseshit. but hey they could be wrong as well i dunno.

I could never work in child protection, and thank fuck we have a chld protection system in place.

Edited October 20, 2010 by incognito

[Sonny Jim]

or maybee she really did just eat a bagel and came up positive.

but from what ive heard from professionals in the drug and alcohol field is that testing positive from eating bread or pastrys with poppy seeds is just plain horseshit. but hey they could be wrong as well i dunno.

 

Poppy seeds are literally coated with opiate alkaloids. I and many people here know this as an undisputed fact. These "professionals" you mention really should know better. In fact, there really are not that many different types of drugs "of abuse" that people are tested for. I don't think its to much for these "professionals" to be thoroughly across all of these drugs and all the of the things that can cause false positives. If its to much for these "professional" to memorize them all, they could at least have a handy chart or booklet, this way they might have a chance at doing their jobs a bit more professionally. If the story is true and she really did just eat some poppy seeds, then what happened to the mother and her new born was both unjust and completely avoidable.

Of course child protection services are necessary. I and I am sure many other people reading this thread have seen the f'ed up way many children are forced to live because of the way their nasty, psychotic, drug addicted etc parents live.

[incognito]

If the story is true and she really did just eat some poppy seeds, then what happened to the mother and her new born was both unjust and completely avoidable. word. i dunno, i know some junkies that are great parents as well. child protection is a grey and murkey area, kudos to anyone working in child protectio really, oftened they are damned if they do, damned if they dont, and absolutely slaughtered by media if they make an error.

i shouldnt have flapped my gums without checkin with the sources first. I shall do that and get back to this

I believe it went u would have to eat a lot more than what occur in bagels or in bread to register positive.

but anyhoo ill check and get back.

To take a child away JUST because of ONE positive drug test, especially a newborn, is cruel insanity.

[santiago]

im willing to bet there is a lot more to this case than the sensationalist media report briefly describes.

all the story says is child taken away from mother due to bagel, it doesnt mention history, it doesnt mention hospital records, it doesnt mention criminal convictions...........of course it makes a great story as far as the media goes but its simply today tonight style journalism.

what about some comments from the social workers or doctors or drug testers, it only shows one basic biased side to the story.

[incognito]

what he said^

[Sonny Jim]

I believe it went u would have to eat a lot more than what occur in bagels or in bread to register positive.

Yeah incognito, to me that makes sense if one wanted to get an opiate effect/high from the seeds. I don't want to go into particulars but to me it makes sense that a sprinkle or 10-20g (or less) of the seed could show up on a drug sensitive drug test that does not give the concentration of the drug in blood. Just a simple positive, negative result test, like a simple urine test.

[Sonny Jim]

I believe it went u would have to eat a lot more than what occur in bagels or in bread to register positive.

Yeah incognito, to me that makes sense if one wanted to get an opiate effect/high from the seeds. I don't want to go into particulars but to me it makes sense that a sprinkle or 10-20g (or less) of the seed could show up on a sensitive drug test that does not give the concentration of the drug in blood. Just a positive, negative result test, like a simple urine test.

Edited October 20, 2010 by Sonny Jim