Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
aflac duck

Parents lose custody of Nazi-named children

131 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

lordstanley

I thought that they would have a better reason then just the childrens names. I wonder if the parents were teaching the kids the way of *white power* I guess that was probably it. Maybe they were saying stuff in school to the other kids and that was the last straw or something along those lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
__Kratos__

UPDATE: Toddler called Adolf Hitler, sisters not removed from home because of Nazi names

A New Jersey Department of Youth and Family Services spokeswoman says that the agency would not remove children from a home because of their names.

DYFS made the statement today after The Express-Times reported Tuesday that the state had taken Adolf Hitler Campbell, 3, and his younger sisters, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie, from their parent's Holland Township, Hunterdon County home.

"Just to be clear, removal of a child from a family is only done when there's an imminent danger to a child and that wouldn't include the child's name alone," spokeswoman Kate Bernyk said. "We wouldn't remove a child based on their name."

lehighvalleylive.com visitors and others have speculated that the children were taken from their parents custody because of their names, which pay homage to Nazism.

More of the article here: Link

---------------------------------------------------------------

It's not illegal to teach your kids nazism. Stupid, yes.

Edited by __Kratos__

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tooth_and_Claw

Name change?

Me Thinks Yes! :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr.United_Nations

Ah apparntley the parents chose those names, because no one else wanted them.

OF COURSE NO ONE ELSE WANTED THEM!.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Finsup22
UPDATE: Toddler called Adolf Hitler, sisters not removed from home because of Nazi names

A New Jersey Department of Youth and Family Services spokeswoman says that the agency would not remove children from a home because of their names.

DYFS made the statement today after The Express-Times reported Tuesday that the state had taken Adolf Hitler Campbell, 3, and his younger sisters, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie, from their parent's Holland Township, Hunterdon County home.

"Just to be clear, removal of a child from a family is only done when there's an imminent danger to a child and that wouldn't include the child's name alone," spokeswoman Kate Bernyk said. "We wouldn't remove a child based on their name."

lehighvalleylive.com visitors and others have speculated that the children were taken from their parents custody because of their names, which pay homage to Nazism.

More of the article here: Link

---------------------------------------------------------------

It's not illegal to teach your kids nazism. Stupid, yes.

HA! I was right for once. :lol:

I had a feeling that was the isssue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sarah snow
Ah apparntley the parents chose those names, because no one else wanted them.

OF COURSE NO ONE ELSE WANTED THEM!.

Unreal isn't it? Typical 'defence' for the terminally moronic. Finally the answer as to who was at the back of the queue when God gave out brains/common sense. Mr & Mrs Campbell methinks

:hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jesspy

im guessing there was nazi paraphernalia around the home or something I belive this happened in holland and i believe its against the law to have anything relating to nazisim in your house or on your person

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vampwitchenstein
im guessing there was nazi paraphernalia around the home or something I belive this happened in holland and i believe its against the law to have anything relating to nazisim in your house or on your person

Holland Township, NEW JERSEY, USA.

Typical American White Trash.

I can call them that because I too, am Typical American White Trash.

I'm just not a white supremacist or Aryan whatnot idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MissMelsWell
im guessing there was nazi paraphernalia around the home or something I belive this happened in holland and i believe its against the law to have anything relating to nazisim in your house or on your person

Naw, this was in the United States, New Jersey I believe. It's not illegal to have Nazi stuff here, in fact, it's quite legal. I'm guessing that the children were removed because it was discoverd that there was some suspicion of some sort of neglect or abuse going on in the home. Dumb names and Nazi or white supremicist ideals don't give social services the right to remove kids from homes. Illegal activity (drugs, illegal guns, etc...) and or physical harm to the kids could get them pulled. If I had to make a wild guess, I'm going with illegal guns... just a guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Karlis
If the parents are stupid enough to give the children nazi names, and all of the problems that will go along with that; what else are they doing?

Idiots. Of course to be that big a fan of Hitler, you cant really be that sharp to begin with, so...probably best off if they aren't burdened with the trouble of breathing, walking, and raising kids at the same time.

On the other hand, the US of A still is the Land of the Free, correct? Anyone care to take this point a step or two further?

Karlis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
newbloodmoon

ok so granted those weren't the greatest names for their children, but to take the kids away because of it? I think that is absolutely ridiculous IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
atom286
Ah apparntley the parents chose those names, because no one else wanted them.

OF COURSE NO ONE ELSE WANTED THEM!.

If I name my kid Tiberious will the social come and take him away?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Karlis
ok so granted those weren't the greatest names for their children, but to take the kids away because of it? I think that is absolutely ridiculous IMO.
Ridiculous maybe, but more to the point -- how much arbitrary power are some civil servants able to exercise? In this case it seems that someone in Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) has used the process of the law in virtually kidnapping children. Some may say I am overstating the case, but am I?

Here is a short report from foxnews regarding this case:

Adolf Hitler Campbell and his sisters, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell, were taken from their Holland Township, N.J., home on Friday by the state's Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS), Sgt. John Harris of the Holland Township Police Department told FOXNews.com.

Their father, Heath Campbell, is expected in court Thursday in Flemington, N.J., in connection with the case.

Kate Bernyk, a spokeswoman for the DYFS, said confidentiality laws barred her from commenting on the case or even confirming that the Campbell children were involved.

"DYFS has their reasons and they normally don’t release any information, so we kind of have to go on faith with them," Harris said. Police were not told what the agency was investigating.

"I’ve dealt with the family for years and as far as the children are concerned, I have never had any reports of any abuse with the children," Harris said. "As far as I know, he’s always been very good with the children." [Note: Sgt. Harris is a senior local Police Officer.]

Speaking generally, Bernyk said the state's "decision to remove a child is based on the safety and well being of the child and the risk to that child, and that decision is made in conjunction with the courts and the county family court judge."

The Campbells made national news last month when a ShopRite supermarket refused to sell them a birthday cake with Adolf Hitler's name on it. The story generated a slew of angry Internet chatter.

Forensic psychologist N.G. Berrill said naming a boy Hitler could be considered child abuse. ... It is abuse."

Story link

It seems the parents have no "black marks" against them, but a civil servant from the Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) reads about the birthday cake incident; takes personal offense against this and obtains a court order to kidnap the children. The next step will be for the father to appear in Closed Court to face unknown charges.

What are the odds the father will be found guilty on no more evidence than the opinion of a psychologist, that naming their son Hitler is child abuse?

Karlis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Karlis
If I name my kid Tiberious will the social come and take him away?
Well Atom, if you happen to live under the jurisdiction of the Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS), then the answer may well appear to be, "Yes".

Karlis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
atom286
On the other hand, the US of A still is the Land of the Free, correct? Anyone care to take this point a step or two further?

Karlis

Well Freedom of speech is one of the foundations of Democracy.

As such it is peoples Democratic right to be Nazis, Communists, or anything else they choose. However when it starts causing harm to people then the line needs to be drawn.

Naming your kid after the Fuhrer is going to mean it gets lots of verbal and probably physical abuse too. This kid deserves to grow up into a happy productive citizen so something does need to be done about his name.

I think placing him into care is the wrong way to go as this itself will harm the child. Simply making the parent rename the kid would be enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Karlis

Friday, January 16, 2009

FLEMINGTON, N.J. — A family court hearing for the parents of three New Jersey children with Nazi-inspired names has been postponed.

Heath and Deborah Campbell were scheduled to appear in court in Hunterdon County on Thursday.

A spokeswoman for the state Division of Youth and Family Services says the state would not remove children from a home simply because of their names.

No date was released for a new hearing. Family court proceedings are not open to the public.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,480169,00.html

So the hearing has been postponed. If it is correct that "the state would not remove children from a home simply because of their names," -- could the DYFS be desperately searching for some charge/s to lay against the parents, "if" one of their civil servants originally had no other case against the parents than their naming the children inappropriately?

This could end up being an interesting case. Just a thought.

Karlis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Karlis
That may not be the whole story. I doubt it is...
You realise that you would have just disqualified yourself from jury duty, if called to serve on one? B)

What do you now say the odds are that the only reason the kids were officially kidnapped was because of the way some civil servant viewed the birthday cake incident?

Karlis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MissMelsWell
You realise that you would have just disqualified yourself from jury duty, if called to serve on one? B)

What do you now say the odds are that the only reason the kids were officially kidnapped was because of the way some civil servant viewed the birthday cake incident?

Karlis

That's actually not true. There's always more to the story than is reported. I think the same thing Fluffybunny does, and it would not disqualify us from jury duty in this country. You have to pledge to listen to the evidence and make a decision about that evidence. Just thinking there's probably more to the story doesn't disqualify you.

I'll never serve on a jury though, so it doesn't matter what I think... My religion doesn't specifically bar me from serving or testifying, but I have an issue with taking any kind of oath for religious reasons which are accomdated for by law. I also have a tendency to believe that everyone has a hand in what comes to them; I don't believe that anyone is entirely innocent of anything, or entirely guilty. No attorney would select me for a jury. LOL, I've been called for Jury Duty 5 times. haha, three times I wasn't in the country, the other two times I was excused after the first round of questions. It's not that I don't want to serve, it's simply that I'm not suitable for it.

There HAS to be more to the story.. it's unlikely that their names are what got them removed from there parents. Social Services has to have some sort of evidence of physical abuse, or illegal activity in the home to remove children from their biological parents. The evidence might be hazy, and it could be that there is nothing going on, but on the heels of the Texas Polygamist case, Social Services is very careful about these high profile cases and removing the children without good evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Karlis
That's actually not true. There's always more to the story than is reported. I think the same thing Fluffybunny does, and it would not disqualify us from jury duty in this country. You have to pledge to listen to the evidence and make a decision about that evidence. Just thinking there's probably more to the story doesn't disqualify you.

I'll never serve on a jury though, so it doesn't matter what I think... My religion doesn't specifically bar me from serving or testifying, but I have an issue with taking any kind of oath for religious reasons which are accomdated for by law. I also have a tendency to believe that everyone has a hand in what comes to them; I don't believe that anyone is entirely innocent of anything, or entirely guilty. No attorney would select me for a jury. LOL, I've been called for Jury Duty 5 times. haha, three times I wasn't in the country, the other two times I was excused after the first round of questions. It's not that I don't want to serve, it's simply that I'm not suitable for it.

There HAS to be more to the story.. it's unlikely that their names are what got them removed from there parents. Social Services has to have some sort of evidence of physical abuse, or illegal activity in the home to remove children from their biological parents. The evidence might be hazy, and it could be that there is nothing going on, but on the heels of the Texas Polygamist case, Social Services is very careful about these high profile cases and removing the children without good evidence.

On the other hand, the birthday cake incident just "may be" (???) the sole reason for the "official kidnapping". I guess only time will tell. I have their names in "Google search" daily news reports. I'm looking forward as to how all this develops.

BTW, anyone who does not wish to swear on the Bible in any court can simpl "affirm" that the evidence that they will give is the truth; same applies for jury duty.

Cheers,

Karlis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldTimeRadio
I wonder if the parents were teaching the kids the way of *white power* I guess that was probably it.

So raising one's children is not illegal and is protected by the First Amendment.

Evil, undoubtedly - illegal, no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
goalienan

DYFS is always under pressure here in Jersey, mostly for not doing their job right, so I agree that there has to be more to this story, other than being removed because of the kids names. They were also taken from the house without incident. Don't think I would be to calm about that..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fluffybunny
You realise that you would have just disqualified yourself from jury duty, if called to serve on one? B)

What do you now say the odds are that the only reason the kids were officially kidnapped was because of the way some civil servant viewed the birthday cake incident?

Karlis

I am a foster parent, and am often able to get the full story when the official news story cannot be let out for the fact that charges are pending. I am not talking about this case, but cases we deal with in general.

In a case like this, the parents dubious actions caught the eye of the CPS workers, which by all rights means that they should look to see if the children were indeed in a safe environment. If the parents were stupid enough to name their kids nazi names, what other kinds of stupid things are they doing? It is enough to warrant checking. A simple check of the house might of been enough to say that they lived in an environment that was not safe for the kids.

I see time and time again stories on tv where the entire story cannot be released for legal reasons. You may see some point in the furure where the parents are convicted and the evidence can be legally talked about by the CPS workers, whether they choose to or not, who knows, but the general public isnt going to hear the whole story...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Karlis

Mystery Surrounds Removal of Young 'Adolf Hitler' and Nazi-Named Sisters

Friday, January 16, 2009

Exactly why the state of New Jersey removed 3-year-old Adolf Hitler Campbell and his two younger sisters from their parents' home last week remains a mystery.

A state official was adamant Friday that a child would never be removed from his parents based solely on his name. But a First Amendment expert said that the boy's name might have had something to do with it.

… a name like Adolf Hitler could have contributed to their removal, said Rod Smolla, dean of the Washington and Lee Law School.

"I doubt that the name alone would be enough to trump the First Amendment interests that the parents have, but if it were coupled with other things, it could be a factor that tells us that society has a legitimate reason to intervene with regard to the children," Smolla said.

… "The burden would be on the government to say that to name your child after Adolf Hitler places such a stigma on the child and would be so damaging to the child’s future in society that the government would have a right to intervene and prevent that name from being used," Smolla said.

"I’ve never heard of such a case, but I could see the argument."

LINK

Kate Bernyk, a spokeswoman for New Jersey's Division of Youth and Family Services, wants us to know it was not about the names. Or at least, it wasn't just about the names. … it was because of "an imminent danger," Bernyk explained to the Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania, Express-Times, "and that wouldn't include the child's name alone." Which suggests that the children's Nazi-themed names did have something to do with their removal from the custody of their parents, …

What other factors might have played a role in the state's decision? Because of confidentiality rules, the state isn't saying. But I'm guessing the Campbells' decorating taste (heavy on the swastikas) did not help their case. Their white supremacist — excuse me, separatist — ideology probably also did not endear them to the social workers. And then there is the Campbells' avowed obliviousness to the consequences of using their children as billboards for their ideology.

But does any of this rise to the level of child abuse?

LINK

For the moment, grant me the assumption that these children are not being physically abused. All the available evidence suggests that they are not being abused. If they were removed because of concerns about the parents' beliefs and political activities they are involved in that have no direct threat to the kids' safety, then this case gets very dicey.

The most obvious concern is where one draws the line. Once one says that parental beliefs can be a cause for child removal, how in heaven's name do we determine which beliefs are okay and which are not? The slippery slope here is very, very slick and leads to a very bad place.

But there's also a more subtle concern. Suppose the parents are raving neo-Nazis who are taking their kids to meetings and the like. Suppose they are teaching them to hate Jews and blacks etc. But suppose that the kids' physical and emotional needs are being minimally cared for. We might all agree that this is a terrible way to grow up, but is it worse for the kids than becoming wards of the state and shuffling around the foster care system until they are 18? I would be prepared to argue that staying in that home is the lesser of two evils here.

Family policy decisions are no different from any other policy decision: utopia is not an option. We are always engaged in comparative institutional analysis of imperfect options. The Fallacy of the Ipso Facto Leap applies here too. We might deplore what these parents believe and how they are raising their kids, but it's not clear that the state's solution is automatically better. Our rightful sympathy for children in a situation they didn't consent to doesn't change that.

LINK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldTimeRadio

There seem to be upwards of 10,000 Neo-Nazis in the United States. Many of them have children. Most of them likely have a swastika or a photograph of Adolf Hitler on tghe wall.

But the various states aren't taking their children away. (Whether they should or not.)

What's the difference here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldTimeRadio
In a case like this, the parents dubious actions caught the eye of the CPS workers, which by all rights means that they should look to see if the children were indeed in a safe environment. If the parents were stupid enough to name their kids nazi names, what other kinds of stupid things are they doing? It is enough to warrant checking.

Is it? That's the question, and you may be right. But does the CPS have the right to investigate parents' legal actions?

Don't misunderstand me. I regard what the parents did as evil. But being evil is NOT against the Law. We have Law courts in this country. We don't have Moral courts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.