Perverse child avocate

A statement made in an article linked by WorldNetDaily on Monday appalled me.

The article quoted

Children’s Rights Council spokesman David L. Levy as praising the storm trooper tactics ordered by Attorney General Janet Reno and carried out by Immigration and Naturalization Service agents in seizing 6-year-old Elian Gonzales from the home of his Miami relatives in the middle of the night on Easter weekend.

Levy not only approved of the tactics but also recommended the federal government use them more often when he said, “We need Janet Reno to go into a thousand homes this week. Elian is but the tip of the iceberg.”

‘Tip of the iceberg,’ eh? If you read between the lines of Mr. Levy’s statement, you would conclude: a) there are tons more kids “out there” who he believes are “at risk” and; b) every one of them should be taken from their families in the middle of the night by heavily armed government agents. And this guy calls himself a “child advocate?”

If you’re talking about using force to address a perceived “problem” in the short term, there is no doubt the federal government is an expert. Just ask the survivors of Waco or Ruby Ridge – what few of them are left — how “effective” government force can be.

Or ask thousands of other Americans who have had their homes invaded — even those who were completely innocent — by state and federal officials who are armed to the teeth and hell-bent on breaking in doors and windows in the middle of the night to feed their egos. They’ll all tell you the same thing: When it comes to brute force, nobody does it better than Uncle Sam and his state and local cousins.

When, however, you examine Mr. Levy’s statements a little more closely, you have to ask yourself: “After the doors are busted in and the perp is hauled away, what next?” Indeed.

Because you see, you Big Government advocate, there is always the “next step” to solving problems. And this is where the federal and state leviathans fall flat on their huge assets, especially in the issue of what is and is not best “For The Children.”

In the case of Elian Gonzales, he is receiving near-personal attention from US government masters, so he is the exception. What about the thousands of other children currently being held captive in government-subsidized homes, shelters and halfway houses? Who’s giving them the personal attention they need?

Nobody. Why? Because nobody can; there are too many to give that kind of attention to, and the federal and state “masters” who oversee these juvenile hellholes do not have the resources, training or ability to render that kind of care so desperately needed by a child.

Not only that but Uncle Sam has erected so many bureaucratic roadblocks, regulations and rules that prohibit fine, upstanding Americans from adopting these kids for their own. Elian is being used as a political pawn but these other kids will have to continue to deal with this bloated bureaucracy long after Elian has completed his mind-control regime implemented by dictator Fidel Castro.

Back in the days when Uncle Sam let local communities, churches and private organizations take care of the errant child problem, kids were better off. With few exceptions, private charities and organizations — which have no regular tax revenue gravy train to use as disposable income — had to make up for less funding with more personalized care. They didn’t always succeed, but such arrangements were far better than corralling kids into government protectorates where they were neither protected nor loved and cared for.

There is more to “caring” for a child than simply feeding him or her three square meals a day. There has to be nurturing; there has to be somebody there to answer questions about life; there has to be someone willing to spend time with the child and teach him or her what is right and what is wrong. All the things government neglects the most but advocates the most often.

Private organizations — especially those which were, at one time, operated en masse by churches — have people who volunteer to do these things. Volunteers who want to be near these kids and who want to help them and spend time with them are about a thousand times better than having these needs addressed by some overworked bureaucrat with one eye on his pension and the other on the time clock.

Smaller, private organizations are infinitely more qualified to handle the crisis of neglected children in this country than government-sponsored child warehouses.

But then again, Elian wasn’t being neglected, was he? Makes you wonder how many other kids really aren’t being “neglected” by parents whom the government says must be “relieved” of their parental duties — by force, if necessary.

So you see, it isn’t difficult to get a platoon of robo-cops to bust down a door to get a kid out of a house, Mr. Levy. The hard part comes after you have him.

And Uncle Sam has a dismal record of dealing with these kinds of long-term problems.