The following story is really horrible if you’re a parent. A lot of things that might seem funny suddenly don’t look that way when little kids are involved.
A woman, intoxicated and pregnant, was carrying her toddler around in the cold rain with nothing but a pair of dirty diapers and a t-shirt — at 3AM! So, some man (probably a father) saw her and asked what the hell she was doing with the kid in that weather.
At 3 o’clock on the morning of the incident, a man in the 3700 block of South 144th Street called Tukwila police after spotting Woldeab carrying her child, who was wearing only a diaper and T-shirt despite the chilly weather, a Tukwila detective told the court. Concerned for the child’s safety, the man called out to Woldeab.
“What the hell are you doing with your baby out like that?” he yelled.
Woldeab broke into a run but tripped, dropping her daughter and landing on top of her, the detective continued. The witness approached Woldeab, according to charging documents, prompting her to shout, “Don’t take my baby!”
Woldeab then threw her purse at the man and raced into a nearby parking lot, where she dropped her daughter again, the detective told the court. She picked the child back up, but then tossed her into thorny bushes before stepping inside a gas station nearby.
Tukwila police arrived to find Woldeab running onto Tukwila International Boulevard with the toddler tucked under her arm “like a bag,” the detective told the court. When an oncoming car stopped to avoid hitting Woldeab, she threw her child through its open window.
“The child struck the side of the car with her head and fell limply into an open window, partially hanging out of the vehicle,” the Tukwila detective told the court. “The child was not moving or making any noise.”
Woldeab then jumped into the car and told the driver – a stranger to her – to drive away. The man did not oblige her, and the first officer to arrive snatched up the injured child.
By then, the toddler had sustained several cuts and bruises to her face, and had a tennis ball-sized lump rising from her head. The detective noted the girl was also covered in feces.
Having secured the child in a patrol car, the officer returned to the other vehicle and pulled Woldeab from it. Woldeab was handcuffed and arrested; police later found a bottle of spoiled milk in her purse.
The child was placed in state custody.
This is about as bad as it gets short of killing the kid. And she’s pregnant with another one…
The fact that she’s pregnant presents a real dilemma for feminists and our courts. On the one hand, the courts are supposed to act “in the best interests of the child,” but according to feminists it’s “her body” to do with as she pleases. As for the toddler, of course that kid has to be removed from her, and hopefully handed to the father (if he’s not in jail or also habitually intoxicated).
However, what about the child in her womb? If you let her out of jail, chances are she’s going to get loaded again, possibly causing irreparable damage to the child’s organs. So, if you want to protect the infant, the best course is to deny bail and keep her locked up until she gives birth. But that would be to deny her “agency,” and after all it’s “her body.”
So where would a feminist stand in this case? What’s more important, the woman’s freedom to do as she pleases or the health and safety of the unborn child?
If I were a judge, I know what I would do. I’d order her locked up in a women’s prison until she gave birth, then take the child and give it to the father, or if he refused put it up for adoption. It wouldn’t be a difficult decision at all. But I guarantee that there will be some real legal drama over this case, because mothers – no matter how bad – are privileged in our society.
It’s nothing for a judge to remove a child from a father, but take a drunk, abusive, train wreck of a woman, and they will bend over backward to try to work something out. It is this mandate that children must always be with their mothers that is responsible for a great many child fatalities.
In a sense, I agree with the mandate. It shouldn’t be easy to take a child from a parent. But when the courts so easily and casually take children from fathers, including protective fathers who want the best for their children, yet at the same time go to great lengths to keep children with questionable mothers, it really gives the lie to the “best interests of the child” doctrine.
{ 28 comments… read them below or add one }
This is why feminists want baby care facilities in women’s prisons. They want the father gone no matter what the mother does.
If the father wants custody there’s a good chance he couldn’t win, notwithstanding the facts at hand. Like you said, the system bends over backwards when mothers fail. Indeed, there’s a good chance the toddler is in this position because the father has already lost once.
Is this what happens when feminist entitlement meets YOLO?
Holy shit, I’m not even a parent and that is shocking.
I know it’s overused and used inappropiately, but those “judges” are black-robed Hitlers….They “sign the paperwork” just the same way.
Isn’t the polite term “collateral damage?”
Feminist “principles” must come before all else.
In my opinion this woman deserves capital punishment. After giving birth to the child she already has of course. She is a serial murderer no more no less. Her baby could have died. He could have died from cold, from bruises, from suffocating, from getting crushed, from a lots of stuff. It is a miracle he stayed alive. At this rate her child or her next children WILL die if she is kept alive. She will get drunk again, have irresponsible sex again, get pregnant again, give birth again, get drunk again, accsidentily damage her baby again. She has no human decency left. She is beyond correction. A pregnant woman who gets drunk is the lowest and filthiest life form imaginable. There is no lower low. She will never be a productive member of society. She will only drain resources trough social security and kill babies in her womb with alcohol or mutilate them into down syndrome or something similar. How do you classify a person who frequently mutilates people? Mass mutilator? She is causing a harm to her unborn child more deeper than any rape would ever do after he/she is born. her punishment should be harder than that of the most sadistic rapist and murderer because what she did was not only as evil but way way more degenerate, too .
Welmer.
You do realize that the greater space and place given for women’s / mothers bestial / feral tendencies, the better served are the interests of bureaucrats and civil servants, whom’s jobs it is to create and manage more of such governmental business.
Ordinary fatherhood no less than responsible fatherhood simply gets in the way of such bestial mothers /women and colluding authorities / bureaucrats … Because borrowed, printed, taxed or confiscated monies only accrue to these rent seekers on their enproblematization and triangulation of an irresponsible, absent, unknown, ejected or rejected father.
So you see Welmer. The very authority figures and mothers/women’s groups whom garner the most attention, most decrying and most bewailing the current plight of children, are indeed the very forces jeopardizing and bastardizing children. For them to say or do anything else to really secure or to protect children, would be to renounce the political advantage, the profitability and the rents, they have up till now freely received on behalf of children. That is children, that they can give absolutely not slightest damn nor any true thought about.
For example: Today’s idiot in chief and in charge, is on the cusp of singing an executive order that decrees a ban on assault rifles and other weaponry hitherto protected as a constitutional right. This is merely a smoke screen to distract people from wising up to the very real fact that even single-mother bastardized, ransomed and exploited children, no less than their violated fathers, are waking up to their plight and reacting very badly indeed.
So where would a feminist stand in this case?
As always, the feminazi would side with the drunken negligent mother.
Feminists don’t acknowledge that stuff like this could ever go on. It ruins the narrative.
If they do, they will probably blame it on the (presumably) absent father or assume the woman is the victim of abuse.
A man who agreed to have a child with a woman by in-vitro fertilization but later separated from her is entitled to parental rights, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled today.The justices said a lower court was wrong when it decided that the man fell under a state law that said a sperm donor “is not the parent of a child conceived through assisted conception unless the donor is the husband of the gestational mother.”William D. Breit and the girl’s mother, Beverly Mason, were not married but lived together and underwent the medical procedure to have a child. The day after the baby was born they signed an acknowledgement of paternity naming Breit the biological father.They also agreed the girl, now 3, would have a hyphenated last name consisting of their surnames.After the couple separated Mason argued Breit could not be the legal father because a of state law. A Virginia Beach Circuit Court judge agreed with her. Breit appealed to the Virginia Court of Appeals, which held that the interpretation of the law given by the Virginia Beach court supporting the mother “results in a manifest absurdity.”“Such a narrow reading of the assisted conception statutes fails to accord harmony with — and indeed all but negates — the ability of a known biological father, chosen by the birth mother, to establish parentage,” the appeals court panel held.The Virginia Beach court decision ignores the intent of the General Assembly to ensure that all children born in Virginia have a known legal mother and father, the appeals judges said.
My guess at why so many negligent, or simply faulty and incompetent mothers want to keep their children no matter what? No matter how much the children might be better off with the father? (Aside from the money, housing, food stamps etc.) It is the final means available for such mothers to make the rationalization that they are good women. Whether deep down inside or quite consciously, they have come to know that they are immoral beings and poison to men and society. Holding on to the belief that they are somehow good, or just loving mothers, or even just the fact they desire to be mothers, is the only thing they have left to enable themselves to look in the mirror and hold the belief that they are worth something. We can always change, but I strongly doubt that I will not go to my grave believing that when women are not guided by the authority of men, they become progressively un-virtuous mothers and wives. whilst going insane, resultant the compounding of their “logic”.
Mothers purposefully inducing fetal alcohol syndrome to collect higher welfare benefits
Check this out!
Ah, the rose of American womanhood is in full bloom with this one.
From Bill’s linked article, the woman’s name is Eyerusalem M. Woldeab. No picture or reference to the woman’s ethnicity in the article which means she’s not white. If she were white, the article would have made that clear.
An unusual name. She’s probably an Eritrean immigrant. So, what, triple minority? She’ll be handled with kid gloves by the justice system. Good jorb, King County taxpayers!
Woman 28 given 120 days for sex with dog. Read the comments by the manginas saying she was forced into it by her thug boyfriend. Possibly, but she will go back to him when she gets out, but she will have competition from other women for this alpha male. The poor dog will need councilling for the remainder of his life. :0
http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/st-louis-woman-sentenced-to-120-days-for-having-sex-with-her-dog/
Or she could be sent to rehab, a common solution for people that abuse substances.
So where would a feminist stand in this case? What’s more important, the woman’s freedom to do as she pleases or the health and safety of the unborn child?
The silence is deafening, isn’t it?
Feminists do not stand in defense of children. As a matter of fact children or the “burden” of pregnancy and raising a child, especially when it involves dependence on a man, is the front line battle of feminism. Feminism is blatantly Anti-Child and Children…because this places an imposition on her ascendency over men. Once she embraces Motherhood they lose her to Patriarchy.
Feminsts are actively avoiding debate right now, because there’s an army of online intellectuals with nothing to lose who’ve deconstructed and debunked their narrative just waiting to pounce. They’re beginning to melt in the culture wars, like the wicked witch of the west having water thrown on her.
Next time you have a chance ask a Feminist: Which is worse Rape or a mother abusing her child as witnessed above? To them Thy Holy Woman, her body and her choice takes precedence over child. It’s group narcissism personified, solipsism incarnate; abject egocentrism. Child birth and Children are the enemy of Feminism. Patriarchy is nothing but a strawman.
“President Obama: Where are the Women?”
Write to him today!
http://action.now.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=7132
The real question they should be asking if they were intellectually honest would be “Why are the women quitting?”. Because they’re tired, because of family, because they can make more money as lobbyists in the private sector.
Apparently Obama has a very thin “binder of women” to choose from.
OT: Schadenfreude – enjoyable rant from a single New York woman. Seeing more and more of these. Cue greyghost.
“Twelve years ago I had a boyfriend for one and a half years. On and off. We broke up three times during the one and half years we were together. Actually, I was the one who kept breaking up with him, because I never felt totally loved even though he was faithful and mature and handsome and worked at an investment bank and was athletic and tall and blond and blue-eyed and looked like a J. Crew model.”
“I have two cats and I’m trying to train them to shake my hand with their paws. Are any of you cat lovers?”
“I also had a thing recently where I kept fooling around with my personal trainers, one after the other, until each relationship became no longer viable, for one reason or another.”
“Anyway, ladies and gentleman, thank you for listening. If there’s anything you can spare, even a kind word, or something like telling me: “It’ll work out for you when the time is right. You won’t be alone for the rest of your life.” You can also say that I’m not like other single women in New York, that I’m different. I would appreciate it very much. God bless you.”
Fuck me. I really hate women now but i know that there are fine women out there too, rest assured that women today are majority of child abusers.
Generally women pick the male on the ability to do the things they can’t do Themselves , Like work , provide , and now child care and common sense .
The modern Women can arrange place mats and table settings . Smoke crack and Fuck ( witch is not a skill )
Its not a genetic lottery its making a good choice, Good guy males , that work go to Church and Ignore the garbage are Being overlooked for The Feminist Ideal male “The gay guy warring the speedo at the parade with the shaved body .
This genetic Mistake will produce a smallish , less productive , whinny social mistakes that will need to be weeded out and In the end diminish the quality of the gene Pool .
Get used to seeing dumpster baby’s with crack addicted moms the choice is there’s and they will pick a invisible man Called Uncle Sam .
You Uncle SAM on the Harley with the baby in his hands and the American flag wrapped around his emaciated body .
Good choice Slut , good choice . The problem is we have to pay for it . In more ways then you know , The future will be exciting .
Eric, if you said the above to me in a tavern here I’d assume you worked for Washington state DSHS. Only this kind of person would suggest rehab for a woman who criminally abuses her children, and jail for the father who doesn’t give her money every month so she can buy her liquor and drugs.
My guess is that they’ll find the presumptive father, charge him with child endangerment for allowing the mother to be with his presumptive child, throw his butt in jail, and put the mother up in a women’s shelter, with free feminist counseling.
I bet this lady somehow skates off on this. The government will make a show of arresting her and pretending to pass judgement and responsibility to assist in the peasants believe in constitutional law so they’ll still think going to work is how it is done. I suspect the government will take the child that was injured and then give the lady 30 days in jail just to show a convict of some kind of crime for taking the child. (no attempt will be made to even consider the father) She will be then a victim and sent to some kind of rehab and will be classified as a single abandoned mother and put her child to work entitling her to her benefits.
Pussy pass. This trash cunt goes scot-free.
My god, what a worthless cretin.
30 days house arrest I bet.
You Come a Long Way, Baby! (Let’s hear it for Feminism.)
Simple solution, whenever the pregnancy has crossed the threshold where abortion is no longer permitted, treat the baby to be as if it was an actual baby. Feeding it booze or smoking should be constituted as child abuse and so on, and you could arrest her for such. I don’t understand why this isn’t already the case? If those who commit crimes against pregnant women are also charged for crimes against the child (in the womb), then why aren’t the women carrying the kid held to the same standard?
One thing I’m sick of hearing about is how children are being neglected. Our culture worships children.