The House Children and Youth and Judiciary committees held a joint hearing last week to review the recommendations outlined in the report offered by the Task Force on Child Protection, says State Rep. Jim Cox (R-129). The task force, established in December 2011, was charged with conducting a comprehensive review of the laws and procedures relating to the health and safety of children.
Among the top recommendations made by the task force are clarifying and furthering the definition of child abuse in the state’s child protection law. Currently, child abuse is defined differently in criminal law than in civil protection matters handled by Children and Youth caseworkers. As a result, different thresholds must be met for action by counties and/or law enforcement.
The report also recommended adding more professionals to the list of mandated reporters with a required training element and implementing more child advocacy centers (CACs), which use a multi-disciplinary approach to investigate, prosecute and treat victims of child abuse.
Both committees will hold additional informational meetings and voting meetings in February and March to further their work on the task force recommendations.
I am against child abuse (though I’ve heard some GOP members float the idea of abortion being child abuse, and that’s just garbage.) But while you’re on the GOP passing and blocking bills…….why don’t you talk about them blocking the Violence Against Women Act for the FIRST time in over TWENTY years? And yes, it was the Republicans who blocked it. Now sexual offenders don’t have to be investigated or prosecuted if cops don’t want to. Why didn’t they pass that? What makes them think we (women) don’t need that?
The Violence Aganst Women Act — not that it has anything to do with the subject at hand.
Note that it was signed into existence in 1994 by Bill Clinton, which is what one would call irony.
Further note that the objections to the reauthorization stem from issues relating to acceptance of illegal immigration being sneaked into the bill and constitutional issues relating to the rights of people on Indian reservations.
And why would some think women don’t need it? Being as how women are now subject to being ordered into combat against their will, it does seem kind of pointless.
And why do you think the police no longer will investigate sexual offenders? Granted they didn’t do it with Clinton but that was when the bill was in effect.
Actually Clinton made things a lot better – there was a surplus under him – Bush not only spent that, but got us into debt.
Anyways, the Violence Against Women Act makes sure that sexual offenses are investigated. Without, authorities don’t have to do shit.
And women aren’t being forced into anything. Women will being joining the military because they want to. Like I said in my pervious comment, which you refused to post, women [and gays] are free to serve our country if they want. Nobody is forcing them to. We DO NOT have a draft. I have NO idea where you’re getting that idea. You also never served our country, so I don’t know why you think you should be allowed to regulate it.
One more thing: which one of us has the vagina here?