Comments on: No More Child Advocacy In Much of Illinois http://www.invisiblechildren.org/2009/06/14/no-more-child-advocacy-in-much-of-illinois/ Kids at Risk Action (KARA) - Children's Rights Advocacy Network Fri, 03 Sep 2010 01:55:13 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: John Hehl http://www.invisiblechildren.org/2009/06/14/no-more-child-advocacy-in-much-of-illinois/comment-page-1/#comment-9041 John Hehl Sat, 06 Mar 2010 18:10:43 +0000 http://www.invisiblechildren.org/?p=697#comment-9041 Perhaps, people should think about the consequences of having a child BEFORE they do so. If they are not able to properly raise, confort, educate, provide for, cultivate, foster, encourage, challenge and love the people they are going to create - they should not do so. It's pretty darn easy to not create a life - if one is not an animal. Pretty simple - if you conjugate, you create. I don't believe in abortion at all. However, I also believe it is possible to keep from creating life and still enjoy a satisfying committed loving sexual relationship with a partner. It seems the situation from which the highest numbers of negative consequences for children occurs is within a self-sustaining cycle of poverty, hopelessness and very limited choices. I don't believe in supporting any such system. Just as in our global environmental system - there are limits to the sustainability of any system. Whether we are speaking of bacteria, panda bears or human beings - the environmental economy can only support a limited amount of neglect and abuse before resources which "must" be consumed to support behavior with negative effects (the overwhelming population growth of people who do not have adequate resources of time, finances and stability to provide an optimal growth environment for healthy offspring) reaches a point when it becomes obvious that the overarching system is in danger because of the abuse. It's great to point fingers at 'the system' - however, we might all benfit if everyone kept their pants on until they are SURE they can be committed to the life they are sure to bring about. Perhaps, people should think about the consequences of having a child BEFORE they do so. If they are not able to properly raise, confort, educate, provide for, cultivate, foster, encourage, challenge and love the people they are going to create – they should not do so. It’s pretty darn easy to not create a life – if one is not an animal. Pretty simple – if you conjugate, you create. I don’t believe in abortion at all. However, I also believe it is possible to keep from creating life and still enjoy a satisfying committed loving sexual relationship with a partner.
It seems the situation from which the highest numbers of negative consequences for children occurs is within a self-sustaining cycle of poverty, hopelessness and very limited choices.

I don’t believe in supporting any such system. Just as in our global environmental system – there are limits to the sustainability of any system. Whether we are speaking of bacteria, panda bears or human beings – the environmental economy can only support a limited amount of neglect and abuse before resources which “must” be consumed to support behavior with negative effects (the overwhelming population growth of people who do not have adequate resources of time, finances and stability to provide an optimal growth environment for healthy offspring) reaches a point when it becomes obvious that the overarching system is in danger because of the abuse. It’s great to point fingers at ‘the system’ – however, we might all benfit if everyone kept their pants on until they are SURE they can be committed to the life they are sure to bring about.

]]> By: Carroll B. Merriman http://www.invisiblechildren.org/2009/06/14/no-more-child-advocacy-in-much-of-illinois/comment-page-1/#comment-4028 Carroll B. Merriman Fri, 25 Dec 2009 02:09:17 +0000 http://www.invisiblechildren.org/?p=697#comment-4028 I've been reading a few posts and really and enjoy your writing. I'm just starting up my own blog and only hope that I can write as well and give the reader so much insight. I’ve been reading a few posts and really and enjoy your writing. I’m just starting up my own blog and only hope that I can write as well and give the reader so much insight.

]]> By: Dean Connor http://www.invisiblechildren.org/2009/06/14/no-more-child-advocacy-in-much-of-illinois/comment-page-1/#comment-517 Dean Connor Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:31:03 +0000 http://www.invisiblechildren.org/?p=697#comment-517 According to the American School Counselor Association: "Although ASCA recommends a 250 to 1 ratio of students to school counselors, the national average is actually 475..." Illinois has an astounding ratio of 1172 to 1 (school year 2006-2007). http://www.schoolcounselor.org/content.asp?contentid=460. For more on this national atrocity; visit my site http://dean-connorsblog.blogspot.com. According to the American School Counselor Association: “Although ASCA recommends a 250 to 1 ratio of students to school counselors, the national average is actually 475…” Illinois has an astounding ratio of 1172 to 1 (school year 2006-2007). http://www.schoolcounselor.org/content.asp?contentid=460. For more on this national atrocity; visit my site http://dean-connorsblog.blogspot.com.

]]> By: Dean Connor http://www.invisiblechildren.org/2009/06/14/no-more-child-advocacy-in-much-of-illinois/comment-page-1/#comment-352 Dean Connor Sun, 23 Aug 2009 04:01:35 +0000 http://www.invisiblechildren.org/?p=697#comment-352 From the national FY 2010 Budget: Among other things, the budget would: * "Eliminate the two major sources of discretionary money at the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) – Part E Demonstration Projects, funded at $82 million this year, and the discretionary portion of the Byrne Discretionary and Competitive Grants. The Byrne grants would go from $208 million to $30 million, with none of it slated as discretionary. One apparent reason: Although the funds can be awarded through competitive bids, Congress has increasingly eaten up the money in earmarks. Almost all of the Part E money announced for this year was taken by earmarks, as this report explains." From Gov. Pat Quinn: http://www.broadband.illinois.gov "We're going to work together so that no home, business, school, or hospital in our state IS LEFT BEHIND. I look forward to hearing about your projects, and supporting your efforts to position Illinois as the epicenter of America's broadband revival." There it is; earmarks on the national level and dedication to "broadband revival" on the state level. Does anyone else see a prioritizing problem? The state of Illinois, among others, was directly affected by the misuse of the Byrne Discretionary and Competitive Grants. It would seem that technology improvements are more important than the safety of abused children. How is it that this incredibly irresponsible allocation of funds is allowed? From the national FY 2010 Budget:
Among other things, the budget would:

* “Eliminate the two major sources of discretionary money at the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) – Part E Demonstration Projects, funded at $82 million this year, and the discretionary portion of the Byrne Discretionary and Competitive Grants. The Byrne grants would go from $208 million to $30 million, with none of it slated as discretionary.

One apparent reason: Although the funds can be awarded through competitive bids, Congress has increasingly eaten up the money in earmarks. Almost all of the Part E money announced for this year was taken by earmarks, as this report explains.”

From Gov. Pat Quinn: http://www.broadband.illinois.gov
“We’re going to work together so that no home, business, school, or hospital in our state IS LEFT BEHIND. I look forward to hearing about your projects, and supporting your efforts to position Illinois as the epicenter of America’s broadband revival.”

There it is; earmarks on the national level and dedication to “broadband revival” on the state level. Does anyone else see a prioritizing problem? The state of Illinois, among others, was directly affected by the misuse of the Byrne Discretionary and Competitive Grants. It would seem that technology improvements are more important than the safety of abused children. How is it that this incredibly irresponsible allocation of funds is allowed?

]]>