• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Youngest Migrants Held in 'Tender Age' Shelters

Parents who commit misdemeanors don't usually get their children snatched away from them and put in warehouses.


These children are being emotionally abused so that Trump can blackmail Democrats into paying for a wall that Trump said Americans wouldn't have to pay for.

Trump is flat out evil. People who defend Trump have left their consciences at the door.

Parents who commit misdemeanors can serve jail time for those misdemeanors. And if there are no relatives readily available or competent to care for the kids, this is indeed what happens.
 
Parents who commit misdemeanors can serve jail time for those misdemeanors. And if there are no relatives readily available or competent to care for the kids, this is indeed what happens.

They don't usually go to jail for misdemeanors. And even less often do they go to jail before they have a trial. Parents are almost always given time to make arrangements for their children. The children aren't just taken away and put in foster care without the parents getting due process. Not for misdemeanors.
 
Kids are sent to juvenile all the time.

U.S. sends 2 million children to juvenile detention every year.
95% have never committed a violent crime.

again please stop using appeal to emotion arguments.

Link please, this is bs
 
They don't usually go to jail for misdemeanors. And even less often do they go to jail before they have a trial. Parents are almost always given time to make arrangements for their children. The children aren't just taken away and put in foster care without the parents getting due process. Not for misdemeanors.

Misdemeanors can and do often involve jail time. And sorry but yes, kids are indeed put into foster care, or group homes if no relatives are readily available or competent to care for the kids.
 
Just wondering. Why weren't the children and parents given hospital-type bracelets to identify the children and their parent(s)? I'd hate to think that my government had sinister intent with this inhumane treatment of minors.
 
There's a humanitarian reason to separate children from incarcerated adults.
 
Just wondering. Why weren't the children and parents given hospital-type bracelets to identify the children and their parent(s)? I'd hate to think that my government had sinister intent with this inhumane treatment of minors.


I agree.

It seems the government did not think about reuniting the children with their parents or they just did not care.

From :

One legal aid organization, the Texas Civil Rights Project, is representing[
more than 300 parents and has been able to track down only two children.

“Either the government wasn’t thinking at all about how they were going to put these families back together, or they decided they just didn’t care,”
said Natalia Cornelio, with the organization.

Government officials say they have given detained parents a flier with a toll-free number for the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the U.S. agency that is usually in charge of providing shelter for unaccompanied immigrant children. But not a single one of Goodwin’s clients had received one, she said. Lawyers maintain that when they have called the number, often no one answered. In some cases, when someone did pick up, that person refused to offer details of where children had been taken, the lawyers said.

The Washington Post: The chaotic effort to reunite immigrant parents with their separated kids
 
I never heard of preschool children being arrested in the U.S.

the US jail 2m kids a year. i guess you didn't read that part.
interesting you can't see the forest for the tree's.

but then again i figured this is the response i would get from you.
 
the US jail 2m kids a year. i guess you didn't read that part.
interesting you can't see the forest for the tree's.

but then again i figured this is the response i would get from you.

We were talking about tender age shelters.

Sorry you missed the thread title.
 
We were talking about tender age shelters.

Sorry you missed the thread title.

We are talking about the outrage of jailing kids.
I am just seeing if you are equally outraged here.

i guess not.

PS they are not being jailed.
nor are the kids under arrest.

however we can't have the just running out in the streets can we?
 
We are talking about the outrage of jailing kids.
I am just seeing if you are equally outraged here.

i guess not.

PS they are not being jailed.
nor are the kids under arrest.

however we can't have the just running out in the streets can we?

Where is your outrage that many of these kids will never be reunited with their mothers?
 
Evidently there's no outrage over a parent who endangers her child in a risky illicit border crossing either.

I think we need to step back from the emotional reaction to Trump and consider the irreducible facts; people who illegally cross the border are subject to arrest and deportation; due process requires even these people be afforded access to a judicial determination that verifies the fact they are not entitled to be in the US, the high volume of transgressors does not allow spontaneous adjudications of these facts.

During the time it takes to process each deportation the unlawful border crosser may be incarcerated; the US prison system does not allow children to be held in the same jail as adults. What would you change?

Is you answer to entitle unlawful border crossers to lawful residence until adjudicated deportable if accompanied by minors?

The minors are innocent, they had no role in their parent's decision to break the law, should they be deemed victims instead?

If the kids are victims, should their parents be afforded the option of lawfully remaining in the US because this is in the best interests of their child?

I think the authorities are dealing with the situation as it arises; they separate the guilty parents who are incarcerated from the children they brought with them, the innocent kids are processed differently, probably held by some social services entity until they can be sent back, but since we know it will take years, arrangements must be made for their feeding, clothing, custody, care, shelter, schooling, etc.

Is anything abnormal being done with the children brought across the border illicitly by irresponsible parents?
 
Last edited:
We do this all the time everyday when parents are arrested in the us.
If there is not a family member that will take them they go to live in a group home or other such state run institution.

So what is the difference?

One difference is that most are not 'undocumented' which complicates matters considerably.
 
One difference is that most are not 'undocumented' which complicates matters considerably.

No they aren't. That wasn't the argument presented though.
The selective outrage here is just mind numbing.

No one looks at what the problem is and that is people coming here illegally.
Then claiming asylum when caught. That are coached and everything else on what to say to try and get in.

Obama made it worse when he would catch and release them and then they get a Stern warning to appear for their hearing.
They never show up. Why would they? They are already in the country.

The other issue is that for asylum adults can get quick expedited hearings. Kids cannot.
They have to go through the whole process.
 
...

The other issue is that for asylum adults can get quick expedited hearings. Kids cannot.
They have to go through the whole process.


Actually , even though our government makes it easier for unaccompanied children to apply for asylum,not many do so.

(See #5 from the following.)

Here are the six things you need to know about how asylum works, and how it relates to the current crisis.



1) Refugee status is for people applying in their home countries; asylum is for people applying here


2) Refugee and asylum applicants have to show they've been persecuted


To get either refugee status or asylum, an individual has to prove two things:

He or she has been persecuted
The persecution was because of his/her race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.

3) The US cares more about persecution by governments than persecution by gangs


4) Children can still qualify if their families have been targeted



But even though being threatened by a gang doesn't qualify someone for asylum on its own, a child can still qualify for asylum if he or she proves that the gang was targeting him or her based on one of the five categories above: race, religion, political beliefs, nationality, or membership in a particular social group.



5) Most children who come to the US aren't actually getting asylum

Even though the government currently makes it easier for children who come to the US unaccompanied to apply for asylum, not many of them do so....


Furthermore, most unaccompanied children don't formally file their asylum applications until several months after they've arrived in the US. So very few of those cases were from children who had actually come to the US during the last several months.

Children often have other options for legal status that are easier to obtain, like Special Immigrant Juvenile Status. Many of them apply for those instead: 3,900 immigrants applied for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status from October to June. All in all, the number of unaccompanied children who end up receiving asylum in the US is much smaller than the number who come.



6) The US can make it easier to apply for refugee status from home — but they have to keep offering asylum, too

According to news reports last week, the US is considering a program to make it easier for young people in Honduras to apply for refugee status without having to come to the United States first. That's the program that President Obama downplayed the importance of on Friday. And his implication, that the program would only grant refugee status to a few people, is consistent with how programs like this have worked in the past.

Read more:

https://www.vox.com/2014/7/30/5947909/asylum-children-border-refugees-apply-home-embassies-explain
 
Last edited:
The denial rate is about 80%, and our asylum guidelines to not include at risk of a domestic crime in their home country, so any claim on that basis is frivolous by default.

This is a constant liberal trope “explain why you support child abuse” well first off I do not support Child abuse, the act of taking an adult into custody for committing a criminal act and finding living arrangements for a minor who’s not guilty of any crime and releasing them is big child abuse, I also openly said I supported legislation to remedy this in this case but that I also didn’t support ending immigration enforcement simply because of the family issue. The liberal democrats who claim to care about children have not made any effort to end family seperations because what they really want is to allow the entire family to enter the US, the last thing they want is the whole family unit deported together

Since you are not a liberal, on what basis do you have any credence to make the bolded claim? Where do you get off on ascribing motive that isn't otherwise stated? Do you have any foundation or cite for this rather idiotic assertion? Please provide or back off.

Separating very young childern from their parents without contact or certainity of their reunification is trauma. Deliberately inflicting trauma is child abuse. Very, very few pursuits could possibly justify the actions currently being taken by the Trump administration. It is institutional child abuse. Those that support these actions are enablers to that abuse.

The long-lasting health effects of separating children from their parents at the U.S. border

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doctor-colleen-kraft-separating-families-at-border-form-of-child-abuse/

https://www.usatoday.com/media/cine...igrant-children-from-families-is-child-abuse/

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/ne...ing-immigrant-families-child-abuse/717745002/

It is time for the good people of America to stand together in outrage against the Trump Administration AND all those that support this, justify this or look the other way at this.

When will the Trump minions realize that you can support President Trump AND be outraged at some of his actions, policies and behaviors. Only cultists justify and defend all actions of the cult leader.

We are undergoing a very dark period in American political history. May the Lord have mercy on the souls of all that fail to do the right thing here.
 
Last edited:
No they aren't. That wasn't the argument presented though.
The selective outrage here is just mind numbing.

No one looks at what the problem is and that is people coming here illegally.
Then claiming asylum when caught. That are coached and everything else on what to say to try and get in.

Obama made it worse when he would catch and release them and then they get a Stern warning to appear for their hearing.
They never show up. Why would they? They are already in the country.

The other issue is that for asylum adults can get quick expedited hearings. Kids cannot.
They have to go through the whole process.

No one is coached and before an IJ you don't just tell your story and they believe you. You have to bring evidence. What is telling is that while Obama was president, he implemented catch and release for families, these families showed up in the 90% range.
 
Actually , even though our government makes it easier for unaccompanied children to apply for asylum,not many do so.

(See #5 from the following.)



Read more:

https://www.vox.com/2014/7/30/5947909/asylum-children-border-refugees-apply-home-embassies-explain

Except, if a person is in danger, applying from their home country isn't an option....their life is in danger...applying maybe from Mexico, yes. How about we work on a cooperation agreement between Canada, Mexico and Costa Rica or Panama to help these people either resettle or be given asylum in one of the countries...apply a certain amount to each one per their population.
 
No one is coached and before an IJ you don't just tell your story and they believe you. You have to bring evidence. What is telling is that while Obama was president, he implemented catch and release for families, these families showed up in the 90% range.

I don't know where you get these numbers from.
Report says immigrants set for deportation not showing in court | Miami Herald

They are completely wrong.

75% are due to failure to appear.
https://cis.org/Report/Courting-Disaster
 
Except, if a person is in danger, applying from their home country isn't an option....their life is in danger...applying maybe from Mexico, yes. How about we work on a cooperation agreement between Canada, Mexico and Costa Rica or Panama to help these people either resettle or be given asylum in one of the countries...apply a certain amount to each one per their population.

Asylum depends on why their life is in danger not their life is in danger which is why most of these people do not qualify.
 
No one is coached and before an IJ you don't just tell your story and they believe you. You have to bring evidence. What is telling is that while Obama was president, he implemented catch and release for families, these families showed up in the 90% range.

Eh, more like the 60% - 70% range. But I see why you said 90%, it wasn't that far from accurate. The gap was only between reality and the moon.

https://www.vox.com/2014/7/17/5909481/60-to-70-percent-of-central-american-kids-are-showing-up-to
 
Back
Top Bottom