Immigrant Children Cry Out in Audio Recorded at Detention Center

[Dashinka 24,493]

20 minutes ago, bcking said:

Those are by themselves. I thought IDWAF was talking about children crossing the border with adults that weren't their family? Unaccompanied minors clearly aren't going to be placed with adults that they didn't show up with. That doesn't make any sense.

 

I'm not trying to be onery. I'll gladly get on board with your concerns if I say any evidence to suggest it is a significant issue.

 

They are simple numbers I'm looking for -

1. Total number of children crossing in a given period

2. Number of children crossing with an adult that isn't a family member in the same given period.

 

Obviously since number 2 requires time to investigate I'm not looking for 2018 data. 2015 would be fine.

 

 

It is not as simple as you think as there are simply two categories.  One is unaccompanied minors and the others is Family Unit.  The definition of a family unit is as follows:  *Note: (Family Unit represents the number of individuals (either a child under 18 years old, parent or legal guardian) apprehended with a family member by the U.S. Border Patrol.), so it is my understanding that the parent or legal guardian is verified by some means to determine this.  As to the unaccompanied minors, they may have been picked up with adults that are neither a relative or guardian.  The numbers are just not filtered enough.

 

It is what it is.

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Immigrant Children Cry Out in Audio Recorded at Detention Center

 

This is what I am seeing?

The topic that I was discussing with B&K...that you decided to enter by quoting me.

 

But don't worry, I see what you're doing.

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

It is not as simple as you think as there are simply two categories.  One is unaccompanied minors and the others is Family Unit.  The definition of a family unit is as follows:  *Note: (Family Unit represents the number of individuals (either a child under 18 years old, parent or legal guardian) apprehended with a family member by the U.S. Border Patrol.), so it is my understanding that the parent or legal guardian is verified by some means to determine this.  As to the unaccompanied minors, they may have been picked up with adults that are neither a relative or guardian.  The numbers are just not filtered enough.

 

It is what it is.

If a minor is just "picked up" with adults, I would assume they wouldn't be kept together unless they claimed to be a family unit.

 

I'd also imagine there would be a low threshold to be suspicious if the child says "that's not my daddy". Yes for the smallest infants that wouldn't work, but that would also weed out a lot.

 

Boiler, in his attempt to detail our conversation, brought up another interesting point. How safe do you think the "child detention centers" are when many "migrant children" are going to be 17 old boys.

 

Clearly whether they are with their "family" or in the "child center" there will be under some level of observation, but no observation is perfect. We can worry about the "false parents" doing something bad, but we can also worry about the teenagers all grouped together doing something bad as well. 

 

Both are probably issues. Which one would be worse/more prevelent? Hard to say.

 

It is a shame we don't have better numbers and demographics. This isn't a dig at anyone here, as you said "it is what it is". I'm sure there are many problems, but it's always hard to decide how to handle problems without understanding their magnitude.

[Boiler 45,486]

I would assume it would be similar to what happens in the UK.

 

The children (see photo) are placed in child care facilities with real children with the inevitable consequences.

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

I would assume it would be similar to what happens in the UK.

 

The children (see photo) are placed in child care facilities with real children with the inevitable consequences.

Oh I agree.

 

Therefore it would be likely better to keep them with their families rather than stick them together with a bunch of teenage "unaccompanied minors" under questionable and realistically limited observation.

 

Glad we're on the same page.

Edited June 21, 2018 by bcking

[Boiler 45,486]

Just now, bcking said:

Oh I agree.

 

Therefore it would be likely better to keep them with their families rather than stick them together with a bunch of teenage "unaccompanied minors" with questionable observation.

 

Glad we're on the same page.

How do you know they are with families, often Coyotes.

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Boiler said:

How do you know they are with families, often Coyotes.

Ah see now you are on our topic! Welcome!

 

How do you know they are not? Do you have any estimate of what percentage of children come with their own families versus people claiming to be their families?

 

Also - once captured there is a high likelihood of speaking age children being able to corroborate the relationship quite quickly. It would only take a single doubt to question the relationship.

 

It boils down to two things:

 

1. What assumption do we want to make about family units? Do we assume they are families unless there is any suspicious reason not to, or do we assume they are all child smugglers? 

-- In the absence of any concrete data on the percentage of child smugglers relative to overall child migration I would assume families. They will still be detained and monitored.

 

2. What is safer? Putting all children together and "monitoring them", or putting children with the people claiming to be their parents (many of which are) and monitoring them?

-- teenage boys, when placed into large groups, are particularly dangerous. But again I'd like to see some estimation of the risk in both options.

 

Overall people are just pulling potential concerns out of hats, with no measure for how big an issue each one really is. They are all legitimate concerns, but some may be more serious than others.

[Dashinka 24,493]

11 minutes ago, bcking said:

Oh I agree.

 

Therefore it would be likely better to keep them with their families rather than stick them together with a bunch of teenage "unaccompanied minors" under questionable and realistically limited observation.

 

Glad we're on the same page.

That is what really opens up the questions overall relative to anyone that commits a crime or jailable offense with a child present, OUIL for example.  Should the child be kept with the jailed adult if it can be ascertained they are an immediate relative, or turned over to CPS if no other immediate relative can be found?

Edited June 21, 2018 by Bill & Katya

[Boiler 45,486]

Just now, bcking said:

Ah see now you are on our topic! Welcome!

 

How do you know they are not? Do you have any estimate of what percentage of children come with their own families versus people claiming to be their families?

 

Also - once captured there is a high likelihood of speaking age children being able to corroborate the relationship quite quickly. It would only take a single doubt to question the relationship.

 

It boils down to two things:

 

1. What assumption do we want to make about family units? Do we assume they are families unless there is any suspicious reason not to, or do we assume they are all child smugglers? 

-- In the absence of any concrete data on the percentage of child smugglers relative to overall child migration I would assume families. They will still be detained and monitored.

 

2. What is safer? Putting all children together and "monitoring them", or putting children with the people claiming to be their parents (many of which are) and monitoring them?

-- teenage boys, when placed into large groups, are particularly dangerous. But again I'd like to see some estimation of the risk in both options.

 

Overall people are just pulling potential concerns out of hats, with no measure for how big an issue each one really is. They are all legitimate concerns, but some may be more serious than others.

Safest situation is of course to involve their Embassy and arrange a speedy return to where they can be properly cared for.

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

That is what really opens up the questions overall relative to anyone that commits a crime or jailable offense with a child present, OUIL for example.  Should the child be kept with the jailed adult if it can be ascertained it is an immediate relative, or turned over to CPS if no other immediate relative can be found?

Well CPS doesn't have large detention centers with hundreds of children all in one place. The vast majority of the time the child is placed with family, or a friend, or even a neighbor that the child is familiar with. If that doesn't work the next best option is a foster family. Only after those are exhausted do they turn to group homes. And you're right - those aren't great places for children. But that is only done when every attempt to keep the children together with family is tried. It isn't the first step in the process.

 

4 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Safest situation is of course to involve their Embassy and arrange a speedy return to where they can be properly cared for.

Absolutely agree. At best let's say that takes 48 hours. What do we do until then?

 

You have a six year old and a couple "claiming" to be her parents. She says "mommy" and "daddy" and responds appropriately to them. I'd have a hard time saying "to be safe I'm going to assume these aren't your real parents, and instead place you in this facility with other children of varying ages".

[Boiler 45,486]

7 minutes ago, bcking said:

Well CPS doesn't have large detention centers with hundreds of children all in one place. The vast majority of the time the child is placed with family, or a friend, or even a neighbor that the child is familiar with. If that doesn't work the next best option is a foster family. Only after those are exhausted do they turn to group homes. And you're right - those aren't great places for children. But that is only done when every attempt to keep the children together with family is tried. It isn't the first step in the process.

 

Absolutely agree. At best let's say that takes 48 hours. What do we do until then?

 

You have a six year old and a couple "claiming" to be her parents. She says "mommy" and "daddy" and responds appropriately to them. I'd have a hard time saying "to be safe I'm going to assume these aren't your real parents, and instead place you in this facility with other children of varying ages".

 I look at it as what would we expect from any other country, if a US child was trafficked then I would hope the other Government would keep the child secure until the child could be repatriated and then CPS would deal with the situation.

 

Should be a matter of hours not days.

[bcking 3,157]

5 minutes ago, Boiler said:

 I look at it as what would we expect from any other country, if a US child was trafficked then I would hope the other Government would keep the child secure until the child could be repatriated and then CPS would deal with the situation.

 

Should be a matter of hours not days.

You have to know the child is being trafficked. I don't think it's appropriate to assume all children are being trafficked until proven otherwise. If the child is crying for their parents, and the parents are reaching for their child...I couldn't do the job of pulling them apart and saying "Look we know you're upset, but we just have to assume that you are an evil child trafficker until you prove to us otherwise. We know it happens, we don't exactly know how often it happens, but because it happens at least once we just gotta assume you are one of them".

 

I'm not that kind of "human".

Edited June 21, 2018 by bcking

[Umka36 781]

Please ignore my ignorance in all this, but is it true that families who wait in line at the border crossing in order to enter the US and file an asylum as kept together?

 

And the only folks who are actually running into trouble are the families who just jump the border and then asking for asylum? If that's the case, aren't they just "jumping" the line while others painfully wait at the border crossing for their turn?

[Randyandyuni 2,682]

4 minutes ago, Umka36 said:

Please ignore my ignorance in all this, but is it true that families who wait in line at the border crossing in order to enter the US and file an asylum as kept together?

 

And the only folks who are actually running into trouble are the families who just jump the border and then asking for asylum? If that's the case, aren't they just "jumping" the line while others painfully wait at the border crossing for their turn?

they are just anticipating that the CBP will expedite their asylum request, they all have remarkably perfect reasons for violating the sovereignty of the United States, this isn't really a criminal activity, just the result of a policy by an orange lunatic gone wrong, it will be corrected when Soros buys enough votes to run the government

[Dashinka 24,493]

38 minutes ago, Umka36 said:

Please ignore my ignorance in all this, but is it true that families who wait in line at the border crossing in order to enter the US and file an asylum as kept together?

 

And the only folks who are actually running into trouble are the families who just jump the border and then asking for asylum? If that's the case, aren't they just "jumping" the line while others painfully wait at the border crossing for their turn?

That is my understanding.  Of course, the line at CBP moves slow, and some decide to pay helpers to get across illegally.  That is really the big change recently that they are detaining illegal border crossers for prosecution and this is when the children are being separated if present.