Trump says he won't sign legislation banning separation of children from parents

[The Barbarian]

things like dragging them through violence-torn mexico and illegally crossing the border in the middle of the night?

According to the attachment theory, developed in 1958 by John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, young children’s sense of security is rooted in their relationships with caregivers. That in turn shapes their social, cognitive, and emotional regulation skills. Separating a child from the caregiver puts the child’s long-term development at risk.

“The effect is catastrophic,” Charles Nelson, a pediatrics professor at Harvard Medical School, told the Washington Post. “There’s so much research on this that if people paid attention at all to the science, they would never do this.”

It's almost as though someone did some research into the worst possible thing they could to to kids, to get even with their parents for applying for asylum.

As you know, that was the plan, separating families to discourage asylum applications.

 

[ok doser]

Barbie claims:

Adversity in general is bad for kids. Things like poverty, racism, abuse, exposure to violence abuse ...

dozer asks:

things like dragging them through violence-torn mexico and illegally crossing the border in the middle of the night?

crickets

how about it?

is dragging children through violence-torn mexico and illegally crossing the border in the middle of the night bad for kids?

 

[The Barbarian]

As you know,these parents were fleeing violence-prone places, trying to get asylum in America. This is why Trump's people dreamed up something even worse to do to them to discourage them from applying for asymlum.

young children’s sense of security is rooted in their relationships with caregivers. That in turn shapes their social, cognitive, and emotional regulation skills. Separating a child from the caregiver puts the child’s long-term development at risk.

“The effect is catastrophic,” Charles Nelson, a pediatrics professor at Harvard Medical School, told the Washington Post. “There’s so much research on this that if people paid attention at all to the science, they would never do this.”

It's almost as though someone did some research into the worst possible thing they could to to kids, to get even with their parents for applying for asylum.

As you know, that was the plan, separating families to discourage asylum applications.

 

[Sherman]

​How about legal immigration? The whole illegal activity they are doing isn't good for the kids. Granted legal immigration should be more accessible.

 

[Rusha]

As you know,these parents were fleeing violence-prone places, trying to get asylum in America.

This is what any *loving* parent would do to protect their child. They made the mistake of not understanding that the leadership in the USA has not valued (all) children since January 2017.

Insofar as *legal* immigration ... that won't happen until there is a majority of Dems in the house because the majority of the GOP doesn't want them here.

 

[ok doser]

As you know,these parents were fleeing violence-prone places....

all of them?


and you still haven't answered my question:

is dragging children through violence-torn mexico and illegally crossing the border in the middle of the night bad for kids?

 

[ok doser]

The whole illegal activity they are doing isn't good for the kids.

seems intuitive, doesn't it?

but you'll never get barbie to admit it

 

[ok doser]

... the leadership in the USA has not valued (all) children since January 2017.

shouldn't the leadership of a country place its emphasis on the children of its own citizens and those of immigrant parents who follow the legal process?

 

[Sherman]

I am not keen on separating the kids from their parents if it is true. Just send the whole family back where they came from. You have the issue of 'anchor' babies. Just send the entire family back to its home country or they can begin the process of legal immigration if they want to be here.

 

[Rusha]

It's almost as though someone did some research into the worst possible thing they could to to kids, to get even with their parents for applying for asylum.

As you know, that was the plan, separating families to discourage asylum applications.

Well, the biggest vulnerability every decent parent has is the love for their children. I would expect a parent to flee their home with their children were it to catch on fire. Outside of the uncertainly of when the fire would spark, this is no different.

 

[ok doser]

I am not keen on separating the kids from their parents if it is true. Just send the whole family back where they came from. You have the issue of 'anchor' babies. Just send the entire family back to its home country or they can begin the process of legal immigration if they want to be here.

many (most?) have no identification - mexico doesn't want them back, guatemala doesn't want them back, etc


that's why mexico tries to control its border to the south


we need a wall

 

[lifeisgood]

When is the news media going to show any outrage about VETERANS being homeless? I was told by a person working with homeless veterans that there are almost 10,000 homeless veterans in my state alone. WE as a COUNTRY should be ashamed to have one veteran homeless.

Where is the news media outrage about homeless children?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Yesteday's NBC news went far and wide with its "Trump backtracking" related to signing an executive order, but nowhere in almost 15 minutes of coverage, in a 30 minute segment, was mention made of the Flores consent decree from 1997 that underlies a great many of the issues related to separating children from parents attempting to illegally immigrate to the U.S.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/...d-know-about-family-separation-at-the-border/

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/20/17484...ation-flores-settlement-agreement-immigration

https://www.vox.com/2014/8/6/5971003/families-together-detention-separate-ice

The fact that the executive order may be litigated in favor of Flores was also not mentioned in the newscast. Nor was any mention of how badly things went with Obama when bumping up against Flores in 2014.

Maybe it is just me, but as a long-time NBC newscast watcher, I have yet to see a segment each day since Jan 1 that did not mention something about Trump. Daily. Day after day. When he is mentioned in a favorable light, which has actually happened on a very few occasions, the mention is begrudgingly proffered by Lester Holt or Richard "war monger" Engel or Chuck "look!" Todd.

My kingdom for a balanced newscast of all the facts versus one that subliminally attempts to point all the issues at one person. Does such a venue actually exist? If so, please point me to it. I am not looking for Trump gushing broadcasts, nor the opposite, just what used to be called news: newly received or noteworthy information, especially about recent or important events.

AMR

 

[The Barbarian]

I am not keen on separating the kids from their parents if it is true.

Apparently, it's going to end now. Thank God. And thank everyone, including many republicans who pressured the administration to end this abuse.

Just send the whole family back where they came from.

At least, they'd be no worse off than before. Separating children from parents is intrinsically evil. To do it as a policy to discourage parents from applying for asylum is beyond evil. The prospects for a young girl in some places in Central America are so grim that parents were willing to face almost anything to get them out.

You have the issue of 'anchor' babies.

Yes. How big a problem that is, I don't know. (Barbarian checks)

It's substantial, but declining:
About 295,000 babies were born to unauthorized-immigrant parents in 2013, making up 8% of the 3.9 million U.S. births that year, according to a new, preliminary Pew Research Center estimate based on the latest available federal government data. This was a decline from a peak of 370,000 in 2007.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...n-in-u-s-to-unauthorized-immigrants-declines/

Just send the entire family back to its home country or they can begin the process of legal immigration if they want to be here.

The law properly distinguishes between illegal immigrants and those seeking asylum. The former should be removed with families intact. The latter should be processed and a determination made as to the need for asylum.

Our immigration policy is broken. When full enforcement of the law would result in damage to our economy, we need to rethink it. What's of great concern now, is the Obama policy of seeking out and deporting dangerous criminals first, has been abandoned, in favor of getting the easy targets, who aren't dangerous, but more easily found.

That endangers every American.

The first step would be to do an assessment of the economic and social effects of having so many people here illegally. To be credible, a bipartisan study should be made, and our immigration policy should be designed to address those findings.

I'm sure that such a rational approach would enrage the extremists on the right and on the left. So I'm not optimistic about that happening.

 

[eider]

.......................... There are already so many infringements of the right of the people to keep and bear arms, that the only real champions of the essential or inalienable right would be those who are trying to repeal laws, not add new ones.

You could repeal the machine-gun ban legislation!
Everybody could buy a machine gun then...... Just think how many burglars an honest decent home-owner could shoot at one time with those.... ?

Yeah........ I think I see that.....

 

[annabenedetti]

 

[annabenedetti]

 

[annabenedetti]

 

[Idolater]

You could repeal the machine-gun ban legislation!

That's the NFA, 1934. Before that, people in America anyway could order machine guns through the mail. They cost I want to say about 45 dollars if memory serves, for a Thompson. 'Could be wrong on the cost, but not on mail order availability.

Everybody could buy a machine gun then...... Just think how many burglars an honest decent home-owner could shoot at one time with those.... ?

Or bears or mountain lions, or rapists and murderers, kamikaze murderers, mass shooting murderers, all sorts of good targets out there, if you really think about it.

Yeah........ I think I see that.....

The right of LGBT people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The right of black people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The right of ex-con people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
&c.

 

[The Barbarian]

This will be Trump's legacy. Maybe even more than Putin and Stormy Daniels.