Update and Question re: supervised visitation

[stealth2]

Welcome to the FreeAdvice bandwagon, where people jump on just because they can. And some, because the opportunity to kick someone is just too tempting to resist.

It's not a bandwagon, CJane. Some of us have been discussing this offline for quite a while.

 

[MichaCA]

welcome to the freeadvice bandwagon, where people jump on just because they can. And some, because the opportunity to kick someone is just too tempting to resist.

Also, i hate that whole "didn't you know him/her better before you slept with him?"

i'm sure those of us who were with someone long term and who ended up eventually abusing the children or punching us in the face, or leaving us tied to a chair for hours on end while they went to a bar with their friends thought that we knew the person well enough to know they wouldn't do that.

I'm sure lacy peterson thought she knew scott well enough to know he wouldn't kill her while she was pregnant. Or that at the beginning nicole never once thought that oj would slit her throat in the middle of the night.

It's funny too that if mom was here trying to prove that dad's a psychotic child abuser (which, by the way, she's not done), the very first thing anyone would ask her is why she didn't take kiddo to the doctor, why she didn't go to the er, why she didn't make sure a case was filed with cps.

thank you!!!!

 

[mistoffolees]

In IC's defense:

Here is my issue with you, IC. The above is what you wrote yesterday. 99% healed. Yet you describe the injuries as:



Second degree burns. split an full thickness burns. You first posted about this on 3/25, roughly 2 weeks ago. I had a patient, a 3 year old who had pulled on a plug and a pot of hot coffee spilled over her chest and arms. deep second degree burns, with no "external skin" left. She was in the hospital for 3 months. Had to have skin grafts.

As I'm sure you know (as an RN), there are different degrees of damage even within the same category. Not all 2nd degree burns are the same. Some 2nd degree burns are superficial and some are deep (with a wide range even within those categories).

Various online sources say that 2nd degree burns take "up to 3 weeks" to heal, so being mostly healed in 2.5 weeks is not necessarily out of line.

There's also the matter of size. Perhaps only 2% of the area had a 2nd degree burn and 98% was milder. If the 2nd degree portion was only 50% healed, the total would be 99% healed - as OP says.


Now, I am also just a bit suspicious, but no more than I am of many of the people posting here. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that 90% of the posts here are distorted in some significant way. Sometimes, it's just a matter of OP having a different viewpoint than ex, and sometimes, it's OP intentionally distorting the facts to try to get the answer s/he wants. And sometimes it's even totally fabricated (sm pretending to be dad or something similar). I think that's just a fact of life in reading the posts here.

IC's story may seem a little off, but I think a large part of that is because it has been reported at such length that we have far more details than we normally get. And I'm sure IC is presenting things in a way favorable to her side - as does almost everyone here. But I'm not sure that it's any worse than the other people who get help here all the time.

 

[InfantCustody]

I would do exactly what you are doing right now IC.

You are keeping dad in the loop while this is ongoing, you are allowing him visitation (while still keeping the child safe)

Since dad cant come up with a reasonable explanation for how the child was harmed on his time, and you have a substantiated CPS case, you are asking the court to modify the order so that dad must complete the CPS mandates before resuming his unsupervised visitation.

And since it has been admitted that CPS can and will take the child if you fail to keep him safe (in their view)- whether they are right or wrong, I would err on the side of caution and go with CPS. Because if they take the child from you- even if you win against them and get the child back- there is no telling what will happen in foster care or anything else and how hard it will be to get the child back and how long you will be separated. So, even though legally you dont have to follow CPS rules, until there is better oversight, I would not risk my child being taken from me.

Thank you. I appreciate your response...the reason I asked is because I truly, for the life of my, cannot figure out what it is EVERYONE thinks I am doing so wrong. And I remain open to any suggestions that may shed light on what happened.

One aspect no one considers, that Dad and I have discussed at length, is that IF Dad is correct and this just occurred, then it is a ticking time bomb until it happens again because we don't know what caused it. Then it will be CPS focusing on me, not him, and our son could end up with a relative or in foster care until they figure it out.. I asked the MD about THAT as well, and he said "he wouldn't lose sleep worrying about it just happening again." Dad also said as much as he wouldn't want Bean to go through it again, at least then I would know he is telling the truth. Literally, every possible aspect we could think of has been considered. Anyone who has a new aspect - we have remained open to it and consider it.

I find it AMAZING that so many people will criticize and say I am such an evil b*tch who must be getting "euphoria" (how dare the one who said that) out of this, and yet not one of THEM can manage to post something they would be doing DIFFERENTLY given what I am faced with. So, it doesn't make "sense" and therefor must be my fault, or I am leaving something out, and THAT is my fault. Any way you slice it...I would love one of the people who finds my actions (and I don't even know which actions they are ) so deplorable to step up and say what THEY would do different in my shoes. Because there is NO MORE TO IT than has been posted. Plain and simple.

 

[CJane]

It's not a bandwagon, CJane. Some of us have been discussing this offline for quite a while.

Oh, of that, I am absolutely certain.

And given that I've been involved in several offline discussions of cases posted on this board, that doesn't make me think it's less of a bandwagon.

 

[MichaCA]

Not everyone thinks your doing wrong. I don't, and I see others don't too. Why your integrity is being disputed, I don't know, I think this forum does like to look for any hidden motives in general, sometimes when the hidden motives do not exist.

My thinking is not so legal however - it is more based on understanding your child comes back with serious (whatever degree) marks/burns on his butt. Period. No one knows 'who done it' much less, why. The fact remains, the child was injured. Its creepy to me dad has NO idea what happened...does he also not know who gave the child a bath (!!??) - woops, the baby. Even if it IS something besides a burn, that has not been determined and its up to the mother and CPS to protect the child pending a investigation.

The fact that OP has had issues with the father does not have to mean when the baby is returned to her with burns, she is happy to have the opportunity for supervised visitation. I do not see an ounce of maliciousness in InfantCustodys posts. I see a mother who has handled a traumatic incident with grace, intelligence and level headed-ness.

I don't understand. I respect everyone has a right to their opinions. I just want Infant Custody to know I don't think you blew it in any way, but handled a truly hard situation in a way involving professionals apppropriately and following their advice.

 

[dmcc10880]

No. The baby has never been tested for allergies. Dad said he uses Target brand unscented hypoallergenic wipes, I use the cucumber and green tea wipes from Huggies.

Hypoallergenic = Aloe as a common ingredient. Just sayin'.

 

[Just Blue]

Hypoallergenic = Aloe as a common ingredient. Just sayin'.

Welcome to the band-wagon.

 

[milspecgirl]

IC- look and see if your wipes have aloe in them. If they do, then it puts that issue to rest cause you've been using them all along with no issue.

I also find it interesting that if it is aloe allergy that the leg, genitals, etc wouldnt be affected, because surely the wipe was used on those areas too (or bath soap, or whatever)

 

[Nevergrowup]

I've been following this story, and I don't think I've commented at all...but I notice you have asked several times "what would you do", and haven't gotten all that many answers.

I'm going to answer in the opposite way...what I "wouldn't" do is worry about Dad's rights over the safety of my child. Dad should be looking out for himself, for sure, but your #1 job is to make sure your child is safe, not to look out for Dad's legal rights. If Dad's rights are getting trampled, he has the right to address that...that is NOT your responsibility.

Your gut is telling you Dad wouldn't hurt the baby intentionally. His lack of explanation is very concerning, and is likely an effort for self preservation. You have the responsibility to follow the advice of CPS (otherwise YOUR parenting skills could be considered questionable), the doctors you trust, and your lawyer.

What I would do? What you are doing. Keep communication open and allow Dad supervised visits until he completes the requirements CPS puts in place. If CPS didn't follow the law, then it is up to DAD to challenge that, not you. You aren't his lawyer. And if Dad didn't do this, then either he knows who did, or he failed to get medical attention for the baby when it "magically appeared". Either way, sounds like neglect...Neglect is usually unintentional.

 

[InfantCustody]

IC- look and see if your wipes have aloe in them. If they do, then it puts that issue to rest cause you've been using them all along with no issue.

I also find it interesting that if it is aloe allergy that the leg, genitals, etc wouldnt be affected, because surely the wipe was used on those areas too (or bath soap, or whatever)

I found this on the Huggies website.

Q. What are the skin care ingredients in Huggies Baby Wipes?
A. Huggies Baby Wipes contain Vitamin E and Aloe Vera. Vitamin E is a natural skin conditioner that helps keep skin naturally healthy. Vitamin E is found in a number of popular baby care and skin products. Aloe Vera comes from Aloe Vera plants and is a natural botanical ingredient. It is gentle and soothing to the skin. No synthetic Aloe Vera is used in Huggies Newborn & Sensitive Baby Wipes.

I buy my wipes in the extra large package, and don't have the box with ingredients, but this would make it sound as though they would have Aloe in them. I will check next time I'm at Target. I do have to agree, and wonder why the reaction wouldn't be everywhere the wipes touched. And certainly, you would think the wipes would be guaranteed to touch his lower butt crack given that this area would surely need to be wiped!

 

[>Charlotte<]

I've been following this story, and I don't think I've commented at all...but I notice you have asked several times "what would you do", and haven't gotten all that many answers.

I'm going to answer in the opposite way...what I "wouldn't" do is worry about Dad's rights over the safety of my child. Dad should be looking out for himself, for sure, but your #1 job is to make sure your child is safe, not to look out for Dad's legal rights. If Dad's rights are getting trampled, he has the right to address that...that is NOT your responsibility.

Your gut is telling you Dad wouldn't hurt the baby intentionally. His lack of explanation is very concerning, and is likely an effort for self preservation. You have the responsibility to follow the advice of CPS (otherwise YOUR parenting skills could be considered questionable), the doctors you trust, and your lawyer.

What I would do? What you are doing. Keep communication open and allow Dad supervised visits until he completes the requirements CPS puts in place. If CPS didn't follow the law, then it is up to DAD to challenge that, not you. You aren't his lawyer. And if Dad didn't do this, then either he knows who did, or he failed to get medical attention for the baby when it "magically appeared". Either way, sounds like neglect...Neglect is usually unintentional.

IC, print this and read it every day.

 

[challenges]

flounce

Okay this will be the last time I post here (not that I've posted much). I've read enough to conclude that there is something seriously wrong with OhioGal. S/he has psychological issues that are disturbing. His or her posts are impulsive (clear that s/he gets posters mixed up; frequent backtracks on statements) cruel (complete lack of empathy), lacking in common sense (e.g., why would aloe baby wipes cause the burn pattern in this case?).

The rest of you who support this person are sheep (oh, yeah, I get a hinky feeling too. . .). So what if he or she is a lawyer, so what if he or she is a GAL? Those qualifications do not mean she or he is moral, ethical, emotionally balanced, sane, kind, etc. They are common qualifications, there are a million lawyers, tons of GALs. The knowledge and expertise this person provides do not outweigh his or her shortcomings in the areas of personality, intelligence, and common sense.

So for all the people out there that come to this site for help - Do not take OhioGAL's words to heart!

 

[Artemis_ofthe_Hunt]

Okay this will be the last time I post here (not that I've posted much). I've read enough to conclude that there is something seriously wrong with OhioGal. S/he has psychological issues that are disturbing. His or her posts are impulsive (clear that s/he gets posters mixed up; frequent backtracks on statements) cruel (complete lack of empathy), lacking in common sense (e.g., why would aloe baby wipes cause the burn pattern in this case?).

The rest of you who support this person are sheep (oh, yeah, I get a hinky feeling too. . .). So what if he or she is a lawyer, so what if he or she is a GAL? Those qualifications do not mean she or he is moral, ethical, emotionally balanced, sane, kind, etc. They are common qualifications, there are a million lawyers, tons of GALs. The knowledge and expertise this person provides do not outweigh his or her shortcomings in the areas of personality, intelligence, and common sense.

So for all the people out there that come to this site for help - Do not take OhioGAL's words to heart!

And you would be WHO? Since you don't know OG personally, you have NO RIGHT to make that kind of accusation on character, morality or anything else AT. ALL. This isn't coming from a sheep or any other lemming type animal. This is coming from someone who is nearly as blunt and straightforward as OG is. Don't like her delivery? Tough bounce, Cookie.

 

[InfantCustody]

Okay this will be the last time I post here (not that I've posted much). I've read enough to conclude that there is something seriously wrong with OhioGal. S/he has psychological issues that are disturbing. His or her posts are impulsive (clear that s/he gets posters mixed up; frequent backtracks on statements) cruel (complete lack of empathy), lacking in common sense (e.g., why would aloe baby wipes cause the burn pattern in this case?).

The rest of you who support this person are sheep (oh, yeah, I get a hinky feeling too. . .). So what if he or she is a lawyer, so what if he or she is a GAL? Those qualifications do not mean she or he is moral, ethical, emotionally balanced, sane, kind, etc. They are common qualifications, there are a million lawyers, tons of GALs. The knowledge and expertise this person provides do not outweigh his or her shortcomings in the areas of personality, intelligence, and common sense.

So for all the people out there that come to this site for help - Do not take OhioGAL's words to heart!

Now, listen here, OhioGal may not be the most sensitive person on earth, and I may take some of what she says to be VERY harsh, the fact is she is often times right and when she isn't right she admits it. You say she "backtracks" well, to most people, that a good thing. It takes a big person to say "I screwed up!"

She has provided me with FANTASTIC advice over the past 8 months and while I may not, in any way, like the tone she took over this issue it doesn't discount the good she does. I have done a lot of learning and growing because of OG (and the other seniors, who I don't always like what they have to say )...and I still respect her opinions and knowledge. I don't always agree with her and I don't always "like" what she has to say, but it doesn't mean I want to see her attacked in this manner!